895 réponses à ce sujet

[Shadow Fox]

Direwolf0294 wrote...

I think going forward, BioWare just needs to be a lot clearer on what their intentions are. Don't leave things open to speculation. Don't have a character express a view that's open to interpretation if it's supposed to have a set, intended meaning. Don't let player characters express certain things if there's no intention of allowing the player to follow up on it.

Or the fandom could start listening when Gaider says something instead of U WRONG and stating their wrong opinion as fact.

[LobselVith8]

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

Direwolf0294 wrote...

I think going forward, BioWare just needs to be a lot clearer on what their intentions are. Don't leave things open to speculation. Don't have a character express a view that's open to interpretation if it's supposed to have a set, intended meaning. Don't let player characters express certain things if there's no intention of allowing the player to follow up on it.

Or the fandom could start listening when Gaider says something instead of U WRONG and stating their wrong opinion as fact.

Gaider has been wrong before; he isn't infallible.

[Direwolf0294]

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

Direwolf0294 wrote...

I think going forward, BioWare just needs to be a lot clearer on what their intentions are. Don't leave things open to speculation. Don't have a character express a view that's open to interpretation if it's supposed to have a set, intended meaning. Don't let player characters express certain things if there's no intention of allowing the player to follow up on it.

Or the fandom could start listening when Gaider says something instead of U WRONG and stating their wrong opinion as fact.

But people wouldn't be saying "you're wrong" if what he intended was actually expressed in the game. You can't have a character say "I don't believe in any sort of divine entity" and then come out and say that you're intention was not that the character should express those views. It's just confusing. How is anyone supposed to trust anything a character says, even their own, if there's a chance there's a completely different meaning behind what is being spoken that only the developers are privy to? 

[Adrian68b]

"I didn't have that view. To me, Hawke was religious. He says Leandra is with the Maker, tells Feynriel that he hopes the Maker guides him, and other dialogue that has him being religiously Andrastian. I guess we want different things from a DA game; I prefer shaping my protagonist in this type of RPG, rather than playing a pre-made character."

I also prefer that way. In DA:O some of my avatars were believers of their respective faith (noble human and dwarf, dalish), others not (circle mage, dwarf commoner). As you said, it is about the character's history. In case of Hawke, I played it an atheist because it seemed more plausible - the influence of Malcolm, the constant need to protect Bethany made Hawke to question the Chantry. Of course, Hawke was rogue. In the case of a mage Hawke I played it a believer, desiring to be able to meet other mages and being part of the Circle. In kirkwall the mage Hawke also became atheist. Plausible?

Modifié par Adrian68b, 22 septembre 2012 - 02:34 .

[Shadow Fox]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...

Direwolf0294 wrote...

I think going forward, BioWare just needs to be a lot clearer on what their intentions are. Don't leave things open to speculation. Don't have a character express a view that's open to interpretation if it's supposed to have a set, intended meaning. Don't let player characters express certain things if there's no intention of allowing the player to follow up on it.

Or the fandom could start listening when Gaider says something instead of U WRONG and stating their wrong opinion as fact.

Gaider has been wrong before; he isn't infallible.

Again retcon he's still Word of God on the franchise so what he says is law you're free to dislike it but it doesn't make him wrong.

Modifié par Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke, 22 septembre 2012 - 02:41 .

[Adrian68b]

"For clarification- I see a lot of people upset because they don't want to be forced to play a religious character. But I guess I just don't understand how anyone's forcing anyone to do anything. I mean couldn't you just not buy or play the game?"

What I mean is about GAME OPTIONS. Specifically, available avatar options. Of course that in the case of only dogmatic avatars available, I will simply not play the game.

[LobselVith8]

Adrian68b wrote...

"I didn't have that view. To me, Hawke was religious. He says Leandra is with the Maker, tells Feynriel that he hopes the Maker guides him, and other dialogue that has him being religiously Andrastian. I guess we want different things from a DA game; I prefer shaping my protagonist in this type of RPG, rather than playing a pre-made character."

I also prefer that way. In DA:O some of my avatars were believers of their respective faith (noble human and dwarf, dalish), others not (circle mage, dwarf commoner). As you said, it is about the character's history. In case of Hawke, I played it an atheist because it seemed more plausible - the influence of Malcolm, the constant need to protect Bethany made Hawke to question the Chantry. Of course, Hawke was rogue. In the case of a mage Hawke I played it a believer, desiring to be able to meet other mages and being part of the Circle. In kirkwall the mage Hawke also became atheist. Plausible?

It would help if the game accommodated that; for example, it felt odd for my Hawke to tell Merrill that Leandra was with the Maker. I certainly wanted my apostate Hawke to be atheist. I suppose you can decide that Varric was wrong, since it's just his version of events.

I'm not a fan of the Chantry, so I see no reason to play as an Andrastian (in terms of my own gameplay). I know others feel differently, but I don't see why a mage would follow a religion that vilifies them, and turns society against them. Merrill is a religious character, and the contrast between the People's view on magic and mages in comparison to the Andrastian view is like night and day. I thought it was intriguing.

[LTD]

According to my knee jerk reaction, Atheism in a fantasy world sounds infinitely boring! If not plain  dangerous to your health:p

 I really digged the religion and how it was presented in DA:O. Way it  was indeed  a question of faith (save for Ashes of Andraste, mayhaps. )rather than something you just have to believe-because-you-see-it.

DA:O Was such an awesome game. I hope we get DA:O II one day.

Modifié par LTD, 22 septembre 2012 - 02:46 .

[Shadow Fox]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Adrian68b wrote...

"I didn't have that view. To me, Hawke was religious. He says Leandra is with the Maker, tells Feynriel that he hopes the Maker guides him, and other dialogue that has him being religiously Andrastian. I guess we want different things from a DA game; I prefer shaping my protagonist in this type of RPG, rather than playing a pre-made character."

I also prefer that way. In DA:O some of my avatars were believers of their respective faith (noble human and dwarf, dalish), others not (circle mage, dwarf commoner). As you said, it is about the character's history. In case of Hawke, I played it an atheist because it seemed more plausible - the influence of Malcolm, the constant need to protect Bethany made Hawke to question the Chantry. Of course, Hawke was rogue. In the case of a mage Hawke I played it a believer, desiring to be able to meet other mages and being part of the Circle. In kirkwall the mage Hawke also became atheist. Plausible?

It would help if the game accommodated that; for example, it felt odd for my Hawke to tell Merrill that Leandra was with the Maker. I certainly wanted my apostate Hawke to be atheist. I suppose you can decide that Varric was wrong, since it's just his version of events.

I'm not a fan of the Chantry, so I see no reason to play as an Andrastian (in terms of my own gameplay). I know others feel differently, but I don't see why a mage would follow a religion that vilifies them, and turns society against them. Merrill is a religious character, and the contrast between the People's view on magic and mages in comparison to the Andrastian view is like night and day. I thought it was intriguing.

Because worshiping/revering a deity of a religion means you agree with every tenet of that religion.It's not like you can disagree with Cullen and Meredith right?

[Adrian68b]

"But people wouldn't be saying "you're wrong" if what he intended was actually expressed in the game. You can't have a character say "I don't believe in any sort of divine entity" and then come out and say that you're intention was not that the character should express those views. It's just confusing. How is anyone supposed to trust anything a character says, even their own, if there's a chance there's a completely different meaning behind what is being spoken that only the developers are privy to?"

Maybe I am completely wrong, but NO ATHEISM is different from ATHEIST VIEWPOINT. I think David was talking about atheist social or political entities (schools of thought, countries) not individuals. And his concern is about the need to design such a social entity, with insitutions, characters, dialogues and specific social issues.

Modifié par Adrian68b, 22 septembre 2012 - 02:57 .

[LobselVith8]

Adrian68b wrote...

"But people wouldn't be saying "you're wrong" if what he intended was actually expressed in the game. You can't have a character say "I don't believe in any sort of divine entity" and then come out and say that you're intention was not that the character should express those views. It's just confusing. How is anyone supposed to trust anything a character says, even their own, if there's a chance there's a completely different meaning behind what is being spoken that only the developers are privy to?"

Maybe I am completely wrong, but NO ATHEISM is different from ATHEIST VIEWPOINT. I think David was talking about atheist social or political entities (schools of thought, countries) not individuals.

I believe Direwolf0294 is addressing something else; how Morrigan voices, multiple times, that she doesn't believe in the Maker or a higher power. Origins establishes her with an atheist viewpoint; for a developer to say Morrigan isn't an atheist - despite what she explicitly said - contradicts the story of Origins. It's pretty much a recton.

Modifié par LobselVith8, 22 septembre 2012 - 02:58 .

[Adrian68b]

"Because worshiping/revering a deity of a religion means you agree with every tenet of that religion.It's not like you can disagree with Cullen and Meredith right?"

The really strange thing is that maybe not. And that is only because Bioware's careful job designing faith and writing faith lore. A character is able to believe in the Maker, but distrust the written Chantry dogma, because it was intentionally altered several time. I remember the dialogue in Denerim with the two priests about faith (the older and the young). In case of an elven PC, the older hinted about the book about elves being erased.
The game lore is detailed enough to offer such an option.

Modifié par Adrian68b, 22 septembre 2012 - 03:10 .

[Foolsfolly]

All I'll say, and this is directed at nobody and nothing currently being discussed, is how could Morrigan be an atheist if she acknowledges there are Old Gods? Sounds like she's whatever religion worships Tevinter Old Gods.

Does that have a term? It's a pseudo-dead religion since I imagine the dragon cults aren't too dissimilar from them... one's a dragon and the other's a god in dragon form or something. I don't have enough information to clearly stress the connection.

[Spicen]

LobselVith8 wrote...

Adrian68b wrote...

"But people wouldn't be saying "you're wrong" if what he intended was actually expressed in the game. You can't have a character say "I don't believe in any sort of divine entity" and then come out and say that you're intention was not that the character should express those views. It's just confusing. How is anyone supposed to trust anything a character says, even their own, if there's a chance there's a completely different meaning behind what is being spoken that only the developers are privy to?"

Maybe I am completely wrong, but NO ATHEISM is different from ATHEIST VIEWPOINT. I think David was talking about atheist social or political entities (schools of thought, countries) not individuals.

I believe Direwolf0294 is addressing something else; how Morrigan voices, multiple times, that she doesn't believe in the Maker or a higher power. Origins establishes her with an atheist viewpoint; for a developer to say Morrigan isn't an atheist - despite what she explicitly said - contradicts the story of Origins. It's pretty much a recton.

About Morrigan- She believes in the Old Gods, like it or not beieving in an old god seems anti-atheism to me.

[jpraelster93]

Stupid idea

[TJPags]

Foolsfolly wrote...

All I'll say, and this is directed at nobody and nothing currently being discussed, is how could Morrigan be an atheist if she acknowledges there are Old Gods? Sounds like she's whatever religion worships Tevinter Old Gods.

Does that have a term? It's a pseudo-dead religion since I imagine the dragon cults aren't too dissimilar from them... one's a dragon and the other's a god in dragon form or something. I don't have enough information to clearly stress the connection.

Does she actually acknowledge that there ARE Old Gods, or does she simply acknowledge that there were entities/beings that were WORSHIPPED as Old Gods?

There is a distinction.

[Adrian68b]

"I believe Direwolf0294 is addressing something else; how Morrigan voices, multiple times, that she doesn't believe in the Maker or a higher power. Origins establishes her with an atheist viewpoint; for a developer to say Morrigan isn't an atheist - despite what she explicitly said - contradicts the story of Origins. It's pretty much a recton."

If that is the case I was wrong. Sorry. Clearly David forgot about that. In DA:O Morrigan showed an explicit atheist viewpoint and nothing else.

[Spicen]

jpraelster93 wrote...

Stupid idea

Erm, what is exactly?

[Spicen]

TJPags wrote...

Foolsfolly wrote...

All I'll say, and this is directed at nobody and nothing currently being discussed, is how could Morrigan be an atheist if she acknowledges there are Old Gods? Sounds like she's whatever religion worships Tevinter Old Gods.

Does that have a term? It's a pseudo-dead religion since I imagine the dragon cults aren't too dissimilar from them... one's a dragon and the other's a god in dragon form or something. I don't have enough information to clearly stress the connection.

Does she actually acknowledge that there ARE Old Gods, or does she simply acknowledge that there were entities/beings that were WORSHIPPED as Old Gods?

There is a distinction.

No, she acknowledged the existence of Old Gods.

[LobselVith8]

Foolsfolly wrote...

All I'll say, and this is directed at nobody and nothing currently being discussed, is how could Morrigan be an atheist if she acknowledges there are Old Gods? Sounds like she's whatever religion worships Tevinter Old Gods.

Does that have a term? It's a pseudo-dead religion since I imagine the dragon cults aren't too dissimilar from them... one's a dragon and the other's a god in dragon form or something. I don't have enough information to clearly stress the connection.

There is a difference between acknowledging that they exist, and viewing them as deities. Andrastians (who believe in the Maker) don't worship the Old Gods, even though they know the Old Gods exist. It's no different with Morrigan.

[Vandicus]

TJPags wrote...

Foolsfolly wrote...

All I'll say, and this is directed at nobody and nothing currently being discussed, is how could Morrigan be an atheist if she acknowledges there are Old Gods? Sounds like she's whatever religion worships Tevinter Old Gods.

Does that have a term? It's a pseudo-dead religion since I imagine the dragon cults aren't too dissimilar from them... one's a dragon and the other's a god in dragon form or something. I don't have enough information to clearly stress the connection.

Does she actually acknowledge that there ARE Old Gods, or does she simply acknowledge that there were entities/beings that were WORSHIPPED as Old Gods?

There is a distinction.

The Old Gods are pretty heavily documented by the Tevinters. They have special powers and are immortal, and are documented as having had some sort've psychic way to communicate with their priests(confirmed first hand with Legacy dlc). That qualifies them for deity status. Morrigan may choose to ignore this(but I doubt she did).

To me this means Morrigan is not an atheist. She may not worship the Old Gods, but she acknowledges their existence. If the Old Gods don't qualify as gods, well I don't think anything short of an absolute power god would qualify(most deities in religions don't have absolute power).

[Emzamination]

Spicen wrote...

TJPags wrote...

Foolsfolly wrote...

All I'll say, and this is directed at nobody and nothing currently being discussed, is how could Morrigan be an atheist if she acknowledges there are Old Gods? Sounds like she's whatever religion worships Tevinter Old Gods.

Does that have a term? It's a pseudo-dead religion since I imagine the dragon cults aren't too dissimilar from them... one's a dragon and the other's a god in dragon form or something. I don't have enough information to clearly stress the connection.

Does she actually acknowledge that there ARE Old Gods, or does she simply acknowledge that there were entities/beings that were WORSHIPPED as Old Gods?

There is a distinction.

No, she acknowledged the existence of Old Gods.

She went out of her way to give birth to an Old god :innocent:

[Adrian68b]

"About Morrigan- She believes in the Old Gods, like it or not beieving in an old god seems anti-atheism to me."

The only thing I remember about what Morrigan said was about "worth preserving"; and nothing suggesting "worth worshiping". It's the same as wanting to preserve Siberian tigers equals worshiping them.
Also, you don't need to "preserve" a God. If so, is not a God.

Modifié par Adrian68b, 22 septembre 2012 - 03:24 .

[Vandicus]

Adrian68b wrote...

"About Morrigan- She believes in the Old Gods, like it or not beieving in an old god seems anti-atheism to me."

The only thing Morrigan said was about "worth preserving"; and nothing suggesting "worth worshiping". It's the same as wanting to preserve Siberian tigers equals worshiping them.

There's a disconnect here.

DG when he refers to atheism is referring to its definition, as are many of the other posters explaining why Morrigan isn't an atheist.

You on the other hand, are using its connotation, that of the absence of worship of gods. Agnostics also do not worship gods, that doesn't make them atheists.