Why did Otto Octavius use tentacles mounted on himself instead of remote controlled robots?
To be able to manipulate radioactive substances, Otto Octavius created a device with four tentacle-like, mechanical arms. I've not read the original comic books, but I've seen Spider-Man 2. The Marvel Wikia page on Otto Octavius doesn't fully agree with the film, but both involve accidents. Considering the risk involved, why did he not use remote controlled robots instead? The device itself is not responsible for what happened, but using robots, he could have overseen from a safer location, and since he's depicted as a genius, he surely would have been able to create robot-like machines (though he might have called them something else), even in 1963 (when, according to the wiki, he first appeared).
The out-of-universe reason is most likely that without the tentacles, he wouldn't be Doctor Octopus.
I'm looking for an in-universe explanation. Preferably an explanation given in a published story, but in-universe explanations given by Stan Lee or Steve Ditko or Marvel Comics in interviews or published without being part of a specific story plot are also welcome. If there are different explanations over retcons and reboots, all of them are of interest, but mostly I'm looking for what happened originally.
marvel spider-man
edited yesterday
Edlothiad
54.4k21287297
asked Mar 14 '17 at 4:51
Duane DibbleyDuane Dibbley
4361513
add a comment |
To be able to manipulate radioactive substances, Otto Octavius created a device with four tentacle-like, mechanical arms. I've not read the original comic books, but I've seen Spider-Man 2. The Marvel Wikia page on Otto Octavius doesn't fully agree with the film, but both involve accidents. Considering the risk involved, why did he not use remote controlled robots instead? The device itself is not responsible for what happened, but using robots, he could have overseen from a safer location, and since he's depicted as a genius, he surely would have been able to create robot-like machines (though he might have called them something else), even in 1963 (when, according to the wiki, he first appeared).
The out-of-universe reason is most likely that without the tentacles, he wouldn't be Doctor Octopus.
I'm looking for an in-universe explanation. Preferably an explanation given in a published story, but in-universe explanations given by Stan Lee or Steve Ditko or Marvel Comics in interviews or published without being part of a specific story plot are also welcome. If there are different explanations over retcons and reboots, all of them are of interest, but mostly I'm looking for what happened originally.
marvel spider-man
edited yesterday
Edlothiad
54.4k21287297
asked Mar 14 '17 at 4:51
Duane DibbleyDuane Dibbley
4361513
@CreationEdge I didn't notice those tags. But I would like to point out that while my first contact with Doc Ock was in Spider-Man 2, an explanation from the original comic book incarnation is of more interest.
– Duane Dibbley
Mar 14 '17 at 5:08
1
That should be enough now, then. I misread your your last paragraph, thinking you wanted in-universe for the movie only
– user31178
Mar 14 '17 at 5:16
But then he wouldn't be called Doc Ock :)
– Gallifreyan
Mar 14 '17 at 5:31
1
Maybe the remote interface would introduce too much latency?
– Walt
Mar 14 '17 at 19:00
1
"and since he's depicted as a genius, he surely would have been able to think about robot-like machines" At the same time, since he is depicted as a genius, he doesn't think he'll screw up. Certainly not badly enough to need the extra safety precautions. The world's best driver isn't going to develop automated cars for safety, either.
– Shane
Mar 14 '17 at 19:52
add a comment |
To be able to manipulate radioactive substances, Otto Octavius created a device with four tentacle-like, mechanical arms. I've not read the original comic books, but I've seen Spider-Man 2. The Marvel Wikia page on Otto Octavius doesn't fully agree with the film, but both involve accidents. Considering the risk involved, why did he not use remote controlled robots instead? The device itself is not responsible for what happened, but using robots, he could have overseen from a safer location, and since he's depicted as a genius, he surely would have been able to create robot-like machines (though he might have called them something else), even in 1963 (when, according to the wiki, he first appeared).
The out-of-universe reason is most likely that without the tentacles, he wouldn't be Doctor Octopus.
I'm looking for an in-universe explanation. Preferably an explanation given in a published story, but in-universe explanations given by Stan Lee or Steve Ditko or Marvel Comics in interviews or published without being part of a specific story plot are also welcome. If there are different explanations over retcons and reboots, all of them are of interest, but mostly I'm looking for what happened originally.
marvel spider-man
edited yesterday
Edlothiad
54.4k21287297
asked Mar 14 '17 at 4:51
Duane DibbleyDuane Dibbley
4361513
To be able to manipulate radioactive substances, Otto Octavius created a device with four tentacle-like, mechanical arms. I've not read the original comic books, but I've seen Spider-Man 2. The Marvel Wikia page on Otto Octavius doesn't fully agree with the film, but both involve accidents. Considering the risk involved, why did he not use remote controlled robots instead? The device itself is not responsible for what happened, but using robots, he could have overseen from a safer location, and since he's depicted as a genius, he surely would have been able to create robot-like machines (though he might have called them something else), even in 1963 (when, according to the wiki, he first appeared).
The out-of-universe reason is most likely that without the tentacles, he wouldn't be Doctor Octopus.
I'm looking for an in-universe explanation. Preferably an explanation given in a published story, but in-universe explanations given by Stan Lee or Steve Ditko or Marvel Comics in interviews or published without being part of a specific story plot are also welcome. If there are different explanations over retcons and reboots, all of them are of interest, but mostly I'm looking for what happened originally.
marvel spider-man
marvel spider-man
edited yesterday
Edlothiad
54.4k21287297
asked Mar 14 '17 at 4:51
Duane DibbleyDuane Dibbley
4361513
edited yesterday
Edlothiad
54.4k21287297
asked Mar 14 '17 at 4:51
Duane DibbleyDuane Dibbley
4361513
edited yesterday
Edlothiad
54.4k21287297
edited yesterday
Edlothiad
54.4k21287297
edited yesterday
Edlothiad
54.4k21287297
54.4k21287297
asked Mar 14 '17 at 4:51
Duane DibbleyDuane Dibbley
4361513
asked Mar 14 '17 at 4:51
Duane DibbleyDuane Dibbley
4361513
asked Mar 14 '17 at 4:51
Duane DibbleyDuane Dibbley
4361513
4361513
@CreationEdge I didn't notice those tags. But I would like to point out that while my first contact with Doc Ock was in Spider-Man 2, an explanation from the original comic book incarnation is of more interest.
– Duane Dibbley
Mar 14 '17 at 5:08
1
That should be enough now, then. I misread your your last paragraph, thinking you wanted in-universe for the movie only
– user31178
Mar 14 '17 at 5:16
But then he wouldn't be called Doc Ock :)
– Gallifreyan
Mar 14 '17 at 5:31
1
Maybe the remote interface would introduce too much latency?
– Walt
Mar 14 '17 at 19:00
1
"and since he's depicted as a genius, he surely would have been able to think about robot-like machines" At the same time, since he is depicted as a genius, he doesn't think he'll screw up. Certainly not badly enough to need the extra safety precautions. The world's best driver isn't going to develop automated cars for safety, either.
– Shane
Mar 14 '17 at 19:52
add a comment |
@CreationEdge I didn't notice those tags. But I would like to point out that while my first contact with Doc Ock was in Spider-Man 2, an explanation from the original comic book incarnation is of more interest.
– Duane Dibbley
Mar 14 '17 at 5:08
1
That should be enough now, then. I misread your your last paragraph, thinking you wanted in-universe for the movie only
– user31178
Mar 14 '17 at 5:16
But then he wouldn't be called Doc Ock :)
– Gallifreyan
Mar 14 '17 at 5:31
1
Maybe the remote interface would introduce too much latency?
– Walt
Mar 14 '17 at 19:00
1
"and since he's depicted as a genius, he surely would have been able to think about robot-like machines" At the same time, since he is depicted as a genius, he doesn't think he'll screw up. Certainly not badly enough to need the extra safety precautions. The world's best driver isn't going to develop automated cars for safety, either.
– Shane
Mar 14 '17 at 19:52
@CreationEdge I didn't notice those tags. But I would like to point out that while my first contact with Doc Ock was in Spider-Man 2, an explanation from the original comic book incarnation is of more interest.
– Duane Dibbley
Mar 14 '17 at 5:08
@CreationEdge I didn't notice those tags. But I would like to point out that while my first contact with Doc Ock was in Spider-Man 2, an explanation from the original comic book incarnation is of more interest.
– Duane Dibbley
Mar 14 '17 at 5:08
1
1
That should be enough now, then. I misread your your last paragraph, thinking you wanted in-universe for the movie only
– user31178
Mar 14 '17 at 5:16
That should be enough now, then. I misread your your last paragraph, thinking you wanted in-universe for the movie only
– user31178
Mar 14 '17 at 5:16
But then he wouldn't be called Doc Ock :)
– Gallifreyan
Mar 14 '17 at 5:31
But then he wouldn't be called Doc Ock :)
– Gallifreyan
Mar 14 '17 at 5:31
1
1
Maybe the remote interface would introduce too much latency?
– Walt
Mar 14 '17 at 19:00
Maybe the remote interface would introduce too much latency?
– Walt
Mar 14 '17 at 19:00
1
1
"and since he's depicted as a genius, he surely would have been able to think about robot-like machines" At the same time, since he is depicted as a genius, he doesn't think he'll screw up. Certainly not badly enough to need the extra safety precautions. The world's best driver isn't going to develop automated cars for safety, either.
– Shane
Mar 14 '17 at 19:52
"and since he's depicted as a genius, he surely would have been able to think about robot-like machines" At the same time, since he is depicted as a genius, he doesn't think he'll screw up. Certainly not badly enough to need the extra safety precautions. The world's best driver isn't going to develop automated cars for safety, either.
– Shane
Mar 14 '17 at 19:52
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
In the 2003 comic Doctor Octopus: Negative Exposure, Octavious reveals this to nobody in particular (unless you count DaVinci's ghost who isn't there).
DaVinci's Vitruvian Man greatly inspired him, and he sought to emulate what he saw as eight appendages.
Using a bunch of remote controlled tentacles not attached to him by a harness would hardly resemble the drawing, now would it?
As I was saying, it was this, your seminal sketch, "Proportional Study of Man in the Manner of Vitruvius," which forever changed my life.
Your perfect human specimen, with his eight gloriously symmetrical appendages, inspired my humble contribution to the world of invention.
answered Mar 14 '17 at 5:53
phantom42phantom42
111k46492726
3
Unfortunately it is hard to tell whether this was his reasoning at the time - when he was sane - or his personal justification so long afterwards...
– Weckar E.
Mar 14 '17 at 23:57
2
This is a retcon from his original appearance back in the 60s, but I really don't mind since the original reason was "he just felt like making giant arms".
– Thunderforge
Mar 15 '17 at 1:31
add a comment |
This was addressed in the official novelisation for Spider-Man 2. In short, Doc Ock was sick and tired of not having enough hands. They were inspired, it seems, by the humble octopus.
Octavius loved the design he had created for the arms. It had come to
him one day after a visit to the Coney Island Aquarium: the answer to
the endless frustration of trying to perform experiments and wishing
one had more hands at one’s disposal. Thanks to the four
actuators—which, he had to admit, sounded like the name of a singing
group—a scientist could have all the hands he reasonably needed. And
they weren’t even the main invention he’d developed. They were merely
tools he would use to help get the fusion generator started up.
Spider-Man 2: Official Novelisation
answered Mar 14 '17 at 15:33
ValorumValorum
406k10929553179
An upvote for this. It's certainly interesting. However, the checkmark remains with phantom42.
– Duane Dibbley
Mar 14 '17 at 17:10
@DuaneDibbley - I felt it addressed your concerns about the film
– Valorum
Mar 14 '17 at 17:17
It did. And that is indeed good. But the origin of the idea is still more interesting.
– Duane Dibbley
Mar 14 '17 at 17:25
That's actually also the reason I deduced from the movie itself - maybe he did say something along that wish as well.
– Zommuter
Mar 15 '17 at 8:30
add a comment |
Not citing any sources here, but I find it logical for a scientist like Otto Octavius to want to keep full control.
With robots, you can only look at them doing what they're told. They cannot improvise, etc.
But with two new pairs of arms, directly connected to Octavius's spine, he is still able to keep the control.
answered Mar 19 '17 at 16:43
Marc BrillaultMarc Brillault
31448
1
Why couldn't he achieve the same with a wireless connection?
– Valorum
Mar 19 '17 at 16:45
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "186"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fscifi.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f154694%2fwhy-did-otto-octavius-use-tentacles-mounted-on-himself-instead-of-remote-control%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
In the 2003 comic Doctor Octopus: Negative Exposure, Octavious reveals this to nobody in particular (unless you count DaVinci's ghost who isn't there).
DaVinci's Vitruvian Man greatly inspired him, and he sought to emulate what he saw as eight appendages.
Using a bunch of remote controlled tentacles not attached to him by a harness would hardly resemble the drawing, now would it?
As I was saying, it was this, your seminal sketch, "Proportional Study of Man in the Manner of Vitruvius," which forever changed my life.
Your perfect human specimen, with his eight gloriously symmetrical appendages, inspired my humble contribution to the world of invention.
answered Mar 14 '17 at 5:53
phantom42phantom42
111k46492726
3
Unfortunately it is hard to tell whether this was his reasoning at the time - when he was sane - or his personal justification so long afterwards...
– Weckar E.
Mar 14 '17 at 23:57
2
This is a retcon from his original appearance back in the 60s, but I really don't mind since the original reason was "he just felt like making giant arms".
– Thunderforge
Mar 15 '17 at 1:31
add a comment |
In the 2003 comic Doctor Octopus: Negative Exposure, Octavious reveals this to nobody in particular (unless you count DaVinci's ghost who isn't there).
DaVinci's Vitruvian Man greatly inspired him, and he sought to emulate what he saw as eight appendages.
Using a bunch of remote controlled tentacles not attached to him by a harness would hardly resemble the drawing, now would it?
As I was saying, it was this, your seminal sketch, "Proportional Study of Man in the Manner of Vitruvius," which forever changed my life.
Your perfect human specimen, with his eight gloriously symmetrical appendages, inspired my humble contribution to the world of invention.
answered Mar 14 '17 at 5:53
phantom42phantom42
111k46492726
3
Unfortunately it is hard to tell whether this was his reasoning at the time - when he was sane - or his personal justification so long afterwards...
– Weckar E.
Mar 14 '17 at 23:57
2
This is a retcon from his original appearance back in the 60s, but I really don't mind since the original reason was "he just felt like making giant arms".
– Thunderforge
Mar 15 '17 at 1:31
add a comment |
In the 2003 comic Doctor Octopus: Negative Exposure, Octavious reveals this to nobody in particular (unless you count DaVinci's ghost who isn't there).
DaVinci's Vitruvian Man greatly inspired him, and he sought to emulate what he saw as eight appendages.
Using a bunch of remote controlled tentacles not attached to him by a harness would hardly resemble the drawing, now would it?
As I was saying, it was this, your seminal sketch, "Proportional Study of Man in the Manner of Vitruvius," which forever changed my life.
Your perfect human specimen, with his eight gloriously symmetrical appendages, inspired my humble contribution to the world of invention.
answered Mar 14 '17 at 5:53
phantom42phantom42
111k46492726
In the 2003 comic Doctor Octopus: Negative Exposure, Octavious reveals this to nobody in particular (unless you count DaVinci's ghost who isn't there).
DaVinci's Vitruvian Man greatly inspired him, and he sought to emulate what he saw as eight appendages.
Using a bunch of remote controlled tentacles not attached to him by a harness would hardly resemble the drawing, now would it?
As I was saying, it was this, your seminal sketch, "Proportional Study of Man in the Manner of Vitruvius," which forever changed my life.
Your perfect human specimen, with his eight gloriously symmetrical appendages, inspired my humble contribution to the world of invention.
answered Mar 14 '17 at 5:53
phantom42phantom42
111k46492726
edited Mar 14 '17 at 10:44
answered Mar 14 '17 at 5:53
phantom42phantom42
111k46492726
answered Mar 14 '17 at 5:53
phantom42phantom42
111k46492726
answered Mar 14 '17 at 5:53
phantom42phantom42
111k46492726
111k46492726
3
Unfortunately it is hard to tell whether this was his reasoning at the time - when he was sane - or his personal justification so long afterwards...
– Weckar E.
Mar 14 '17 at 23:57
2
This is a retcon from his original appearance back in the 60s, but I really don't mind since the original reason was "he just felt like making giant arms".
– Thunderforge
Mar 15 '17 at 1:31
add a comment |
3
Unfortunately it is hard to tell whether this was his reasoning at the time - when he was sane - or his personal justification so long afterwards...
– Weckar E.
Mar 14 '17 at 23:57
2
This is a retcon from his original appearance back in the 60s, but I really don't mind since the original reason was "he just felt like making giant arms".
– Thunderforge
Mar 15 '17 at 1:31
3
3
Unfortunately it is hard to tell whether this was his reasoning at the time - when he was sane - or his personal justification so long afterwards...
– Weckar E.
Mar 14 '17 at 23:57
Unfortunately it is hard to tell whether this was his reasoning at the time - when he was sane - or his personal justification so long afterwards...
– Weckar E.
Mar 14 '17 at 23:57
2
2
This is a retcon from his original appearance back in the 60s, but I really don't mind since the original reason was "he just felt like making giant arms".
– Thunderforge
Mar 15 '17 at 1:31
This is a retcon from his original appearance back in the 60s, but I really don't mind since the original reason was "he just felt like making giant arms".
– Thunderforge
Mar 15 '17 at 1:31
add a comment |
This was addressed in the official novelisation for Spider-Man 2. In short, Doc Ock was sick and tired of not having enough hands. They were inspired, it seems, by the humble octopus.
Octavius loved the design he had created for the arms. It had come to
him one day after a visit to the Coney Island Aquarium: the answer to
the endless frustration of trying to perform experiments and wishing
one had more hands at one’s disposal. Thanks to the four
actuators—which, he had to admit, sounded like the name of a singing
group—a scientist could have all the hands he reasonably needed. And
they weren’t even the main invention he’d developed. They were merely
tools he would use to help get the fusion generator started up.
Spider-Man 2: Official Novelisation
answered Mar 14 '17 at 15:33
ValorumValorum
406k10929553179
An upvote for this. It's certainly interesting. However, the checkmark remains with phantom42.
– Duane Dibbley
Mar 14 '17 at 17:10
@DuaneDibbley - I felt it addressed your concerns about the film
– Valorum
Mar 14 '17 at 17:17
It did. And that is indeed good. But the origin of the idea is still more interesting.
– Duane Dibbley
Mar 14 '17 at 17:25
That's actually also the reason I deduced from the movie itself - maybe he did say something along that wish as well.
– Zommuter
Mar 15 '17 at 8:30
add a comment |
This was addressed in the official novelisation for Spider-Man 2. In short, Doc Ock was sick and tired of not having enough hands. They were inspired, it seems, by the humble octopus.
Octavius loved the design he had created for the arms. It had come to
him one day after a visit to the Coney Island Aquarium: the answer to
the endless frustration of trying to perform experiments and wishing
one had more hands at one’s disposal. Thanks to the four
actuators—which, he had to admit, sounded like the name of a singing
group—a scientist could have all the hands he reasonably needed. And
they weren’t even the main invention he’d developed. They were merely
tools he would use to help get the fusion generator started up.
Spider-Man 2: Official Novelisation
answered Mar 14 '17 at 15:33
ValorumValorum
406k10929553179
An upvote for this. It's certainly interesting. However, the checkmark remains with phantom42.
– Duane Dibbley
Mar 14 '17 at 17:10
@DuaneDibbley - I felt it addressed your concerns about the film
– Valorum
Mar 14 '17 at 17:17
It did. And that is indeed good. But the origin of the idea is still more interesting.
– Duane Dibbley
Mar 14 '17 at 17:25
That's actually also the reason I deduced from the movie itself - maybe he did say something along that wish as well.
– Zommuter
Mar 15 '17 at 8:30
add a comment |
This was addressed in the official novelisation for Spider-Man 2. In short, Doc Ock was sick and tired of not having enough hands. They were inspired, it seems, by the humble octopus.
Octavius loved the design he had created for the arms. It had come to
him one day after a visit to the Coney Island Aquarium: the answer to
the endless frustration of trying to perform experiments and wishing
one had more hands at one’s disposal. Thanks to the four
actuators—which, he had to admit, sounded like the name of a singing
group—a scientist could have all the hands he reasonably needed. And
they weren’t even the main invention he’d developed. They were merely
tools he would use to help get the fusion generator started up.
Spider-Man 2: Official Novelisation
answered Mar 14 '17 at 15:33
ValorumValorum
406k10929553179
This was addressed in the official novelisation for Spider-Man 2. In short, Doc Ock was sick and tired of not having enough hands. They were inspired, it seems, by the humble octopus.
Octavius loved the design he had created for the arms. It had come to
him one day after a visit to the Coney Island Aquarium: the answer to
the endless frustration of trying to perform experiments and wishing
one had more hands at one’s disposal. Thanks to the four
actuators—which, he had to admit, sounded like the name of a singing
group—a scientist could have all the hands he reasonably needed. And
they weren’t even the main invention he’d developed. They were merely
tools he would use to help get the fusion generator started up.
Spider-Man 2: Official Novelisation
answered Mar 14 '17 at 15:33
ValorumValorum
406k10929553179
answered Mar 14 '17 at 15:33
ValorumValorum
406k10929553179
answered Mar 14 '17 at 15:33
ValorumValorum
406k10929553179
answered Mar 14 '17 at 15:33
ValorumValorum
406k10929553179
406k10929553179
An upvote for this. It's certainly interesting. However, the checkmark remains with phantom42.
– Duane Dibbley
Mar 14 '17 at 17:10
@DuaneDibbley - I felt it addressed your concerns about the film
– Valorum
Mar 14 '17 at 17:17
It did. And that is indeed good. But the origin of the idea is still more interesting.
– Duane Dibbley
Mar 14 '17 at 17:25
That's actually also the reason I deduced from the movie itself - maybe he did say something along that wish as well.
– Zommuter
Mar 15 '17 at 8:30
add a comment |
An upvote for this. It's certainly interesting. However, the checkmark remains with phantom42.
– Duane Dibbley
Mar 14 '17 at 17:10
@DuaneDibbley - I felt it addressed your concerns about the film
– Valorum
Mar 14 '17 at 17:17
It did. And that is indeed good. But the origin of the idea is still more interesting.
– Duane Dibbley
Mar 14 '17 at 17:25
That's actually also the reason I deduced from the movie itself - maybe he did say something along that wish as well.
– Zommuter
Mar 15 '17 at 8:30
An upvote for this. It's certainly interesting. However, the checkmark remains with phantom42.
– Duane Dibbley
Mar 14 '17 at 17:10
An upvote for this. It's certainly interesting. However, the checkmark remains with phantom42.
– Duane Dibbley
Mar 14 '17 at 17:10
@DuaneDibbley - I felt it addressed your concerns about the film
– Valorum
Mar 14 '17 at 17:17
@DuaneDibbley - I felt it addressed your concerns about the film
– Valorum
Mar 14 '17 at 17:17
It did. And that is indeed good. But the origin of the idea is still more interesting.
– Duane Dibbley
Mar 14 '17 at 17:25
It did. And that is indeed good. But the origin of the idea is still more interesting.
– Duane Dibbley
Mar 14 '17 at 17:25
That's actually also the reason I deduced from the movie itself - maybe he did say something along that wish as well.
– Zommuter
Mar 15 '17 at 8:30
That's actually also the reason I deduced from the movie itself - maybe he did say something along that wish as well.
– Zommuter
Mar 15 '17 at 8:30
add a comment |
Not citing any sources here, but I find it logical for a scientist like Otto Octavius to want to keep full control.
With robots, you can only look at them doing what they're told. They cannot improvise, etc.
But with two new pairs of arms, directly connected to Octavius's spine, he is still able to keep the control.
answered Mar 19 '17 at 16:43
Marc BrillaultMarc Brillault
31448
1
Why couldn't he achieve the same with a wireless connection?
– Valorum
Mar 19 '17 at 16:45
add a comment |
Not citing any sources here, but I find it logical for a scientist like Otto Octavius to want to keep full control.
With robots, you can only look at them doing what they're told. They cannot improvise, etc.
But with two new pairs of arms, directly connected to Octavius's spine, he is still able to keep the control.
answered Mar 19 '17 at 16:43
Marc BrillaultMarc Brillault
31448
1
Why couldn't he achieve the same with a wireless connection?
– Valorum
Mar 19 '17 at 16:45
add a comment |
Not citing any sources here, but I find it logical for a scientist like Otto Octavius to want to keep full control.
With robots, you can only look at them doing what they're told. They cannot improvise, etc.
But with two new pairs of arms, directly connected to Octavius's spine, he is still able to keep the control.
answered Mar 19 '17 at 16:43
Marc BrillaultMarc Brillault
31448
Not citing any sources here, but I find it logical for a scientist like Otto Octavius to want to keep full control.
With robots, you can only look at them doing what they're told. They cannot improvise, etc.
But with two new pairs of arms, directly connected to Octavius's spine, he is still able to keep the control.
answered Mar 19 '17 at 16:43
Marc BrillaultMarc Brillault
31448
answered Mar 19 '17 at 16:43
Marc BrillaultMarc Brillault
31448
answered Mar 19 '17 at 16:43
Marc BrillaultMarc Brillault
31448
answered Mar 19 '17 at 16:43
Marc BrillaultMarc Brillault
31448
31448
1
Why couldn't he achieve the same with a wireless connection?
– Valorum
Mar 19 '17 at 16:45
add a comment |
1
Why couldn't he achieve the same with a wireless connection?
– Valorum
Mar 19 '17 at 16:45
1
1
Why couldn't he achieve the same with a wireless connection?
– Valorum
Mar 19 '17 at 16:45
Why couldn't he achieve the same with a wireless connection?
– Valorum
Mar 19 '17 at 16:45
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Science Fiction & Fantasy Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fscifi.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f154694%2fwhy-did-otto-octavius-use-tentacles-mounted-on-himself-instead-of-remote-control%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
@CreationEdge I didn't notice those tags. But I would like to point out that while my first contact with Doc Ock was in Spider-Man 2, an explanation from the original comic book incarnation is of more interest.
– Duane Dibbley
Mar 14 '17 at 5:08
1
That should be enough now, then. I misread your your last paragraph, thinking you wanted in-universe for the movie only
– user31178
Mar 14 '17 at 5:16
But then he wouldn't be called Doc Ock :)
– Gallifreyan
Mar 14 '17 at 5:31
1
Maybe the remote interface would introduce too much latency?
– Walt
Mar 14 '17 at 19:00
1
"and since he's depicted as a genius, he surely would have been able to think about robot-like machines" At the same time, since he is depicted as a genius, he doesn't think he'll screw up. Certainly not badly enough to need the extra safety precautions. The world's best driver isn't going to develop automated cars for safety, either.
– Shane
Mar 14 '17 at 19:52