SureAI

To BigElectricCat Wow, both of you live there?

I figured I should add that this refers to a small scope because it sounds quite silly otherwise (ugh.. still sounds silly anyway). Psychology is all about the individual, therefore I believe that it cannot necessarily make statements about world affairs (and after all the main source of inspiration for this game were the works of Carl Gustav Jung, a psychoanalyst of the first hour). In politics there is usually more involved than just the mental state of a few people. What would come closest to the cleansing theme would be WW I for me in in that regard. But this too was not just the matter of a handful people making awful personal decisions about the future. Wilhelm II in particular though seems like a man who could never accept that he was guilty of his own downfall and tried to blame everyone else in exile.

Some interesting quotes from Nicolas Samuel on the topic:

"Enderal dreht sich in erster Linie um den freien Willen und innere Dämonen."

http://forum.sureai.net/viewtopic.php?f ... ine#p84153

Translation:
Enderal revolves primarily about the free will and inner demons.

"Enderals Kernthema ist der freie Wille und das fanatische Streben nach Absolution. Der Rest - Leuchtfeuer, Hohen, roter Wahnsinn - sind eigentlich nur eine Metapher. Zumindest war das beabsichtigt."

http://forum.sureai.net/viewtopic.php?f ... ine#p72225

Translation:
The core theme of Enderal is the free will and the fanatical pursuit of absolution. The rest - the beacon, high ones, red madness - are actually just a metaphor. At least this was the intention.

(fun fact: both quotes are taken from his replies to people who complained that Enderal is like Mass Effect 3)

Hmm... I actually wanted to find a different quote but I failed at that. Oh well... It was something along the lines of "beyond the cycle and epic battles Enderal is simply a story on a very personal level".

Still, this doesn't necessarily mean that our own interpretations need to end there. Political references forced themselves upon me as well at some points in the game and also when thinking about some of the core themes.

Take what I'll say with a grain of salt, this is my personal view of Enderal, not a guidebook how you should see Enderal themes as Enderal is far too open to come up with conclusive results.

That said, remember when Constantine started his rambling about religion - it was after you asked why he joined the Nehrimese Mage Order.
He told you that he one day went to Ostian where he saw the ugly side of religion (persecution of the infidels, reasonless killings of women and children, etc.) and it culminated in his hatred for religion.

But ask any citizen, or a priest in a temple what he thinks about Malphas and the Path. Do they seem brainwashed? In Riverville there is a (scripted, hence repeating) mass each evening in the temple.
It is about one of my personal favourites in religion (and I'm not exactly religous) - why have people to suffer death and other injustices, when an allmighty being reigns above them? (take Hiob from the Old Testament as a comparison)
Or take Calia, she never fully believed in the Light Born, but she felt that their teachings are right - as they stabilized the world and gave every human in the world a raison d'être.

So, do you think religion is inherently evil? Or good?
The answer is simply that none of both are true - how people see religion is always a result of their experiences with it. And neither Constantine, nor Calia and the rest of Malphas followers are in the wrong.

What Enderal criticizes is e. g. that no religion (apart from maybe the Buddhism) has the right to call itself peaceful - remember, that was also something that Constantine said to you.
Take Christianity, Hinduism, Taoism, the Islam or any other religion you know and tell me one which never had a part where it persecuted infidels. The Koran or the Bible both have chapters in which infidels get killed either by God or believers of said God - so how can that religion call itself peaceful?
The moment religion becomes a matter of interpretation it lost that right, because of what I stated above - how you see and also how you deal with religion is a result of your experiences.


As Stampfer said, Enderal is a story about human nature - yes it exaggerates the issue into a worldwide problem, or better said the source of all "evil" (otherwise the actual story would fall flat), but you can break it down to a personal level, and it still holds true.

So what did you do: you instrumentalized the Cleansing as a political statement - even though it hits all people in Vyn, regardless of race, gender, age or religion. As the Catharsis ending shows, beacons also exist at other parts of Vyn - so you can't even say that religious people are the source of all evil (as Coarek does )
That is what Enderal is at its base - it is a story about a lone human with a tragic past (no matter how you interpret it) and how he or she deals with it - again human nature at its best.
And it should't! Enderal is written the way it is so that people can come to their own conclusions

But I personally loved the 2 endings, because they tell you much about what kind of human you are (at least in your first playthrough).

Do you know Richard Wiseman’s “Q” test for lying?
It is a very simple test which gives a general outlook if sb is a good or a bad liar:
You tell sb to draw a Q on his forehead with his hand. If that person draws the Q so that you can easily read it, he cares much about the opinion of other people so he thinks more about what he says and how his conversation partners interpret what he said -> better liar

If he draws the Q so that he can read it easily he does not care as much about the opinion of other people (which does not mean he is selfish!) -> worse liar.

The two endings of Enderal are similar: it is a very personal choice if you would sacrifice yourself to save as many people as you can or if you rather try to survive, perhaps even at all costs.
Obviously they are hyperboles but if they are similar to the Q test in a way - yes you can choose just to go to the Starcity for the heck of it, hence it is far less suitable for a real test but it nevertheless says sth about which kind of character you have and your values.

in regards to the endings we pick leading to a deeper understanding of the type of person we are, in my case it was more the type of person my character was, as i was roleplaying.

my first character in enderal: blair, a level 54 (iirc) shadow dancer, chose to flee for the starcity for several reasons. this biggest one being (not the only one mind you)... she simply wanted to survive. in her case, mainly because for the first time in her life she actually started to live, as opposed to simply surviving. had she not evolved as a character during the game i think surviving wouldn't have even been a consideration for her (as she saw little in her life worth saving), however, i think she would have still chosen to flee. because that machine (the BG) convinced her she was instrumental to the survival of the next cycle, and that the current one was already lost with or without the cleansing, or rather this cleansing.

---several edits

from blair's point of view, you have the high-ones still causing the red madness, you have one person besides the pc who understands what the beacon actually does at this point, so if they die too (likely with the nehrimesse army surrounding the temple) and someone else uses it or builds another one then uses it without a focus (as i doubt there's another high-one's essence laying around, or a container for it handy either), the cleansing starts anyway. i could go on, but you get the drift

---edit even more
and unless i've forgotten something, isn't it impossible to get the numinos without the main character (as you need that ability of his/hers? so you wouldn't be able to use the beacon anyway, well without causing the cleansing...

Being a pragmatist , I can give two main morals of Enderal's - and Nehrim's - story:
1. Fighting against fate is completly pointless - if you predestined, then you will stay predestined even after burning books and killing strangers.
While if you're actually not predestined, then such fight even more ridiculous.
2. Killing your gods is a really, REALLY bad idea. What comes after them will be much worse.
On a more canonical side I want to point:
To be free you need knowledge. Without it you just a marionett of your wishes - and those, who are able to use them. You know, advertising and all that stuff.
And the minor aspect:
The first person at murder scene - except, of course, the detective - most likely to be the killer.

To improve. And to execute his freedom. Because there is no progress without conflict and no point in choosing without sacrificing.
Nope - Buddhism prove to be VERY violent. He was actually banished from India due to his bloodthirsty nature and still being the only dharmic religion, that have succesfully repelled Christianity three times - each one through genocide.
There is no such thing as "peaceful religion". And problem is not a religion itself, but the fact, that it is humans, who actually participate in it - and humans are full of dark passions.
For the record: atheist are obviously the worst kind of believers - take it from person, who was actually born in atheist state and spent last four years on history and philosophy of atheist movements.
Btw, no offence meant.

I've been avoiding spoilers like the plague and am only just now entering The Living Temple so I admit I haven't really figured things out yet.

I'm not sure if it's Calia who says, "people want simple answers" when talking about religion, but it really stood out to me when I heard it.

To me, this really rings true. In my own investigations, it seems religious fundamentalism is a direct response to political/cultural oppression. The Pilgrims as dissenters were forbidden places of worship within x-miles of villages/towns. Their attempts at protest and dissent resulted in having noses and ears removed by the Crown. The subsequent activities of Oliver Cromwell and the removal of "God's Representative on Earth" (i.e. Charles I) really isn't that much different to what we're seeing with fundamentalists today.

I have to disagree with Marx's statement that "religion is the opiate of the masses" and suggest Rushdie's quote, "religion is the crystal meth of the masses" is more appropriate today.

Seems to work well with what I've encountered so far in Enderal, too.

i have to agree that the statement "religion is the opiate of the masses" is incorrect. i think fear gets that particular title. and that happens to be the one universal weapon in about any religion's arsenal, fear. fear of this, fear of that, fear of becoming that. that's why i count myself among the like of firespark, though a bit less... em, extreme i suppose.

And now in the U.S., the latest religion is Fear of Emails, by pastor DJ Don!

hmm... i check my email like once every 6 months or so. and my inbox has something like 8000 messages (i'm not kidding here). so does that make me religious?