algroth

Maybe I'm less critical than you guys because I've always viewed the series as 'full Hollywood', don't see how it was ever any different. It's not exactly Marketa Lazarova we're talking about. I value in a series like this emotion over logic, and it is present throughout this episode. To me it was damn fine spectacle and storytelling, regardless of any nitpickings about what would have been a better strategy or what coat Dany was using to head beyond the Wall.

Man, Marvel just don't know how to close a season, do they? First six episodes are pretty good if not necessarily great... Good chemistry between the stars, some nice choreographies, some Hand shenanigans made somewhat interesting by the characters and performances of Sigourney Weaver and Yutaka Takeuchi... There seems to have been some thought as to how to bring all of these characters together. It's a shame that not nearly as much thought was put as to what to have them unite against. So yeah, dumb, convoluted and unmemorable ending again, following the tradition of each of the shows that preceeded it.

The first episode was okay, I think. I like that it already seems more visually striking than anything we've seen in Iron Fist, although I feel the blaxploitation elements to the Luke Cage scenes are played a bit too much on the nose and jar in ways the series itself didn't - maybe due to the context surrounding it. All the same, I'm mildly curious for now. The character I don't know what to make of anymore is Madame Gao. She was pretty rad in the first Daredevil but her exposure since then has essentially lifted any mystery or aura she once had. Seeing her back at it this episode made me groan a little. Again, I blame Iron Fist (the series, not the character).

Well, it does affect the way some characters will interact with you and the kind of options you are given to interact with them, in some specific cases. Case in point, romances.

Also I think I would be happier if games in general asked for 'sex' instead of 'gender' as that implies a more biological element that therefore leaves open to the player to identify and play their character as they wish (funny enough, in the Spanish version of Baldur's Gate they do just that, as in Spanish 'sexo' is used as both 'sex' and 'gender' and is thus far more commonly used, whilst 'género' also exists as a translation for the latter).

As Fluffle and FlintlockJazz mention, the issue with using gender politics terminology directly in the game is that you are therefore directly transposing these issues as present in the modern world into a Renaissance-based fantasy setting, and I cannot see how that would not clash. However, it does not mean the subject of gender neutrality, fluidity and transgenderism couldn't be approached using terms and concepts that would better fit the world of Eora: FlintlockJazz has mentioned how awakenings could lead to a character having memories of a past life in an opposite sex, and thus affecting their present-day perspective of their gender. Even without considering more soul-related business, you can also have cases like Pallegina's where a biologically female godlike could be accepted into a male-only society due to her infertility, which can also lead to that character growing up and being treated essentially as a man in a man's society. These things could lead to interesting discussions involving identity, but I would for the sake of immersion either use terminology that is more adequate to the world of Eora in-game, or have it up to the players to discuss outside the game what to 'label' each of these characters.

I'm not sure if Hendyna at some point sells them... Though you can acquire some dragon egg dishes at the Wailing Banshee is that's useful for you.

We know she was travelling for 5 years already by the time you encounter her. She is 57 so I doubt she just popped a kid and went for a lengthy journy. It is likely that her children will be adults by the time Deadfire will be taking place. Wait, when is her age mentioned?

From what I understand, part of the reason the Deadfire was chosen as a location for the sequel was that it could provide a really wide variety of environments and locales, so I don't think we'll be sticking to *just* tropical/subtropical even if it's what we've so far seen. I know the White that Wends was considered as an option but was also set aside given that the snowy/frozen setting was already worked with on The White March - this doesn't preclude that there could be some colder areas in the game though, and that we could see an expansion set around these parts in the future.

The adra dragon we could find a vessel for in the first Pillars could make for an interesting crew member. Though she would of course be kith in her current state.

Asking for minority representation isn't entitlement, but I think what injurai is replying to is the thought that by not having it you are deliberately and maliciously excluding a minority (which is what you alluded to when you said that not having a same-sex romance would be telling gay people that the game is not for them). Regardless of this I do have to wonder at what point can we still claim the LGB side is lacking in representation, as there seems to be no shortage of games, films, books and music nowadays including gay characters and addressing the matter of homosexuality. By contrast, the trans community is barely represented in these games (only example that comes to mind is that priestess from Siege of Dragonspear, and even that one line of hers seemed to be enough to cause an uproar from the bigots), yet I rarely hear any demands for their appearance in videogames or other media. In all frankness, there should be, and Eora does represent a pretty peculiar chance to work with trans themes given the misplacement of souls, awakened memories and so on (the soul of a woman in the body of a man gains a literal meaning in this setting after all). Do I think Deadfire should by consequence include a trans character? Not really. I can't demand it of them because they have their topics of interest - in the end the best way I can ensure to see the content *I* want in a game, and done with the degree of attention and detail so as to not be another throwaway gesture of inclusion, is to make that game myself.

In all frankness I've been enjoying the heck out of this season so far. Granted, some moments in episodes 2 and 3 left a bit to be desired, but the last two have been amidst my favorites of the saga. Great television.

The Westerosi Bunch

I bet Edér would want to cuddle either way. :3

This looks lovely.

Somehow this conversation starts to be interesting. I do not think, you are right. I think (I can only guess, as I am not gay and can only take my experience with women into account), that those two Eders would be different, or at least would act different depending on the MCs sex. I really try to act towards women as I would try to act towards men. Meaning, if I work together with a woman as my boss or coworker I'm trying to treat her with the same respect or disrespect as I would treat a man. When it's about hard work, I try not to spare women too much if I think they are able to do it and so on. But: I never have the impression that I am fully sucessful. I do treat women differently, no matter how much I try not to. I think if you see a person as a potential partner you will always do that. So I think the gay Eder will behave differently towards male or female characters than the straight Eder. Unless of course he lives in a vulcan world, were emotions dont interfere with your normal behaviour. And there is more. It is not only about wether the world accepts Eders sexual orientation. It is about how his sexual orientiation is viewed in general. I assume that in our fantasy world gay people are still not 50% of the population, so they are the exception. Noone in our fantasy world sees that as a bad thing. But they still see it as something. Maybe they think Eder is a female soul trapped in a mans body. Or maybe he is viewed as being sexually very adventurous. But whatever the world thinks about him shapes his character in a certain way. If I choose to wear only black cloth, which is a relatively minor decision compared with my sexual orientation people will get a certain image about me. If I wear only bright colors, they will get another one. Depending on that, they will react to me and that will further shape who I am. Yes, I agree with all of this. Also that does bring up a pretty interesting idea too: what is certain dialogue options or NPC reactions were tied to the kind of gear we wear or carry with ourselves? Clearly a man wearing full plate and packing steel will be more intimidating than one dressed in padded armour and concealing a dagger. And for that matter, certain specific items would have their own specific connotations: what if a blacksmith were to see the MC wielding the Hammer of Abydon? How would a magic-user react to an archmage's grimoire, or a somewhat studied lord to a regal suit of armour? These could all be interesting acknowledgements from behalf of the NPCs that would make our choice of equipment even more interesting as well. Obviously this is an aside point. Maybe it's worth bringing up in a different topic?

There's plenty of extras throughout, but granted, no 'battle scene' as such. Mostly though I was referring to the scarce/'invisible' use of CGI you mentioned above.

Not TV, but seen Dunkirk yet?

In films and books *as well as* videogames the content is provided for you. Your choice is limited by the choices that are provided to you, and they ultimately guide you along a story and to a conclusion the game has planned for you. Videogames, like any other artform, can seek to explore certain themes or deliver certain messages, which the authors define through the events and encounters they place before you, and the choices they present to you (as well as their result, of course). Some *may* cater to you but they are under no obligation to do so, same as you are under no obligation to buy the game (it is merely convenient to do the former in exchange of more of the latter). Ultimately, though, this whole 'entitlement' talk is kinda missing the point. If anyone is that desperate to see content removed from a game, they should mod it out themselves - but to demand it from the creators as if the game's existence is entirely based on your individual experience is complete bobbins. The authors make narrative-driven videogames because they want to *tell* something. It's up to you as to how you respond to what is being told, but it's not up to you to demand they tell what you want to hear or otherwise silence it. So really, see injurai's post.

As a bit of an aside note, I don't really mind it if Pillars were to introduce a few weapon types that are fictional and only existent in the world of Eora. So long as it makes martial sense, of course.

I am in agreement with this, but I also want to point out again that fantasy is never written or created in a vacuum. The setting may not correspond to reality but it is written within a certain period for a playerbase that has a certain exposure to a topic or other. We as writers don't choose what is a controversial subject for our society and what isn't, and when it comes to their inclusion in any narrative piece, videogame or otherwise, we have to treat it with some awareness to that fact. If you want to make a society that doesn't bat an eye at homosexuality, that's fine, but as you mention it has to be set somehow first, you have to ease a sensitive audience into the fact first, and secondly you must address the 'why'. Any addition to a world that creates a exception or difference to our own (or to genre expectations) is bound to call attention to itself, and so when it just happens casually and without an apparent motive as is the inclusion of so many LGBT characters in videogames, it is bound to clash and feel forced. The ideal that sexuality should not matter and that it's the same if you love a man or woman only goes so far as a defense for what will normally be regarded as an exception to the norm, as by its exceptional status alone it'll call one's attention to the fact (we mustn't forget that, ultimately, we are still the exception to the rule, and for that matter a clear minority) - the inclusion isn't an invisible one, in the end you will be telling something by your choice of representing it, and the better you justify it, integrate it into a setting and work with it *directly*, the better it'll work. Or so I see it, anyways. I still hold, however, that the character and theme must come before a relationship. A relationship, heterosexual or otherwise, will only work so long as it involves an interesting character with whom romance is both a natural progression and an aspect that can inform us better of their conflicts, anxieties and the ideas that drive them to exist in a story in the first place. This is, after all, ultimately a narrative work, and so everything we choose to include in it, it's because we want to tell something with it. Every trait informs us of who that character is and what they are meant to tell us as an audience. A character that only serves as a vessel for a romantic experience, which itself only exists because of fanbase pandering, is not a good character, and will not lead to a good romance.

Spoiler: For the final battle Zahua comes flying in with a special mushroom concoction that makes Edér grow to Eothas-size, and what proceeds to happen is a full-on Rock 'em Sock 'em Robots punch-out between him and Eothas. His everyman charm multiplies along with his size.

It's still BioWare though, which is why I mention it as an exception.

I'm sorry that this surprisingly constructive discussion offends you so much. Point out the constructive discussion. Comparing Bioware romances and saying which are worse is like comparing different types of poop, and the discussion here seems to be consisting of personal attacks and demands dressed up as 'requirements'. If you actually want decent relationships in the game then the best thing would be to steer clear of anything Bioware related. If all you want is gratuitous fap fantasy then at least have the guts and decency to admit to such. Not sure which comments you are singling out here, but I wasn't comparing BioWare romances myself, and aside from Viconia (which I do think is well written, but hey, YMMV and all that) I have not referred to any of them, partly because those mentioned (Mass Effect and Jade Empire) I have not played. I merely addressed the focus/approach, which I agree should be focused on characters and motivations firstly, and *then* be allowed to develop into romances if it makes sense for what is being told with each, rather than on the romances themselves and the sexual orientation they adopt.

Spiral motifs in Game of Thrones... Also, because this joke had to be done...