Point being, Thedas is not faux-medieval because of some clever authorial decision, but because it's derivative. Just like Mass Effect as a setting is neither scientifically sound nor particularly futuristic in any way other than set-dressing because it's derivative. The best settings are not the ones that are bursting with pointless details, but the ones that have a unique personality and service the other elements in the story, such as plot, characters and themes. And you only obtain such a setting through careful design and application of it.
But that's the thing: DA is medieval fantasy, not medieval history. The entire point is to deviate from what historical societies may have been like. That is why magic exists, and why it is formative to the societies and the geopolitics of Thedas. Tevinter are not Rome, even if they are inspired by them. Orlais is not France, even if they are inspired by them. Because these cultures inhabit a world in which is metaphysically different - and, as such, those worlds are ontologically different. This is why I find it pointless to say 'why does the game not represent medieval values?' Because you are measuring a world which is different to our on an ontological level on its closeness to our own, ignoring the effect magic, the blight, titans, and all the rest may have on that.
It is unfair to say that Bioware do not design their worlds carefully, from a lore perspective. Other than perhaps the ME3 ending. And, of course, everything we make is informed in some way by the unique experiences and the structures in which we produce them. Nothing is made in a vaccuum, even the very language we use to express ourselves is infused with meaning and ideas which we do not recognise. The best way to see this is, say, in French, where nouns are assigned gender. Is that not potentially from some gender bias, and does it not reinforce certain biases?
Mass Effect is scientifically sound enough, that the only people who really have issues with the mechanics of its science are usually pedants or experts. The literary function of the fantastical elements are not harmed by the world's failure to adhere to current science - they're writers, not theorietical physicists.
Or, rather, science fiction is not about the minutiae of how this or that interacts, and how close that is to our knowledge of real world science: deviating from real world science is precisely what makes it science fiction. Or, in other words, science fiction is more than fiction which happens to be about scientific things. This is why facetiousness never wins arguments.
But this is a story we're talking about. Stories' aren't real. They're artificial, constructed entities. So everything that is in the game is a choice someone somewhere made. I'm less interested in how plausible Thedas is and more in why it is the way it is from a Doylian perspective. And my guess is that the reason is that they didn't even think of making it more authentic, and that even if they had they wouldn't have had the knowledge or the will and interest to pursue it, since applying it is not considered fashionable nor necessary in this day and age.
I struggle to see your issue with the choices made. Of course how plausible Thedas is is important to how it's made, because plausibility is something every fantasy world strives towards.
Also, what do you mean by 'authentic'? Does the world seem false, to you? Is it not usual for the player to accept some level of inauthenticity in fantasy, given both the artifice of playing a game, and the fantastical elements? In other words, why could so many players suspend their disbelief, and not you? Do you consider that the fault for this may be with you, as a player? Are you playing the game in a sensible way? Are you carrying some generic bias into the game, which prevents you from enjoying it?
Sometimes, when people can't enjoy things, it's their fault. But because nobody thinks they're wrong (self-serving bias) or are incapable of introspection, they instead blame the text, as though it was supposed to be created specifically for them.
I'm not making a historical argument. Yes, it is theoretically possible that a medievalesque-looking society with 21st century values could exist. Yes, magic messes up the equation tremendously.
Bioware does this very well at times, but others they just copy and paste whatever's hip from some mainstream speculative fiction franchise (or from their previous games...), which just hurts their storytelling.
My post didn't accuse you of making a historical argument. I accused you of bias. I almost typed 'ethnocentric' in my first post, but that could have seemed inflammatory, or accusatory, which isn't what I'm trying to do.
Dragon Age does not have 21st century values. Or is there some stance on magic in the real world? Sure, on some issues, like gay rights, it is far more progressive than our world. But it is only medieval in its aesthetic. Andrastianism is more like Islam, Orlais is more like Imperial China, Fereldan is more like medieval France, Tevinter is more like Tsarist Russia. And, given that civilisation in DA has existed for far longer than in our world, they are bound too be more progressive or permissive in some aspects.
But that last point you made is so unfair and so unsubstantiated, that it kind of supports my initial feelings that you were biased.
Retour en haut
