236 réponses à ce sujet

[-TC1989-]

Plaintiff wrote...

-TC1989- wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

-TC1989- wrote...
But to add a m/m rape scene or something, I think would probably start a wildfire of criticism. Plus alot of people can't think outside the box as it is, and probably would find it "repulsive" or something ridiculous.

People should be repulsed by rape. 

You missed my point. I'm not saying the aspect of rape as a whole. Of course rape is repulsive, like I had said earlier in my post. What I'm saying is if you combine rape with the idea of it being m/m rape, people would be more against it because of the simple fact it's two males.

I'm sorry, but I find it really disturbing that anyone would say that ASOIAF doesn't have "enough rape", or that it needs more different kinds of rape.

Well I never said that more rape would be nice. But that is a recurring theme in ASOIAF.. it's just what it is. What I said was that things like the Loras and Renly relationship is a bold move, and that it's refreshing to branch out into things that are controversial. Personally with a show as dark as ASOIAF is, if they're going to do it, why not do it from different angles? Again I'm not a fan of rape, but if I know a show or movie is going to have it, might as well not make it the same scenario.

Modifié par -TC1989-, 16 mars 2013 - 02:55 .

[karushna5]

Plaintiff wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...
Why can't good people be xenophobic?

Because if you're xenophobic, you're not a good person.

I think prejudice goes further than good or evil in any regard and usually, not always by any means but usually, it is out of ignorance. Take Leandra, she is a good person, but how she was raised shows she has a prejudice against elves. Sometimes showing someone that there is more to who they judge and knowing them for real shows the truth. The difference between a good person and a bad one when it comes to xenophobia is willing to get over it or at least a lack of maliciousness. Leandra is not trying to hurt the elves, she really does believe they are a bit lesser, but she can be kind too. Being able to learn and not wanting to hurt people separates the two. In my opinion.

[Xilizhra]

karushna5 wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...
Why can't good people be xenophobic?

Because if you're xenophobic, you're not a good person.

I think prejudice goes further than good or evil in any regard and usually, not always by any means but usually, it is out of ignorance. Take Leandra, she is a good person, but how she was raised shows she has a prejudice against elves. Sometimes showing someone that there is more to who they judge and knowing them for real shows the truth. The difference between a good person and a bad one when it comes to xenophobia is willing to get over it or at least a lack of maliciousness. Leandra is not trying to hurt the elves, she really does believe they are a bit lesser, but she can be kind too. Being able to learn and not wanting to hurt people separates the two. In my opinion.

I look at it in the opposite way: xenophobic cultures simply have fewer good people in them, and the only good people are the ones who go against that in some manner. Certainly there are those like Leandra who have the potential to be good, but aren't quite there yet, and they can perhaps be shown tolerance to allow goodness to grow further, but this doesn't mean that xenophobia should ever be tolerated.

[TEWR]

Plaintiff wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...
Why can't good people be xenophobic?

Because if you're xenophobic, you're not a good person.

Plaintiff wrote...

But I'm not saying racism should be taken out of the DA setting. I'm just saying racists are not good people.

As I understand xenophobia, it's not always a form of racism. It can be, but couldn't one argue that isolationism is a form of xenophobia, even if you have no problem with the people you're isolating yourselves from? 

[Fast Jimmy]

The Qunari could be viewed as a form of xenophobia. Those who are not of the Qun are viewed as inferiors, not worth dealing with. And they certainly don't embrace differences or diversity... everyone is equal under the Qun, with no dissenting ideas or concepts allowed.

One can be a culture, nation, institution, religion, profession or even a fashion and still exhibit xenophobic characteristics.

[Silfren]

The Ethereal Writer Redux wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...
Why can't good people be xenophobic?

Because if you're xenophobic, you're not a good person.

Plaintiff wrote...

But I'm not saying racism should be taken out of the DA setting. I'm just saying racists are not good people.

As I understand xenophobia, it's not always a form of racism. It can be, but couldn't one argue that isolationism is a form of xenophobia, even if you have no problem with the people you're isolating yourselves from? 

Problem with this, TEWR, is that you are isolating yourself from a people, you obviously have a problem with them.  Else you wouldn't be isolating...

I disagree that if you are racist you are automatically a bad person.  Which isn't to say that racism is a good thing.  It isn't.  But racism is more complicated--and much more pervasive--than that.  There have always been people, after all, who would be appalled by, and would denounce, racism of the cross-burning/white sheet variety, but who would take an extremely dim view of, say, interracial marriage, particularly of the thought of their own child inter-marrying.  But that attitude IS a symptom of racism.  Just like the attitude of "I'm not racist, but..." or "I have X friends I can't be racist!"  Nearly everyone is racist to some degree, even those who refuse to accept such a dirty little fact about themselves.  But it hardly requires that you consciously desire to see a certain group of people beaten, their churches burned, or their legal rights denied. 

It's been argued more than once that all persons who belong to the dominant culture of a society are racist by default by virtue of being automatically privileged under an inherently racist system.  First time I heard that, I wanted to argue the point because I felt it was a case of badly defined terminology.  Then I got my head out of my ass long enough to think about it and realized what was meant by it.

What makes a person with a racist streak bad is when they would sooner deny the fact of their racism and privilege than learn and grow from the realization.  But part of the very nature of what makes racism so hard to root out and destroy is that it can manifest in a million little, invisible ways, by people who would be considered decent, good persons by any reasonable definition.

[Gyrefalcon]

Silfren wrote...

Sutekh wrote...

Gyrefalcon wrote...

You do realize that the most important thing here is that you are actually comparing a video game to a novel.

Indeed. Comparing character and plot development of a series of books which has thousand of pages to do so properly and a video game is not only unfair, it's pointless. Those aren't the same writing processes at all, just as you don't write a short story like a novel or a movie like a TV show. Add to that the interactive aspect of the game which means writers are constrained to take variables (player's input) into account, and you end up with things basically different.

What's funny here is that you apparently didn't read beyond the first sentence of the person you just quoted, because you write as if you agree with them that it's a bad idea to compare a video game with a novel, while their whole point was that it was great to now be comparing games with books.

Actually, that was my point as well.  It seems that everyone is reading it differently.  I am excited that Bioware is raising the bar of video game writing to the point that they may truly get accepted as an art form.  That the writing is approaching that of a novel is AMAZING!  Writing methods may vary between media types, but good storytelling is still recognizable and worth celebrating.  I am sorry that it did not seem to be coming through that way on my post.  Tone does not communicate via text.  Believe me, it makes me happy. 

Modifié par Gyrefalcon, 16 mars 2013 - 04:55 .

[TEWR]

Problem with this, TEWR, is that you are isolating yourself from a people, you obviously have a problem with them. Else you wouldn't be isolating...

I don't think that's necessarily true. Maybe you just like living with nature because it's very beautiful to look at, maybe you feel you're the problem and not them, or so on.

[Dabrikishaw]

Xilizhra wrote...

karushna5 wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...
Why can't good people be xenophobic?

Because if you're xenophobic, you're not a good person.

I think prejudice goes further than good or evil in any regard and usually, not always by any means but usually, it is out of ignorance. Take Leandra, she is a good person, but how she was raised shows she has a prejudice against elves. Sometimes showing someone that there is more to who they judge and knowing them for real shows the truth. The difference between a good person and a bad one when it comes to xenophobia is willing to get over it or at least a lack of maliciousness. Leandra is not trying to hurt the elves, she really does believe they are a bit lesser, but she can be kind too. Being able to learn and not wanting to hurt people separates the two. In my opinion.

I look at it in the opposite way: xenophobic cultures simply have fewer good people in them, and the only good people are the ones who go against that in some manner. Certainly there are those like Leandra who have the potential to be good, but aren't quite there yet, and they can perhaps be shown tolerance to allow goodness to grow further, but this doesn't mean that xenophobia should ever be tolerated.

[Fredward]

Much as racism and xenophobia is ****ed up labelling a person as "bad" just because they are is incredibly simplistic. What if there is this incredibly racist and xenophobic grandma, like she HATES anything that doesn't come from her village. In a way she's a product of her time but that isn't really an excuse for her behaviour. But IN her village she's an amazingly nice person she saves puppies and kittens, she raises the kids of people who can't afford them, she donates her entire pension to charity and lives from the garden in her backyard, she knits clothes for the village people all through summer so they have something new to wear in winter etc.

Yet this same grandma is borderline malicious to anyone entering the village who doesn't "fit in" whether this is because of skin colour or where they're from. Like she secretly throws rocks at them and such. So yah really peeps, morality isn't something so clear cut. There is very rarely black and white. It's all fifty shades of grey.

Which is exemplified in aSoIaF (booyah totally brought that tangent back on topic)!

[Commander Kurt]

IntoTheDarkness wrote...

Give me one example in medieval history where a field commander outright betrays his king leading troops and convinces nobles that an ancient order of noble purpose with widespread recognition (this is non existing of course but let's say church or an order of knights that participated in the battle) is responsible for all these with no proof to support his claim and hundreds of his own soldiers witnessing his betrayal.

Or, how about assigning two grey wardens to go to an unsecured tower across the bridge to fire a signal because you can't trust mages to send a signal when they are actually here to help the battle? Has it not occured to the chantry that they can have knights watching the mages in case they decide to not send a signal?

Don't be rediculus. As someone has said, DA:O is objectively and definately not well-written nor as realistic as ASOIF or TW2. Bioware games always follows a pattern of a bad guy's schemes succeeding at the beginning and the protagonist screwing it up with one big battle. It's not just media's problem as you can see from The Witcher 2. It has practially every character with their own motives and agenda.

In TW2, the bad guys constantly get in each other's way and their plots often change in directions they didn't anticipate because they are not collectively working against the protagonist but for their own goal, as ASOIF characters do. That is realitic and superior writing.

Granted, I admit that Bioware games generally have superb writing for RPG genre, but they are not the best. They make interesting characters but under a close scrutiny theses characters only talk in their character and barely act in their character. Bioware games will fall behind if you extend your scope to other genres, too.

This actually works best if you keep track of both my arguments and yours. If your argument is that something is unrealistic, disputing my counterargument by claiming that this has never happened IRL really only serves to loose you the discussion.

Also, it's bad because you say so? That's a fair statement, I'll get back to you when I find some meaningful way of arguing it. I do agree that the plot would benefit from being more winding and less straightforward, TW did that really well and so did ASOIAF. Taking some aspects from these sources would serve DA well, I'm sure, but my point was that constant agony doesn't equal realism.

[IntoTheDarkness]

Commander Kurt wrote...

IntoTheDarkness wrote...

Give me one example in medieval history where a field commander outright betrays his king leading troops and convinces nobles that an ancient order of noble purpose with widespread recognition (this is non existing of course but let's say church or an order of knights that participated in the battle) is responsible for all these with no proof to support his claim and hundreds of his own soldiers witnessing his betrayal.

Or, how about assigning two grey wardens to go to an unsecured tower across the bridge to fire a signal because you can't trust mages to send a signal when they are actually here to help the battle? Has it not occured to the chantry that they can have knights watching the mages in case they decide to not send a signal?

Don't be rediculus. As someone has said, DA:O is objectively and definately not well-written nor as realistic as ASOIF or TW2. Bioware games always follows a pattern of a bad guy's schemes succeeding at the beginning and the protagonist screwing it up with one big battle. It's not just media's problem as you can see from The Witcher 2. It has practially every character with their own motives and agenda.

In TW2, the bad guys constantly get in each other's way and their plots often change in directions they didn't anticipate because they are not collectively working against the protagonist but for their own goal, as ASOIF characters do. That is realitic and superior writing.

Granted, I admit that Bioware games generally have superb writing for RPG genre, but they are not the best. They make interesting characters but under a close scrutiny theses characters only talk in their character and barely act in their character. Bioware games will fall behind if you extend your scope to other genres, too.

This actually works best if you keep track of both my arguments and yours. If your argument is that something is unrealistic, disputing my counterargument by claiming that this has never happened IRL really only serves to loose you the discussion.

Also, it's bad because you say so? That's a fair statement, I'll get back to you when I find some meaningful way of arguing it. I do agree that the plot would benefit from being more winding and less straightforward, TW did that really well and so did ASOIAF. Taking some aspects from these sources would serve DA well, I'm sure, but my point was that constant agony doesn't equal realism.

You can't find examples because it's freaking unrealistic, and you avoided the argument because you don't know how to explain that particular story is plausible. If you don't have any historical instances, you could at least argue how "betraying his king in the field with thousands of witnesses and convincing other nobles to believe that the traitor is the ancient order that has been devoted in defeating the enemy for thousands of years." is in any way believable.

You've also avoided answering this: "Or, how about assigning two grey wardens to go to an unsecured tower
across the bridge to fire a signal because you can't trust mages to send
a signal when they are actually here to help the battle? Has it not
occured to the chantry that they can have knights watching the mages in
case they decide to not send a signal?"

Save me your palpable sarcasm. It's not even funny when a person claims he won the discussion after avoiding the argument.





"Also, it's bad because you say so? That's a fair statement, I'll get back to you when I find some meaningful way of arguing it."

You do have dyslexia, don't you? Did my aforementioned arguements only entail my subjective opinions? No. Do you realize I first asked historical proof and second questioned the plot's plausbility? If you deny both and claim you won the argument; what the hell are you trying to say? That you love monologue and don't want to talk to anyone else but yourself?




"Taking some aspects from these sources would serve DA well, I'm sure,
but my point was that constant agony doesn't equal realism."

No, it is not. The reaon why ASOIF and TW2 are realitic is because their characters act on their own interest instead of being conviniently accomodating to the protagonist, because there are no plot armors, no idiot balls by the villains, a stupid choice punishing players/characters, more morally ambigiuos settings as evident in discussion with baron Kim, no ancient devil
god trying to dominate the world(less cliche), plausible behavior of
characters, no contrived plots, motivated character actions, no
superpower protagonist.

It has nothing to do with agony because there is no contrived agony in both series. It is a direct result of greed and actions of characters pursuing their own interest in highly cunning political maneuvers. DA:O don't have the same level of complexity in both plots and character depth. (IMO, of course. But I've provided sufficient reasons as to why.)

ME is even much worse than DA because there are so many cases of idiot balls by characters. Frozen Harbinger in the EC is one thing, and dumb Shepard in Leviathan asking how to fix the elvator to obviously indoctrinated workers is the other example. Different studio, yes, but it's roughly Bioware's level of storytelling. Cliche, sidetracking, predictable plots, and the only redeeming thing is interesting characters.

Next time you do a discussion try to answer all major points raised by your opponent. If you claim the other's arguement subjective, try to explain why instead of typing one-line responce of typical trolls. That will help your points more than what little you did.

Modifié par IntoTheDarkness, 16 mars 2013 - 02:58 .