510 réponses à ce sujet

[Ending]

I wish we could have cookies in DA...and cake, more cake!

Don't worry m8 Sera has you covered on the cookie part. 

[papercut_ninja]

Don't worry m8 Sera has you covered on the cookie part. 

 

...and she will share some muffin too if you like...

[TennesseeTuxedo]

I very much agree with the OP.  The fiends in DAI are just not that scary or interesting.  

[tmp7704]

No, games are not rated PG-13, you're thinking of movies. I never said the game was supposed to be rated PG-13. It literally can't. It could be rated Teen. Sort of similar.

The PG-13 rating for games is named Teen, yes. It literally says that's games with content "for those aged 13 or older". So, what do we get out of it other than splitting hair over the name difference? That the content of this game was considered to exceed what's considered acceptable for the T rating. And so it got M.

If your point is now supposed to be the game doesn't deserve its M rating because this sort of stuff would be rated PG-13 if it was a movie, then I don't even. It has M rating as a game, not a movie; based on conditions used to rate game content. Movies and games are quite different in the end, if just due to the interactivity of the latter and the fact you'll rarely play one with "parental guidance".

[LarryDavid]

Just saw this as I just got home from work. So now you've come up with a new splendid analogy that is more appropriate for th e discussion. And yes, the variences on the toppings make sense in the proportions given, but there is only on that has the toppings equal, and that is when they are in the same amount. I'm not saying that is what the baker should choose, but buy the definition of equality, it would be where white chocolate and dark chocolate are produced in similar amounts.

But the choice ultimately remains with the baker. If he feels that it's worth making more with dark chocolate for whatever reason, then he is free to do so. Just as bioware is free to add in as much content for whatever group they feel like. In this way everyone has a chance of getting what topping they want for their cookies.

 

I can just as well say that there is only 1 case in which each costumer preference is proportionally represented in the topping. So by the definition of equality 90 percent of the topic should consists of WS.

 

'Equal' only has meaning when you compare two (or more) quantities. As long as there are different ways to 'quantize' a situation, 'equality' can't have an objective meaning and thus can't be used as an argument.

 

Of course the baker and Bioware should do whatever they pleases. However, their concept of equality nor their decision to act accordingly can ever be justified by saying that it IS what equality implies.

[LarryDavid]

Treating the consumer as equal would mean everyone got equal content, which would work very differently in the cookie analogy than in a game.

 

eg. 10 customer, 9 want white chocolate. The baker makes 9 white cookies, and one dark cookie. The 9 people each have their 1 white cookie each, the other gets their 1 dark cookie. Everyone gets the same amount of cookie they want.

 

eg. 10 customers, 9 want straight romances, 1 wants a gay romance. The writers write 9 straight romances, 1 gay romance. The 9 straight players now have a choice of 9 romances, but the one who wants a gay romance only has one option. Everyone does NOT get the same amount of content.

 

Sorry, it just really really really bugs me that this analogy does not work.... Besides nobody wants a dark cookie when they can have a white cookie. 

 

 

It is only from your point of view that treating consumers equally means they get equal content. My two sons consume my time and money, so does this mean that I can only treat my children equally when I spent the same amount of time and money on each of them? They are unfortunately too young at the moment, but suppose I buy a magnifying glass for my eldest son and a Large Hadron Collider model set for my youngest son. So, while I'm helping my youngest son build his LHC model my oldest son is running in the garden, maybe discovering why spiders are no insects. I definitively haven't divided time nor money equally over my sons but from my point of view I have treated them equally because their happiness is my concern. I want them both to be as happy as possible and an uneven distribution of resources is to no concern to me.

 

The word 'analogy' was kind of a translation error on my part. What I meant was that the cookie example is fundamentally the same as my previous example. It wasn't meant as a analogy for something DA specific. If you take the game as 1 cookie it can be I guess. Anyway, you forgot that there was the constraint that all cookies will have the same topping. There is of course no trade-off if you can give every costumer what (s)he wants.

 

For the situation at hand there are 3 major reasons why your concept of equality does not work for me

1) It is completely arbitrary because it depends on how you divide people in groups. You can state that there are people who want straight LIs and there are people who want non-straight LIs. According to your equality concept half of the LIs should be straight. You can also divide people in groups according to their preference to have LIs that are

- straight

- gay

- bisexual

- transsexual

Once again applying your definition of equality we now obtain that only 1 out of 4 LIs should be straight. That's a contradiction you can only avoid by adding an extra layer of subjectivity, i.e. you'll have to argue why there exist only 1 way to divide people in groups (for each situation).

2) You take numbers out the equation so everyone who wants something should get it, because the opposition, even if it is everyone else, only counts for as much. Application of your 'equality' means for instance that only half of the LIs should have a nose bone, that only half of the LIs should be fertile, ... .

3) It doesn't take into account how important or non-important something is for someone.
 

 

 

I'm one of the nobodies who prefers dark cookies over white cookies. When I was younger, you know, wild and not thinking about the future, I ate a lot of white cookies. It escalated at the university when I was all like "**** classes, I'm going to drink beer and eat white cookies all day long". But when I started to work and was forced to grow up I learned that the middle class in China is starting to be able to afford chocolate. Over a few years cacao bean production will not be able to follow the demand. It will be harder to obtain chocolate and it will become rather expensive. So I went all-in; no brown chocolate transition; immediately from white to dark chocolate. White chocolate is no real chocolate so when I reach my midlife crisis it will be waiting for me and I'll be ready to rebel, eat white cookies and feel young again. Anywayz, I would say; join me at the dark side before it is to late!

[Saphiron123]

Let's be honest, the contraversy facing dragon age is more about gay relationships and sexuality then about violence. In terms of violence and non-sexual matters dragon age inquisiton is very PC. There's your mature rating, it bothers Americans I guess.

I mean look at da2. The combat was solid (minus the annoying waves jumping down) and it was a slaughterhouse.

Kind of miss that... Inquisition is very sanitary in comparison. Like we're killing them with pillows.

[LinksOcarina]

I think people complaining about things like enemies exploding in geysers of gore as being very unrealistic has the less amounts of blood geysers to blame for that.

 

But again, we still get jarring blood splatters. At least for once its less ridiculous. 

[atlantico]

The PG-13 rating for games is named Teen, yes. 

No. And if I wanted to write Teen, I would have. 

 

Let's be honest, the contraversy facing dragon age is more about gay relationships and sexuality then about violence. In terms of violence and non-sexual matters dragon age inquisiton is very PC. There's your mature rating, it bothers Americans I guess.

I mean look at da2. The combat was solid (minus the annoying waves jumping down) and it was a slaughterhouse.

Kind of miss that... Inquisition is very sanitary in comparison. Like we're killing them with pillows.

 

The slight (optional thank the Maker) sexuality is definitely what earns this game an M. The rest is very tame. 

 

Without the sex, this would have been a T.

[tmp7704]

The slight (optional thank the Maker) sexuality is definitely what earns this game an M. The rest is very tame. 
 
Without the sex, this would have been a T.

Right, the language and violence had no effect on that rating whatsoever, and they were included in the summary merely for shits and giggles.

[atlantico]

Right, the language and violence had no effect on that rating whatsoever, and they were included in the summary merely for shits and giggles.

 

The summary included also that this was an RPG, do you think that had an affect on the M rating or merely there for shits and giggles? Or is the description of the game perhaps just a short summary of what it is.

[tmp7704]

The summary included also that this was an RPG, do you think that had an affect on the M rating or merely there for shits and giggles? Or is the description of the game perhaps just a short summary of what it is.

Considering "intense violence" and "strong language" are included in the content descriptors field of the certificate while "rpg" is not, I'm sure you can figure out the difference here, eventually.

[atlantico]

Considering "intense violence" and "strong language" are included in the content descriptors field of the certificate while "rpg" is not, I'm sure you can figure out the difference here, eventually.

 

Well, it claims things to be in the game, which are most certainly not found in the game, so either way, don't take this blurb as gospel.

[Blade_RJ]

Notice how much more PC the monsters are? 

Brood mothers were gross but at least they were compelling... there are no compelling, hideous, and gross monsters in DAI... maybe the thing in the fade, but one's not enough.

Darkspawn have gone from hideous monsters to tiny soldier variations.

Desire demons are just staples of the series... inclusive is fine, but the devs seem too quick to throw away the past of dragon age, like with the new qunari. The arishok was a scary dude, there's no way to replicate his look in the character creator, the eyes, the look aren't even an option.

Everyone is so bloody pretty.

 

i disagree in darkspawn, while i liked more the version from origins, they were simply orcs problably inspired by lord of the rings movies, but they visual was against the lore stabilished, then we got stupid skeletors in DA2, but now in DAI if you zoom on them you can see they match the description of the codexes....it almost make you pity them with the blank lifeless stare and the wretched skin,a shell of a person,even more so for gouls.

 

I think they went too japanese rpg for the new demons,

[tmp7704]

Well, it claims things to be in the game, which are most certainly not found in the game, so either way, don't take this blurb as gospel.

I take it as fairly accurate representation of what's in the game and what I personally encountered while playing it. As opposed to claims how it's "most certainly" not the case, given these claims come with nothing but rather ridiculous excuses to misinterpret what is there.

"Maybe it's not blood!" Maybe it's Maybelline.

[atlantico]

I take it as fairly accurate representation of what's in the game and what I personally encountered while playing it. 

 

Sure, that's a reasonable interpretation. That's in fact the purpose of the blurb. .... and then you go overboard and start reading into it what exactly cause the M rating. 

 

No. The blurb does not say which things in it caused the M rating. But sex is the answer.

[mutantspicy]

The darkest game from Bioware that I remember is Hordes of Underdark.  DAO was a bit darker than DAI but not by much.  DAO had some dark elements, but was full of silly also.  

 

Honorable Mention Jade Empire had the seriousness of DAI but with really twisted plot choices.  Not quite as twisted as HotU but way darker than DAO.

[tmp7704]

Sure, that's a reasonable interpretation. That's in fact the purpose of the blurb. .... and then you go overboard and start reading into it what exactly cause the M rating. 
 
No. The blurb does not say which things in it caused the M rating. But sex is the answer.

http://www.esrb.org/...tings_guide.jsp

MATURE

Content is generally suitable for ages 17 and up. May contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content and/or strong language.

http://www.esrb.org/...rtificate=33723

Content Descriptors: Blood, Intense Violence, Nudity, Sexual Content, Strong Language

http://www.esrb.org/ratings/faq.jsp#12

Do Content Descriptors list all of the different content found in a game or app?

Content Descriptors are not intended to be a listing of every type of content one might encounter in the course of playing a game or using an app. They are applied within the context of the product's overall content and relative to the Rating Category assigned, and are there to advise of content that may have triggered a particular rating and/or may be of interest or concern.

tl;dr: no, sex is not "the answer". It's merely another nonsensical excuse you'd rather cling to.

And with this, I'm done. Educate yourself on how the ratings actually work, keep on belieeeeeving or find another thread to troll, either way it's gotten way past too boring to continue.

[atlantico]

http://www.esrb.org/...tings_guide.jsp

 

Yes,: TEEN

Content is generally suitable for ages 13 and up. May contain violence, suggestive themes, crude humor, minimal blood, simulated gambling and/or infrequent use of strong language.

 

That describes DA:I to a t, except for the sex part. 

 

Violence: yep

Suggestive themes: .... no! it has SEX and gay sex and more than suggestive.

Crude humor: for sure

Minimal blood: oh yes, of the disappearing variety

Simulated gambling/infrequent strong language: sure, some fucks and shits, but sparely used and infrequently.

 

TEEN

 

But: sex so: M. 

 

Buh bye.

[Madrict]

Bring back Desire Demons with female and male forms based on character romance gender. If no romance is selected have them default to female.

[In Exile]

 

Yes,: TEEN

Content is generally suitable for ages 13 and up. May contain violence, suggestive themes, crude humor, minimal blood, simulated gambling and/or infrequent use of strong language.

 

That describes DA:I to a t, except for the sex part. 

 

Violence: yep

Suggestive themes: .... no! it has SEX and gay sex and more than suggestive.

Crude humor: for sure

Minimal blood: oh yes, of the disappearing variety

Simulated gambling/infrequent strong language: sure, some fucks and shits, but sparely used and infrequently.

 

TEEN

 

But: sex so: M. 

 

Buh bye.

 

 

But this is idiotic. You don't need to show any of these things to write a mature storyline. And having all of them - even having incredible torture porn level gore - doesn't mean something is mature. Saw isn't mature. 

[Saphiron123]

You have to admit inquisition is much happier and fluffier then origins or da2. We see almost zero impact from the war, almost no blood or dead, very few dark moments.

Inquisition is very toned down. They even took out the blood splatter.

[In Exile]

You have to admit inquisition is much happier and fluffier then origins or da2. We see almost zero impact from the war, almost no blood or dead, very few dark moments.

Inquisition is very toned down. They even took out the blood splatter.

The only thing I think one cay say about DA:I is that it's less explicit in some parts than DA:O. I don't think that makes it less dark, especially when the darkest moment of DA:O - by far - is centered around things not being explicitly said. But that's a YMMV I suppose. 

[MACharlie1]

While I do miss more Darkspawn and Brood Mothers - the setting doesn't fit right now. We aren't in a Blight therefore we shouldn't be seeing these guys be an actual threat until it pertains to the story. And I think with the connections going on with Lyrium and the Elves and Gods we will be seeing more of them soon enough.

 

As for Desire Demons...yeah. I don't know why these guys never showed up once. Maybe they'd have a combat set too similar to Despair? Hopping around and all that? Still wouldn't hurt to see some and not Ishmael taking on OTHER demonic forms...

[Saphiron123]

While I do miss more Darkspawn and Brood Mothers - the setting doesn't fit right now. We aren't in a Blight therefore we shouldn't be seeing these guys be an actual threat until it pertains to the story. And I think with the connections going on with Lyrium and the Elves and Gods we will be seeing more of them soon enough.

 

As for Desire Demons...yeah. I don't know why these guys never showed up once. Maybe they'd have a combat set too similar to Despair? Hopping around and all that? Still wouldn't hurt to see some and not Ishmael taking on OTHER demonic forms...

A big part of it was DAI was so recycled, no unique demons really. And the mage templar war had a few burning buildings but we never saw the impact of the war. Origins had refugees, guys having from trees in the kocori wilds, and yeah, the broodmother was brutal, even just being implied. Since we only saw the wilds, we were totally removed from the actual war.

They also didn't use cinematics at all, I mean I have no idea what despair demon actually looks like because you never get a closeup. DAO and DA2 presented their content far better.