126 réponses à ce sujet

[KaiserShep]

It's not so much a matter of the morality, but rather that there's a clear imbalance in terms of the conflict presented to the player when comparing all of these characters.

[ThreeF]

Well, Sera goes a long way in that direction though. Although with her, it's more "immature" than "bad", imo, with a weird helping of "surprisingly wise" sprinkled in (= good, interesting!). But I'm still pining for the likes of Jack, or, from my recent playthrough of NWN: HotU, Nathyrra. =(

And yeah, looks is one among many other relevant things, such as character, character development/story etc., and can also be subject to criticism. Which I share for a large part, btw.

 

I'm still pining for Valen, obviously not his looks and character development, but that voice oozed sexy and was extremely well done.

 

 

Blackwall's a total fraud that you have to bust out of prison in order to keep around.

He also speaks like religious fanatic, remains for the most of the game as one dimensional knight  in shiny armour and could be your granpa. Not to mention that many seems to not be very fond of him leaving the IQ after the sex and the kiss scene at his trial.

 

I mean you can find negative and undesirable traits in every single one of the options.

[Terodil]

It's not so much a matter of the morality, but rather that there's a clear imbalance in terms of the conflict presented to the player when comparing all of these characters.

Eh, since you insist, now I have to ask.

What is the structural/systematic difference between a plot element that dis/pleases and a graphical design element that dis/pleases? Because apparently there is such a huge difference that one is allowed to be un/happy with one but not with the other, and I don't see it.

[BobZilla84]

Harding & Dagna thats what I would want in a Romance DLC make it happen Bioware.

I liked Tallis more than both Isabella & Merrill in DA2 so not gonna comment on that topic.

I personally loved both Cassandra & Josiephine but I still wish Vivienne would have been a option seeing how we have had a female Mage LI in every game since Origins "Morrigan,Merrill".

[Panda]

Eh, since you insist, now I have to ask.

What is the structural/systematic difference between a plot element that dis/pleases and a graphical design element that dis/pleases? Because apparently there is such a huge difference that one is allowed to be un/happy with one but not with the other, and I don't see it.

 

The way things are presented and justification behind them.

[Terodil]

The way things are presented and justification behind them.

No.

You are trying to shoehorn morality into stuff that is not inherently good or evil. Aesthetics is not good or evil. "Justification" is not required for anything to do with art. You are trying to turn aesthetic decisions and evaluations into a moral battlefield, and that I will not accept.

[Panda]

No.

You are trying to shoehorn morality into stuff that is not inherently good or evil. Aesthetics is not good or evil. "Justification" is not required for anything to do with art. You are trying to turn aesthetic decisions into a moral battlefield, and that I will not accept.

 

Nope.

 

Not liking sexual kink or behaviour that's seen morally wrong aka lying about your identity and being wanted murderer isn't same than claiming some facial feature makes women ugly, undesirable and even makes them man.

[papercut_ninja]

No.

You are trying to shoehorn morality into stuff that is not inherently good or evil. Aesthetics is not good or evil. "Justification" is not required for anything to do with art. You are trying to turn aesthetic decisions and evaluations into a moral battlefield, and that I will not accept.

 

Stating that straight females were treated worse because their romance options were aesthetically unpleasing is inherently wrong, because it implies that someone can speak for all straight females...neither do those people who complain about Cassandra and Josephine speak for all straight males, and when they act like it by stating that BW made them "unattractive" on purpose to punish heterosexual males, they will get called out on that bs and hopefully return to the manosphere on reddit...

[ThreeF]

As I wrote in a similiar thread, I'd rather see DLC that expanded on the existing romances instead of introducing new ones. None of the options appealed to me, there simply wasn't "my type" among them. Neither straight, bi or gay matters in that case... what I am looking for is an actual relationship and not 4 conversations, 3 cutscenes and 2 conversations/banter from the companions after. There's not enough content in any romance. Things don't change.

 

Why is your LI not moving into your chambers? Why do they never surprise you with anything? Why do you always have to initiate everything? Why does nothing change?

 

Oh... and the IB romance? BioWare -really- needs to get some writers who know what they are writing about. Holy crap, this is almost as wrong as 50 Shades of Grey.

 

Although my main beef with the DA:I romances might simply be that I can't related to any of the NPCs in game, because they are all so... meh. I don't know.

 

I agree with many things you write here, it would be a pity if the romance was ignored in a DLC, it's already feels weird in post game. I do feel however that DAI did made some huge improvements in many aspects of romance. For one it attempted to create separate feel for each character depending on their personality. Cullen's romance is the only one that I've tested from many angles and while there are not many unique to romance dialogues/cutscenes, the way it integrates into the story and his personal quest makes his romance an evolving relationship, a relationship that can be played from a happy one  to a tragic one, there is pretty good range there. Considering that he is basically someone who is stuck behind a desk, that's pretty good evolution.

 

I also personally feel that there is no need for LI to move into your bedroom, they are all independent individuals. Heck it would be creepy if my boyfriend would be constantly found in my bedroom in a very 'get a life, dude' way

 

 

Aesthetics is not good or evil.

 

Actually, many will disagree....The link between aesthetics and morality  is a subject as old as humanity and not something that started to get noted only recently, it always existed, can't avoid it.

[Terodil]

Nope.
 
Not liking sexual kink or behaviour that's seen morally wrong aka lying about your identity and being wanted murderer isn't same than claiming some facial feature makes women ugly, undesirable and even makes them man.

I'd never have thought that I'd have to say this: Are you aware that you are playing a game, i.e. a product of art? Everything, plot, looks, character design, with no exception, is a result of an artistic decision. Remember that little blurb every movie has somewhere in the credits: "All characters are fictional, and any resemblance..."?

To answer my own question from above:
 

What is the structural/systematic difference between a plot element that dis/pleases and a graphical design element that dis/pleases?

There is no difference.

You can like or dislike as a matter of taste (= aesthetics), but morality does not come into it.

I'm so tired of people instigating morality wars. Live and let live, a good motto both in the fictional and in the real world.

[Terodil]

Actually, many will disagree....The link between aesthetics and morality  is a subject as old as humanity and not something that started to get noted only recently, it always existed, can't avoid it.

That is true. I had thought/hoped that we had left this way of thinking in the past, where it belongs. It shocks me to see where the world is headed with religious battles fought to the death over art, I would never have expected this 10 years ago (maybe I was naive).

Even more reason to take a stand for the separation of morality and aesthetics.

[Panda]

I'd never have thought that I'd have to say this: Are you aware that you are playing a game, i.e. a product of art? Everything, plot, looks, character design, with no exception, is a result of an artistic decision. Remember that little blurb every movie has somewhere in the credits: "All characters are fictional, and any resemblance..."?

To answer my own question from above:
 

There is no difference.

You can like or dislike as a matter of taste (= aesthetics), but morality does not come into it.

I'm so tired of people instigating morality wars. Live and let live, a good motto both in the fictional and in the real world.

 

Morals are always involved in everything. Art in any forms is always open for critism and also used way of study society as well so I don't know what you are trying to say here.

 

People saying that it's wrong for women to have short hair, scars, moles etc. translates a lot to real world and their views of women there as well unless people have personality disorder. I'm not talking about making different kind of characters but talking here on forums from your own viewpoint that isn't your characters but yours. Unless you RP in forums.

[ThreeF]

Even more reason to take a stand for the separation of morality and aesthetics.

Heh, good luck with that. These two things are inherently connected, you can choose to disengage on  personal level, but they will never be separated.  And in fact by choosing to disengage on  personal level in a way you take a moral stand. So, yes, complex.

[Terodil]

Morals are always involved in everything. Art in any forms is always open for critism and also used way of study society as well so I don't know what you are trying to say here.

Criticism of art must be based on aesthetics, not morality. Otherwise we'll end up burning books again pretty soon. Oh wait, that is already happening.
 

People saying that it's wrong for women to have short hair, scars, moles etc. translates a lot to real world and their views of women there as well unless people have personality disorder.

Oh god, that dinosaur paradigm of abusing art to force cultural change. I wish it'd finally disappear in that black pit it crawled out of.

Besides, saying just that ("it's wrong for women to have short hair"), which you rightly cricise, is stupid, because it's a moral statement. Which is just the reason why I'm trying to keep morality out of it. Saying: "I don't like her hair" has no moral context, no imperative in the likes of "wimmens, grow your hair or you won't be loved", and is based solely on an individual understanding of aesthetics.

[Terodil]

Heh, good luck with that. These two things are inherently connected, you can choose to disengage on  personal level, but they will never be separated.  And if fact by choosing to disengage on  personal level in a way you take a moral stand. So, yes, complex.

I would go so far as to say that they must be separated if we want to survive as a species.

[Panda]

Criticism of art must be based on aesthetics, not morality. Otherwise we'll end up burning books again pretty soon.
 

Oh god, that dinosaur paradigm of abusing art to force cultural change. I wish it'd finally disappear in that black pit it crawled out of.

Besides, saying just that ("it's wrong for women to have short hair"), which you rightly cricise, is stupid, because it's a moral statement. Which is just the reason why I'm trying to keep morality out of it. Saying: "I don't like her hair" has no moral context, no imperative in the likes of "wimmens, grow your hair or you won't be loved", and is based solely on an individual understanding of aesthetics.

 

No it must be based on morality. Have you heard about critism that 50 shades of grey has got. It's critism straight about morality.

 

I'm social science student and different art forms are used in my studies a lot. But art was used a lot during my highschool days as well since art usually says a lot about it's artists and world it's artists lives in.

[KaiserShep]

I thought 50 Shades of Grey was criticized for just being poorly written shlock with some cornball ideas about BDSM. Well, that and its origins as sh**ty Twilight fanfic.

[ThreeF]

I would go so far as to say that they must be separated if we want to survive as a species.

It would take for art to separate itself from culture.

 

 

I thought 50 Shades of Grey was criticized for just being poorly written shlock with some cornball ideas about BDSM. Well, that and its origins as sh**ty Twilight fanfic.

I'm under this impression too.

[Terodil]

I'm social science student and different art forms are used in my studies a lot. But art was used a lot during my highschool days as well since art usually says a lot about it's artists and world it's artists lives in.

Oh yes, I suspected that you were a social "science" student. And I know the currently predominant paradigms. However, I do think you should be aware of where your train of thought goes. Keyword: "degenerate art".

[turuzzusapatuttu]

- Leliana:

If she isn't in a relationship with the warden: why not? It would be especially interesting if they made a little twist, depending if she had been hardened or not.

 

[DaemionMoadrin]

I agree with many things you write here, it would be a pity if the romance was ignored in a DLC, it's already feels weird in post game. I do feel however that DAI did made some huge improvements in many aspects of romance. For one it attempted to create separate feel for each character depending on their personality. Cullen's romance is the only one that I've tested from many angles and while there are not many unique to romance dialogues/cutscenes, the way it integrates into the story and his personal quest makes his romance an evolving relationship, a relationship that can be played from a happy one  to a tragic one, there is pretty good range there. Considering that he is basically someone who is stuck behind a desk, that's pretty good evolution.

 

I also personally feel that there is no need for LI to move into your bedroom, they are all independent individuals. Heck it would be creepy if my boyfriend would be constantly found in my bedroom in a very 'get a life, dude' way

 

That was just an example. What I don't like about the LIs is that they are all so passive. Why can't a cutscene start once I return to Skyhold in which my LI welcomes me back? Or invites me to a drink? Or gives me a small present?

Why isn't any LI seeking me out on their own, because they miss me?

 

I still have no idea why the companions and LIs don't get proper rooms to live in btw.

 

Blackwall sleeps in the hay inside the stable.

Cassandra sleeps above the forge, with only a blanket between her and the floor.

Solas doesn't even have a bed and he spends his time watched at from above.

Cullen's room lacks a roof.

Iron Bull's room has a hole in the roof, too.

Josephine's office doesn't have a bed.

Dorian has a comfy chair in the library. No bed.

Sera annexed a corner of the tavern and made it her own.

 

Vivienne got a good spot... for exhibitionists.

Cole... no room.

Varric... no room either.

Leliana sleeps in the rookery, next to the statue of Andraste?

 

And I've got this beautiful room with a large bed. Why wouldn't I want my LI to move in with me? Except for Sera none have better accomodations.

 

 

*sees a dozen new posts while writing this*

Guys, art is subjective and morals are a construct of society. Of course they don't mesh well.

[Mushashi7]

I'd like to romance Celene

 

 

 

 

[ThreeF]

<good post but snip because space>

 

Oh I'm actually a bit miffed that the IQ is not very proactive, I mean when in Cullen's romance IQ actually touched his cheek I thought "whoa, progress!" because for the most part there is no touching, most annoying moment being when he almost collapses and IQ just casually strolls toward her acting spot with a blank face.

 

But yes it would be awesome if the character would initiate things more, but there are baby steps there too. Again speaking only of Cullen's romance, he asks you to go with him for a trip and gives you a present, is worrying about you before the final battle and hugs you after it. I would still like more, because it makes the interactions more natural. And really it doesn't need to be confined just in romance setting. Feeling part of the story is probably the most important thing to me, without it I rather go and read a book (less repetitive combat and better plot too)

[Panda]

Oh yes, I suspected that you were a social "science" student. And I know the currently predominant paradigms. However, I do think you should be aware of where your train of thought goes. Keyword: "degenerate art".

<snip>

 

Umm no XD

 

People live within society and because of that, especially in commercial art like video games, morals are in display a lot. It's important to critism things that aren't good for society and people living in it, things that promote morally wrong things like 50 Shades of Grey and Blurred Lines by Robin Thicke for example. Moral critism is always important.

 

What you are talking about is limiting freedom of expression. Of cource morals can limit it as well but it's good for people and you have lot of space to move within morals too. The thing you are talking about and that picture is some political view or religious one trying to push their morals to people and limit their freedom which is wrong of cource.

[DaemionMoadrin]

Umm no XD

 

People live within society and because of that, especially in commercial art like video games, morals are in display a lot. It's important to critism things that aren't good for society and people living in it, things that promote morally wrong things like 50 Shades of Grey and Blurred Lines by Robin Thicke for example. Moral critism is always important.

 

What you are talking about is limiting freedom of expression. Of cource morals can limit it as well but it's good for people and you have lot of space to move within morals too. The thing you are talking about and that picture is some political view or religious one trying to push their morals to people and limit their freedom which is wrong of cource.

 

Morals are neither good or bad. They just are.

 

In our society morals are often based on tradition, religion and similiar doctrines. What is good and right morality for our society might be completely alien to another.

 

For example, there are still countries where women have very limited rights. Arranged marriages, strict rules for behaviour, forbidden from driving, voting or protesting...  to us westerners that's morally wrong. It isn't right. But for someone who grew up in such a society, it's the way things are and there is nothing morally wrong for a man to beat his wife when she's disobedient. Most women in such a society will even agree with him.

His friends, neighbours and colleagues will still see him as an upstanding citizen with strong morals, even if in our eyes he's abusing his power.

 

Applying morals to art is... iffy. Let's say I write a novel, featuring a strong, female and lesbian protagonist who defies tradition and wreaks chaos while advancing her own agenda. Our society might applaud that and middle eastern society might call it morally deviant.

 

Let's take your example of 50 Shades of Grey. I dislike it because it paints a wrong picture of BDSM, ignores practices like SSC/RACK and makes a lot of people try out being kinky without having any experience with it. Which can be quite dangerous. Is that morally wrong? Nope. It's just stupid. And everyone who thinks that's how things work and tries to copy it themselves is stupid, too. But those people aren't immoral.

 

There are lots of works that are questionable. There are many which are racist, discriminatory or otherwise problematic. The thing is... no one is forced to consume it. It would be morally wrong to forbid people from publishing their stupid ideas.

It's another matter entirely if consumption of this problematic art was inevitable or mandatory. For example... ads during high profile shows or events. Or endorsment of those ideas by influential people. Or, worst case, being put into the mandatory text books for schools.

That is morally wrong.

 

But art itself? Never is. At most it's bad, stupid and offensive. Which says a lot about the artist and their morals but that's as far as I would go.