3411 réponses à ce sujet

[Former_Fiend]

 

But there are other words that do. They may be few, but they still exist and thus the swear words are not needed. 

 

Thank you for the respect though. The feeling is mutual, minus the "don't like you much at all" at bit.

 

But yeah, I disagree with both of those examples. Jack's character would have worked just as well without the swearing and Cassandra could have said any number of non-swears with equal results. 

 

In this case, something that is absolutely needed. 

Yes, I have seen those movies. Or at least parts of them.

 

 

Called it. And yeah, you and I just aren't going to see eye to eye on this. I think Jack's foul mouth is an essential part of her character, and I think that Cassandra's line is the most efficient and powerful way to have gotten her point and her character across. 

 

Far as not liking you - I say this with no intended disrespect and in hopes that you can  use it towards self improvement, I think you're too prone towards expressing self pity on these forums when complaining about not getting the things you want. I know that's part of what I respect about you; that refusal to compromise, but I think you play the victim a little much.

 

Like I said, I mean no disrespect from that. Just an honest appraisal. 

[AlanC9]

But there are other words that do. They may be few, but they still exist and thus the swear words are not needed.

Is "needed" a sensible criterion in the first place? I don't see why we're even talking about this.

[LinksOcarina]

 

Tone is a major part of a story, and this could affect tone considerably.

 

Let's take a look at another major developer; Rockstar.

 

Rockstar's Grand Theft Auto V is one of the highest selling games of all time. Last I checked it's sold more than all of Bioware's games put together, at least the ones that numbers are available for.

 

It contains a scene where you torture an innocent man for information. The scene is brutal, disturbing, and graphic. It's also entirely unskippable, and is one of the only missions in the entire game that can't be skipped - though the skippable ones are such as an anti-frustration feature due to difficulty, not content.

 

Why the scene was included is a matter of some debate. A lot of people think it was included just for shock value. I'm of the camp that thinks it was there as part of Rockstar's social commentary on government/police abuse and brutality, and on the horror and ultimate pointlessness of torture.

 

Whatever the case, Rockstar made the choice to include the scene and make it unskippable because they felt that having that scene be skippable wasn't true to the story they were telling. 

 

Now obviously, Bioware isn't aiming at the same audience that a GTA game is aimed at. But the core of it is the same; they want to tell a story, and they want that story to have a certain tone. And foul language can have a major impact in setting the tone for a scene. It can be a subtle impact, but a major one.

 

John McClane waking down the streets of Harlem in Die Hard With a Vengeance wearing a sign that says "I hate everybody!", as it is often edited to on tv, has a completely different tone and meaning compared to him walking down the streets of Harlem wearing a sign that says "I hate n*****!" Hell, John McClane saying "Yippie-kye-yay motherf*cker!" carries a tone that is ruined by the dozens of TV alternate lines such as "my friend!" or the worst one, "Mr. Falcon!"

 

But you are also missing the point, which brings me back to my original question.

 

If it's an optional aspect of the game, and you choose not to put a filter on it, why do you care if others do that? Does their tone of the story affect the tone of your story that way?

 

This is always the sort of question that is still perplexing in the end. If the argument is again, pulling punching on scenes that can happen, then you may have a point, but BioWare is not going to do that, it's not feasible unless they tone it down completely before release without such a filter.

 

So I fail to see why your argument of tone is relevant to the actual question, if it's optional, how does it really affect you when you have the option to say no?

 

I guess I am not seeing where the panic is setting in.

[dreamgazer]

Is "needed" a sensible criterion in the first place? I don't see why we're even talking about this.

Adding the word "please" to a request is technically never needed.

[AresKeith]

I'm still trying to figure out what a "monkey-fighting snake" is.

 

Worse than mother trucker

[Former_Fiend]

But you are also missing the point, which brings me back to my original question.

 

If it's an optional aspect of the game, and you choose not to put a filter on it, why do you care if others do that? Does their tone of the story affect the tone of your story that way?

 

This is always the sort of question that is still perplexing in the end. If the argument is again, pulling punching on scenes that can happen, then you may have a point, but BioWare is not going to do that, it's not feasible unless they tone it down completely before release without such a filter.

 

So I fail to see why your argument of tone is relevant to the actual question, if it's optional, how does it really affect you when you have the option to say no?

 

And you're missing my point, which is that how it affects me, personally, is not at all relevant to whether or not the feature should be included.

 

I'm not arguing from my personal preference. I'm arguing from a writer's perspective. As a writer, a creator, you want to convey a certain tone in the story. Including this feature could compromise the quality of the story you're trying to tell, and that is a valid reason not to include it. 

 

This isn't an issue that falls under the "it's optional so it doesn't affect you so what does it matter", like romance is. This is something that affects the fabric of the game. 

[9TailsFox]

Citation needed

[The Hierophant]

Worse than mother trucker

Reminds me of when i saw Blade on TNT, and they changed his coup de grâce line at Frost to "Some motherfreakuh's always trying to ice skate uphill." I laughed myself to tears.

[ExoGeniVI]

We definitely need at least ONE 'Bleep' in Mass Effect: Andromeda

[AresKeith]

Reminds me of when i saw Blade on TNT, and they changed his coup de grâce line at Frost to "Some motherfreakuh's always trying to ice skate uphill." I laughed myself to tears.

 

That's why I hate when TV channels ruin lines because "too much profanity"

[LinksOcarina]

And you're missing my point, which is that how it affects me, personally, is not at all relevant to whether or not the feature should be included.

 

I'm not arguing from my personal preference. I'm arguing from a writer's perspective. As a writer, a creator, you want to convey a certain tone in the story. Including this feature could compromise the quality of the story you're trying to tell, and that is a valid reason not to include it. 

 

This isn't an issue that falls under the "it's optional so it doesn't affect you so what does it matter", like romance is. This is something that affects the fabric of the game. 

 

Except it doesn't affect the game at all.

 

The writer is still making that scene, it is still in the tone the writer intended that way, that's not changing here, and the writers are not going to fully tone down parts of the game just to reflect such a thing. 

 

Your reason becomes invalid because it's a non-existent problem. Focusing way too much on the authorial intent that things will be "toned down" because such a filter exists is just silly because again, it's not feasible to do if you put that filter in place by design of how games actually work. It is just more cost-effective to bleep and censor vs re-write a scene.

 

So this entire argument is kind of fruitless if that is where your coming from. Not to mention the fact that the writers perspective is one that is not destroying story in that way because we don't know what the process was to make such scenes, or the fact that this commercial medium will force compromise between the creative team and the people fitting the bills. From experience it's something people deal with, but it doesn't compromise the art or the tone. 

 

So if it doesn't affect you though, then this discussion is also kind of moot then, and we have the answer. Otherwise, it just feels like groundless accusations to how other people think or act.

[Mordokai]

But an entire head exploding, with bits of skull flying about?  Or the entire body exploding? (Yeah, body shots with a Widow or other powerful weapon in ME3 would do that)  Do we really need that?

 

Hell yeah we do! Ludicrous gibs are the main reason why I love fighting Cerberus so much

 

Well, that and the way they panic when you move them down like so much... things that you mow down quickly.

 

So you don't you dare take that away from me!

 

Sometimes, fools need a righteous assplosion.

 

 

In the words of Jeff Moreau: Take that, ya sons of b*tches! 

 

I require a sauce. This looks like something stupidly awesome I usually go for.

 

I'll come after you like quarian Liam Neeson after his easily kidnapped family members

 

That is... wow.

 

Probably the single most apt and simplified comparison I've ever heard

[Zazzerka]

I require a sauce. This looks like something stupidly awesome I usually go for.

 

That is Neill Blomkamp's "District 9," a triumph of cinema in my humble opinion.

[Former_Fiend]

Except it doesn't affect the game at all.

 

The writer is still making that scene, it is still in the tone the writer intended that way, that's not changing here, and the writers are not going to fully tone down parts of the game just to reflect such a thing. 

 

Your reason becomes invalid because it's a non-existent problem. Focusing way too much on the authorial intent that things will be "toned down" because such a filter exists is just silly because again, it's not feasible to do if you put that filter in place by design of how games actually work. It is just more cost-effective to bleep and censor vs re-write a scene.

 

So this entire argument is kind of fruitless if that is where your coming from. Not to mention the fact that the writers perspective is one that is not destroying story in that way because we don't know what the process was to make such scenes, or the fact that this commercial medium will force compromise between the creative team and the people fitting the bills. From experience it's something people deal with, but it doesn't compromise the art or the tone. 

 

So if it doesn't affect you though, then this discussion is also kind of moot then, and we have the answer. Otherwise, it just feels like groundless accusations to how other people think or act.

 

It absolutely does affect quality, though. Several movies have been cited in this thread that, when edited for language, have negative effects on quality. Several more could be. We're talking about either having alternate lines that could compromise the emotional context of a scene and violate the word budget of the game, or adding in bleeps, which would just sound comical.

 

Beyond that I find the entire concept unnecessary. These are games that are rated M for mature, intended for audiences 17 years old or older. There is no significant portion of that audience that is going to boycott or refuse to buy a game due to harsh language. So there's no financial reason to include the feature, either. 

[9TailsFox]

Except it doesn't affect the game at all.

 

The writer is still making that scene, it is still in the tone the writer intended that way, that's not changing here, and the writers are not going to fully tone down parts of the game just to reflect such a thing. 

 

Your reason becomes invalid because it's a non-existent problem. Focusing way too much on the authorial intent that things will be "toned down" because such a filter exists is just silly because again, it's not feasible to do if you put that filter in place by design of how games actually work. It is just more cost-effective to bleep and censor vs re-write a scene.

 

So this entire argument is kind of fruitless if that is where your coming from. Not to mention the fact that the writers perspective is one that is not destroying story in that way because we don't know what the process was to make such scenes, or the fact that this commercial medium will force compromise between the creative team and the people fitting the bills. From experience it's something people deal with, but it doesn't compromise the art or the tone. 

 

So if it doesn't affect you though, then this discussion is also kind of moot then, and we have the answer. Otherwise, it just feels like groundless accusations to how other people think or act.

Why you wrong. I can give you more examples but I think it's more then enough.

 

1)Deadpool.

 

2)

[Hanako Ikezawa]

And you feel the material would have been unaltered without the profanity?

Yes.

 

Called it. And yeah, you and I just aren't going to see eye to eye on this. I think Jack's foul mouth is an essential part of her character, and I think that Cassandra's line is the most efficient and powerful way to have gotten her point and her character across. 

 

Far as not liking you - I say this with no intended disrespect and in hopes that you can  use it towards self improvement, I think you're too prone towards expressing self pity on these forums when complaining about not getting the things you want. I know that's part of what I respect about you; that refusal to compromise, but I think you play the victim a little much.

 

Like I said, I mean no disrespect from that. Just an honest appraisal. 

That's fine. You're free to think whatever you want on the subject. I just vehemently disagree. Those attributes lessened my liking of those characters, just as they improved yours. 

 

To be honest, that Dory gif was meant to be lighthearted. Didn't expect a heart to heart from it.

I can see what you mean. I appreciate your honesty. 

 

Is "needed" a sensible criterion in the first place? I don't see why we're even talking about this.

People said swearing is needed for certain scenes. Others disagree. 

[rapscallioness]

BW games, to me, seem fairly conservative in regards to those issues. I can see the part about gore because there can be some fleshy bits in there. Although, when in the midst fighting for my pixel life, I don't notice that too much. But I can see where you're coming from on that.

 

Language? I don't see it. There is maybe the occasional "Dayum", but BW seems...how shall I say?...conservative when it comes to their word budget. Foul language is almost nonexistent in BW games. And I love cursing. Love it. Well, I mean, not when I'm at the grocery store with a bunch of Nana's and little ones running around. I feel those situations are neither the time nor the place for such vulgarity. It don;t feel right to me. But amongst peers just hanging out? Yes.

 

BW, however, is not one you need to worry about when it comes to cursing,or language. Now Witcher 3. lol!. I have never been so thoroughly called a "Mother..Trucker" as I was in W3 by some random npc mook guarding a door, "I remember you, MOTHERTRUCKAAAH." Oh, my goodness.

 

Sex? Again, BW has been painfully conservative in regards to sexually explicit content. To the point of absurdity. I think DAI made great strides in showing sexual content in a natural way without it being necessarily vulgar, or gratuitous. It was moments, brief moments, when you were with your lover. It was natural and appropriate without being ott. Before DAI, however, BW's need to cover all the "naughty bits" seem to border on a mild pathology, and actually drew more attention to it.

 

I mean, hey, if they can implement a...idk..I hate to say toggle, but a setting like "Gore off" that some games have, then sure. Why not? But I think your concern with BW games may be a bit misplaced.

[Oni Changas]

That is Neill Blomkamp's "District 9," a triumph of cinema in my humble opinion.

Hell yeah. Best sci fi director today hands down. Original ideas and awesome casting. And he brought us the equally awesome Sharlto Copely. D9 is what Avatar wished it was.

[Elhanan]

That is Neill Blomkamp's "District 9," a triumph of cinema in my humble opinion.

This must be the film with over 150+ f-bombs used in 112 min. Skipped this one; prefer my popcorn with less salt than this....

[Zazzerka]

This must be the film with over 150+ f-bombs used in 112 min. Skipped this one; prefer my popcorn with less salt than this....

 

Does the fact they're said in a hilarious Seth Efrican accent not sooth your sensitive, sensitive ears?

 

Fookin' prawns, mate.

[AlanC9]

We're talking about either having alternate lines that could compromise the emotional context of a scene and violate the word budget of the game, or adding in bleeps, which would just sound comical.

I'd probably turn the bleeps on once just for the funny.

[ExoGeniVI]

When In my line of work things tend to get bloody...really bloody...

[caradoc2000]

So the request is for a sex-drugs-and-rock'n'roll game with no sex, definitely no drugs and preferably no rock'n'roll either.

[Decepticon Leader Sully]

[AlanC9]

People said swearing is needed for certain scenes. Others disagree.

The posts I recall were more along the lines of saying that the scenes would be worse without the swearing, not that they couldn't be written at all. But I may be over-estimating the sensibleness of the thread.