390 réponses à ce sujet

[Dragoonlordz]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Faerunner wrote...

 What I liked about DA:O was the balanced representation of pro and anti Chantry arguments, of theism and atheism, etc. (Especially between Leliana and Morrigan. Their arguments seemed very fair, balanced, logical, and left open for the viewer to decide what they believed.) 

DA2 seemed to be very slanted toward theism and organized religion. Anders, Merrill, Sebastian, and Hawke's unsolicited "She's with the Maker" comment, I'm looking at you.

Belief does not necessarily constitute adherence to or membership within an organized religion, as the cases of Anders and Merrill particularly exemplify.

As far as your criticism of DA2 goes: Theism yes, organized religion not so much. Sister Petrice is probably the most reviled character in the game, and with good reason, and let's take a look at the nature of her plots and what she represents.

With the name of DA3 being what it is, there is a potential theme implied of being pro-chantry as possible protaganist. Just a possibilty as not much is known at this stage. This goes against my characters I played in both previous games and would be going against my character I desire to play in DA3. Now I do not know if they will try to force regilous allegiance on the player from the offset for the purpose of story and plot but for myself I would like my character to not be a follower of either the Qun or the Chantry. I want to be able to be critical and opposed to both the Qun and the Chantry.

Like I said however they have shown in both games so far the ability to do so, which means I do not have a big concern about it. I just think they should allow that to continue with DA3 rather than force a religious allegiance due to the theme of the game. The companions could and probably should be believers in such religious groups in order to add to the personality and diversity of the dialogue and interactions, just not my character who I would like to be against the Chantry and against the Qun as he/she has always been in both DA games using different protaganists.

I am sure there is probably nothing to be concerned about but given the name of the game and assumed theme personally it is just something I have on my mind as a slight issue.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 30 septembre 2012 - 02:37 .

[slimgrin]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

You mean the vast swarths in which the largest, most devastating, and most systematic genocides in Human history have occured under the aegis of secular ideologies?

A symptom of the modern era. Don't think for a second ancient religious fanatics wouldn't do the same. And there is no militant secular movement. People don't kill each other in the name of not believing in religion. They kill each other in belief of the wrong god, or the wrong sect, or the wrong faction...have you learned nothng from the conflict in the middle east?     

Modifié par slimgrin, 30 septembre 2012 - 02:39 .

[Dragoonlordz]

slimgrin wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

You mean the vast swarths in which the largest, most devastating, and most systematic genocides in Human history have occured under the aegis of secular ideologies?

A symptom of the modern era. Don't think for a second ancient religious fanatics wouldn't do the same. And there is no militant secular movement. People don't kill each other in the name of not believing in religion. They kill each other in belief of the wrong god, or the wrong sect, or the wrong faction...have you learned nothng from the conflict in the middle east?     

Actually 'unbelievers' are killed by fanatics in the middle east too. Unbelievers meaning belief not only in a different god but also belief in no god can get you killed by those fanatics by any religion including the middle east where it is most prominent at the moment where happens but not limited to there alone. What you are right about though is that only the fanatics are the ones who would do such.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 30 septembre 2012 - 02:44 .

[upsettingshorts]

I lost track of the number of oversimplifications made in just that paragraph.

Define modern era. Why then?
Define ancient. Why then?
Define religious fanatic vs. nonfanatic. Would nonfanatics do the same?
Describe some secular movements in history.
Define militancy.
Demonstrate the difference between war goals and war justifications.
List major wars involving professed religious leaders and their corresponding war goals.
Describe what you have learned from the (allegedly singular) conflict in the Middle East.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 30 septembre 2012 - 02:46 .

[upsettingshorts]

On second thought do none of those things, it would be super off topic. Nevermind I asked.

[slimgrin]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

On second thought do none of those things, it would be super off topic. Nevermind I asked.

I won't, since asking and not answering is your forte.

[upsettingshorts]

slimgrin wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

On second thought do none of those things, it would be super off topic. Nevermind I asked.

I won't, since asking and not answering is your forte.

Don't knock it, It's a fantastically low-effort way to make your point.   As most effort on the BSN is totally wasted... it's efficient.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 30 septembre 2012 - 03:04 .

[Dragoonlordz]

This thread will without doubt get locked if talk about real world religions and situations, if keep to the game lore and game religions it might stay unlocked. It is unlikely to offend someone talking about the Chantry and Qun for example or events in game, you go down path of real world problems and religions then that chance is greatly increased so try to stay away from non game related discussion.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 30 septembre 2012 - 03:12 .

[Urzon]

When i read some of these post, it almost makes me feel bad about being an atheist. Though, i do get a bunch of laughs when i compare just how alike the "militant atheist" and "religious fanatic" are.

With so many similarities, you would think they would be BFFs...

[Plaintiff]

I have no problem with the Chantry continuing to exist as a religion, I just don't think it should have its own armies, be in charge of mages, or have any involvement in politics whatsoever.

[slimgrin]

Urzon wrote...

When i read some of these post, it almost makes me feel bad about being an atheist..

Then maybe you should grow a pair.

[CELL55]

Urzon wrote...

When i read some of these post, it almost makes me feel bad about being an atheist. Though, i do get a bunch of laughs when i compare just how alike the "militant atheist" and "religious fanatic" are.

With so many similarities, you would think they would be BFFs...

I agree with you there. They're two sides of the same coin.

At least there are plenty of sane people on this thread trying to calm it down. 

I think that should the game illustrate nearly any highly debatable theme as having a clear right and wrong choice would make me think less of it. I appreciate being able to see different perspectives and coming to my own conclusion, rather than having it be given to me. I'm pretty sure this is known as 'roleplaying', and I think the Dragon Age franchise has been pretty good at doing this so far.

[Urzon]

slimgrin wrote...

Urzon wrote...

When i read some of these post, it almost makes me feel bad about being an atheist..

Then maybe you should grow a pair.

So i could go out and impose my views and opinions onto other people, all the while demonizing the other side? If i wanted to keep doing that, i wouldn't have become an atheist.

[Xilizhra]

I don't really care so long as I get to oppose the Chantry and not believe in the divinity of the Maker or Andraste. Is that entirely too much to ask?

[Lithuasil]

Xilizhra wrote...

I don't really care so long as I get to oppose the Chantry and not believe in the divinity of the Maker or Andraste. Is that entirely too much to ask?

It's a whole lot to ask to start out that way, actually.

[Xilizhra]

Lithuasil wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

I don't really care so long as I get to oppose the Chantry and not believe in the divinity of the Maker or Andraste. Is that entirely too much to ask?

It's a whole lot to ask to start out that way, actually.

It wasn't in DAO. I hardly see why it'd be harder here.

[AlienWolf728]

Xilizhra wrote...

Lithuasil wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

I don't really care so long as I get to oppose the Chantry and not believe in the divinity of the Maker or Andraste. Is that entirely too much to ask?

It's a whole lot to ask to start out that way, actually.

It wasn't in DAO. I hardly see why it'd be harder here.

As Gaider said in another thread, asking "I wish to announce myself as an atheist" quickly develops into "I want to go on a crusade against all religion".

[Vit246]

AlienWolf728 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Lithuasil wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

I don't really care so long as I get to oppose the Chantry and not believe in the divinity of the Maker or Andraste. Is that entirely too much to ask?

It's a whole lot to ask to start out that way, actually.

It wasn't in DAO. I hardly see why it'd be harder here.

As Gaider said in another thread, asking "I wish to announce myself as an atheist" quickly develops into "I want to go on a crusade against all religion".

Here's a solution: Just because your character opposes the Chantry and is a unbeliever does not mean you cannot do all that covertly . Provided we get that option.

Modifié par Vit246, 30 septembre 2012 - 04:02 .

[Xilizhra]

AlienWolf728 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Lithuasil wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

I don't really care so long as I get to oppose the Chantry and not believe in the divinity of the Maker or Andraste. Is that entirely too much to ask?

It's a whole lot to ask to start out that way, actually.

It wasn't in DAO. I hardly see why it'd be harder here.

As Gaider said in another thread, asking "I wish to announce myself as an atheist" quickly develops into "I want to go on a crusade against all religion".

As Gaider rather badly misunderstood in the other thread. I don't need to go on a crusade against all religion; neither the Creators nor the Stone have done anything bad to me, only the Maker.

[Lithuasil]

Xilizhra wrote...

It wasn't in DAO. I hardly see why it'd be harder here.

Because a position so far outside of societies norms requires a reason, especially in medieval times when "far out there" positions are much harder to uphold or form in the first place.
So yeah - having a character abandon the faith they were brought up with, after a series of traumatic events or in times of crisis should be an option. Starting out as a character decked out with modern, western beliefs should not.

[jillabender]

I just wanted to say that the title of this post amused me, because I'm an English literature grad, and it reminded me of essays I wrote as an undergrad. Which made me wonder what sort of reaction BioWare would get if, instead of calling DA3 "Dragon Age: Inquisition," they instead gave it a title in the style of an English Lit. essay:
"Dragon Age 3: A Thematic Critique of Institutionalized Religion."

Modifié par jillabender, 30 septembre 2012 - 04:10 .

[Vit246]

nevermind.

Modifié par Vit246, 30 septembre 2012 - 04:10 .

[ElitePinecone]

Dave of Canada wrote...

almost everyone who I've seen create threads like these seem borderline psycopathic in their hatred for real-world religion.

It's a bit disconcerting, really. 

[Odd Bet]

dragonflight288 wrote...


The ancient Spartans threw their elderly and sickly children (even new-borns) into a pit to die if they weren't strong enough. Their entire philosophy revolved around war. It got to the point that the ancient greek olympics banned any spartan from wrestling because their training was so deeply ingrained that they couldn't compete in a sport. It was always life or death, and the olympics banned them because it was too deeply ingrained into them. But the spartans have the most famous last stand at the battle of Thermopylae.

 

Made it through most of the thread without feeling the need to comment, but I can't keep quiet on this. There are just so many things wrong with this. Off topic rant incoming.

The Spartans didn't throw their elders anywhere to die, they died much like any other Greek. In fact, the Gerousia consisted solely of men over sixty. To say that their philosophy revolved entirely around war is also incorrect. The Spartans did indeed live in a militaristic society and valued discipline, strength, valor, and loyalty, but they were not some unfeeling war marchine. The focus on military was necessary due to the ruling Spartiate class being greatly outnumbered by the helots (slaves) and perioikoi (free non-citizens) who were the labor backbone of the city-state, thus requiring a strong military to prevent widespread revolt.

The most ridiculous point, though, is the claim that Spartans couldn't compete in sports. Competing in athletic competitions was a huge part of Spartan culture, and Spartans participated in such events from an early age. They are even believed to be the ones that introduced athletic nudity into the Olympic Games.They were, however, indeed banned from the Olympics during the Peloponnesian War, because the city-state controlling the site of the games sided with Athens. Not because they were some sort of society of psychopaths.

With that out of the way, as far as the topic, I think DA has handled to issue of organized religion quite well so far and hope that they continue to approach it in the same balanced manner.

[Xilizhra]

Lithuasil wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

It wasn't in DAO. I hardly see why it'd be harder here.

Because a position so far outside of societies norms requires a reason, especially in medieval times when "far out there" positions are much harder to uphold or form in the first place.
So yeah - having a character abandon the faith they were brought up with, after a series of traumatic events or in times of crisis should be an option. Starting out as a character decked out with modern, western beliefs should not.

If there are different racial options and I start as a Dalish, it won't be hard at all. If we have to live in an Andrastian society... well, I'm sure not all mages completely pick up on it; it's definitely an option not to in DAO, even without an explicit explanation. Maybe you could bring up a past crisis if it comes up in conversation, but having one happen in-game shouldn't be necessary.