I don't get why PST is so often mentioned as an example of limited roleplaying. As I see it an RPG that allows me to be good while pretending to be evil isn't limiting at all.



Also… terrible article… I read it hoping it would be funny but it wasn't…
Just dumb.

I also think he got it all wrong, even through the maker is presented as a fact, because most people in the middle age did believe it’s a fact, there are actual no fact in the game that prove that the maker is real?

There are no priest or cleric class and there are no Devine spells, unlike most other RPG’s, example in Baldurs Gate, you know the gods are real, you can play classes that actual get granted powers directly from the gods, and sometime they even walk the earth. But in Dragon Age you see no real prof that the make is real, even that most other in the game think there are, you are free to make up your own mind.

The writer did not pay attention, as an example he talk about dwarf gods, but there are no god dwarf in the game, they just get inspiration from great dwarf, that have made an impact on the society, be it living or dead ancestors.

A few people on this thread do seem to be missing that. There is no proof of a maker - that is the entire point. The entire religion is open to question. So being an atheist is not like denying the existence of an obvious divine being in DAO. It is more like saying - show me some proof of this maker and all your lore, otherwise as far as I am concerned there isn't any. Andrasta was just a powerful mage. Her ashes are lyrium enriched.

Or you can play another way and worship the old gods or the elven gods. I was far less an atheist than I was just someone who didn't buy into the whole Maker fairytale, since there was no proof.

Which is why I think they did a great job of making it very open to role playing someone who did not believe in the Maker. Simply put there is no more proof of the Maker in the game then there is proof in the real world of a god. Magic, demons, spirits, etc., may all be there but that doesn't mean there has to be a Maker as well.

The two posters above are correct: There is no proof of the existence of the Maker. Like I said previously in the thread: Morrigan is an atheist and explains her view quite extensively from time to time. I don't know why so many missed that.

Irony as it is, the name of Morrigan 8as I linked to above) is perhaps the name of a Goddess herself - or at least that of a like entity - in Irish Mythology.

Now THAT would bcome an interesting theme : A Goddess who herself is an Atheist - and proclaims (herself) so …

Which wouldn't mean that she "would not believe in herself", that would be too much short-sighted, but instead that she would just not regard herself to be (any) kind of "special" or who would even be totally unaware of her "inner self" …

This could be(come) an interesting story; if well layed out, it could become of PS:T proportions.

Because you *have* to be TNO, male, 3rd level fighter. That let's the game have a very strong story but is definitely very limited compared to other games (and not limited compared to some others like Gothic).

Unless you are simply talking about the protagonist's appearance I still don't get it.
You may have to be a male TNO, but you can chose class, stats, equipment etc. and you most certainly can chose TNO's personality, the way he interacts with the world and the way the world responds - which is what defines a character in my opinion and not his gender and appearance.

Most RPGs may offer many choices on appearance, race, gender etc. but how many times have you actually seen a game that responds to such choices in any meaningful way? -other than NPCs merely mentioning your race every now and then.

No, you *always* start as a fighter (3rd level IIRC) in PST. Given the way D&D games are usually set up that seemed odd at the time.

And the male/female thing can big a big deal to some people. For instance, while a teen my daughter wouldn't touch it when she found out she couldn't be a female character.

Compared to say Baldur's Gate your opportunity to play the role you may want is much more limited. But again, that's what lets PST have a stronger story.

It is much more limited because you start at level 3 and cannot be a female? Your character has some predefined history in every rpg, whether that is a level 1 nobody or a level 3 fighter. What's important (and what defines roleplaying) is that you can change that as you go. Tho I do agree with male/female thing, but I don't think it's such a big deal.

I just hope no one gets the silly idea of putting a new rank on our games so we know that gods of the deep, the mountains, or whatever are involved in game X………..so parents beware? As I said, its a game, get over it or don't buy them….almost every game out has some taste of atheism or theological premise in the storys. ;)

Ranked "X - dangerous against religious beliefs" ? That would be indeed interesting. Because current rating don't take spiriuality into account at all - since no-one belives in that.

Spirituality in the modern,science-dominated world is considered an anachronism, to put it mildly.

Similar things go for philosophy. Perhaps this is why no-one does games like PS:T anymore (with PS:T having to do with philosophical themes, after all), because … - well, who needs actually philosophy, after all ? Most people - especially in the media industry - consider philosoph just a waste of time. Hence no movies and even less games involving philosophical themes - "the people want action ! Not some weird fuzzing with something obscure as … thinking !"

Plus, in the computer industry, which is basically a sience-based industry, both philosophy and spirituality even more are considered to be … well, unimportant, if not a total hindrance at all. Everything - even programming and making of games - is based on total rationality and logic, in this world even art is just tolerated, nothing more (in games), some believe that even programming can be "art". So they consider something that isbased on rationality as "art".

This science-orientation might very well lead to us becoming some kind of beings like Spock's species. No emotions, please, because they are a hindrance against logic and rationality, and a total waste of time. As are art, spirituality, and philosophy (almost).

[cynism]Action games rule ![/cynism]

Are you sure? I don't think there's any shortage of religious people - I suppose they are less than they used to be, but atheists are not persecuted as much anymore so they are more open. (Of course religion and spirituality aren't necessarily the same thing but maybe that's beyond the point… maybe not, don't know)

I think it's more of matter of political correctness (not judging any other person's relion even if he believes in the gods of the deep or the mountains) + We've already gone through the whole list of things that make you a satanist (like D&D or metal music or… music instruments in general - 'Diabolus in Musica') in the past, so maybe enough people simply realized that that's just ridiculous and embarrassing.

Also
I don't think that philosophy was ever that big a part of mainstream media and arts… And especially not in games - I think that PST was unique for its time as well. In fact it kind of seems to me that 'philosophy' sells more today than it used to (though I might be wrong at that - influenced by my own interests exclusively).

Well, I'm biased, too. I have learned philosophy at school, and throughout the years I had always been hanging onto it, although it comes back to me only in the last recent years.

I like a nicely written, well fleshed-out religion or two in a game, and I think religion was handled really well in DA. Morrowind was awesome in this respect, made even better by the opportunity to actually meet the mythology first-hand!

I think you're right. A philosophical visually interesting indie game would probably sell pretty well if distributed online.

But video games are (and have always been) far behind films and (especially) books when it comes to depth.