AgentBlue said:
Because she bit one of them, and the other said "we'll do it my way" implying that this is how he wanted to do it in the first place.
The sadistic streak kicks in when she resists.
Because she bit one of them, and the other said "we'll do it my way" implying that this is how he wanted to do it in the first place.
The sadistic streak kicks in when she resists.
Implying that rape is primarily driven by sexual desire. You're just saying incredibly otherworldly things.AgentBlue said:
For some reason, we want to give Nilgaard the benefit of the doubt, but the woman in this case is definitely guilty. I just don't understand the reason for this bias.
The character's reactions to all details make them pivotal, so I think you're wrong about this.
Right- I'm just going to cite all the evidence that you think doesn't imply such an action because like I said, it's open to interpretation.
I'm not going to lie, I didn't see an intent to rape the first time I saw the trailer, but after reading other members' posts, I think my view of it was also colored. In this case, where many people can see different things, I think it's accurate to say that the character can also see it in more than one way.
The problem is just that- people can see different things in this trailer, and it would have been incredibly gauche to have Geralt walk away from a situation where rape was even minimally implied.
KnightofPhoenix said:
Which means their purpose is to punish her. This is very clear. If all they wanted was to be sadistic pricks for no reason, if she was just a random victim of their sadism, they would have tormented her extensively before attempting to hang her.
They didn't.
Ergo.
cmdrsilverbolt said:
You completely missed my point regarding rape and I won't even go in there.
I guess we'll just agree to disagree then.
Any word from CDPR as to whether this was a cinematic from the game or specifically made for this trailer?
I'll say it again, even if Geralt prevented an instance of excessive brutality, I don't see what's wrong with that.
Like I said before, we don't know what he thinks, only how he reacts. I didn't make up his reaction.
AgentBlue said:
No, rape is the worst kind of torture (physical or psychic). In fact It's a sexual torture. The executor has pleasure with his/her feeling of power outraging and abusing the victime. The executer destroys the dignity, the safety, takes away victim's humanity (or so intended). And don't ask why I see it this way.
AgentBlue said:
No, and nobody said aword about the quality of it. All the debate is about morality. CDPR's dev don't deserve this total omisssion of their great work
It's amusing to see this CGI trailer elicit so much discussion - I can't wait til the actual game comes out and we can debate the truckload of moral quandaries it's sure to possess!
AgentBlue said:
Killing someone for no reason, or to vent frustrations, is also sadism. Sadism can be demonstrated in multiple ways.
First of all, her clothes are already torn and her face is bruised up from the get go, which suggests they hurt her before. Not to mention the unnecessary punch in the gut. So they were already being sadistic before trying to hang her.
Second of all, one of them says "we'll do it my way", sowing that this is what he wanted to do in the first place. So at least one of them has a sadistic streak.
As such, given the lack of proof and evidence we have of her guilt, it is possible that they were behaving in such a way to vent up frustration or to attempt to terrorize nearby communities. Neither possibility implies her guilt.
Ergo, saying she is is guilty is erroneous. The most you can say is she may be guilty.
Not that it matters in the slightest.
Wichat said:
I seem to not be getting across. I talk about parmesan tuilles, you get back at me with Clam Chowder. Is it ever going to work out between us?
* I am not talking about real lfie suffering, I am not assigning value, passing judgement, commentary, personal opinion, none, nothing, nada, zilch, I am not not saying a damn thing about the acts themselves as they happen in real life*
* And I am certainly not in a million years justifying in any shape or form the soldiers' behaviour, for goodness sake *
Are we clear?
All I'm saying is that if indeed they were trying to rape her that might leave the door open for her innocence - and even that is debatable. Since they are clearly set out to punish her , I take it to be an indication of her guilt. Unless you sidetrack us all with an elaborate theory on how it would be possible for them to hold the opinion she's guilty when in fact she's not. A theory, of course, rooted in the trailer not just in imagination.
@KnightofPhoenix, trailer shows otherwise. She obviously offered resistance. The fact the trailer begins with the commander reciting the accusation strongly suggest otherwise.
And the detail does matter as it might be the lead for another trailer showing us the other side or the bigger picture. It hints at a larger meaning.
I've had my say.
You're skipping over the part where they mentioned bringing in a hammer for her teeth. Remember, Geralt was riding away before we hear the dialogue implying excessive brutality, that's the pivotal detail.AgentBlue said:
You seem to be mistaken about stories- people associate real world imagery etc. with them all the time. Also, what kind of storytelling is based on facts alone, and not imagination. Sorry, but that's ridiculous.AgentBlue said:
You do realize that Geralt saving her does not absolve her of what she might have done, right?
It doesn't matter who or what she was, but what Geralt observed and reacted to in that situation.
AgentBlue said:
I cannot manage people who claim for reality in the weight to carry on or a punisment for loot in peasant house and can make differentiation between the brutality in real life and the game.
KnightofPhoenix said:
This is my take. Guilty or not, I don't think people deserve to be put to death by 'torment'. And the soldiers acting as they did is unethical but common in wartime. That's about all we can say on the issue. Everything beyond this is speculation.
cmdrsilverbolt said:
They were clearly in a hurry to hang her. That is not consistent with wanting to indulge in sadistic violence. That is however consistent with wanting to punish her.
As for the rest of your post,
no (public) comments.
AgentBlue said:
How do you know this?
How did she offer resistance when they punched her in the gut?
Could be lies and fabricated crimes, so no.
All that you are saying *might* be true. But don't pretend you are not speculating like everyone else.
@ Agent: Why do I feel like you haven't seen the trailer. You keep saying that they were "in a rush" to hang her, but the trailer implies torture, of more than one kind. Or maybe you don't see it that way.
In that case, it's a matter of perception, so what you're arguing is why we all don't see what you see.
In that case, it's a matter of perception, so what you're arguing is why we all don't see what you see.
KnightofPhoenix said:
Err, because she offered resistance all thoughout?
This was meant as a remark to your suggestion the beating had begun prior to what's shown. Judging by her said behaviour, one can assume she put up a fight when the three soldiers originally captured her. That would explain the sate her clothes are in at the beginning of the trailer.
Again, judging from the trailer, what makes you think that? What in the trailer that authorizes the suspicion?
Not all speculation was created equal. Certainly, I'm trying hard here not to invoke what's not shown but I can't be overly sure others aren't, I'm afraid.
Regardless, my statement was I take their punitive intent to be an indication of her gilt. I'd say this is a fairly open remark.
We don't have any indication that she is being hanged based on just, fair, or accurate reasons, so no- her being punished doesn't mean she's definitely guilty.