54 réponses à ce sujet

[Xenoseroster]

As other people have said, just because we don't get to PLAY a peasant doesn't mean they aren't dirty, stinking, disease-ridden, flea-mongering, religiophobes.  I think the Chantry pretty well emulates the catholic church in the middle ages, in that "everyone" that is human in the setting believes in a certain set of beliefs, and anyone questioning these beliefs, or, ironically, working magic without the churches approval (Cause c'mon, medieval catholics thought their preists did "magical" things all the time, but it was OK cause they were priests. >.>) are shunned, ostracized, and/or hunted down and killed.  The only major difference is there's no "other" set of beliefs for humans, they've shoved that role onto elves, and to a lesser extent, dwarves. 
And saying "It doesn't matter cause they aren't human" is a pretty lame concept IMO.  They're sentient beings, they will be presented as entities-closely-resembling-but-not-quite-humans.  Folks used to think African-ish folks were almost a different species, sounds pretty similar IMO.  If it looks like a human, talks like a human, weeps like a human, and apparently sexes like a human, but it has pointy ears, that's not a human?

[Drasanil]

Xenoseroster wrote...
 The only major difference is there's no "other" set of beliefs for humans, they've shoved that role onto elves, and to a lesser extent, dwarves.

 

*Points to the Rivaini*

Modifié par Drasanil, 29 octobre 2009 - 04:08 .

[Xenoseroster]

Drasanil wrote...

Xenoseroster wrote...
 The only major difference is there's no "other" set of beliefs for humans, they've shoved that role onto elves, and to a lesser extent, dwarves.

 

*Points to the Rivaini*

Who, as I understand it, are far away from the main chantry areas, and have the Qunari backing them up.  It's not that the Chantry wouldn't like to kick them in the religious lobes and burn down their actually giant temples, or whatever they use, it isn't politically/militarily feasible.  Most of the information we've been given about the Rivaini have basically been scholars thinking they're litterally mentally impared for giving up the chantry, which sounds like religious intolerance to me.  They just can't do anything about it.

Edit: Oh, and this:
 "Dealing with those of the local populace which had converted to the qunari religion proved difficult, especially as some of these had lived under the qun now for generations, and the response by many armies was simply to exterminate all those who had converted. Officially the Chantry denies this, claiming most converts fled north into Rivain and Par Vollen, but the mass graves at Nocen Fields and Marnus Pell attest otherwise. Indeed, so many were slain at Marnus Pell that the Veil is said to be permanently sundered, the ruins still plagued by restless corpses to this day."

Genociding religious converts?  Saying nothing bad happened?  Toooootally not religious intolerance.

Modifié par Xenoseroster, 29 octobre 2009 - 04:22 .

[DaySeeker]

Could the setting be darker, certainly. They could make us play as a character with a disability and healing packs could be leeches, and maybe we'd lose a limb or two to gangreen as we are raped by our father after being beaten for being of a mixed race.



It is true, but as previous posters have pointed out "dark" does not need to mean filled with intolerance and bigotry. I can actually see that in a dark setting there would be little time for such things as folks would have to struggle to survive with whomever they could.



I think the game is centered mostly on the PC and the player in regards to an self-exploration into "What would I do?" We choose to help the sick child by stealing the religious artifact from another village. We are presented with options where the right one isn't the best one, where there are no best ones. I, of course haven't played it yet, but it seems like the world is set up without a moral compass, everything is grey (even the wardens), there may be no holy power, and those ruling may be good but fallible, or evil, but looking to protect their property (citizens included). So basically the player is thrown into a world of uncertainty and must do their best to make sense of it.



It is the darkest it could be, no. Is it darker then most RPG's out there, I think so. Even games like The Force Unleashed where you play an evil apprentice (who, yes, may redeem himself) didn't feel dark because the answer to any problem was just kill everyone, and I enjoyed the game, but I don't think dark means evil, I think dark means ambiguous. Your companions may judge you, but no higher power will, there is no morality meter, and in the end, while you may stop this blight, another will come. The world is not saved.

[jrastaban]

DaySeeker wrote...

Could the setting be darker, certainly. They could make us play as a character with a disability and healing packs could be leeches, and maybe we'd lose a limb or two to gangreen as we are raped by our father after being beaten for being of a mixed race.

*Scribbles notes for first DA:O mod*  

[Mcy1000]

Drasanil wrote...


In the case of elves, it doesn't seem to make much sense considering they are sub-par physical labourers

Where are you getting this from?

[Drasanil]

Mcy1000 wrote...

Drasanil wrote...


In the case of elves, it doesn't seem to make much sense considering they are sub-par physical labourers

Where are you getting this from?

Given they are smaller, thinner, and have less muscle than humans, it stands to reason they would not be able to perform physically demanding tasks as well or for as long as the average human would. In essence when it comes to intensive physical labour they are sub-par compared to humans.  

[Varenus Luckmann]

DaySeeker wrote...
Could the setting be darker, certainly. They could make us play as a character with a disability and healing packs could be leeches, and maybe we'd lose a limb or two to gangreen as we are raped by our father after being beaten for being of a mixed race.

Oh god, I so wish that I could fit that into my signature. That is just Grade A, right there. Hahahaha.

Drasanil wrote...

Given they are smaller, thinner, and
have less muscle than humans, it stands to reason they would not be
able to perform physically demanding tasks as well or for as long as
the average human would. In essence when it comes to intensive physical
labour they are sub-par compared to humans.

I find that comment
derogatory, hurtful, unfair and racist!

Also, I present to you, Vulcans.

Modifié par Varenus Luckmann, 29 octobre 2009 - 05:10 .

[Mcy1000]

Drasanil wrote...

Given they are smaller, thinner, and have less muscle than humans, it stands to reason they would not be able to perform physically demanding tasks as well or for as long as the average human would. In essence when it comes to intensive physical labour they are sub-par compared to humans.  

That just seems awfully presumptuous.  There are so many more factors at play than the ones you cite.

[Saurel]

Mcy1000 wrote...

That just seems awfully presumptuous.  There are so many more factors at play than the ones you cite.

Such as? I would rather an Ogre do my physical labor if I had a choice 

[Drasanil]

Mcy1000 wrote...

Drasanil wrote...

Given they are smaller, thinner, and have less muscle than humans, it stands to reason they would not be able to perform physically demanding tasks as well or for as long as the average human would. In essence when it comes to intensive physical labour they are sub-par compared to humans.  

That just seems awfully presumptuous.  There are so many more factors at play than the ones you cite.

True it's a guess at best, but given that they are less physically imposing than humans, and that in-game they have no physical stat bonuses unlike the other races it seems a fairly good bet that such is the case.

@Varenus: Vulkans are about the same height and weight as humans, plus star trek gave them a quai-magical 3x strength bonus

[Herr Uhl]

Drasanil wrote...

Mcy1000 wrote...

Drasanil wrote...

Given they are smaller, thinner, and have less muscle than humans, it stands to reason they would not be able to perform physically demanding tasks as well or for as long as the average human would. In essence when it comes to intensive physical labour they are sub-par compared to humans.  

That just seems awfully presumptuous.  There are so many more factors at play than the ones you cite.

True it's a guess at best, but given that they are less physically imposing than humans, and that in-game they have no physical stat bonuses unlike the other races it seems a fairly good bet that such is the case.

Still, enslaving your own race instead of elves for a small benefit in muscular power just seems weird to me. It's the outsiders and conquered that tend to become slaves, not the most physically able. In history that is.

Modifié par Herr Uhl, 29 octobre 2009 - 05:43 .

[Drasanil]

Herr Uhl wrote... Still, enslaving your own race instead of elves for a small benefit in muscular power just seems weird to me.

 
It isn't when you already have an indentured labour force in the form of peasants, which was the original point I made about slavery. It would have made more sense that Tevinter sack Arlathan and enslave it's population in order to aquire wealth and knowledge (ie: Rome-Greece situation) instead of to simply aquire secondary source of cheap labour which is sub-par to the one they already had.

It's the outsiders and conquered that tend to become slaves, not the most physically able. In history that is.

That's true but not all slaves were used for the same thing, nor they all treated in the same manner. 

Modifié par Drasanil, 29 octobre 2009 - 06:55 .

[Rylor Tormtor]

Maria Caliban wrote...

kuraw wrote...

Korva wrote...

[...] just because it's not a setting where women exist only to be brutalized, degraded, dehumanized and exploited? And I might add that I for one am DAMN glad that it is not, because I wouldn't pay for sh*t like that. [...]

here lies the answer why bioware (and not only them) don't have the guts to cut with political correctness... people would not even buy it.

that's a pity because it would be fun to play a women who kicks ass despite gender discrimination, and evolves to sort of a jeanne d'arc 

Did you not notice the origin where a group of elven women are gathered up by a human noble to be raped?

People by politically incorrect games, books, and movies all the time. I don't recall reading about how 300 was a boxoffice bomb or how aSoIF can't sell copies.

Yeah, BioWare doesn't have a setting where Duncan won't take female Grey Wardens, and women are only good for making babies. They didn't do so out of a sense of political correctness but because that doesn't interest them. The writers want to write about interesting and powerful women so they made a setting where they could. In no way does this take away from it being dark fantasy.

Dark fantasy tends to be far more progressive in its depiction of women than traditional fantasy. 'Traditional' fantasy likes stories of farm boys becoming noble knights and rescuing fair women while saving the world from a dark lord. The dark lords forces are all dark and stinky, and many times they rush into the idealic farm village, kill the men, burn the houses, and ravage the helpless women. In stock fantasy, the gender roles tend to be rigidly defined.

An interesting parallel is the newer version of BSG. Here we have a dark science fiction setting, end of humanity and all that, but we have what seems to a more gender equal model as well. While many people at first were not sold on certain casting choices, (in the first three seasons at least) we see an alternative model of social behavior that is both believeable and different from what would be considered traditional. 

[Sm1lingAssas1n]

Racially prejudical contexts aside...



I think its refreshing that for once the lazy, no-good, waifish, pixie dust snorting, forest canoodaling, tree-hugging, hippy race is being put to some kind of practical use in a Fantasy element.



Ok maybe that was prejudicial... but what i meant to say was booo elves! BOOO!



No not you Viconia, i could never be mad at a drow =D

[Kemor]

Drasanil wrote...

Part of what makes a setting 'dark' for me especially when it appears to be a quasi-medival one, is that there will be ignorance, superstition, bigotry, sexism, exploitation, religious persecution and that your character will have to deal with it and/or even exploit it to further his/her own ends. This is where Dragon Age seems to fall short in the 'dark' category, every one seems to be equal with in the set parameters and with exception of some token discrimination against a non-human subgroup everything seems to go.

In short I get the feeling that the darkness was tacked on as an after-thought rather than being an integral part of the setting and I'd like to hear your thoughts on the subject.

While the "general" freedom of speech has improved overall in the 20th century and continues today, the actual content of the speech itself has become more and more limited by "political correctness". Most people today just cannot bring themselves to speak publicly of core humans flaws and what they mean to us, our societies and civilizations. Worst, if they do, they are immediately flung aside, qualified by words usually completely misunderstood (and misused) but that have deep emotional values that none can ignore or discuss unless they too want to be cast aside. If you don't like what someone is saying, label them racist, homophobic, anti-semit, anti-patriotic or any other term wit the same general effect and they will be unable to discuss of anything but this for a long...long time.

More and more, there are some things you just cannot say or express, especially if you are involved in any business practices and this varies from country to country. It's a bit the same as for example in the USA 50 years ago where you simply could NOT have any black woman in a mainstream commercial for a bra. Doing so would have ruined you instantly and public uproar might even have pushed justice to get involved. Today, if you do not include every single human "colour" in your commercials (or tv series, movies, etc), you can very easily be labeled a racist and this would impact your sales dramatically. Therefore, everybody moves with the current and ends up doing pretty much the same "average" thing. Main-steaming if you will.

Anyone educated and able to put himself in context can imagine part of how it could have been back in medieval times, even though it's very, very difficult. But nobody can picture it because it would cause an INSANE uproar in some parts of the society and, unless if you were already a marginal and not care about money/social interactions, would ruin you.
Video games are not meant to make a stand or to make your learn something, they are primarily entertainment. You can use them to slightly educate or make a point but you cannot depict kings, peasants and knights basically raping women every single day of the week or the fundamental logic of slavery in a given context and how civilizations (even ours) improved because of it. If you would, your game would simply NEVER be released because even though you have freedom of speech, you do not have freedom of content.

Blizzard is pushing this a bit and I have to say, having a religion in a game that is so close to real world religion and so obviously "grey" on top of having homosexual relations and whatnot, is a bit daring in this day and age but MUCH less than it was 10 years ago.

The funniest thing is, to really make you understand how context in time is important, today, it might cause more uproar NOT to have homosexual romances than to have it. In 10 years, I would not be surprised to have video game companies FORCED to have homosexual options for romances if they don't want to be accused to homophobia and this done by the very people who are pretending to defend freedom of speech today.

Another thing for example, to put you in the mindset even more and hopefully make you understand that Bioware just cannot do some things:
HP Lovecraft is an author I love, always have. Not the man itself but his books and his mind. When you read Lovecraft however, his depictions of black people (non whites in general) are very foreign and the first thing that comes into mind is that he was a stupid racist. In our day and age, I'm proud to consider that reaction logical. However, judging his work as racist and disregarding it is, I believe stupid BUT, to people knowing the books and finding the author racist, make it almost impossible to praise it publicly. Imagine a white male politician caught reading Lovecraft on his vacation, you'd have such a fuss about it that it would be really hard to recover from it because Lovecraft writing REALLY seem racist today and people have a lot of trouble putting things in context...

Anyway, the more freedom of speech we seem to have, the less we seem to actually can say and that's...interesting, even in video games

[DaySeeker]

I don't know, I think people have just gotten better about working their way around PC as in the gay marriage debate, "We're not against homosexuals, we're just against them marrying." Pretty homophobic, but hiding behind "protecting marriage." My point being, we just find new ways to voice prejudice and make ourselves sound rational.

[TuringPoint]

Umm, this is a PC game?  Yeah, I know, I'm stupid

[Ajyk]

After reading the books, I'm more than satisfied with the setting and tone.

[KethWolfheart]

One point I have not seen made is the darkness on a personal level.  I don't want to do any spoiling so I can't really give examples.  However both Grey Wardens and Mages make major sacrifices, both of which are pretty dark, especially the Wardens.  Mages have the harrowing which can result in death or, if not up to it, made tranquil.  Your character has a lot more issues than what comes up in many other games.

There is plenty of "dark and gritty" on the personal level - MUCH more so than I have seen in the higher fantasy games.  It is also darker on moral decisions, on quest endings and how the game plays out - from what little I have heard.  Again much darker than the typical "Snow White" story line, or even the LoTR storyline.  Yet I didn't really see any mention of this.  I would say being dark doesn't have to be based on a macro-scale.

I also tend to agree that thinking that the elves are not human and therefore enslaving them is not dark is faulty logic.  This isn't earth, it is another world.  Elves and Dwarves are part of this world.  Why should the humans of this fantasy world mirror our own as far as what our world considers dark?  Makes zero sense.

Instead, because they are intergrated fully into this world, you have to take into account the culture and society of the other races - because they exist and are part of the oeverall environment of the world you are in.

This world is filled with many problems, corruption, societal ills, darkness and the like .  Just because it doesn't mirror earths history and culture 100% I hardly see that as a valid reason for saying it is not dark.

Modifié par KethWolfheart, 01 novembre 2009 - 02:23 .

[viking135]

I think Drasanil makes some good points. Dragon Age is probebly darker then previous Bioware RPGs but i comperd to let say Conan or the Witcher it is really PC. But well as Drasanil also says creating a to dark setting for the game particularly if it includes sexism or racism would hurt sales and potentially create RL legal problems.

[Maddyn Malweed]

You have to also remember that "The Witcher" is based on a truly dark European medieval type character.

The Witcher 2 "Assassin Of kings" will be even darker..

www.youtube.com/watch

Modifié par Maddyn Malweed, 01 novembre 2009 - 10:50 .

[Maddyn Malweed]

You have to also remember that "The Witcher" is based on a truly dark European medieval type character. If you look at European RPG they are always a bit darker and grittier,it's because we in Europe know what a medieval type town looks like and the history,plus we can see real life castles.



I always find that American or Canadian RPG devs are a bit Hollywood with their story's and graphic styles,it's all very American.



The Witcher is really an adult RPG,it is what it says on the box,that's not to say DRO won't be as good,but it wont be as dark and gritty as that game.

[Promethean 47]

While it's lovely for idle forum chat, why do you particularly care if the game comports with your view of what constitutes 'dark' fantasy? Either the world, characters, and story are well made and evoke an enjoyable/meaningful reaction in you or they don't.



As to what does and doesn't constitute 'dark' fantasy, I think you're focus on racism/bigotry/sexism is misplaced. Take a step back from a larger view and compare it with other works.



Take sci-fi for example. There is no overt sexism or racism in the alien movies, and yet they would undoubtedly be considered 'dark' science fiction when compared to the likes of Star Trek, Mass Effect, or other more positive visions of humanity in space.



Similarly, Dragon Age appears to be more 'dark' in its tone than say Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, or perhaps even the Forgotten Realms (though there have certainly been 'darkish' fantasy stories/campaigns told inside the FR universe). Whether it's as dark as Warhammer is ultimately a pointless question.



I'd take Dragon Age for what it is and do not try and compare it to what it is assuredly not: Warhammer.

[Promethean 47]

"You have to also remember that "The Witcher" is based on a truly dark European medieval type character. If you look at European RPG they are always a bit darker and grittier,it's because we in Europe know what a medieval type town looks like and the history,plus we can see real life castles."



Ya, but we also have these things called 'books' in America and Canada. Anyone who lived through medieval times in Europe is now dead. While you can make a cultural sensibility argument, really being born in Europe has very little to do with one's ability to make a realistic approximation of medieval life. Plus, your statement assumes that the developers WANT to portray a medieval type life. These are fantasy games after all. If Bioware was making a historical RPG set in actual medieval Europe, then this argument would make more sense.



"The Witcher is really an adult RPG,it is what it says on the box,that's not to say DRO won't be as good,but it wont be as dark and gritty as that game."



I tend to resent statements like these. The Witcher certainly had its fair share of blood and sex, but that doesn't make it an 'adult' RPG (unless you're using the term 'adult' in the ratings sense, in which case, yes it had art with full nudity so it will likely be more explicit content wise). Whether it is more 'mature' in the sense of how sophisticated its story is, is yet to be seen. That said, simply making a story with a more morally ambiguous bent than say Mass Effect or BGII doesn't make it a more mature game. It's sophomoric to think that simply by doing the opposite or some twist on the classic heroic quest archetype you are necessarily making a more sophisticated or mature game.



The devil is in the details. Anyway, blah...deep thoughts by Jack Handy.