FANDOM


Faulty CharacterEdit

One wonders how someone that produced all the other sucessful product lines like McClendon previously had would simply bypass the whole 'prototyping' methodology by launching into full scale production BEFORE a working model was proven/accepted by the customer.  Instead of alcoholism AFTER the failure, as presented,  it might be more logical to have some impairment like that BEFORE, possibly including mental problems caused by ADAM addiction. 

Another question might be how was this expected to work Sea Slug-wise if the whole ADAM process (and probably extensively previously attempted) had been found to not work WITHOUT a symbiotic combination with a host - child.


Can't begin to explain the robo Little Sister/slug thing. Maybe Jack McClendon always had a problem with heavy drinking, we just don't know. We only get one Audio Diary for him, no comments about him from others, etc. He might have been a brilliant designer, but taking on such a risky contract seems to indicate he was a poor businessman.


Unownshipper (talk) 03:42, June 24, 2014 (UTC)

Robotic Little Sister? (name change) Edit

Shouldn't the name for this page be Robotic Little Sister insted of Sisters?

Shacob (talk) 20:35, June 28, 2015 (UTC)

Not necessarily. Robotic Little Sisters were an idea not something practically encountered by Subject Sigma. If they were to actually be put into production, they'd again only be useful as a group of workers in tandem with the Big Daddies. I can see Little Sister, singular, being a useful spelling as there are plenty of times when the protagonist runs into only one or where they might be listed as singular in a description on one of the articles.
With the robots, they're only encountered in groups (posed together in the workshop) or would only be usefully described as plural, so it's not necessary to render them in the singular form.


Unownshipper (talk) 02:15, June 29, 2015 (UTC)
I see what you mean, so lets leave it as it is.
Shacob (talk) 19:28, June 29, 2015 (UTC)