382 réponses à ce sujet

[NKnight7]

I don't mind certain topics, most provide some interesting conversations.

[Laughing_Man]

The main issue with ME3's ending is that it insulted the intelligence of the player by expecting them to accept its ludicrous and ill-designed premise.

 

...
 

This ending is built on a broken wrists-level of shoddy handwaving and for some reason BioWare thought it was not just going to fly, but inspire high-level intellectual speculation among the fans. Self-delusion on a truly remarkable level.

 

Cool stuff.

 

It's probably not everything that is wrong with the ending, but it's still does a good job of covering some of the insanity in a relatively short wall of text.

[Arcian]

Cool stuff.

 

It's probably not everything that is wrong with the ending, but it's still does a good job of covering some of the insanity in a relatively short wall of text.

Yeah I could have gone on for much longer but it was already long enough that it might put people off reading it.

[The Real Pearl #2]

social justice warriors will be a problem obviously, With the release of Mass effect 1 they were squawking at bioware for including liara's arse in a 2 minute cinematic accessible through sitting through her dialogue while choosing all the paragon options. And deemed it a male supremacy game although you can play as a femshepard. So, basically no, i don't think we leave some topics out of the fear that someone will get offended, Sometimes these topics can be comforting to victims or provide insight in how they can move on or cope with these hardships. Notable example is hanako from Katawo Shoujo. She provides insight on how depressed people feel and I related to her struggle. I can't say that everyone can cope this way, and i don't look down on them for not or for getting offended. Guiding the dimwitted Hisao to understand that simply being a self righteous knight is not going to make the situation any better. The best way to handle this topics is not be Hisao's, learning how to be respectful and tread the frozen lake bed gracefully. Understanding these issues is what helps us fix these issues, and we can't understand these issues without talking about them. 

[Dunmer of Redoran]

To this:

 

It seems that no matter how many walls of text will be written about the ME3 ending some people still don't get it. (or are more comfortable pretending not to)

 

Yes, the ME3 ending was a rather depressing ending, and some people wanted a happy ending and therefore disliked it.

 

However, that was not the only or main reason that caused the ending to become almost universally hated.

The ending had many problems, flawed logic (things that simply didn't make sense), it was not really in line with the overall tone and theme of the ME trilogy, and like with many other video game failures - it was very obviously rushed.

 

and this:

 

The main issue with ME3's ending is that it insulted the intelligence of the player by expecting them to accept its ludicrous and ill-designed premise.
 

This ending is built on a broken wrists-level of shoddy handwaving and for some reason BioWare thought it was not just going to fly, but inspire high-level intellectual speculation among the fans. Self-delusion on a truly remarkable level.

 

My point's not about what tone the ending had, my point's that the creators pushed a bad ending and look what happened. That wasn't even a touchy social issue or anything. It was just an ending to a video game. If they push a serious social issue or anything else and don't do it in a way that people approve of, the reaction will be even worse. As such, they must be exceedingly careful.

[DaemionMoadrin]

It has already been said in this thread but it bears repeating: No topic should be avoided.

It's up to the writers to handle it correctly though and if they aren't confident they can do so, they should skip it. But if done right...

 

Example: Marvel's Jessica Jones is a thriller with film noir influences and the main theme is physical and psychological abuse and trauma. That includes rape. If that topic had been avoided they wouldn't have had enough material for two episodes, much less 13. In my opinion the writers/producers handled it brilliantly and used it to create a great show. Oh, and superpowers, lesbians, David Tennant, violence, blood, sex, yadda yadda geek out.

[The Real Pearl #2]

It has already been said in this thread but it bears repeating: No topic should be avoided.

It's up to the writers to handle it correctly though and if they aren't confident they can do so, they should skip it. But if done right...

 

Example: Marvel's Jessica Jones is a thriller with film noir influences and the main theme is physical and psychological abuse and trauma. That includes rape. If that topic had been avoided they wouldn't have had enough material for two episodes, much less 13. In my opinion the writers/producers handled it brilliantly and used it to create a great show. Oh, and superpowers, lesbians, David Tennant, violence, blood, sex, yadda yadda geek out.

I need to start watching that show 

[DaemionMoadrin]

I need to start watching that show 

 

I should have added that Carrie-Anne Moss plays an important role, too. And more Trinity/Aria T'Loak certaintly can't hurt.

[The Real Pearl #2]

I should have added that Carrie-Anne Moss plays an important role, too. And more Trinity/Aria T'Loak certaintly can't hurt.

 

Damn you BSN and your limited likes

[Gago]

Leliana impostor sounds interesting. 

 

As for certain topics being avoided, I am against self-censorship, people bi tch about everything these days anyway. 

[Synthetic Turian]

Damn you BSN and your limited likes

 

Happens to me daily. 

[slimgrin]

It's all well and good till someone gets triggered and needs a safe space. 

[Hiemoth]

If I recall correctly Gaider's comments on the Leliana impostor thing, the main problem with it was that they had never thought that the situation could be considered in such a way before someone raised in a meeting and then Gaider immediately understood the issue with the scene. When he discusses it, I've never felt he was talking about censorship, but rather the benefit of having an open writing environment with multiple viewpoints, especially here where they never wanted to the scene to have such a tone. Besides, they ended up removing the whole fake Haven scenario anyway as they couldn't make it work.

 

The discussion here does, however, raise an interesting question to me as I see mentions about how the writers should be able to tell the story they want without censorship, yet all the examples discussed are situations where the writers themselves removed those parts of the story because they didn't feel they worked within it. So it isn't a question of censorship, but the writers actually writing the story they want?

 

Also, I am kind of glad to have been reminded that the next time I go out to a bar and throw a hardcore racial slur at some stranger, it's really their fault for taking offense at it.

[DaemionMoadrin]

If I recall correctly Gaider's comments on the Leliana impostor thing, the main problem with it was that they had never thought that the situation could be considered in such a way before someone raised in a meeting and then Gaider immediately understood the issue with the scene. When he discusses it, I've never felt he was talking about censorship, but rather the benefit of having an open writing environment with multiple viewpoints, especially here where they never wanted to the scene to have such a tone. Besides, they ended up removing the whole fake Haven scenario anyway as they couldn't make it work.

 

The discussion here does, however, raise an interesting question to me as I see mentions about how the writers should be able to tell the story they want without censorship, yet all the examples discussed are situations where the writers themselves removed those parts of the story because they didn't feel they worked within it. So it isn't a question of censorship, but the writers actually writing the story they want?

 

Also, I am kind of glad to have been reminded that the next time I go out to a bar and throw a hardcore racial slur at some stranger, it's really their fault for taking offense at it.

 

Writers should write what they want, if they think such a topic wouldn't work, then that's fine. They shouldn't have to change their story just because someone might be offended or triggered or whatever. You can't write realistically and then expect people to take your story serious if you skip all the bad parts of life.

 

Btw... what's that about Leliana being an impostor? Is that part of a new DLC or novel or something?

[Dabrikishaw]

DAI has an interview where they removed a scene where Leliana impostor seduced the Inquisitor, but it was removed because they perceive it as rape by one of the female staff members. 

I'm still not sure why they couldn't just remove the seduction part of that fake out and keep the rest of it it.

[Laughing_Man]

Also, I am kind of glad to have been reminded that the next time I go out to a bar and throw a hardcore racial slur at some stranger, it's really their fault for taking offense at it.

 

Right. And since the act of throwing racial slurs in bars is more or less business as usual, sanitizing such a scene in a game would hardly make the game

more real and immersive.

 

I'm still not sure why they couldn't just remove the seduction part of that fake out and keep the rest of it it.

 

I'm still not sure what was the problem at all.

 

Someone considered it a rape? So what?

 

First, I assume that you have the option to reject "Leliana".

Second, impersonation is hardly a moral or righteous thing to do, and it might be considered rape, but it is hardly the classical meaning of the word.

Third, we are talking about a Desire demon, a creature of magic, while this all happens in a place were reality and rules are hardly the same as in the real world.

 

I mean, in my book even an actual rape should be possible (while being handled correctly), but this hardly even counts as one.

[X Equestris]

Btw... what's that about Leliana being an impostor? Is that part of a new DLC or novel or something?

It was the original draft of Champions of the Just. In it, the Inquisitor would have fought a duel with the Lord Seeker, won, the Templars would have sworn loyalty, and the Inquisitor returns to Haven. It seems too easy. When you arrive, Leliana starts asking strange questions. This culminates in the possibility of a sexual encounter with Leliana. Turns out, it's the Envy Demon trying to get a measure of the Inquisitor. After breaking free, the mission would have continued much as it did in the final game. It was dropped because of possible implications the Envy Demon masquerading as Leliana raised.

[DaemionMoadrin]

It was the original draft of Champions of the Just. In it, the Inquisitor would have fought a duel with the Lord Seeker, won, the Templars would have sworn loyalty, and the Inquisitor returns to Haven. It seems too easy. When you arrive, Leliana starts asking strange questions. This culminates in the possibility of a sexual encounter with Leliana. Turns out, it's the Envy Demon trying to get a measure of the Inquisitor. After breaking free, the mission would have continued much as it did in the final game. It was dropped because of possible implications the Envy Demon masquerading as Leliana raised.

 

So this never happened at all. Anywhere? Good.

 

Leliana being a demon the entire time would have been a neat explanation for her being present though. You know, after her potential demise in DA:O.

[Arcian]

It was the original draft of Champions of the Just. In it, the Inquisitor would have fought a duel with the Lord Seeker, won, the Templars would have sworn loyalty, and the Inquisitor returns to Haven. It seems too easy. When you arrive, Leliana starts asking strange questions. This culminates in the possibility of a sexual encounter with Leliana. Turns out, it's the Envy Demon trying to get a measure of the Inquisitor. After breaking free, the mission would have continued much as it did in the final game. It was dropped because of possible implications the Envy Demon masquerading as Leliana raised.

That makes way more sense than the rape argument.

[X Equestris]

So this never happened at all. Anywhere? Good.
 
Leliana being a demon the entire time would have been a neat explanation for her being present though. You know, after her potential demise in DA:O.

There is an explanation for Leliana if you import a world state where she's dead. It involves lyrium and the Titans. Only shows up in Trespasser's epilogue if she isn't Divine.

[Hiemoth]

It was the original draft of Champions of the Just. In it, the Inquisitor would have fought a duel with the Lord Seeker, won, the Templars would have sworn loyalty, and the Inquisitor returns to Haven. It seems too easy. When you arrive, Leliana starts asking strange questions. This culminates in the possibility of a sexual encounter with Leliana. Turns out, it's the Envy Demon trying to get a measure of the Inquisitor. After breaking free, the mission would have continued much as it did in the final game. It was dropped because of possible implications the Envy Demon masquerading as Leliana raised.

 

They didn't actually drop it because of that, I saw Gaider explicitely state that in an interview. According to him, the issue was raised and they were thinking about otherways to do it, as not having Leliana hit on the Inquisitor is actually a relatively easy solution, but they couldn't get the fake Haven really work due to other issues with the story. However, once that interview was given, somehow mystically the running narrative became that the scene was dropped because of the Leliana thing which was not true.

 

Writers should write what they want, if they think such a topic wouldn't work, then that's fine. They shouldn't have to change their story just because someone might be offended or triggered or whatever. You can't write realistically and then expect people to take your story serious if you skip all the bad parts of life.

 

But here we run to the core issue at the argument because this mythical real world doesn't work like that. If you have someone working at a register at a store who decides to make a sleazy sexit comment to every person they consider attractive, they would probably get fired really fast unless the store in question really wants a law suit. If I go to a bar and yell out racial slurs, all the bars I've been to will probably throw me out as that is not seen as appropriate behaviour. Yet in this argument, writers should be immune from criticism on this matter even though no one else in the regular real life could act in such a way.

 

Besides, the other point missed here it that with video games, there's no one writer. It is a group effort with a certain what the game should be. So if the developers don't really want the game to be crazy misogynistic, but the writer of the game really, really feels that it needs to be misogynistic ot be 'realistic', the developers are not in the wrong or censoring the writer if they insist on removing such elements from the game as it is not the game they want to make.

 

 

Right. And since the act of throwing racial slurs in bars is more or less business as usual, sanitizing such a scene in a game would hardly make the game

more real and immersive.

 

Well, first of all you go to awesome bars. To be honest, for me, if I played a game where in a bar people were constantly throwing hardcore racial slurs in bars without anyone responding or acting, I really wouldn't find it either realistic or immersive. Kind of the opposite actually. Also, great that we agree that the people having to listen to the slurs are the real problem here for taking offense in intentionally offensive language.

[DaemionMoadrin]

But here we run to the core issue at the argument because this mythical real world doesn't work like that. If you have someone working at a register at a store who decides to make a sleazy sexit comment to every person they consider attractive, they would probably get fired really fast unless the store in question really wants a law suit. If I go to a bar and yell out racial slurs, all the bars I've been to will probably throw me out as that is not seen as appropriate behaviour. Yet in this argument, writers should be immune from criticism on this matter even though no one else in the regular real life could act in such a way.

 

Besides, the other point missed here it that with video games, there's no one writer. It is a group effort with a certain what the game should be. So if the developers don't really want the game to be crazy misogynistic, but the writer of the game really, really feels that it needs to be misogynistic ot be 'realistic', the developers are not in the wrong or censoring the writer if they insist on removing such elements from the game as it is not the game they want to make.

 

I think you're not looking at the full picture. This isn't about insults or "bad words" or anything like it, it's about the underlying issues. It is up to the writers, producers etc... the developers of the game if and how they want to include certain topics in their game. They could imply it, mention it offhandedly, make it the focus of a quest... and then there's the tone they choose.

Your examples are... I don't know what they are but they don't fit. How do you compare writing a story with committing a felony? You not only missed the point, you flew past it into space.

 

Realistic doesn't mean the game has to be an accurate representation of our society. It means that the persons in the game behave in a realistic way. That they have personalities and lives of their own. Lives that could include bad things, too.

 

I don't see why people shy away from everything that seems troubling these days just because there's a chance that someone is unable to deal with it. Grow the **** up. It is precisely because we're overprotective, because we keep everything potentially hurtful away from kids that they grow up into adults that get triggered by everything. Someone with PTSD, someone who went through abuse, someone who actually suffered gets triggered... not snotty brats on their quest for more self importance. Learn to deal with situations that make you uncomfortable, with problems that you can't solve, with life being unfair and a society filled with assholes and idiots. Dealing with it does not mean hiding from it by removing it from the media.

 

Some people deal with those issues by telling jokes. For example:

 

[Hiemoth]

I think you're not looking at the full picture. This isn't about insults or "bad words" or anything like it, it's about the underlying issues. It is up to the writers, producers etc... the developers of the game if and how they want to include certain topics in their game. They could imply it, mention it offhandedly, make it the focus of a quest... and then there's the tone they choose.

Your examples are... I don't know what they are but they don't fit. How do you compare writing a story with committing a felony? You not only missed the point, you flew past it into space.

 

Realistic doesn't mean the game has to be an accurate representation of our society. It means that the persons in the game behave in a realistic way. That they have personalities and lives of their own. Lives that could include bad things, too.

 

I don't see why people shy away from everything that seems troubling these days just because there's a chance that someone is unable to deal with it. Grow the **** up. It is precisely because we're overprotective, because we keep everything potentially hurtful away from kids that they grow up into adults that get triggered by everything. Someone with PTSD, someone who went through abuse, someone who actually suffered gets triggered... not snotty brats on their quest for more self importance. Learn to deal with situations that make you uncomfortable, with problems that you can't solve, with life being unfair and a society filled with assholes and idiots. Dealing with it does not mean hiding from it by removing it from the media.

 

I guess as a counter-argument I feel you are looking at the smaller picture, but I guess that is at the root of our disagreement. There is a thing, though, that is repeated often in this response that is causing to me scratch head a bit as it seems to go from the basis that the only people who complain about representation or those trigger words and so forth are people that have never been affected. That it is just overprotective people wanting to spare their children from the horrors of the 'real' world where horrible things happen and thus they grow to be these tender adults who just can't handle things. And for me, that argument is questionable on many fronts.

 

First, it basically asserts that none of the people bothered by these things have actually experienced, which I just cannot agree with. Most people I personally know who have issues for example with the flippant representation of sexual violence are people who either themselves or someone close to them had experienced sexual violence. And the argument here, and I am honestly trying to avoid putting words in to mouth here, seems to be that they just need to grow up even though they probably understand that thing a lot better than either parties in this argument. Furthermore, it seems that the claim is that the people making those jokes are always people who are dealing with their own issues, which again probably isn't true. For example Titus there was a victim of a horrific childhood and he is processing those things through his humor. Is the assumption then that he would be totally fine if someone white bread guy thought it would be funny to just make up jokes about beating children?

 

I read actually a really interesting essee a while back from a starting comedian who had had a lengthy discussion with a famous veteran comedian and walked away with a realization that when discussing these trigger warning and how horrible they are the comedy, in that instance, there are actually two levels there. For the successful comedian, it was people attacking their material without really understanding it and that does happen, I'm not denying that. However, on the other side of the coin, there were these starting comedians who were just making really bad and lazy jokes, and instead of understanding that the crowd was reacting to them because their jokes were bad instead started complaining about about how the PC world is destroying things.

[DaemionMoadrin]

You know, this discussion would be much more productive if you would read everything I wrote and not just cherry pick one or two things out of context.

[Hiemoth]

You know, this discussion would be much more productive if you would read everything I wrote and not just cherry pick one or two things out of context.

 

I agree, I just don't what I cherrypicking as my response to this specific comment:

 

.Realistic doesn't mean the game has to be an accurate representation of our society. It means that the persons in the game behave in a realistic way. That they have personalities and lives of their own. Lives that could include bad things, too.

 

I don't see why people shy away from everything that seems troubling these days just because there's a chance that someone is unable to deal with it. Grow the **** up. It is precisely because we're overprotective, because we keep everything potentially hurtful away from kids that they grow up into adults that get triggered by everything. Someone with PTSD, someone who went through abuse, someone who actually suffered gets triggered... not snotty brats on their quest for more self importance. Learn to deal with situations that make you uncomfortable, with problems that you can't solve, with life being unfair and a society filled with assholes and idiots. Dealing with it does not mean hiding from it by removing it from the media.

 

I was not cherrypicking a couple of points, I was responding to your whole argument here. There was the first part, which dealt with the themes and how they should do those if they feel it is right. I guess they could and there have been instances when that has been done, I just don't agree with the general comment, which you literally make there, that it is about being overprotective and that the reason adults are getting triggered is because they were shielded as children.

 

If I am misrepresenting your argument here, I am honestly, as I don't really know how else to read what you wrote.