390 réponses à ce sujet

[Eternal Phoenix]

StElmo wrote...

simfamSP wrote...

DarkKnightHolmes wrote...

No, I get enough religion bashing from Assassin's Creed and the internet.

It's a game based on historical events. It's not bashing, it's history. Or are you telling me that Borgia weren't little poo-heads?

Some religious people are overly sensitive about the facts and history.

You clearly haven't played AC then. Everyone agrees it is anti-religious and if "aliens created us" and "all major events in history were caused by aliens" are historically accurate facts according to you then you really need to go back to school. I suppose Altair and Ezio were real people too?

AC is filled with errors regarding history. The Assassins were Muslims called Hashashins who were led by Hassan-i Sabbah (who was a Muslim not an atheist) and in truth he was fighting against both Christians and Muslims for political power. Oh and most of those people who Altair killed in AC1 weren't even killed in real life and AC1 goes out of its way to show the assassination targets as being evil monsters when in actual reality, many of them weren't.

Historically accurate? Asides from visiting historic places and meeting historic characters, no, the AC series aren't historically accurate.

Nah. Keep religion bashing out of DA3. Include it as a role playing choice (as previously) but I don't want a whole plot based around bashing religion. I want the plot to show the Chantry and mages as they've been shown before (with flaws and pros). Dragon Age is a role-playing series. If you want to be anti-religious then I'm sure that option will be there just as the option to be religious will be there (as previously). I don't want an anti-religious message shoved down my throat.

Modifié par Elton John is dead, 29 septembre 2012 - 06:08 .

[slimgrin]

There's a fair bit of jabbing at religion in DA:O. I rather liked it, but it wasn't forced either.

[Swagger7]

Androme wrote...

What amazes me is how people are always so keen on criticising the Chantry but not the Qun, and calls the Chantry power-hungry people, a reflection of how Atheists are in the real world; continously criticise Christianity, but not a word about Islam. While we can with absolute certainty conclude that it is in fact the Qun (and Islam in the real world) that wishes for power the most out of the two.

Common myth.  I've actually encountered multiple Muslims that make your same argument, but in reverse.  Most atheists I know (myself included) only speak against religion when it's out to actively do something against them.  So, if you're a Christian, you'll only hear criticisms against Christianity because that's what you are.  This is called sample bias, IIRC. 

Similarly, since all DA games have been set in Thedas so far, the chantry is the religion that a non-religious PC would most likely be negatively affected by.

Oh, by the way, "militant atheist" is something religious people call any atheist who opens his/her mouth.  It's like "angry black man" or "shrill feminist".  It's a put-down the majority uses to justify not actually listening to something a minority has to say.  Now I will agree that some atheists go out of their way to bother those who aren't bothering them.  Using a name like "militant atheist" just makes it sound like you're dismissing what's said soley because of its source and this can lead to confusion.  There's already a perfectly good word for people who go around insulting those who did nothing offensive: ***hole.

I'd also like to point out that Bioware did a good job of stirring all this discussion up in the first place, by making the Chantry so close to the actual Catholic Church.  I'm not complaining, just saying that if they don't like these conversations, well, they did it to themselves.

Modifié par Swagger7, 29 septembre 2012 - 06:28 .

[ElitePinecone]

Erik Lehnsherr wrote...

Considering the Templar-Mage issue is what DA3 is all about

Possibly not necessarily true - from the very limited information we have in a marketing survey, the Templar-Mage issue is a backdrop to Thedas' general state of chaos, but it's not the sole focus of the story. The civil war in Orlais, tensions with Ferelden and even Tevinter (among other things?) feature as components also.

Anders' actions and the significant events in Asunder (the spitting of the Chantry, Templars going rogue, the Circles rebelling) definitely help set up DA3, but other things seem to quickly demand the attention of the player at the start of the next game.

That's not to say we won't be heavily involved in the internal politics of the Chantry, because I think it looks like it's a fair chunk of the game, but it's not like the entire thing is set up around the Templar-Mage conflict - that's only one part of a very different type of main story and the motivations of the player character. 

[Major Crackhead]

Flood the game with religious crap so I can play my evil "Black Divine" Blood Mage character.

[Vandicus]

The Chantry's role in regulating mages is entirely unrelated to their existence as a religious institution. Any other international power could've taken the role, thing is, the Chantry is the only real international power in Thedas. To criticize institutionalized religion on the basis of an action which has no real world analogy would be a pretty idiotic criticism.

This is a bit of a silly thing to ask anyways, what're we going to have next, a criticism of feudalism?

[Volus Warlord]

To display the fact that we are about tolerance, love, and peace, we will senselessly bash, hate, and disparage other's views that are not ours. It will only spread tolerance.

1.) Saying you hate institutionalized religion is pretty much the same as saying you hate the religion. Why bother with the modifier? Saying you hate institutionalized religion but not religion is: "Hey, religious people should be allowed to be religious, but they should not be allowed to meet and discuss it." It's hilariously silly. Just be honest with yourself and say you hate religion. Because you apparently do.

2.) I do not see how criticism of any single ideal or institution is inherently good or bad. So, criticism of any group(s), person(s), or event(s) is not inherently good or bad. Think of it in the philosophical sense. It is not what you say, but how you back it up. OP insists that criticism of the church is inherently good "on principle" (lol!). Sorry honey, you're gonna have to do better than that.

3.) As the BSN's resident angry fundamentalist, I often find myself opposed to the opinions, morals, and decision making process of others in this forum. If it could even be called decision making. However, I have not run around in a Jeep waving around an AK-47 over it just yet. As such, I'd prefer not to be equated to such anomalies in religion. K?

Modifié par Volus Warlord, 29 septembre 2012 - 06:59 .

[BouncyFrag]

I'm not looking to video game devs to either confirm or deny the core beliefs I have as a person. I don't want Bioware making this (or any) game with the focused goal of attacking or supporting institutionalized religion to please what ever side of the issue you yourself are aligned with. I just want a great game. Will these themes undoubtedly come up? Absolutely, characters in the game will have their own motivations and their actions will reflect this and most importantly you can make decisions from whatever perspective you desire.

[Volus Warlord]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...

3.) As the BSN's resident angry fundamentalist

Hmm. Can I be our happy fundamentalist?

You seem more of a patient fundamentalist.

[slimgrin]

Volus Warlord wrote...

EntropicAngel wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...

3.) As the BSN's resident angry fundamentalist

Hmm. Can I be our happy fundamentalist?

You seem more of a patient fundamentalist.

Neither of you are as fundamental as me.  

[Vandicus]

slimgrin wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...

EntropicAngel wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...

3.) As the BSN's resident angry fundamentalist

Hmm. Can I be our happy fundamentalist?

You seem more of a patient fundamentalist.

Neither of you are as fundamental as me.  

So that would make you the prideful fundamentalist?

[Volus Warlord]

slimgrin wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...

EntropicAngel wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...

3.) As the BSN's resident angry fundamentalist

Hmm. Can I be our happy fundamentalist?

You seem more of a patient fundamentalist.

Neither of you are as fundamental as me.  

I thought your only religion was boobs.

[Zkyire]

Purge the heathens wrote...

I'm not all that pious myself, but I'd prefer if the game told an entertaining and enthralling story rather than try to shove some political message down my throat.

Agreed.

We play games to escape real life, not to have people's real life ideals shoved in our faces.

Modifié par Zkyire, 29 septembre 2012 - 07:14 .

[Swagger7]

greengoron89 wrote...

@Swagger - What, so "minorities" should be absolved of any responsibility for what they say and do... simply because they're "minorities"?

Brilliant logic.

Way to put words in my mouth.  I was saying that people use these terms to dismiss people automatically, rather than listen to the content of their arguments.  In what way is this absolving minorities of responsibility for what they say and do?  If you wish to argue, please don't strawman me.

Modifié par Swagger7, 29 septembre 2012 - 07:55 .

[Swagger7]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Swagger7 wrote...

Oh, by the way, "militant atheist" is something religious people call any atheist who opens his/her mouth.  It's like "angry black man" or "shrill feminist".  It's a put-down the majority uses to justify not actually listening to something a minority has to say.  Now I will agree that some atheists go out of their way to bother those who aren't bothering them.  Using a name like "militant atheist" just makes it sound like you're dismissing what's said soley because of its source and this can lead to confusion.  There's already a perfectly good word for people who go around insulting those who did nothing offensive: ***hole.

Not always.

There are black people who are pure rasicts, and think they personally deserve better treatment from the rest of the world for events that happened decades ago.

So, "angry black man" and I guess other such phrases (I'd never heard "shrill feminist" or "militant atheist" before this thread, actually.) do have some basis in realism.

I'm not saying that these phrases are never accurate.  It's just that they're completely overused in situations where they don't apply, often in a dismissive manner.  This paints the user of the phrase in an unpleasant light and confuses the discussion.  Basically, it's like how calling every violent person a "terrorist" waters down the term so it no longer has meaning.

(As an aside, "militant atheist" is almost never an accurate label anyway.  I know of no atheists that argue in favor of using violence to oppose invasive religion, or of arming themselves for defense.  These are things which are necessary for being militant.)


Back on topic, I personally like the way Bioware has handled the Chantry so far.  They seem perfectly happy to let us make up our own minds and I like that.  I jsut hope they give our PCs the same ability.  I'm not calling for an "atheist playthrough", but I want to be able to voice a little dissent every once in awhile, like in Origins.  Just a little.....

Modifié par Swagger7, 29 septembre 2012 - 07:53 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

StElmo wrote...

One thing that has impressed me greatly and kept me in the DA game is the portrayal of the Chantry as apower hungry, dominant and manipulative force, in the DA universe.

It draws heavy parallels with the historical and modern day context of the Catholic Church in real world society - which I find absolutely fascinating.

If DA3 really ramps this up (something I expect is being hinted at with a title called "inquisition") I would be happy to put my money on the table, purely based on principle.

Exposing the flaws, injustices and overall powerplay of institutionalized religion in society is a controversial but highly respectable theme.

I really hope they do something outlandish and creative with this opportunity. If they don't and I will know this before I put down my money (from fan reviews) I will be sorely dissapointed.

Kind Regards,

Elmo

I hope it does the EXACT OPPOSITE.

Portrays anyone opposing insitutionalized religion as stupid, ignorant, lazy, primitive rednecks.

B.t.w - attacking religion isn't "contraversial but highly respectable".. it's what hacks use to grab attention.
Attacking institutions like Catholic Church is easy because it doesn't really fight back. So it's rather popular to attack it by anyone who's creatively bankrupt and need some contraversy in order for people to even look at the crap they produce.

There is nothing evil in institutionalized religion...it just..is.
The "evil" comes from simply people being epoepl and large organizations being hard to manage.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 29 septembre 2012 - 07:59 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Swagger7 wrote...
(As an aside, "militant atheist" is almost never an accurate label anyway.  I know of no atheists that argue in favor of using violence to oppose invasive religion, or of arming themselves for defense.  These are things which are necessary for being militant.)

Not necessarily. I know a few.

And "militant atheist" basicly refers to being exceptionaly hostile and desireing the destruction of religion.
I've met plenty who'd give religious fanatical zealots a run for their money in terms of crazyness.