183 réponses à ce sujet

[Zkyire]

maxernst wrote...
 For all we know, the Qunari and the Chasind may burn homosexuals at the stake.

Qunari do not have gay sex.

Even if there are homosexual or bisexual Qunari, they only have sex in order to procreate. They're basically assigned a partner and bam.

So even if they wanted to; wouldn't happen.

[Stanley Woo]

DamnThoseDisplayNames wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...
If that is the case, then of course we're going to use somewhat anachronistic concepts and language. The game, while set in a medieval-ish European-ish setting, is made for a modern audience to enjoy. You don't want people speaking in late Middle / early Modern English, as not everyone is familiar with such language.

Mr. Woo is't into Betrayal at Krondor, huh?

I was very much into Betrayal at Krondor, even though I got very frustrated with some of the gameplay choices the developers made. I love the setting and it was one of the first RPGs based on a literary property I played.

My point isn't that it is necessarily wrong to develop a game that is more rooted in realitty and medieval concepts or language or themes. I was merely stating some reasons why we might have chosen to design our setting and game the way we did. Of course other developers are free to make their own choices, and I'm certainly not going to say that they are wrong for making different choices than our developers.

[Rahelron]

Ceesko wrote...


Just watching the trailer for the new DLC{very hollywood-ish:} gives strength in my opinion that bioware turned its medieval fantasy rpg which was adequately portrayed in DA:O to neither medieval nor fantasy, but simply a postmodernist setting with swords instead of guns. Replacing the weapons with automatic machines will absolutely make no difference.

My feeling and this opinion in general stems from the way characters react to each other, the way they talk like if they were living in the 21th century, they way they react to gender differences as if everyone is unisex, all this defies all climate or logic that bioware tried to establish in DAO. It simply lost its feelings; it doesn't feel like a fantasy anymore, just a bizarre mish-mash between a modernistic setting and a medieval one.
Just my opinion.

I agree with you. It's exactly as you said.

It seems that at bioware are obsessed with LGBT romances and sex equality. Don't get me wrong, I do support women and gay rights, but introducing them so bluntly in a medieval setting simply destroys any immersion you could get from the game. And these things are not the only ones: what about the party banters where your party members talk about sex like they were in a strip club? Or the borthel where you end up in bed with homless people, chantry sisters and transexual partners? A little bit too much IMHO.

I know that we are indeed in the 21st century and game producers can't ignore the latest achievements in human rights but I think that they could be more discreet when they put them into the game.

My suggestions:
1- Less explicit party banters. Writers that need sex to make people laugh are not good writers at all.
2- Less "kinky adventures" at the brothel (by the way: do we really need a brothel in every DA game?)
3- Less bisexual partners!! A world where everyone goes both ways is not realistic at all.
4- Do you want gay romances? Than create gay only NPCs! This would allow you to create more complex and intriguing storylines and more coherent characters.

[AudioEpics]

I would really love it if a game would be released that returns to the grand old Tolkienian tradition where it's all about myth and mystery and the language is rich and beautiful. Nothing makes me happier than that. I've come to grudgingly accept that fantasy games have become more and more "modern" and... "non-mythic" in feel. I understand that the Dragon Age universe is very political at times, that magic is explicable in practical terms, that the characters joke around like normal 21st century people, and so on... But I accept all these things because there is still enough that I love. I don't love these qualities themselves... That's the most important reason why I don't like The Witcher: this series has turned fantasy into something so political and cynical that it utterly undermines my own Tolkienian sensibilities. Dragon Age is somewhat guilty of this too, but to a much lesser extent and as I've said, I do feel enough warmth, romanticism and sense of wonder to enjoy the Dragon Age games... But I would really love to return to a more... "innocent" style in a way. KotOR did this very well, actually. It really emphasized the mythical qualities of Star Wars. I'm just tired of politics and mundane misery. I'm of the "you want reality, take the bus" mindset. Give me what Tolkien used to call "Faërie". But to each his own! The last thing I want is for different approaches to fantasy being banned :-) I just hope my own preference will come back into style.

[whykikyouwhy]

Rahelron wrote...
I agree with you. It's exactly as you said.

It seems that at bioware are obsessed with LGBT romances and sex equality. Don't get me wrong, I do support women and gay rights, but introducing them so bluntly in a medieval setting simply destroys any immersion you could get from the game. And these things are not the only ones: what about the party banters where your party members talk about sex like they were in a strip club? Or the borthel where you end up in bed with homless people, chantry sisters and transexual partners? A little bit too much IMHO.

I know that we are indeed in the 21st century and game producers can't ignore the latest achievements in human rights but I think that they could be more discreet when they put them into the game.

My suggestions:
1- Less explicit party banters. Writers that need sex to make people laugh are not good writers at all.
2- Less "kinky adventures" at the brothel (by the way: do we really need a brothel in every DA game?)
3- Less bisexual partners!! A world where everyone goes both ways is not realistic at all.
4- Do you want gay romances? Than create gay only NPCs! This would allow you to create more complex and intriguing storylines and more coherent characters.

Was there a brothel in Awakening?? I can't believe that I missed that!

I find it interesting that there is a perception that Bioware is "obsessed" with LGBT matters, when s/s romances are such a minor (and optional) part of their games. If anything, I would think people would draw the conclusion that Bioware is obsessed with...oh, I don't know...blood and gore, or even torn trousers.

So too, it's interesting to see how much realism people want injected in their fantasy games, and where. Players don't mind that dragons are swooping out of the sky, or that people can bring down a whirlwind of electricity from the ethereal plane, but once there's a dash of the bisexual, that causes some issue and breaks the immersion.

Just interesting, is all.

[Eudaemonium]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

I find it interesting that there is a perception that Bioware is "obsessed" with LGBT matters, when s/s romances are such a minor (and optional) part of their games. If anything, I would think people would draw the conclusion that Bioware is obsessed with...oh, I don't know...blood and gore, or even torn trousers.

So too, it's interesting to see how much realism people want injected in their fantasy games, and where. Players don't mind that dragons are swooping out of the sky, or that people can bring down a whirlwind of electricity from the ethereal plane, but once there's a dash of the bisexual, that causes some issue and breaks the immersion.

Just interesting, is all.

Well, it's a well-known fact that there were dragons in the middle ages, they were hunted to extinction by European nobles. We're still looking for the mythical bisexual, though. Several cryptozoologists have claimed to have encountered them, but mainstream science believes those to be mere hoaxes.

[Apollo Starflare]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

I find it interesting that there is a perception that Bioware is "obsessed" with LGBT matters, when s/s romances are such a minor (and optional) part of their games. If anything, I would think people would draw the conclusion that Bioware is obsessed with...oh, I don't know...blood and gore, or even torn trousers.

So too, it's interesting to see how much realism people want injected in their fantasy games, and where. Players don't mind that dragons are swooping out of the sky, or that people can bring down a whirlwind of electricity from the ethereal plane, but once there's a dash of the bisexual, that causes some issue and breaks the immersion.

Just interesting, is all.

Yeah I've noticed this as well. I have no idea how fragile one's sense of immersion must be for such a thing to break it.

[syllogi]

Dear OP,

Please change the title of this thread to "Anachronism in Bioware's Fantasy RPGs" unless you are secretly planning to blow our minds with a thesis on Derrida and Foucault's connections to Flemeth.

Thanks in advance.

[Huntress]

thats1evildude wrote...

GodWood wrote...

I already felt that way with Origins and its very liberal views on homosexuality and female warriors.

I figure that in a world where everyday life brings the risks of getting eaten by dragons, possessed by demons or flayed alive by darkspawn, people wouldn't get too hung up about sexuality.

Agree now add, that in that world or realm there is NO rules/book of beans that said: "with who anyone go to bed" and about females warriors.. http://en.wikipedia....edieval_warfare

Oh about everyone wanting to bed the hero/champion.. HELLO!!! If you are a movie star everyone, man's and women's will want to bed you! not just for you're looks but for the heck of it, if you are a Singer the same thing and yet in this world sexuality is taboo. In Old times people  bed anyone who had POWER..Even queen's " hello cleopatra!" today people still do it, of course "power" have become more diverse but people still being drawn to anyone who outshine the rest of us.

[jbrand2002uk]

Ryzaki wrote...

Filament wrote...

Herr Uhl wrote...

Ceesko wrote...


My feeling and this opinion in general stems from the way characters react to each other, the way they talk like if they were living in the 21th century, they way they react to gender differences as if everyone is unisex, all this defies all climate or logic that bioware tried to establish in DAO.

I found all of this to be there in DAO, and in their manifest for the game setting. It is not new.

Yeah.

It was so I don't get why the OP seems to think this is a new phenomenon.

Oh he understands the term of post modernism just fine but if your going to claim DAO is superior to DA2 listing flaws with DA2 that DAO also had is not a good place to start
so here's my gift to you  A mammoth USA sized FAIL WHALE ha

[Joy Divison]

TeenZombie wrote...

Dear OP,

Please change the title of this thread to "Anachronism in Bioware's Fantasy RPGs" unless you are secretly planning to blow our minds with a thesis on Derrida and Foucault's connections to Flemeth.

Thanks in advance.

I think he's more influenced by Levi-Strauss myself.

[Darkly Tranquil]

AudioEpics wrote...

I would really love it if a game would be released that returns to the grand old Tolkienian tradition where it's all about myth and mystery and the language is rich and beautiful. Nothing makes me happier than that. I've come to grudgingly accept that fantasy games have become more and more "modern" and... "non-mythic" in feel. I understand that the Dragon Age universe is very political at times, that magic is explicable in practical terms, that the characters joke around like normal 21st century people, and so on... But I accept all these things because there is still enough that I love. I don't love these qualities themselves... That's the most important reason why I don't like The Witcher: this series has turned fantasy into something so political and cynical that it utterly undermines my own Tolkienian sensibilities. Dragon Age is somewhat guilty of this too, but to a much lesser extent and as I've said, I do feel enough warmth, romanticism and sense of wonder to enjoy the Dragon Age games... But I would really love to return to a more... "innocent" style in a way. KotOR did this very well, actually. It really emphasized the mythical qualities of Star Wars. I'm just tired of politics and mundane misery. I'm of the "you want reality, take the bus" mindset. Give me what Tolkien used to call "Faërie". But to each his own! The last thing I want is for different approaches to fantasy being banned :-) I just hope my own preference will come back into style.

An interesting take on the state of the genre. I guess you're not a fan of George R.R. Martin and Joe Abecrombie's style of bleak low/realist (in the political sense) fantasy, then?

I guess I'm at the polar opposite end of the spectrum. I love the darker style of fantasy that is becoming increasingly prominent in the genre. From my POV, it reflects that fantasy is growing out of its good vs. evil Tolkein-esque roots and reflecting the complexity and moral ambiguity of the real world. Personally, I think that is for the better. The genre could not survive
if it simply continued to rehash old good-vs-evil stories ad nauseum.

Although I loved DA:O, I also felt that it copped out in places where it could have pushed the envelope more. One of the things that disappointed me about DA2 was that it was even less adventurous than DA:O. Personally,  I would like to see DA head more in the Witcher direction in the future (darker, more adult oriented), rather than heading in the more traditional Tolkein direction.

[Rahelron]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

Was there a brothel in Awakening?? I can't believe that I missed that!

I find it interesting that there is a perception that Bioware is "obsessed" with LGBT matters, when s/s romances are such a minor (and optional) part of their games. If anything, I would think people would draw the conclusion that Bioware is obsessed with...oh, I don't know...blood and gore, or even torn trousers.

So too, it's interesting to see how much realism people want injected in their fantasy games, and where. Players don't mind that dragons are swooping out of the sky, or that people can bring down a whirlwind of electricity from the ethereal plane, but once there's a dash of the bisexual, that causes some issue and breaks the immersion.

Just interesting, is all.

1- Yeah, in DA2 Bioware seemed to be obsessed with blood and gore too. The players addressed the issue and with Legacy we had a patch that reduced the rating of people exploding in hundred of gory pieces upon death. Here I'm addressing a problem that IMHO has not been solved yet.

2- Making someone fall in love with you should be a difficoult thing, not just something that you do in your spare time. Let me explain the thing with an example: in DAO to marry Anora you had to do a lot of things... You had to be a human noble, you had win the landsmeet, you had to spare Loghain, you had to win a persuasion check etc. You had to be male too because she was straight. Marry her was difficoult so it was rewarding. What I want to say is that making people fall in love with you in DA2 is not difficoult at all so doesn't give you any satisfaction when you manage to achieve it. Are you male or female? Doesn't matter because everyone is bisexual. Do you agree or disagree with someone's point of view about world, life and mage-templar matters? Doesn't matter because you can rival-romance everyone. All you have to do is hit the "flirt" button during the dialogues and you get your romance.

3- Another thing: you like or dislike the people around you (and the chararcters of novels, movies and videogames) because you like or dislike their personality, what they believe in etc. But what about romances in DA2? Your companions manage to be both annoying because they never listen to what you say (not until it's too late: take anders, merrill, fenris...) and at the same time they fall in love with you and doesn't matter if you support them in their battles or not. Oh yeah, great, in real life it's just like that: tomorrow I'll go to that lesbian girl that I like a lot and I'll start to say her that everything she has done in her life is wrong and everything she believes in is crap. She won't give a f*** about what I say, but instead she will fall in love with me. Do you think it is realistic? It's what happens in DA2 all the time.

That's why I think that making everyone bisexual is not a good thing for the game. Do the developers want to add bisexual characters to the game? It's perfectly fine to me, but this should be a background thing specific to some character and not to everyone.

Modifié par Rahelron, 22 septembre 2011 - 12:14 .

[Relix28]

Stanley Woo wrote...

DamnThoseDisplayNames wrote...

Stanley Woo wrote...
If that is the case, then of course we're going to use somewhat anachronistic concepts and language. The game, while set in a medieval-ish European-ish setting, is made for a modern audience to enjoy. You don't want people speaking in late Middle / early Modern English, as not everyone is familiar with such language.

Mr. Woo is't into Betrayal at Krondor, huh?

I was very much into Betrayal at Krondor, even though I got very frustrated with some of the gameplay choices the developers made. I love the setting and it was one of the first RPGs based on a literary property I played.

My point isn't that it is necessarily wrong to develop a game that is more rooted in realitty and medieval concepts or language or themes. I was merely stating some reasons why we might have chosen to design our setting and game the way we did. Of course other developers are free to make their own choices, and I'm certainly not going to say that they are wrong for making different choices than our developers.

So, why did you guys chose the way you did, and didn't go with a more traditional medieval feel? Mass appeal?  Trying to make your game feel more unique that way?  Experimenting?

[whykikyouwhy]

@Rahelron - I don't know how you could properly inject the nuances of a real romance into a video game. DA:O wasn't perfect in this regard - you had a gift giving system that some declared to bribery. DA2 had friendship/rivalry, which I found to be an improvement. DA2 was a much more condensed game though, so a lot of the conversations were abbreviated from how they were structured in DA:O.

As far as companions being annoying because they don't agree with you - well, that's a sad way to look at life. I have plenty of friends who I don't see eye to eye with, on some fairly significant things. But they have my respect and my love. We don't have to agree to be friendly, converse, or hang out.

So too, not *everyone* in the game is bisexual. And even if 4 people in all of Kirkwall happen to be bisexual and happen to follow Hawke, that really isn't all that unrealistic. People mingle for like interests or similar goals. The romance options in the game are exactly that - options. No single character declares his/herself to be bi. Only two LI characters make references to previous lovers, from which you can glean what you will. Sexual identity doesn't even come up in conversation. These are just characters who live and love as their hearts direct them. I see nothing wrong with that. In fact, I find it kind of beautiful.

[snfonseka]

OP has some good points.

[syllogi]

Joy Divison wrote...

TeenZombie wrote...

Dear OP,

Please change the title of this thread to "Anachronism in Bioware's Fantasy RPGs" unless you are secretly planning to blow our minds with a thesis on Derrida and Foucault's connections to Flemeth.

Thanks in advance.

I think he's more influenced by Levi-Strauss myself.

Well, yes, if you are talking about blue jeans and not a famous anthropologist.

[Addai]

Darkly Tranquil wrote...
I guess I'm at the polar opposite end of the spectrum. I love the darker style of fantasy that is becoming increasingly prominent in the genre. From my POV, it reflects that fantasy is growing out of its good vs. evil Tolkein-esque roots and reflecting the complexity and moral ambiguity of the real world. Personally, I think that is for the better. The genre could not survive
if it simply continued to rehash old good-vs-evil stories ad nauseum.

For that matter, I don't think Tolkien is as simple good and evil as people characterize a lot.  Maybe they do that because they're not familiar with the Silmarillion, and the Noldor- which is my favorite aspect of his work.  Even the orcs are reflections of human (elven/dwarven) weakness, they are just its extreme development. 

Humanity has enjoyed these stories for a long time.  Even Tolkien is just a revival/ reworking of the Kalevala and Eddas.  There's nothing wrong with the familiar stories, though on the other hand there's nothing wrong with wanting to tell them in as simple language as possible.  It's more the injections of modern pop culture/ modern political themes that I don't like.  That, to me, is dreary.  DA2 also did this with the obvious draw on the "war on terror."  I also felt that with Anders' preachy bit on bisexuality, that it was an injection of modern politics that felt out of place.  I prefer themes that are human and universal, I think it makes for a more compelling story.

Modifié par Addai67, 22 septembre 2011 - 03:34 .

[GodWood]

thats1evildude wrote...
I figure that in a world where everyday life brings the risks of getting eaten by dragons, possessed by demons or flayed alive by darkspawn, people wouldn't get too hung up about sexuality.

The real world isn't all that great either and yet people still get hung up on the most trivial of things (including sexuality)

So personally I'd rather keep this stupid bigotry to keep the theme of it being a 'dark' medieval fantasy rather then  a modern liberal utopia.

Huntress wrote...
Agree now add, that in that world or realm there is NO rules/book of beans that said: "with who anyone go to bed" and about females warriors.. http://en.wikipedia....edieval_warfare

Yes female warriors have existed.
I don't believe I stated otherwise.

Modifié par GodWood, 22 septembre 2011 - 03:38 .

[Herr Uhl]

GodWood wrote...

thats1evildude wrote...
I figure that in a world where everyday life brings the risks of getting eaten by dragons, possessed by demons or flayed alive by darkspawn, people wouldn't get too hung up about sexuality.

The real world isn't all that great either and yet people still get hung up on the most trivial of things (including sexuality)

So personally I'd rather keep this stupid bigotry to keep the theme of it being a 'dark' medieval fantasy rather then  a modern liberal utopia.

Well, there is the slavery and open bigotry towards elves kind of ruining the utopia. The sexuality and sex is pretty much what people don't seem to be hung up about.

They made a world where men and women are seen as equals by society (more or less, some exceptions), possibly partly to make it easier to make one story fit for both genders. Like, becoming a Teyrn.

[Darkly Tranquil]

Addai67 wrote...
For that matter, I don't think Tolkien is as simple good and evil as people characterize a lot.  Maybe they do that because they're not familiar with the Silmarillion, and the Noldor- which is my favorite aspect of his work.  Even the orcs are reflections of human (elven/dwarven) weakness, they are just its extreme development.

Perhaps I did something of a disservice to Tolkein, although frankly I've never been much of a fan; I find his book painfully slow moving most of the time, and I've never bothered to go beyond LotR. At its heart though, LotR is a struggle between the forces of order/life against the forces of destruction/death. Yes, there are more layers to it than that, but at its core, its a good vs. evil struggle. 

George R.R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire on the other hand, is simply a battle between competing factions vying for power. While the story is told from the perspective of certain players and we are supposed to empathise with the position with those protagonists, it cannnot be defined is simple terms of good guys and bad guys; there are only "our guys" and "their guys" not an existential struggle (unless you count the White Walkers, who are against everyone else).

Humanity has enjoyed these stories for a long time.  Even Tolkien is just a revival/ reworking of the Kalevala and Eddas.  There's nothing wrong with the familiar stories, though on the other hand there's nothing wrong with wanting to tell them in as simple language as possible.  It's more the injections of modern pop culture/ modern political themes that I don't like.  That, to me, is dreary.  DA2 also did this with the obvious draw on the "war on terror."  I also felt that with Anders' preachy bit on bisexuality, that it was an injection of modern politics that felt out of place.  I prefer themes that are human and universal, I think it makes for a more compelling story.

I agree that traditional stories have long lasting cultural resonance for a reason; they speak to universal core values of life/hope/humanity struggling against the forces of nature that threaten our survival, for which bogeymen like Sauron are a metaphor. However, I would argue that many of the themes cropping up in modern fantasy are not that modern in themselves. They are simply a reflection of the same universal human struggles for power, resources, ideology, etc. that have always gone on. Yes, they give a nod to the contemporary world in order to keep it relevant to present day audiences, but I would argue that the underlying themes remain the same.

To take the "War on Terror" example (hopefully without getting mired in politics); what is the War on Terror but a struggle between ideologies for control of territory and resources? While the form of the struggle has changed, its fundamental nature has not.

Regardling the bisexuality argument, I think you have to keep in mind that while tolerance of alternative sexual identities is a relatively recent phenomenon in Judeo-Christian societies, its not remotely remarkable in other cultures. The suggestion that the bisexual option in DA2 is the importation of post-modern western values into a medieval setting is only valid if you assume that Thedas IS medieval Europe and that it  follows the same views and prejudices on sexuality that medieval Christian Europe did. I don't adhere to this position, as I think that while Thdeas is inspired by medieval Europe it is not the same and that it does not automatically follow that the same cultural mores automatically apply.

Quite apart from this, I suspect that Bioware went with the whole bisexuality thing on the basis of game design descisions over ideology. Allowing players to romance companions irrespective of the gender of their character allows the player more freedom in the design of their character. In DAO you had to have a male character to romance Morrigan, and a female to romance Alistair (necessary if you want to unlock all the achievements), but not all players want to be forced to play a particular gender in order to complete an aspect of the game. Ergo, making all the love interests bi freed the player's choice in who they romanced. This is just a theory, of course. I would be interested to hear from someone from Bioware on the subject.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Darkly Tranquil wrote...

Perhaps I did something of a disservice to Tolkein, although frankly I've never been much of a fan; I find his book painfully slow moving most of the time, and I've never bothered to go beyond LotR. At its heart though, LotR is a struggle between the forces of order/life against the forces of destruction/death. Yes, there are more layers to it than that, but at its core, its a good vs. evil struggle.

No it isn't.  LotR is a tragic and ultimately futile struggle against progress.  The hobbits strike out from the shire in order to preserve their pastoral world as it is, and they fail.

The fight between good and evil is tangential at best.

[Icesong]

Rahelron wrote...

Ceesko wrote...


Just watching the trailer for the new DLC{very hollywood-ish:} gives strength in my opinion that bioware turned its medieval fantasy rpg which was adequately portrayed in DA:O to neither medieval nor fantasy, but simply a postmodernist setting with swords instead of guns. Replacing the weapons with automatic machines will absolutely make no difference.

My feeling and this opinion in general stems from the way characters react to each other, the way they talk like if they were living in the 21th century, they way they react to gender differences as if everyone is unisex, all this defies all climate or logic that bioware tried to establish in DAO. It simply lost its feelings; it doesn't feel like a fantasy anymore, just a bizarre mish-mash between a modernistic setting and a medieval one.
Just my opinion.

I agree with you. It's exactly as you said.

It seems that at bioware are obsessed with LGBT romances and sex equality. Don't get me wrong, I do support women and gay rights, but introducing them so bluntly in a medieval setting simply destroys any immersion you could get from the game.

It destroys the immersion of historical medieval societal expectations which isn't the same thing as destroying the immersion of the game. Unless you're trying to play the game like it's that. I get very immersed in this so called post modernism; if racism, sexism and homophobia kept cropping up that would actually snap me out of it as I'd have to come back to reality because I'd be bothered by it.

4- Do you want gay romances? Than create gay only NPCs! This would allow you to create more complex and intriguing storylines and more coherent characters.

I don't see how it would accomplish any of these goals. It certainly hasn't with characters in the past, even BioWare's own. How was Juhani made more complex and coherent by this?  Sexuality is a minor part of someone's identity, it shouldn't actually add any depth to them unless they were oppressed because of it. And that has limited viability for storytelling, perhaps none nowadays. I know I'm tired of it.

Bisexuality is the easy way out of the Juhani problem: wanting a romance but being unable to pursue one because you're only option(s) are horrible.

I don't even consider it bisexuality; just being able to romance whoever you want(unless it's otherwise stated or shown). That you're able make a new game as a different sex and still romance them isn't really the point to me as that's a new story you're telling, a different world.

[SphereofSilence]

For the most part, I am of the opinion that BW made the right choice on having a more modern English speech/writing for DA.

Except for some occasional odd moment like 'Oh, sh*t.' by Janeka when Hawke and co faces Corypheus in the DLC Legacy. That's a very modern swear word and should not be used in DA IMO. Remember reading somewhere that for the development of Baldur's Gate 2, it's a rule for them not to use any contemporary profanity. Well maybe they forgotten about it after a decade. It's minor, but still detracts slightly from the experience and can be avoided easily.

[whykikyouwhy]

SphereofSilence wrote...

For the most part, I am of the opinion that BW made the right choice on having a more modern English speech/writing for DA.

Except for some occasional odd moment like 'Oh, sh*t.' by Janeka when Hawke and co faces Corypheus in the DLC Legacy. That's a very modern swear word and should not be used in DA IMO. Remember reading somewhere that for the development of Baldur's Gate 2, it's a rule for them not to use any contemporary profanity. Well maybe they forgotten about it after a decade. It's minor, but still detracts slightly from the experience and can be avoided easily.

The word may be older than most think. Per the Online Etymology Dictionary: "The noun is O.E. scitte "purging;" sense of "excrement" dates from 1580s, from the verb. Despite what you read in an e-mail, "sh*t" is not an acronym. The notion that it is a recent word may be because the word was taboo from c.1600 and rarely appeared in print (neither Shakespeare nor the KJV has it), and even in "vulgar" publications of the late 18c. it is disguised by dashes."