201 réponses à ce sujet

[Ziggeh]

crimzontearz wrote...
ok.....what do you consider "dark"?

The terms themselves are subjective to the point of meainglessness.

Once you assume that, their use in marketing seems fairly straightforward. "We would like you to associate this game with other things you may have liked in a vague way which we don't need to define."

"Spiritual successor to Balder's Gate" would be a good example of similar language.

[The Lyons]

I suppose 'comically' was a poor choice of wording. They are about as standard for villains in DA:O as one can get. Evil dark skinned and orcish villains massacring towns and villages with no reason other than they are mindless and being controlled by a higher power. This is not a new concept, it is almost par for Lord of The Rings. Archdemon = Sauron, Darkspawn = The army of Mordor. It even is aped right down to the "mutated/twisted" version of higher beings angle. It is incredibly generic evil.



DA:A may have been different but that is one ambiguous choice in a sea of black and white ones. Also, Loghain was another terrible character. His appearance alone told his moral stance and his "save ferelden" angle was contradicted by the fact that he constantly attempted to do away with any allies that might keep the land from falling. He seemed stupidly evil, as in literally shortsighted and idiotic for what boiled down to a corrupt **** archetype.

[crimzontearz]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...
ok.....what do you consider "dark"?

The terms themselves are subjective to the point of meainglessness.

Once you assume that, their use in marketing seems fairly straightforward. "We would like you to associate this game with other things you may have liked in a vague way which we don't need to define."

"Spiritual successor to Balder's Gate" would be a good example of similar language.

hence why an explanation is required

Early on the ME2 explained how they wanted to make the game "darker", are you telling me the DA2 team just "can't" or is told "Don't"?

[Ziggeh]

crimzontearz wrote...

hence why an explanation is required

That....doesn't mean anything on it's own, needing an explanation is not the reason you need an explanation; It's the original statement. If you want one, fine, but that ain't the same thing.

crimzontearz wrote...
are you telling me the DA2 team just "can't" or is told "Don't"?

Those aren't the only two options available.

[Vylan Antagonist]

Unreasoning evil needn't necessarily be adolescent though. Yes, the Darkspawn have a lot of analogues. The host of Mordor is the clearest, but the Undead are also usually similarly mindless. Most would agree that GRRM's SoI&F is 'dark' (whatever they may think of its quality) but he too uses a mindless devouring foe. I don't feel that the inclusion of that sort of antagonist, particularly if they aren't the only antagonists, defines a narrative's darkness or maturity one way or another. They are like a force of nature. The character of the narrative will emerge (or fail to) based on the responses to that nihilistic presence.

Whether Bioware beats us over the head with it or not, there are hidden facets of depth to the darkspawn and their motives via the Architect subplot. That's more than we got in Tolkein. Then there's the Archdemons themselves. Were they truly once 'Gods'? Of what sort? Were they corrupted? Are they insane? What is their motivation? What really happened in the Golden City? There's the potential for depth there. It isn't really comparable to Rita Repulsa and Bob Geldorf or whoever the badguys were in Power Rangers, ranting hysterically at the camera as their plans are foiled again. They also aren't 'gratuitously dark' as in adolescent dark fiction. Look at most Tzimisce splatbooks for good examples of this.

As for Loghain, his appearance may have seemed overly ominous, and yes, from our perspective, he was hideously short-sighted an myopic (who cares about Orlais when your land is ash), but he was convinced that it wasn't truly a blight. He really believed as much AND he was certain that he could win against the darkspawn on his own terms. Who knows? Maybe he could have, had he successfully wiped out the Gray Wardens and not been troubled by the main character's improbable successes. Perhaps Flemeth would have approached him with a Dark Ritual proposal instead. My point is that yes, obviously if the player wins the game, Loghain failed, but perhaps if they'd done just a bit more to develop his hatred of Orlais in-game, his motivations would have made more sense to you. I don't think they were instrinsically 'stupid', so much as perhaps not as well presented as they could have been. I still think the seeds of something deeper were present, and to an extent not often seen in CRPGs. Judged against the rest of the medium, I think Dragon Age has done pretty darn well in that regard.

Modifié par Vylan Antagonist, 17 décembre 2010 - 06:21 .

[crimzontearz]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

hence why an explanation is required

That....doesn't mean anything on it's own, needing an explanation is not the reason you need an explanation; It's the original statement. If you want one, fine, but that ain't the same thing.

crimzontearz wrote...
are you telling me the DA2 team just "can't" or is told "Don't"?

Those aren't the only two options available.

of course it does, I am about to spend money on a producrt which is advertised as "dark, gritty and sexy" without an explanation which tells me very little. Sure the marketing department might think it a good move not to explain this to reel in the simple-minded ones but that does not mean that those of us who are about to blow 60$ (or more) and understand how sybilline those buzzwords are should not feel the need for an explanation.

also......which other option is there? it's either  they are told not to elaborate on it (by marketing and branding) or they just "can't" for whatever reason

[Liablecocksman]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...
ok.....what do you consider "dark"?

The terms themselves are subjective to the point of meainglessness.

Once you assume that, their use in marketing seems fairly straightforward. "We would like you to associate this game with other things you may have liked in a vague way which we don't need to define."

"Spiritual successor to Balder's Gate" would be a good example of similar language.

While I had been thinking similarly on the darker, grittier, sexier (especially with regards to excessive use in DA:O marketing) - the "Spiritual successor to BG" never really struck me as such.

You post is, therefore, thought-provoking - as I see you have a point, and I was actually being manipulated in a clever way, because I'm such a sucker for BG.
Cheers.

[AlanC9]

Yeah, that stuff works great for marketing. The problem comes when you actually deliver the game, and everyone turns out to have read different things into the phrase.



Suddenly I find myself thinking of the Obama campaign.

[Aoba]

Sexier, eh? Does this mean that there's a high probability of fem!Hawke being pushed up against a stone wall only to be ravaged by her LI, 'cos that would be FRIGGIN' HAWT. *envisions Fenris doing that to her fem!Hawke* ... I'll be in my bunk.

Seriously, though, I'm all for sexier aspects, as long as they don't involve underwear; also, they should be created equal for BOTH Hawke's. As an example, I remember seeing a cutscene of m!Hawke passionately kissing Isabela. If things are to be equal, this should mean that a scene would play similar with our fem!Hawke and her LI, yes? We'll see when the game comes out, but I'm pretty confident that Bioware would not intentionally alienate their female fanbase by only giving the male gamers hot scenes and we get notta.

Now, for the darker and grittier aspects, I'm lead to believe that the decisions we'll have to make will be much harder and will have much more of an impact on the world around us. A darker story could mean more death, lots of anguish, blood everywhere, things of that sort. Grittier may mean more on-the-edge-of-your-seat/extreme nail-biting type of storyline with twists and turns everywhere. That's my opinion, anyway.

Modifié par ACWolfe, 17 décembre 2010 - 07:31 .

[Ziggeh]

crimzontearz wrote...

of course it does, I am about to spend money on a producrt which is advertised as "dark, gritty and sexy" without an explanation which tells me very little. Sure the marketing department might think it a good move not to explain this to reel in the simple-minded ones but that does not mean that those of us who are about to blow 60$ (or more) and understand how sybilline those buzzwords are should not feel the need for an explanation.

Would "cooler" need explaning? How about "Awesomer"? Subjective terms with no readily quantifiable elements. When a film is described as "bigger and better" than it's prequel, do you want to hear some measurements before you decide to frequent your local film screening establishment?

crimzontearz wrote...
also......which other option is there? it's either  they are told not to elaborate on it (by marketing and branding) or they just "can't" for whatever reason

Howsabout "don't really feel marketing blurb has effected the way they've gone about making the game in any way so are slightly bemused by requests for clarification and have decided not to comment and/or give it some snark"

Modifié par ziggehunderslash, 17 décembre 2010 - 07:37 .

[crimzontearz]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

of course it does, I am about to spend money on a producrt which is advertised as "dark, gritty and sexy" without an explanation which tells me very little. Sure the marketing department might think it a good move not to explain this to reel in the simple-minded ones but that does not mean that those of us who are about to blow 60$ (or more) and understand how sybilline those buzzwords are should not feel the need for an explanation.

Would "cooler" need explaning? How about "Awesomer"? Subjective terms with no readily quantifiable elements. When a film is described as "bigger and better" than it's prequel, do you want to hear some measurements before you decide to frequent your local film screening establishment?

crimzontearz wrote...
also......which other option is there? it's either  they are told not to elaborate on it (by marketing and branding) or they just "can't" for whatever reason

Howsabout "don't really feel marketing blurb has effected the way they've gone about making the game in any way so are slightly bemused by requests for clarification and have decided not to comment and/or give it some snark"

totally different  context. "cool" and "awesome" are way too broad to be a addressed in any effective way. Dark Gritty and Sexy now those are different. Explaining what one means about them makes the difference between blabbering about using buzzwords and actually passing for an intelligent studio (which Bioware is) and getting  your fans pumped (as opposed to what happened with a number of marketing moves made recently...."this is the new ****!" anyone?). Obviously you want a game to be cool and awesome....and the generality of those statements is massive that just saying them means nothing. The ME2 team went in details about "Dark and Gritty" and how they were using it in their game which means that, perhaps, it does need some elaboration.


as for the second statement

that would fall under the second option because effectively the marketing is actually advertising something that is not true....as such they can't comment on it because it is not so. 

[Ziggeh]

crimzontearz wrote...
and the generality of those statements is massive that just saying them means nothing.

This is literally what I'm saying about those three words.

The ME team might have elaborated, but doing so was further marketing.

[crimzontearz]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...
and the generality of those statements is massive that just saying them means nothing.

This is literally what I'm saying about those three words.

The ME team might have elaborated, but doing so was further marketing.

and I do not believe Dark, Gritty, and Sexy are on the same level as Awesome and Cool...

infact they are much less broad and you can prove that to yourself by thinking that  a game can be awesome and cool BECAUSE it is dark gritty and sexy...but the opposite would never make sense now would it?

[Ziggeh]

crimzontearz wrote...

infact they are much less broad

And generality requires a specific quantity?

[crimzontearz]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

infact they are much less broad

And generality requires a specific quantity?

you can definitely see that as generic as both "Dark Gritty and Sexy" may be "awesome and cool" are much MUCH more general

the point is that evidently I as well as many others find that this Dark, Gritty and Sexy business warrants an explanation.

You may not, but we do...it's really that simple

[Ziggeh]

crimzontearz wrote...

you can definitely see that as generic as both "Dark Gritty and Sexy" may be "awesome and cool" are much MUCH more general

Much more yes, but being much less general than very general indeed gives plenty of room for really rather general.

I get that people who aren't me feel exploration of the point might be valuable, theres a thread here after all. I just don't see what a dev comment would achieve given that any defintion they give us would likely not overlap with at least someones personal defintion and then we're left with a conversation that runs until we all agree it's actually really subjective and they can pretty much do whatever and still allow marketing to go "ooh its dark, so dark" on the basis that they're saying things to promote the game rather than educate us on the subject.

[crimzontearz]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

you can definitely see that as generic as both "Dark Gritty and Sexy" may be "awesome and cool" are much MUCH more general

Much more yes, but being much less general than very general indeed gives plenty of room for really rather general.

I get that people who aren't me feel exploration of the point might be valuable, theres a thread here after all. I just don't see what a dev comment would achieve given that any defintion they give us would likely not overlap with at least someones personal defintion and then we're left with a conversation that runs until we all agree it's actually really subjective and they can pretty much do whatever and still allow marketing to go "ooh its dark, so dark" on the basis that they're saying things to promote the game rather than educate us on the subject.

that definition and explanationj by the devs tho will color the rest of the speculations, reveals, and any other tidbit that will be given to us because now we know what "direction" their "dark" has taken. We might also know what to expect in terms of flavor as well....which is alwaus a plus...might also convince someone that their brand of "darkness" is mature enough or  striking and intelligent nough to warrant a preorder

[Ziggeh]

crimzontearz wrote...
that definition and explanationj by the devs tho will color the rest of the speculations, reveals, and any other tidbit that will be given to us because now we know what "direction" their "dark" has taken. We might also know what to expect in terms of flavor as well....which is alwaus a plus...might also convince someone that their brand of "darkness" is mature enough or  striking and intelligent nough to warrant a preorder

That's fair enough, but you could say much the same about the question "tell us some more about the game"?

I suppose being specific, but not too specifc is more likely to elicit a response.

[crimzontearz]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...
that definition and explanationj by the devs tho will color the rest of the speculations, reveals, and any other tidbit that will be given to us because now we know what "direction" their "dark" has taken. We might also know what to expect in terms of flavor as well....which is alwaus a plus...might also convince someone that their brand of "darkness" is mature enough or  striking and intelligent nough to warrant a preorder

That's fair enough, but you could say much the same about the question "tell us some more about the game"?

I suppose being specific, but not too specifc is more likely to elicit a response.

true, but many might not want responses about the game " in general". The nature of the questions if often brought up by the marketing itself. How many times has it been asked to have a gameplay vid? why was it asked so vehemently? because some marketing rep said "oh yeah our new motto is (say it with me) push a button and something awesome happens" oh and "think like a general but fight like a spartan" which lead people to think the game was going to turn into Dinasty Warriors or 99 knights. and now it's the "dark gritty and sexy" turn

[Dr. wonderful]

Mary Kirby wrote...

Oh good. We're having this discussion again. I really didn't get enough of the, "What does dark and gritty mean?" before Origins shipped.

Tis, tis, even the writers are getting annoyed

Modifié par Dr. wonderful, 18 décembre 2010 - 12:15 .

[Piecake]

This post is basically an excuse just to use an analogy that i thought up and pimp an awesome show, but I always found that something that tries to be more 'mature' by becoming darker, grittier, and sexier kinda absurd. Id say that is The Shield approach because while it was darker, grittier, and sexier than The Wire(best show ever), I sure wouldnt call it more mature.

[Ziggeh]

Piecake wrote...

Id say that is The Shield approach because while it was darker, grittier, and sexier than The Wire(best show ever), I sure wouldnt call it more mature.

I'd call the wire grittier.

In fact, unless actual grit was involved, there are very few fictions I'd describe as grittier than the wire.

[Piecake]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

Piecake wrote...

Id say that is The Shield approach because while it was darker, grittier, and sexier than The Wire(best show ever), I sure wouldnt call it more mature.

I'd call the wire grittier.

In fact, unless actual grit was involved, there are very few fictions I'd describe as grittier than the wire.

Yea, now that i think on it, you are right.  I think i was probably ignoring the grittier part since when i hear the line of "darker, grittier, sexier" I tend to think of it as a whole, and i think that line's sentiments fits shows like The Shiled more than The Wire

I am going to be disappointed if True Grit isnt the grittiest thing we've ever seen, cause that would just be false advertisment, and thats not right. 

[Ziggeh]

Piecake wrote...

Yea, now that i think on it, you are right.  I think i was probably ignoring the grittier part since when i hear the line of "darker, grittier, sexier" I tend to think of it as a whole, and i think that line's sentiments fits shows like The Shiled more than The Wire

Definitely true, as a single description. Not much sexy 'bout the wire.

I've actually thought of a number of grittier things now. Ken Loach films, for example tend to be "unflinching portrayals" that might as well see him run sand through a projector.

[Piecake]

ziggehunderslash wrote...

Piecake wrote...

Yea, now that i think on it, you are right.  I think i was probably ignoring the grittier part since when i hear the line of "darker, grittier, sexier" I tend to think of it as a whole, and i think that line's sentiments fits shows like The Shiled more than The Wire

Definitely true, as a single description. Not much sexy 'bout the wire.

I've actually thought of a number of grittier things now. Ken Loach films, for example tend to be "unflinching portrayals" that might as well see him run sand through a projector.

Cant say I have seen anything by him, and your description doesnt instill me with a whole lot of interest