645 réponses à ce sujet

[Elhanan]

One sided views and revisionist factoids, as well as the current social love for redacting history is likely to send mankind back a step or two in the realm of education.

As for DAI, the DLC appears to be setting up a future title with quite a bit of lore. Much like Legacy DLC led to DAI, both JoH and Descent appear to be helping springboard the next DLC and/ or game.

[Heimdall]

I'm sorry, but calling the Catholic Church "one of the few bastions of culture and learning in Medieval Europe" is either sarcasm or not knowing history.
As it turns out, they had some of the best artists working for them (since they had the money)... But...

This is the institution that kept (through punishment of excommunication - if you were lucky, torture and death otherwise) the western civilizations from advancing from the ridiculous ideas of the universe, world, anatomy, sickness, geology, seismology, etc. that were the norm back then.
(Incidentally, inquisition belonged to the middle ages - starting in 12th century, while witch hunts started a bit later.)

The church - especially back then - had institutionalized hatred of anything not of their liking, bigotry, ignorance and a complete disrespect of women.
The few kind priests that helped people do not offset what the church's dogma and doctrines were, and how much pain and death they've brought to the human race over the centuries - through institutionalized dogmas and doctrines and politics, not as some indirect side effect.

Reading and owning the Bible in any language but Latin (once the flock were finally permitted to read the Bible, because for centuries, the Church only allowed the "flock" to listen to the priests, they weren't allowed to read for themselves) was punishable by burnings and (again) death.
Sir Thomas More was responsible for organizing thousands and thousands of burnings (murders) of english men and women who owned the Bible in English.
This is a historical fact. It is also highly likely he was torturing "heretics" in his own house (!) - which btw, he admitted to (keeping them imprisoned, saying he tortured only several... which makes it okay, I guess).
The same Thomas More was canonised in the 1930s as a martyr and declared the "heavenly patron of statesmen and politicians" in 2000 - long after everybody knew what a disgusting human being More actually was.

Please.
I have written essays on this, I could go on for hours and hours.
When I hear how the Catholic church was a bastion of knowledge, it makes me want to puke.
(even today, ask Africa how church's teachings that "AIDS is bad, but condoms are worse" is working out in Africa...)

My point is....
I have no intention in trying to delve into what the church in DA:I is trying to be or wants to be, etc.
TBH, I found the whole story and the world rather shallow and childish - for reasons I've described multiple times, from a cardboard world to no children in it, etc.
But CDPR is basing their Church of Eternal Fire on the Catholic Church of medieval Europe.

There is nothing gray about the Catholic Church of medieval ages. It was the world's most powerful organization (still is), based on ignorance and hatred, and brought about so much pain, death and misery that I'm honestly not sure why they'd be portrayed as anything other than evil.
(now this might sound harsh, but it just might be the best word to describe medieval religious institutions)

Friend, you are exposing your ignorance. You aren't the only one who's written essays on the matter. Historically speaking, the medieval church was the only institution in Europe that funded and supported scholarly work for centuries. They weren't holding knowledge back they were one of the few things keeping what fragments there were of classical knowledge alive. That the church has always been an opponent of science and advancement is largely a myth built off two incidence: Galileo and Darwin, but even then there were major religious figures on both sides of those debates. Until the past century, the Church also offered the only form of social relief people in Europe had access to. Yes, there were inquisitions and crusades, but those were not the totality of the church's impact on Europe and in many cases they were localized or short lived.

[Corto81]

Friend, you are exposing your ignorance. You aren't the only one who's written essays on the matter. Historically speaking, the medieval church was the only institution in Europe that funded and supported scholarly work for centuries. They weren't holding knowledge back they were one of the few things keeping what fragments there were of classical knowledge alive. That the church has always been an opponent of science and advancement is largely a myth built off two incidence: Galileo and Darwin, but even then there were major religious figures on both sides of those debates. Until the past century, the Church also offered the only form of social relief people in Europe had access to. Yes, there were inquisitions and crusades, but those were not the totality of the church's impact on Europe and in many cases they were localized or short lived.

 

Wait. You think the Catholic church was funding and supporting science?

They funded universities, yes. But never to actually promote science and advancement.

Which form of science would that be, that wasn't clashing with religion - as almost all natural science is? You do realize alll the thinkers like Thomas Aquinas, Albert Magnus etc. were almost exclusively Catholic priests and functioneers?

No theory that clashed with religious beliefs was allowed to stand.

They funded "scholars", not scientists.

 

And you think that the church being an opponent of science and advancement is a myth based of two examples? I mean, I don't even know what to tell you.
Disregarding that the church battled heavily against stuff like Copernicus' heliocentrism, do you know who Giordano Bruno is?

Michael Servetus? Even philosophers or reformers who didn't share the Church's view, like Jan Hus or John Wycliffe?

That's not taking into account theories opposed and books burned, from Copernicus' Heliocentrism onwards.

[Queen Skadi]

I'm sorry, but calling the Catholic Church "one of the few bastions of culture and learning in Medieval Europe" is either sarcasm or not knowing history.

As it turns out, they had some of the best artists working for them (since they had the money)... But...

 

This is the institution that kept (through punishment of excommunication - if you were lucky, torture and death otherwise) the western civilizations from advancing from the ridiculous ideas of the universe, world, anatomy, sickness, geology, seismology, etc. that were the norm back then.

(Incidentally, inquisition belonged to the middle ages - starting in 12th century, while witch hunts started a bit later.)

 

The church - especially back then - had institutionalized hatred of anything not of their liking, bigotry, ignorance and a complete disrespect of women.

The few kind priests that helped people do not offset what the church's dogma and doctrines were, and how much pain and death they've brought to the human race over the centuries - through institutionalized dogmas and doctrines and politics, not as some indirect side effect.

 

Reading and owning the Bible in any language but Latin (once the flock were finally permitted to read the Bible, because for centuries, the Church only allowed the "flock" to listen to the priests, they weren't allowed to read for themselves) was punishable by burnings and (again) death.
Sir Thomas More was responsible for organizing thousands and thousands of burnings (murders) of english men and women who owned the Bible in English.
This is a historical fact. It is also highly likely he was torturing "heretics" in his own house (!) - which btw, he admitted to (keeping them imprisoned, saying he tortured only several... which makes it okay, I guess).

The same Thomas More was canonised in the 1930s as a martyr and declared the "heavenly patron of statesmen and politicians" in 2000 - long after everybody knew what a disgusting human being More actually was.

 

Please.

I have written essays on this, I could go on for hours and hours.
When I hear how the Catholic church was a bastion of knowledge, it makes me want to puke.

(even today, ask Africa how church's teachings that "AIDS is bad, but condoms are worse" is working out in Africa...)

 

My point is....

I have no intention in trying to delve into what the church in DA:I is trying to be or wants to be, etc.

TBH, I found the whole story and the world rather shallow and childish - for reasons I've described multiple times, from a cardboard world to no children in it, etc.

But CDPR is basing their Church of Eternal Fire on the Catholic Church of medieval Europe.

 

There is nothing gray about the Catholic Church of medieval ages. It was the world's most powerful organization (still is), based on ignorance and hatred, and brought about so much pain, death and misery that I'm honestly not sure why they'd be portrayed as anything other than evil.

(now this might sound harsh, but it just might be the best word to describe medieval religious institutions)

 

Don't bother Corto, you might as well be talking to a brick wall, I would not be surprised to see your post miraculously disappear as the moderators can be pretty liberal with what they define as "offensive language".

 

It is a one sided argument where only those with a favorable outlook on the church are permitted while those with a dissenting view will be censored.

[Queen Skadi]

They weren't holding knowledge back they were one of the few things keeping what fragments there were of classical knowledge alive.

 

Yeah, classical knowledge such as the world is flat, magnets are the work of the devil and if you present any information or evidence that contradicts what is said in the bible you get burned at the stake?

[Heimdall]

Yeah, classical knowledge such as the world is flat, magnets are the work of the devil and if you present any information or evidence that contradicts what is said in the bible you get burned at the stake?

Thank you for demonstrating your ignorance by relying on erroneous myths of the Middle Ages. For starters, almost nobody believed the earth was flat and the church never took issue with the idea of it being round.

[X Equestris]

Yeah, classical knowledge such as the world is flat, magnets are the work of the devil and if you present any information or evidence that contradicts what is said in the bible you get burned at the stake?

A number of classical thinkers believed the world was round, and by Columbus' day even the simplest sailor figured the world was round.

I'm going to need a source for that magnet thing. I've never even heard that one before. And neither of these things is stated in the Bible, so no contradictions.

[Queen Skadi]

A number of classical thinkers believed the world was round, and by Columbus' day even the simplest sailor figured the world was round.

I'm going to need a source for that magnet thing. I've never even heard that one before. And neither of these things is stated in the Bible, so no contradictions.

 

It wasn't meant to be taken as a literal example, just a jab at the sort of "classical information" the church would consider worth saving. I am not going to bother with a detailed explanation because odds are it will just get deleted by the moderators.

[Giantdeathrobot]

It wasn't meant to be taken as a literal example, just a jab at the sort of "classical information" the church would consider worth saving. I am not going to bother with a detailed explanation because odds are it will just get deleted by the moderators.

 

AKA I got no idea what I'm talking about, so I'm going to play the victim in order to hide my lack of knowledge on the topic.

[X Equestris]

It wasn't meant to be taken as a literal example, just a jab at the sort of "classical information" the church would consider worth saving. I am not going to bother with a detailed explanation because odds are it will just get deleted by the moderators.

Why am I not surprised by this answer?

[Heimdall]

Wait. You think the Catholic church was funding and supporting science?
They funded universities, yes. But never to actually promote science and advancement.
Which form of science would that be, that wasn't clashing with religion - as almost all natural science is? You do realize alll the thinkers like Thomas Aquinas, Albert Magnus etc. were almost exclusively Catholic priests and functioneers?
No theory that clashed with religious beliefs was allowed to stand.
They funded "scholars", not scientists.

And you think that the church being an opponent of science and advancement is a myth based of two examples? I mean, I don't even know what to tell you.
Disregarding that the church battled heavily against stuff like Copernicus' heliocentrism, do you know who Giordano Bruno is?
Michael Servetus? Even philosophers or reformers who didn't share the Church's view, like Jan Hus or John Wycliffe?
That's not taking into account theories opposed and books burned, from Copernicus' Heliocentrism onwards.

The did support science, such as it existed at the time. They also funded astronomers and encouraged the founding of the world's first medical school in Salerno, which started as a dispensary of a local monastery. In regards to Copernicus, he actually had support from the church at the time. The Pope expressed interest in his ideas and a Cardinal wrote to him encouraging him to publish. Obviously some opinions have differed through the years but that's why it's important not to view the church as a monolithic whole. And I'm afraid your wrong, the idea that natural sciences are innately incompatible with religion didn't become popular until the nineteenth century. Many religious minded thinkers saw natural science as the exploration of God's creation, not a contradiction of God.

My point is not that the Church has always supported all ideas, simply that it's record isn't what you make it out to be.

All of this is straying somewhat from the origin of this conversation, that is to say the medieval church. The examples you mentioned belong to the Renaissance period or later, around the time witch burnings became popular (Prior to that period, the official stance of the church was that witches were baseless superstition and witchcraft did not exist).

[Corto81]

Thank you for demonstrating your ignorance by relying on erroneous myths of the Middle Ages. For starters, almost nobody believed the earth was flat and the church never took issue with the idea of it being round.

 

Hm. D'Ascoli was burnt alive in the 14th (or 15th) century for saying the Earth was round and that there were people on the other side of the Earth.

But yes, it was fairly early accepted that the Earth, was indeed, round.

 

Anyway, they did fight the heliocentric system. 

They did fight evolution (they still do).

They said disease was caused by sin and mental illness by demons.

They banned dissection for centuries and relied on the pseudo-medicine like with Aquinas. They fought (still do) innoculation and vaccination. 

Contraception etc.

Honestly, believing in something is fine... But going on about how the church was good for human race throughout history is just a bit silly.

[Heimdall]

Hm. D'Ascoli was burnt alive in the 14th (or 15th) century for saying the Earth was round and that there were people on the other side of the Earth.
But yes, it was fairly early accepted that the Earth, was indeed, round.

I haven't heard of him, but Google tells me he was an astrologer, not an astronomer and he was condemned for trying to determine the nativity of Christ by reading his horoscope. A bizarre charge, but not related to the roundness of the earth.

Anyway, they did fight the heliocentric system.
They did fight evolution (they still do).
They said disease was caused by sin and mental illness by demons.
They banned dissection for centuries and relied on the pseudo-medicine like with Aquinas. They fought (still do) innoculation and vaccination.
Contraception etc.
Honestly, believing in something is fine... But going on about how the church was good for human race throughout history is just a bit silly.

Did I ever make that argument? And you're doing exactly what I cautioned you against doing, treating the church as a monolithic entity removed from history and chronological context.

[Corto81]

All of this is straying somewhat from the origin of this conversation, that is to say the medieval church. The examples you mentioned belong to the Renaissance period or later, around the time witch burnings became popular (Prior to that period, the official stance of the church was that witches were baseless superstition and witchcraft did not exist).

 

Middle ages were from the 5th-15h century.

Renaissance was from the 14th-17th. It was the bridge between medieval (middle age) and modern history.

Witch hunts started in the 15th century, around 1450. 
Witch hunts were primarily linked with the later period, but they started, and were present, in the middle ages.

 

As for the above post, I'm not sure what your point is.

That the church did some good? Sure it did.

But it was minute compared to the horror, pain, torture and death it caused.

And more importantly, its doctrines and dogmas caused it, not single priests or local abbeys.

[Heimdall]

Middle ages were from the 5th-15h century.
Renaissance was from the 14th-17th. It was the bridge between medieval (middle age) and modern history.
Witch hunts started in the 15th century, around 1450.
Witch hunts were primarily linked with the later period, but they started, and were present, in the middle ages.

As for the above post, I'm not sure what your point is.
That the church did some good? Sure it did.
But it was minute compared to the horror, pain, torture and death it caused.
And more importantly, its doctrines and dogmas caused it, not single priests or local abbeys.

They happened in the late period, but my point in making that comment was that the church is not a static institution, it's stances and beliefs change through time.

I seriously doubt you can prove that all the good the church has done is inconsequential compared to the bad that has been emphasized in modern media and myths of the Middle Ages. My issue is that you've been attempting to portray the church as an altogether evil organization using ahistorical reasoning. That you don't like current and some past stances of the church does not wipe away centuries of good work that has gone alongside the bad, centuries of providing education, charity, and supporting academia and study.

I'm not dismissing the bad, but you're dismissing the good and exaggerating the bad where it suits you.

[Elhanan]

While I am not aware of what the religious state is for the TW series, am quite pleased that Bioware examined the fantastical concepts of a monotheistic church (ie; The Maker), a polytheistic belief (ie; Elven pantheon), and other beliefs (eg; the Stone, Old gods, cults, etc). Generally this was done trying to illustrate a complete examination of these beliefs, having both good and bad examples of events and believers.

Personally am enjoying the DAI DLC for detailing even more of this; hope it is also used in the next title.

[Kabraxal]

While I am not aware of what the religious state is for the TW series, am quite pleased that Bioware examined the fantastical concepts of a monotheistic church (ie; The Maker), a polytheistic belief (ie; Elven pantheon), and other beliefs (eg; the Stone, Old gods, cults, etc). Generally this was done trying to illustrate a complete examination of these beliefs, having both good and bad examples of events and believers.

Personally am enjoying the DAI DLC for detailing even more of this; hope it is also used in the next title.

And this is one of the reasons I love DA:I... it has managed to tackle religion, faith, spirituality, historical accuracy/revisionism, and how people react to all of it with great enough care they have managed to keep the choice alive of what the player believes.  Usually, when a game or any story tackles these ideas, the writers' bias become clear quite early and there are almost always "this is stupid thinking and this is how rational people think!" moments.  

 

DA:I goes out of its way to let the player decide these matters and it is refreshing.  Especially playing a Tal Vashoth Andrastian and going straight into a an Elven pragmatist that is less keen on worshipping any god, just studying each with a rather cynical eye.

[AedanStarfang]

On this subject recently I got through Novigrad.  Or been getting through Novigrad, almost about ready to jump ship and head onto Skellige...after I finish Descent of course.  This whole area is the one thing that has really made me fall in love with the game and the character writing is stellar.  BUT, on the subject of one (yet another thing) that DA I does better then the Witcher is...its portryal of religion.  The writing, which has been varying from very good to down right amazing, has really fallen off a cliff when it comes to the flame of the eternal fire.  Just horrible, horrible writing.  Some of the worse portryals of religion, and indeed anything, I have ever seen in fiction.  COmpare that to the deep, varied, nuisanced, 'gray' Chantry, and it does not even hold a candle.  

Uh...no...not really.  At least not to me.  I mean now that you raise the point I am even more confused with him then I was with Krem.  To me this guy barely even qualifies as a transvestite considering he just occasionally likes dressing up as women.  From time to time.  For a gag.  He is perfectly able to dress up as a man as well.  

It's called cross-dressing or tranvestitism, some people do it because it is fetish or a kink or other psychological factors involved. I presume we are not shaming those people now too? 

[Maeshone]

There are some things this game does better than The Witcher 3 in my opinion as a huge fan of both. The biggest, and most obvious to me, is the environments we visit in Dragon Age. W3 has a beautifully realised world that feels expansive and large, but it's very samey. Which, of course, is logical, as it takes place in an area that is heavily influenced by the Baltic states/Poland and Scandinavia. On the other end of the spectrum, we have DAI, which has zones spread out across all of southern Thedas, and that means we get a much larger variety of environments to explore. In my book, that's a better deal, as I live in Scandinavia and see landscapes like the ones in W3 pretty much daily

 

The second thing is payoff to the romances. W3 has 2 great romances, with 2 great characters in Yen and Triss. But after Novigrad and Skellige the romance storyline kind of just... goes away, and comes back with some small cutscenes nearer to the end. I felt that DAI had romances that paced with the main story better, and I always had something new to discuss with the characters I romanced after I finished a big event.

 

Obviously, both of these are my personal opinions, and YMMV.

[Scofield]

Dragon Age does the only thing right that really matters to me when i sit to game, i enjoy it an have a good laugh

 

The Witcher series does not do that for me, its unfortunate but well i cant expect myself to sit an enjoy every game i pick up, hopefully when the company behind the witcher games move on to something different i can try that out an enjoy it, having more games i enjoy is always a good thing

[Dread-Reaper]

Dragon Age does the only thing right that really matters to me when i sit to game, i enjoy it an have a good laugh

 

The Witcher series does not do that for me, its unfortunate but well i cant expect myself to sit an enjoy every game i pick up, hopefully when the company behind the witcher games move on to something different i can try that out an enjoy it, having more games i enjoy is always a good thing

There next game is Cyberpunk 2077, it's suppose to have CC and maybe open-world. 

[Giantdeathrobot]

 

They funded universities, yes. But never to actually promote science and advancement.

 

 

Waitwaitwait, let me get this straight.

 

The Church, as you said, funded universities; indeed, often it recognized estalished centers of learning and funded them a lot (Université de Paris being a prime example). This set the stage for the academic culture that persists to this day, Western universities easily ranking among the very best in the world and producing many of the greatest minds humanity ever had.

 

And to you, this is not promoting science and advancement?

 

Nor is the fact that Catholic monks enabled ancient Greek and Roman texts to survive to the present day by copying and studying them in a day and age where no one else gave a toss about what Plato wrote a thousand years ago?

 

Or how several prominent Catholic figures went on to become influencial theologian, jurists or philosophers, like Aquinas and Isidore de Séville?

 

Sorry, but you seem to be just as dogmatic as the religions you denounce. There is no way anyone who is informed about the period thinks that the Church was this bastion of obscurantism and mental servitude that you depict.

 

And to get back on topic, even if it was (and I'm saying it wasn't), it doesn't mean that depicting the faux-Catholic Church in your game as a one-dimentional pack of cruel, literal mustache-twirling zealots is good writing. Especially when you pride yourself on creating a world where grey morality is supposed to reign. This is easily one of TW3's biggest failing as I saw it. Even TW1 avoided this pitfall by having Siegfried serve as the token good guy among the Order of the Flaming Rose. And Dragon Age rises far above by depicting religion with much more depth than The Witcher ever did.

[Queen Skadi]

To be honest it is very hard to take the claims of good the church has done seriously, while I am sure the church has probably done some good it is far outweighed by the bad and even the good gets called into question due to the church's tendency to skew facts in the church's favor and even publish outright fabrications. There are so many examples of the church trying to censor facts (often through violent means) that do not align with it's superstitions, so many examples of the church standing in the way of medical science and research into cures for preventable illnesses it is very hard to take claims that the church was instrumental in the spread of science and knowledge seriously, sure they may have founded universities but one does have to question the motive? Was it because of a genuine desire to spread knowledge and understand the laws of the universe or did they have other motives in mind, in any case I am pretty sure the spread of science and knowledge happened mostly in spite of religion.

 

Looking at the great minds of the renaissance one has to wonder were these people actually religious or was it merely something they went along with in order to survive? Look at the roof of the Sistine chapel for instance, the scene depicting the creation of Adam with god existing inside what looks like a giant floating brain, of course now that it has been discovered the theists will tell you it represents "god gifting Adam with divine knowledge" but to me it seems to infer that god is a construct of the mind.

 

Even today it seems religious groups are the biggest obstacle to the sharing and pursuit of knowledge as they fight tooth and nail to keep evolution out of the classroom and replace it with the faux-scientific study of creationism, they push for stem cell research to be outlawed and even today are still trying to skew the facts of history, I have seen people claim that Albert Einstein was a christian and even a massive push to attribute Hitler to atheism which is just absurd given how outspoken he was about being a roman catholic.

[Paul E Dangerously]

even a massive push to attribute Hitler to atheism which is just absurd given how outspoken he was about being a roman catholic.

 

Welp, close the thread. Someone invoked the Nazis, we're done. I will also avoid the requisite fedora tipping joke these arguments tend to lead to. Or I'll try, at least.

 

The problem with this is in fact, history. Hitler was a Roman Catholic, but he fell out of it after a while. He kind of flip-flops as politicians are wont to do, but he did distance himself a lot and began to push more atheistic views after he rose to power and didn't need to worry about the power of the churches. It's a complicated thing - as real people are - and it isn't easy to boil it down like that.

 

Now, as far as the topic itself goes: The Witcher 2 port. Yes, CDPR didn't release it for a bit shy of a year on the 360, but dear sweet God is it like night and day compared to what we got with DAI. No, it isn't as pretty as the PC version. But it still looks damned good, runs well, and has the entire experience that the PC version does.

[Corto81]

 

 

The problem with this is in fact, history. Hitler was a Roman Catholic, but he fell out of it after a while. He kind of flip-flops as politicians are wont to do, but he did distance himself a lot and began to push more atheistic views after he rose to power and didn't need to worry about the power of the churches. It's a complicated thing - as real people are - and it isn't easy to boil it down like that.

 

Hitler's own beliefs are neither confirmed, nor relevant. Whether he was catholic, atheist or had reportedly northern pagan beliefs, matters little.

(mind you, in Mein Kampf Hitler says his work against the Jews is directed to him by the almighty God)

 

What is important is that Catholic doctrine was to accuse the Jews collectively of deicide, and it was official and valid all the way up to 1964,

giving a massive pool of anti-Jewish hatred to any and all who wanted to use it for fascist purposes all over Europe.

What is important that the Church went out of its way to cater to these fascist leaders, making their first political contract with Hitler (exchanging control over education for dissolving their party and giving Hitler less competition in the elections), making a contract with Mussolini, celebrating Hitler's birthday, etc.

I mean, the church even had a priest at the had of one of the Nazi puppet states in Slovakia (father Tiso).

 

...

 

Now, we can move any serious talk about religion to another forum (if it's even allowed, most forums consider it a tabu topic as it riles up emotions),

but my entire point was that CDPR portrayed their Church of Eternal FIre like the Catholic Church of medieval Europe, and that it suited the grim and "real" world of slavic-based Witcher universe.