Please no political rubbish

[Caspoi]

I don't want them to be restrained in anyway but I'm just saying the sith are clearly the bad guys and they are selfish/greedy power hungry pricks. I can see instances where social justice could be brought up in a way that is less about good and evil than the Sith example. As for pushing an agenda, if you aren't drawing lines between good and evil or right and wrong it's pretty hard to push one.

PS. I said nothing about KTOR II "exemplifying a "political agenda"".

Ah, I apologize I misrunderstood you, I thought that you meant that they did push a political agenda by saying "greed is bad" (although greed wasn't a central theme there).

 

[hagen_hase]

is it the same team that made new vegas? if yes all will be fine, ghouls that want to go to the moon and fisting robots...

 

[Aries666]

What a ridiculous premise, a Role playing game without any ideologies. Next up a car racing game without any wheels.

 

[Silfae]

I believe the base issue was not about not having any ideology in the game as it was about not having any blatant pandering of a specific, arbitrary ideology.

 

[Aries666]

I believe the base issue was not about not having any ideology in the game as it was about not having any blatant pandering of a specific, arbitrary ideology.

This however is totally in the eye of the beholder. Essentially the only people who would feel this are people who see themselves as having an opposing world view and and then pick out every little detail in the game that they perceive as attacking that view regardless of whether there is any substance to that perception.

 

[Silfae]

This however is totally in the eye of the beholder. Essentially the only people who would feel this are people who see themselves as having an opposing world view and and then pick out every little detail in the game that they perceive as attacking that view regardless of whether there is any substance to that perception.

I do not think that is the case, unless a person is completely devoid of any kind of objectivity, he will be capable to see if he's being cathered to or not, and, even then, there could be plenty of people who are just neutral on a specific subject and can perceive how one of two equally uninteresting option is given a greater weight by a narrator.

There are both ways of keeping all choices open without penalization or to support a specific choice without being blunt and uninteresting. Personally, the main problem I see in RPGs is not as much the penalization of choices as much as the lack of certain kinds of choices.
In MotB Obsidian allows you to do pretty evil things and, on parallel, either move on the authoritarian or liberitarian scale, and different characters will call you out on different matters, but, say, in DA:I, there's always some lines you will not be allowed to cross, you will never have the option to keep some characters, with certain views, on your side.

 

[WorldViper]

I believe the base issue was not about not having any ideology in the game as it was about not having any blatant pandering of a specific, arbitrary ideology.

Yes that is exactly the problem I was thinking of.

 

[Darehus]

I only have 2 problems
1st is: I don't want to have ideology that have no sense in game world
If i see some PC in game that have setting based on 5th century. I will say that this is just wrong.
If i will see some PC in a game that is based on 21st century. OK.
But i BEG YOU Don't force us to take some stance because we MUST. Allow us to have CHOICE.
Even games that are not the best can by adding choice become something great (Undertale).
So i want RPG that allows me to have choice and make sense. Is that much ?

 

[TheWolfFate]

Well anything like that really. I'm not against the game being politically. I mean trying to push a particular agenda.

Like that new Assassin's Creed game with Karl Marx and is clearly geared towards that political ideology.

I'd rather be able to make up my own mind rather than "oh these guys are objectively good/bad because the game says so!"

U wot, they turned Marx into a weird Social Democrat in Syndicate.

 

[TheDungen]

U wot, they turned Marx into a weird Social Democrat in Syndicate.

Well if you made it to syndicate without abandoning the AC ship then I am impressed.

 

[Chyll]

I believe the base issue was not about not having any ideology in the game as it was about not having any blatant pandering of a specific, arbitrary ideology.

More like, anyone complaining this far in advance is requesting to not have any ideology they disagree with in the game.

 

[DCParry]

I only have 2 problems
1st is: I don't want to have ideology that have no sense in game world
If i see some PC in game that have setting based on 5th century. I will say that this is just wrong.
If i will see some PC in a game that is based on 21st century. OK.
But i BEG YOU Don't force us to take some stance because we MUST. Allow us to have CHOICE.
Even games that are not the best can by adding choice become something great (Undertale).
So i want RPG that allows me to have choice and make sense. Is that much ?

The problem with this is that the average gamer, or at least the average gamer who seems most vocal about these sorts things, has no idea about actual social conditions and culture norms of non- contemporary society, and so they cry about things like gender relations and gender identity without any idea of what these (extremely fluid and complex) things were actually like.

 

[Silfae]

The problem with this is that the average gamer, or at least the average gamer who seems most vocal about these sorts things, has no idea about actual social conditions and culture norms of non- contemporary society, and so they cry about things like gender relations and gender identity without any idea of what these (extremely fluid and complex) things were actually like.

Not many game developers have degrees on ancient history either, though that is not the point. If the world is a fantasy setting, then, regardless of which "base period" of real history it has been built on, the social norm will not be the same, since there will be other variables to take into consideration for its development through the history of a world which has magic, dragons, elves, etc.
The point, as other users said, is to not have forced norms that clash within the original context of that same world or, even in that case, to force said norms by limiting player choice.

 

[Silas1775]

The problem with this is that the average gamer, or at least the average gamer who seems most vocal about these sorts things, has no idea about actual social conditions and culture norms of non- contemporary society, and so they cry about things like gender relations and gender identity without any idea of what these (extremely fluid and complex) things were actually like.

This is absolutely correct. Even the American television show "Mad Men" taking place only 60~ years ago totally fails to accurately represent the state of mind, beliefs and worldview of the people of the time. Why? Because to most people in the western world now, the average American in the 1950/60's was a scary alien, totally incomprehensible. They cannot understand that people could, for example, believe in the separation of whites in blacks in the American south, or refuse to serve Jews in their store and STILL be good, kind and moral people according to their way of life at the time.

So rather than attempt to show these things and alienate the average viewer, they just dress people up in period clothing and equip them with modern, western sensibilities that have absolutely no place in that time whatsoever. Which is lazy, reinforces a warped view of history and humanity and is always defended by cries of "it's just TV! I don't watch it for the historical accuracy!" . But many people get their image of that time from that type of media. EDIT: Besides, it's just not as powerful and interesting writing as it could be!

Anyway, it's a fantasy setting so if it's a bronze-age planet of all races, creeds and genders on an even field with no discrimination except for the beast people stand-ins, then the writing will be terribly hamstrung by such childish world building and it will not move the medium forward past simply an updated version of the traditional masturbatory fantasy/sci-fi culture(that contrary to what some may say has usually espoused a utopian "avant-garde" stance regarding the social norms depicted) .

 

[illathid]

This is absolutely correct. Even the American television show "Mad Men" taking place only 60~ years ago totally fails to accurately represent the state of mind, beliefs and worldview of the people of the time. Why? Because to most people in the western world now, the average American in the 1950/60's was a scary alien, totally incomprehensible. They cannot understand that people could, for example, believe in the separation of whites in blacks in the American south, or refuse to serve Jews in their store and STILL be good, kind and moral people according to their way of life at the time.

So rather than attempt to show these things and alienate the average viewer, they just dress people up in period clothing and equip them with modern, western sensibilities that have absolutely no place in that time whatsoever. Which is lazy, reinforces a warped view of history and humanity and is always defended by cries of "it's just TV! I don't watch it for the historical accuracy!" . But many people still get their image of that time from that type of media.

Anyway, it's a fantasy setting so if it's a bronze-age planet of all races, creeds and genders on an even field with no discrimination except for the beast people stand-ins, then the writing will be terribly hamstrung by such childish world building and it will not move the medium forward past simply an updated version of the traditional masturbatory nerd culture(that contrary to what some may say has usually espoused a utopian "avant-garde" stance regarding the social norms depicted) .

You must have not watched Mad Men. All the things you mentioned are actually addressed.

 

[Silas1775]

You must have not watched Mad Men. All the things you mentioned are actually addressed.

But not in a way that is seriously believable for the attitudes and morals of the time. At every turn the characters, at least most of them, act with modern sensibilities unless they're being set up as a sort of villain or just a vehicle to show how "barbaric" people were back then.

I'll quote a passage from an article on this very subject that I think describes it quite well, talking about the plot of an early episode from the European "Borgia" series.

One of the heads of the Orsini family bursts into his bedroom and catches Juan (Giovanni) Borgia in flagrante with his wife. Juan grabs his pants and flees out the window as quickly as he can. Now here is Orsini alone with his wife. [The audience knows what to expect. He will shout, she will try to explain, he will hit her, there will be tears and begging, and, depending on how bad a character the writers are setting up, he might beat her really badly and we’ll see her in the rest of this episode all puffy and bruised, or if they want him to be really bad he’ll slam her against something hard enough to break her neck, and he’ll stare at her corpse with that brutish ambiguity where we’re not sure if he regrets it.] Orsini grabs the iron fire poker and hits his wife over the head, full force, wham, wham, dead. He drops the fire poker on her corpse and walks briskly out of the room, leaving it for the servants to clean up. Yes. That is the right thing, because this is the Renaissance, and these people are terrible. When word gets out there is concern over a possible feud, but no one ever comments that Orsini killing his wife was anything but the appropriate course. That is historicity, and the modern audience is left in genuine shock.

EDIT: I'll go ahead and include his counter example from the American "The Borgias" series, demonstrating the typical application of modern sensibilities to a time and place they do NOT belong.

We are facing the papal election of 1492. Another Cardinal confronts Rodrigo Borgia in a hallway. It has just come out that Borgia has been committing simony, i.e. taking bribes. Our modern audience is shocked! Shocked, I say! That a candidate for the papacy would be corrupt and take bribes! Our daring Cardinal confronts Borgia, saying he too is shocked! Shocked! This is no longer a matter of politics but principle! He will oppose Borgia with all his power, because Borgia is a bad person and should not sit on the Throne of St. Peter! See, audience! Now is the time to be shocked! No. This is not the Renaissance, this is modern sensibilities about what we think should’ve been shocking in the Renaissance. After the election this same Cardinal will be equally shocked that the Holy Father has a mistress, and bastards. Ooooh. Because that would be shocking in 2001, but in 1492 this had been true of every pope for the past century. In fact, Cardinal Shocked-all-the-time, according to the writers you are supposed to be none other than Giuliano della Rovere. Giuliano “Battle-Pope” della Rovere! You have a mistress! And a daughter! And a brothel! And an elephant! And take your elephant to your brothel! And you’re stalking Michelangelo! And foreign powers lent you 300,000 ducats to spend bribing other people to vote for you in this election! And we’re supposed to believe you are shocked by simony? That is not historicity. It is applying some historical names to some made-up dudes and having them lecture us on why be should be shocked.

A big wall of text, but he demonstrates the point very, very well.

 

[illathid]

You're moving the goal posts (and really this all off topic).

 

[Limak]

OH NOES SJWS!!!!111111111111

Anita Sakerisan bribed the team behind Tyranny to make the game secretly about feminism. Run for your lives.

I'm fine as long as I get the option to burn them all.

 

[BBBD316]

Dear god have we started this already??

You guys know it is just a game, one that has only just been announced. Seriously if you have issues just wait for release and then read reviews.

If you want to whinge about SJW's and neo-cons go to the OT forum.

 

[Dagda]

That wasn't even a controversy. A dirty limerick from a backer wasn't properly vetted and made it into the game. When obsidian became aware of it, they asked the backer to submit new content. You're inventing controversy where none exist.

If Obsidian was really swarming with SJWs Durance wouldn't have been able to say a single line in the game.

Actually, according to the backer, he/she offered to change the content to curb the drama of their own volition.

Obsidian is swarming with Southern Californians. And let's be honest, if a person uttered the phrase 'social justice warrior' in the real world they would be laughed out of the room by any sane individual.