709 réponses à ce sujet

[fdgvdddvdfdfbdfb]

Massive failure all over this post. Where do you even get your statistics from? And how on earth do these, apparently mostly white males, owners make a profit by discriminating against their own (potential) customers? They cant. Which is why they dont. The media and the world at large looks the way it does most likely because its the most profitable way to do it. If black people had as much, or more, purchasing power as whites they would have their very own catered-to media and entertainment. 

 

I think the whole thing is spelled profit. If there is profit to do something, entrepeneurs like bioware (or the media/whatever) will do it. They might also do some things despite there being little or no profit in doing so, but in general they want to simply make money or build a brand. 

 

Since it is apparently fine to say white straight men run the media , I might note, for curiosities sake, that most of the biggest papers,publishers, school books, and TV-channels in Sweden are owned and made by jews. We dont call them "white". Maybe you americans do. We don't.

 

In the USA it is the following men who run the biggest media corporations, :

 

Geral levin , AOL Time warner

 

Michael Eisner, Walt disney

 

Edgar bronfman, Seagram company

 

Sumner redstone, Viacom

 

Barry meyer, Warner brothers

 

Michael lynton, Sony pictures

 

Leslie Moonves, CBS

 

Harry Sloan, MGM

 

Jeff Zucker, NBC

 

Brian Graden, MTV

 

Wanna guess what they all have in common?

Why are the jews so good to white folks

 

Also jewishness is a highly ambiguous categorization of people, and most of the ones in popular media do in fact look white.

[Fast Jimmy]

If Jon Stewart isn't white, just what is race anymore

 

The argument could be made that if your race was ethincally cleansed by the millions by white (or, in this case, "whiter") people in the past century, then you get a seat at the table when being counted as non-white is considered a sort of "badge of honor."

[The Night Haunter]

I would just say he is a white minority. I would think it's more the people who see whiteness as a 'badge of honor' who are the ones who take exception with Jewish people being considered white, because they run the world of course.

Lol, I wish that were true. Then I could look down from my palace at the rest of you

[Allan Schumacher]

The vast majority of games and movies are marketed to an American audience. Even the majority of Japanese games have primarily white antagonists (often with some small features hinting at maybe being 1/8th Japanese) so there aren't a whole host of games with non-white casts we can draw from.

 

But good job refuting a perfectly valid argument against your point by.... doing nothing?

 

I think this is the primary motivator for "add it just because" is.  Because if we continue to force ourselves to dig up reasons (when we really don't for other people), we continue to under represent.

 

I don't think it's necessary for white people to be so pervasive. 

 

 

 

 

The biggest problem for the one camp (inclusion but w/ a story / setting) is that we don't like "token" or "random" people just turning up and there are probably plenty of examples of worlds where there are just one or two "different" people show up and their characters end up being shoe-horned into being the "different" person simply because they are the only one there that is actually different.

 

I used to feel this way too.  For some reason, I stopped.  I don't like "token" characters either.  But if mandating that the mere existence of non-white person means "token" or "random" diversity turning up, then we're making a non-trivial political statement.  It creates an arbitrary and perhaps unfair bias, especially when looking at the entire catalogue of gaming (and entertainment) in aggregate.  So I find pointing at Jade Empire and going "see" is a bit misleading, because it's one game.  And for a white dude like me, it adds a novelty factor.  Would I be okay with it if ALL games were asian people?  Well I have the benefit of not being put in that position.

 

 

 

 

Having a whole new culture that introduces a compelling new addition to the world is something that is far more interesting from a story perspective.  Would I play DAx if you (the grand you here) randomly sprinkled people of various earthly visages into the game where there wasn't any before? Yes I would play (my enjoyment of a game is not dependent on the looks of a random npc or spikes as some crazy people on these boards seem to get catatonic about) it but it would be weird, just weird. The same kind of weird I felt when Isabella, the elves, dwarves looked completely / noticeably different in DA2. I still played the game multiple times and I still enjoyed it.  I just thought some things about it were weird.

 

There's an important distinction here that needs to be separated.  Of course having a full new culture would be great, because everyone wants more content.

 

That said, I see a disconnect with your statement.  If your enjoyment is not dependent on the looks of a random NPC, then that tells me that everything you've said so far isn't true.  Because if you're unaffected by the looks of a random NPC, what you're now saying to me is "I don't care what you do with the skin colour of the characters."  But then you say it's "weird."

 

 

 

 

In this regard, this is the reason why it would be nice to have a story based explanation for their being there.  The rest of the humans don't even need to comment on it because they could have been their all along (like the qunari). It would simply be nice to know that those people (of whatever variety) actually had a place where they came from rather than just popping into existence when they were not there before.  If the previous media had people of random ethnicity just sprinkled through the world then this wouldn't be an issue for me; its only because this has not been the case across 2 games (more if you count the social games), four books (where descriptions were available), and a number of comics.  The world exists in a certain state; can it be changed without reason? Of course, an explanation would just make more sense to me.

 

I actually like that we do not handicap ourselves based on the technical aspects of the previous games.  The Eclipse engine is pretty poor by today's standards.  I know I also was blind to the issue so the tendency to go with "normal" (for me, in Edmonton, is definitely white) is a big thing.  Especially given that we could make arguments that what we saw in DAO and DA2 was such a small (tiny, really) slice of the population.

 

There's also the personal aspect.  For instance, the inclusion of racial diversity in DAI wouldn't be something that bothered me.  I wouldn't find it weird.  So why am I okay with it, but it's something that you find "weird."  Is it on us to make sure you don't feel weird, or is it on you to let yourself not feel weird by it?  Because I used to feel the same way as you, but now I don't.  I do not get the impression that you're not bothered about it.  It really reads like it would bother you, it's just that it wouldn't be a deal breaker.  Am I incorrect in reading it this way?

 

 

The thing is, for me, I see people suggest that we're "checking boxes to make sure we have some sort of diversity quotient" (tell that to those that are upset about a 6-3 potential companion split).  It's more coming down to (what many of the same people say....) does it matter for the story?  I see so many people make disparaging remarks about how they don't care what someone looks like (directed in a way that, therefore, other people shouldn't care either!).  But if they truly don't care, then we could add diversity.

 

An advantage of Dragon Age is that the physical appearances of a particular group are not actually tied to any particular culture.  As such, it often seems like "there isn't really a good reason NOT to mix it up."  And sometimes it's just about being more conscious about it all.  I'm a white person, so someone saying to me "draw a woman" means there's a decent chance I'll immediately draw a white woman (aside: reasonable arguments could be made that more than just white people may do this, and that reads as a symptom to a subtle problem to me).  But when I learn that I have more freedom, and I simply have some exposure for some people that say "hey what about this?" it plants thoughts in my mind: "maybe I'll draw a black woman."  Because, why not?

[Lieutenant Kurin]

I think this is the primary motivator for "add it just because" is.  Because if we continue to force ourselves to dig up reasons (when we really don't for other people), we continue to under represent.

 

I don't think it's necessary for white people to be so pervasive. 

 

*snip*

 

The thing is, for me, I see people suggest that we're "checking boxes to make sure we have some sort of diversity quotient" (tell that to those that are upset about a 6-3 potential companion split).  It's more coming down to (what many of the same people say....) does it matter for the story?  I see so many people make disparaging remarks about how they don't care what someone looks like (directed in a way that, therefore, other people shouldn't care either!).  But if they truly don't care, then we could add diversity.

 

An advantage of Dragon Age is that the physical appearances of a particular group are not actually tied to any particular culture.  As such, it often seems like "there isn't really a good reason NOT to mix it up."  And sometimes it's just about being more conscious about it all.  I'm a white person, so someone saying to me "draw a woman" means there's a decent chance I'll immediately draw a white woman (aside: reasonable arguments could be made that more than just white people may do this, and that reads as a symptom to a subtle problem to me).  But when I learn that I have more freedom, and I simply have some exposure for some people that say "hey what about this?" it plants thoughts in my mind: "maybe I'll draw a black woman."  Because, why not?

 Why not indeed. To be honest, the argument that has always bothered me is the "token" one. Why have a token coloured character, wouldn't that be racist/homophobic/etc.?

 

I dunno about racist, but it is bad. There are two main reasons for this, imo:

1. The "token" stereotypically becomes a stereotype.

2. The "token" is written off as being enough, sometimes seen as a "there's one, now be quiet."

 

When it comes to BioWare, I personally don't believe either of these are the case, but more importantly in ANY form of media, as awful as it is to say (can you see I'm putting it off?)

IN MY OPINION, a token is better than nothing. The main issue is that the idea of a coloured character doesn't pop up into people's mind immediately (as you pointed out), not your fault as up until recently most media were pretty whitewashed in terms of characters, when write and need a hero, unless the role is race-specific, I often imagine a white man (and as a coloured man I realize that that is a problem).

 

The token often starts as one character, maybe a bad one, but at least it increases saturation of coloured characters in whatever media we're talking about. And I like to think that in BioWare's case, the introduction of one means the introduction of more. And the proof is obvious. DA:O was white-only, DA:2 had Isabela, and now DA:I has Vivienne, Scribbles and (it looks like to me) DHMG.

 

As for the idea that story applies to race, well, why? Vivienne is black, but I'm sure she'd be the first to tell you she's Orlesian through. With Thedas being as small as it is, it stands to reason the many different looking humans have all crossed nation borders at some point and overall Thedas is a more colourful place. I'm Canadian and brown-skinned. Vivienne is black and Orlesian, Cassandra is white and Nevarran. Why must coloured characters be blocked off from being part of any nation? Why must coloured characters only exist if it is to exploit colour-specific content? Why can't a black character exist without parading the black thing around? Want to get rid of "bad token coloureds"? Stop making their story about their colour. Just like sexuality, some cases of gender, etc.

 

TL; DR, I also meant to quote ghostmessiah, but oh well, we don't need colour specific content. We need coloured characters, and a token one is better than none at all. The way to make video games (or any media), more inclusive? Stop forcing their primary characteristic to be something that makes them "different". That being said, I don't believe BioWare is at fault for this, but it is a real issue.

 

Just my two cents.

[AkiKishi]

On the actual subject of the thread, that of "Asians in Thedas", I stand by my earlier comment. I simply do not understand why people believe that individuals who possess stereotypically East Asian facial features are not realistic in the setting. Those features are available in the character creator. If the game devs think that the setting's "realism" can survive Asian Hawke and an Asian Warden, I can't imagine any plausible arguments against the realism of other Thedosian "Asians".

 

Because the CC is there purely as benefit for the player.There is no carry over into anyone elses game. The PC also exists as an entity apart,more and more obviously. Try casting blood magic in front of a Templar as Hawke and nothing happens. Yet there is no justification like in DA:O. 

 

While you may be able to make any sort of character, as far as the game is concerned, you are default Hawke and no mention of your look or imagined race, will ever be acknowledged.

[fdgvdddvdfdfbdfb]

Does the CC allow epicanthal folds? That's probably the most defining feature of oriental people.

[Allan Schumacher]

Because the CC is there purely as benefit for the player.There is no carry over into anyone elses game. The PC also exists as an entity apart,more and more obviously. Try casting blood magic in front of a Templar as Hawke and nothing happens. Yet there is no justification like in DA:O. 

 

While you may be able to make any sort of character, as far as the game is concerned, you are default Hawke and no mention of your look or imagined race, will ever be acknowledged.

 

How often do NPCs comment on the colour of another NPCs skin in our games?

[AkiKishi]

How often do NPCs comment on the colour of another NPCs skin in our games?

 

Unless your saying regardless of what the character looks like they are always from Fereldan and taken as being from Feraldan ? While they don't comment on the skin colour specifically, they comment on nationality and often. It's usually quite a big part of the characters background. 

 

If your saying that regardless of the characters skin colour, they are always the character, then that's just what I said.

[Allan Schumacher]

Unless your saying regardless of what the character looks like they are always from Fereldan and taken as being from Feraldan ? While they don't comment on the skin colour specifically, they comment on nationality and often. It's usually quite a big part of the characters background. 

 

If your saying that regardless of the characters skin colour, they are always the character, then that's just what I said.

 

Are we agreeing then, that it doesn't matter if we add racial diversity, since it needn't have any influence on the nationalities of those that make up those people?

 

I just bring it up because you cite the omission of any acknowledgement of the player's look as being exclusive towards the player because the player is a special snowflake.  As such, your post comes across as "they can let people make the character look like anything because the player specifically is never acknowledged." (sidenote: we could easily restrict it, too.  In other words, the inclusion of people of colour in the character creator can be used as evidence that a Ferelden person can, in fact, have non-white skin and still be considered Ferelden.  And I think a great many people on these boards would totally use the "it fits the story" if we did restrict the character creator as well).

 

So I'm curious if the games actually makes any reference among species about the intraspecies "race."  (i.e. I know the difference exists between Dwarves, Elves, Humans, and Qunari.  Does it ever happen among any particular race).  I actually couldn't say for sure.  I find the fanbase is significantly more knowledgeable about these types of details than myself.

 

Because if it doesn't, I'm not sure how relevant your earlier response is because, in this case, the player character isn't actually receiving any special treatment in regards to not having the colour of their character's skin discussed.

[AkiKishi]

Are we agreeing then, that it doesn't matter if we add racial diversity, since it needn't have any influence on the nationalities of those that make up those people?

 

I just bring it up because you cite the omission of any acknowledgement of the player's look as being exclusive towards the player because the player is a special snowflake.  As such, your post comes across as "they can let people make the character look like anything because the player specifically is never acknowledged." (sidenote: we could easily restrict it, too.  In other words, the inclusion of people of colour in the character creator can be used as evidence that a Ferelden person can, in fact, have non-white skin and still be considered Ferelden.  And I think a great many people on these boards would totally use the "it fits the story" if we did restrict the character creator as well).

 

So I'm curious if the games actually makes any reference among species about the intraspecies "race."  (i.e. I know the difference exists between Dwarves, Elves, Humans, and Qunari.  Does it ever happen among any particular race).  I actually couldn't say for sure.  I find the fanbase is significantly more knowledgeable about these types of details than myself.

 

Because if it doesn't, I'm not sure how relevant your earlier response is because, in this case, the player character isn't actually receiving any special treatment in regards to not having the colour of their character's skin discussed.

 

As I said CC only applies to a specific persons game so it really makes no difference to anyone else. If it makes someone happy to see an analog of themselves in the game by only changing their game, then you lose nothing either way. 

 

I personally would like to see culture as part of the CC because like the NPCs it's another way to go into the background of the game world. It does of course introduce it's own problems since that adds another layer of pre-determination for each culture. But overall I still think it's a win. 

 

When you widen that to include the whole game world it becomes tricky, because then I believe you do need to justify what exists in the world for in world reasons.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

So I'm curious if the games actually makes any reference among species about the intraspecies "race."  (i.e. I know the difference exists between Dwarves, Elves, Humans, and Qunari.  Does it ever happen among any particular race).  I actually couldn't say for sure.  I find the fanbase is significantly more knowledgeable about these types of details than myself.

There are no scenes where someone responds differently if your character has black skin than if they have white skin. 

 

Just answering your curiosity.

[Aimi]

Because the CC is there purely as benefit for the player.There is no carry over into anyone elses game. The PC also exists as an entity apart,more and more obviously. Try casting blood magic in front of a Templar as Hawke and nothing happens. Yet there is no justification like in DA:O. 
 
While you may be able to make any sort of character, as far as the game is concerned, you are default Hawke and no mention of your look or imagined race, will ever be acknowledged.

 
As noted by others, there is essentially no acknowledgment of any skin-color or "racial" facial features by any character in any Dragon Age game. It's not just the PC's [human] "race" that exists as an entity apart as far as the story is concerned, but rather that of all characters. So I don't view this as a relevant objection.
 

Does the CC allow epicanthal folds? That's probably the most defining feature of oriental people.

Ehhhh...it doesn't really, but I think that that's more down to the limitations of the engine than anything else. CC faces are generally "smoothed-out" and lack much detail. There are eye shapes that sort of mimic the effect you get from epicanthal folds, but YMMV as to whether they're actually there. Character-creator systems in other games have similar limitations; Saints Row, while it possesses an arguably more detailed CC, still doesn't incorporate epicanthal folds but rather has something called "eye style".

Also, I mentally read your comment in Mallory Archer's voice. "Orientals are crazy for firecrackers!" "Oh my God and rice!"

[AkiKishi]

 
As noted by others, there is essentially no acknowledgment of any skin-color or "racial" facial features by any character in any Dragon Age game. It's not just the PC's [human] "race" that exists as an entity apart as far as the story is concerned, but rather that of all characters. So I don't view this as a relevant objection.
 

 

If it's enough that you just see asian analogues wandering around for no apparent reason, then it's probably not. But like I said CC only applies to the game of that particular player. If you want to include something in the game as a whole , it needs an in game explanation. 

If Bioware want to stick in some sort of slider for population, then again as it only applies on an individual basis I don't care (I'm a big fan of sliders, just ask Allan).

 

Otherwise I think adding them in a manner in which they are a method of learning about another part of the game world is far better.

[tmp7704]

With Thedas being as small as it is, it stands to reason the many different looking humans have all crossed nation borders at some point and overall Thedas is a more colourful place.

May be worth noting that Thedas isn't really that small -- the area we have mapped isn't too far from the size of Europe minus Russia, and considerably larger than say, India. Certainly though, that's not an argument against having diverse population.

[Aimi]

If it's enough that you just see asian analogues wandering around for no apparent reason, then it's probably not. But like I said CC only applies to the game of that particular player. If you want to include something in the game as a whole , it needs an in game explanation. 
If Bioware want to stick in some sort of slider for population, then again as it only applies on an individual basis I don't care (I'm a big fan of sliders, just ask Allan).

I'm not arguing in favor of creating a defined "racial"-ethnic group designed to mimic "Asian" features and culture in the games, with story implications and/or references. That would be kind of silly of me, because I've been pointing out that among Thedosian humans, race simply isn't acknowledged. An "Asian" group like that wouldn't make any sense.

If I'm arguing in favor of anything, it's in favor of including more individual characters, especially NPCs with dialogue and backstory, who "look Asian". And really, I'm not doing that so much as I am pointing out that any arguments against including more individual NPCs who "look Asian" are operating under bad or factually incorrect assumptions.

[tmp7704]

As I said CC only applies to a specific persons game so it really makes no difference to anyone else.

Not really true, in the sense the CC is just exposed end of the system that governs appearance of all characters in the game, including the NPCs. It's not that "only the player" can make their character look black, Asian (more like sort-of-Asian atm, but anyway) or whatever -- game devs have exactly as much (and more) control over appearance of all NPCs in the game, and can grant them similar looks. Whether they do comes down to individual choices.

[AkiKishi]

Not really true, in the sense the CC is just exposed end of the system that governs appearance of all characters in the game, including the NPCs. It's not that "only the player" can make their character look black, Asian (more like sort-of-Asian atm, but anyway) or whatever -- game devs have exactly as much (and more) control over appearance of all NPCs in the game, and can grant them similar looks. Whether they do comes down to individual choices.

 

Yes but what someone chooses their character to look like has no effect on my game at all and vice versa. That was the point I was making. The game itself treats you as the default creation anyway. Anything Bioware does changes the world for everyone. I can't for example have Cassandra as her DA2 self in DA:I as much as I would like to do that.

 

http://forum.bioware...ragon-age-game/

 

That thread is an example of what happens when the players version of the world and the world as it appears to everyone clashes.

[tmp7704]

Yes but what someone chooses their character to look like has no effect on my game at all and vice versa. That was the point I was making.

Yes, but nothing you do in your game has effect on my game. It's not limited to player character's appearance. That's simply because your game and my game are two different, separate 'alternate reality' versions of the story which starts at some common point, but then diverge as result of all choices you make as you go.

These choices you make have no impact on my game, but they do exist and shape your own game. If someone makes a black Hawke then they create a story in which the Champion of Kirkwall was a black man/woman. As far as that player and their own game is concerned, that choice has impact just like all the others.

[Das Tentakel]

These are repeatedly brought up, both in this thread and others, and I want to take a moment to point out that merely saying "modern studies! DNA!" doesn't really mean anything.

Most academic studies that attempt to use DNA evidence to analyze historical events do so with a previous understanding of the historical context in which those events took place. An example: the so-called Völkerwanderung, or Migration Period, that characterized western Eurasian history about a millennium and a half ago. For many, many years, accepted historical orthodoxy was that the most important events of those times were vast migrations by people from Central Asia and northern Europe into the former territories of the Roman Empire. So when people started to try to look at DNA evidence from remains that dated back to that period, they looked for similarities between remains from inside the Roman Empire and outside it. They then tried to connect these findings with modern populations, which would supposedly display similar genetic markers as the migratory people. Not surprisingly, they found exactly what they were looking for; this was touted as evidence that the Migration Period really did happen the way people had been saying that it did.

The chief problem with this analysis is that during the same time, academic historians and archaeologists have turned an increasingly critical eye on the notion that migrations played the sort of role that people used to think that they did.
*snip*

Halsall has drawn out criticisms of many of the DNA studies

*snip*

It also concerns me that this emphasis on genetics and race does a great deal to muddle the issue, destroy modern understandings of the complexity of identity, and return people's historical understanding to the sorry state it was in during the era of Toynbee and Spengler. To take the example from the quoted post again, you refer to skin color, geography, religion, ethnicity, and linguistics almost interchangeably. That's a problem, less for the specifics of your actual example (blond-haired, blue-eyed Jesus is pretty unlikely, although I have to say that I usually see him depicted with brown or black hair) and more because it is indicative of an understanding of identity that simply won't fly.

---

On the actual subject of the thread, that of "Asians in Thedas", I stand by my earlier comment. I simply do not understand why people believe that individuals who possess stereotypically East Asian facial features are not realistic in the setting. Those features are available in the character creator. If the game devs think that the setting's "realism" can survive Asian Hawke and an Asian Warden, I can't imagine any plausible arguments against the realism of other Thedosian "Asians".

Oh dear, Guy Halsall...

There's a general problem with historians and archaeologists accepting or working with DNA research. Some embrace it, some are cautious, some attack it, some go into denial. It isn't helped by the fact that much DNA research, particularly the earlier projects in the 1990's and 2000's, were limited in scale, way too dependent on modern DNA and their conclusions - no matter how putative or cautious (not always the case...) tended to be overblown in the press. The influence of the historian(s) / archaeologist(s) who were co-authors of the resulting papers is in some cases quite evident; very often you can see that an 'anti-migrationist' co-author is attached to a paper stressing continuitity, and the reverse is also true.
Halsall's own initial scepticism (if I remember correctly) was based on a talk he had in 2005 with some senior archaeologist who expressed doubts about the ability to extract useful DNA from bodies; that wasn't exactly true in 2005, and has become less true since. Anyway, Halsall's staked out his intellectual position in this regard and we'll see how it will end up.
For people who are interested, professor Halsall - 'probably the most significant historian of early medieval Europe under the age of 60 anywhere in the world', to quote 'Professor Grumpy' in his own words - has his blog here: http://600transformer.blogspot.nl/

 

For a recent synthesis about the state of knowledge regarding DNA research and its relevance to Europe's (population) history, see Jean Manco's Ancestral Journeys: The Peopling of Europe from the first venturers to the Vikings. Manco herself is a historian who got interested in DNA research and its uses in a historical context, and is pretty well informed regarding the subject. It also means the book is very readable. Do mind that research in this area moves quickly if a bit unevenly and a lot of the information, including any interpretations, can get obsolete very quickly.

 

The 'confusion' of race, genetics and identity is actually pretty irrelevant among the people (scholars / researchers but also interested laymen) that participate in these debates; these people bloody well know that DNA isn't culture isn't language. That's more of a political / popular media issue, as well as a failure by academics to clearly communicate with the wider public.

 

Anyway, this is rather OT and I'll end here.

 

It should be clear that on the actual subject, I'm in the 'Put them in' camp.

[AkiKishi]

Yes, but nothing you do in your game has effect on my game. It's not limited to player character's appearance. That's simply because your game and my game are two different, separate 'alternate reality' versions of the story which starts at some common point, but then diverge as result of all choices you make as you go.

These choices you make have no impact on my game, but they do exist and shape your own game. If someone makes a black Hawke then they create a story in which the Champion of Kirkwall was a black man/woman. As far as that player and their own game is concerned, that choice has impact just like all the others.

 

But Bioware changing the makeup of the game in whatever way does. That applies to everyone. 

 

If someone created an asian looking PC, no one would ever know. If Bioware turned 50% of the population of Orlais to asian analogues,it would be hard to miss.

[tmp7704]

But Bioware changing the makeup of the game in whatever way does. That applies to everyone. 
 
If someone created an asian looking PC, no one would ever know. If Bioware turned 50% of the population of Orlais to asian analogues,it would be hard to miss.

I admit, I can't really figure out what the point of that is supposed to be. Are you trying to say something like "if someone makes their PC look Asian then I don't care because I never get to see it, but if BioWare adds Asian-looking NPCs to the game then I have no choice but to notice it" ... and then, what? o.O

Or is it something else?

[AkiKishi]

I admit, I can't really figure out what the point of that is supposed to be. Are you trying to say something like "if someone makes their PC look Asian then I don't care because I never get to see it, but if BioWare adds Asian-looking NPCs to the game then I have no choice but to notice it" ... and then, what? o.O

Or is it something else?

 

Things that change the game for everyone need an in game explanation.For example when the Qunari grew horns. Things that don't , don't.