183 réponses à ce sujet

[jlb524]

TeenZombie wrote...

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

Icesong wrote...
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? 

She wasn't...she had the worst characterization and romance of all of them.

I suspect people know they won't do strictly gay characters (mainly b/c, you know, Gaider said they wouldn't) so push for this 'gay and straight' thing b/c basically 'they dun like the bisexual thing' and want mostly straight only LIs with that one token bisexual they can avoid.

Icesong wrote...
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 actually suspect that if Juhani was also an LI for male Revan both her character and romance would have been loads more developed.  The argument of 'gay characters are better!' is a bunch of baloney with a hidden agenda, namely, 'I don't want bisexual characters b/c I don't want to share 'my' LIs with teh gayz!'.

Icesong wrote...
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.

Same here...when I play DA2, I only care about the sexuality of the LI I want to romance and don't give a rats ass which way the others go.  The knowledge that Anders could possibly romance a dude in someone else's game doesn't affect my F!Hawke/Merrill romance game.

Modifié par jlb524, 24 septembre 2011 - 07:07 .

[SphereofSilence]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

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."

This shows that the word's existed long before in the real world.

But more importantly, if enough players perceive it as off and took the experience away from them somewhat, then I think it ought to be taken out, despite being historically accurate. In this case, perception is more important than fact, IMO. 

Well, I don't know about others, for me though it felt wrong for it to be there. Is it just me alone? Or many others feel the same way.  Don't ever remember watching any medieval shows that used 'Oh sh*t' for swearing, maybe I haven't watch much. 

[whykikyouwhy]

SphereofSilence wrote...

This shows that the word's existed long before in the real world.

But more importantly, if enough players perceive it as off and took the experience away from them somewhat, then I think it ought to be taken out, despite being historically accurate. In this case, perception is more important than fact, IMO. 

Well, I don't know about others, for me though it felt wrong for it to be there. Is it just me alone? Or many others feel the same way.  Don't ever remember watching any medieval shows that used 'Oh sh*t' for swearing, maybe I haven't watch much. 

I personally didn't feel that it was incongruent. It always seemed like an older term to me though. But general perception of age may be offset by the fact that words go in and out of fashion, or their applications alter slightly. So something that may have been used in the 16th century, let's say, wasn't used for a good century or two, but then re-emerged in literature and then everyday use. So a word can seem or feel modern, when in fact, it's old and is just now commonplace.

I could make the argument that Cassandra's use of "bullsh*t" was out of place, not because of the term but because we haven't seen any bulls in the DA world. Just one ox, if I recall, that a vendor in DA:O had.

[Volourn]

", they way they react to gender differences as if everyone is unisex, "

Uh... people react differently to the two genders in modern times. Equal but different.

[Uccio]

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.

Those Orlesians do look like they are from 17th century and not medieval.

[SerraAdvocate]

People complaining that the setting isn't a perfect replica of medieval society will have problems because they're attempting to immerse themselves in a setting that isn't the one the game is trying to present. You can have all kinds of problems with the setting that is being presented, but that becomes a difference of opinion between the player and the writer about what the story should be, and that's an argument the writer always wins by default.

Writers likely make this kind of choice about the setting in part because the PC needs to be a character a modern person can role-play. If a modern person is always super-imposing opinions on their PC that could never have existed in the setting of the game, that player is going to struggle playing their assigned role. The easiest way to deal with that is superimpose some modern standards of behavior and ideology on a setting in which they would otherwise be anachronistic. But there's no reason they have to be anachronistic. This isn't our world.

Modifié par Helm505, 24 septembre 2011 - 10:44 .

[Foolsfolly]

DamnThoseDisplayNames wrote...

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

You realize that's like telling an engineer that he must hate the Golden Gate Bridge because his bridge isn't a suspension bridge, right?

[Wyndham711]

I agree with the OP. This annoyed me a bit in Origins already (some of the humour, gender equality, political correctness), but my issues were much more minor then than with the sequel, especially since we were given explanation that in many ways (particularly when it comes to gender equality) Ferelden was the exception and not the rule when it comes to Thedas as a whole.

Of cource when the political correctness and the modern values of characters in many respects only intensified with DA2, even though the setting was supposed to be a new and in many ways harsher one, I was disappointed.

[whykikyouwhy]

Wyndham711 wrote...

I agree with the OP. This annoyed me a bit in Origins already (some of the humour, gender equality, political correctness), but my issues were much more minor then than with the sequel, especially since we were given explanation that in many ways (particularly when it comes to gender equality) Ferelden was the exception and not the rule when it comes to Thedas as a whole.

Of cource when the political correctness and the modern values of characters in many respects only intensified with DA2, even though the setting was supposed to be a new and in many ways harsher one, I was disappointed.

I suppose any game where you could create a female character of the warrior, rogue or mage classes could be perceived as indulging too much into that sticky and nasty little realm of gender equality. Unless of course, by selecting that character, you spent your 35+ gameplay hours sitting in a tower weaving tapestries, or selling pock-marked in the village market.

[maxernst]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

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."

I have a suspicion that both sh*t and f*ck are anglo-saxon in origin as words, though I'm not sure how far back their use as expletives goes.  I think it's better to have the writers try to use the modern idiom that they're comfortable with (while avoiding out-of-world references and modern concepts), rather than have them try to write an artificial hybrid of modern and archaic english.  The example somebody cited from the old ultima games of "Thou dost find no trap" is precisely the sort of language I don't want to see in the game.  But honestly, aside from the odd joke, I haven't found the language in DA2 to draw me out of the game.  I find it humorous that TW is viewed as being a paragon of historicism, when words like "psychobabble" pop up in it.

[jlb524]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

I suppose any game where you could create a female character of the warrior, rogue or mage classes could be perceived as indulging too much into that sticky and nasty little realm of gender equality. Unless of course, by selecting that character, you spent your 35+ gameplay hours sitting in a tower weaving tapestries, or selling pock-marked in the village market.

Yah, DA should be another 'we straight men!  we betta than everyone else!' circle jerk.

[Gnaeus Trebonius]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

I suppose any game where you could create a female character of the warrior, rogue or mage classes could be perceived as indulging too much into that sticky and nasty little realm of gender equality. Unless of course, by selecting that character, you spent your 35+ gameplay hours sitting in a tower weaving tapestries, or selling pock-marked in the village market.

Mount & Blade was a game that handled that particular aspect nicely, in my oppinion. Any player who wanted a more surrealistic spin on their gaming experience had free rein to create a female warrior that enjoyed the exact same prerogatives as any male counterpart, but when it came to the NPCs about 95% of the prominent characters were male, thus keeping the absurdities to a minimum. Truly a shining example to all game developers.

[esper]

jlb524 wrote...

whykikyouwhy wrote...

I suppose any game where you could create a female character of the warrior, rogue or mage classes could be perceived as indulging too much into that sticky and nasty little realm of gender equality. Unless of course, by selecting that character, you spent your 35+ gameplay hours sitting in a tower weaving tapestries, or selling pock-marked in the village market.

Yah, DA should be another 'we straight men!  we betta than everyone else!' circle jerk.

You do realize that men are properly a little worse of in the gender equailty thing than women given that they can't be elected for Divine or Mother (and the chantry is important).
As for fighting woman. We have Andraste who is a woman warrior and Aveline who cleared the way to the Chevaliar title and the silent sister whose parogon also did the same thing as far as I remembered. I am not too well into the dwarven culture.
It is not uncommon in Thedas to have woman warriors and such they are represented a lot.

[whykikyouwhy]

Gnaeus Trebonius wrote...

whykikyouwhy wrote...

I suppose any game where you could create a female character of the warrior, rogue or mage classes could be perceived as indulging too much into that sticky and nasty little realm of gender equality. Unless of course, by selecting that character, you spent your 35+ gameplay hours sitting in a tower weaving tapestries, or selling pock-marked in the village market.

Mount & Blade was a game that handled that particular aspect nicely, in my oppinion. Any player who wanted a more surrealistic spin on their gaming experience had free rein to create a female warrior that enjoyed the exact same prerogatives as any male counterpart, but when it came to the NPCs about 95% of the prominent characters were male, thus keeping the absurdities to a minimum. Truly a shining example to all game developers.

I suppose that is what I take issue with - the perception that having women in roles other than those I described is an absurdity. Dragon Age games are not true historical representations - they are not medieval sims, or even truly medieval. They're fantasy games - sword and sorcery, where all manner of peoples can meet and interact on level playing fields. So when people find the women in the games (or...shock of shocks...anyone who happens to identify as other than heterosexual) as being unrealistic and therefore problematic, it's really quite ridiculous.

[GodWood]

jlb524 wrote...
She wasn't...she had the worst characterization and romance of all of them.

I suspect people know they won't do strictly gay characters (mainly b/c, you know, Gaider said they wouldn't) so push for this 'gay and straight' thing b/c basically 'they dun like the bisexual thing' and want mostly straight only LIs with that one token bisexual they can avoid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I actually suspect that if Juhani was also an LI for male Revan both her character and romance would have been loads more developed.  The argument of 'gay characters are better!' is a bunch of baloney with a hidden agenda, namely, 'I don't want bisexual characters b/c I don't want to share 'my' LIs with teh gayz!'.

This is all absolute nonsense.

My second favourite character was Zevran and one of my favourite playthroughs was with a male DE who romanced him.

Not everyone hates the LOLEVERYONEISBI trash out of senseless homophobia.

[Satyricon331]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

Gnaeus Trebonius wrote...
Mount & Blade was a game that handled that particular aspect nicely, in my oppinion. Any player who wanted a more surrealistic spin on their gaming experience had free rein to create a female warrior that enjoyed the exact same prerogatives as any male counterpart, but when it came to the NPCs about 95% of the prominent characters were male, thus keeping the absurdities to a minimum. Truly a shining example to all game developers.

I suppose that is what I take issue with - the perception that having women in roles other than those I described is an absurdity. Dragon Age games are not true historical representations - they are not medieval sims, or even truly medieval. They're fantasy games - sword and sorcery, where all manner of peoples can meet and interact on level playing fields. So when people find the women in the games (or...shock of shocks...anyone who happens to identify as other than heterosexual) as being unrealistic and therefore problematic, it's really quite ridiculous.

Yes, I agree (and thanks for your slew of great posts) - and I think Bioware motivated having women in the game really well.  To me what seems absurd is this idea that somehow the real-world medieval gender norm would survive centuries of exclusively female religious leadership.  To gainsay that leadership you'd have to make really implausible claims like it was unlikely for Andraste to be female, or it was unlikely for people (who were reacting against Tevinter, which in its ancient days seems to have been more patriarchal) to follow Andrastianism once it had female leaders.  Having reduced gender differences just makes sense in the setting.

[Wulfram]

Was Andraste a warrior? She was a war leader, but I never got the impression she fought in hand to hand combat.

[whykikyouwhy]

Wulfram wrote...

Was Andraste a warrior? She was a war leader, but I never got the impression she fought in hand to hand combat.

Well, you find Andraste's Arrows in the temple where her ashes are. The book The Search for the True Prophet suggests she was a mage. And her statue in the Kirkwall Chantry depicts her in full plate. So...it's really up in the air as to whether or not she was strictly a warrior. Perhaps she is all things, all classes - all aspects of the martial pursuits.

[Gnaeus Trebonius]

whykikyouwhy wrote...

Gnaeus Trebonius wrote...

Mount & Blade was a game that handled that particular aspect nicely, in my oppinion. Any player who wanted a more surrealistic spin on their gaming experience had free rein to create a female warrior that enjoyed the exact same prerogatives as any male counterpart, but when it came to the NPCs about 95% of the prominent characters were male, thus keeping the absurdities to a minimum. Truly a shining example to all game developers.

I suppose that is what I take issue with - the perception that having women in roles other than those I described is an absurdity. Dragon Age games are not true historical representations - they are not medieval sims, or even truly medieval. They're fantasy games - sword and sorcery, where all manner of peoples can meet and interact on level playing fields. So when people find the women in the games (or...shock of shocks...anyone who happens to identify as other than heterosexual) as being unrealistic and therefore problematic, it's really quite ridiculous.

Oh, I never asked for "true historical representation", but yes, I prefer a somewhat more realistic fantasy world. That means I find a character like Avelline just as absurd as the DA2-rogue's (n.b. male or female) defiance of gravity.

[esper]

Gnaeus Trebonius wrote...

whykikyouwhy wrote...

Gnaeus Trebonius wrote...

Mount & Blade was a game that handled that particular aspect nicely, in my oppinion. Any player who wanted a more surrealistic spin on their gaming experience had free rein to create a female warrior that enjoyed the exact same prerogatives as any male counterpart, but when it came to the NPCs about 95% of the prominent characters were male, thus keeping the absurdities to a minimum. Truly a shining example to all game developers.

I suppose that is what I take issue with - the perception that having women in roles other than those I described is an absurdity. Dragon Age games are not true historical representations - they are not medieval sims, or even truly medieval. They're fantasy games - sword and sorcery, where all manner of peoples can meet and interact on level playing fields. So when people find the women in the games (or...shock of shocks...anyone who happens to identify as other than heterosexual) as being unrealistic and therefore problematic, it's really quite ridiculous.

Oh, I never asked for "true historical representation", but yes, I prefer a somewhat more realistic fantasy world. That means I find a character like Avelline just as absurd as the DA2-rogue's (n.b. male or female) defiance of gravity.

Aveline is not as absurd as defying gravity. Woman has more power politcally than men (the chantry) and it had already been stated that the fighting for women in army has been done. (The first Aveline).
Think Andraste, think Maferath and then think why it is that woman rights is not an issue under the white divine. Now go to the qun and you have a non-combat woman society.

[whykikyouwhy]

Gnaeus Trebonius wrote...
Oh, I never asked for "true historical representation", but yes, I prefer a somewhat more realistic fantasy world. That means I find a character like Avelline just as absurd as the DA2-rogue's (n.b. male or female) defiance of gravity.

So, you like oxymorons? Ok.

Do you only have issues with Aveline, or with every female guardsman? And what of Andraste (as others have brought up as an example) - a prominent religion in Thedas is based upon the endeavors of a single woman who reignited the faith. A woman who may have very well been a warrior - who, in the very least, did organize battles and lead her people in rebellion. Is she so very unrealistic as well?

[jlb524]

GodWood wrote...
This is all absolute nonsense.

My second favourite character was Zevran and one of my favourite playthroughs was with a male DE who romanced him.

Not everyone hates the LOLEVERYONEISBI trash out of senseless homophobia.

I never said it was out of sensless homophobia.

Though, it does seem senseless...whatever it is.

I'm not sure why you are getting so defensive

[Gnaeus Trebonius]

whykikyouwhy wrote...
So, you like oxymorons? Ok.

My bad, but disregarding that my syntax can be a source of confusion, I was trying to describe the measure of realism I like to see in a fictional world. If people can fly without there beeing an explanation for it, it annoys me as well.

Do you only have issues with Aveline, or with every female guardsman? And what of Andraste (as others have brought up as an example) - a prominent religion in Thedas is based upon the endeavors of a single woman who reignited the faith. A woman who may have very well been a warrior - who, in the very least, did organize battles and lead her people in rebellion. Is she so very unrealistic as well?

I would prefer if the guardsmen were male, yes. Concerning Andraste I percieve her more as Joan D'Arc-like leader with mythical value rather than a brawny frontline soldier, so no, I have no issues with her portrayal.

Modifié par Gnaeus Trebonius, 25 septembre 2011 - 09:03 .

[whykikyouwhy]

Gnaeus Trebonius wrote...

My bad, but disregarding that my syntax can be a source of confusion, I was trying to describe the measure of realism I like to see in a fictional world. If people can fly without there beeing an explanation for it, it annoys me as well.

I would prefer if the guardsmen were male, yes. Concerning Andraste I percieve her more as Joan D'Arc-like leader with mythical value rather than a brawny frontline soldier, so no, I have no issues with her portrayal.

A dash and dose of realism in fantasy is fine, and is typically the case with stories in that genre.

How you feel about the role of women in the games is, of course, your perogative. I suppose I look at it from a few different angles -

1. The game is not meant to be historically accurate because, in the very least, it does not capture real world history. While it may draw inspiration from, it is not meant to carbon copy anything of our known past.

2. Women have already been established as equals (or near equals) in Thedan society, from the military to the Chantry. That is a given for this particular world-that-is-not-our-own.

3. The DA perception of women is vital to the story being told. Which is Bioware's tale to tell...and this is how they choose to tell it.

4. Fantasy video games that include women in strong, powerful, and equal roles allow for players, male and female alike, to have a more well-rounded gaming experience. It is a decision of inclusion on the part of the developers - an acknowledgement that gender has nothing to do with what kinds of games you play, what stories you like, or how bad*ss you are or may want to be.

As for Andraste, Joan D'Arc (taking all prophetic aspects out) rode into battle, no? Whether or not she actually drew a sword, she served in a military function. So therein is a realistic parallel which would give credence to how Aveline is portrayed.

Again, your preference. I, for one, appreciate how Bioware writes their women.

[GodWood]

jlb524 wrote...
I never said it was out of sensless homophobia.

Though, it does seem senseless...whatever it is.

Well for me it's because I'd prefer a character to be written as a character for the palyer to interact with and not a puttee for the player to mold.

I'm not sure why you are getting so defensive

You're reading it wrong.