Dragon Age - Theology and Atheism @ bit-tech.net
 

bit-tech.net's Joe Martin posts his impressions of and problems with how religion plays out in character choices and storyline in DA:O in a slightly off-the-beaten-path blog post entitled Atheism in Dragon Age: Origins. (NOTE:This article contains spoilers.)
Here's a short excerpt to set the stage:
More information.

Oh good grief. That was a ridiculous article. :-/

I haven't finished Dragon Age, but religious criticism is a theme I have seen in a couple of RPG's, Mask of the Betrayer, Final Fantasy X, Gothic III, even Dreamfall which is more of an adventure though.

I don't agree with this article at all. As the comments below mention - Dragon Age a game where being an atheist is certainly possible. In fact, Morrigan is one, and voices her opinion quite often (sometimes she's even rude to people who do not see things the way she does, such as Leliana).

Actually, acknowledging that those are the ashes of Andraste (and they are) doesn't necessarily acknowledge the presence of the Maker, especially considering Oghren's dialogue in that quest.
If anything, Bioware did a pretty good job with giving players the possibility of playing an atheist character.

Yep.

Handling of religion is actually one of DA´s strongest points, both in terms of overall setting and roleplaying possibilities available to player.
A welcome change from, say, D&D.

+1

A lot of bitching over nothing.

I have to agree that DAO did a good job with religion and you could easily take an atheist approach. I played most of my characters that way.

Just a side note on the ashes - one small example is if you do that quest with the Dwarf, as he will mention the possibility they aren't holy, just soaked up a lot of magic do to all the lyrium all over the place.

Actually I enjoyed reading this, and to be honest I share some concerns (and a pinch of annoyance) about how the Maker is often presented almost as a fact.

Writer don't seems to get the point here - Maker in the world of DA is not an optional abstract "god", he existed and created all the spirits that inhabit the fade, and all those spirits acknowledge his existence. However Chantry and their chant of light, advertising "maker's return when all the world will chant with us", is very optional thing, and that is what "nonbelivers" is talking about. Chantry is all about influence and power, using maker as an excuse to make all the crusades and other things. And this is why Chantry so afraid of mages, who can learn from spirits about faulty of their claims and spread the word to common folk. And so indoctrinations take place in the circle, to "prepare" mages not to listen and dismiss spirits as "lying demons". And there you go why Chantry says "apostates" are dangerous and must be destroyed.

"I share some concerns (and a pinch of annoyance) about how the Maker is often presented almost as a fact."

Um, this is a world where people throw all kinds of magic around willy-nilly.

Jeez, i am not even going to read that article.

1. It is just a game. A game should be able to have religious elements if they choose too or not, it is their choice. If you dont like it find another game that doesnt have religious themes. But that would make you a silly, silly person for missing out on a great game over nothing. And you dont even need to keep party members who are overbearing with it.

2. Maybe they should make it so you are able to kill "God" ala Shin Megami Tensei games and Bayonetta. And while they are at it maybe they can make "God" into an asshole ala SMT games. No one ever complained about those games, why? because they are just games.

I *knew* the name of "Morrigan" was sounding familiar ! :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Morr%C3%ADgan

Yeah, I find it interesting that people want to project a real life atheist opinion on a game world, but don't feel they have to be sceptic of magic or fantastical creatures.

Ofcourse in Dragon Age it is still possible to deny the influence of the maker since he doesn't make a direct appearance in the game.

In other games gods are sometimes physically in the game and as such their existance undeniable. But even then one could deny they have a true divine influence on the world.

In Morrowind the tribunal were shown to be immortals acting like they were gods. The invasion in Oblivion didn't feel godly (demonic) but wasn't very much different from an invasion orchestrated by a mage. Gamefact is that we see the demon, so one can't rightly deny it exists. But one could debate what it is, how it came to be, what it wants, how much divine influence does it have but not wether or not it exists.

I guess the closest to being an atheist in Morrowind/Oblivion is denouncing a god/demon's divine/demonic power and influence and simply consider it a very strong and powerful magical being.

If I want to bring any form of religion or atheist banter to my gaming experience I will drag my laptop to church and play the games there. When did the word "GAME" loose all rational definition?:SO_O:thinking::deal:

I guess since this is a *role*playing game people want to *role*play.

I think I was able to play as an atheist but it looked like the Maker was presented as a fact,didn't annoy me though.

but roleplaying doesn't mean that you can play any role you want. It needs to be restricted to the world your character is in. You can't roleplay a 'nuclear physicist' in Middle Earth. The world of Dragon Age has a god (or gods), you can roleplay an atheist, but you can't complain if in Dragon Age 2 the gods actually come down and show themselves to everybody. Just roleplay accordingly.

Roleplaying (and many other) games are not just games, just like a serious film or a good book is not just a game.

Exactly. Far too many people forget this. Some of the best RPGs ever had very limited choice in your role. PST anyone?

I guess these are the first signs of a new definition coming. Some even say that video games are an entirely new form of media, unlike anything before (but clearly borrowing from precessors).

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.