153 réponses à ce sujet

[leaguer of one]

Sorry, war.

 

Soldiers kill.  Sadly it's what they do.  And while they can distance themselves from the enemy (to an extent), they can't distance themselves from their friends and comrades-in-arms.  So yes, when a friend dies on the battlefield its 'FEEL'S', but when an enemy does, it's not.  If soldiers felt empathy for every single enemy, they would not be able to kill.  This is the way every single military conflict works.  The death toll has to become abstract for soldiers, and even more so for commanders who don't necessarily even step on the battlefield. 

 

The characters you play in every single ME/KOTOR and DA games are professional soldiers (either by trade like Shepard) or by the necessity.  They literally have tokill to survive and learn to distance themselves from empathizing with enemies. 

Do I think it's a good thing? No, I'd prefer life with no violence and conflict.  But do the games give (semi)-accurate description of the battlefield antics? Yes they do.  In DAO you only get to know the point of view of Loghain in detail, and suddenly, he can be sympathized with. 

 

I would think that picking up something like Grim Fandango or some other similar classic would be more towards what you are looking for.  But those are really not the games Bioware is known for.

The problem is when soldier don't know when to turn it off. Sure they don't "feel" over time when they kill an enemy, but what happen when they can't get the war out of the soldier?

[JerZey CJ]

So...what? You want that in every encounter your enemies should just stop you and go, "Okay, wait. Before we fight to the death, my name is Steve. My wife was killed by a dragon and I had to give up my only son. but let's start back at the beginning, shall we? I grew up in Denerim.........*several hours later*.......and so that brings us to this confrontation. Ready to fight then?"

[sangy]

There are ratings on games.  If you take the time to read this, you'll find they post if there will be violence, harsh language, etc.  If these things oppose your beliefs or morals, please move along to another item that follows your gaming desires.  Preaching on a fantasy game forum is really not helping anyone, at all.  I am assuming no one is forcing you to purchase something you do not agree with.  

 

Have a nice day.

[hellbiter88]

Short answer: I don't care about the bad guys. They picked the wrong side.

[Spectre Impersonator]

I think every time we kill an enemy, his mother should come in and weep as tragic music plays and the camera dramatically focuses on the poor henchman's last breath.

 

Naw but really I don't care if a video game is "gamey."

[hellbiter88]

I think every time we kill an enemy, his mother should come in and weep as tragic music plays and the camera dramatically focuses on the poor henchman's last breath.

 

Naw but really I don't care if a video game is "gamey."

 

Those group battles will take forever lol

[hellbiter88]

I dont care for the vast majority of humans in the world you think I would care even more for digital ones? Also you are looking from the modern perspective , and Im pretty sure that in older times (were dead and killing was more common) most people wouln´t feel remorse for their actions. And to add in Dragon Age games ... you are fighting people who wants to MURDER you , so you defend yourself , excuse me if I dont feel empathy for people trying to harm my character and kill them before they do that to my party.

 

THIS. too funny.

[Spectre Impersonator]

OP trying to go all Faramir but less eloquently.

 

[De1ta G]

Gamey filler? Haven't heard that one before.

[hellbiter88]

 

ok im done lol

[Gothfather]

I think this is a fabicated issue designed to create a faux intellectual conversation.

 

When I see combat vets using video games to decompress from combat it shows me that games are not in anyway shape or form like combat and they are not intended to be. CSI doesn't use real forensic science it tells stories, its not designed to educate the public in forensic science.  MOST Video games are not design to educate or be a tool to open the topic of violence. CSI is there to entertain so they don't wory about accuracy in teh science and they have zero need to. DA:I's combat is there to entertain so Bioware doesn't need to worry that violence isn't protrayed in a realistic way.

 

Simply because something isn't designed to educate doesn't diminish its value. The structure of your argument and the words used to construct it imply that you think because game violence is used to entertain is has less value. You can't prove that it does have les value because entertainment is valueable to mental health, if we never do things that give us enjoyment we are not in a healthy mental state. So there is inherent value in games NOT being serious about violence.

[Caramacchiato]

Having every mook and their grandmother have a massive tragic backstory would probably be a little tiring. Though it would be nice to wipe out a group of city guards  and then later hear a woman asking if anyone has seen her fiance who was on patrol a few days ago and hasn't come back.

 

Actually, I take it back. That would not be nice in the slightest.

[Spectre Impersonator]

I think this is a fabicated issue designed to creat a faux intellectual conversation.

To be fair, the OP spawned your reply, which was quite intellectual.

[RenAdaar]

Every time you kill an enemy, a little piece of information about them should pop up on screen.

*kills bandit and gains 50xp*

Inquisitor: hells yeah take that faceless bandit.

game: that man had a family

inquisitor: who said that!?

game: it was just him and his sick wife taking care of there seven kids

inquisitor: What!? I-i didn't kno-

game: with out him to buy medicine his wife will die 

inquisitor: o-oh maker...

game: his kids will be orphans

inquisitor: what have I done... ;-; 

[DaySeeker]

I am all for a game with less violence, or more considered violence- in terms of fewer enemies, but greater impact.  It is bizarre killing off hundreds of enemies, and seeing few living creatures in a game that aren't trying to kill you.  That said, swords are for stabbing, it would be hard to feel like a warrior without killing folks.  A game about not using magic to light up the sky, and instead doing your best not to use magic, and get new and better magic- hard to see as fun.  

 

I would like to be able to incapacitate enemies and build things instead of always destroying, but there does look to be some of that in this game.  I would like more Verbs for my character besides kill.  I like the possibility of diplomacy, and we've seen some possibility of that as well.  I understand the OP's point.  I really liked that DA2 was a more human story and that the best Hawke could do was try to stop his city from exploding.  I liked the smaller scale and more human interactions.  I hope some of that is carried over in DAI.

[Tevinter Soldier]

this is one of those things that I would walk away from the DA series if they brought this in. Having served in iraq in a combat role having to deal with all the **** that comes with that. a way to wind down after patrol was oddly enough all sit around and play gears of war, Why? because the Nameless Grubs didn't matter (that and it supported lan) its not real its a bit of fun. Inversely there's still movies i don't watch because their too "real" I like my fantasy, fantasy. I don't want to sit there and contemplate the ethics of what i do in video games, That's not i play them for. I play them to relax and have fun the end.

 

Hopefully it's a concpet i never have to deal with in video games.

[Maverick_One]

Do Broodmothers cry over fallen Darkspawn? Well I know of one that laughed over the loss of her other lesser Broodmothers and a darkspawn called The Lost she was quite mad though. Sorry went off on a tangent.

 

Where was I? Oh yeah. When things in the DA games worry about what happens if they kill me and my companions and how it hinders me trying to save the World and or City State. Then perhaps I will worry about the filler violence. Till then any enemy coming near me with a weapon or fist is gonna die. Cuz ya know it is us or them.

[Laughing_Man]

Tevinter Soldier: Well said.

 

There is such a thing as *too real* in a fantasy game.

And frankly, I'm sick of games that try to shove psychological and emotional problems in your face.

It's nice for flavoring, but too much of it, and the game becomes a disgusting wangsty mess.

[Maverick_One]

Thank you Tevinter Soldier. I know I am getting off topic but I feel like I should say thank you for your service.

[mikeymoonshine]

Generally I don't like it at all when a game tries to "educate" me and I don't play games to be educated. That said I am not against a game occasionally guilting me a little bit for a decision I made, if I actually got to make the decision. 

 

I am not really in favor of this idea that games should be this educational learning experience, especially not games that are aimed at adults. The people that argue for that usually just want whatever views they support to be promoted and adhered to. I am not saying educational games are a bad thing but if a game dev wants to make a game that doesn't take violence (or whatever) seriously then (s)he should be able to and if you don't like that then don't buy it. 

 

Not that I am saying that is the argument being made here but these kinds of discussions often end up with that argument being made by someone. 

[Revan Reborn]

I like the approach they take in games like Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Alpha Protocol or Dishonored where you can choose to slaughter without care, you can choose to sneak around enemies or take them down non lethally (knock them out or tranquilize them) and talk your way around certain situations instead of fighting and the game recognizes it. I don't think they could really implement it with the current party based combat system but it would be cool if they did add some of those elements in. There was a part in Mass Effect 1 where you had these tranquilizer grenades you could use on the crazed colonists instead of killing them, stuff like that every so often as well as more chances to avoid combat through diplomacy would be nice.

I have to politely disagree. I still haven't gotten around to playing Deus Ex, but Alpha Protocol was a terrible game, and I absolutely hated how Dishonored worked. If you wanted to gain "low chaos" for each and every mission, you had to avoid killing anyone and you were forced to take out main targets non-lethally. Why this was a problem? Virtually every single tool you had in the game was meant for killing. You had 100 different ways you could take an enemy down, and yet you were restricted to the same three ways. Absolutely terrible game design. I shouldn't be penalized and restricted in how I play just to get the "low chaos/good ending," especially when the studio and advertisements were promoting an assassin game all along. I'll only accept a ridiculous system like that if I have more non-lethal options in the game to actually use. I'm looking at you Dishonored 2.

 

The mission in ME1 with the tranquilizer grenades was a gimmick. Sure you weren't "killing" them, but the grenade worked the same way any other grenade did. It was actually irritating having to sit there and wait for the grenade icon to go off cooldown while enemies shoot at you. It would have been one thing if you could use melee to knock out enemies without killing them or if you had other weapons like a taser of some sort.

 

Moral of the story? If you are going to force players to use non-lethal means to take out enemies, give them multiple options to do it. Otherwise, you are merely just penalizing the player and making a frustrating experience if they want to achieve a different result.

[Revan Reborn]

Sorry, war.

 

Soldiers kill.  Sadly it's what they do.  And while they can distance themselves from the enemy (to an extent), they can't distance themselves from their friends and comrades-in-arms.  So yes, when a friend dies on the battlefield its 'FEEL'S', but when an enemy does, it's not.  If soldiers felt empathy for every single enemy, they would not be able to kill.  This is the way every single military conflict works.  The death toll has to become abstract for soldiers, and even more so for commanders who don't necessarily even step on the battlefield. 

 

The characters you play in every single ME/KOTOR and DA games are professional soldiers (either by trade like Shepard) or by the necessity.  They literally have tokill to survive and learn to distance themselves from empathizing with enemies. 

Do I think it's a good thing? No, I'd prefer life with no violence and conflict.  But do the games give (semi)-accurate description of the battlefield antics? Yes they do.  In DAO you only get to know the point of view of Loghain in detail, and suddenly, he can be sympathized with. 

 

I would think that picking up something like Grim Fandango or some other similar classic would be more towards what you are looking for.  But those are really not the games Bioware is known for.

I would never argue BioWare games even semi-accurately depict battlefield antics. War, for one is morally ambiguous, even if the government tries to tell you otherwise. You may have an "enemy" you are trying to neutralize, but these individuals have families and friends that you remove from the world, and there are always civilian casualties that get in the way and could actually be threats, like civilian women and children. There's also the fact that some of these enemies will use these civilians as shields in order to kill your side, whereas in BioWare games you rarely have to deal with that reality. I don't think anyone actually wants BioWare games to depict actual war. The last thing people will be asking for is for their characters to suffer from PTSD.

 

People just want to be Shepard and save the galaxy. They don't want to be a broken and shattered individual by the time the game closes.

[Almostfaceman]

The mission in ME1 with the tranquilizer grenades was a gimmick. Sure you weren't "killing" them, but the grenade worked the same way any other grenade did. It was actually irritating having to sit there and wait for the grenade icon to go off cooldown while enemies shoot at you. It would have been one thing if you could use melee to knock out enemies without killing them or if you had other weapons like a taser of some sort.

 

 

Just FYI you can, on the PC version, hit the R button once to throw the grenade then hit the R button again to make it explode, thus you don't have to wait for them to go off. Probably something similar on console, been forever since I played it on Xbox 360.

[Revan Reborn]

Just FYI you can, on the PC version, hit the R button once to throw the grenade then hit the R button again to make it explode, thus you don't have to wait for them to go off. Probably something similar on console, been forever since I played it on Xbox 360.

That's not what I'm referring to. Once the grenade discharges, you have to wait before you can throw another one (there is a cooldown). It would be one thing if I had other tools to take out enemies non-lethally. You do not. This makes this a terrible implementation and made the entire experience more of a chore than me making the "choice" to spare these individuals. I shouldn't have to sit in cover and wait five minutes for my grenades to come off cooldown just because the tranquilizer grenade missed one guy and I have to sit there until it resets. That's silly.

[Almostfaceman]

That's not what I'm referring to. Once the grenade discharges, you have to wait before you can throw another one (there is a cooldown). It would be one thing if I had other tools to take out enemies non-lethally. You do not. This makes this a terrible implementation and made the entire experience more of a chore than me making the "choice" to spare these individuals. I shouldn't have to sit in cover and wait five minutes for my grenades to come off cooldown just because the tranquilizer grenade missed one guy and I have to sit there until it resets. That's silly.

 

That's odd, I can throw them as fast as I want.