623 réponses à ce sujet

[Allan Schumacher]

Since we're discussing fair representation, how come the majority of dogs are mabari? I have seen a couple of regular stray dogs, but they certainly weren't anything important. Just background NPCs really. I know Fereldan is famous for mabari, but surely other dogs are brought there or migrate there, especially since Fereldans love their dogs.

It's hard for my mini schnauzer when I play Dragon Age. I always have to tell him that he is just as important as mabari. He isn't as big, sure. And he gets regularly groomed and enjoys the luxuries of life, but I know if dark spawn attacked me, he'd come to wreck, dawg.

 

This post frustrates me....

 

I don't think your satire is being very effective.  It reads as dismissive.

[SardaukarElite]

Has anyone even discussed generic enemies and fair representation in the last few pages?

 

I thought I was, just before you started complaining about people not discussing the topic. But feel free to continue playing amateur forum moderator.

[KBomb]

This post frustrates me....

I don't think your satire is being very effective. It reads as dismissive.

Yes, it does. Which is why I apologized.

[Ina]

I'm just surprised this thread isn't locked with all the dirt flinging...in fact, I seem to remember it was locked some 12 hours ago. Was it unlocked?

[KBomb]

But in those apologies for creating the wrong impression, you just antagonised them more, as the needless pointed (if you'll excuse the pun) 'bewbs' comment earlier on this page.

Yep. It's just pretty frustrating to read comments stating that people like the Witcher because there is "boobs" in it. (Which is a comment not from me, but from others) and how women have killed as much as men in real life, so it makes sense that they kill in video games. Personally, I find both of those things to be pretty insulting. It's also annoying to see people being told they don't know what it's like because they don't have to deal with not being included and that is why this issue isn't of import to them. I find that comment the worst of all. A lot of insults being thrown out and glazed over. I am a little surprised by it, tbh. I handled it poorly, though. True enough.

[Samahl]

It's also annoying to see people being told they don't know what it's like because they don't have to deal with not being included and that is why this issue isn't of import to them. I find that comment the worst of all.

 

Why? The majority of people arguing that it's not important are people who aren't actually affected by it, while people who are affected by lack of representation in some way tend to think it is important. Do you think that's a coincidence?

[BabyFratelli]

Yep. It's just pretty frustrating to read comments stating that people like the Witcher because there is "boobs" in it. (Which is a comment not from me, but from others) and how women have killed as much as men in real life, so it makes sense that they kill in video games. Personally, I find both of those things to be pretty insulting. It's also annoying to see people being told they don't know what it's like because they don't have to deal with not being included and that is why this issue isn't of import to them. I find that comment the worst of all. A lot of insults being thrown out and glazed over. I am a little surprised by it, tbh. I handled it poorly, though. True enough.

 

I appreciate that you're mature about it, even if your first apology was a bit snarky.  

 

And I don't think the only reason people like the Witcher is because of boobs, though I'm sure a lot of people find it to be a happy bonus, I'm curious about the part I bolded. Why is it insulting to you that some people think women have killed as much as men in real life? Or that they kill in video games? Correct me if I've misinterpreted. 

[KBomb]

Why? The majority of people arguing that it's not important are people who aren't actually affected by it, while people who are affected by lack of representation in some way tend to think it is important. Do you think that's a coincidence?

I think that it is a generalization, pure and simple and a pretty insulting one at that. Just because someone says that the representation of gender in generic enemies isn't an important issue with them in no ways means they feel fully included in any media. An over weight person may feel excluded in representation in media, but finds generic enemies a pretty small and unimportant area.

I have explained before that I certainly don't feel as though my body type is represented, yet I don't find the lack of generic enemies an important issue either, at least not personally. So yeah, to say, "You don't know what it's like, so how can you understand?" is dismissive and insulting, imo. Yet, it's pretty much an accepted rebuttal.

 

@BabyFratelli

 

I don't find it insulting that people think women kill in real life or that women kill in video games. I just think there is a better arguments for the inclusion of women other than the fact we can kill stuff too. That is already pretty much established in Bioware games. I know that it came from the fact some people were saying men are just factually stronger than women, but it seems like using the fact that women kill in real life should be the reason they belong on the battlefield "stooping to that level". Women should be included on the battlefield in Thedas because it's established lore. In battle scenes both in the beginning and end of DA:O, there were just as many women marching to battle. Women are seen as equals in Fereldan because Bioware thought it was important to do so. It makes sense that they would join their fellow men in arms to protect those they love, the land they love and the way of life they love--not because they can lop off a head as good as any man, but because they have the same desire for life, protection and honor as men and have as much to lose if the battle is lost. 

[SardaukarElite]

So yeah, to say, "You don't know what it's like, so how can you understand?" is dismissive and insulting, imo. Yet, it's pretty much an accepted rebuttal.

 

You keep bringing this up like it has been a recurring argument throughout this thread, when as far as I can tell it hasn't. The only place I've seen it is in your posts. If someone says something you disagree with or find insulting, quote them and address their post personally. This generalising about what's in the thread and constant coming back to it just brings the whole discussion down to that level, worse no one can address it because they don't know what you're referring to.

 

 

and how women have killed as much as men in real life, so it makes sense that they kill in video games. Personally, I find both of those things to be pretty insulting.

 

What?

[Samahl]

I think that it is a generalization, pure and simple and a pretty insulting one at that. Just because someone says that the representation of gender in generic enemies isn't an important issue with them in no ways means they feel fully included in any media. An over weight person may feel excluded in representation in media, but finds generic enemies a pretty small and unimportant area.

I have explained before that I certainly don't feel as though my body type is represented, yet I don't find the lack of generic enemies an important issue either, at least not personally. So yeah, to say, "You don't know what it's like, so how can you understand?" is dismissive and insulting, imo. Yet, it's pretty much an accepted rebuttal.

 

I certainly think that body shaming is a pervasive issue, and society/mainstream media tends to push some rather unhealthy ideals onto the population, but if you're a man, then you aren't going to know what it's like to be excluded on the basis of gender for the most part.

 

Sometimes, you'll find feminists who are fine with whitewashing and racism if it means a (white) woman is "empowered". Cis gay people will throw bi and trans people under the bus in order to appeal to straight sensibilities. Their lack of privilege in one area does not invalidate the privilege they have in another.

 

Either way, it's not meant to be a dismissal, just an examination of perspective.

[Nonoru]

I can picture OP posing the game and checking under templar/mage robes to see what gender (s)he's facing. I mean, it's important to know if you have to bash the face in gently or roughly.

 

As for me, I'll just backstab opposition the same way regardless of details such as species or gender.

[andy6915]

One interesting thing to note. Bioware goes easier on showing violence against women than against men in DA2. Why? You can't explode women enemies. Can't be done no matter how much you overkill them. Out of a dozen or more playthroughs, I've never once pulled that off on a female enemy. So while they don't mind showing that women are capable of dying violently just like men, they do mind showing women getting broken into chunks in a bloody and gory way.

[KBomb]

 

 

 

 

What?

I already explained it once.

 

 

One interesting thing to note. Bioware goes easier on showing violence against women than against men in DA2. Why? You can't explode women enemies. Can't be done no matter how much you overkill them. Out of a dozen or more playthroughs, I've never once pulled that off on a female enemy. So while they don't mind showing that women are capable of dying violently just like men, they do mind showing women getting broken into chunks in a bloody and gory way.

Really? I honestly never paid any attention before. Doesn't seem like something they'd waste time on, but if so, that is interesting. Next time I play, I'll pay attention to the women I kill. Though, to be honest, I never really paid attention to the males I killed either. In DA2, they seem to constantly spawn all around you, so I may have not noticed because there were just so many it all blended.

[TheButterflyEffect]

Pfft. You think a woman can't fight alongside men? Go to Israel.

[SardaukarElite]

I don't find it insulting that people think women kill in real life or that women kill in video games. I just think there is a better arguments for the inclusion of women other than the fact we can kill stuff too. That is already pretty much established in Bioware games. I know that it came from the fact some people were saying men are just factually stronger than women, but it seems like using the fact that women kill in real life should be the reason they belong on the battlefield "stooping to that level". Women should be included on the battlefield in Thedas because it's established lore. In battle scenes both in the beginning and end of DA:O, there were just as many women marching to battle. Women are seen as equals in Fereldan because Bioware thought it was important to do so. It makes sense that they would join their fellow men in arms to protect those they love, the land they love and the way of life they love--not because they can lop off a head as good as any man, but because they have the same desire for life, protection and honor as men and have as much to lose if the battle is lost. 

 

Your idealistic views on fighting women in Thedas count for nothing when someone is denying that women can fight in the real world.

 

Women should be included on the battlefield because women have been on the battlefield. I can't think of a better argument than that. In the real world women have fought to 'protect those they love' or for an ideal, or to prove that they could, or for any number of reasons, and they've succeeded.

[MrMrPendragon]

One interesting thing to note. Bioware goes easier on showing violence against women than against men in DA2. Why? You can't explode women enemies. Can't be done no matter how much you overkill them. Out of a dozen or more playthroughs, I've never once pulled that off on a female enemy. So while they don't mind showing that women are capable of dying violently just like men, they do mind showing women getting broken into chunks in a bloody and gory way.

 

Really? I might have to check that out if I ever start another playthrough.

 

It's weird because I don't even notice. They all just die so quick I can't even tell which ones are the women, because they're npcs.

[KBomb]

Your idealistic views on fighting women in Thedas count for nothing when someone is denying that women can fight in the real world.

 

Women should be included on the battlefield because women have been on the battlefield. I can't think of a better argument than that. In the real world women have fought to 'protect those they love' or for an ideal, or to prove that they could, or for any number of reasons, and they've succeeded.

Idealistic views? lol what? My views on women fighting in Thedas are just that, my views. In my opinion, one thing has nothing to do with the other and to be honest, I don't really care if someone thinks women can't fight in real life. I don't need to "prove" to anyone that women can and/or have killed in real life. It would be like trying to prove rain is wet. 

 

Women do fight in Fereldan, that has never been a point of debate for me. And saying that women in Thedas are soldiers, therefore; lore dictates they are trained warriors--is pretty much what I said to begin with. I also never said women who fight in real life don't fight for the same reasons women in Thedas do, whether they're successful or not. I don't know why you even brought that up.

 

I simply stated that the knowledge that women can kill "just as good as any man" shouldn't be the only reason they're considered important enough to be included. In fact, it shouldn't even be a question raised as to why women fight alongside men in Thedas--they fight for the same reasons men fight. The lack of brute strength shouldn't be a reason why women shouldn't be included, but strength alone shouldn't be the only reason they are included, nor should it be the most important reason when one considers why women are present as warriors in Dragon Age. 

[Zered]

You have to consider that amongst the people who actually enjoy the witcher for it's storytelling, setting and combat there is a large majority of people who play the witcher for boobs and the fantasy of being an alpha male monster hunter primarily consisted of straight male guys ranging from 13 to 30 years of age A.K.A majority of the internet.

 

 

Rather an epic setting based on some golden literature but that is an point people fail to see here.

[hexaligned]

 

Pfft. You think a woman can't fight alongside men? Go to Israel.

I worked for JSOC out of Germany, and actually did some joint training missions with the Israeli army, their female soldiers (at least on the special operations side of things) are absolutely brilliant, fierce too (not to mention goddamn gorgeous).  

[SurelyForth]

Really? I might have to check that out if I ever start another playthrough.

 

It's weird because I don't even notice. They all just die so quick I can't even tell which ones are the women, because they're npcs.

 

I think that person is wrong- I'm pretty sure you can gib female enemies, but the gibbed model defaults to the same bald dude no matter what. So it's not BW softening violence against women, it's just a bug (or another side effect of the reduced dev cycle). 

[ManchesterUnitedFan1]

Allowing women soldiers fully is one of the (only) good things about Israel in my opinion. But anyway.

Is that really true about women not being able to explode in DA2? Wtf, that's completely ridiculous!

What possible justification could they have for that?!

EDIT: just read surelyforth's comment, hope that's true seems logical

[SardaukarElite]

I'm pretty sure I've seen women explode in DA2, but I can't say for certain.

 

I simply stated that the knowledge that women can kill "just as good as any man" shouldn't be the only reason they're considered important enough to be included. In fact, it shouldn't even be a question raised as to why women fight alongside men in Thedas--they fight for the same reasons men fight. The lack of brute strength shouldn't be a reason why women shouldn't be included, but strength alone shouldn't be the only reason they are included, nor should it be the most important reason when one considers why women are present as warriors in Dragon Age. 

 

What you take for granted others don't. I haven't been arguing with you, yet you apparently found my arguments frustrating and insulting, so I tried to explain why I felt they were necessary to counter people who aren't you.

 

For someone who entered this discussion stating you didn't think it was important you've spent a lot of time complaining that the discussion doesn't live up to your standards.

[Pateu]

though I find the claim that TW is more appreciated than Dragon Age to be suspect in itself

 

You only need to look at any poll ever.

 

Even Origins is below both TW and TW2.

 

 

If I had a dollar for every misogynist who said that the Witcher was better than Dragon Age...

 

Feminist logic: just because a game has a male main char it's a game for mysoginists.

 

Please go.

[Pateu]

Witcher doesn't even let people play a female character, is that why it's "better"?

 

And that is wrong, why?

 

The series is about a man. Putting a woman main char into it would simply be bending lore just to cater to women.

[ManchesterUnitedFan1]

Pateu, that's not at all what he/she was saying.

I also find it ironic that you're telling them to just 'go' when a few pages back you said you would never grace this thread with your presence again.

Apparently that wasn't a very genuine remark.