144 réponses à ce sujet

[Mr.House]

b09boy wrote...

ademska wrote...

no, we know what we've been told.

and it's largely the chantry that's been telling us. y'all are really hung up on this immutable chantry lore thing.

and @xkg, that was my point. there is no way to have a productive discussion because we know nothing.

So your whole point is that we should just throw away all established lore as unreliable.

...

Then what is even the point of having lore?  Of having a codex?  Of the writers writing any of this?

The codexs are wirrten by in game characters don't see, and most of it is by the Chantry, something which we know lies. The codex is just info, but that does not mean it has to be right.

[xkg]

So if codex is written by those "in game characters" and they are written by the writters so it shoud be obvious who wrote the codex. Do you wanna guess ?

TIP for you : Use basic laws of logic.

Modifié par xkg, 09 juillet 2011 - 12:34 .

[Mr.House]

xkg wrote...

So if codex is written by those "in game characters" and they are written by the writters so it shoud be obvious who wrote the codex. Do you wanna guess ?

TIP for you : Use basic laws of logic.

The point is we don't know if the codex entry is true, not all histroy is true, more so from the Chantry.

Modifié par Mr.House, 09 juillet 2011 - 12:38 .

[ademska]

lolllll oh you

[Saphara]

xkg wrote...

So if codex is written by those "in game characters" and they are written by the writters so it shoud be obvious who wrote the codex. Do you wanna guess ?

TIP for you : Use basic laws of logic.

doesnt mean those authors are right. The devs could have written those characters to have biased opinions written in the codex, such as the Chantry.

[hoorayforicecream]

xkg wrote...

So if codex is written by those "in game characters" and they are written by the writters so it shoud be obvious who wrote the codex. Do you wanna guess ?

TIP for you : Use basic laws of logic.

Stuff written 1200 years ago is always totally and entirely factual. True story.

[jlb524]

xkg wrote...

So if codex is written by those "in game characters" and they are written by the writters so it shoud be obvious who wrote the codex. Do you wanna guess ?

TIP for you : Use basic laws of logic.

No.  The writers probably have an idea of what the 'true' history and timeline of Thedas is, yes.  We don't know it though from our perspective (which is the same as our characters).  We only get stories and historical accounts in-game from characters (like Genitivi) or crap someone in the Chantry wrote.  Only the writers now have the meta-knowledge truly happened and when, but they don't have to show that to us right away, or ever....

[xI extremist Ix]

"The wardens were founded over 2.000 years ago."
*looks back at it.*
"The wardens were founded over 1.200 years ago."
*Tehehehehe I am so diabolical! -Brother Genitivi in the Life of a Chantry Scholar

[xkg]

Ok. So I belive in the codex - you guys don't.
And this was the only proof i had to backup my arguments.

Sorry but i don't have any other sources so i must stop here - because i really don't like to talk about things that I can't prove.

Edit because that sounds bad:  that I can't prove that no one can prove - it is clear that neither of us can, in this case.

Modifié par xkg, 09 juillet 2011 - 12:54 .

[b09boy]

Aye, we have one source of information.  If you have some proof as to why we should be skeptical of that information then go ahead with it.  Otherwise you're basically snubbing the entirety of the world's lore.

[Saphara]

b09boy wrote...

Aye, we have one source of information.  If you have some proof as to why we should be skeptical of that information then go ahead with it.  Otherwise you're basically snubbing the entirety of the world's lore.

Well, I'd certainly would take the Chantry's word with a spoonful of salt, since the Chantry can be contasted well with... certain real world institutions (and thats ALL I am going to say about that to avoid going offtopic!). We're supposed to believe them because...they said so?

Im sorry, but im not going to believe word for word what the Chantry tells me based on word alone.

[LiquidGrape]

b09boy wrote...

Aye, we have one source of information.  If you have some proof as to why we should be skeptical of that information then go ahead with it.  Otherwise you're basically snubbing the entirety of the world's lore.

We should always be skeptical of information. Especially when spirituality enters the picture. Obfuscating the truth with reductive fairytales, unwittingly or not, does seem like the kind of thing the Chantry would do in order to further its agenda.

Modifié par LiquidGrape, 09 juillet 2011 - 12:58 .

[Blacklash93]

Why don't we just wait and see instead of jumping to conclusions? The writers know more than we do.

Modifié par Blacklash93, 09 juillet 2011 - 01:02 .

[tuppence95]

b09boy wrote...

Aye, we have one source of information.  If you have some proof as to why we should be skeptical of that information then go ahead with it.  Otherwise you're basically snubbing the entirety of the world's lore.

Codex?  David Gaider said in the early days of Origins that codex is written by characters in the game.  Some of it is "fact."  Some of it is just theory.  I no longer have the link to that statement, but someone here might.

[Sutekh]

Couldn't we just wait to actually play the thing before nitpicking the lore and whatnot?

We see a bit with a Warden saying they built the prison to contain the guy.

We see another bit with the guy saying "2000 years, the magic holds"

There's no way to tell now whether they're both talking about the same thing. Could be related to Hawke's legacy instead of the prison. Could be refering to himself. Could be talking about how his hairdo is absolutely phenomenal since he used that shampoo 2000 years ago.

Could also be a big revelation that *gasp* the Chantry lies.

We. don't. know. All we can do is assume, and you know what they say...

[xkg]

ademska wrote...

lolllll oh you

Hahaha i know what you mean

[jlb524]

b09boy wrote...

Aye, we have one source of information.  If you have some proof as to why we should be skeptical of that information then go ahead with it.  Otherwise you're basically snubbing the entirety of the world's lore.

It's because historical accounts are never 100% accurate and we never see the 'full picture' of what happened...there's always a bias depending on who wrote the historical account.

Remember in DA:O how we heard two conflicting stories about Flemeth from Morrigan and Leliana.  Both are part of the world's lore and neither could be accurate.  Only the writers know who/what Flemeth actually is and they will divulge that info to us when they're ready for it (if they ever do).

Also, read how the Codex entry on Darkspawn changes based on the Warden's race (it's different for a dwarf as the story comes from a Shaper instead of the Chant of Light). 

[b09boy]

jlb524 wrote...
It's because historical accounts are never 100% accurate and we never see the 'full picture' of what happened...there's always a bias depending on who wrote the historical account.

Aye, but in the same breath you can't create an entire world lore which you have to be skeptical of from the very start.  There's also a difference in the codex entries between "The chantry teaches us" and "in -305 Ancient the Wardens were formed.

[Savber100]

Great... another retcon.


Ugh and here I thought the writer of Baldur's Gate 2 will be better than this.

[jlb524]

b09boy wrote...
Aye, but in the same breath you can't create an entire world lore which you have to be skeptical of from the very start.  There's also a difference in the codex entries between "The chantry teaches us" and "in -305 Ancient the Wardens were formed.

Why not? 

[Saphara]

Savber100 wrote...

Great... another retcon.


Ugh and here I thought the writer of Baldur's Gate 2 will be better than this.

If finding out something that contradicts something else and can be proven true is a retcon, then the entire history of the Earth is one huge retcon.

Not that i can say that this 2000 year thing is true, as we havent seen the whole story yet, but a fact isnt wrong just because it contradicts a previously held belief.

[AtreiyaN7]

It's been said before that the Chantry's teachings aren't necessarily the cold, hard truth. They were happy enough to excise that canticle about Shartan, etc. I wouldn't take everything the Chantry says as gospel, especially things like when the darkspawn first came into being. *shrug*

Do you think that everything in the Bible is true? Because I'm pretty darned sure that the world was NOT created in seven days. You'll forgive me if I'm skeptical of religious organizations, including fictional ones in a fictional game world.

[LiquidGrape]

Saphara wrote...

Savber100 wrote...

Great... another retcon.


Ugh and here I thought the writer of Baldur's Gate 2 will be better than this.

If finding out something that contradicts something else and can be proven true is a retcon, then the entire history of the Earth is one huge retcon.

Not that i can say that this 2000 year thing is true, as we havent seen the whole story yet, but a fact isnt wrong just because it contradicts a previously held belief.

We are communcating by means of digitally transferred bit-parts of data.
1200 years ago this would probably have been perceived as witchcraft.

...does this mean we are contradicting the human canon?