92 réponses à ce sujet

[Addai]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

Do you think that the game writers intended a social justice (i.e. politically "progressive") POV?

Not sure if you were only hoping to hear from the poster you quoted, but I'd like to think that you can aim for multiple targets with a story. Ultimately, the main goal is to be entertaining and memorable. It's pretty clear that the attitudes in game about sexuality and gender are intentional; they bring it to light through a variety of examples (the story of Ser Aveline, Andraste, even the couple of blacksmiths in Denerim whose names I forget). It isn't unfeasible that they would bring something similar to other social issues.

Simply the depiction of a female or gay character (or minority character, or poor character etc.) doesn't necessarily imply that there's an agenda in presenting them.  Of course, in the world of postmodern literary criticism, you can't not write without a political agenda, so I guess there's that- if you accept the premise.

I was just curious how people perceived it.  There seems to be an assumption, on both the part of the people who hate the notion and those who cheer it, that DA2 was more politically progressive than Origins.  It's still a question mark for me.  I did notice that there were more modernisms and more self-aware irony, the 4th wall being broken and such.  It would make sense that if the game is more intentionally modern and takes itself less seriously, that it could also be more intentionally "agenda-ified."

Modifié par Addai67, 21 avril 2011 - 07:16 .

[hoorayforicecream]

Addai67 wrote...

Simply the depiction of a female or gay character (or minority character, or poor character etc.) doesn't necessarily imply that there's an agenda in presenting them.  Of course, in the world of postmodern literary criticism, you can't not write without a political agenda, so I guess there's that- if you accept the premise.

I was just curious how people perceived it.  There seems to be an assumption, on both the part of the people who hate the notion and those who cheer it, that DA2 was more politically progressive than Origins.  It's still a question mark for me.  I did notice that there were more modernisms and more self-aware irony, the 4th wall being broken and such.  It would make sense that if the game is more intentionally modern and takes itself less seriously, that it could also be more intentionally "agenda-ified."

I'm not sure whether I would say it is an agenda, but I do know that at least some of the writers chose to focus on the characters from a specific perspective when writing. Anders was written from the perspective that he was mentally ill. Is that a politicized agenda saying something about the treatment of mentally ill people in society and how it could be improved? I don't think so. But is there something there about it? Yeah, I'd say so. I always thought that the focus is on making the characters and story interesting, and using aspects of society that may or may not be familiar as a method of drawing the player in. Whether that makes the player think about those selfsame aspects in modern living is anybody's guess, but if it does so for some, why not enjoy it?

[Maria13]

OK so I'm only a very 'umble FFer but from my minimal experience I say that even when writing fantasy you can be aware of having an 'agenda' or indeed 'agendas' for social justice.

Sorry if this makes me sound terribly boring!!!

PS for Addai the most important agenda for me in DA2 was that however much you progress you and your fellow Fereldans will always be seen as foreigners and interlopers  ripe for exploitation both by native Kirkwallers and other more fortunate foreigners like Hubert the orlesian mine owner...

Modifié par Maria13, 21 avril 2011 - 08:05 .

[mesmerizedish]

As an example, four bisexual LIs (because that's totally my issue): did the writers all say "Let's push for acceptance of homosexuality!"? No. They said "Let's try to give as many people as much choice as we can." But were they completely ignorant of how large a step it was for gay players? Absolutely not!

They may have had one clear goal in mind, but of course they were aware of what it meant as far as "being progressive" is concerned, and I think that they were pretty happy about that.

[Maria Caliban]

nightscrawl wrote...

There really needs to be a multi-quote button on these forums. Can I ask for that somewhere?

Yes.

Ryzaki wrote...

Really mage Hawke (or Bethany) going to Kirkwall was a dumb idea from the start.

Yes. But their other option was death.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 21 avril 2011 - 08:11 .

[Shacary]

I like DA 2 but i think the article was kinda wishful thinking. I didnt find things to be as inspiring as the writer inferred, in particular about the great character building for females.. Eh? what back stabbing, using sexual amoral types is invigorating? ooo where have I NOT seen that cliche before.
I would have liked a bit of a hint previously that they were not just stupid in noticing fireballs scorching the ground around ... IM talking to you Cullen!!!! .. the battlefield. Yes the mercenaries/smugglers bribed ignorance, but who paid after that? why didnt at LEAST someone indicate they were apostates... I really had trouble believing that even by the way the article tried to explain it.
I really felt like Da2 was less about choices in the game, than participating in a video that would play out the same way without regards to player choices. That doesnt mean I hated the game, but in reality.... it was not BW's best imo. Enjoy it for its own sake but I cant see all roses and candy in its presentation. Its flawed... big time.

[Addai]

Maria13 wrote...

OK so I'm only a very 'umble FFer but from my minimal experience I say that even when writing fantasy you can be aware of having an 'agenda' or indeed 'agendas' for social justice.

Sure, you can.  Though I usually find these types of stories are good in spite of their agenda rather than because of it, especially if it's very overt.  As an example, Battlestar Galactica is a thinly veiled allegory for Mormon myth.  I still liked the series (both of them, the newer one better than the old one), but at the times when it got preachy and overt about its Meaning, it was dull.  I find the same in Star Trek, with Roddenberry's social utopia vision, and with C.S. Lewis which is not very thinly veiled Christian mythology.  IMO stories are much better when they stick to basic, universal, human themes, or when any self-aware analogies are deeply buried- such as Tolkien's or G.K. Chesterton's Catholic dogma/ traditionalist politics.

Thus far I've found the Dragon Age stuff to be mostly about the story and haven't perceived much agenda.  I did think that Anders' speech about why he sleeps with men to be an instance of preachiness that would have been better left out. 

PS for Addai the most important agenda for me in DA2 was that however much you progress you and your fellow Fereldans will always be seen as foreigners and interlopers  ripe for exploitation both by native Kirkwallers and other more fortunate foreigners like Hubert the orlesian mine owner...

I didn't find there to be any overt modern parallels going on there.  That would be more an example to me of something human and basic.

[Maria13]

@ Addai, I loved BSG too and I don't give a damn where the story came from, even if it was the Mormon saga, doesn't matter because it is as old as the hills, the story of a displaced peoples seeking a home (the Isrealites, Watership Down even Hawke & co...)

As for the agenda thing I just reread your post, happily high on some excellent Spanish red here, and no, I didn't pick up much modern post modern stuff in DA2 anymore than there was in DA:O I was just rather lamely attempting to explain how an agenda (or is it being old?) sometimes affects your writing...

[Joy Divison]

Thanks for the article.

While I do agree that there is a conscious decision by the writers to implement social commentary, I do think that Nightscrawl is correct in that too often people read into things that either conform or offend their socio-political worldview.

I read from numerous people that said that Anders was written from the perspective he was mentally ill. Really? News to me. Having learned that, my entire previous thoughts about what Anders may have represented is now totally invalid. What we see or think we see just isn't there sometimes.

There are two points from the previous two pages of comments that I would like to share my opinion (and it's just that).

1. Passing. The article is correct in that Hawke does get a pass from the establishment AFTER defeating the Arishock. Meredith says this unequivocally. However, there is nothing to support such a pass after your 1st year indentured servitude is up until the Qunari attack. This is plot armor the writers never addressed.

2. I would not put Duke Nukem and Grand Theft Auto in w/ CoD or suggest they are something of a standard. CoD, since it is a military game where all you pretty much do is shoot people, is intrinsically going to be a sasuagefest, whereas the former two are intentionally designed to cater to a particular demographic. This is a fundamental difference. I see Duke Nukem very much like the trashy novels my sister reads while at the beach.

[Riona45]

Added this blog to my favorites, thanks for posting it.

[Clover Rider]

Not a bad blog but I did not care for the Duke Nukem jab but that's just me.

[Darth Krytie]

Joy Divison wrote...
I read from numerous people that said that Anders was written from the perspective he was mentally ill. Really? News to me. Having learned that, my entire previous thoughts about what Anders may have represented is now totally invalid. What we see or think we see just isn't there sometimes.

Actually, even if he was written with a certain intent, whatever you may or may not have gleaned from his character is not invalid. We do not know the minds of numerous authors of even more numerous works, but we still think about what the works say...none of those interpretations are invalid. There are some forms of literary criticism that state the author's intent is unimportant and whatever the reader perceives is...so, your viewing of the character is just as valid as the intent of the person who wrote him.

[Chaota Vos]

While the auther seems to have quite the chip on her shoulder regarding the male gender in general, I found most of the article pretty thought provoking. While playing the prelude to Kirkwall part I did find myself rolling my eyes at Weasley's death assuming, like the auther, that it was setting up for Hawke to get his/herself a slice of the Aveline cake. It was a huge twist to me that Avaline ends up asking you to help her court Donell, and a very refreshing twist at that. I also loved that as Hawke, you had the option of playing the spurned and jealous "other", as opposed to the generic "two LIs compete for Hawke's attention". The fact that that DOES actually happen with Fenris and Anders is far more appropriate than any other potential LI clashes, mostly coz of their polar opposite political views regarding mages.

[Clover Rider]

fibchopkin wrote...

@ CV- Heehee- I'm pretty much a dyed in the wool feminist and even I've found that many of the bloggers at borderhouse have a chip on their shoulders concerning the male gender- particularly the white, middle class, heterosexual male. Not completely without cause mind you, but still...

We white, middle class, heterosexual men get a lot of hate don't know why it's not like we are rich jerks.

Modifié par Some Geth, 22 avril 2011 - 12:23 .

[inquartata02]

There's a societal privilege aspect, of having privileges automatically granted to you that you may not really take notice of since they've always been there. The Invisible Backpack tries to "unpack" that theory of privilege.

[Joy Divison]

Darth Krytie wrote...

Actually, even if he was written with a certain intent, whatever you may or may not have gleaned from his character is not invalid. We do not know the minds of numerous authors of even more numerous works, but we still think about what the works say...none of those interpretations are invalid. There are some forms of literary criticism that state the author's intent is unimportant and whatever the reader perceives is...so, your viewing of the character is just as valid as the intent of the person who wrote him.

I agree, actually very much so, BUT I am uncomfortable projecting my view of the (mentally healthy) as commentary on mental illness.  Once literary criticism gets into a level of specificity which demands the literary critic make pretty hefty assumptions (which will be based on their biased ideology) to fill in the blanks an author left behind, therein lies the danger.

[Clover Rider]

inquartata02 wrote...

There's a societal privilege aspect, of having privileges automatically granted to you that you may not really take notice of since they've always been there. The Invisible Backpack tries to "unpack" that theory of privilege.

Oh sure but I say I don't fit into that too much like I have had people call me bad names(and try to do worse things) because I "look like a Jew" or get call a commie because of Russian looks.

But hey I am from Baltimore Maryland if you are not rich white you get look down on anyway.

Modifié par Some Geth, 22 avril 2011 - 04:39 .