"I'll say this much: when the original thread was up, I asked the rest of the team what they remembered of the original game, and we all agreed that "atheism" was not something we'd ever supported as a viewpoint for the PC. And by supported, I mean something that-- whenever the topic arose-- we would make sure we included it as an option. Anything we consider "supported" is something we would make sure to maintain consistently throughout the game... that's a design term we take seriously.
Yes, there was indeed the occasional dialogue option to express it-- something you guys obviously remember better than we do (writing something over six years will definitely do that, let me tell you). I don't know if we would consider that "supported" as I defined above, but you're correct that it definitely pops up. Probably because, at the time, such an option seemed appropriate, and I wouldn't have a problem with that even now.
The part where I get stuck, and am clearly quite poor at expressing the exact point where my support for this idea breaks down, is where "atheism" stops being "I doubt that the Maker actually exists" to being some kind of political view... as atheism often is in the modern world. More secularization than atheism, really. There's a strong streak of anti-religious organization present here on the forums, and when the topic is broached it seemed to be done in the sense of "I should be allowed to go on a crusade against all religion", which is really the thing that I believe is out of place in our setting. Being able to occasionally express doubt, sure... but in order to make such a view supported we would need to provide a full path for such a stance.
The forums being what they are, they will automatically interpret that as in only the extreme opposite must then be the truth-- I'll never be able to express ANYTHING anti-religious and therefore must myself BE RELIGIOUS OMG!... which of course is simply not so, but I guess if you intend to freak out about it go ahead and get it out of your system.
And that's as far as I'll go on that topic. Thanks."
If this entire debate is only about this statement by David, things are clear. It there are other posts by him it is another story.
I could completely understand David position. DA is a fictional world similar to late 13 / early 14 century Europe (my guess). That means institutions, culture, technology related to late 13 century Europe. There is nothing in Thedas to make possible a completely secular, non-religious society. Such a society implies:
(1) Religion is abolished or has no political power
(2) Because of (1) Nobility has no real power, it is just an empty title. Kings are just symbolic (ex. England). So there is some sort elected government, or something similar - power is not hereditary.
(3)The bulk of the population is educated (mass education) and able to be involved in political / administrative decisions.
(4) There is a strong bulk of factual knowledge about the world and religious statements, making possible a general non-believer attitude.
And, of course (5) There are no real gods in Thedas, who will show themselved in DA3.
What David is saying is only that the DA universe is not at all prepared for conditions 1-4. (Condition 5 concerns only the future story). It would be utterly unrealistic to change DA3 toward such an end. In order to be coherent, DA story could be only similar to religious wars. So, no major challenge against any form of religion, kings, institutions, culture.
But David doesn't exclude individuals having atheistic viewpoints, because in such a case there is no real impact storywise. He thinks such kind of statements or behaviors realistic and:
"such an option seemed appropriate".
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
