I missed that part at the end where she killed the fly. They made it pretty clear flies can crawl all over their faces and into their eyes and they don't react. You'd think, however, they'd build in a "shoo fly" response. It could be very disconcerting to a guest to see that.
Yeah, it's a bit hamfisted, as one of the company's people said the words "they literally couldn't hurt a fly." Everything else is so well thought out that reacting to surrounding natural stimuli in a believable manner should be obvious... BUT, I also take it as a "fastforwarding" device: some of the machines are now beyond their protocol, and even if they could have done it better, I'd much rather have a hamfisted premise establisher than 2-3 episodes of trying to make the audience wonder about the same.
I sure hope they don't make the Fear the Walking Dead mistake and jettison the "slow burn" and jump right into the robot apocalypse after 3 eps. I really enjoyed the start of Fear where society is starting to break down, frog in a pot of increasingly hot water style, and people aren't quite putting it together. I think societies tend to collapse that way. There's lots and lots of "tells" for a long time before it all goes to hell in a hand basket ASAP.
I get what you're saying, but the premises are so wildly different that I should think that even if robot apocalypse occurs rapidly, there will be plenty of material to draw from (considering that the protagonists are robots) as opposed to Fear tWD, which turned into a family melodrama with a zombie apocalypse backdrop. TWD survives despite its flaws because it's a survival story with moral ambiguity (though the farm season bordered on what Fear tWD became).
I'm hopeful for Westworld because it presents ALL sorts of moral and ethical questions from both human and robot perspectives, regardless of if/when "the revolt" occurs.