Ce sujet est fermé
I don’t think we’ve ever presented the idea of a mage revolution as
Unlike in Asunder, I think theConfession:
games make it too easy for fans to brush aside how dangerous magic is,
how much society fears mages, and how mages require special training
because they really aren’t like other people. I hope Inquisition does
better at showing how difficult this situation is so half-cocked plans
about revolution aren’t automatically assumed as the correct answer,
even though the circles are broken. The complexity here is far more
interesting than simplistic ideas of mage freedom.
being the best answer with an obviously good resolution. There are,
however, a couple of things which complicate this.
First, the segregation between lore and gameplay. It’s something
we’ve been trying to address, but ultimately a player mage (or the mages
in the player’s party) don’t really encounter the same issues that
mages at large do. They don’t get tricked or overtaken by demons, they
don’t lose control of their powers or get tempted… or, when it’s a party
member who does, some just assume it to be the result of rashness or
stupidity. Which is not a completely unreasonable conclusion,
considering the player mage never has those difficulties and can always
opt out of such a situation by simple choice.
Could we force such difficulties on the player? We could, and perhaps
it will come to that. That’s an issue of agency, however, which relates
to gameplay. It’s the same reason that player Templars didn’t need to
be addicted to lyrium, or how non-Warden party members in DAO happened
to never contract the Blight despite repeated close encounters with
darkspawn. Lucky them!
It’s something we’ve discussed (and are discussing), but the needs of
gameplay aren’t easily dismissed— unless the story actually centers on
the issue (as in the plot revolves around it, as in Asunder) it’s
difficult to have issues like this meaningfully impact the player.
The second issue, however, is that notions of freedom are pretty
deeply rooted in players— particularly those who live in western
societies. We have the characters and world around the player espouse
the issues and prejudices inherent in the conflict, but I suspect that
even if we did have these things affect the player more personally the
attitude among many would still default to freedom being good and
oppression being bad. No matter what.
Is this a simplistic way of looking at it? Possibly. Part of the
problem, in my mind, is how people equate this to issues of oppression
in the real world— which is fine, as that’s an intended analogy, except
that many appear to either forget or dismiss the differences. People in
the real world don’t throw fireballs, accidentally turn into
abominations, or make deals with demons. It’s more like a gun control
issue— if there were people with guns that could go off and kill
innocents by accident, and who couldn’t be disarmed without a lobotomy.
The idea that society wouldn’t try to protect itself, even if incidents
were statistically rare, ignores how society reacts to problems in the
real world… even ones that don’t involve fireballs and abominations.
Why would they do that? Because mages aren’t guns, they’re people.
And it’s far easier to sympathize with the jailed than the jailors—
particularly when the cause of the jailors is fueled by righteousness.
The fact the jailors’ attitude has an understandable cause doesn’t mean
it’s likeable, or excuse the prejudices it has led to. One could say
there are historical (and current) precedents in Thedas as to why mages
being free would just lead to all sorts of badness… but not everyone
pays heed to history. It could always be different this time.
Or could it? That’s the nature of the debate, both in-world and out.
I find it a bit strange that one of the most frequent questions I’m
PM’d with is which side of the mage-templar issue I personally support.
The answer, of course, is that I support neither… or, rather, I support
both. I have to wrap my head around both sides, because if I can’t
construct an argument to support a side that a rational person could
make, then it’s not a very good argument. Thankfully I can, so there I
stand.
I imagine many won’t believe that, preferring to believe I lean
towards one side or the other— colored by their own preferences, just as
those preferences color how they look on the arguments of others. And
that’s fine.
I look forward to showing what we’re doing in Inquisition— though if
one were to assume that the entire story of Inquisition revolves around
“the mage-templar issue”, they would be incorrect. It’s a big piece (as
one would rightly expect), but there’s far more going on. Just FYI.
dgaider.tumblr.com/
Now that's what I was looking for! I was getting tired of one of the central conflicts in the Dragon Age universe being too simple. Mage Revolution just seems too cliche.
Bring on the Greyness I've come to expect, Bioware.
Modifié par almostinsane99, 30 septembre 2013 - 03:41 .
Retour en haut
