The vitriol is mind-boggling...

[Haddon]

but is honestly also the least surprising thing I've ever seen. "oH mUh gOd a BLAKC MAN!!! ThE GAYS?!?!" from people who legitimately cannot help themselves. You people are addicted to being mad at something, to screaming about culture war nonsense.

I am someone who is absolutely sick of forced diversity and inclusion, because it is overwhelmingly just pandering and a band-aid for bad products. I especially hate this in historical titles that are actually trying to be historical. I detested how Total War added female generals; not because they were added, but in a way that didn't care in the slightest for historicity.
But one black guy in the game has people frothing at the mouth, as if no scholars or doctors sold their services, or ended up in places that still believed in Galen's theory of humors, while they were practicing scientific medicine...to some degree, at least.
People being able to choose homosexuality in an RPG has people freaking out. Just don't choose it. It isn't like Veilguard. Just don't pursue a dude.

People feel "betrayed" because the dev added a single black guy, with plausible historical background (don't know if you folks are aware, but Malians could leave Mali and study in the many, many universities of North Africa), and the ability to choose to be gay in a role-playing game. So don't play that role. Be super straight and ultra manly.

[Haddon]

Escrito originalmente por type-1:

Escrito originalmente por Haddon:

No..no they didn't "get sorted out pretty quick". If it was someone ELSE'S wife, sure. If it was an unmarried woman? A person's own wife? Nope. She had zero recourse.
Also love that you are assuming this is coming from google search results (how is that a bad thing? Doing research vs...not doing any) even when I explained where it came from. Actual history courses, which I can 100% guarantee you've never taken.
I even gave you historical explanation for it from multiple movements during the period. This game is set literally during the life of Jan Hus, the Hussite Wars are JUST about to start. The Great Peasants Revolt was in living memory. The Black Death had come along and shaken up social systems, and they were in a period of extreme socio-political shift which would end the Middle Ages, and Bastard Feudalism with it.

Your argument is "they had child brides!!!" but so did Europe. You are not accurately interpreting anything, you are just stating things you believe while ignoring the exact same treatment in Europe. The difference in Mali was better treatment. Not treated well, not sure how that part is hard to understand. But better. Because Europe, especially in eastern HRE, was cracking down HARD on anyone and everyone who was not a wealthy noble man, or clergy. Women weren't treated especially badly in Bohemia because there was some surge in misogyny or something, but because everyone who wasn't a rich man was being treated very, very badly.

Argument from authority holds no weight. You're too emotionally attached to the topic to discuss it as a scholar. I'm not arguing the facts, I'm criticising you.

When you said "they didn't even have grape laws" that told me that you're no longer thinking for yourself and are just collecting convenient facts to regurgitate.

So I'll take it on face value that back I the day they did have grape laws in Mali. However a bit of interpretation will lead is to a more accurate interpretation.

1. They had grape laws
2. If it was your wife it isn't considered grape
3. You could marry children
4. They couldn't say no to the marriage

So despite there being grape laws in the region it actually don't didn't make any difference because there were other cultural practices that made it possible to circumvent those laws.

You just know that there is this law in one place and not in the other, so that was your proof that women were treated better even though in reality that law meant nothing.

On the other hand in Bohemia there may not have been laws specifically but the father valued the purity of his daughters and there were laws in place to protect that, but also cultural practices as well.

So even taking it on face value that there were no grape laws in Bohemia women still had greater protection against that in general.

...oh honey that is not what argument from authority means. Argument from authority means claiming to be an authority in a subject, and using the authority to claim you know another subject.
I think you might mean appeal to authority. But I am not claiming my knowledge of history makes me right. I am showing the exact reasons why I am right, with explanations of that history of this specific period.

And you keep making claims, backing them up with nothing, and have zero argument against the points i've made but "nuh uh!" You are claiming women in Bohemia had better protection based on what?
Because I am telling you they didn't, based on how maliki Islam viewed women compared to how everyone who wasn't a rich man was treated in Bohemia due to socio-political shifts of the very specific time period.

I can almost 100% guarantee you either don't know who Jan Hus and the Hussites are, or only went to look it up after I mentioned them. Though...I doubt that actually.

I've given you historical explanation, with explanation of events leading up to this period and directly following the period. You've given "Well Mali now is bad!"

[type-1]

Escrito originalmente por Haddon:

Escrito originalmente por type-1:

Argument from authority holds no weight. You're too emotionally attached to the topic to discuss it as a scholar. I'm not arguing the facts, I'm criticising you.

When you said "they didn't even have grape laws" that told me that you're no longer thinking for yourself and are just collecting convenient facts to regurgitate.

So I'll take it on face value that back I the day they did have grape laws in Mali. However a bit of interpretation will lead is to a more accurate interpretation.

1. They had grape laws
2. If it was your wife it isn't considered grape
3. You could marry children
4. They couldn't say no to the marriage

So despite there being grape laws in the region it actually don't didn't make any difference because there were other cultural practices that made it possible to circumvent those laws.

You just know that there is this law in one place and not in the other, so that was your proof that women were treated better even though in reality that law meant nothing.

On the other hand in Bohemia there may not have been laws specifically but the father valued the purity of his daughters and there were laws in place to protect that, but also cultural practices as well.

So even taking it on face value that there were no grape laws in Bohemia women still had greater protection against that in general.

...oh honey that is not what argument from authority means. Argument from authority means claiming to be an authority in a subject, and using the authority to claim you know another subject.
I think you might mean appeal to authority. But I am not claiming my knowledge of history makes me right. I am showing the exact reasons why I am right, with explanations of that history of this specific period.

And you keep making claims, backing them up with nothing, and have zero argument against the points i've made but "nuh uh!" You are claiming women in Bohemia had better protection based on what?
Because I am telling you they didn't, based on how maliki Islam viewed women compared to how everyone who wasn't a rich man was treated in Bohemia due to socio-political shifts of the very specific time period.

I can almost 100% guarantee you either don't know who Jan Hus and the Hussites are, or only went to look it up after I mentioned them. Though...I doubt that actually.

I've given you historical explanation, with explanation of events leading up to this period and directly following the period. You've given "Well Mali now is bad!"

The argument from authority is you pretending to be an authority on the subject because of your profession to make your argument carry more weight, or appear more valid.

Escrito originalmente por Haddon:

Actual historian.

I don't believe you and I'll explain why. Real historians don't use Wikipedia or google.

Escrito originalmente por Haddon:

.
Also love that you are assuming this is coming from google search results (how is that a bad thing? Doing research vs...not doing any)

Real historians don't just dig up information off of google real quick. Real historians get access to actual databases and archives replete with primary sources.

What I'd expect is that you probably did one unit in black history studies as an extra credit in college. Your total surface level analysis of the culture in those places at that time based on information that was literally returned on the first page of google tells me you're an imposter or you're just awful at your profession.

[Warper243]

Escrito originalmente por Haddon:

blue anon rant.

I bet you bought and supported dustborn, concord, acolyte and eternals right, right?

[2Shy]

Escrito originalmente por Haddon:

but is honestly also the least surprising thing I've ever seen. "oH mUh gOd a BLAKC MAN!!! ThE GAYS?!?!" from people who legitimately cannot help themselves. You people are addicted to being mad at something, to screaming about culture war nonsense.

I am someone who is absolutely sick of forced diversity and inclusion, because it is overwhelmingly just pandering and a band-aid for bad products. I especially hate this in historical titles that are actually trying to be historical. I detested how Total War added female generals; not because they were added, but in a way that didn't care in the slightest for historicity.
But one black guy in the game has people frothing at the mouth, as if no scholars or doctors sold their services, or ended up in places that still believed in Galen's theory of humors, while they were practicing scientific medicine...to some degree, at least.
People being able to choose homosexuality in an RPG has people freaking out. Just don't choose it. It isn't like Veilguard. Just don't pursue a dude.

People feel "betrayed" because the dev added a single black guy, with plausible historical background (don't know if you folks are aware, but Malians could leave Mali and study in the many, many universities of North Africa), and the ability to choose to be gay in a role-playing game. So don't play that role. Be super straight and ultra manly.

Why is it that every game about Europeans HAS to have black people shown in a positive light, but no piece of media ever has to have white people in it?

[Haddon]

Escrito originalmente por type-1:

Escrito originalmente por Haddon:

...oh honey that is not what argument from authority means. Argument from authority means claiming to be an authority in a subject, and using the authority to claim you know another subject.
I think you might mean appeal to authority. But I am not claiming my knowledge of history makes me right. I am showing the exact reasons why I am right, with explanations of that history of this specific period.

And you keep making claims, backing them up with nothing, and have zero argument against the points i've made but "nuh uh!" You are claiming women in Bohemia had better protection based on what?
Because I am telling you they didn't, based on how maliki Islam viewed women compared to how everyone who wasn't a rich man was treated in Bohemia due to socio-political shifts of the very specific time period.

I can almost 100% guarantee you either don't know who Jan Hus and the Hussites are, or only went to look it up after I mentioned them. Though...I doubt that actually.

I've given you historical explanation, with explanation of events leading up to this period and directly following the period. You've given "Well Mali now is bad!"

The argument from authority is you pretending to be an authority on the subject because of your profession to make your argument carry more weight, or appear more valid.

Escrito originalmente por Haddon:

Actual historian.

I don't believe you and I'll explain why. Real historians don't use Wikipedia or google.

Escrito originalmente por Haddon:

.
Also love that you are assuming this is coming from google search results (how is that a bad thing? Doing research vs...not doing any)

Real historians don't just dig up information off of google real quick. Real historians get access to actual databases and archives replete with primary sources.

What I'd expect is that you probably did one unit in black history studies as an extra credit in college. Your total surface level analysis of the culture in those places at that time based on information that was literally returned on the first page of google tells me you're an imposter or you're just awful at your profession.

That isn't what argument from authority means. And no, I am not; I am letting the explanations speak for themselves. You refuse to accept them.

Real historians don't use Wikipedia or google.

This is insane. Yes. We do. We use google all the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ time. We use wikipedia too, we just use it for what it is; a tertiary source.
And you keep saying I found this "real quick" on google. Based on....nothing. Literally nothing but you not wanting these things to be true.

I have multiple primary sources (for my era) sitting right behind me. I don't turn to primary sources for an argument with some person on Steam who doesn't understand even basic chronology, and wouldn't accept those sources anyway. While also giving zero sources themselves. Where are YOUR sources for explanation of why Malian women were treated worse than in Bohemia in ~1400?
The fact you think the explanation of socio-economic shift is "surface level" is...odd, honestly. Just seems like hella cope.

And I definitely didn't take any courses on "black history". I learn Islamic history, of which Mali and maliki are pretty important; they are what spread Islam through West Africa, and are why Mali and Chad and norther Nigeria are still Muslim, even after the Christianization of coastal West Africa.

You are just refusing to accept the historical reality explained to you because...I don't know, I can only guess bigotry. Rather than accepting you don't know any of the history for crap, and I know a little bit (I am nowhere near an authority, and have repeatedly stated this is not my area)...and that little bit is enough to disprove everything you have said.
Because all you have said is "nuh uh Mali bad," and "you're a bad historian,".

[2Shy]

Escrito originalmente por Haddon:

Escrito originalmente por The most racist man alive:

Not every game needs LA type "diversity"

One black guy.
That's it.
First game already even had gay characters.

"IT ALREADY HAD GAY CHARACTERS"

But why wasn't Henry made gay until there was political motivation for them to do so?

[jV]

13 years of service and you only own 100 games while Kingdom Come isn't even one of them. You're here to be outraged by people's disappointment while belittling them.

[Haddon]

Escrito originalmente por Warper243:

Escrito originalmente por Haddon:

blue anon rant.

I bet you bought and supported dustborn, concord, acolyte and eternals right, right?

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ no. I don't play any of those sorts of games, and wouldn't support them if I did.

Escrito originalmente por 2Shy:

Escrito originalmente por Haddon:

but is honestly also the least surprising thing I've ever seen. "oH mUh gOd a BLAKC MAN!!! ThE GAYS?!?!" from people who legitimately cannot help themselves. You people are addicted to being mad at something, to screaming about culture war nonsense.

I am someone who is absolutely sick of forced diversity and inclusion, because it is overwhelmingly just pandering and a band-aid for bad products. I especially hate this in historical titles that are actually trying to be historical. I detested how Total War added female generals; not because they were added, but in a way that didn't care in the slightest for historicity.
But one black guy in the game has people frothing at the mouth, as if no scholars or doctors sold their services, or ended up in places that still believed in Galen's theory of humors, while they were practicing scientific medicine...to some degree, at least.
People being able to choose homosexuality in an RPG has people freaking out. Just don't choose it. It isn't like Veilguard. Just don't pursue a dude.

People feel "betrayed" because the dev added a single black guy, with plausible historical background (don't know if you folks are aware, but Malians could leave Mali and study in the many, many universities of North Africa), and the ability to choose to be gay in a role-playing game. So don't play that role. Be super straight and ultra manly.

Why is it that every game about Europeans HAS to have black people shown in a positive light, but no piece of media ever has to have white people in it?

What "positive light" do Total War games portray them in? Paradox games?
This is one character, stating his opinion about how his homeland treats women better. That's it.
And it is historically accurate because of the specifics of the period, a period where everyone in Europe who wasn't a lord was getting ♥♥♥♥ on as knee-jerk reaction to populist revolts.

[98.7]

Escrito originalmente por jV:

13 years of service and you only own 100 games while Kingdom Come isn't even one of them. You're here to be outraged by people's disappointment while belittling them.

Roasted, ground, and binned. Seems like a solid checkmate.

[Haddon]

Escrito originalmente por jV:

13 years of service and you only own 100 games while Kingdom Come isn't even one of them. You're here to be outraged by people's disappointment while belittling them.

"Only 100 games"...wow. Holy crap youseem to have hundreds of games you've never actually PLAYED more than a few minutes of.
Yeah I don't generally get games unless I feel like playing them. I actually got KCD and didn't enjoy the combat. Did enjoy watching others play it though. Not much for action combat, thought it would be worth it to RP, didn't like it, returned it.
And I am not outraged by anything. I think people's outrage is sad. I was pissed at what Bioware did to Veilguard, didn't bother playing or watching it. This isn't anywhere near that.

[2Shy]

Escrito originalmente por Haddon:

Escrito originalmente por Warper243:

I bet you bought and supported dustborn, concord, acolyte and eternals right, right?

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ no. I don't play any of those sorts of games, and wouldn't support them if I did.

Escrito originalmente por 2Shy:

Why is it that every game about Europeans HAS to have black people shown in a positive light, but no piece of media ever has to have white people in it?

What "positive light" do Total War games portray them in? Paradox games?
This is one character, stating his opinion about how his homeland treats women better. That's it.
And it is historically accurate because of the specifics of the period, a period where everyone in Europe who wasn't a lord was getting ♥♥♥♥ on as knee-jerk reaction to populist revolts.

"Total war"

Picking a game about war simulation when we're talking about individual characters, lmfao, if you got anymore bad faith Satan would crawl out of your ass.

[98.7]

Escrito originalmente por 2Shy:

Escrito originalmente por Haddon:

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ no. I don't play any of those sorts of games, and wouldn't support them if I did.


What "positive light" do Total War games portray them in? Paradox games?
This is one character, stating his opinion about how his homeland treats women better. That's it.
And it is historically accurate because of the specifics of the period, a period where everyone in Europe who wasn't a lord was getting ♥♥♥♥ on as knee-jerk reaction to populist revolts.

"Total war"

Picking a game about war simulation when we're talking about individual characters, lmfao, if your got anymore bad faith Satan would crawl out of your ass.

cool it with the antisemitism

[2Shy]

Escrito originalmente por jV:

13 years of service and you only own 100 games while Kingdom Come isn't even one of them. You're here to be outraged by people's disappointment while belittling them.

"California"

Nothing you say matters, stop stalking people's profiles for ammo, freak.

[Zulie]

The biggest joke is that these anti-woke morons think they're acting like men, instead of petulant children. Just utterly pathetic.

[Haddon]

Escrito originalmente por 2Shy:

Escrito originalmente por Haddon:

♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ no. I don't play any of those sorts of games, and wouldn't support them if I did.


What "positive light" do Total War games portray them in? Paradox games?
This is one character, stating his opinion about how his homeland treats women better. That's it.
And it is historically accurate because of the specifics of the period, a period where everyone in Europe who wasn't a lord was getting ♥♥♥♥ on as knee-jerk reaction to populist revolts.

"Total war"

Picking a game about war simulation when we're talking about individual characters, lmfao, if you got anymore bad faith Satan would crawl out of your ass.

...Total War has actual character in it. Between the whole series it has lots of lots of them. Including a game uhhh...set in Africa.