- Status
Dethmold is evil , that's it . The guy in his room where Roche kills Dethmold also states "Forgive me , he forced me" . Force sex is crime no matter the gender , Roche did right and punished Dethmold for his crimes . +1 for him and his character . On other hand Witcher games are not sex games , sex is part of Witcher universe and CDPR already stated this lot of times that the sex scenes and characters in the game fit perfectly with the plot and they never do something like "Hey lets create this quest here so in the end of it Geralt can have sex with that chick" . No offense but stop being so sensitive , no one is good in Witcher universe . It's all part of plot and depth of predefined characters from the book .
But why Geralt supposed to comment on Roche killing Dethmold? Dethmold went completely insane and start interrogating, torturing and executing many, many of his own soldiers and most of them were not guilty of treason (including Roche's men). Even before, he knew how sick person Dethmold is. He has no sympathy for him at all.
I also wonder when did Vernon joked after Dethmold death, because I didn't heard anything like that. With his words, he was just expressing his hatred toward Dethmold (for very understandable reasons), which you could translate as "That's for my men, you SOB". Especially prominent in polish version of the game, when you can clearly hear an anger in his voice. Not funny at all.
In case of Henselt, the fact that, after bragging so much about his "godhood", is gutted by nobody like Vernon just right after his victory was humilating enough, cutting off his balls would be nothing compare to that. Also killing a king means a lot, while killing someone like Dethmold (who was already hated by everyone, including other mages) would not impact anything.
It's worth to mention that many "villains" (let's call them that way) in Witcher world dies in a really humilating way: Rience, Schirru, Bonhart, Vilgefortz, Professor (from the first game), aforementioned Henselt and Dethmold. Actually it's easier to list a villains who actually die with at least a bit of dignity. Possibly to make fun of "Evil is cool" trope.
P.S: Why everyone assume that Dethmold is a rapist? Boy doesn't look like he was forced to do that and his words could possibly be just a way to defend himself by claiming that he has no relationship with Dethmold.
If I see another commander shepard Mass Effect gay or Dragon Age 2 crew that everybody in your party wants to screw your ass I won't play the game. Witcher is a STRONG MALE game. MANLY game and i LOVE it for being that way. If you want gay products go to bioware.
Sorry to butt in, but I cannot disagree more. That is what I expect from my entertainment, to forget that real world even exists. To escape out of it, and from it's problems, just for couple of hours.KnightofPhoenix said:
Resounding "NO!"KnightofPhoenix said:
Art should be created for the art's sake. Art should not be held hostage to the real life' issues.
Strange asseveration when it' known that art use to be the most free means of life's issues interpretation....pomor said:Sorry to butt in, but I cannot disagree more. That is what I expect from my entertainment, to forget that real world even exists. To escape out of it, and from it's problems, just for couple of hours.
Resounding "NO!"
Hold on a second. Why is it a strawman?dragonbird said:
Do dwarfs exist? They do. I can count with one hand the times I have seen dwarfs portrayed in movies and/or TV as just regular people dealing with everyday issues; they are normally there for our amusement. There's but a handful of actors who happen to be dwarfs who have been able to break the munchkin/leprechaun/circus clown/Humpa Lumpa stereotypes. But you don't usually see people who are dwarfs complain about blatant stereotypical portrays of dwarfs, do you?
It is a very valid comparison.
KnightofPhoenix said:
Turning of real world in problems in a game with murder, torture, rape, racism, terrorism, in a setting that very loosely resembles real world in our distant history is actually very logical. The popular demand is changing established things for the sake of a forced relation to our world and most importantly our timeline.
Assire var Annahid is disgusted with Philipas sexual preferences and I wouldn't want it any other way.
I didn't ignore the OP, he was clear enough and generalized enough.KnightofPhoenix said:
The people you have been in contact about this scene, are equally irrelevant as the number of people I have been in contact that where happy about killing the bastard, without searching for excuses to make him better for being gay.
You'll have to take my word for it.
I'm not talking about the real world.KnightofPhoenix said:
Two things are relevant to my interest
1.Sapkowski and his books.
2.CD Project and their interpretation of Sapkowskis books.
If the game is unable to drag in the gay player, with it's story, quests, characters than the game failed miserably.
The idea that such a failure is going to be undone by using political correctness, forced inclusivity, religious and moral manipulation and ego stroking is strange at least.
If the game did everything wrong the OP would have never finished it.
It assumed however that the player is mature enough to deduce the finesses of the Witchers world.
Forgetting one self in a immersive world is actually the best thing that can happen, it's neither undesirable, nor unrealistic.
The abuse of art, as a form by using it as a intimidation, acceptance device, lowers it to a political, religious or societal voice, it's not better than the"arts," of the past
that have been abused in a similar manner.
And it propagates the equal amount of creative freedom- exactly no freedom at all.
I suppose fat gamers ("famers" ) should make a ruckus because there isn't a single fat character in W2 that isn't a scumbag (Loredo, bandits, etc...).
No, it's not. At all.MarcAuron said:
How could a game with such heavy and sensitive themes that we go through on a daily basis help you forget about the real world?
You are telling m that when you saw things happening in TW2, you didn't draw parallels with real life and history? I find that hard to believe, and even if you did manage it, no one is obligated to play that way at all. I couldn't care less how you played the game, I know how I played it and it's by drawing heavy parallels with real life. So your entire point is moot.
Who said anyone wanted it any other way?
This clearly shows that you still do not know what we are arguing. No one is arguing against the presence of homophobia in the game's characters. We are arguing against an ambiguity that makes *the game* look like it's promoting or indulging itself in homophobia.
The OP and no one claimed the game did everything wrong. That doesn't mean it didn't commit a mistake that would make people uncomfortable. Uncomfortable does not mean they hate the game or are unable to finish it.
As for the rest, we clearly reached an impasse. Your view on art is something I find completely undesirable and even absurd. But arguing over it will become a black hole tangent.
I agree that we pretty much said everything that could be said right now on that matter, the sides can now digest and think through all the counterarguments. For now, it seems unlikely that anybody will change their minds drastically.
But I wanted to address one more thing that is raised constantly here: that policing the art, and in this case, the writing of the game will somehow make it inferior. As I view it, if the writers actually listened to all the concerns that the OP and his supporters voice (and there is no guarantee on that front), it would make the script more difficult to create. On the other hand, not being able to rely on clichés and storytelling shortcuts, so prelevent in many stories nowadays (not only games), could result in the stronger overall product. CDPR want to be challenged, not making compromises, good! It would be glorious if they managed to present us with the game which avoided harmful stereotypes while maintaining the quality, diversity and originality of the previous titles. Writing a non-PC story is actually easier than creating something non-offensive and still fresh, interesting, gripping, and fun. This would be my ideal game ever.
But I wanted to address one more thing that is raised constantly here: that policing the art, and in this case, the writing of the game will somehow make it inferior. As I view it, if the writers actually listened to all the concerns that the OP and his supporters voice (and there is no guarantee on that front), it would make the script more difficult to create. On the other hand, not being able to rely on clichés and storytelling shortcuts, so prelevent in many stories nowadays (not only games), could result in the stronger overall product. CDPR want to be challenged, not making compromises, good! It would be glorious if they managed to present us with the game which avoided harmful stereotypes while maintaining the quality, diversity and originality of the previous titles. Writing a non-PC story is actually easier than creating something non-offensive and still fresh, interesting, gripping, and fun. This would be my ideal game ever.
Ugh... Seriously, let's talk it simple. I am a guy, I like females. And wonder what: When I saw Roche cutting Dethmold's balls off, I didn't thought: "oh, he was gay, he deserved it." - I thought: "That cruel bastard had that coming."
Was that simple enough for everyone to understand?
What's wrong with me, huh? I do not see the obvious, or I just think normally without searching gods knows what everywhere?
Personally, I couldn't care less about who prefers who, who beds who. Do your thing, but do not put me in it. You may be wondering why I step into this beehive. For one reason, it's getting ridiculous.
Witcher games are set in the grim medieval age's style universe. Additionally, the Witcher world, apart from having a zealous religious fanatics ( eternal flame ) - if that wasn't enough - Witcher world is full of racists. Tolerance isn't really a common thing, as you can see.
Reason why we do not see many homosexual characters? Because they are most likely hiding it so they won't be hanged for being different.
Why when we see them it's Fil and Dethmold? Because they are in a different social "class", Fil doesn't even hide it, while Dethmold does - we just stumble into it.
Other things - Geralt and all his friends are heterosexual, end of the line ( books, deal with it ).
Seriously, what else is there to talk about?
Was that simple enough for everyone to understand?
What's wrong with me, huh? I do not see the obvious, or I just think normally without searching gods knows what everywhere?
Personally, I couldn't care less about who prefers who, who beds who. Do your thing, but do not put me in it. You may be wondering why I step into this beehive. For one reason, it's getting ridiculous.
Witcher games are set in the grim medieval age's style universe. Additionally, the Witcher world, apart from having a zealous religious fanatics ( eternal flame ) - if that wasn't enough - Witcher world is full of racists. Tolerance isn't really a common thing, as you can see.
Reason why we do not see many homosexual characters? Because they are most likely hiding it so they won't be hanged for being different.
Why when we see them it's Fil and Dethmold? Because they are in a different social "class", Fil doesn't even hide it, while Dethmold does - we just stumble into it.
Other things - Geralt and all his friends are heterosexual, end of the line ( books, deal with it ).
Seriously, what else is there to talk about?
Let's talk it simple: KOP and others have talked thorugh this over and over again, presenting valid answers to each and every single one of your points. you should try and read all the posts on this thread, before bringing up the same arguments that were used now for already 100 timesColIsengrim said:
- Status