Backstage - OOC Forums
EVE-Online RP Discussion and Resources => EVE OOC Summit => Topic started by: Seriphyn on 23 Jul 2011, 12:22
-
I was discussing with another member of the RP community in private a couple days ago, the general problem with EVE PF is how vague it is, and we're either forced to do either one of two things...
1) Extrapolate and deduce from what we have
2) Use a RL point of reference.
Let's take faction navies. All four are very different in their doctrine and function. However, as far as gameplay mechanics are concerned, they all operate the same. They appear all over the world, in missions, in deadspace, doing the exact same things. So how do we differentiate? I personally would extrapolate. The Federation Navy, though not the largest, could be argued to be the most widespread of all four navies. They've got Guristas to fight in the north ("The one thing Gallente and Caldari can agree on"), they've got Serpentis and nullsec interests to the west, helping the Republic and fighting the Cartel to the west, and leading the Sansha occupation (is CONCORD an extension of Gallente influence?) in the south. Now, according to missions, the faction navies are everywhere, but this would all be fluff. FedNav is an "influence-projecting tool" versus the "rapid reaction force" of the Caldari Navy.
Or, alternatively, use RL points of references to make it easier. It's not a case of "This bit in EVE = this in RL" but just some loose foundations. For example, the Federation military is similar to the American military; ethnically mixed, a power-projection force and, though it tries to be cutting-edge, often competes with a civilian government for funding and battling red tape. The Amarr military is similar to the Russian military. Massive, world's largest arms manufacturers, but significantly outdated across many areas. Another similarity to the Russian military is the extensive experience with counter-insurgency operations (see, Riot Interdiction Teams in-game item). The Caldari military is similar to Israel and small "powerhouse" East Asian states such as S.Korea, Japan and Singapore, with conscription and an idea of "total defence" (however, they entail being a rapid reaction force too). The Minmatar military is similar to post-Soviet bloc militaries of Eastern Europe; not as well-equipped as larger powers, but unrivalled in the knowledge of their home territory, and fully capable in using the tools they are given to fight off invaders.
Is this a bad thing, using this RL point of reference? Outside of that extrapolation/comparison, the EVE militaries are sometimes (sometimes) portrayed as very American; gung-ho with shouts of "Sarge!" and other genericisms (I would argue Gallenteans are the gung-ho types with nude women on their shoulder pads, while the Minmatar are the most susceptible to heinous acts; anyone telling them to treat Amarr POWs well? Nope...).
But it's not just military stuff. Stuff like the Amarr, in terms of everyday attitudes, I see as very Middle Eastern, especially through system names (though the religious institute has Western Christian influences of course). Women covering up flesh, clothing, perhaps defined gender roles (please don't murder me okay lol), and so forth. A few (a lot) of us play the Amarrians are Roman Imperials or Medieval Europeans, for example, which I personally don't see the connection, but that's an example of using a RL point of reference. (if pre-industrial Gallente potentially had Greco-Roman and Medieval European influences, than would it be possible for the Amarrians to have the same thing, given the stark differences in culture? I would argue no, and that Persia is a better influence point).
I'm sure some of you are twitching now at the "this is that" present in this post, but I'm presenting the idea that, in lack of knowing any better, using a RL point of reference is the only thing to go on. Yes, Amarr is Amarr, Caldari is Caldari, but there are so many aspects of the EVE universe that is unexplored, there is no other option. What do you think?
Also, half-asleep when writing this. Apologies for weak writing or bad tone.
-
I can relate to most of what's outlined here but I would make a quick difference of opinion. The Amarr religious institution is dramatically more related to Old Testament Judaism and Islam than Western Christianity.
You've got the Theocracy outlook of the Roman Catholic church during the Medieval Ages combined with the overtly military, expansionist mandate of early Judaism and Islam.
These kinds of "blender" combinations in faith, culture and practice in each government, race and religion is what makes EVE so difficult to RP at times, because with no PF point of reference on something, you come down to how each player perceives each aspect of each government, religion, race and then you have to try and come to some sort of acceptable middle ground between the viewpoints of each situation.
Only to find out that other players are having the same disagreement from completely different angles and now nothing makes sense logically.
-
RL points of reference are bad. A few similarities in no way means there is widespread equivalence.
-
Very much an observation in passing, but...
I can relate to most of what's outlined here but I would make a quick difference of opinion. The Amarr religious institution is dramatically more related to Old Testament Judaism and Islam than Western Christianity.
You've got the Theocracy outlook of the Roman Catholic church during the Medieval Ages combined with the overtly military, expansionist mandate of early Judaism and Islam.
How is this different to the Christianity of the Crusader era, the Spanish Reconquista, etcetera?
And did anyone notice the reference to the history of the place-name Vitrauze in "The Vitrauze Project (http://www.eveonline.com/background/potw/default.asp?cid=13-07-09)"?
It had been named after an early Federation Senator, whose name in turn was supposedly taken from one of the first settlers to come through the EVE Gate. To the Amarr, "Vitra" meant simply "life." Life itself. The Gallentean understanding of the word was more subtle, however. To them it meant "living."
Somewhere in the conversion to the EVE world, Latin 'vita' and Italian 'vita' (another point supporting the idea that Gallente blends Italian elements with French) added an "r" (which, incidentally, turns them glassy).
-
Hm, my ramblings around the point instead of ON the point threatens a digression here, but regardless, that's very interesting, Mata. Gallente and Amarr....quality of life versus sanctity of life?
Also, yes, Villore (the Federation capital) is actually an Italian town. There is a system called "Harner" in Solitude which is an Old English name. In this regard, I take Gallente to be a catch-all for British, French, Italian and W.Europe in general etc. (English being a combination, amongst other things, of French and Latin, the latter of which can be seen on FedNav NPC names).
But point is...with all this in mind...and with ZERO information on how pre-industrial Gallente society looked like...what do we do? How do we picture it? If we put the RL reference point of W.Europe/Romance civilization aside, they could be feudal Japan and we wouldn't think any better. That's what I mean. A point of reference to take loose influences from, and twist it into the EVE universe.
-
Somewhere in the conversion to the EVE world, Latin 'vita' and Italian 'vita' (another point supporting the idea that Gallente blends Italian elements with French) added an "r" (which, incidentally, turns them glassy).
Soul trapped in glass?
Head in a jar? :D
-
Very much an observation in passing, but...
I can relate to most of what's outlined here but I would make a quick difference of opinion. The Amarr religious institution is dramatically more related to Old Testament Judaism and Islam than Western Christianity.
You've got the Theocracy outlook of the Roman Catholic church during the Medieval Ages combined with the overtly military, expansionist mandate of early Judaism and Islam.
How is this different to the Christianity of the Crusader era, the Spanish Reconquista, etcetera?
I specifically dictated "Western Christianity." The Crusades were militant campaigns to reclaim the "holy land" of Israel and were specifically Islam vs Medieval Militant Theocratic Chistianity. That's the only distinction. It's semantics, really.
-
First and foremost, identifying similarities between real world cultures and those of New Eden are a good start in understanding these (alien) civilizations. CCP didn't conjure these ideas from thin air; the took some interesting concepts and mixed them together to make something new, and is somewhat critical to RPers in understanding their own character's place in this environment.
However, the downfall in this is interposing additional characteristics based on those previous similarities. The Federation may share many similarities with modern western culture, but to then build on that idea on the assumption that they possess the same value system as we do would be, in my eyes, a critical misstep.
For example, the Amarr Empire shares many characteristics with those of the Byzantine Empire and theocratic societies of the middle east. To then suggest that women all wear bhurkas, or that they somehow have a Medieval mindset, in my opinion, short-changes the concept in many ways.
Ideally, you really have to step back and define what are the key elements of each culture, what their similarities are to the real world, and then investigate how those concepts became so vital to that culture. In other words, theocracy + convert by the sword does not always = muslims, and democratic society + free market doesn't always = USA. When you start filling in the gaps with real world interpretation, rather than analyzing all the factors, you suddenly have the United States of Gallente and a complete misappropriation of ideas.
So the practical dilemma in this is you need a background for your character, and the universe is too incomplete to reasonably develop it without fear of contradicting possible future cannon, or make it too unreasonable that the reader doesn't really identify with your interpretation of the world. In my opinion, requires a measure of flexibility in scope.
Say, perhaps we had a character who's past experience was as a lowly recruit in the Imperial Navy. Instead of trying to define customs, military traditions of the entire Imperial Navy, gloss over the areas that aren't important and focus on the details specific to your character. Perhaps the unit he served in operated in a specific area of space, under a specific holder under a much larger heir navy, and thus their customs are flexible enough that another character with a similar background could have an entirely different experience and still be plausible.
I think there's a reasonable balance to be met with when filling the gaps with your own interpretations of lore, and it requires you to be adaptable and avoid trying to define how everything should be for everyone.
-
Very much an observation in passing, but...
I can relate to most of what's outlined here but I would make a quick difference of opinion. The Amarr religious institution is dramatically more related to Old Testament Judaism and Islam than Western Christianity.
You've got the Theocracy outlook of the Roman Catholic church during the Medieval Ages combined with the overtly military, expansionist mandate of early Judaism and Islam.
How is this different to the Christianity of the Crusader era, the Spanish Reconquista, etcetera?
I specifically dictated "Western Christianity." The Crusades were militant campaigns to reclaim the "holy land" of Israel and were specifically Islam vs Medieval Militant Theocratic Chistianity. That's the only distinction. It's semantics, really.
I realise this is a detour but now I'm really curious: what do you mean by "Western Christianity" that doesn't include what people in Western Europe did in the name of the church?
-
Very much an observation in passing, but...
I can relate to most of what's outlined here but I would make a quick difference of opinion. The Amarr religious institution is dramatically more related to Old Testament Judaism and Islam than Western Christianity.
You've got the Theocracy outlook of the Roman Catholic church during the Medieval Ages combined with the overtly military, expansionist mandate of early Judaism and Islam.
How is this different to the Christianity of the Crusader era, the Spanish Reconquista, etcetera?
I specifically dictated "Western Christianity." The Crusades were militant campaigns to reclaim the "holy land" of Israel and were specifically Islam vs Medieval Militant Theocratic Chistianity. That's the only distinction. It's semantics, really.
I realise this is a detour but now I'm really curious: what do you mean by "Western Christianity" that doesn't include what people in Western Europe did in the name of the church?
Actually byzantene era eastern orthodoxism works better in my opinion. This is especially so because the position of emperor is, as far as we know, more secular than religious. There are no rites that an emperor seems to be required to lead etc. and the whole involvement of apostles is a very strong indicator to the theologically and historically savvy. :)
Edit: Another good argument is the definition of sin we see in the scriptures. I haven't seen any indication that amarrians believe into the ongoing sinfulness of the fall of man from grace - especially relevant for this is The Scriptures, Book of Missions 5:14.
-
Mhh, I was about to say more or less the same thing than Kaleigh.
-
Yeah, great post Kaleigh, the idea that "these didn't come from thin air" is definitely a strong point. I think also, most importantly, the empires of EVE are NOT post-singularity, excluding Sansha's Nation. They are very grounded in contemporary politics. If, say, the Gallente Federation had each and every one of its citizens connected to each other via a GalNet sort of deal, with instantaneous communication and instant democracy, with drones executing the consensus of the population, THEN RL points of references fall flat.
I'm going to digress on the idea of "United States of Gallente" actually...with a few ideas of how they differ...
Sacred/near-religious concepts of freedom and liberty - Perhaps more akin to the US in the 19th century, the Gallente aren't like the Americans who justify foreign actions with pragmatic, realpolitikal terms such as "national interests" and "ensuring security abroad". President Roden used the term "grand human project of universal freedom", and it's very likely Gallente use the ideas of freedom very similar to how the Amarr use God in their propaganda pieces.
Sometimes covert methods of cultural warfare (eg. food services) - Unlike American food, Gallente food isn't shit, and has more roots in exquisite, European gourmet (With the exception of Quafe food chains). Brought up in Jita 4-4, as opposed to the Federation going overbearing with their food services industry (excluding Quafe), their companies lose face and take up whatever culture they are residing in. Restaurants in the State, Republic and Empire may all sell the local cuisine, but the major ones are going to have Gallente chefs, etc. This is opposed to McDonald's fast food junk (again, excluding Quafe).
Extreme diversity to the power of 100 - Take every culture on Earth right now, and it all exists in one form or another in the Federation. Minmatar tribalism and the Amarr religion (along with offshoots such as Sani Sabik) is definitely practiced in the Federation. Take the Intaki traditions; it's not going to be practiced exclusively in the Intaki home system, but likely as far as a melting pot such as Luminaire. Likewise, the Jin-Mei caste system probably exists in some form or another (The loosest form being how ethnic Jin-Meis interact with each other) across the Federation. In this sense, the Federation resembles more of a 22nd united Earth faction such as the Systems Alliance. Governed by a Western political system (democracy), but its culture varies greatly.
Possible female-dominance? - Purely conjecture. My own theory is that the Gallente have concepts of hypermasculinity AND hyperfemininity. If there is no male dominance, then the men are likely going to be quite laid-back. A woman's biologically smaller frame means that they may be more inclined to try and "beat" the naturally larger male gender. This has no root in PF, of course, mostly because a lot of the main characters are male. :tonyg:?
It's the FUTURE! - God Almighty, this is the most important bit. Do people not play Mass Effect because the Systems Alliance is democratic and therefore "US-in-space"? No, of course not. the Federation is NOT a copy-paste of the US or Europe, because firstly it's an interplanetary democracy. Drones, artificial intelligence, faster-than-light communication...how does this all influence the Gallentean government? Near-instant, or at least superfast, democracy? The Federation has towering, crystalline cities of multiple layers, they have simulated planetary environments in space...they build habitations with a temperate ecosystem underground...
But yeah, the things I would emphasize is 1) the GalFed has future technology (as to ALL factions) and 2) the GalFed resembles more of a future Earth faction than the US, mostly because of its extreme diversity. There's much more than that but there's a few points.
-
I was discussing with another member of the RP community in private a couple days ago, the general problem with EVE PF is how vague it is, and we're either forced to do either one of two things...
What you see as a problem, I see as an advantage.
You seem to be a cataloguer, someone who likes to pin down and codify everything into verifiable (and immutable?) facts. For me a codified catalogue of knowledge (usually with attentdant judges telling me "You can't do that because of X written here and here" tends to stifle my creativity and fun of play. Part of the fun is trying to imagine what something is like with only limited knowledge as a starting point.
Of course everything is grounded in contemporary stuff, if only because we cannot help but look at EVE stuff through our own colored glasses. And of course its fun to try and draw parallels, and try to flesh out stuff. I think you should see this gaps as a blessing too, because it certainly seems to stimulate your creativity too, judging from what write about EVE.
-
I'd also make a strong distinction between points of reference and equivalence. That is, one may find it useful to note that CCP originally based the Brutor on elements of Maori culture and then examine what we see of Brutor culture in that light. But turning that into "space Polynesians" seems somewhat more problematic.
-
I'd also make a strong distinction between points of reference and equivalence. That is, one may find it useful to note that CCP originally based the Brutor on elements of Maori culture and then examine what we see of Brutor culture in that light. But turning that into "space Polynesians" seems somewhat more problematic.
This. Real world points of reference serve some purpose, but a very limited one. Too many people take them literally.
-
Somewhere in the conversion to the EVE world, Latin 'vita' and Italian 'vita' (another point supporting the idea that Gallente blends Italian elements with French) added an "r" (which, incidentally, turns them glassy).
Soul trapped in glass?
Head in a jar? :D
I like the way the Dark Forces think. :)
-
I'd also make a strong distinction between points of reference and equivalence. That is, one may find it useful to note that CCP originally based the Brutor on elements of Maori culture and then examine what we see of Brutor culture in that light. But turning that into "space Polynesians" seems somewhat more problematic.
I'd be inclined to agree with this and what Kaleigh Doyle said a few posts earlier.
I feel we should try to primarily examine Eve cultures on their own, trying to find what is chracteristic for them, what makes each unique - as opposed to try to make them into copies of RL cultures based on the two sharing a few features.
That said, I also do feel comparisons to RL cultures have their place in worldbuilding and RP. They work well as sources of inspiration during brainstorming, as RL cultures are rich and deep compared to most fictional cultures. I feel examining phenomena from RL cultures an Eve culture is vaguely similar to can help us understand and create richer and more contextually fitting Eve cultural stuff for our RP. We just need to be careful to examine the pieces we would like to copy over, and see whether they need adjustment to fit or can be used at all.
-
I think one has to examine the idea of originality to appreciate current ideas adapted in new ways. For instance, we've been retelling the same tales for hundreds of years now, with variations of characters and settings, and even across artistic mediums, because the manner in which a story is told is just as important as the story itself. I guess my point here is that there's no such thing as a truly original idea; it had to come from somewhere, but I think people identify something as less 'creative' when easily recognizable in their own world.
-
Agree, and yes, agree. Kaleigh has nailed it. Also, when you have near-Earth societies, etc. just like any good sci-fi story, it is *representative* of a specific human vice or conflict, not verbatim. So you get the creative side, but also the basis for your idea rooted in something you (mostly) understand and are familiar with.
I too am a 'cataloguer' and respect that approach. Props to Aristotle. :P
-
Sometimes covert methods of cultural warfare (eg. food services) - Unlike American food, Gallente food isn't shit, and has more roots in exquisite, European gourmet (With the exception of Quafe food chains). Brought up in Jita 4-4, as opposed to the Federation going overbearing with their food services industry (excluding Quafe), their companies lose face and take up whatever culture they are residing in. Restaurants in the State, Republic and Empire may all sell the local cuisine, but the major ones are going to have Gallente chefs, etc. This is opposed to McDonald's fast food junk (again, excluding Quafe).
First of all, 'American food' isn't shit, but I'll not chew on you for saying that.
Secondly, there are references to 'Caldari take-out' being all greasy and deep fried, while not at all being Caldari. I'm quite sure that the Federation has many poorly imitated and ultra-cheap takes on foreign food, just like American culture has. They haven't all been mentioned, but the 'Caldari take-out' and the ubiquitous Quafe product is a good mirror of Americanized foods and Coca-Cola.
I agree with the rest of your post though. The Federation is not the U.S. in space, and I don't think it was ever intended to be. It does have a lot of examples of American culture though, along with a healthy dose of French.
-
First of all, 'American food' isn't shit, but I'll not chew on you for saying that.
I know all my US friends tell me I shouldn't judge America based on Las Vegas, and my experiences are all ten years old, but yeah, it was. I was served at (supposedly high class) restaurants beef that smelled faintly like sewers, and chicken with blood in the middle of it.
Matariki gave me hassles for my choice of breakfast cereal until she visited a supermarket with me and discovered that the hyper-sweet stuff I'd chosen was the least sugary stuff available.
The Mexican from "Baja Fresh" was the highlight - food with actual fresh vegetables in it! *sigh* I remember it fondly.
Going back to the topic, I actually get flashes of (parts of) the US in the Caldari stuff I've been reading than the Federation. The Hyper free-marketism, the corporations as political entities with all the power, the screwing over the little person as long as the corporation is making a profit ...
-
"Baja Fresh" as a RL point of reference for Mexican food makes me cringe. And these days, I get a distinctly Amarrian vibe from many of my countrymen.
-
We now have Mexican restaurants in New Zealand, run by actual Mexicans, and the food is very very good, but Baja Fresh excelled because of the quality of its competition.
-
Damnification through faint praise. Something else that feels very EVE-ish. (I admit to being more than a little biased when it comes to Mexican food... :cube: )
-
Only problem with any cultural representation, be it fictional or real, is blindness to its misgivings.
If someone uses a real life culture as a reference for a fictional one and blatantly uses only the 'good' parts of it, then there can be no real constructive discourse about any issue at hand.
To me, a culture is what it is because of its 'good' and 'bad' parts.
It has evolved to what it is as a whole.
The 'bad' parts have been as necessary to its survival as the 'good' parts.
Because the culture evolves constantly, its 'good' parts can be 'bad' in a decade and vice versa.
This is one of the reasons I stay away from threads that has been initiated by this way of perceiving things, especially if the person initiating the thread is using the culture that they are living in as a real life reference and uses only its 'good' parts as a point of reference.
To me this shows that the person doing this is completely socialized by their own culture and would feel that any kind of discussion about the issues presented in the thread would make them feel defensive for they would feel that they have been doing something wrong by following a train of thought that has been taught to them by their own culture.
Then you throw in to the mix the different perceptions about New Eden, space opera or realistic for example, and you have a nice little flame war brewing.
Let's take an example.
Brutor are based on the maori people.
Maori do tattooing.
Maori are tribal.
Maori were warriors.
Maori were cannibals.
If you do not go from the basic concept of the Minmatari people being noble savages, you use all aspects of the real life culture to build your view on the Brutor.
Good and bad things about all aspects of the culture that you are basing your train of thought on.
I will make this very simple and quite aggravating as well.
Tattooing, integral part of the culture.
Those without tattoos are outside the culture. Hence anyone seen without a tattoo, to a Minmatari the gut reaction would be to treat one as a person of no social status.
The culture is tribal.
Real life references to tribal culture; gangs, American Natives, Aboriginals, african tribes.
All real life references do not have atmosphere for progressive thinking or technological development.
Hence a tribal culture would not seek to advance technologically, it would try to find a balance with its environment instead of changing it through technological advancements.
The culture holds warrior ideals.
Instead of striving to create art or science the culture would strive to create ways for its participants to prove themselves in battle, ritual or otherwise. Would lead to a very physical culture with social practices that would enable one to go to battle with just about anyone for any reason. A lot of internal strife.
The culture has cannibalism.
Either it is linked to warfare or dealing with the death of loved ones. Consuming of the enemies or consuming parts of the loved dead so that they would stay with you always.
As you may have noticed, my examples of the real life references taken to a fictional culture could be perceived as 'bad' or as something that a person would put together if they do not really like the Minmatari culture for personal reasons. Unfortunately, I do like the concept of a tribal culture that has advanced beyond the inherent ostracism, sexism, superstition and stupidity.
An advanced tribal society would have the best surroundings for a child to grow up in, emotionally and spiritually nurturing environment where education would be custom made for each individual hence getting the most out of each and everyone on a societal level.
A society where each and every person would be equal in the eyes of the Tribe, each and everyone doing what they love for their whole lifetime which would make the Tribe stronger and self-sufficient in every way.
True freedom brought to the individuals within their society through administrative means where each individual can get their voices heard by representing a certain viewpoint when a need arises, no real politicians, just people that make their voices heard in the society when they get passionate about it.
Not to mention the wonderful rituals that bring a sense of passage to a life, from rituals that happen each day, each week, each season, each year, each lifetime and even beyond.
A family showing their love to their old by consuming them and carrying them with them in their life always.
A boy becoming an adult by passing through the trials and earning his tattoos.
A tribal leader having his face tattooed after his people have decided to give him the honor.
Hmmmm... what was I rambling about.
Oh yes, when making references to anything, I think it would be beneficial to always take in the whole picture.
Not just a part of it.
Backstage is a place for discussions and discourse, not about winning arguments.
Sharing all of the thoughts about a subject, even if you would be handing someone ammo IC, can only make for a fuller picture of New Eden and make more RP.
Anyhoos, better make some brekkies.
-
The problem I've always found, in trying to RP/write about Baxter's experiences in EVE, is that when I use a RL point-of-reference it robs the experience of whatever 'exotic' flavor it had. Going back to Seriphyn's comment about Mass Effect (really pumped about ME3 coming out next year!), I don't play it to experience the Systems Alliance. I play it to experience the exotic flavor of the game, including the Systems Alliance. Different architecture, armor, weapons, people/species, places, etc. If I look at that and then walk out my front door there's an obvious change between the two.
Using RL points-of-reference just lessens the experience of being immersed in something that's quite different from reality. Simplistic I know, but it works for me.