is this game leftist?

[mint jams]

does this game have a leftist/atheist bent? Considering getting it, but I'd prefer none of that in a medieval game.

[Mezentius]

Instead of making fun of this question, I think it's more useful to treat it as opportunity to learn something about history: the political distinction between "left" and "right" is totally meaningless in the context of 16th c. Bavaria, as those terms were not used until the French Revolution (ca. 1789).

After the Estates-General (later the National Assembly) was convened in 1789, "left" and "right" distinguished relative seating arrangements between the faction that leaned toward republican reform (left), and those who preferred to maintain some kind of constitutional monarchy (right). Those words have since been used more generally to refer to those in favor of progressive reform (left), and those in favor of tradition, authority, and the status-quo (right).

[Napoleonic S]

Publicado originalmente por Anderson:

Well, I just finished the game and in my opinion it's good and well worth playing.
But regarding you question: yes, it has a leftist/ahteist bent. It's not too overt, but lots of items in the checklist get marked. From what I can remember now:
- same-sex monk couple
- saints and gods are pretty much made up stories
- heinous crimes get commited in the name of God and preserving the Faith
- one of the monks is a secretly an witch/occultist, later even becomes inquisitor

Those are historical reality that happens in real world... Only the religious people would take offense at those stuffs, and furthermore only it those happens to be in their religion, they would totally laugh at the same kind of events if it involves other religions and would say that apparently it exposes other religions as being frauds...

[D-Ice<3]

It is anti faith in a marxists sense. People here made fun of this but it's literally a marxist view on religion. Its just opium for the masses. Some which lets you cover and cope with the hard and bad reality. You are playing a you go gurl feminist in the last act and you have a critical feminist point of view of christianity and medival times of course.

At the end its a huge social contrutivist view point. Isnt truth a fancy illusion which we make for oursel? That truth is at the end just something we all agreed upon? So the "truth" doesnt actually exists. It our discourse what decides which is "ture" and which is not ture. Behind the curtain the hidden thing (aletheia which is greek for truth means unhidden) there is actually nothing. There is nothing which you can uncover here because truth is just what we all agreed upon.

I think its stupid it is/was a waste of my time.

And it's pro Protestant Reformation and anti catholic church.

So if you wanna listen to boring written dialouges from people who can't wait 500 years so we can be free atheists liberals after all this game is for you.

[Napoleonic S]

Publicado originalmente por D-Ice<3:

It is anti faith in a marxists sense. People here made fun of this but it's literally a marxist view on religion. Its just opium for the masses. Some which lets you cover and cope with the hard and bad reality. You are playing a you go gurl feminist in the last act and you have a critical feminist point of view of christianity and medival times of course.

At the end its a huge social contrutivist view point. Isnt truth a fancy illusion which we make for oursel? That truth is at the end just something we all agreed upon? So the "truth" doesnt actually exists. It our discourse what decides which is "ture" and which is not ture. Behind the curtain the hidden thing (aletheia which is greek for truth means unhidden) there is actually nothing. There is nothing which you can uncover here because truth is just what we all agreed upon.

I think its stupid it is/was a waste of my time.

And it's pro Protestant Reformation and anti catholic church.

So if you wanna listen to boring written dialouges from people who can't wait 500 years so we can be free atheists liberals after all this game is for you.

Haha, if the game is about confronting Buddhism and Buddhist monks, I bet people like you wouldn't bat an eye to the "message".

[Nikako]

Publicado originalmente por D-Ice<3:

It is anti faith in a marxists sense. People here made fun of this but it's literally a marxist view on religion. Its just opium for the masses. Some which lets you cover and cope with the hard and bad reality. You are playing a you go gurl feminist in the last act and you have a critical feminist point of view of christianity and medival times of course.

At the end its a huge social contrutivist view point. Isnt truth a fancy illusion which we make for oursel? That truth is at the end just something we all agreed upon? So the "truth" doesnt actually exists. It our discourse what decides which is "ture" and which is not ture. Behind the curtain the hidden thing (aletheia which is greek for truth means unhidden) there is actually nothing. There is nothing which you can uncover here because truth is just what we all agreed upon.

I think its stupid it is/was a waste of my time.

And it's pro Protestant Reformation and anti catholic church.

So if you wanna listen to boring written dialouges from people who can't wait 500 years so we can be free atheists liberals after all this game is for you.

That's an interpretation of it, by no means the only one. Especially in the conclusion.

[D-Ice<3]

Publicado originalmente por Nikako:

Publicado originalmente por D-Ice<3:

It is anti faith in a marxists sense. People here made fun of this but it's literally a marxist view on religion. Its just opium for the masses. Some which lets you cover and cope with the hard and bad reality. You are playing a you go gurl feminist in the last act and you have a critical feminist point of view of christianity and medival times of course.

At the end its a huge social contrutivist view point. Isnt truth a fancy illusion which we make for oursel? That truth is at the end just something we all agreed upon? So the "truth" doesnt actually exists. It our discourse what decides which is "ture" and which is not ture. Behind the curtain the hidden thing (aletheia which is greek for truth means unhidden) there is actually nothing. There is nothing which you can uncover here because truth is just what we all agreed upon.

I think its stupid it is/was a waste of my time.

And it's pro Protestant Reformation and anti catholic church.

So if you wanna listen to boring written dialouges from people who can't wait 500 years so we can be free atheists liberals after all this game is for you.

That's an interpretation of it, by no means the only one. Especially in the conclusion.

I wouldnt not say so because this is sociology 101. The criminal gerne like CSI Miami and these kind of thingsis a rationalist empistomology dream land. You undercover things use your rationality and at the end there is a certain point. Knowlegde is neccesary to dertermin the right decision. The right decision is contingend on our knwolegde.

In the social contructivist theorie this is all a lie we tell ourself. The right decision is not contingend on our knowlegde because there is no "right" unambigious decision in the first place.

I choose ferece. For the villiagers it is the right decision and therefore the truth because he was an occultist. For the monks it is the wrong decision because there monaistic life got worse because of this. So for the villigaers he is the murderer and this is ture. But for the monks it is flase.

Then I have chosen Martin. He depicts a catholic viepoint of human nature, that you can change yourself. The protestants think there is something like a "character" which is predetermined and you cannot change this. So if Martin is a lazy thief. He can never change. So the new one must be an imposter. Because if he would not be an imposter the calvinists protestants would be wrong. This cannot be so he must be the killer and an imposter. So we all agreed on this so it is true.

That the developers have chosen the murder mystery / crime gerne is no accident.
because in the social science it is a ratiionalist myth.
That you cannot uncover and be certain who the real killer is at the end is on purpose like this. Because truth in a rartionalistic sense which we can uncover is a myth. An illusion which we made.

This is not an interpretation from me but an answer to the question if this game is leftist or not.

I would say it is social contructivist with some feminist leanings and pro protestant and I explained or tried to explained why I think it belongs to the social construtivism.

[Nikako]

Publicado originalmente por D-Ice<3:

Publicado originalmente por Nikako:

That's an interpretation of it, by no means the only one. Especially in the conclusion.

I wouldnt not say so because this is sociology 101. The criminal gerne like CSI Miami and these kind of thingsis a rationalist empistomology dream land. You undercover things use your rationality and at the end there is a certain point. Knowlegde is neccesary to dertermin the right decision. The right decision is contingend on our knwolegde.

In the social contructivist theorie this is all a lie we tell ourself. The right decision is not contingend on our knowlegde because there is no "right" unambigious decision in the first place.

I choose ferece. For the villiagers it is the right decision and therefore the truth because he was an occultist. For the monks it is the wrong decision because there monaistic life got worse because of this. So for the villigaers he is the murderer and this is ture. But for the monks it is flase.

Then I have chosen Martin. He depicts a catholic viepoint of human nature, that you can change yourself. The protestants think there is something like a "character" which is predetermined and you cannot change this. So if Martin is a lazy thief. He can never change. So the new one must be an imposter. Because if he would not be an imposter the calvinists protestants would be wrong. This cannot be so he must be the killer and an imposter. So we all agreed on this so it is true.

That the developers have chosen the murder mystery / crime gerne is no accident.
because in the social science it is a ratiionalist myth.
That you cannot uncover and be certain who the real killer is at the end is on purpose like this. Because truth in a rartionalistic sense which we can uncover is a myth. An illusion which we made.

This is not an interpretation from me but an answer to the question if this game is leftist or not.

I would say it is social contructivist with some feminist leanings and pro protestant and I explained or tried to explained why I think it belongs to the social construtivism.

Except you do find out who the Thread-Puller is, who caused the murders, and on whom the writing is pretty strong in suggesting should be considered the real murderer. There is a definite answer there. The ambiguity of the earlier 2 resolutions meant to build up a sense of doubt to support the mental anguish we see Andreas overcome. The writing presents quite strong support for religious themes, even from the perspective of the peasants and townfolk. This isn't Disco Elysium.

[D-Ice<3]

Publicado originalmente por Nikako:

Publicado originalmente por D-Ice<3:

I wouldnt not say so because this is sociology 101. The criminal gerne like CSI Miami and these kind of thingsis a rationalist empistomology dream land. You undercover things use your rationality and at the end there is a certain point. Knowlegde is neccesary to dertermin the right decision. The right decision is contingend on our knwolegde.

In the social contructivist theorie this is all a lie we tell ourself. The right decision is not contingend on our knowlegde because there is no "right" unambigious decision in the first place.

I choose ferece. For the villiagers it is the right decision and therefore the truth because he was an occultist. For the monks it is the wrong decision because there monaistic life got worse because of this. So for the villigaers he is the murderer and this is ture. But for the monks it is flase.

Then I have chosen Martin. He depicts a catholic viepoint of human nature, that you can change yourself. The protestants think there is something like a "character" which is predetermined and you cannot change this. So if Martin is a lazy thief. He can never change. So the new one must be an imposter. Because if he would not be an imposter the calvinists protestants would be wrong. This cannot be so he must be the killer and an imposter. So we all agreed on this so it is true.

That the developers have chosen the murder mystery / crime gerne is no accident.
because in the social science it is a ratiionalist myth.
That you cannot uncover and be certain who the real killer is at the end is on purpose like this. Because truth in a rartionalistic sense which we can uncover is a myth. An illusion which we made.

This is not an interpretation from me but an answer to the question if this game is leftist or not.

I would say it is social contructivist with some feminist leanings and pro protestant and I explained or tried to explained why I think it belongs to the social construtivism.

Except you do find out who the Thread-Puller is, who caused the murders, and on whom the writing is pretty strong in suggesting should be considered the real murderer. There is a definite answer there. The ambiguity of the earlier 2 resolutions meant to build up a sense of doubt to support the mental anguish we see Andreas overcome. The writing presents quite strong support for religious themes, even from the perspective of the peasants and townfolk. This isn't Disco Elysium.

I do not know these games you guys are citing and make comparisons with. This just shows how common these themes are in video games.

The priest is not the killer he just provoked the killer which is unknown.
Josh saywer even admitted this that there is no clear solution at the end.
This is the rationalistic dream every question every problem is reduced to an epistemic problem which means a problem of : Knowledge, Competence, Expertise
At the end you have a final clear solution which Pentiment does not give you on purpose. This is admitted by Josh Saywer

[cruiser]

Publicado originalmente por Anderson:

Well, I just finished the game and in my opinion it's good and well worth playing.
But regarding you question: yes, it has a leftist/ahteist bent. It's not too overt, but lots of items in the checklist get marked. From what I can remember now:
- same-sex monk couple
- saints and gods are pretty much made up stories
- struggle of the labor class vs corrupt chuch/violent lord
- women's rights (characters complain about this so often, it feels a bit forced)
- minor character marries POC character that appears out of nowhere
- heinous crimes get commited in the name of God and preserving the Faith
- one of the monks is a secretly an witch/occultist, later even becomes inquisitor
- one of the characters is okay with his wife cheating on him repeatedly, later forgives her and all is well
- pro-abortion/pro-choice. One of the nuns can get pregnant after a one night stand and years later just nonchalantly states that took some herbs and had an abortion. Problem solved.

*Edit: Added last item which I found out later. Just for the sake of completion.

JFC sounds like a nightmare, thanks. Shame because I like games set in this historical period. "Labor class"? Really?
Damn there needs to be a tag for this ♥♥♥♥

[cruiser]

For a game with the Peasant's War as a background, I'd like to explore just how exactly do Renaissance armies defeat peasants 10~100 times their number while suffering minimal casualties. From a strategic overview down to skirmish-level. Plus I'd like to find out more about the religious/political struggles while meeting characters of that time and seeing what they have to say. This margrave, that bishop, fighting over land rights, plotting against each other, making marriage alliances, etc etc etc, all against the backdrop of the Protestant reformation and emerging technologies. Kingdom Come Deliverance does this very well.

I don't want post-Industrial Revolution social issues blatantly shoehorned into this. It just takes me out of the immersion and reminds me that this is written by someone in the 21st century whose ideas, values, and worldview vastly and jarringly differ from mine.

[SamHill]

Publicado originalmente por cruiser:

For a game with the Peasant's War as a background, I'd like to explore just how exactly do Renaissance armies defeat peasants 10~100 times their number while suffering minimal casualties. From a strategic overview down to skirmish-level.

Have read a fair bit of military history, and very high casualties inflicted/very low casualties sustained is always a pointer that either the winning side had much higher firepower, or that the losing side ran away before contact, or both. The armies fighting the peasants did enjoy much higher firepower, far better supply, and troops who had been training most of their lives. It would be a safe bet to assume that if a mass grave of the Peasant casualties was examined, the minority would have missile injuries to their front, whilst a large majority would have hand to hand weapon injuries to their backs.

[Blue Candle]

Half way through the game right now and while yes it has leftist style politics its not twitter style politics, it makes sense for the time for people to be talking about what they do talk about and the game presents it as a genuine conversation piece instead of just telling you what to think. The game also promotes some conservatism in promoting the old ways and how the people in charge would want to erase the old ways. Some slight spoilers ahead for some examples. In part one its an "American Psycho" situation with a character acting a bit Patrick Bateman and in part two if you are still in good standing with the abbot you can hear his side of the story of the current situation and it actually makes sense and isn't just "church bad".

Overall I would still highly recommend this game and I fully understand your worries. I find the game strikes a nice balance and I appreciate the game talking to me like a person instead of commanding me to accept what they say or else I am a bad person.

[Brian]

I'm very little into the story so far, but I've already been lectured to by a nun who laments at how awful life for a woman is in this setting. Which sounded VERY much like a woman from 2022 judging the 1500s. Actual women from the 1500s would not be playing the victim, woe-is-me card. They wouldn't even think to do that.

[KriKitBoNeZ]

Publicado originalmente por Brian:

Publicado originalmente por KriKitBoNeZ:

How did you come to this infantile mind midget conclusion, then?

I'm trying to decode what you're asking through the, to use your word, infantile insults. Want to try again, as an adult?

I'm asking if you have a time machine, clown's shoe, because I know you didn't read any books.

[Victor66]

Very leftist. Most characters are either trans or fluidgendered.