557 réponses à ce sujet

[SymbolicGamer]

Ashley does seem a little preachy. Maybe it's just because I've had so many playthroughs that I've heard her routine over a dozen times.

Dragon Age did it well because it felt like it had some purpose within the game.

The Bioware dude asked what role would a modern-day Earth religion deity play for a space-faring, alien-meeting human, and I can't think of any, but the possibilities for alien religions are endless.

As long as you feel religion is justified being in the game, I say go with it, but if it doesn't contribute to anything, then don't bother.

Modifié par SymbolicGamer, 21 janvier 2010 - 01:54 .

[Yojimboo]

Willowhugger wrote...

Why would it? They basically reconstruct him, trough the means of science. It would throw allot more questions to the religion fraktion.

I'm not sure.  A huge debate in an atheist science fiction discussion group I had friends in was made over transporters in Star Trek and the cloning process in the Sixth Day.  Basically, they questioned whether a human reduced to particles like happens on Star Trek and reconstructed was still "you."  Without a soul, the question of identity was much more pronounced in their opinion.

But yes, I hope there's nightmares during your "ressurection."

Like a Near-Death experience, with no real answers.

Why wouldn't you be yourself? Our memory's and conscious is only a matter of electronic impulses and chemical reactions. Nothing more and nothing less, i can understand your position, the vast unknown of death is a truly scary thing. The only thing i can do is accept that i will go out in a blip when my life ends.

Only death is really certain.

[Kileyan]

Borschtbeet wrote...

Medhia Nox wrote...

That was your rebuttal Borschtbeet?

And I, and my "religious sheep", are the ones who are closed minded to possibilities and change?

I think I'm beginning to understand better.

Yeah, I typically don't let people spin with philosophical mumbo jumbo about arts, paintings, music etc.  None of that is relevant.
My original point was that believing in a cosmic magician makes you stupid.  I gave you a chance to validate that belief and you instead tried to talk to me about paintings, and flowers. 

Dude, we get it. You hate, you hate a lot, we don't need you affirming every post how much you love to hate. Move on.

[Yojimboo]

OldSchoolChicken wrote...

Yojimboo wrote...

OldSchoolChicken wrote...

Willowhugger wrote...

To actually get into a deep topic of religion in Mass Effect.

Do we want religious questions in Mass Effect 2?

Shepard dies and rises from the Grave, so to speak.

That's got to open a can of existential questions, even if you play him as a die hard atheist.

Doesn't it?

I don't think Bioware could pass up the chance to have religion in it; they try so hard to make it a believable world in a social sense that religion would have to play a part.  Religion can be a huge motivator, and without proper motivations behind a characters actions, they hardly seem believable.  Money and power being among other chief examples of stock motivation, I don't think those alone would make a good universe.

How about simple morals? And no, morals aren't mutual exclusive to religous people.

Morals could be a motivator too, but is every question truly a moral question?  Can a question have religious implications without moral ones? Religions usually deal with some sort of salvation of ones soul, or at least the soul in general, usually by presenting a method of how to live, with the "ends" being the motivation.  Morals alone go on a more case by case basis, and because of that difference the overall character motivation might be different.  One has a long term goal, the other uses morals on a case by case basis, therefore the two would probably ultimately end up in different circumstances.

The case by case morals type person might be another option for motivation however, true.

Religious morals are way different then normal morals, the one is enforced through fear the other one is not.

[atheelogos]

Willowhugger wrote...
Shepard dies and rises from the Grave, so to speak.

That's got to open a can of existential questions, even if you play him as a die hard atheist.

Doesn't it?

Hmmm... well it doesn't really bring up any hard questions for me. As long as the brain is intact and, more importantly, the information that the brain holds is keep safe, then there is no problem.

[atheelogos]

MarginalBeast wrote...

Borschtbeet, you are an absolute embarrassment to atheists and agnostics.

agreed

[Medhia Nox]

That isn't true Yojimbo.



Not all of religious morality is based on fear. And even those that are loosely based on punishment, are not always based on it. Different denominations interpret things differently.



----



SkullandBonesmember:



Was I saying something that contradicted you?



If the "sci-fi" vats comments seemed snarky - it was, but it was only intended to poke fun at the lack of explination all science fiction MUST have. You know, like all the Star Trek techno-jargon.



I wasn't saying science couldn't bring him back. Not at all.



I'm not sure if I unintentionally offended or annoyed you, but that wasn't my meaning.

[OldSchoolChicken]

Yojimboo wrote...

OldSchoolChicken wrote...

Yojimboo wrote...

OldSchoolChicken wrote...

Willowhugger wrote...

To actually get into a deep topic of religion in Mass Effect.

Do we want religious questions in Mass Effect 2?

Shepard dies and rises from the Grave, so to speak.

That's got to open a can of existential questions, even if you play him as a die hard atheist.

Doesn't it?

I don't think Bioware could pass up the chance to have religion in it; they try so hard to make it a believable world in a social sense that religion would have to play a part.  Religion can be a huge motivator, and without proper motivations behind a characters actions, they hardly seem believable.  Money and power being among other chief examples of stock motivation, I don't think those alone would make a good universe.

How about simple morals? And no, morals aren't mutual exclusive to religous people.

Morals could be a motivator too, but is every question truly a moral question?  Can a question have religious implications without moral ones? Religions usually deal with some sort of salvation of ones soul, or at least the soul in general, usually by presenting a method of how to live, with the "ends" being the motivation.  Morals alone go on a more case by case basis, and because of that difference the overall character motivation might be different.  One has a long term goal, the other uses morals on a case by case basis, therefore the two would probably ultimately end up in different circumstances.

The case by case morals type person might be another option for motivation however, true.

Religious morals are way different then normal morals, the one is enforced through fear the other one is not.

You know, I don't want to get into it, as it might detract from the religion in ME debate going on, but while yes, religious morals are largely in place by fear (a fear of what might become of you if you don't make the right choice) I think I might argue the other morals could also be motivated by fear, and certainly not altruism.

When someone makes a choice that benefits someone other than themselves, in the long run, I think we find it often benefits us as well.  It improves our reputation, others are then more likely be around us in  the future, and, in the same manner, more likely to do things for our benefit, so that they can expect continuing favour from us in the future. 

We worry what will become of us if we don't make those decisions according to "those' morals.  Except now we worry about what will become of us physically, instead of worrying about our soul.  Both people could then be said to be motivated by fear.

[Willowhugger]

Hmmm... well it doesn't really bring up any hard questions for me. As long as the brain is intact and, more importantly, the information that the brain holds is keep safe, then there is no problem.

And if it isn't?  I mean there's sorts of fun issues.  I mean, at one point does Shepard stop being Shepard?  What if the brain was damaged but reconstructed?

There's a lot of fun what ifs.

[Kileyan]

@the bioware post



I don't play these games to draw parallels to real religion. I kinda like the old D&D and other games with pantheons of religions and deities that meddle in the affairs of humans. Without that, the religion aspect is mostly filler, a codex entry. You can never address it seriously because affirming or denying the existance of the Maker would cause an uproar on either side.



Not saying I didn't like DA or the way you approached the religion, it is just that I know it will never go anywhere in the game, so it meant little to me from a gamer point of view.



In science fiction I'd like to see the religious stuff take a more Outer Limits or Twilight Zone approach. Discuss it from the point of view of what is a "god". At what point does a being or race of beings so far beyond our understanding become more than just a more intelligent or long lived race, and become categorized and so big bad and scary beyond us, that it is magical or divine.



Dunno something along those lines.

[VanTesla]

After Shepard dies from age or battle there will be a new religion called shepardism.



It will be different depending on how your Shepard was in the universe you played in.



So if you where a full Paragon your followers would be peace lovers and peace would flood the universe. If Renegade they would be mass killers and the universe would be destroyed. If you where morally gray then you would have both the peace and killers



Oh and depending on who Shepards partner is will have a mass effect on the views as well.

[Yojimboo]

OldSchoolChicken wrote...

Yojimboo wrote...

OldSchoolChicken wrote...

Yojimboo wrote...

OldSchoolChicken wrote...

Willowhugger wrote...

To actually get into a deep topic of religion in Mass Effect.

Do we want religious questions in Mass Effect 2?

Shepard dies and rises from the Grave, so to speak.

That's got to open a can of existential questions, even if you play him as a die hard atheist.

Doesn't it?

I don't think Bioware could pass up the chance to have religion in it; they try so hard to make it a believable world in a social sense that religion would have to play a part.  Religion can be a huge motivator, and without proper motivations behind a characters actions, they hardly seem believable.  Money and power being among other chief examples of stock motivation, I don't think those alone would make a good universe.

How about simple morals? And no, morals aren't mutual exclusive to religous people.

Morals could be a motivator too, but is every question truly a moral question?  Can a question have religious implications without moral ones? Religions usually deal with some sort of salvation of ones soul, or at least the soul in general, usually by presenting a method of how to live, with the "ends" being the motivation.  Morals alone go on a more case by case basis, and because of that difference the overall character motivation might be different.  One has a long term goal, the other uses morals on a case by case basis, therefore the two would probably ultimately end up in different circumstances.

The case by case morals type person might be another option for motivation however, true.

Religious morals are way different then normal morals, the one is enforced through fear the other one is not.

You know, I don't want to get into it, as it might detract from the religion in ME debate going on, but while yes, religious morals are largely in place by fear (a fear of what might become of you if you don't make the right choice) I think I might argue the other morals could also be motivated by fear, and certainly not altruism.

When someone makes a choice that benefits someone other than themselves, in the long run, I think we find it often benefits us as well.  It improves our reputation, others are then more likely be around us in  the future, and, in the same manner, more likely to do things for our benefit, so that they can expect continuing favour from us in the future. 

We worry what will become of us if we don't make those decisions according to "those' morals.  Except now we worry about what will become of us physically, instead of worrying about our soul.  Both people could then be said to be motivated by fear.

I agree to a certain degree but it's already coded in our genes to help each other out, yes i said it. The simple motivation factor is the continuation of our own species. There where severel field test about this specifiec thing, people get assaulted/or placed in other dangers and while most people where afraid first (which is pretty normal), as soon 1 person helped in those situations, allot more bystander always helped out.

The people that helped certainly didn't do it because they hoped to gain something or religious motivations.

Modifié par Yojimboo, 21 janvier 2010 - 02:12 .

[Chained_Creator]

Borschtbeet wrote...
 We should rely on science
Philosophy=useless drivel.

You do know one of the most well-known philosophers of all time defined the specific purpose peculiar to humans life as "the exercise of reason", right?

And that, advocating relying on science (The exercise of reason to comprehend things as they are) is, at the most basic level, an agreement with that philosopher and the philosophy he espoused?

Delicious.

Modifié par Chained_Creator, 21 janvier 2010 - 02:14 .

[atheelogos]

Willowhugger wrote...

I think the Reapers have a good Satanic edge to them.

I like that while they COULD just be AI, they might also be something more. Like beings that really do have no origin or beginning from the dawn of time.

I think they are simply too proud to admit their origins. I believe they were once like us. Beings of flesh and blood. Their technology keep advancing and it got to the point were they could put the tech inside their bodies and become cyborgs. Kinda like Ghost in The Shell.
And with time they became more mechanical and less organic. And it just keep evolving from there.

Modifié par atheelogos, 21 janvier 2010 - 02:19 .

[OldSchoolChicken]

Yojimboo wrote...

I agree to a certain degree but it's already coded in our genes to help each other out, yes i said it. The simple motivation factor is the continuation of our own species. There where severel field test about this specifiec thing, people get assaulted/or placed in other dangers and while most people where afraid first (which is pretty normal), as soon 1 person helped in those situations, allot more bystander always helped out.

The people that helped certainly didn't do it because they hoped to gain something or religious motivations.

When I made my last post I sort of wondered what the true difference was between fear and self-interest...  In this case, usually I would think this would be an actual example of altruism, something that doesn't happen nearly as often as people like to think it does.

It could also be the actions of someone with a mental disorder, who sees things in a skewed sort of way or is extremely egotistical and wishes to be seen as a hero but at the same time doesn't care in the least for the person he steps in to help, its merely an opportunity...  In this case, obviously not altruism.

Makes me wonder though, would those motivated by religious fear be more likely to step in than those simply with good morals? (as this would seem like the sort of thing that could affect your soul by not acting, but affect your physical body by acting?)

Seems like a good Bioware game scenario if setup right.

[Ktauliss]

My opinion: Keeping in mind that Mass Effect takes place approx 2 centuries from present 'real' date. It is entirely believable that Ashley would believe in God. Whether we do or not is not relevant.

What you choose to believe in (as long as you do not 'force' other to share your belief) is entirely up to you.

Does it add to the story? Yes for me it does, it would be less believable if there was NO Belief systems in game.

Re: Dragon Age. Does it add/subtract from the story? It adds, love it or hate it Religion has been a major shaper of history and was very much of concern to folks Pre-Renaissance.

[VanTesla]

Chained_Creator wrote...

Borschtbeet wrote...
 We should rely on science
Philosophy=useless drivel.

You do know one of the most well-known philosophers of all time defined the specific purpose peculiar to humans life as "the exercise of reason", right?

And that, advocating relying on science (The exercise of reason to comprehend things as they are) is, at the most basic level, an agreement with that philosopher and the philosophy he espoused?

Delicious.

 Also Philosophy does not have to be about religion and can be about all things of life.

 Some of the best scientists in the worlds history were philosophers.

 I get a bit annoyed when people say bad things about stuff they do not know the first thing about.<_<

 Talking about Borch by the way.

Modifié par VanTesla, 21 janvier 2010 - 02:22 .

[Yojimboo]

OldSchoolChicken wrote...

Yojimboo wrote...

I agree to a certain degree but it's already coded in our genes to help each other out, yes i said it. The simple motivation factor is the continuation of our own species. There where severel field test about this specifiec thing, people get assaulted/or placed in other dangers and while most people where afraid first (which is pretty normal), as soon 1 person helped in those situations, allot more bystander always helped out.

The people that helped certainly didn't do it because they hoped to gain something or religious motivations.

When I made my last post I sort of wondered what the true difference was between fear and self-interest...  In this case, usually I would think this would be an actual example of altruism, something that doesn't happen nearly as often as people like to think it does.

It could also be the actions of someone with a mental disorder, who sees things in a skewed sort of way or is extremely egotistical and wishes to be seen as a hero but at the same time doesn't care in the least for the person he steps in to help, its merely an opportunity...  In this case, obviously not altruism.

Makes me wonder though, would those motivated by religious fear be more likely to step in than those simply with good morals? (as this would seem like the sort of thing that could affect your soul by not acting, but affect your physical body by acting?)

Seems like a good Bioware game scenario if setup right.

There are several severe cases where people say that their bodies almost moved on their own, like rescuing a drunkard from a incoming train.

Psychological field studies are rather interesting to watch.

[Chained_Creator]

VanTesla wrote...

Chained_Creator wrote...

Borschtbeet wrote...
 We should rely on science
Philosophy=useless drivel.

You do know one of the most well-known philosophers of all time defined the specific purpose peculiar to humans life as "the exercise of reason", right?

And that, advocating relying on science (The exercise of reason to comprehend things as they are) is, at the most basic level, an agreement with that philosopher and the philosophy he espoused?

Delicious.

 Also Philosophy does not have to be about religion and can be about all things of life.

 Some of the best scientists in the worlds history were philosophers.

 I get a bit annoyed when people say bad things about stuff they do not know the first thing about.<_<

I call it the "too lazy, didn't study" corollary to the "tl;dr" 'rule'.

[Meta-Scourge]

it's very well handled in my opinion

[VanTesla]

Yojimboo wrote...

OldSchoolChicken wrote...

Yojimboo wrote...

I agree to a certain degree but it's already coded in our genes to help each other out, yes i said it. The simple motivation factor is the continuation of our own species. There where severel field test about this specifiec thing, people get assaulted/or placed in other dangers and while most people where afraid first (which is pretty normal), as soon 1 person helped in those situations, allot more bystander always helped out.

The people that helped certainly didn't do it because they hoped to gain something or religious motivations.

When I made my last post I sort of wondered what the true difference was between fear and self-interest...  In this case, usually I would think this would be an actual example of altruism, something that doesn't happen nearly as often as people like to think it does.

It could also be the actions of someone with a mental disorder, who sees things in a skewed sort of way or is extremely egotistical and wishes to be seen as a hero but at the same time doesn't care in the least for the person he steps in to help, its merely an opportunity...  In this case, obviously not altruism.

Makes me wonder though, would those motivated by religious fear be more likely to step in than those simply with good morals? (as this would seem like the sort of thing that could affect your soul by not acting, but affect your physical body by acting?)

Seems like a good Bioware game scenario if setup right.

There are several severe cases where people say that their bodies almost moved on their own, like rescuing a drunkard from a incoming train.

Psychological field studies are rather interesting to watch.

 Some people have a protective instinct that causes them to help others in dire situations even if they do not seem to have that type of personality.

[OldSchoolChicken]

Yojimboo wrote...


There are several severe cases where people say that their bodies almost moved on their own, like rescuing a drunkard from a incoming train.

Psychological field studies are rather interesting to watch.

Yeah, I would think that your brain would focus on a very specific set of instructions, probably adreneline fueled, that evolution has worked out to improve our chances of success in such situations.  Once you make the choice to act, you go in with blinders to everything else.

Back on topic... did you agree or disagree with the idea of religion being in Mass Effect?  In what ways would it help or hurt the game in your opinion?  To me, if nothing else, its a good way to accomplish better character exposition (is that even a proper term?).  It can also add to a story/lore for those that want to see that as well.

[Ghurshog]

Stanley Woo wrote...

I'm not sure if it's been brought up already, but how do players here feel about the way religion was handled in Dragon Age: Origins--a fictional monotheism which could very easily be compared to real-world religions?

It is interesting and engaging? Does it seem preachy or modeled too closely on a real-world religion? Did you even notice? Did you want to learn more about it?

And to keep it on topic for the forum: What kind of religion system do you think would fit in well with the Mass Effect universe? What role would a modern-day Earth religion deity play for a space-faring, alien-meeting human?

And thank you all for keeping it mature and professional. I appreciate that.

Religion is fine in DA:O or ME as long as its not pushed on my character. Even better if I get to choose to align myself or not with whatever factions. 

In SciFi religion might play a cultural part in any race however when sentients can create weapons that can destroy planets/star systems or find technology from dead civilizations that appear to function by pure magic (beyond current comprehension) but  we know its science and not super natural I think religion is relegated to a smaller role in the daily lives of those that actually choose to venture into places unknown or unseen by sentients. 

Modifié par Ghurshog, 21 janvier 2010 - 02:35 .