Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[The Architect]

It really went a ways off-topic with the dimorphism issue.

It was nice to prove that the members of the community are capable of handling these issues maturely, and it is the first time I've seen that happen. It doesn't look like there is much more to say about them. We didn't really come to any kind of consensus, and I find myself still uncertain about the inclusion of sexual violence in the game.

Many people made comments along the lines of "I don't think Toady would ever include X, but it's really up to him..."
The fact is that Toady's currently posted goals DO include some of these (sometimes offensive) things, and while he will undoubtedly handle them well when he eventually gets to them, it would be nice if the community had a mature, well-formulated view of them.


I think the generally most common opinion is as follows, but of course a small sampling of comments doesn't prove a thing:

Elements of sexual crime, especially against "minors", is the most offensive firestarter a game could include. Most people would only want to see them included as a part of Legends and at the most as accepted trademarks of evil civilizations and cultures. Another desired item for flavour seems to be the presense of sexual violence as a crime to be punished by adventurers. It has been pointed out that there are far better things to use programming time for, but when it comes down to it we do need a mature understanding of what it could offer to the game and what damage it could do.

Very few people seem to have issue with slavery or religious elements. Both seem to be likely to forever remain on the list of items players can choose to participate in or not, though they will generate events in the worlds of DF.

A miniscule minority is undoubtedly deeply bothered by the way we have our Dwarves treat animals, but it does fit in with the time period where everything was cattle. Again, it remains up to the player how they wish to treat animals and nature within the game.

The issue of homosexuality within the game did not come up. Does anyone see it as possibly adding flavour or anything tangible to the game? I think forum disputes would multiply like bunnies as eventually some people would undoubtedly begin treating homosexuality as a crime within their forts (and describing that in their narrations, believing it to be a good joke, or making fun of it), and of all the issues that have caused dispute this seems to be the most highly volatile. Should it be included for completeness? Avoided as a can of worms? Should it simply take the form of some dwarves* having "lovers" who are of the same sex? Is it something anyone feels strongly should be included? I've had a gender-confused dwarf in my narration of a community fort before, but it didn't require the game to actually simulate it. Could it serve any important purpose?

*Edit: typo correction

[Foehamster]

It was nice to prove that the members of the community are capable of handling these issues maturely,

IS THAT A CHALLENGE? 

The issue of homosexuality within the game did not come up. Does anyone see it as possibly adding flavour or anything tangible to the game?

Probably not unless there's an ethical tag about it.  Gameplay-wise its the same as having 2 dwarves that will never have children.

With the ethics tag you might have your sheriff jailing them or worse.  The vanilla settings of HOMOSEXUALS:ACCEPTABLE/UNTHINKABLE is probably the only thing to offend people.

Also, as I said before I have no interest in on-screen DF sex.  Socialize prone in the same tile if you want, but I don't care to be bothered further than that.

SLIGHTLY OFF TOPIC
We need more actual crime, less trustworthy dwarves should pilfer items now and again.  More aggressive dwarves should assault their grudge and every kind of minor or major offense should be included.

[NewoTigra]

With the ethics tag you might have your sheriff jailing them or worse.  The vanilla settings of HOMOSEXUALS:ACCEPTABLE/UNTHINKABLE is probably the only thing to offend people.

Gameplay-wise that would actually work quite well. For example there might be some civs with little or no bias against it (Acceptable / Personal Matter?), whereas some civs might react in a realistic 'shun those who are different' (unthinkable / shun?).
For instances of the latter, see most non-modern views on the subject, e.g. Oscar Wilde, who's alleged homosexuality was regarding by the Judge overseeing his trial as "The worst thing he'd ever had in his court". Records of the court show that a few weeks before Oscar's trial, there were several cases of child murder.

In the 'middle-ages' it was not uncommon for people to be executed or burned at the stake for homosexuality, which was regarded at the time to be on the same tier as (or evidence of) witchcraft.

OFF TOPIC -
I'd say the tag that best incorporates modern views of homosexuality would be PERSONAL_MATTER

[Cyx]

I am aware of the difference between what is an opinion and what isn't. I simply considered that, given the facts that we are not the ones making the decision anyway, that even with a lot of research you couldn't be sure about this particular case because of all the elements involved, and that on top of it all no one would ever make that research anyway, it just regressed to an "opinion" status.
You see, given that a truth exists regarding all things, setting a line between "things you have an opinion about" and "things you have knowledge about" implies that there is an unreachable part of truth we just have to make guesses about. The question is simply about what is in "range" and what isn't. I think that accurately predicting something like this is impossible for us as forum-dwellers, thus we can do nothing more than weight the knowledge we do have. Whether or not it is a matter of opinion is, really, a matter of opinions.
I don't blame you for bringing it up, though, you had good intentions. I just wanted to explain myself.

[The Architect]

Hah, well, I understand what you're saying. Technically that is not the meaning of opinion, but your meaning is very clear.

You're right, it is very much a matter of conjecture for us. Hopefully someone might come along with some knowledge about it at some point and educate us.

[Mechanoid]

Could it serve any important purpose?

Making it meaningful in the gameplay, as directly as possible.
If dwarf fortress is going to tell stories, it should at least tell the highest dimensional story possible, because it'd be nice to not have to lie or fill in blanks with imagination to tell a story of a fortress.

You can dump as many dwarven children into as many dank pits and kill their mothers all you want, but all the imagined suffering in the word won't matter if their thought profile says their happyness is at "Ecstatic" and everyone they know are friends, because ultimately as long as that is the case, you'll never get one orphan to kill another. Even if you imagine there's a love triangle (or love web) there won't be any conflict because such things were never programmed, for fear it would offend someone's sensabilities.

[Pilsu]

If the game will eventually let me enslave and torture people for the fun of it, I feel it's a bit hypocritical to leave out lynching

I don't think acceptability of the act will cover the whole spectrum. After all, some cultures were all about the manlove while treating women as nothing but incubators

[Mechanoid]

If the game will eventually let me enslave and torture people for the fun of it, I feel it's a bit hypocritical to leave out lynching

Isn't this already possible by attaching a creature to a rope and then releasing a draw bridge or hatch they're standing on? Or has it not been implemented yet, because i remember reading about it in the dev notes...

[Little]

A point on the whole media-picking-it-up thing.

It won't. Look at Mass Effect. Mass Effect, they could just show a three second clip of the two people on top of eachother and people would be outraged. Hot Coffee, they played a brief, unfinished portion of it and people were in arms.

Dwarf Fortress, you have ASCII characters moving around. There's no realistic blood, violence, or sex. Could you imagine one of the people at Faux News pointing at a red trail behind a f and going, "The player just brutally disemboweled a fox!" It simply wouldn't be comprehended. There isn't any pretty pictures or videos to showcase to militant parents on the news. DF is fairly obscure, anyways, outside hard-core gaming circles.

DF isn't pretty or known enough to be mainstream controversial 

[Silverionmox]

One night, she snuck away from her husband and went in search of the Giants.  She came across four Dwarves who possessed the most beautiful necklace ever created.  They had made it of gold, rubies, and amber and Freya had to have it.  The Dwarves made a bargain with her.  She could have the necklace if she slept with each of them.  Freya was disgusted, but then she looked upon the necklace, Brisingamen, again and she told them that she would comply.

[Lord Dakoth]

This game will get very interesting if this suggestion is implemented. I can't wait to see [ETHIC:HOMOSEXUALITY:IF_GOOD_REASON] in the raws. 

But I fail to see how things like necrophilia really contribute to the game at all. Other than making elves even creepier, of course.

[The Architect]

Hmm, well there we have it. The most disgusting addition to our list of controversial topics.

[Dakk]

With the ethics tag you might have your sheriff jailing them or worse.  The vanilla settings of HOMOSEXUALS:ACCEPTABLE/UNTHINKABLE is probably the only thing to offend people.

Vanilla DF has that? Either I need to read the past comments or I've been partially blind everytime I looked into the Civ raws.

[The Architect]

Don't worry about it, it's just really bad english. I think the idea is that Foehamster thinks vanilla should have those tags as part of an ethics code, and that will be all it needs.

Anyway, if you disagree, don't start arguing with me. I disagree too. It's a crazy oversimplification of both the "problems" and solution. Most people ignored it, I think.

[Andeerz]

 

Architect, thanks for posting this thread!  I must admit I haven't read everything there is in this thread, but I read your initial posts and I must say I agree with you 100% and I feel that this game will be the first game with the capacity (and in my opinion one of few creative works) to ever implement fantasy-genre-esque themes in a truly meaningful and believable way.

Only few literary works and I believe no video games actually detail a world where the magic or fantastic creatures in their respective universes influence the world in these stories in plausible ways.  This game has the capacity to finally do this, and in order to do this, I believe certain contentious features (not necessarily the ones harped on about so much in this thread) should have at least the option of being implemented.   

The value of such a game as DF reaches outside of the gaming community and satisfying curiosity, I believe.  This may be off topic, but such a simulation as DF could eventually provide would have seriously awesome applications in certain fields of anthropological and even biological research.  Srsly.