15897 réponses à ce sujet

[o Ventus]

Lol yes 1500 3v3 S12 git on mah level scrubbins.

 

 

Ok I was never a fan of the way they talk but I did my best imitation.

 

I think I have like 150 days played in WoW across 10 years and many characters, pretty sure that qualifies as playing the game I talk about.

 

I used to follow Ghostcrawler's twitter when he was a designer on Cataclysm and Pandaria and discussing all these things (he's now at Riot for LoL by the way).

 

More on topic DA2 was utterly copied from WoW around the same time, with no deviations whatsoever, TW has a modicum of originality to it. DA:O was half strength Infinity Engine game, DA:I split the difference.

 

150 days played, yet you said that they abandoned the hotkey-based design in favor for something like Dark Souls. Anybody with even a passing knowledge of WoW knows that this isn't true. WoW's combat has been the same since literally forever, and it is not even remotely like Dark Souls. It's still based on hotkeys and managing cooldowns and global cooldowns like it always has been. It's statements like that that make me question your credentials.

 

Also, 1500 in 3v3's is a dreadful rating. I'm pretty sure that was a satirical comment, but even an idiot who brags about his arena ranking knows not to brag about his rank when his rank is ****.

 

And how exactly is DA2 in any way similar to WoW? 

[FlipFee]

Yennefer looks outstanding, I love the outfit too.

[Seraphim24]

150 days played, yet you said that they abandoned the hotkey-based design in favor for something like Dark Souls. Anybody with even a passing knowledge of WoW knows that this isn't true. WoW's combat has been the same since literally forever, and it is not even remotely like Dark Souls. It's still based on hotkeys and managing cooldowns and global cooldowns like it always has been.

 

And how exactly is DA2 in any way similar to WoW? 

 

Of course it's not Dark Souls, they changed tanks to have timing based moves in WoD, so you can use an absorb but once every 6 seconds (about how often you would put up a shield in a typical Souls fight if you were going with that kind of build), they were aiming to make moves more reactive and timing based as opposed to just the barrage of continuous damage and spam healing that predominated in Wrath and also Cataclysm to a degree.

 

Obviously it's still a hotkey system and therefore quite different from Demon Souls, but you'll also notice in things like Deadmines and stuff they were increasingly making an effort to put in platforming elements and stuff, they were straining, in essence, to make it more of an action game.

 

DA2 (All the DAs actually) has the trinity system from WoW that is in every dungeon or raid, it's tank, healer, dps.

[herkles]

could the discussion about stats and game mechanics be taken to anohter thread, particularly as you are discussing games that are neither the witcher or dragon age?

[Seraphim24]

could the discussion about stats and game mechanics be taken to anohter thread, particularly as you are discussing games that are neither the witcher or dragon age?

 

We are discussing DA, DA is the WoW trinity system, TW is an action hybrid RPG thing.

 

We've been discussing whether action games or stat games are the way to go in the first place, I said action games are more challenging generally than stats which are always just kind of reducible down to max the best ones.

[o Ventus]

 

I mean WoW was the model for DA2 basically and even WoW barely has stats anymore, they converted their MMO hotkey design into something approximating a heavy action game (like the Souls seris) which is probably more stat heavy than DA otherwise.

 

 

Of course it's not Dark Souls, they changed tanks to have timing based moves in WoD, so you can use an absorb but once every 6 seconds (about how often you would put up a shield in a typical Souls fight if you were going with that kind of build), they were aiming to make moves more reactive and timing based as opposed to just the barrage of continuous damage and spam healing that predominated in Wrath and also Cataclysm to a degree.

 

Obviously it's still a hotkey system and therefore quite different from Demon Souls, but you'll also notice in things like Deadmines and stuff they were increasingly making an effort to put in platforming elements and stuff, they were straining, in essence, to make it more of an action game.

 

DA2 (All the DAs actually) has the trinity system from WoW that is in every dungeon or raid, it's tank, healer, dps.

 

So is it like Souls, or is it not? You just backpeddled and contradicted yourself.

 

And those changes to tanking were to promote what Blizzard calls active mitigation, originating with Death Knights in WotLK. Prior to them, tanking was very passive. It has nothing to do with Souls. Souls combat is entirely real-time.

 

And there isn't any platforming in the Deadmines. Like, at all. I can't think of any 5-mans that feature platforming to any degree, actually. Platforming has only become prominent with Warlords of Draenor and the removal of flight at the max level, to promote ground exploration.

 

DA has never been built around the "holy trinity" of healer, DPS, and tank. You CAN play it that way (as with any RPG), but I would strongly hesitate to say that it was DESIGNED that way. The only character at all capable of really being a "healer" in DA2 was Anders, and that's if he specced properly. Otherwise he's just a mage who has a healing spell (and if that's all it takes for him to be a healer, then my Death Knight in WoW is a healer because he can heal too with the right talents and glyphs). But what does this have to do with DA2 being influenced by WoW? The trinity design has existed for far longer than WoW has.

[Seraphim24]

So is it like Souls, or is it not? You just backpeddled and contradicted yourself.

 

And those changes to tanking were to promote what Blizzard calls active mitigation, originating with Death Knights in WotLK. Prior to them, tanking was very passive. It has nothing to do with Souls. Souls combat is entirely real-time.

 

And there isn't any platforming in the Deadmines. Like, at all. I can't think of any 5-mans that feature platforming to any degree, actually. Platforming has only become prominent with Warlords of Draenor and the removal of flight at the max level, to promote ground exploration.

 

DA has never been built around the "holy trinity" of healer, DPS, and tank. You CAN play it that way (as with any RPG), but I would strongly hesitate to say that it was DESIGNED that way. The only character at all capable of really being a "healer" in DA2 was Anders, and that's if he specced properly. Otherwise he's just a mage who has a healing spell (and if that's all it takes for him to be a healer, then my Death Knight in WoW is a healer because he can heal too with the right talents and glyphs). But what does this have to do with DA2 being influenced by WoW? The trinity design has existed for far longer than WoW has.

 

I'm pretty sure you could jump over the laser beams at the 3/4 mark in Deadmines, but to be honest the better term of would just been "action oriented." You were moving to avoid the objects. I thought of platforming because they remind me of the rotating fire beams from any Mario game. A better example is something like oh lets say the first boss in the Temple dungeon where you have to jump over the water stream. (at least in heroic or something)

 

The trinity system was refined in WoW, it existed in probably Wizard 4 for all I know, but many of these things were before my time, and DA didn't noticeable change anything about that formula.

 

Also I don't know how to characterize shifting from "passive" to "active" mitigation as anything other than a shift from more passive to more real time action, sure it's not identical, but it's in the same spirit. I didn't bring up the comparison to say they were functionally identical or separate, I said it was in that spirit.

 

TW avoids all of this rigamarole simply by having an actual dodge mechanic for example, which is beyond anything in either DA or most of WoW in terms of reactivity, although WoW is complicated by all the mage blink moves and Warlock transport circles etc etc.

[Wyvernet]

I know this topic is probably over, but I feel like I should say something about domestic abuse. In my very personal opinion, morally grey characters who are assassins, mercenaries or dispassionate rulers are different to domestic abusers and rapists. One, we very rarely encounter in real life and the other, we can encounter in real life quite often. That's why people get so hyped up about this issue.

 

Now I am one of those people who has never played Witcher and yet is lurking on this thread. For reasons unknown. Maybe because this thread is moving so fast. Therefore this point is not addressed necessarily at the Witcher games but for people defending sympathetic portrayals of domestic abusers. So I don't know what exactly happened with the Baron and his wife (and because the game is new, the wiki hasn't updated yet).

 

Nonetheless, I argue that representing domestic abusers in a sympathetic light in media can be harmful, because we see way too many sympathetic portrayals of them already. Way too often we see on the news, or in the comment sections of news articles, 'oh he says he's sorry he won't do it again' and 'I don't know the exact details but she probably deserved it' and 'it was her fault, she should've left'. Some of the responses in this thread are starting to look like that. Video games, like any form of media, can have some influence over attitudes and beliefs. And while the redemption arc of a morally grey assassin probably has little impact, sympathetic representations of domestic abusers can possibly alter perceptions of real life abuse. Therefore, I believe that it would be better to not portray characters who are domestic abusers as sympathetic, whether these characters are males or females. Morally grey characters, and sympathetic portrayals of morally grey characters, would be better suited to issues that are less controversial in real life.

 

Also, feminism is never about solely victimising women. It's about gender equality. It's also about getting rid of ridiculous notions of masculinity and femininity so that male victims of abuse can be taken more seriously. 

 

About the lack of personality of the Inquisitor, I think Bioware was focusing more on people who create headcanons. While in Origins, you were aware of your characters life and motivations ('Arl Howe killed my family so I'm going to find him and shove a sword up his ass'), in Inquisition you can make up your character's past to explain their motivations ('I love my Dalish clan so I will do anything to protect them' or 'I didn't have many friends in my clan so it is a relief to find somewhere I belong'). This meant that people who didn't really do headcanons for their characters (like me) found the Inquisitor kind of bland and lacking in personality. Hopefully this is something they will rectify in the next game.

[TobyJake]

This is sort of on-topic!

PC Concerns topic was shut down mainly because the contributors mostly moved to Witcher 3. And there was a lot of discussion about W3 vs DAI,

No profanity or EA crucifying, just talking about W3. Evidently it is not a safe topic for BW forums.

[Seraphim24]

I know this topic is probably over, but I feel like I should say something about domestic abuse. In my very personal opinion, morally grey characters who are assassins, mercenaries or dispassionate rulers are different to domestic abusers and rapists. One, we very rarely encounter in real life and the other, we can encounter in real life quite often. That's why people get so hyped up about this issue.

 

Now I am one of those people who has never played Witcher and yet is lurking on this thread. For reasons unknown. Maybe because this thread is moving so fast. Therefore this point is not addressed necessarily at the Witcher games but for people defending sympathetic portrayals of domestic abusers. So I don't know what exactly happened with the Baron and his wife (and because the game is new, the wiki hasn't updated yet).

 

Nonetheless, I argue that representing domestic abusers in a sympathetic light in media can be harmful, because we see way too many sympathetic portrayals of them already. Way too often we see on the news, or in the comment sections of news articles, 'oh he says he's sorry he won't do it again' and 'I don't know the exact details but she probably deserved it' and 'it was her fault, she should've left'. Some of the responses in this thread are starting to look like that. Video games, like any form of media, can have some influence over attitudes and beliefs. And while the redemption arc of a morally grey assassin probably has little impact, sympathetic representations of domestic abusers can possibly alter perceptions of real life abuse. Therefore, I believe that it would be better to not portray characters who are domestic abusers as sympathetic, whether these characters are males or females. Morally grey characters, and sympathetic portrayals of morally grey characters, would be better suited to issues that are less controversial in real life.

 

Also, feminism is never about solely victimising women. It's about gender equality. It's also about getting rid of ridiculous notions of masculinity and femininity so that male victims of abuse can be taken more seriously. 

 

About the lack of personality of the Inquisitor, I think Bioware was focusing more on people who create headcanons. While in Origins, you were aware of your characters life and motivations ('Arl Howe killed my family so I'm going to find him and shove a sword up his ass'), in Inquisition you can make up your character's past to explain their motivations ('I love my Dalish clan so I will do anything to protect them' or 'I didn't have many friends in my clan so it is a relief to find somewhere I belong'). This meant that people who didn't really do headcanons for their characters (like me) found the Inquisitor kind of bland and lacking in personality. Hopefully this is something they will rectify in the next game.

 

No ones going to be unhappy if you go about an earlier topic, I personally don't have much to say, all I have to say is domestic violence/hitting people is so obviously wrong so I don't really have anything to add to that discussion personally. If anyone hits another person like at all, that person is deeply in the wrong period, context is utterly irrelevant.

[TheOgre]

-skip-

 

I didn't portray him in any positive light. It's never good to just label something by the way without understanding the cause of it. Researchers today still seek to answer "why" when looking at cases of abuse. Words can sting just as much as a punch at that. They were both venomous people and negativity feeds off negativity.

[Wyvernet]

I didn't portray him in any positive light. It's never good to just label something by the way without understanding the cause of it. Researchers today still seek to answer "why" when looking at cases of abuse. Words can sting just as much as a punch at that. They were both venomous people and negativity feeds off negativity.

 

I am very much aware of the research that goes into domestic abuse, such as determining the causes of domestic abuse, determining why abusers and individuals at risk of being abused are often attracted to each other, and finding out the effects of physical abuse vs. verbal abuse vs. social exclusion. That was not the point I'm trying to make. I was trying to say (in a very long-winded way) that sympathetic portrayals of domestic abuse in media are dangerous because media can very much alter our perceptions on domestic abuse. We can already see that in the dismissal of claims against popular sporting stars and actors.

 

Also, media is where the majority of people get their information from. Not many people find joy out of reading scientific journal articles that require special access or $20 to read.

 

Other people have expressed concerns about the portrayal of the Baron, and I feel that the company can easily address that, and ensure that that their subsequent portrayals of morally grey characters and choices are less controversial, without sacrificing much.

[Zinho73]

I know this topic is probably over, but I feel like I should say something about domestic abuse. In my very personal opinion, morally grey characters who are assassins, mercenaries or dispassionate rulers are different to domestic abusers and rapists. One, we very rarely encounter in real life and the other, we can encounter in real life quite often. That's why people get so hyped up about this issue.

 

Now I am one of those people who has never played Witcher and yet is lurking on this thread. For reasons unknown. Maybe because this thread is moving so fast. Therefore this point is not addressed necessarily at the Witcher games but for people defending sympathetic portrayals of domestic abusers. So I don't know what exactly happened with the Baron and his wife (and because the game is new, the wiki hasn't updated yet).

 

Nonetheless, I argue that representing domestic abusers in a sympathetic light in media can be harmful, because we see way too many sympathetic portrayals of them already. Way too often we see on the news, or in the comment sections of news articles, 'oh he says he's sorry he won't do it again' and 'I don't know the exact details but she probably deserved it' and 'it was her fault, she should've left'. Some of the responses in this thread are starting to look like that. Video games, like any form of media, can have some influence over attitudes and beliefs. And while the redemption arc of a morally grey assassin probably has little impact, sympathetic representations of domestic abusers can possibly alter perceptions of real life abuse. Therefore, I believe that it would be better to not portray characters who are domestic abusers as sympathetic, whether these characters are males or females. Morally grey characters, and sympathetic portrayals of morally grey characters, would be better suited to issues that are less controversial in real life.

 

Also, feminism is never about solely victimising women. It's about gender equality. It's also about getting rid of ridiculous notions of masculinity and femininity so that male victims of abuse can be taken more seriously. 

 

About the lack of personality of the Inquisitor, I think Bioware was focusing more on people who create headcanons. While in Origins, you were aware of your characters life and motivations ('Arl Howe killed my family so I'm going to find him and shove a sword up his ass'), in Inquisition you can make up your character's past to explain their motivations ('I love my Dalish clan so I will do anything to protect them' or 'I didn't have many friends in my clan so it is a relief to find somewhere I belong'). This meant that people who didn't really do headcanons for their characters (like me) found the Inquisitor kind of bland and lacking in personality. Hopefully this is something they will rectify in the next game.

TW 3 presents more an opportunity to understand the character motivations.

 

It is not that he is seen in a good light. It is more that he is not alone in his villainy and we got a glimpse of what may have moved him towards a dark path. It is not just the guy that is twisted, it is the whole situation.

[TheOgre]

I am very much aware of the research that goes into domestic abuse, such as determining the causes of domestic abuse, determining why abusers and individuals at risk of being abused are often attracted to each other, and finding out the effects of physical abuse vs. verbal abuse vs. social exclusion. That was not the point I'm trying to make. I was trying to say (in a very long-winded way) that sympathetic portrayals of domestic abuse in media are dangerous because media can very much alter our perceptions on domestic abuse. We can already see that in the dismissal of claims against popular sporting stars and actors.

 

Also, media is where the majority of people get their information from. Not many people find joy out of reading scientific journal articles that require special access or $20 to read.

 

Other people have expressed concerns about the portrayal of the Baron, and I feel that the company can easily address that, and ensure that that their subsequent portrayals of morally grey characters and choices are less controversial, without sacrificing much.

 

I'd honestly much prefer their controversial story telling to a more censored mess. Slippery slopes are funny. "Without sacrificing much" can lead to sacrificing too much for some people.

[KBomb]

I am very much aware of the research that goes into domestic abuse, such as determining the causes of domestic abuse, determining why abusers and individuals at risk of being abused are often attracted to each other, and finding out the effects of physical abuse vs. verbal abuse vs. social exclusion. That was not the point I'm trying to make. I was trying to say (in a very long-winded way) that sympathetic portrayals of domestic abuse in media are dangerous because media can very much alter our perceptions on domestic abuse. We can already see that in the dismissal of claims against popular sporting stars and actors.

Also, media is where the majority of people get their information from. Not many people find joy out of reading scientific journal articles that require special access or $20 to read.



Other people have expressed concerns about the portrayal of the Baron, and I feel that the company can easily address that, and ensure that that their subsequent portrayals of morally grey characters and choices are less controversial, without sacrificing much.

The game simply tells the story of the Baron, Anna and their daughter. It doesn't imply or convey that the Baron is sympathetic character. The story simply tells you what happened. It is left to the player to decide if you want Geralt to use empathy in the situation or contempt. Throughout the mission you can tell the Baron how vile he is and how it's his fault.

[Laughing_Man]

Bloody Baron. *snip*

 

To start with, I wanted to point out that it seems that your great sensitivity to the topic of domestic abuse does not stop you from writing:

"oh he says he's sorry he won't do it again" - as the example for a situation of abuse, when of course there are plenty of female abusers and abused males that are ashamed to admit it.

 

Stinks of extreme feminism, the kind that speaks of gender equality but has a rather different meaning for the word "equality".

 

But that's not the issue. As others said, the game does not protect the BB, it simply tells you a story, that thankfully isn't flat.

It leaves you thinking instead of beating you on the head with the "correct" answer.

 

You want the the story with clear lines of morality, all in black and white?

I'm sure someone in Bioware will be very happy to write a preachy story on just about any "social justice" hot topic.

 

Myself, I like my stories adult rated, both when it comes to morality, sexuality, violence, and any other similar issues.

 

Edit:

 

Regarding the line: "Also, feminism is never about solely victimizing women. It's about gender equality. It's also about getting rid of ridiculous notions of masculinity and femininity so that male victims of abuse can be taken more seriously."

 

Feminism means different things to different feminists, and certainly to people from outside the group.

 

"Saving males from themselves" and from "ridiculous notions of masculinity" is the kind of approach that is doomed to failure,

because it usually comes with an extra helping of arrogance and a condescending attitude.

 

As I see it, feminism wants to help feminists first, and I don't really have a problem with it.

Just don't tell me that feminism is all about helping males.

[Steelcan]

what did people think of the crones when you encountered them?

I thought that there isn't nearly enough napalm in the world to cleanse that place

[Steelcan]

People who don't play The Witched really should refrain from talking about how CDPR should handle delicate subjects.

Anyone who thinks the Bloody Baron was portrayed intentionally sympathetic clearly hasn't been paying attention, nor does it preclude the ability for the player, and by extension Geralt, from realizing that the Baron has also suffered at the hands of his wife, and not in any "she burned the pot roast" kind of way. She tried to kill him, after cuckolding him for years, on top of that she constantly mocks and belittles a man with deep seated insecurities, alcoholism, and so on.

Obviously none of that excuses continued physical abuse (I'll cut him some slack when Anna tried to you know, kill him)

[o Ventus]

 

Also, feminism is never about solely victimising women. It's about gender equality. It's also about getting rid of ridiculous notions of masculinity and femininity so that male victims of abuse can be taken more seriously. 

 

Heheh, that's a good one. I needed a laugh.

[Wyvernet]

Thanks for assuming that I am some extremist who despises men. That was really amusing. I feel like a lot of confusion could be be solved if some of you bothered to Google the definition of 'feminism'. I used male pronouns because the most high profile cases in the news are about men, usually celebrities, committing domestic abuse against women, and because I'm trying to relate it to your responses to what happened in the game. If you'd like, I'd comment on how annoyed I am by how female on male violence is often portrayed as a joke, even in recent films such as Wreck It Ralph. Though I imagine this may go over some of your heads because of your ignorance of the definition of feminism. I don't know where a lot of you are based, but I live in Australia and literally everyone I know - teachers, friends and many television personalities - identifies as feminist.

 

I'll stop commenting on this thread it you'd prefer. I only commented because I was seriously disturbed by some of the responses on this topic. The only reason I'm still responding is to clarify my points. I don't know how the Witcher handled domestic abuse, and I am aware now that their intention was not to be sympathetic to the abuser, but I know how you guys here seem to handle it. A fairly large portion of you seem to sympathise with the abuser's predicament, and this is fine when the situation is fictional and you know everything about the situation. However, when real life abuse happens, sympathy towards the abuser also occurs, even when not all the details are known. The responses in this thread are eerily similar to responses to real life domestic abuse cases ('they were both at fault' and 'she cheated on him') and that was the point I was trying to comment on.

 

I can believe that the Witcher handled this subject in a sensitive way. I, however, do not believe its players are capable of handling this subject, judging by the comments I currently see on this topic. 

 

This is why portrayals of such sensitive subjects, in my opinion, should not be in video games. There are so many other morally grey situations to explore in works of fantasy fiction: a ruler starving their subjects in order to wage war, vigilante fighters, assassins, sacrificing loved ones to save a nation.

[AlanC9]

People typically don't come to these boards to avoid confusion, you know. People come to state their POV. Some POVs require adding more confusion rather than taking it away.

I'm not quite sure which side of that line you're falling on. Are games different than other media, or are gamers uniquely sensitive consumers who need to be protected from this material?

[Grieving Natashina]

Fellow feminist and may I ask: Why are you taking a minority of TW3 fans (the ones that will post online,) a minority of that, (TW fans on the BSN,) and an even smaller minority still as a reflection of an entire fan base?  While a few of the response have been a little questionable imho, I haven't seen anyone defend an abuser, whether it's male on female or vice versa.  They may have different stances on the character, but let's not assume that with all the TW fans on the forums.  Enough of that, please.

 

 I've been reading throughout the whole time, and never once did I hear a player post, "It was totally awesome the way that <female character> was pushed around!"  Mostly, I've read, "It felt good to save her and I stomped the people that hurt/kidnapped/whatever."  Whether or not you consider that condoning abuse is up to you, but I sure don't.  

 

I can understand why some of the poster responses make you uncomfortable.  It hasn't always been a pleasant read, but one thing I've found: Someone's enjoyment or preference in a game does not reflect who they are in life.  I am the first to say video games can affect the way we think, but sometimes a game is just a game.  Sometimes, how a person plays their game isn't a reflection of who they are.  It's called roleplaying.   Sometimes, what a person likes in a story is just that.  

 

 I understand that feminism and the portrayal of women in media does need work, but to be frank this is getting off topic.  I'm not reading the thread to watch two fanbases debate about feminism and abuse.  May we just push that stuff aside and focus more on the game play?  This isn't the place for it, and I would rather not see this get locked.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

I thought that there isn't nearly enough napalm in the world to cleanse that place

Would Chlorine Triflouride do the trick?

[Hazegurl]

I know this topic is probably over, but I feel like I should say something about domestic abuse. In my very personal opinion, morally grey characters who are assassins, mercenaries or dispassionate rulers are different to domestic abusers and rapists. One, we very rarely encounter in real life and the other, we can encounter in real life quite often. That's why people get so hyped up about this issue.

 

 

I don't understand this argument.  So because we can encounter abusers more often than assassins, abusers shouldn't be portrayed in the media as having no other qualities other than "evil"?  or just not be portrayed at all?

 

Now I am one of those people who has never played Witcher and yet is lurking on this thread. For reasons unknown. Maybe because this thread is moving so fast. Therefore this point is not addressed necessarily at the Witcher games but for people defending sympathetic portrayals of domestic abusers. So I don't know what exactly happened with the Baron and his wife (and because the game is new, the wiki hasn't updated yet).

 

I can't take anything else you have to say about the Baron quest seriously.  Why judge when you've never experienced the story?
 

 

Nonetheless, I argue that representing domestic abusers in a sympathetic light in media can be harmful, because we see way too many sympathetic portrayals of them already.

 

Slippery slope much. 

 

This argument is just as ridiculous as the claim that video games make people violent.  Also, no one in this thread is saying she deserved to get hit but that she was also an abuser within the relationship.  Verbal and mental abuse does exist. Should he have hit her? NO!  Should she berate him? NO!  Both parties were in the wrong and the only innocent party was their daughter.  But you wouldn't know that because you didn't play the game.