I see the ACTUAL problems people have, but how is this game woke?

[Capitao Fuchead]

I agree, this game has numerous problems. The attacks shown in gameplay don't have weight. The companion designs are weak, ugly, out of place and their introductions were terribly executed. The world is too smooth - from the demons, the people and the structures around them. There is no blood caused by attacks. The trailers have generally been straight ass.

A lot of other issues are merely speculation, such as whether or not the RPG elements will be good, whether or not the will retain the feature that allows you to change the world state, whether or not Solas - The entire POINT of the last game - will be the actual Big-Bad. But how on Earth is this game anymore "woke" than the others?

Hasn't Bioware, with DA specifically - been putting in same-sex relationships since 2009? Why is this a problem now? And it isn't even as if every character is romanceable by the same-sex (Though I'm not sure about it in this game, but even then, BG 3 shows that it doesn't detract from the game). If I'm not mistaken, there were elves of other skin tones in the other games, and I don't see that pulling away from the enjoyment. I get there have been, like, only 4 talking heads lurking in these posts just to whine, but then there are people who seem to not even know what DA is, and just come in to say they won't buy it like... Pastor Bob or whatever I just don't understand how the title itself is "woke" or more than any other title.

Not sure if I'm going to get it myself. I wanna see the Sword and Shield gameplay, since that has been my bread and butter since my Xbox days, and I don't think the gameplay looks as horrendous as a bunch of others do, and it does have numerous actual flaws, but some of you are whining about nothing.

[Capitao Fuchead]

Originally posted by Shinno:

Pastor Bob did nothing wrong! But I agree these hate topics are getting tiresome. The only major flaw of DAVG is a complete lack of templars.:lone:

My apologies to Pastor Bob

[Xaphnir]

Originally posted by Capitao Fuchead:

Hasn't Bioware, with DA specifically - been putting in same-sex relationships since 2009? Why is this a problem now?

Because these people weren't opposed to the SJWs because they were annoying or censored things, but because of the political message they represented. And they were jealous of the SJWs because they wanted to do what the SJWs could. So finally in the last few years they managed to organize enough to do what the SJWs did, and now they're running wild with it. And they're more annoying than the SJWs ever were.

If Dragon Age Origins released today, you'd have similar backlash against Zevran and Leliana. Hell, even KOTOR would have all these weirdos focusing on Juhani's confession of love for the female player character, and would be whining about Jolee being in the game.

[Capitao Fuchead]

Originally posted by criffyzou:

It has been confirmed by a dev that the blood splatters were removed for the gameplay reveal, but they're actually in the game.

YIPPEE!

[pr1mus]

Originally posted by Capitao Fuchead:

Hasn't Bioware, with DA specifically - been putting in same-sex relationships since 2009? Why is this a problem now?

i think characters ought to have their preferences and standards rather than that standard always being you, the player.

the only reason why every companion is now pan/player sexual is because players feel entitled to bump ugly with whoever they want without being locked out of these romances on account of characters not being into their sex, it's an arbitrary decision to cater to these sad sacks that go around complaining that they couldn't bone Judy in Cyberpunk or romance Cassandra/Dorian in DA:I (even though Dorian being gay is very integral part of his character, and making him similarly pansexual would just detract from his writing).

Originally posted by Capitao Fuchead:

If I'm not mistaken, there were elves of other skin tones in the other games, and I don't see that pulling away from the enjoyment.

i think it is worth differentiating that elves have an array of skin colors they've shown in the games, but what we're seeing now in DA4 is that the elven species is being superseded by humans.

Davrin for instance has an afro (not entirely sure but i don't believe i've seen elves with something other than straight hair in the games) and an African VA, Bellara has monolid eyes and an Asian VA; this is in contrast with the Elves as we know in Thedas (which is their native land, quite literally Elven motherland where supposedly all Elves come from) who prior to this game had their own physiognomy and anthropological features to suggest they were vaguely humanoid with alien features, not just.. actual humans with pointy ears.

this doesn't have anything to do with skin color, but it has everything to do with elves now representing very specific human ethnicities rather than representing elves, Davrin is clearly an allegory for Africans while Bellara is an allegory for Asians (we haven't seen any white elves yet, but i'm going to assume they're similarly replacing remaining elf designs as well).

Solas for instance has "white" skin, but clearly not "human", his design is too alien for that, these DA4 companions? they do not look elven.

https://x.com/davidgaider/status/1800442520767529038

David Gaider has the opinion that one continent (which is Thedas) shouldn't natively house all cultures on it because that wouldn't make a lot of sense, but that these alien cultures should be explainable if they come from elsewhere; which begs the question where our elven companions are coming from because it isn't Thedas if we reference them next to.. any all other elves we've ever seen on Thedas.

of course they can retcon the entire lore (something Gaider is okay with) or they can invent a new mystery continent that conveniently is native to all the human allegory-elves they wish to put into your party roster, in any case the designs are contrived and the writing is arbitrary; more centered on focusing in inclusion first and then explain it away afterwards with no real respect the source material they're iterating on.

[Capitao Fuchead]

Originally posted by pr1mus:

the only reason why every companion is now pan/player sexual

I was not aware that they had made this change, so thank you for letting me know! The thing about this though is - Personally speaking, of course - if the character's sexuality doesn't matter much to their overarching story, like with Dorian being from a noble household that inadvertently pushed away their heir, I don't mind them being playersexual. Though that obviously comes down to a matter of preference.

I do admit, some instances where the wires got crossed and the player got rejected made for interesting cutscenes, like the one with Cassandra or Cullen, but the impact that the loss of those scenes will make will be next to none realistically, and hopefully gave them time to improve on other areas likely not shown to us.

Originally posted by pr1mus:

David Gaider has the opinion that one continent (which is Thedas) shouldn't natively house all cultures on it because that wouldn't make a lot of sense, but that these alien cultures should be explainable if they come from elsewhere;

This was actually something that I had considered after posting, and is a very valid point. I simply doubt however that many of the rage bait posts cared much for a thought process like this. I find the integrity of the world building in these games is just as important as the personal experiences and stories that the players make on them, so I can really only hope that they have some explanation for the diversity in their appearance - Possibly making them half-elven, if their biology would have previously allowed that, though I am not entirely familiar with the specifics of elven biology in regards to this universe.

If most of the criticisms could be considered to be made in good faith and in regards to the established lore, I wouldn't have even posted, but it genuinely feels more akin to parroted hate. Thank you for a better perspective on the matter.

[Queco Jones21]

Yeah, I have no issue with the relationships. Dragon Age has always been very open in this aspect.

Blood is obviously held back so that the trailers can reach a wider audience. One of the devs even shared a post on X that showed blood (probably taken down by now). Marketing is just crap...

I like the world design. No problem with this aspect.

Agree that the companion designs are crap. Taash is the worst (didn't even release it was a female until break down videos). From the choices available I'll probably choose the dwarf scout. At least until mods come out and hopefully modders can give the companions some make overs.

Don't care so much about the rogue combat (rarely play rogues anyways). Too jumpy and flipping about. Want to see warrior combat style and mage combat with the limited abilities (just 3... ugh).

[kinna]

Originally posted by Horus Blackheart:

Originally posted by Xaphnir:

Because these people weren't opposed to the SJWs because they were annoying or censored things, but because of the political message they represented. And they were jealous of the SJWs because they wanted to do what the SJWs could. So finally in the last few years they managed to organize enough to do what the SJWs did, and now they're running wild with it. And they're more annoying than the SJWs ever were.

If Dragon Age Origins released today, you'd have similar backlash against Zevran and Leliana. Hell, even KOTOR would have all these weirdos focusing on Juhani's confession of love for the female player character, and would be whining about Jolee being in the game.

A good number of people complaining about "woke" messaging arnt upset that there are Gay people in the game, or women or different ethnicity's your arguments are misrepresenting the issue. putting check list of minority's in to a work and supporting it with weak preachy writing is not being "inclusive" or helping some grand cause, its a condescending lecture. Thais down to implementation and a misunderstanding of what equality actual means. The people championing this crap don't support charity or work with the groups in question. Instead they want clout on social media and listen to "consultancy groups" which are typically the most extremest.

i'll use star trek as an example. It's always been progressive but it focused on story first and presented commentary in away that let the audience make up its own mind. Ware as the new shows toss nuance out the window focal on the superficial and lecture the audience to death. "strong femail black adopted Vulcan is a murder but that's ok because shes a strong women lets forgive her. shes also a better volcan than spok ever was and sarik liked her better anyway" just obnoxious shallow drivel. Compare that to tng or deep space nine where dax reconnects with a lover of a previous host and explores the consequences of that. Sure both hosts were women but that was not the main point.
One puts story first the other just beats the audience over the head with how amazing it is because Representation.

That argument might fly a bit better if you guys cried woke only after the game is out. But no, even before we know anything about the characters stories you proclaim they are there just to fill boxes.

What is so wrong about women leads that they get called out on story things that have been ok in the past when done by men?

[kinna]

Originally posted by Horus Blackheart:

Originally posted by kinna:

That argument might fly a bit better if you guys cried woke only after the game is out. But no, even before we know anything about the characters stories you proclaim they are there just to fill boxes.

What is so wrong about women leads that they get called out on story things that have been ok in the past when done by men?

There Is nothing wrong with female leads. you are resorting to straw man arguments. Ripley is an example of a well rounded character. Why? Because they don's beat people over the head with how capable she is they show her being capable with out demeaning the rest of the crew to do it. Ray palptine is the exact opposite of that. "look at ray she can beat a sith in light saver combat who trained for decades without any training. knows more about the falcon than han/ lectures and talks down to han, to show how independent she is I could go on.

What you're describing here is bad writing. It has been going on for years but suddenly became a more of a problem when men no longer were the most prominent lead characters.

I mean Rey doing anything she did would be just as bad if she was a he, right? So why does her gender matter when it comes to quality of writing?

[kinna]

Originally posted by Horus Blackheart:

Originally posted by kinna:

What you're describing here is bad writing. It has been going on for years but suddenly became a more of a problem when men no longer were the most prominent lead characters.

I mean Rey doing anything she did would be just as bad if she was a he, right? So why does her gender matter when it comes to quality of writing?

That's a question for writers of this stuff. Because that's the crux of the issue for me. You can have all the representation in the game you like but if the writing is just the equivalent of a gender study's lecture, it comes across as obnoxious and antagonistic. Which turns off the people they clame they are trying to "educate" I don't know about others but I don't watch si-fi or play rpgs to be "educated" on some hacks narrow view of whats socially acceptable. I watch and play first and foremost to be entertained. People responding with the usal they just hate women lgbt race ect are only interested in the superficial because it gets them good person points when they are missing the wider point. Equality= good but they cant just cherry pick the bits they like, what the activists seem to want is not equality but rasing favored groups at the expense of others. That is not equality. its bigotry.

Why do you bring up representation? Would Rey be badly written character if she was a he? And if this was the case, then why does her gender matter to you so much?

[kinna]

Originally posted by Horus Blackheart:

Originally posted by kinna:

Why do you bring up representation? Would Rey be badly written character if she was a he? And if this was the case, then why does her gender matter to you so much?

I bring up representation because the standard retort to criticism of gender swapping/ race swapping and other laziness in the name of "inclusion" and "representation is "well if you don't like the trend its just cause you hate those things you bigot. Luke had talent yes but he grew over 3 movies you could replace ray with a blind chimp and it would still be the same quality. A better example is fin. He had potential but they turned him in to a joke character to elevate others so much for equality.

What has race/gender swapping have anything to do with examples you have brought up? If you could just answer the first question about Rey and then we can discuss if Fin is a joke character or not, although this has nothing to do with Dragon Age.

Edit. Maybe if you actually criticized the writing instead of claiming that a POC or a woman is there just as a token character people would't call you a bigot.

[kinna]

Originally posted by Horus Blackheart:

Originally posted by kinna:

What has race/gender swapping have anything to do with examples you have brought up? If you could just answer the first question about Rey and then we can discuss if Fin is a joke character or not, although this has nothing to do with Dragon Age.

The issues go beyond any one aspect of media. as for the race swapping and genderswaping, its the preferred method of making established ip and characters "inclusive" qeerbaiting is the other one. Thor is a women now how progressive we are. ect. Getting back to dragon age. my issue with vailgaurd are due to what we have been discussing the lack of player agency compared to past games a check box of "inclusion" stripped down systems party members are pan sexual and seem to be deigned around catering to fetishes rather than giving them preferences and agency. the detective being an amputee is particularly tone deaf they went out of there way to bring attention to that one aspect.

No they did not go out of their way in showcasing that she's lost her leg. And so what that she has lost a leg, as we know people can still function with missing limbs. Should she just stop adventuring and doing what she's good at because some minor limitation? Do you have a problem with Daredevil being blind? See, I too can throw more and more layers for you to argue.

On the Thor part, there have been many iterations of Thor because of the whole multiverse thing going on in Marvel (not really a "new" thing). Jane Foster as Thor (Thordis) is a different character than Thor, from What if series started in 1977, and the original Thor still exist, so what is the problem?

[kinna]

Originally posted by Horus Blackheart:

Originally posted by kinna:

No they did not go out of their way in showcasing that she's lost her leg. And so what that she has lost a leg, as we know people can still function with missing limbs. Should she just stop adventuring and doing what she's good at because some minor limitation? Do you have a problem with Daredevil being blind? See, I too can throw more and more layers for you to argue.

On the Thor part, there have been many iterations of Thor because of the whole multiverse thing going on in Marvel (not really a "new" thing). Jane Foster as Thor (Thordis) is a different character than Thor, from What if series started in 1977, and the original Thor still exist, so what is the problem?

More strawmen arguments? I was hoping we got passed that? again it comes down to how its presented Daredevel is blind but it does not define who he is as a character Bioware deliberately drew attention to the fact the detective mage has a prosthetic leg. We knew nothing else about her yet they lead with that? Did their highly payed consultancy group really think that was the best introduction? Did the bioware writers expect an award for how progressive and brave it was? Hell joker in mass effect was handled with more tact. the problem with thor and other genderswaps is " hey look its thor bit better its a women now". lets undermine and crap on everything that made the original character great in the name of progress. (also if we make a established character bi it's in a non cannon mirror universe that's NOT cannon. Also not published in china or anyother place that's offended by that content cause we need their money) that is shallow pandering aka "woke" .

And Neve having a missing leg does not define her as a character, that is just something you woke criers have fixated on. Honestly, I for one paid no attention to her leg before it was brought up here on the forums.

An alternate female version in no way belittles or makes the male version obsolete, that is all in your head. Hell, they killed Jane Foster as female Thor in the movies, while the original Thor lived on.

[kinna]

Originally posted by Horus Blackheart:

Originally posted by kinna:

And Neve having a missing leg does not define her as a character, that is just something you woke criers have fixated on. Honestly, I for one paid no attention to her leg before it was brought up here on the forums.

An alternate female version in no way belittles or makes the male version obsolete, that is all in your head. Hell, they killed Jane Foster as female Thor in the movies, while the original Thor lived on.

first stawmaning then gas lighting? i'm slightly disappointed. genderswap thor was absolutely intended as a replacement going forward. and if it does not diminish og thor then why are they aggressively pushing the new at the expense of the old ? As for how neves situation revel was handled I take particular issue with that. Because i'm the Target group her disability is ment to help make feel represented. as a person with a disability I can tell you that I don't go out of my way to draw attention to it I don't typically mention it online because its not usually relevant. Neve having a disability in a setting where it makes even less sense than in mass effect does not Include or speak for me frankly i'm annoyed insulted and embarrassed and who ever insisted on it understands nothing its a token incert at best it ads nothing to the character. I'm willing to bet they could take out that aspect entirely and the story and character would work just the same.

I'm not gaslighting or strawmanning, you just kept moving the goalposts and introducing more and more things in to the conversation so I can't possibly answer each and every one of your claims.

If Marvel is trying to replace Thor with a female version you undoubtedly have some link to an official source saying this?

I'm just finding it hard to understand why in a setting filled with magic and magical contraptions an artificial leg is such a big problem? Like I said, they showed it yes, but that is not the same as making it her whole personality. Since we do not yet know how it is handled in her story it is odd to claim foreknowledge that it will be bad. You can speculate it might be bad but to be intellectually honest you must also aknowledge that they might do a good job in explaining it.

[kinna]

Originally posted by Horus Blackheart:

Originally posted by kinna:

I'm not gaslighting or strawmanning, you just kept moving the goalposts and introducing more and more things in to the conversation so I can't possibly answer each and every one of your claims.

If Marvel is trying to replace Thor with a female version you undoubtedly have some link to an official source saying this?

I'm just finding it hard to understand why in a setting filled with magic and magical contraptions an artificial leg is such a big problem? Like I said, they showed it yes, but that is not the same as making it her whole personality. Since we do not yet know how it is handled in her story it is odd to claim foreknowledge that it will be bad. You can speculate it might be bad but to be intellectually honest you must also aknowledge that they might do a good job in explaining it.

I'm not moving the goal posts here i'm simply responding to the examples you cited and explaining why they dont make the point you clam they do. If thats moving the goal posts then we need to work on definitions. I'm trying to engage in good faith and your throwing out logical fallacy and whereabouts inplace of fact and good faith positions. As for examples of replacing thor with the genderswaped iteration there is no ovvert proof to cite . As progressive as marvel clams to be they arnt totally stupid. They wont come out and say we are replasing heros and gender swaping. that would be death financially.
insted look at their output phase 4 to be exact. Old characters are killed off and replaced with new inttirations captain marvel female Thor Valkyrie the new captain america. All of there runs had a aggressively progressive push to them. I would add that they all flopped and lost a ton of money.
Now Back to your leg justification. I'm sure the writers had the same thought. The problem is that it's a contrivance, and a lazy one at that. It fails to address the core problem with how it was handled, that being you could remove that aspect from the character and it would change nothing. it's tokenistic. As for predicting the story. that's quite simple we know who the writers are we have examples of their past works. Its really not hard to work out plot points and direction from past work.

So just general outrage, got it.

The team working on Veilguard does have Mark Darrah consulting them on the game so it is not just people who "have no idea what Dragon Age should be", as some here have claimed.

I did try asking why Rey's gender mattered if her writing is bad, meaning how would the situation be any different if she was a he, and you just went on piling more and more stuff without addressing that particular issue.

[kinna]

So it was the writers going around the internet calling Mary Sue and woke, got it.

I'm not here to win anything, just trying to understand why some people are so hell bent on finding issues where there are none, or they are so insignificant that without the outcry they would likely go unnoticed by most people.