727 réponses à ce sujet

[Wulfram]

Don't go there, please

Modifié par Wulfram, 08 octobre 2013 - 03:45 .

[Beerfish]

His ashes will be put in the kitty litter box. I'm sure he will be happy knowing he is having a use that involves cats.

[Xilizhra]

greengoron89 wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Don't go there, please

Why not? Isn't that essentially the same thing?

The Israeli government has contained and actively oppress the Palestininians, much like the Chantry has done to mages.

Therefore, blowing up public institutions full of innocent people is justified because of what the Israeli government/Chantry has done to Palestinians/mages.

It makes perfect sense.

Because IRL political turmoil is a bad thing to bring up when discussing video games, I presume.

[Wulfram]

Because it's a highly emotive current political issue that's therefore liable to overshadow the topic we're discussing.

[Xilizhra]

greengoron89 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

greengoron89 wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Don't go there, please

Why not? Isn't that essentially the same thing?

The Israeli government has contained and actively oppress the Palestininians, much like the Chantry has done to mages.

Therefore, blowing up public institutions full of innocent people is justified because of what the Israeli government/Chantry has done to Palestinians/mages.

It makes perfect sense.

Because IRL political turmoil is a bad thing to bring up when discussing video games, I presume.

But don't people here already do that every day when they discuss white privilege, racial stereotypes, misogyny, and equal representation in video games?

How is this different?

Because those don't involve terrorist attacks, terrorizing retaliations to said attacks, and everyone on both sides having cause to fear outright genocide.

[Rinji the Bearded]

Discussion of Anders's status as a terrorist always...

... ends up in flames.

-- BTW he's totally a terrorist and a murderer, regardless of whether or not those people in the Chantry were "innocent."

That Guy said...

But don't people here already do that every day when they discuss white privilege, racial stereotypes, misogyny, and equal representation in video games?

How is this different?

Oh joy, false equivalency.

Modifié par RinjiRenee, 08 octobre 2013 - 03:59 .

[Shadow Fox]

Wulfram wrote...

Because it's a highly emotive current political issue that's therefore liable to overshadow the topic we're discussing.

Or it leads to offensive comments that result in flamewars thus earning the poor fools who partook in it the wrath of Lord Banhammer.

...Actually that describes 90% of therads here.

Modifié par Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke, 08 octobre 2013 - 04:11 .

[Wulfram]

greengoron89 wrote...

So having more people of color and gay characters in video games is more worthy of discussion and attention than the suffering and deaths of millions of people.

Gotcha.

Those are the important words, because we're on a forum about a video game.

[Rinji the Bearded]

greengoron89 wrote...

So having more people of color and gay characters in video games is more worthy of discussion and attention than the suffering and deaths of millions of people.

Gotcha.

I'm not even sure what you're talking about at this point.  Would you like more representation of suffering in the game...?   Are you talking about mages?  In that case, the mage issue in no way equates with the suffering of people in real life, nor are there millions of mages suffering.

Modifié par RinjiRenee, 08 octobre 2013 - 04:09 .

[Rinji the Bearded]

greengoron89 wrote...
So by that logic, having more or less people of color and gay characters does not equate with anything in real life, either. They're just video games.

Oh yay, wouldn't be BSN without moving goalposts and misrepresenting points.

What is the point of your argument?

[Rinji the Bearded]

[deleted for clicking the wrong dang button, HELP ME]

Modifié par RinjiRenee, 08 octobre 2013 - 04:15 .

[RedArmyShogun]

Just watch this will be a leli path where even if you kill him he'll have been brought back to life because "justice".

[Rinji the Bearded]

greengoron89 wrote...

I just want to know why it's okay to discuss the under- and misrepresentation of people of color, the gay community, women, etc. in regards to video games, but not okay to discuss IRL terrorism in regards to video games.

Well, that's a different issue completely.  It seemed to me as if you were equating terrorists to people discussing social justice issues and that's... not the same at all.  But thank you for clarifying; I misunderstood. We should keep the discussion related to Dragon Age (specifically, Anders) so as to not go off-topic.

To reiterate, Anders is a terrorist.   

Modifié par RinjiRenee, 08 octobre 2013 - 04:27 .

[Rinji the Bearded]

[deleted again, I have forgotten how to BSN]

Modifié par RinjiRenee, 08 octobre 2013 - 04:27 .

[Lord Raijin]

I find it hilarious how the some of you guys are comparing to what Anders did to RL terrorist. That's just ridiculous at best.

If Ander is considered as a terrorist then so should the Chantry be listed as one too. So why is it not OK for a terrorist to go after another group of terrorist?

Modifié par Lord Raijin, 08 octobre 2013 - 04:28 .

[Rinji the Bearded]

Lord Raijin wrote...

I find it hilarious how the some of you guys are comparing to what Anders did to RL terrorist. That's just ridiculous at best.

If Ander is considered as a terrorist then so should the Chantry be listed as one too. So why is it not OK for a terrorist to go after another terrorist?

It's not a clean-cut comparison but by the very textbook definition, Anders is a terrorist.   But then someone thinks that is an attack of Anders's character and support of the Chantry and ... it's not.  It's calling him a terrorist because he is a terrorist. 

[ScarMK]

Lord Raijin wrote...

I find it hilarious how the some of you guys are comparing to what Anders did to RL terrorist. That's just ridiculous at best.

I can't remember, but didn't one of the devs (I'm thinking Gaider) confirm that Anders is a terrorist?  Or was that in regards to what he did?  I know one of them touched upon this subject.

Modifié par ScarMK, 08 octobre 2013 - 04:34 .

[Shadow Fox]

Lord Raijin wrote...

I find it hilarious how the some of you guys are comparing to what Anders did to RL terrorist. That's just ridiculous at best.

If Ander is considered as a terrorist then so should the Chantry be listed as one too. So why is it not OK for a terrorist to go after another group of terrorist?

So innocent priests and worshippers deserve to be murdered because of the suffering of mages?

And you mage supporters wonder why some people think you're all nuts.

[Rinji the Bearded]

greengoron89 wrote...

Except he didn't go after terrorists, he went after a building full of priests and idle churchgoers.

Yep!    And really I don't get arguments made otherwise.  If the Chantry was a complete hard target, there would be no conflict and that completely resolves Anders's actions.   Except that's not what he wanted -- he WANTED a war to start over this issue.

[ScarMK]

Arcane Warrior Mage Hawke wrote...
So innocent priests and worshippers deserve to be murdered because of the suffering of mages?

And you mage supporters wonder why some people think you're all nuts.

I'm gonna call it now, he's gonna say something along the lines of "Guilty by assocation".

[Seboist]

RinjiRenee wrote...

greengoron89 wrote...

Except he didn't go after terrorists, he went after a building full of priests and idle churchgoers.

Yep!    And really I don't get arguments made otherwise.  If the Chantry was a complete hard target, there would be no conflict and that completely resolves Anders's actions.   Except that's not what he wanted -- he WANTED a war to start over this issue.

Anders is more morally reprehensible than those who killed Franz Ferdinand.