Main Story, an atheist cliche?

[PrimeJunta]

It also specifically says that even those gods very false.........

 

Why would I remove faith as a thematic option, if an actual deity were offered in the game? Faith is the basis of all religions of the world specially the 3 dominant Abrahamic religeons .... 

 

Assuming the sun also rises tomorrow morning isn't an act of faith, it's a reasonable assumption.

 

If there was incontrovertible evidence of an actual deity, faith wouldn't be necessary.

 

As to the rest of it... I kinda thought the opposite. In most cRPG's, clerics, priests, and believers are portrayed in one of a handful of paper-thin clichés -- there's the Awful Good paladin, the muhaha evil cultist of a bloody blood god, and... well, the heal-bot where faith is entirely written out of the equation.

 

Pillars on the other hand had Edér, a complex, nuanced character with deep faith in his god and religion, struggling with a massive internal conflict brought on by it; Durance who feels that his god has betrayed him -- or vice versa -- and coming to terms with it; Hiravias who has wrestled with not one, but two gods. They all ring true to me -- other than the fantasy dimensions, these are the kinds of things believers wrestle with. 

 

A cookie-cutter atheistic fairy-tale would've just portrayed believers as buffoons, villains, or ignoramuses, and had them all go "YISSS! I am liberated from mah superstition!" with the big reveal. Pillars wasn't like that at all.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

One thing about that big ending reveal is that it shows who reads and who doesn't; I've seen a number of people who got to the end-where Iovara says "the gods aren't real" and then clarifies how that statement makes sense-and said "pff I spoke with the gods they're clearly real, gimme a break""

 

Depends on your definition of 'god' - if it's merely 'very powerful', then superman counts and the known gods of Eora fit the bill.  If it's 'eternal and outside the created realm of which we're aware' then the PoE gods don't count.  

 

 

 

To be fair, that view of god(s) seems like a uniquely Abrahamic one to me. I'm not sure the average resident of Eora would ever define gods like that.

[kvaak]

Assuming the sun also rises tomorrow morning isn't an act of faith, it's a reasonable assumption.

 

If there was incontrovertible evidence of an actual deity, faith wouldn't be necessary.

 

As to the rest of it... I kinda thought the opposite. In most cRPG's, clerics, priests, and believers are portrayed in one of a handful of paper-thin clichés -- there's the Awful Good paladin, the muhaha evil cultist of a bloody blood god, and... well, the heal-bot where faith is entirely written out of the equation.

 

Pillars on the other hand had Edér, a complex, nuanced character with deep faith in his god and religion, struggling with a massive internal conflict brought on by it; Durance who feels that his god has betrayed him -- or vice versa -- and coming to terms with it; Hiravias who has wrestled with not one, but two gods. They all ring true to me -- other than the fantasy dimensions, these are the kinds of things believers wrestle with. 

 

A cookie-cutter atheistic fairy-tale would've just portrayed believers as buffoons, villains, or ignoramuses, and had them all go "YISSS! I am liberated from mah superstition!" with the big reveal. Pillars wasn't like that at all.

 

 

This. Unlike OP your companions actually realize that the gods being artificial doesn't make them lesser in any regard. Durance is the only one who abandons his faith and he does so for completely unrelated reasons.

 

CRPGs' presentation of religious characters isn't that bad in general IMO, usually you have a mixed bag. Baldur's Gate has both Viconia who has an extremely stereotypical MURDER ALL THE KITTENS shell while being in-depth once you actually get in her head and Keldorn who's as Lawful Good a Paladin as Lawful Good Paladins get. (You still keep him around because holy crap he kicks ass.)

Edited March 13, 2016 by kvaak

[Silent Winter]

 

 

One thing about that big ending reveal is that it shows who reads and who doesn't; I've seen a number of people who got to the end-where Iovara says "the gods aren't real" and then clarifies how that statement makes sense-and said "pff I spoke with the gods they're clearly real, gimme a break""

 

Depends on your definition of 'god' - if it's merely 'very powerful', then superman counts and the known gods of Eora fit the bill.  If it's 'eternal and outside the created realm of which we're aware' then the PoE gods don't count.  

 

 

 

To be fair, that view of god(s) seems like a uniquely Abrahamic one to me. I'm not sure the average resident of Eora would ever define gods like that.

 

Fair point - though 'man-made' wouldn't necessarily fall under their definition either as Iovara claims they're 'not real' based on that.  So there's room within the world for the characters to argue that 'yes, they're still gods regardless of their origin' or 'no, they are merely god-like (as opposed to godlike ) and man should bow to no god' (which is what happens, those are our choices).  There's also room to argue 'no, they aren't real gods but there must be some real god/s out there'.

[house2fly]

Anyway you're rationalizing the ending. The elf lady didn't say they are manufactured but that they aren't real. That was the big secret. A ghost was telling you the gods aren't real because she heard some people talking. That's a crappy ending, sorry and it feels like an atheist propaganda out of place and out of nowhere. That's why it makes mose sense to dismiss her as clinically insane. Especially after playing the WM.

 

The game could have made Raedric an atheist for example. His justification being that if this calamity is happening then there are clearly no gods and if they are and still allow for this to happen then he wants nothing to do with them. That would have been more appropriate given the game context. Not perfect considering the Eora gods are not known for their benevolence but better than that crappy ending.

 

The game is still good though. Would have been even better if there were less emphasis on gods storywise.

She says the gods aren't real and IMMEDIATELY AFTER THAT clairifies they were manufactured.  You talk with her about the gods being manufactured and then you talk with Thaos about the gods being manufactured and then when you beat Thaos you get a long flashback scene of the gods being manufactured.  Did you hit alt+f4 when Iovara said "the gods aren't real" or something.

Edited March 13, 2016 by house2fly

[Sannom]

The game could have made Raedric an atheist for example.

Why transform a religious zealot into an atheist when we already have a perfectly valid atheist as a companion (Pallegina) and two orders of atheists in Twin Elms (the druidic orders)?

 

Fair point - though 'man-made' wouldn't necessarily fall under their definition either as Iovara claims they're 'not real' based on that.

Iovara's claim that the gods aren't real always felt like a comparison to similar settings like D&D in which gods function pretty much like the PoE gods but are necessary to the world, which can't function without them.

[Elerond]

I would say that Pallegina is quite far from atheist as is those druidic orders in Twin Elms.

 

Pallegina for example resents gods, especially Hylea who she seem to blame lots of misery in her life. (So she may not worship gods but she accepts their existence and don't even argue against their place in world) 

 

Druidic orders in Twin Elms not just accept existence of gods, but they disagree with them how world should be run.

 

So categorizing them as people who don't believe existence of gods is bit too much.

 

Raedric would not work that well if he was character that didn't accept existence of gods. Or his story line should be much different.

[Romanul]

 

Anyway you're rationalizing the ending. The elf lady didn't say they are manufactured but that they aren't real. That was the big secret. A ghost was telling you the gods aren't real because she heard some people talking. That's a crappy ending, sorry and it feels like an atheist propaganda out of place and out of nowhere. That's why it makes mose sense to dismiss her as clinically insane. Especially after playing the WM.

The game could have made Raedric an atheist for example. His justification being that if this calamity is happening then there are clearly no gods and if they are and still allow for this to happen then he wants nothing to do with them. That would have been more appropriate given the game context. Not perfect considering the Eora gods are not known for their benevolence but better than that crappy ending.

The game is still good though. Would have been even better if there were less emphasis on gods storywise.

 

She says the gods aren't real and IMMEDIATELY AFTER THAT clairifies they were manufactured.  You talk with her about the gods being manufactured and then you talk with Thaos about the gods being manufactured and then when you beat Thaos you get a long flashback scene of the gods being manufactured.  Did you hit alt+f4 when Iovara said "the gods aren't real" or something.

Yeah, I know she explains they are manufactured hence the atheist propaganda. She doesn't say the gods are manufactured, she says they aren't real period. You would't have a line like that unless you want to shove some propaganda down the player's throat. I'm not like i'm the only one who noticed this, there are a lot of atheist players who loved the atheist message. Nothing wrong with them enjoying it. Still I don't have to like it.

 

And before you start that it doesn' t matter she said the weren't real, let me stop you there and remind you there are no options to tell her it makes no difference if they are manufactured or not. It's clearly implied that's a given ( the fact they aren't real).

 

Now we can rationalize that it doesn't matter if they are manufactured or not or that Iovara is clearly isane for believing they aren't real but that's not the message the game wanted to send.

[Romanul]

 

Raedric would not work that well if he was character that didn't accept existence of gods. Or his story line should be much different.

From my point of view it works if his realisation comes when his child is born hollow. After everything he did for his faith and gods to have something like that could make him break. Otherwise, yes you would need a different story or have the pretender as a rational atheist as opposed to the fanatic Raedric.

[Parasol_Syndicate]

Raedric hosts a massive temple in his keep, and gets special dispensation from Berath to return from death.

He is anything but a nonbeliever, faith is everything to the man. 

[Sannom]

I would say that Pallegina is quite far from atheist as is those druidic orders in Twin Elms.

 

Pallegina for example resents gods, especially Hylea who she seem to blame lots of misery in her life. (So she may not worship gods but she accepts their existence and don't even argue against their place in world)

You can't use the same definition for atheist in a world where gods are a matter of faith (ours) and in a world where gods are a matter of facts (Eora). Pallegina's belief that kith can (and should) create their own principles and aspirations is as close as an atheist as one can be in such a setting.

[house2fly]

 

 

Anyway you're rationalizing the ending. The elf lady didn't say they are manufactured but that they aren't real. That was the big secret. A ghost was telling you the gods aren't real because she heard some people talking. That's a crappy ending, sorry and it feels like an atheist propaganda out of place and out of nowhere. That's why it makes mose sense to dismiss her as clinically insane. Especially after playing the WM.

The game could have made Raedric an atheist for example. His justification being that if this calamity is happening then there are clearly no gods and if they are and still allow for this to happen then he wants nothing to do with them. That would have been more appropriate given the game context. Not perfect considering the Eora gods are not known for their benevolence but better than that crappy ending.

The game is still good though. Would have been even better if there were less emphasis on gods storywise.

She says the gods aren't real and IMMEDIATELY AFTER THAT clairifies they were manufactured.  You talk with her about the gods being manufactured and then you talk with Thaos about the gods being manufactured and then when you beat Thaos you get a long flashback scene of the gods being manufactured.  Did you hit alt+f4 when Iovara said "the gods aren't real" or something.

Yeah, I know she explains they are manufactured hence the atheist propaganda. She doesn't say the gods are manufactured, she says they aren't real period. You would't have a line like that unless you want to shove some propaganda down the player's throat. I'm not like i'm the only one who noticed this, there are a lot of atheist players who loved the atheist message. Nothing wrong with them enjoying it. Still I don't have to like it.

 

And before you start that it doesn' t matter she said the weren't real, let me stop you there and remind you there are no options to tell her it makes no difference if they are manufactured or not. It's clearly implied that's a given ( the fact they aren't real).

 

Now we can rationalize that it doesn't matter if they are manufactured or not or that Iovara is clearly isane for believing they aren't real but that's not the message the game wanted to send.

 

I don't even know what this means.  "yeah I know she says they were manufactured but she doesnt say they were manufactured" did brimsurfer get banned and rereg?

[Miquel93]

 

 

Anyway you're rationalizing the ending. The elf lady didn't say they are manufactured but that they aren't real. That was the big secret. A ghost was telling you the gods aren't real because she heard some people talking. That's a crappy ending, sorry and it feels like an atheist propaganda out of place and out of nowhere. That's why it makes mose sense to dismiss her as clinically insane. Especially after playing the WM.

The game could have made Raedric an atheist for example. His justification being that if this calamity is happening then there are clearly no gods and if they are and still allow for this to happen then he wants nothing to do with them. That would have been more appropriate given the game context. Not perfect considering the Eora gods are not known for their benevolence but better than that crappy ending.

The game is still good though. Would have been even better if there were less emphasis on gods storywise.

She says the gods aren't real and IMMEDIATELY AFTER THAT clairifies they were manufactured.  You talk with her about the gods being manufactured and then you talk with Thaos about the gods being manufactured and then when you beat Thaos you get a long flashback scene of the gods being manufactured.  Did you hit alt+f4 when Iovara said "the gods aren't real" or something.

Yeah, I know she explains they are manufactured hence the atheist propaganda. She doesn't say the gods are manufactured, she says they aren't real period. You would't have a line like that unless you want to shove some propaganda down the player's throat. I'm not like i'm the only one who noticed this, there are a lot of atheist players who loved the atheist message. Nothing wrong with them enjoying it. Still I don't have to like it.

 

And before you start that it doesn' t matter she said the weren't real, let me stop you there and remind you there are no options to tell her it makes no difference if they are manufactured or not. It's clearly implied that's a given ( the fact they aren't real).

 

Now we can rationalize that it doesn't matter if they are manufactured or not or that Iovara is clearly isane for believing they aren't real but that's not the message the game wanted to send.

 

 

Are you for real?

 

The "gods aren't real" line is there for two reasons. One being for effect and impact, the other because that's what Iovara ****ing believes. You can say that it makes no difference, but to her it does. She dedicated her life -and death- to this idea.

 

The amount of projection that is put on the writers shoulders is astonishing... and utterly retarded. 

[Zenbane]

If you were using 'theology' to mean 'a set of religious beliefs' then your claim that "theology entails manufactured deities" is using a definition that fits your whims/ideals.  How very atheist of you.  Why not claim "theology entails the belief in a deity or deities" ?

 

First up...

 

My use of a valid definition for theology simply means I can type this:

"theology entails manufactured deities"

 

instead of this:

"a set of religious beliefs entails manufactured deities"

 

The portion of my sentence that demonstrates my own whims/ideals is the predicate in the sentence, whereas the theology term/definition is in the subject. You managed to get your wires crossed at an impressive level of awful.  Worse yet, the only reason we are now over-analyzing the word theology is because you are trying to save face from your earlier failed attempt at correcting my grammar. You thought theology only meant "a study of religion" - which means you started off understanding my original sentence (subject vs predicate). But once I sent you to the dictionary you stumbled back in to the discussion not knowing the"I know you are's" from the "what I am's."

 

So to be clear: I am not using any definition of the word "theology" in order to prove that the word itself (theology) includes manufactured deities. I am simply using the word in place of one of its valid definitions, and then constructing additional thoughts around it that yes, do fit my own ideals. There is a difference.

 

As for your question, "why not claim that theology entails the belief in a deity or deities?"

 

Even in the Bible there are stories of cultures who worship false deities, such as the false god, Marduk (the Book of Jeremiah). Theology is merely a belief system, or study of that system. The word itself does not require confirmation of a deity. My use of the definition and its application in my sentence is not only valid from a grammatical standpoint, but also a scientific one - since the existence of any "god" has never been scientifically proven. To say that the concept of God is manufactured is scientifically accurate.

 

Second...

 

Even if I was morphing the definition of theology in to something that, all by itself, fits my own ideals, that would mean I am acting like a Christian, not an Atheists. Christians morph virtually every passage in the Bible as needed in order to portray it as a work of non-fiction. So making the comment, "how very atheist of you," after falsely accusing me of using a definition to fit my ideals makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Atheists do not subscribe to a belief system, thus they have no system to morph ideals/whims in to.

 

 

"How very atheist of you." ugh. what a stupid thing to say. really.

 

Indeed. If anything, I was acting like another Christian, not an Atheist.

 

To keep score of Silent Winters failings:

 

1) Subject vs Predicate

2) Christianity vs Atheism

 

 

 

My definition of proof never varied - I pointed out that it wasn't the same as yours.

 

I never accused you of varying in your definition of the word "proof", I accused you of varying in your application of "definitions". You are very loose in your definition of "proof", loose enough to allow a fantasy book like the Bible to confirm, in your mind, that a floating man in the sky exists. But then you get very strict/firm in your use of definitions when it comes to theology; so much so that you spent two posts trying to convince me that there is only one very strict way to use the word "theology." You loosen/tighten the importance of "definitions" to fit your own ideals.

 

Another failing:

 3) Definitions vs Words

 

 

And I stand by my definition of atheist - since there is no evidence for or against a thing, you can either believe that it exists or doesn't. I don't believe in Bigfoot and I believe Bigfoot doesn't exist

You can stand in whatever improper stance you feel most comfortable lol;  but the fact remains that there is a difference between committing to a belief system vs refraining from any belief system.

 

In your self-defeating "Bigfoot" example, the first approach means that you deny the existence of Bigfoot until evidence has been provided to show the contrary; whereas in your second approach you would have performed research to show evidence that Bigfoot never existed. The first approach requires other people (other than yourself) to prove Bigfoot exists; the second approach involves you committing your own time, energy, and resources to prove that Bigfoot is a myth.

 

So, yet another failing:

 5) Passive denial vs Active portrayal

 

 

You are 0 for 5 in this debate.

Edited March 13, 2016 by Zenbane

[Elerond]

 

I would say that Pallegina is quite far from atheist as is those druidic orders in Twin Elms.

 

Pallegina for example resents gods, especially Hylea who she seem to blame lots of misery in her life. (So she may not worship gods but she accepts their existence and don't even argue against their place in world)

You can't use the same definition for atheist in a world where gods are a matter of faith (ours) and in a world where gods are a matter of facts (Eora). Pallegina's belief that kith can (and should) create their own principles and aspirations is as close as an atheist as one can be in such a setting.

 

 

Of course you can use same definition. There is no point to change definition of word like atheist for fantasy world just so that you can have somebody that is called atheist there. If people can't be atheist in fantasy world because of nature of gods there then there is no point to claim that characters are atheists. 

 

Pallegina is quite far from atheist in said setting, as she blames gods for her misery, which itself make her very non-atheistic person. If we want companion that don't really care at all about gods then Devil of Caroc is probably closest and Kana second, because they don't really have passions or motivations that are linked to gods. But undeniably of existence of gods in PoE's setting makes existence of atheistic character near impossibility. Only Iovara style reason to deny Gods godhood or not knowing about existence of gods can make character really be an atheist or non-theist in such setting. Otherwise it is just character's stance towards authority of gods. Characters can be ones that believe self reliance over asking help/permission from gods or they may be ones that don't do anything without blessing from gods or most likely something from the middle. 

 

But everybody is free to define words like they want, but if you go against common definitions it is usually better to mention such thing in one's post so that others know what definition one is using.

[Zenbane]

Of course you can use same definition. There is no point to change definition of word like atheist for fantasy world

 

So you are arguing that even if the entire laws of the universe change, the definitions of the words that apply to those laws must remain the same? I hope you realize how nonsensical that sounds. The definitions are part of the change in the new universe lol

 

The point that you completely missed is that in the "real world" the term Atheist refers to a lack of belief in the unproven existence of Gods. In the fantasy universe, even the manufactured Gods may be experienced. That fact alone removes the need for a belief system based on 100% "theory" since we can make direct observations.

 

Do you understand the difference? When the Gods are a myth we need to invent a belief system based on the possibility of a Gods existence. When the Gods are real we simply choose which God to follow and invent a belief system based on the ideals given to us by the chosen God.

 

The idea of a belief system changes when Gods are a matter of fact; and the term Atheist changes meaning as well. In fact, in a fantasy world the term Atheist is virtually non-applicable; instead we would call them "Heretics."

 

Real World = Atheists

Fantasy World = Heretics

 

new Universe = new Laws = new Definitions

Edited March 13, 2016 by Zenbane

[Romanul]

 

 

 

Anyway you're rationalizing the ending. The elf lady didn't say they are manufactured but that they aren't real. That was the big secret. A ghost was telling you the gods aren't real because she heard some people talking. That's a crappy ending, sorry and it feels like an atheist propaganda out of place and out of nowhere. That's why it makes mose sense to dismiss her as clinically insane. Especially after playing the WM.

The game could have made Raedric an atheist for example. His justification being that if this calamity is happening then there are clearly no gods and if they are and still allow for this to happen then he wants nothing to do with them. That would have been more appropriate given the game context. Not perfect considering the Eora gods are not known for their benevolence but better than that crappy ending.

The game is still good though. Would have been even better if there were less emphasis on gods storywise.

She says the gods aren't real and IMMEDIATELY AFTER THAT clairifies they were manufactured.  You talk with her about the gods being manufactured and then you talk with Thaos about the gods being manufactured and then when you beat Thaos you get a long flashback scene of the gods being manufactured.  Did you hit alt+f4 when Iovara said "the gods aren't real" or something.

Yeah, I know she explains they are manufactured hence the atheist propaganda. She doesn't say the gods are manufactured, she says they aren't real period. You would't have a line like that unless you want to shove some propaganda down the player's throat. I'm not like i'm the only one who noticed this, there are a lot of atheist players who loved the atheist message. Nothing wrong with them enjoying it. Still I don't have to like it.

 

And before you start that it doesn' t matter she said the weren't real, let me stop you there and remind you there are no options to tell her it makes no difference if they are manufactured or not. It's clearly implied that's a given ( the fact they aren't real).

 

Now we can rationalize that it doesn't matter if they are manufactured or not or that Iovara is clearly isane for believing they aren't real but that's not the message the game wanted to send.

 

 

Are you for real?

 

The "gods aren't real" line is there for two reasons. One being for effect and impact, the other because that's what Iovara ****ing believes. You can say that it makes no difference, but to her it does. She dedicated her life -and death- to this idea.

 

The amount of projection that is put on the writers shoulders is astonishing... and utterly retarded. 

 

 

You call it "effect and impact", I call atheist propaganda. I guess it had an effect and impact on me, just wasn't a positive one. 

 

I don't know if the projection put on the writers' shoulders is "retarded" or astonishing for that matter. They choose to go that route, it's natural that they receive some negative feedback from us players who were totally disappointed and appalled by it. 

 

To tell you the truth I don't get it why people are so passive aggressive ( see the retarded statement) about this. It's not like I said the game sucked, I said the ending did. The game was good, I enjoyed it but the ending was awful. I'm writing here because I like the game I want the next installments to be better. I hope Obsidian takes note of this for any future projects in the PoE universe. If not then it's no hard feelings. 

[Zenbane]

You call it "effect and impact", I call atheist propaganda.

Which makes no sense whatsoever to anyone who understands what the words "atheist" and "propaganda" mean.

 

 

 

I guess it had an effect and impact on me, just wasn't a positive one.

Neither did education apparently.

 

 

 

it's natural that they receive some negative feedback from us players

There is nothing natural occurring here, other than the very natural impact an online forum has on trolling.

 

 

 

To tell you the truth I don't get it why people are so passive aggressive

I think people are just having an allergic reaction to the highly unintelligent use of the phrase "atheist propaganda."

Edited March 13, 2016 by Zenbane

[Romanul]

 

 

To tell you the truth I don't get it why people are so passive aggressive

I think people are just having an allergic reaction to the highly unintelligent use of the phrase "atheist propaganda."

 

I don't think is just that. I think some people are just rude.  

[Zenbane]

A few things to keep in mind:

 

1) This is a video game

2) The EULA you accept before playing the game

3) All information about the game is publicly available before buying it (e.g., the storyline)

 

Another thing to keep in mind:

If the ending of PoE confirmed that one or more God's exist, based on your line of reasoning, all Christians can rally against the game by calling it "Sacrilegious propaganda".

 

Fun fact: In the 1960's, people called Rock n Roll the "devil's music" and would burn all the record albums they found lol

[house2fly]

Lol "I hope that future installments on this fantasy story will be properly reverent to the real God"

[Romanul]

A few things to keep in mind:

 

1) This is a video game

2) The EULA you accept before playing the game

3) All information about the game is publicly available before buying it (e.g., the storyline)

 

Another thing to keep in mind:

If the ending of PoE confirmed that one or more God's exist, based on your line of reasoning, all Christians can rally against the game by calling it "Sacrilegious propaganda".

 

Fun fact: In the 1960's, people called Rock n Roll the "devil's music" and would burn all the record albums they found lol

 

 

Thank you for informing me. I might not be as intelligent as you and definitely not us educated but I knew that. 

 

As far as the other statement is concerned, I guess we better agree to disagree. 

 

Regarding your fun fact. I'm sorry that happened in your country. I can't the say the same happened here. Back then all Western music was banned (we were a communist dictatorship ) and had limited access to rock and roll. When people did manage to (illegally) get their hands on it it was revered. 

 

Lol "I hope that future installments on this fantasy story will be properly reverent to the real God"

 

Be fair, I never said that. As the game sells in more countries you're going to get more diverse feedback. Insulting or mocking other players isn't the way to help grow the community. The way forward is to try to accommodate them. If the LGBT community asks for gay characters then you try to write some gay references/companions whatever. If the "unintelligent" and education lacking people from third world countries don't get atheist propaganda in a fantasy settings write a couple of more choices for the player character or be more careful about the wording. It not that hard really. 

[house2fly]

You didn't say it, no, but it's fairly easy to make inferences about people who can consider a fantasy story which expresses the artifical nature of power structures through the metaphor of the gods of the setting being artificial as "atheist propaganda" and who are "appalled" by it.

Edited March 13, 2016 by house2fly

[Zenbane]

Regarding your fun fact. I'm sorry that happened in your country. I can't the say the same happened here. Back then all Western music was banned (we were a communist dictatorship ) and had limited access to rock and roll. When people did manage to (illegally) get their hands on it it was revered.

You do understand that your government banning music is worse than a few American's in the 1960's burning a few records, right? So you should also know the difference between a video game with a story and "atheistic propaganda."

 

 

In case you're still not getting it... you claim that you revered rock n rock that was illegally obtained, but if Rock n Roll is the devil's music, doesn't that mean that you revered Satanic Propaganda? In which case, why do you revere satanic propaganda but detest atheistic video game software? Perhaps the real problem here is that you don't like the PoE soundtrack? lol

[Romanul]

 

Regarding your fun fact. I'm sorry that happened in your country. I can't the say the same happened here. Back then all Western music was banned (we were a communist dictatorship ) and had limited access to rock and roll. When people did manage to (illegally) get their hands on it it was revered.

You do understand that your government banning music is worse than a few American's in the 1960's burning a few records, right? So you should also know the difference between a video game with a story and "atheistic propaganda."

 

 

In case you're still not getting it... you claim that you revered rock n rock that was illegally obtained, but if Rock n Roll is the devil's music, doesn't that mean that you revered Satanic Propaganda? In which case, why do you revere satanic propaganda but detest atheistic video game software? Perhaps the real problem here is that you don't like the PoE soundtrack? lol

 

 

It more complicated. Here rock and roll wasn't the devil's music is was symbol of freedom and rebellion against the government. Heck, I think the even priests listened to it (if they had the chance).

 

Also, I'm not part of the 60s generation, I'm a little younger than that so I do not revere rock and roll as the older people do or did. Personally, I don't listen to rock and roll. I find it horrible.

 

Furthermore, banning rock and roll was the least our worries back then. Having access to proper food(meat) and heating were more pressing concerns. I'm telling you this to give you a better understanding on why the whole"devil's music" trend wasn't an issue here. I'm certain your knee jerk reaction is "uneducated idiots" for "missing" the trend.   

 

I never said I detest atheist video games. I dislike atheist propaganda especially when is out of place. It has no place in a fantasy universe with souls, fireballs etc. Had this been a universe without supranatural occurrences (no magic, souls, gods!!! etc) then it would have made sense and I wouldn't have complained. It wouldn't be my cup of tea but I would understand. 

 

I'm going stop posting on this thread since I derailed it enough. I said all I had to say on the subject.