Eh, I dunno, I’m currently really enjoying Ghosts of Tsushima, although strictly in off-line mode. And I enjoyed the first Jedi: Fallen Order, again, solely off-line.
I tend to only follow Indie games. Have no interest in micro transactions, first person shooters, or watching rather than playing games. There is very little in the AAA sphere that interests me.
OP is not exactly coming up with good examples, but I think the point is you can analyse anything and claim that there is some hidden political message, even if it was not intended by the developers. Even Gilgamesh, one of the oldest text ever found, has scholars discussing gender and sexuality. I don’t think Gilgamesh and Enkidus relationship was considered political at the time the story was written down, but in a new context and a new political landscape it can suddenly be political.
I’m not saying I know anything about this Dragon Age, I haven’t played it.
I think it’s a fair point though, to imagine an a-political narrative game, because I think most if not all RPG games I can think of have some kind of political content.
Shifting the goalposts on behalf of OP, but whatever. Where are you guys coming from?
Narrative games of any scope are almost inevitably going to bump into themes like hierarchy, power dynamics and moral dilemmas. That doesn’t make them “political” in the sense that they’re directly discussing real events around you. I won’t presume anything about your personal position here, but OP gives the impression that if a fantasy game depicted a fictional race subjugated by another he would start complaining that it was woke.
If you want a story without those things you largely need to pick a different genre.
That’s what I’m trying to say. I don’t think such a game is feasible.
Also, in the context of this threat, saying “ooo Tetris isn’t political!” is being pedantic, that’s not what the person meant when they asked for an example of a non political game.
I would like to find a game free of political message,
They asked for a game free of political messages, and got several. Are you sure that’s not what they meant? Does Tic Tac Toe have political messages? What about 2048?
Istanbul was Constantinople now it’s Istanbul not Constantinople been a long time gone, Constantinople and a Turkish delight on a moonlit night. Every gal in Constantinople lives in Istanbul not Constantinople so if you have a date in Constantinople she’ll be waiting in Istanbul. Even old New York was once New Amsterdam, why they changed it i can’t say, people just liked it better that way… So take me back to Constantinople no you can’t go back to Constantinople cause it’s Istanbul not Constantinople been a long time gone, Constantinople why did Constantinople get the works? That’s nobody’s business but the Turks… Dodo do do do de do do do do aaaaaaa whaaaaa (I’m just going to stop here)
Ok it’s from memory don’t sue me if I fucked it up.
The article is not about how the game shouldn’t be political (because this notion is absurd). It’s about how idiotic the treatment of the writer’s views is, to the point it feels like a parody of the statement they wanted to make.
Joke aside, pure competitive games are indeed just pure competitive games with no context at all. But competition in itself is ideological and political (the need to make the opponent lose) so Pong is too.
It’s a point of view on multiplayer gaming. In Pong there is always a loser and a winner, never two winners, never two losers (can we even make a draw in original Pong? I don’t know).
Pong is also a game that opposed human versus computer, it can be view as pure skill exercise to be a ‘better’ human or it can be literally a fight against the machine like playing chess against a computer. Both makes me want to ask what is the point to do this ? I think answers at this questions are political indeed.
Super Mario make a twist on the trope of the knight saving the princess. The knight is just a plumber and it is said to him that the ‘princess is an another castle’.
But at the end the right order of the world is restaured when Mario finally frees the princess from the evil Bowser.
So from a political standpoint Super Mario is a product believing strongly in individualism and in the self made man ideology. The twist shows only that even a plumber can save the princess if he works enough = liberal capitalism making us believed that we’ll be all rock stars and billionaires when we’re definitively not (and yes I’m quoting fight club here). All this is the consequence of the game focussing more on gameplay than it’s narration, therefore it leans towards what was the common thinking of the time.
Polygamy (relationship between Peach, Mario and Luigi, if that’s what you are referring to) is much to me a side effect of the 2 players gameplay possibility, but it is still indeed pretty interesting in itself yeah.
You probably meant it as a joke, but too bad you get a real answer :)
The game’s writing is not up to par with past games in the franchise, and it does suffer from “Marvel speak,” but it’s a pretty good game overall and I’m enjoying it. Being part of the Dragon Age franchise hurts it more than anything else because it doesn’t measure up story-wise.
I am nonbinary, I haven’t played a Dragon Age game before Veilguard, I haven’t yet gotten to this one scene that’s apparently damned the entire franchise, nor have I even met Taash(?) yet. Here’s my off the cuff rambling thoughts:
I’ve just now watched the scene devoid of context, and if that’s where the misgendering conversation started and stopped, I think everyone is wildly overreacting. The first minute is fine, a weird older lady apologizes for screwing up in her own way, I’ve had people react in much stranger ways than that, and in it’s own way “Whoops I fucked up, lemme do some push ups to show I feel bad” is kinda sweet. I’ll concede that the explanation after was heavy handed, but you could definitely include the gist of it somewhere else easily. “Don’t be weird, just say sorry and move on” is the correct advice to give to someone who doesn’t know how to interact with trans people but wants to be supportive. If that last minute of the conversation happened somewhere else in the game, it’d have been fine.
The game overall has been mediocre so far, a solid 6 out of 10, nothing to write home about, but certainly not deserving of the flak it’s been getting. This is one of the first games I’ve played where I feel like I’m represented, I think it might be the first major game where you can make a custom character who’s explicitly transgender, and that counts for something in my book.
From where I’m standing, it really feels like a lot of the outrage DA:V is drawing comes from some discomfort(conscious or no) with having the queer experience very out in the open for everyone to see, which is what I would expect from a series that (as far as I can tell) has always had tons of explicitly queer characters. I’m sure that’s not universally the case, but I simply don’t buy this narrative of “I’m fine with trans people, but the way it’s written is so clunky.” because I’ve had almost the polar opposite experience. I can think of few other games that talk about transness in the way that actual trans people talk about it.
I wouldn’t say it’s always had a ton of queer characters. The first game had a few bi characters and some transmisogynistic depictions of sex workers, the second had a bunch of bi characters and some transmisogynistic depictions of sex workers, and the third game had a few bi characters, a gay man, a well written trans man, and some lesbian characters written by someone who clearly hates lesbians.
Ah, my only context was what little I’ve picked up about Krem and Dorian(as well as an explanation about how the Qun is sexist to the point of wrapping around to be progressive), and assurances from people that the games have always been like that.
Even still, from a 15 year old series, that still manages to be a lot gayer than most.
Having not played it, I’ll stick to using a review I read in the past few days.
To sum it up, the game felt too positive to the reviewer. To them it felt more like a Disney adventure than a grim fantasy world that’s invaded by malevolent, torture-happy evil gods. They felt no bite from their choices, from the story or from their companions. Everything felt like it needed to be happy in some way, like the idea of conflict was a far more terrible outcome than being skullfucked by an angry tentacle god lady.
To sum it up even further, the game felt too safe. And so became a bland meal that’s easily forgettable.
Additionally, everyone speaks in this insufferable Marvel-tone full of cheeriness and quippiness. The characters speak and act as if they’re aware they’re in a video game and never drop the infuriating singsong HR tone.
Ever work with someone whose parent(s) were in HR? You’ll know what I mean.
Maybe this is a gen z thing and I’m just falling behind the times. I don’t know. But the ME3-tier ending really seals the deal. I’ll pay $10 max for this and probably refund in 2 hours, or just get a crack later down the line.
I’m playing the “demo” and just met an elf companion who said something like “whoopsie! My gods are real and they’re going to destroy the world! 🤷” And it just undercuts the whole story.
Marvelization is the perfect way to describe it. There are zero stakes.
Origins had humor and snark, but it was mostly used in service of the story and themes.
DAO sets the tone during the harrowing when one Grey Warden candidate dies drinking Darkspawn Blood, then Duncan straight murders the other candidate when he freaks out.
You need to choose between saving 2 cities with each their respective companion, that will result in one of those cities being overrun by the blight and that companion becoming distant. Turning it into a hellscape with even more consequences than I type here.
I haven’t played it yet, still unsure if I will, but everything I’ve seen of it is nudging me towards not playing it. The dialogues I’ve watched were poorly written, cutscenes were okay at best, and the new companions seemed all to be obnoxious teenagers.
To me, Dragon Age Origins is the only game in the franchise that’s worth playing. The Warden is your character as the player, and that, to me, is the hallmark of a good rpg. None of the other Dragon Age games put as much effort into allowing you to choose and make your own character. The fact that DA:O had entirely different intros, that were both long, well written, and nuanced, based on your combination of class + race was the thing that sold me into that game. Hawke is not your character, but a character they wanted you to play for a reason, but I’ll give it a pass since the idea of Hawke’s story was fairly good, just not as well implemented (DA2 should have been a spin off and not part of the main series). The Inquisitor is even worse, it could have been your character, but it’s some weird generic character that’s there just to perform a function in the world. I’ve played most of DA2, but only a couple of hours of Inquisition, and it was enough to know that both those games fell short of Origins, and this one is looking even worse.
An RPG needs excellent writing above all else. Good gameplay comes as a close second, but it should be mostly about allowing players to forge their own path and have their own interpretations of the world. RPGs need nuance and subtlety, you can’t just constantly regurgitate something to someone’s face and expect them not to be annoyed by it.
I will give you my review as someone who is a trans ally. The writing is bad. Like really bad.
I played DA:O when it first came out, bought the Golem bonus release package. It was a fun, dark fantasy game. Same with the expansion and the other DA games. This game has none of that in the story. It’s just a really awful written story.
The chuds, and I despise even typing this, are right. The trans/non-binary stuff comes out of no where. They go full vegan road biker CrossFit attitude with it and just inject it in the most random places. “Let me tell you about all the sets I did!” And then there are some kind of odd non-consenting scenes which make it even weirder.
It lacks ALL the magic and creative writing of BG3 with almost none of the character development. It’s Mary Sue shit from start to finish.
The combat is good, but it’s likely a separate team made it.
So, you simply mean “being preached at”? What’s the over/under on religious “leaders” feeling they’re above the law, etc., but knowing that they have to keep the sheep from spooking?
This sounds like exactly my response to a ”Christian” movie. They are so ridiculously bad because to earn the label “Christian” they have to be preachy.
I feel like I have a outside the norm third-take opinion on this topic, tbh.
I think including the hot social topic of the day often time is pandering.
But I also don’t think pandering is a problem. The muscles on the main character is also pandering. When McDonald’s does market research and then releases a new product, that is pandering.
Games are a sales industry; they are going to pander to potential buyers, period.
So yes, a potentially trans-centric storyline in a game is unnecessary. But so is including a longsword, or a tavern, or a comic relief character. Unnecessary doesn’t mean bad; all of those things are likely only adding to the depth and value of the game.
So all this to say that when crazy right-wingers talk about SJWs and pandering and all that nonsense don’t waste your time trying to fight them on the irrelevant bits - go ahead and acknowledge the pandering aspect and fight the real fight by telling them it’s not negative pandering and minorities deserve to be pandered to and represented just as much as anyone else. They just don’t recognize the market targeting the white male demographic as pandering because it is the sphere of normal under which they operate.
I guess I should add that I’m not speaking to this game specifically since I’ve never played it. I really enjoyed Dragon Age: Origins but frankly felt like I got everything I needed of the world from it and haven’t been interested in any of the sequels. So I won’t be playing DA: The Veilguard, but that reason has absolutely fuck all to do with the inclusion of any social politics.
If you read the article you’ll see that the author takes issue not with the inclusion itself, but the hamfisted way in which it is included. Pandering can be fine, but when it’s just checking boxes in a cringy, lazy way it’s not, and worse it becomes fodder for the gamergate type to rage about.
I understand that, but my point is that there is no shortage of shoehorned comic relief characters, or awkwardly placed fanservice, etc. Critique the actual fault at play, bad writing, rather than letting the gamergate right-wing nutsos have the benefit of having the conversation on their terms. Make the headline “DA:tV falls short in the writing department, here are some examples” and include the flimsy way the character is written as the valid critique. Games are going to pander to us, that is what I was saying; when we place special emphasis on this particular type of pandering all we’re doing is letting the right define the conversations we’re having.
That seems to be what is being done here. Everything that I have seen on this has done what you asked, said what they where critiquing then giving a clip from the game as an example. If people can not be critical of media for any reason, we have an issue.
You’re right; I have been unclear. Allow me to try to clarify.
My issue is specifically with the headline here using the word “political.” This implies, whether by design or accident, that this inclusion in the game is BioWare specifically making a political stance to push some sort of politically-motivated agenda.
This is, 100%,notthe case.
BioWare is a subsidiary of EA; the only agenda they care about is making money. This is not making some kind of political statement; this is pandering to ensure free media coverage and to attempt to appeal to what they see as a currently valuable demographic. Fucking blast them to hell for that, blast them to hell for their poor writing—whatever. But calling this political is doing exactly what I stated before: allowing the conversation to happen on the terms of gamergate/right-wingers who insist that anything in the entire fucking world that doesn’t specifically cater to their own individual interests is somehow inherently “political.”
Complaining about “the way it’s included” has been a trick to try to gatekeep minorities that dates back from to the origin of time.
For those people always pretend it’s ok to include X except in “that particular context” or “in that particular way” and unsurprisingly enough it’s never the right context or the right way. Unless of course the context is out of their way.
I’ve seen the same boring argument repeated for every single minorities over the last 50 years.
Did you read the article? I found it pretty convincing, as an example “non-binary” is not a word I expect to be said in a fantasy setting. The author also mentions a fantasy book where it’s done much more naturally.
OK you guys sure seem to take your pandering really seriously, so here you go: I’m sorry, this scene is peak writing and a major step for inclusivity. EA is a true champion of the LGBT community, and certainly not a bunch of soulless businessmen driven by profits and focus groups.
Did you write a guidebook of acceptable words and concepts in fantasy ? I ask because if you’re so bothered by the introduction of new words into fantasy literature I’m assuming you don’t read anything with any words invented after the release of the Epic of Gilgamesh sometime in 1155 BC.
I’m not bothered at all lol, I would have already forgotten about it if you weren’t so bothered yourself :) But yeah, IMO it would have been better if they had used a less “modern” word. You did notice that fantasy characters usually don’t speak like they’re from the 21st century, right?
I remember very well bioware games and others in past decades got the same kind of reaction because « omg gay romance, that kind of agenda shouldn’t be pushed in a video game, think of the children ».
So now the new social “battle” is trans right and the game has a gender questioning character (From a review, I haven’t played) that seems to take at most a whole 5 minutes over the course of the whole game. Why not.
Now the game has been designed to cater to 10 year old and not the older crowd who played the original so it doesn’t have the depth you’d want and the dialog is on the nose. Well, too bad. Just play something else.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
No humor/memes etc…
No affiliate links
No advertising.
No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
No self promotion.
No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
No politics.
Comments.
No personal attacks.
Obey instance rules.
No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc…)
Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Regardless of content. I learned a long time ago that only unhappyness can come from paying for games by EA.
Though all AAA should come with a “may cause irritation” label.
Indie games are king and that is where my money goes.
Eh, I dunno, I’m currently really enjoying Ghosts of Tsushima, although strictly in off-line mode. And I enjoyed the first Jedi: Fallen Order, again, solely off-line.
Not heard of the first one.
Which Star Wars game release was trash with horrific performance issues?
Ghosts of Sushi Mama is basically Assassins Creed in Japan.
I’m very surprised that you haven’t heard of Ghost of Tsushima; it has been a highly successful game.
But maybe I am mistaken? I would swear that I had to accept EA terms and conditions to play, but it’s by Sony and Sucker Punch. I dunno.
I tend to only follow Indie games. Have no interest in micro transactions, first person shooters, or watching rather than playing games. There is very little in the AAA sphere that interests me.
Performance issues is Jedi Survivor, but trash I think is Star Wars Outlaws from Ubisoft
I would like to find a game free of political message, can someone please show me one?
I’m really curious about what this mythical beast might look like…
Doom? Tetris? Need for Speed? Wii Tennis? WTF are you talking about?
My point is everything is political, you don’t have to see political standpoint in things, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t there.
If that’s what you meant with your original comment then I deeply regret engaging with this at all 🤣
Have a nice day.
Oh you didn’t perceive the irony, didn’t you?
OP is not exactly coming up with good examples, but I think the point is you can analyse anything and claim that there is some hidden political message, even if it was not intended by the developers. Even Gilgamesh, one of the oldest text ever found, has scholars discussing gender and sexuality. I don’t think Gilgamesh and Enkidus relationship was considered political at the time the story was written down, but in a new context and a new political landscape it can suddenly be political.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/25766947
I’m not saying I know anything about this Dragon Age, I haven’t played it.
I think it’s a fair point though, to imagine an a-political narrative game, because I think most if not all RPG games I can think of have some kind of political content.
Shifting the goalposts on behalf of OP, but whatever. Where are you guys coming from?
Narrative games of any scope are almost inevitably going to bump into themes like hierarchy, power dynamics and moral dilemmas. That doesn’t make them “political” in the sense that they’re directly discussing real events around you. I won’t presume anything about your personal position here, but OP gives the impression that if a fantasy game depicted a fictional race subjugated by another he would start complaining that it was woke.
If you want a story without those things you largely need to pick a different genre.
That’s what I’m trying to say. I don’t think such a game is feasible.
Also, in the context of this threat, saying “ooo Tetris isn’t political!” is being pedantic, that’s not what the person meant when they asked for an example of a non political game.
They asked for a game free of political messages, and got several. Are you sure that’s not what they meant? Does Tic Tac Toe have political messages? What about 2048?
Actually, tetris is really a commentary about the brief and fragile ethnostate in Constantinople as the Byzantine empire fell to the Ottoman empire.
This had me cracking up. I was checking if I opened reddit accidentally.
Yeah, people not getting that is a prime example of the sad state of contemporary media literacy.
Good to see my sixth sense tuned to useless bullshit is still working. I knew some joker was gonna call me out on Tetris 🤣
I just couldn’t let the original commentor get away with saying the most ridiculous shit in this thread, I had to top them.
Istanbul was Constantinople now it’s Istanbul not Constantinople been a long time gone, Constantinople and a Turkish delight on a moonlit night. Every gal in Constantinople lives in Istanbul not Constantinople so if you have a date in Constantinople she’ll be waiting in Istanbul. Even old New York was once New Amsterdam, why they changed it i can’t say, people just liked it better that way… So take me back to Constantinople no you can’t go back to Constantinople cause it’s Istanbul not Constantinople been a long time gone, Constantinople why did Constantinople get the works? That’s nobody’s business but the Turks… Dodo do do do de do do do do aaaaaaa whaaaaa (I’m just going to stop here)
Ok it’s from memory don’t sue me if I fucked it up.
Need for Speed promotes scofflaw activities.
And I’m all for it.
The article is not about how the game shouldn’t be political (because this notion is absurd). It’s about how idiotic the treatment of the writer’s views is, to the point it feels like a parody of the statement they wanted to make.
Indeed, I still get someone giving me names of nonpolitical games.
What about pong?
Tennis again?
Joke aside, pure competitive games are indeed just pure competitive games with no context at all. But competition in itself is ideological and political (the need to make the opponent lose) so Pong is too.
It’s a point of view on multiplayer gaming. In Pong there is always a loser and a winner, never two winners, never two losers (can we even make a draw in original Pong? I don’t know).
Pong is also a game that opposed human versus computer, it can be view as pure skill exercise to be a ‘better’ human or it can be literally a fight against the machine like playing chess against a computer. Both makes me want to ask what is the point to do this ? I think answers at this questions are political indeed.
Super mario bros was clearly about promoting poligamy.
Super Mario make a twist on the trope of the knight saving the princess. The knight is just a plumber and it is said to him that the ‘princess is an another castle’. But at the end the right order of the world is restaured when Mario finally frees the princess from the evil Bowser.
So from a political standpoint Super Mario is a product believing strongly in individualism and in the self made man ideology. The twist shows only that even a plumber can save the princess if he works enough = liberal capitalism making us believed that we’ll be all rock stars and billionaires when we’re definitively not (and yes I’m quoting fight club here). All this is the consequence of the game focussing more on gameplay than it’s narration, therefore it leans towards what was the common thinking of the time.
Polygamy (relationship between Peach, Mario and Luigi, if that’s what you are referring to) is much to me a side effect of the 2 players gameplay possibility, but it is still indeed pretty interesting in itself yeah.
You probably meant it as a joke, but too bad you get a real answer :)
The game’s writing is not up to par with past games in the franchise, and it does suffer from “Marvel speak,” but it’s a pretty good game overall and I’m enjoying it. Being part of the Dragon Age franchise hurts it more than anything else because it doesn’t measure up story-wise.
I quite liked Stephanie’s video about Veilguard’s forced “guyversity” and “himclusion”.
I am nonbinary, I haven’t played a Dragon Age game before Veilguard, I haven’t yet gotten to this one scene that’s apparently damned the entire franchise, nor have I even met Taash(?) yet. Here’s my off the cuff rambling thoughts:
I’ve just now watched the scene devoid of context, and if that’s where the misgendering conversation started and stopped, I think everyone is wildly overreacting. The first minute is fine, a weird older lady apologizes for screwing up in her own way, I’ve had people react in much stranger ways than that, and in it’s own way “Whoops I fucked up, lemme do some push ups to show I feel bad” is kinda sweet. I’ll concede that the explanation after was heavy handed, but you could definitely include the gist of it somewhere else easily. “Don’t be weird, just say sorry and move on” is the correct advice to give to someone who doesn’t know how to interact with trans people but wants to be supportive. If that last minute of the conversation happened somewhere else in the game, it’d have been fine.
The game overall has been mediocre so far, a solid 6 out of 10, nothing to write home about, but certainly not deserving of the flak it’s been getting. This is one of the first games I’ve played where I feel like I’m represented, I think it might be the first major game where you can make a custom character who’s explicitly transgender, and that counts for something in my book.
From where I’m standing, it really feels like a lot of the outrage DA:V is drawing comes from some discomfort(conscious or no) with having the queer experience very out in the open for everyone to see, which is what I would expect from a series that (as far as I can tell) has always had tons of explicitly queer characters. I’m sure that’s not universally the case, but I simply don’t buy this narrative of “I’m fine with trans people, but the way it’s written is so clunky.” because I’ve had almost the polar opposite experience. I can think of few other games that talk about transness in the way that actual trans people talk about it.
I wouldn’t say it’s always had a ton of queer characters. The first game had a few bi characters and some transmisogynistic depictions of sex workers, the second had a bunch of bi characters and some transmisogynistic depictions of sex workers, and the third game had a few bi characters, a gay man, a well written trans man, and some lesbian characters written by someone who clearly hates lesbians.
But yeah you’re describing what I expected.
Ah, my only context was what little I’ve picked up about Krem and Dorian(as well as an explanation about how the Qun is sexist to the point of wrapping around to be progressive), and assurances from people that the games have always been like that.
Even still, from a 15 year old series, that still manages to be a lot gayer than most.
Having not played it, I’ll stick to using a review I read in the past few days.
To sum it up, the game felt too positive to the reviewer. To them it felt more like a Disney adventure than a grim fantasy world that’s invaded by malevolent, torture-happy evil gods. They felt no bite from their choices, from the story or from their companions. Everything felt like it needed to be happy in some way, like the idea of conflict was a far more terrible outcome than being skullfucked by an angry tentacle god lady.
To sum it up even further, the game felt too safe. And so became a bland meal that’s easily forgettable.
Additionally, everyone speaks in this insufferable Marvel-tone full of cheeriness and quippiness. The characters speak and act as if they’re aware they’re in a video game and never drop the infuriating singsong HR tone.
Ever work with someone whose parent(s) were in HR? You’ll know what I mean.
Maybe this is a gen z thing and I’m just falling behind the times. I don’t know. But the ME3-tier ending really seals the deal. I’ll pay $10 max for this and probably refund in 2 hours, or just get a crack later down the line.
I’m playing the “demo” and just met an elf companion who said something like “whoopsie! My gods are real and they’re going to destroy the world! 🤷” And it just undercuts the whole story.
Marvelization is the perfect way to describe it. There are zero stakes.
Origins had humor and snark, but it was mostly used in service of the story and themes.
So, the exact opposite of Baldur’s Gate 3
The very first cutscene has a worm crawling into your eye aboard a ship with brain-eating mindflayers, talk about setting the tone.
DAO sets the tone during the harrowing when one Grey Warden candidate dies drinking Darkspawn Blood, then Duncan straight murders the other candidate when he freaks out.
Veilguard just seems saccharine and safe.
I read this comment in Astarian’s voice, lol
Quite early on you have a difficult choice
spoiler
You need to choose between saving 2 cities with each their respective companion, that will result in one of those cities being overrun by the blight and that companion becoming distant. Turning it into a hellscape with even more consequences than I type here.
So I don’t share your opinion.
deleted by creator
I haven’t played it yet, still unsure if I will, but everything I’ve seen of it is nudging me towards not playing it. The dialogues I’ve watched were poorly written, cutscenes were okay at best, and the new companions seemed all to be obnoxious teenagers.
To me, Dragon Age Origins is the only game in the franchise that’s worth playing. The Warden is your character as the player, and that, to me, is the hallmark of a good rpg. None of the other Dragon Age games put as much effort into allowing you to choose and make your own character. The fact that DA:O had entirely different intros, that were both long, well written, and nuanced, based on your combination of class + race was the thing that sold me into that game. Hawke is not your character, but a character they wanted you to play for a reason, but I’ll give it a pass since the idea of Hawke’s story was fairly good, just not as well implemented (DA2 should have been a spin off and not part of the main series). The Inquisitor is even worse, it could have been your character, but it’s some weird generic character that’s there just to perform a function in the world. I’ve played most of DA2, but only a couple of hours of Inquisition, and it was enough to know that both those games fell short of Origins, and this one is looking even worse.
An RPG needs excellent writing above all else. Good gameplay comes as a close second, but it should be mostly about allowing players to forge their own path and have their own interpretations of the world. RPGs need nuance and subtlety, you can’t just constantly regurgitate something to someone’s face and expect them not to be annoyed by it.
I will give you my review as someone who is a trans ally. The writing is bad. Like really bad.
I played DA:O when it first came out, bought the Golem bonus release package. It was a fun, dark fantasy game. Same with the expansion and the other DA games. This game has none of that in the story. It’s just a really awful written story.
The chuds, and I despise even typing this, are right. The trans/non-binary stuff comes out of no where. They go full vegan road biker CrossFit attitude with it and just inject it in the most random places. “Let me tell you about all the sets I did!” And then there are some kind of odd non-consenting scenes which make it even weirder.
It lacks ALL the magic and creative writing of BG3 with almost none of the character development. It’s Mary Sue shit from start to finish.
The combat is good, but it’s likely a separate team made it.
Being preached by a game company owned by EA is like being preached by actors at the oscars. Gotta love the bourgeoisie proselytising. (edit -at)
So, you simply mean “being preached at”? What’s the over/under on religious “leaders” feeling they’re above the law, etc., but knowing that they have to keep the sheep from spooking?
chuds won
This sounds like exactly my response to a ”Christian” movie. They are so ridiculously bad because to earn the label “Christian” they have to be preachy.
It’s a good game and I haven’t noticed anything preachy about it.
I actually like the gameplay a lot and the storytelling isn’t as bad as some make it out to be.
This is how most Gamer™ outrage is. Lots of sweaty weirdos getting triggered.
These nerds would have called Chess “woke” because the Queen is the most powerful piece.
I don’t care about wokeness, the game looks like plastic garbage and they genericized the combat
I feel like I have a outside the norm third-take opinion on this topic, tbh.
I think including the hot social topic of the day often time is pandering.
But I also don’t think pandering is a problem. The muscles on the main character is also pandering. When McDonald’s does market research and then releases a new product, that is pandering.
Games are a sales industry; they are going to pander to potential buyers, period.
So yes, a potentially trans-centric storyline in a game is unnecessary. But so is including a longsword, or a tavern, or a comic relief character. Unnecessary doesn’t mean bad; all of those things are likely only adding to the depth and value of the game.
So all this to say that when crazy right-wingers talk about SJWs and pandering and all that nonsense don’t waste your time trying to fight them on the irrelevant bits - go ahead and acknowledge the pandering aspect and fight the real fight by telling them it’s not negative pandering and minorities deserve to be pandered to and represented just as much as anyone else. They just don’t recognize the market targeting the white male demographic as pandering because it is the sphere of normal under which they operate.
I guess I should add that I’m not speaking to this game specifically since I’ve never played it. I really enjoyed Dragon Age: Origins but frankly felt like I got everything I needed of the world from it and haven’t been interested in any of the sequels. So I won’t be playing DA: The Veilguard, but that reason has absolutely fuck all to do with the inclusion of any social politics.
If you read the article you’ll see that the author takes issue not with the inclusion itself, but the hamfisted way in which it is included. Pandering can be fine, but when it’s just checking boxes in a cringy, lazy way it’s not, and worse it becomes fodder for the gamergate type to rage about.
I understand that, but my point is that there is no shortage of shoehorned comic relief characters, or awkwardly placed fanservice, etc. Critique the actual fault at play, bad writing, rather than letting the gamergate right-wing nutsos have the benefit of having the conversation on their terms. Make the headline “DA:tV falls short in the writing department, here are some examples” and include the flimsy way the character is written as the valid critique. Games are going to pander to us, that is what I was saying; when we place special emphasis on this particular type of pandering all we’re doing is letting the right define the conversations we’re having.
That seems to be what is being done here. Everything that I have seen on this has done what you asked, said what they where critiquing then giving a clip from the game as an example. If people can not be critical of media for any reason, we have an issue.
You’re right; I have been unclear. Allow me to try to clarify.
My issue is specifically with the headline here using the word “political.” This implies, whether by design or accident, that this inclusion in the game is BioWare specifically making a political stance to push some sort of politically-motivated agenda.
This is, 100%, not the case.
BioWare is a subsidiary of EA; the only agenda they care about is making money. This is not making some kind of political statement; this is pandering to ensure free media coverage and to attempt to appeal to what they see as a currently valuable demographic. Fucking blast them to hell for that, blast them to hell for their poor writing—whatever. But calling this political is doing exactly what I stated before: allowing the conversation to happen on the terms of gamergate/right-wingers who insist that anything in the entire fucking world that doesn’t specifically cater to their own individual interests is somehow inherently “political.”
edit: typos
Complaining about “the way it’s included” has been a trick to try to gatekeep minorities that dates back from to the origin of time.
For those people always pretend it’s ok to include X except in “that particular context” or “in that particular way” and unsurprisingly enough it’s never the right context or the right way. Unless of course the context is out of their way.
I’ve seen the same boring argument repeated for every single minorities over the last 50 years.
Did you read the article? I found it pretty convincing, as an example “non-binary” is not a word I expect to be said in a fantasy setting. The author also mentions a fantasy book where it’s done much more naturally.
deleted by creator
OK you guys sure seem to take your pandering really seriously, so here you go: I’m sorry, this scene is peak writing and a major step for inclusivity. EA is a true champion of the LGBT community, and certainly not a bunch of soulless businessmen driven by profits and focus groups.
Did you write a guidebook of acceptable words and concepts in fantasy ? I ask because if you’re so bothered by the introduction of new words into fantasy literature I’m assuming you don’t read anything with any words invented after the release of the Epic of Gilgamesh sometime in 1155 BC.
It’s a violently stupid argument.
I’m not bothered at all lol, I would have already forgotten about it if you weren’t so bothered yourself :) But yeah, IMO it would have been better if they had used a less “modern” word. You did notice that fantasy characters usually don’t speak like they’re from the 21st century, right?
So you admit that they sometime do ? Kinda kills your whole point. 🤷
I remember very well bioware games and others in past decades got the same kind of reaction because « omg gay romance, that kind of agenda shouldn’t be pushed in a video game, think of the children ».
So now the new social “battle” is trans right and the game has a gender questioning character (From a review, I haven’t played) that seems to take at most a whole 5 minutes over the course of the whole game. Why not.
Now the game has been designed to cater to 10 year old and not the older crowd who played the original so it doesn’t have the depth you’d want and the dialog is on the nose. Well, too bad. Just play something else.
deleted by creator