208 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

Perhaps I should have said something to define the obtaining of personal power rather than lucrative. Sometimes the refusal of a reward has a greater benefit to the character, and my Evil Power Behind the Throne Mages tend to be rather cunning in that. However, if there is an emotional response available that may better suit their true nature, I have taken that sometimes simply to illuminate their character flaws.

 

Video games straight up do not understand that political power is all about winning the likeability battle. Social power is all about that. 

[Jorji Costava]

Video games straight up do not understand that political power is all about winning the likeability battle. Social power is all about that. 

 

There was a quote from the TV show Babylon 5 about this: "People don't take power; they're given power, because we're stupid or afraid or both." And heck, there's been plenty of research suggesting that even the physical attractiveness of candidates exerts a significant influence on election results (of course, it's hard to represent this specific phenomenon in a game, since there's no system for the game to keep track of your character's relative attractiveness).

[In Exile]

There was a quote from the TV show Babylon 5 about this: "People don't take power; they're given power, because we're stupid or afraid or both." And heck, there's been plenty of research suggesting that even the physical attractiveness of candidates exerts a significant influence on election results (of course, it's hard to represent this specific phenomenon in a game, since there's no system for the game to keep track of your character's relative attractiveness).

There's also a so-called halo effect for likeability. We think people we like are more competent at things, just because we like them. 

[Bob from Accounting]

Video games straight up do not understand that political power is all about winning the likeability battle. Social power is all about that. 

 

Boy, you're certainly sure of yourself aren't you?

 

No, I wouldn't say it's particularly 'all about that' at all.

 

[In Exile]

Boy, you're certainly sure of yourself aren't you?

 

No, I wouldn't say it's particularly 'all about that' at all.

 

Likeability gives you tremendous room to maneuver and a social network to leverage. Being an unlikeable pariah makes it very hard for you to act, on the other hand.

[Bob from Accounting]

Being a pariah? Certainly. But while we have our share of Kennedys, I imagine I could find a great deal of politicians considered powerful who weren't thought to be particularly likeable.

[In Exile]

Being a pariah? Certainly. But while we have our share of Kennedys, I imagine I could find a great deal of politicians considered powerful who weren't thought to be particularly likeable.

 

Are we talking likeable in the sense that the public liked them, or that they were liked by their people in the party? 

 

But anyway I didn't mean politics in the actual sense of political elections or career politicians; I meant politics in the everyday, power-play sense. 

[aTigerslunch]

Im going to budge in a moment. Third options are what I end up doing in all of my first play throughs. Saving Geth and Quarians, saving werewolves and elves etc., however I missed being able to have save both Amaranthine and Fort.

 

Now a chime in about dwarves gaining/loosing anvil. They took back some areas thanks to my warden with/without golem support. See Awakening in that respect, golems are alright if its choice only and not forced. I only did one play that saved the forge otherwise I destroy it cause I know a dwarf king will get stupid again.

 

by the way, "Oh lookie, that little darkspawn just swiped a control rod, oops."  Darkspawn controlled golems now, that would be a sight!    They have done it already in a small manner against the Warden.

[Elhanan]

In my initial sessions, I generally choose Good paths (eg; Paragon, Noble, etc) if offered, and will try for the best results if it is evident. But I also try to keep it in character, so some options I may decline if it involves choices that are suspect, immoral, etc.

Later in replays, I the Player have more access to meta-game info, and hopefully retain it in my aging memory. I choose to use this fore-knowledge as part of the new character, which is often a Mage, Psionic, Biotic, etc. to explain the insight.

On topic, sometimes these third options are obvious, some are hidden, and occasionally are not there at all. I enjoy finding my 'best Answer' whatever that may be for that character.

And to my shame, I did save the Anvil once for an Achievement (am not fond of those virtual, nagging at my O-C badges), but did not use that as my Save; re-loaded and destroyed it again for the remainder of that storyline, too. This is one choice I could not choose with any of my characters, even if I originally intended to do so for that character.

[Wulfram]

Video games straight up do not understand that political power is all about winning the likeability battle. Social power is all about that. 

 

I think you need to define "like" fairly broadly for that to be true.  You need respect, and people need to believe that dealing with you will give them some value.  They don't necessarily need to think you're a great guy who they'd like to share a beer with.

 

Being pleasant to be around certainly helps, and being trusted is very valuable.

[Fast Jimmy]

I think you need to define "like" fairly broadly for that to be true.  You need respect, and people need to believe that dealing with you will give them some value.  They don't necessarily need to think you're a great guy who they'd like to share a beer with.
 
Being pleasant to be around certainly helps, and being trusted is very valuable.

But being feared (or, conversely, people fearing what would happen if you weren't in control) is probably the most powerful political power one can wield.

[Wulfram]

But being feared (or, conversely, people fearing what would happen if you weren't in control) is probably the most powerful political power one can wield.

 

It can be rather fragile though.  If your political power comes from fear, no-one will be there for you when you're weak.  Or when you look weak, which can thus amount to the same thing.

[Fast Jimmy]

It can be rather fragile though.  If your political power comes from fear, no-one will be there for you when you're weak.  Or when you look weak, which can thus amount to the same thing.

Perception is reality.

But agreed - but how many video games are about having power through a stable period of time where review and general dissent for your leadership can fall into question?

I mean... we are talking about games that let you choose between executing a slaver, letting hi escape with a bribe that let's you buy approximately three potions or getting a stat boost equivalent to one level up through a Blood Magic ritual that involves killing dozens of people. Getting to the point of nuanced political power is going to take a lot more attention to balance.

[Schreckstoff]

Perception is reality.

But agreed - but how many video games are about having power through a stable period of time where review and general dissent for your leadership can fall into question?

I mean... we are talking about games that let you choose between executing a slaver, letting hi escape with a bribe that let's you buy approximately three potions or getting a stat boost equivalent to one level up through a Blood Magic ritual that involves killing dozens of people. Getting to the point of nuanced political power is going to take a lot more attention to balance.

 

If you refuse his bribe and the ritual but let him live either way he'll owe you, might just come in handy one day.

[Fast Jimmy]

If you refuse his bribe and the ritual but let him live either way he'll owe you, might just come in handy one day.

But it doesn't.

[Schreckstoff]

But it doesn't.

 

Our Warden doesn't know that his existence becomes unacknowledged soon.

[Fast Jimmy]

Our Warden doesn't know that his existence becomes unacknowledged soon.

True. Still, it seems like a large gamble to assume he could come back and help, when he could hat as easily come back and try and kill you.

[Gwydden]

But it doesn't.

I actually let him live on no other grounds that wanting to kill as few people as possible. Even slimy slavers.

[Sylvius the Mad]

... and yes you should criticize people who try or do commit suicide as they not only hurt themselves but also their relatives and friends, if they have some, and waste a whole lot of money the state invested in them.

See, even here you're criticism is based on things other than the self harm. Self-harm, in and of itself, is not worthy of criticism.

And your insurance suggestion does harm to the insurance company and its investors. I'd say insurance fraud is worthy of criticism.

[Bob from Accounting]

I'm curious. Can anyone think of a single politician that has 'led' through fear to actual prosperity and success instead of running their country into crap? Because it really seems like whatever 'power' they have doesn't count for much if it's only power to screw everything up.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Video games straight up do not understand that political power is all about winning the likeability battle. Social power is all about that.

Which is why I work so hard to change the standard by which people are judged to be likeable.

[Wulfram]

Perception is reality.

But agreed - but how many video games are about having power through a stable period of time where review and general dissent for your leadership can fall into question?

I mean... we are talking about games that let you choose between executing a slaver, letting hi escape with a bribe that let's you buy approximately three potions or getting a stat boost equivalent to one level up through a Blood Magic ritual that involves killing dozens of people. Getting to the point of nuanced political power is going to take a lot more attention to balance.

 

Well, Inquisition might be.  And DA2 could have been.

 

Also, it's not just about the PC.  We quite often deal with leaders in trouble, and I'd like the assumption to not always be that the Bhelens of the world are better suited than the Alistairs.

 

Though of course if you have the nice guy also be the best ruler then it doesn't really make a tough choice.

[Fast Jimmy]

I'm curious. Can anyone think of a single politician that has 'led' through fear to actual prosperity and success instead of running their country into crap? Because it really seems like whatever 'power' they have doesn't count for much if it's only power to screw everything up.

Over a long enough period of time, the more power a leader has, the more likely the chance for everything to fall apart. Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Churchill... all of them used the fear of their time to create great power and enforce huge change. The difference was whether or not the systems of power they operated in allowed for a seamless transition to power or not. Seamless transitions of power are the pinnacle of stable society. Someone who holds onto power too long gains too many enemies to be effective over the long term.



But we are getting into much deeper water than the topic at hand.

[Schreckstoff]

See, even here you're criticism is based on things other than the self harm. Self-harm, in and of itself, is not worthy of criticism.

And your insurance suggestion does harm to the insurance company and its investors. I'd say insurance fraud is worthy of criticism.

 

The thing with life insurance was supposed to be a joke. Nowadays society forbids self harm on the grounds that someone who attempts to hurt or kill himself intentionally might not be in his right mind and makes them attend psychological counselling. Even euthanasia which I am entirely for has to follows strict rules on when it is allowed and what has to be done before it is granted. Obviously Thedas isn't that far along and hence I didn't go into that aspect.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I'm curious. Can anyone think of a single politician that has 'led' through fear to actual prosperity and success instead of running their country into crap? Because it really seems like whatever 'power' they have doesn't count for much if it's only power to screw everything up.

Augusto Pinochet.