191 réponses à ce sujet

[Emzamination]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Emzamination wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

Upsettingshorts wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

That actually bothered me a bit, because I would expect a degree of sexism to exist in that kind of world

I don't mind if the sexism actually exists, because it does make the world more realistic.

/faceplant

Time to give up on this thread.

Did you read the rest of my post, or do you like to cherry pick this much?

Most definitely the latter.

I read the whole post.  But I do like cherry picking the parts that claim sexism is required for "realism," though, as I'm already tired of hearing that.  It is, and pulling punches would be pointless at this stage, a load of crap and anyone advancing it ought be ashamed of themselves.

As for Elton John is dead here, I don't even know where to begin.  I don't know whether to laugh or cry at his crippling lack of self awareness, the puzzling concept of "deep sexism", responding to an accusation of a strawman argument by implying a strawman is a kind of argument, and the hypocrisy of accusing me of having an inconsistent position.  Basically a lost cause to write off.

For that matter, support from Emzam in any argument might as well be an albatross as far as your legitimacy goes.  She agreed with me in a thread before and I was horrified and confused, like I had been transported into another discussion where she had been saying something else and I had made a different post entirely.  It was weird and gave me a headache.  But then her rhetoric is dazzling in its incomprehensibility so maybe I shouldn't be surprised.

But you guys can start a club where things mean whatever you want them to mean (especially "dark" and "mature," we can throw in "sexism" and "deep sexism" too), arguments follow logical lines that only you can see, and your goalposts are propelled all over the place by engines of their own, fueled by the frustrations of other posters trying to follow your meandering, inconsistent, and in Emzam's case curiously worded ramblings.

Enjoy the thread!

Agreed. My I.Q approves +9000

Modifié par Emzamination, 02 octobre 2012 - 02:24 .

[Allan Schumacher]

/tongueInCheek

Isn't a setting where sexism isn't an issue an innately more mature one?


Mmmm, Can of worms.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 02 octobre 2012 - 06:00 .

[Maria Caliban]

Because I was talking about the series with a friend earlier...

Silent Hill 2 is an excellent example of a 'dark fantasy' game that handles sexism in a mature manner. Silent Hill 4 is an excellent example of a 'dark fantasy' game that handles sexism in a thoughtless and immature manner because it attempts to ape the themes of Silent Hill 2 and fails.

That said, I don't want Silent Hill 2 or Silent Hill 4 sexism in TheDAs.

cindercatz wrote...

... had her arranged double marriage hijacked by the lawful human noble right of first intercourse (institutionalized rape, ala Braveheart's enemies in the nobility, not just a crazy evil villain)...

This is amusing.

No, there is no legal rape in Ferelden. Human nobles have no such right. The dude was just a straight up crazy evil villain.

cindercatz wrote...

He claims lawful right just like in Braveheart, and that's the first thing I thought of. DA is largely a medieval Europe analogue, and that's part of medieval Europe.

Right.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 02 octobre 2012 - 06:56 .

[Biotic Sage]

Fat Lee has the right of it, at least from where I'm standing. Good on you, Fat Lee.

[Das Tentakel]

Sejborg wrote...

I think that Dragon Age has alot of elements you can point out and say: "that's why it is mature, and that is why it is dark and gritty".

But for me, especially in DA2, alot of those elements didn't leave an imprint on me. It was quickly onward with the over the top silly combat, then have silly banter (often some sexual reference, and Merrill not getting it), and just the overall lighthearted presentation of Kirkwall. Imagine if it was raining all the time instead of sunshine. What if the walls and buildings where dirty and there was trash scattered around?

Everything from the artstyle, to combat animation, to banter, to music and so on contradicted the mature and the dark elements in the game, and somehow it ended up as if the target audience wasn't mature. Like the movie Jumanji. Everytime something scary happens it is quickly followed up with something to laugh at.

I would prefer if everything in the game from art, music, story and gameplay all cooperated to give me a mature, dark and gritty game.

There’s an old interview with Ron Moore (who, while undoubtedly talented, alas can’t plot his way out of a multiple season series if his life depended on it – in my opinion that is) regarding the original Battlestar Galactica series:

‘But look, the story opens with a genocide, an apocalyptic destruction of 12 planets. Billions of human lives are lost. The survivors run away, fleeing an implacable enemy, the Cylons, who are determined to destroy them…And the first place they go is the casino planet.’

I had that same feeling with DA2, and to a lesser extent with DA:O. Or, for that matter, at certain points in The Witcher I (Triss’ dress, the sex cards). Some series get better, others devolve.

Man, some serious stuff is going on in DA. And then I see leather bikini armour with the Dalish, humongous bazongas and no pants in a ‘sexy’ character, spiky SM dominatrix leotards, silly bordellos, bloodspatters up the Wazoo, wisecracking NPC’s commenting that ‘everything is easier these days like eating and fighting’, Elven blood mages with the intelligence of a mummified and dehydrated newt etc. etc. etc. ad nauseam.

Everybody can define dark and mature according to his or her own preferences or rhetorical purposes. But for me, it’s more a matter of to what degree I am immersed in the story and setting and whether it evokes a grim, somber, thoughtful mood in me. DA:O had oodles of annoyance and boredom but also some moments that were touching, grim, somber. DA2 completely failed, every second, to do anything of that sort to me. DA2 made me laugh, but too much of it was laughing at the game. Not a good sign.

It’s an intensely personal thing, I agree. Age, gender, educational, professional and family background, personality etc. all influence on how we experience and perceive something, whether that’s a book, videogame, movie or someone’s behaviour.

If somebody doesn’t want sexism, in the sense of in-setting cultural sexism, in his or her fantasy setting that’s perfectly understandable. I have female friends who dislike ‘realistic’ RPG settings because of this. Others (men and women) on the other hand like this kind of thing, because it makes the setting more ‘real’ to them and because the more real the setting feels to them, the more real the ‘heroism’ of their characters (as well as that of NPC’s that try to do ‘the right thing’) and the more ‘real’ genuinely desperate situations feel.

People vary in terms of their degree of tolerance of being put outside their comfort zone. I know my own limits in this area pretty well, and it lies in the domain of rape, violent incest and genocide. Probably not very unusual. Yet I can accept encountering these in a fantasy setting that goes for a more ‘realistic’ feel, provided these things themselves are not justified in any way, and presented in a matter-of-fact way, and something in which the player has agency. Depicting something is not the same as justifying it. Being a fantasy Schindler can be just as much an empowering power fantasy as being a pantless pirate. But for it to work, ‘stuff has to be real’. And that probably means uncomfortable.

It’s not for everyone, and I certainly don’t advocate BioWare doing this kind of stuff. I don’t think it’s their kind of thing, it’s certainly not the ‘kind of thing’ many of their current fans like, and personally, I like ‘intermediate’ stuff too. Where people get killed, but not in an overly messy way. Where motivations aren’t black and white, but not terribly nuanced either. Where characters are a bit more than mere stereotypes, even if they are still very much based on simple templates. Stuff that engages me somewhat, but doesn’t attempt to grab me by the throat and put my face into the muck of Mankind, or makes me feel melancholy.

Modifié par Das Tentakel, 02 octobre 2012 - 09:08 .

[Sejborg]

Thank you Das Tentakel for a very well put post. You said alot of things I tried to say with my post, just way more detailed. It was a long post, so I will cut quotes out and comment on some specific things. I think we have the same understanding on how the games elements needs to compliment eachother, but I want to expand a bit on my first post, even though I feel you have done most of the work for me. 

Das Tentakel wrote...
Man, some serious stuff is going on in DA. And then I see leather bikini armour with the Dalish, humongous bazongas and no pants in a ‘sexy’ character, spiky SM dominatrix leotards, silly bordellos, bloodspatters up the Wazoo, wisecracking NPC’s commenting that ‘everything is easier these days like eating and fighting’, Elven blood mages with the intelligence of a mummified and dehydrated newt etc. etc. etc. ad nauseam.

As for the sexiness of certain characters. I think Morrigan was done really well. She looked great, and since she was a mage it made sense for to wear whatever. My problem with Isabella isn't that she:
- has huge gigantic boobs and shows it,
- has no pants,
- talks about sex in almost every banter,
- and that it is insinuated, that she has slept with almost everyone in Kirkwall. 

It's the combination of all those points, that makes her so exaggerated that she just seems comical. I love having beautifull or sexy companions. But with Isabella her sexiness was turned up to eleven in everyway I could think of. And that's just ridiculous. I get it. Isabella is sexy. I don't have to beaten with the fact again and again. It made her a one noted character. 
Morrigan was also dressed sexy, but I didn't mind her because that wasn't the only way the game presented her. I wasn't beaten with the fact throughout the game. I guess it is subjective as to when something becomes too much, and it just seems ridicouless. 

As for the wisecracking. It was just too much in DA2. Imagine running around in Darktown and the ‘everything is easier these days like eating and fighting’ banter comes up.  Also the sarcastic Hawke replies gave me the feeling that I was playing a medieval sitcom. Plus that there were too many comical companions. If we are going to have jokes in DA3 I hope they are limited, and context sensitive so they only show up when they are appropriate. You wouldn't tell jokes at a funeral while the casket is being lowered into the ground.

Merrill as a character just made no sense. So childish and stupid. Her character was just so unbeliaveble. Her personality didn't add up with her being appointed the second in line in her elven clan. That just made the entire dalish clan seem stupid - even though she was stripped of her title again. 

Das Tentakel wrote...
If somebody doesn’t want sexism, in the sense of in-setting cultural sexism, in his or her fantasy setting that’s perfectly understandable. I have female friends who dislike ‘realistic’ RPG settings because of this. Others (men and women) on the other hand like this kind of thing, because it makes the setting more ‘real’ to them and because the more real the setting feels to them, the more real the ‘heroism’ of their characters (as well as that of NPC’s that try to do ‘the right thing’) and the more ‘real’ genuinely desperate situations feel.

People vary in terms of their degree of tolerance of being put outside their comfort zone. I know my own limits in this area pretty well, and it lies in the domain of rape, violent incest and genocide. Probably not very unusual. Yet I can accept encountering these in a fantasy setting that goes for a more ‘realistic’ feel, provided these things themselves are not justified in any way, and presented in a matter-of-fact way, and something in which the player has agency. Depicting something is not the same as justifying it. Being a fantasy Schindler can be just as much an empowering power fantasy as being a pantless pirate. But for it to work, ‘stuff has to be real’. And that probably means uncomfortable.

I love fighting injustice. I don't really think I have any themes, I couldn't bear being explored. In the city elf origin, where the humans arrives to rape and kill those who try to stop them - I was pumped up to get back at them. Having something cruel happen, and then being allowed to do something about it, is something I like. I wouldn't have minded if Shianni was even more messed up when I arrived, it would just have added to the realism of what was going on, and pumped me even more up, to go waste the one behind it all. 

There was also a quest with some guy molesting children in DA2. But that just felt flat because then suddenly everyone was roundhousing around, swinging swords larger than themselves as if they weighed nothing. 

As for sexism. Sten says that women shouldn't fight. They should basically just watch the children and make food. That is sexist if you ask me. But I don't mind having that sort of viewpoint in the game, as long as it is not something I am being forced to agree with.

So yeah. I think we agree, I just wanted to expand a bit on what I think. 

Modifié par Sejborg, 02 octobre 2012 - 01:39 .

[Vandicus]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

/tongueInCheek

Isn't a setting where sexism isn't an issue an innately more mature one?


Mmmm, Can of worms.

Well, see the rating systems for video games is basically backwards. This is for a very important reason, but its still backwards, but people use it as a measuring stick of maturity anyways.

A setting where, all else being equal, the denizens are not sexist, is one with more mature characters than a setting where the characters are sexist. Likewise a setting where people solve their problems without violence and lacking in racism would be more mature than one without those things.

However the more mature the characters of a setting are the more likely it is to receive a PG rating, and the more immature the more likely they are to receive an M rating. That's because the video game rating system is supposed to be a guideline for what maturity level the player should have. The idea is to keep younger folks from seeing immature behavior and emulating it.  Unfortunately some people completely miss this, and come to the conclusion that maturity is equivalent to these things that are not included in "less mature" video games. This is partially where the idea that vulgarity and violence equate to maturity comes from.

[upsettingshorts]

Vandicus wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

/tongueInCheek

Isn't a setting where sexism isn't an issue an innately more mature one?


Mmmm, Can of worms.

Well, see the rating systems for video games is basically backwards. This is for a very important reason, but its still backwards, but people use it as a measuring stick of maturity anyways.

A setting where, all else being equal, the denizens are not sexist, is one with more mature characters than a setting where the characters are sexist. Likewise a setting where people solve their problems without violence and lacking in racism would be more mature than one without those things.

However the more mature the characters of a setting are the more likely it is to receive a PG rating, and the more immature the more likely they are to receive an M rating. That's because the video game rating system is supposed to be a guideline for what maturity level the player should have. The idea is to keep younger folks from seeing immature behavior and emulating it.  Unfortunately some people completely miss this, and come to the conclusion that maturity is equivalent to these things that are not included in "less mature" video games. This is partially where the idea that vulgarity and violence equate to maturity comes from.

Can this post be a popup that you have to read through before you're allowed to write "dark" or "mature" on this forum?

That'd be great.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 02 octobre 2012 - 02:09 .

[syllogi]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

/tongueInCheek

Isn't a setting where sexism isn't an issue an innately more mature one?


Mmmm, Can of worms.

I believe so, and it's why Gene Roddenberry's Star Trek has always been my favorite speculative fiction setting.  His setting not only held the characters in high regard, it also respected the maturity of the audience:

We believed that the often ridiculed mass audience is sick of this world's petty nationalism and all it's old ways and old hatreds, and that people are not only willing but anxious to think beyond most petty beliefs that have for so long kept mankind divided.

So you see that the formula, the magic ingredient that many people keep seeking and many of them keep missing is really not in Star Trek.  It is in the audience. There is an intelligent life form out on the other side of that television too.

The whole show was an attempt to say that humanity will reach maturity and wisdom on the day that it begins not just to tolerate, but to take a special delight in differences in ideas and differences in life forms.

We tried to say that the worst possible thing that can happen to all of us is for the future to somehow press us into a common mould, where we begin to act and talk and look and think alike. If we cannot learn to actually enjoy those small differences, take a positive delight in those small differences between our own kind, here on this planet, then we do not deserve to go out into space and meet the diversity that is almost certainly out there.

And I think that this is what people responded to.

--Gene Roddenberry

I would love to see a fantasy setting with this much idealism and maturity one day.

Modifié par syllogi, 02 octobre 2012 - 02:30 .

[Wulfram]

I don't think a setting containing mature people and a mature setting are the same thing. Not as people would generally use the term.

(Maybe Middle Earth is the most mature setting. Most of the characters are pretty old)

[Runningleaf]

cindercatz wrote...

the male origin say's vaughen did the same to an elven servant in his castle last year. No mention of running off with brides. And that his father is away, making him more bold. the guards that come to arrest you are city guards, under the Arl but not the Arls personal guard. It was Vaughen's men, and ones that wanted to join in the behavior that aided him.

I'd say the lord of the land, in a purely feudal system like Fereldan, is the law, so whether he states "Under the authority of so and so" or not, it's pretty self evident. Being told in game, like you found, that it happens "occasionally", and we're talking right out in the open, taking a bride on her wedding day in broad daylight with armed guards and enough troops to control the whole area and contain a riot, is extremely blatant, nothing at all like the hush hush evil of Penn State and it's cover-up by whoever had knowledge of that evil bastard's crimes. Everybody knows about what Vaughn is doing in game. It's no secret and not a huge intellectual shock that he would do it, as the community has suffered very similar (moral) crimes under him and others before. (which I infer, but I don't see how the scenario reads otherwise)

.

Did you read My post, really? The people never say he has ever walked out in the open with or without guards (the people don't even recognise him) or that any bride has ever been made off with. The given example is a castle servant that went missing and was found later dead. Everyone who knew her or Vaughen knew what happend, but there was no proof only dark rumors (as they say in the game). It does not follow that Everyone in the whole game knew anything.

Certainly this sort of thing happens, serial rappists and abuses of power, it happend then, it happens now. that Vaughn was an example of how bad it could be is evident. But the reaction of the elves, especially the male origins, is that this is not allowed, that this is not something that is done,and the leader of the elves even says  that it is only in the Arls absence that Vaughen could do this.

As to the law's ever existing for long, Check Maria Cliban post.

[Runningleaf]

 On the subject of just running across someone beating his wife. Such scenes are ususally used to delineate a Lawless and violent, or primitive, area. Which Fereldens are very proud not to be, as the rest of the world seems to see them as barbarians. I'm not saying that there it is against the law or doesn't happen, just that it isn't likely to happen in the open.

Maybe in Haven.

On Sexism, I think there is just the right amount in DAO. Personal not institutionalized.

[upsettingshorts]

sjpelkessjpeler wrote...

Star Trek in terms of what you describe is exactly what you say it is. Big issues are handled very subtle in Star Trek and one can see them when reading between the lines.

Not always.



Star Trek, like anything that spans hundreds of episodes and dozens of writers, is pretty up and down.  Even Roddenberry had his fair share of weird notions - like putting a therapist on the command staff.  But broadly the quote posted is more or less correct, depending on which episode or movie we're talking about:  

The writer/director of Star Trek 2 and 6, Nicholas Meyer, has explicitly disagreed with Roddenberry's premise and said that a universe without some kind of prejudice was unbelievable.  There's kind of a lot of it in the latter, between humans and klingons.  But he didn't handle it carelessly, consciously giving some of the most vehemently anti-klingon lines to actor Brock Peters to help convey the point, that it was still wrong.  But then along similar lines, Nichelle Nichols refused to say, "Guess who's coming to dinner" and it was given to Walter Koenig instead.  So it depends.

A bit off topic, but my Star Trek nerdery was triggered on.  

Btw Shakespeare is so much better in the original Klingon.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 02 octobre 2012 - 03:16 .

[upsettingshorts]

Also, the less said about Code of Honor and Angel One (TNG episodes) the better.  Both were produced while Gene Roddenberry was still alive and kicking.

Though he fired the director of the former for... well, obvious reasons.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 02 octobre 2012 - 03:17 .

[SpunkyMonkey]

Whilst I love the fact that Bioware has introduced such mature topics into FRPGs, I think that they have a fairly decent balance as it is and buy games like this for the hero experience.

Much like when I watch Star Wars, the romance, Imperial politics and religion aspects all add a nice bit of depth to it all - but that shouldn't bog down the arse kicking conflict factor like the prequels did.

Sexism is for girls, I've got dragons to slay

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 02 octobre 2012 - 03:32 .

[jillabender]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Star Trek, like anything that spans hundreds of episodes and dozens of writers, is pretty up and down.  Even Roddenberry had his fair share of weird notions - like putting a therapist on the command staff.  But broadly the quote posted is more or less correct, depending on which episode or movie we're talking about:  

The writer/director of Star Trek 2 and 6, Nicholas Meyer, has explicitly disagreed with Roddenberry's premise and said that a universe without some kind of prejudice was unbelievable.  There's kind of a lot of it in the latter, between humans and klingons.  But he didn't handle it carelessly, consciously giving some of the most vehemently anti-klingon lines to actor Brock Peters to help convey the point, that it was still wrong.  But then along similar lines, Nichelle Nichols refused to say, "Guess who's coming to dinner" and it was given to Walter Koenig instead.  So it depends.

A bit off topic, but my Star Trek nerdery was triggered on.  

Btw Shakespeare is so much better in the original Klingon.

That's a good point  – I absolutely love Star Trek, especially Star Trek: The Next Generation, but Roddenberry did have some strange ideas at times: I remember reading that before he relaxed his ideas, the writers on TNG were frustrated by his insistence that personal conflicts among the crew were something that humanity had outgrown in his vision of the future.

In general, though, TNG had some incredibly smart writing. To use one example, there's an episode in which Worf refuses to be a donor for a dying Romulan who needs treatment, because the Romulans are mortal enemies of his people and his parents were killed in a Romulan attack. Even though his Starfleet training tells him that he should be tolerant, he can't reconcile that with his Klingon conceptions of honour and loyalty. I love the fact that Star Trek was able to show Worf acting in a way that doesn't fit our own ideals of noble behaviour, while still making us care about him.

I have to admit, the strangeness of the ship's counselor being on the command staff has crossed my mind – I never questioned it as a kid, but when I watch the show now, I can't help but think "Wouldn't that be a huge conflict of interest?" I'm willing to forgive that, though, because I love Troi. :happy:

And yes, everything's better in Klingon!

[syllogi]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Also, the less said about Code of Honor and Angel One (TNG episodes) the better.  Both were produced while Gene Roddenberry was still alive and kicking.

Though he fired the director of the former for... well, obvious reasons.

Those were in the first season, though.  The first season was rough.  And I realize that Star Trek's universe wasn't perfect, given that they needed conflict to keep it entertaining.  They mostly were able to do it, though, without mucking up the original vision of a more enlightened future.  

Getting back to Dragon Age, though, I think asking for *more* discrimination and gender/race/class division is a bit much, in a world that is already being torn apart by the Mage-Templar conflict, has the threat of a religious war between the Chantry and the Qunari looming, and has slavery and oppression in the Tevinter Imperium.  That's not enough for some people?

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Mr Mxyzptlk wrote...

What is so Dark and Mature about the Dragon Age universe? And how exactly will that translate in Dragon Age 3?
(See Dragon Age 3 related, keep those lock happy fingers away from my thread Stan)

I mean I dont get what is considered so Dark and mature about the series, sure the world is bland and ugly but that doesnt make it dark, just bland and ugly. Looking at past examples Origins seems to be the standard good vs evil story, noble heroes fighting against impossible odds and winning, every choice you make has the "fairytale ending" option, nothing really dark about it. To be honest the phrase "Dark and Mature" gets thrown around so much these days I am not really sure what it means anymore, give me your definition of "Dark and Mature".

"Dark and mature" ---- The Witcher 2? Not because of the sex scenes, but everything else. Dragon Age looks and feels like a cartoon in comparison. That's not a bad thing. I actually prefer the more light-hearted stuff. But there it is.

[Runningleaf]

syllogi wrote...

 I think asking for *more* discrimination and gender/race/class division is a bit much, in a world that is already being torn apart by the Mage-Templar conflict, has the threat of a religious war between the Chantry and the Qunari looming, and has slavery and oppression in the Tevinter Imperium.  That's not enough for some people?

Besides if racism or sexism and such were very strong it would make it difficult to play the game. If most thought Elves, or women, vastly inferior they would never have gotten any where at the landsmeet. I suppose Alistar would have had to take the lead there, were that the case.

[Wulfram]

syllogi wrote...

Getting back to Dragon Age, though, I think asking for *more* discrimination and gender/race/class division is a bit much, in a world that is already being torn apart by the Mage-Templar conflict, has the threat of a religious war between the Chantry and the Qunari looming, and has slavery and oppression in the Tevinter Imperium.  That's not enough for some people?

Well, most of that tends to be rather soft-pedalled for the PC and companions.  The setting may be full of discrimination and bigotry, but the player is mostly insulated from it.

Some of the origin stories of DA:O are big exceptions to this, but that was only spottily followed through into the game.

[Mummy22kids]

I'm not even going to address the issue of "dark" but as for "mature' I agree with those who have stated this is more for addressing the age of those who are mature enough (old enough) for a particular game rather than the feel/content of the game itself. If I see anything- game/movie/tv show- with an M rating I know it's not going to be appropriate for my 10 year old to play/watch.

[The Hierophant]

Wasn't the issue of the lack of sexism in Thedas explained by Leliana in her Aveline story?

[Spedfrom]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

/tongueInCheek

Isn't a setting where sexism isn't an issue an innately more mature one?


Mmmm, Can of worms.

The devils's advocate. Bad Allan, bad!