Kingdom Come: Deliverance Kickstarter

[IndiraLightfoot]

Accusations of "political correctness" is just another way of saying "so, you believe in democracy/liberalism/equality... (all those words that made the world you rely upon today decently fun and nice and not medieval)"

 

Women in and around medieval times usually could take care of themselves. They weren't just crawling along the walls, serving food and getting raped all day. I'm sorry. Read up and that. You'll be surprised!

 

And there were cruel and dangerous women in Central Europe at that time too, for instance:

Countess Elizabeth Báthory de Ecsed (; 8 August 1560 – 21 August 1614) was a countess from a renowned noble family in the kingdom of Hungary. She has been labelled the most prolific female serial killer in history and is remembered as the "Blood Countess", though the precise number of victims is debated. The stories of her sadistic serial murders and brutality are verified by the testimony of more than 300 witnesses and survivors as well as physical evidence and the presence of horribly mutilated dead

Edited January 30, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Malcador]

Some good news, I see if the game reaches its 600K mark there will be a female character. So its looking much better

 

That's it for 'much better' ?

[Chilloutman]

Accusations of "political correctness" is just another way of saying "so, you believe in democracy/liberalism/equality... (all those words that made the world you rely upon today decently fun and nice and not medieval)"

 

Women in and around medieval times usually could take care of themselves. They weren't just crawling along the walls, serving food and getting raped all day. I'm sorry. Read up and that. You'll be surprised!

 

And there were cruel and dangerous women in Central Europe at that time too, for instance:

Countess Elizabeth Báthory de Ecsed (; 8 August 1560 – 21 August 1614) was a countess from a renowned noble family in the kingdom of Hungary. She has been labelled the most prolific female serial killer in history and is remembered as the "Blood Countess", though the precise number of victims is debated. The stories of her sadistic serial murders and brutality are verified by the testimony of more than 300 witnesses and survivors as well as physical evidence and the presence of horribly mutilated dead

 

I am Czech, so I know story about Elizabeth Bathory and as you stated she was countess, not blacksmith and as you states she was murderer, not warrior. She actualy didnt go to town and find victims, she have subjects to do that. And for record, she was murdering maidens to bath in their blood to keep young. 

 

Political correctes doesnt have anything to do with democracy, Its just tool to push through ideas that are against common sense but some minority could be offended so they mist it with words to not offend anyone.

 

from wiki:

 

Historically, the term was a colloquialism used in the early-to-mid 20th century by Communists and Socialists in political debates, referring pejoratively to the Communist "party line", which provided for "correct" positions on many matters of politics. The term was adopted in the later 20th century by the New Left, applied with a certain humour to condemn sexist or racist conduct as "not politically correct". By the early 1990s, the term was adopted by US conservatives as a pejorative term for all manner of attempts to promote multiculturalism and identity politics, particularly, attempts to introduce new terms that sought to leave behind discriminatory baggage attached to older ones, and conversely, to try to make older ones taboo. This phenomenon was driven by a combination of the linguistic turn in academia and the rise of identity politics both inside and outside it. These led to attempts to change social reality by changing language, with attempts at making language more culturally inclusive and gender-neutral. These attempts (associated with the political left) led to a backlash from the right, partly against the attempts to change language, and partly against the underlying identity politics itself

 

sorry If it seems offending but I like to call things by true names

Edited January 30, 2014 by Chilloutman

[IndiraLightfoot]

Haha, you just skipped the portal paragraph of the wiki and pasted in a bit you liked. Here's what you skipped:

Political correctness (adjectivally, politically correct; both forms commonly abbreviated to PC) is a term that refers to language, ideas, or policies that address perceived or actual discrimination against or alienation of politically, socially or economically disadvantaged groups. The term usually implies that these social considerations are excessive or of a purely "political" nature. These groups most prominently include those defined by gender, race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation and disability.

 

Basically, in its modern usage it's a pejorative term when you are dissatisfied with someone elaborating issues or contexts or criticizing stereotypical views concerning the blue underlined words above.

[Chilloutman]

Hehe, but you are the one who trying to decive me that womens were equal to man in 15th century central europe. Its political correctnes which trying to imply something which is not true just because it is unconfortable for you (or some womens) and to be fair, you are the one who is reacting only on parts of post which fits you

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

Women thing again even here? Really? Yeah you are all right, women in 15th century in central Europe were equal to man, right. Now lets talk about unicorns in space

Which thawed permafrost cave did you just crawl out of? They describe it as an RPG that is not a medieval simulator. So, a female pc is an obvious choice. They have already acknowledged this themselves. However, they are making the game around a male character, much like the Witcher games. I think that is unfortunate, but referring to medieval reality in a game produced beyond the year 2000, really? It's yet a fantasy game, for goodness sake. Should we exclude female characters from all medieval inspired games while we're at it? Then we'll have that cosy, sweaty locker room feeling, where boys will be boys, and women are from Venus. Medieval views of women are best kept medieval.

 

 

 

 

As I see it a simple way of dealing with the matter is to simply set a realistic stretch goal reflecting all of the extra work and resources that they'll need to implement a female protagonist, voice actress, meshes, different areas, writing and content changes that an accurate portrayal of a female character would need in the extremely sexist and repressed world that they're trying to simulate. Say £0.5-1 million, and let the market decide.

Heh, I just adjusted the amount for you, but that would of course be optimal. I just find that prequel far too little for my taste.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Women thing again even here? Really? Yeah you are all right, women in 15th century in central Europe were equal to man, right. Now lets talk about unicorns in space

Which thawed permafrost cave did you just crawl out of? They describe it as an RPG that is not a medieval simulator. So, a female pc is an obvious choice. They have already acknowledged this themselves. However, they are making the game around a male character, much like the Witcher games. I think that is unfortunate, but referring to medieval reality in a game produced beyond the year 2000, really? It's yet a fantasy game, for goodness sake. Should we exclude female characters from all medieval inspired games while we're at it? Then we'll have that cosy, sweaty locker room feeling, where boys will be boys, and women are from Venus. Medieval views of women are best kept medieval.

 

 

Ehm no, its not fantasy game, it have accurate historical setting. Yes its true that some blacksmith guy would probably doesnt become king (as it will not happend in game) I dont know how would you like to loose combat as women character and then get raped. Watch Joan de Arc movie and its still flavored fiction. In fact Joan didnt ever fight, she was just icon to boost morale.

 

Wrong: They have stated this many times over.

1) It's a game

2) It's an RPG

3) It's not a medieval simulator

4) And they have no agenda per se vs female characters in that setting

 

 

 

 

Yes I can understand why the change of amount Ms Lighfoot, but i'd prefer if they'd make unique content for both genders, to face head on womens struggles in this period and the strength they showed when even the good book castigated them as sinners and fonts of evil. I think that to have a woman arise such as Eleanor of Aquataine, who shook and molded kingdoms at her whim, would be a worthwhile thing and a good statement of equality in the most prejudiced of times.

I'd love to see something like that. It would be a great game!

And historical figures like Queen Victoria or Boudica show that you can rule as a woman in quite different ways.

Chilloutman: If every woman just was a pushover and someone to rape, how on earth did a woman come to rule one fourth of the world in the 19th century?

 

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

 

 

 

Accusations of "political correctness" is just another way of saying "so, you believe in democracy/liberalism/equality... (all those words that made the world you rely upon today decently fun and nice and not medieval)"

 

Women in and around medieval times usually could take care of themselves. They weren't just crawling along the walls, serving food and getting raped all day. I'm sorry. Read up and that. You'll be surprised!

 

And there were cruel and dangerous women in Central Europe at that time too, for instance:

Countess Elizabeth Báthory de Ecsed (; 8 August 1560 – 21 August 1614) was a countess from a renowned noble family in the kingdom of Hungary. She has been labelled the most prolific female serial killer in history and is remembered as the "Blood Countess", though the precise number of victims is debated. The stories of her sadistic serial murders and brutality are verified by the testimony of more than 300 witnesses and survivors as well as physical evidence and the presence of horribly mutilated dead

 

 

Haha, you just skipped the portal paragraph of the wiki and pasted in a bit you liked. Here's what you skipped:

Political correctness (adjectivally, politically correct; both forms commonly abbreviated to PC) is a term that refers to language, ideas, or policies that address perceived or actual discrimination against or alienation of politically, socially or economically disadvantaged groups. The term usually implies that these social considerations are excessive or of a purely "political" nature. These groups most prominently include those defined by gender, race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation and disability.

 

Basically, in its modern usage it's a pejorative term when you are dissatisfied with someone elaborating issues or contexts or criticizing stereotypical views concerning the blue underlined words above.

Here are my posts above.

Where does it say that I deceive you that women were equal to men in the 15th cy?

 

A hint: You'll never find it, coz I would never say something like that. All this shows is that you act on agenda of your own.

Edited January 30, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[BruceVC]

Hehe, but you are the one who trying to decive me that womens were equal to man in 15th century central europe. Its political correctnes which trying to imply something which is not true just because it is unconfortable for you (or some womens) and to be fair, you are the one who is reacting only on parts of post which fits you

 

Indira is really polite. You are coming across as an uniformed sexist, there is no reason that a company can't make a game where a women is an outlaw, mercenary or bard...or one of  many other profession that existed in the medieval ages . But its really annoying to keep hearing people say "well we can't have a women character in a medieval game because that's unrealistic".

 

If you actually want to learn something please read this link I posted earlier

 

http://fozmeadows.wordpress.com/2012/12/08/psa-your-default-narrative-settings-are-not-apolitical/

[Chilloutman]

And on whos agenda you act? My agenda is that I want historicaly accurate RPG game (or at least as much accurate as game can be) and you doesnt saying that womens were equal, you are implying that it was so common that you can base game on it and still be historically accurate. If not then our disscussion is that I want historical game which devs promise and you want fantasy game

[Chilloutman]

 

Hehe, but you are the one who trying to decive me that womens were equal to man in 15th century central europe. Its political correctnes which trying to imply something which is not true just because it is unconfortable for you (or some womens) and to be fair, you are the one who is reacting only on parts of post which fits you

 

Indira is really polite. You are coming across as an uniformed sexist, there is no reason that a company can't make a game where a women is an outlaw, mercenary or bard...or one of  many other profession that existed in the medieval ages . But its really annoying to keep hearing people say "well we can't have a women character in a medieval game because that's unrealistic".

 

If you actually want to learn something please read this link I posted earlier

 

http://fozmeadows.wordpress.com/2012/12/08/psa-your-default-narrative-settings-are-not-apolitical/

 

 

I am not saying having women in 15th century is unrealistic, I am saying that having women blacksmithing and fighting bandits, soldiers and ploting with/against kings in armor during this period in central europe is plain stupid but thanks for whiteknighting (first time I am inpolite during this disscussion because you call me sexist for some unknown reason) 

[BruceVC]

 

 

Hehe, but you are the one who trying to decive me that womens were equal to man in 15th century central europe. Its political correctnes which trying to imply something which is not true just because it is unconfortable for you (or some womens) and to be fair, you are the one who is reacting only on parts of post which fits you

 

Indira is really polite. You are coming across as an uniformed sexist, there is no reason that a company can't make a game where a women is an outlaw, mercenary or bard...or one of  many other profession that existed in the medieval ages . But its really annoying to keep hearing people say "well we can't have a women character in a medieval game because that's unrealistic".

 

If you actually want to learn something please read this link I posted earlier

 

http://fozmeadows.wordpress.com/2012/12/08/psa-your-default-narrative-settings-are-not-apolitical/

 

 

I am not saying having women in 15th century is unrealistic, I am saying that having women blacksmithing and fighting bandits, soldiers and ploting with/against kings in armor during this period in central europe is plain stupid but thanks for whiteknighting (first time I am inpolite during this disscussion because you call me sexist for some unknown reason) 

 

 

Oh no you don't understand, I'm not whiteknighting. This is exactly what I think, it may be a language translation problem but your comments come across as dismissive and sexist

 

Your first comment around this topic  irritated me but I left it as I always seem to comment about these things and I didn't want to overdo it, you said

 

"Women thing again even here? Really? Yeah you are all right, women in 15th century in central Europe were equal to man, right. Now lets talk about unicorns in space"

 

Do you really think this comment cannot be seen in a sexist way?

[Malcador]

Yes it can, he's talking about a past period. You can argue him being wrong on that, but not really seeing where he's stating women are inferior in that. 

 

 

Oh no you don't understand, I'm not whiteknighting

 

Hee hee.

[Chilloutman]

Yes it can, he's talking about a past period. You can argue him being wrong on that, but not really seeing where he's stating women are inferior in that. 

 

 

Oh no you don't understand, I'm not whiteknighting

 

Hee hee.

 

Thanks for someone who can put my mumbling togather with sense

[alanschu]

Reality arguments are a red herring.

 

The player character is never just "some character" in a setting.  The prevalence of women performing acts of significance would be reflected in the entire setting, not the particular gender/sex of a single character.

 

 

That said, if the development team isn't providing women because they prefer to focus on other things than the challenges that that provides, then (though it may be unfair) that's the prerogative.  Not all games are going to allow for a man or women to be playable characters.  If, however, the reason for not adding them is for reasons of being "realistic" then its a problematic situation.  Unless people are asking for significantly more women in power throughout the game, it's a pretty bull**** excuse and those justifying that a single character can't be a woman because of realism need to step back and take some perspective.

 

 

 

 

I am not saying having women in 15th century is unrealistic,

 

When you draw analogues to unicorns in space (even in jest), you're going to draw attention you're probably not intending to.

Edited January 30, 2014 by alanschu

[Malcador]

Thanks for someone who can put my mumbling togather with sense

 

 

I rarely put anything with sense.   Though, this is could be a clever idea to exploit these types.  Add stretch goals that appeal to them, get money for it, and the money doesn't have to the actual cost of that item. 

[Nonek]

I'm split on this, yes I would like a near historically accurate setting, too often nowadays we see what are basically renaissance fayre settings that have no detail, no depth and no logic about them. Through catering overmuch they invalidate their own setting. I say let us face the issues and prejudices (all of them) that were prevalant at that time, and who sponsored them. Build an in depth and detailed setting that is not afraid to shirk reality for the sake of feelings and objections, the truth carries its own responsibility and respect.

 

Then craft a protagonist who is exceptional, can take a stand, has the strength of will and intelligence to affect change and the choice of whether to do so. Give them the opportunity to be proactive, and a standard bearer for what is right, that makes an impression even if they fail. Or embrace the system and sit behind the throne, pulling the strings, reigning in hell rather than serving in heaven.

 

Just do not have them clumsily glamourised by being told how wonderful they are when they do nothing and attempt nothing but following quest givers instructions, avoid this modern trend of insulting over empowerment, focus on real character advancement and the opportunity to demonstrate ones strength of personality, whether it be slanted towards the beatific or diabolic.

 

Edit: For clarifications sake i'm not saying that the protagonist should not be challenged, quite the opposite, make them face gruelling odds and really dangerous situations that carry the full weight of medieval punishments. Simply let them overcome, through grit and cunning, or fail and die in ignominy if they make a mistake or underestimate their opponents.

Edited January 30, 2014 by Nonek

[Keyrock]

The problem with allowing gender choice in a historically accurate period piece of a game is all the extra development that this would entail.  You can't just simply let the player choose male or female, change a few lines of dialogue here and there and keep the rest the same, because that would not reflect an accurate representation of the attitudes of that time period.  Entire quest lines would have to be completely remade for the female character, to accommodate the unique challenges a female character would face when compared to a male.  While I think that would be certainly interesting to play and I would welcome such an option, I can certainly sympathize with the developers not wanting to do the extra work involved in creating many of the quests and scenarios twice to accommodate the gender choice.  They are making a game centered around a very specific protagonist, that is their choice and that is their right. 

[Bryy]

19th century is not 15th. What is so shocking about it? You want to rewrite history because its now 2000+ and womens are equal now? 

... you really, really need to think before you post. You're coming off as not just a historical purist, but you're dangling on the edge of sexism.

 

"Woman thing again?"

 

Implying that you've had this argument before. Were you one of the people that wanted to pull their funding from Torment because you could choose genders at character creation?

 

It's a game, and guess what? Women play games.

 

Nobody is trying to "rewrite history" with a game.

 

It's a game.

 

Women play games.

Edited January 30, 2014 by Bryy

[IndiraLightfoot]

The problem with allowing gender choice in a historically accurate period piece of a game is all the extra development that this would entail.  You can't just simply let the player choose male or female, change a few lines of dialogue here and there and keep the rest the same, because that would not reflect an accurate representation of the attitudes of that time period.  Entire quest lines would have to be completely remade for the female character, to accommodate the unique challenges a female character would face when compared to a male.  While I think that would be certainly interesting to play and I would welcome such an option, I can certainly sympathize with the developers not wanting to do the extra work involved in creating many of the quests and scenarios twice to accommodate the gender choice.  They are making a game centered around a very specific protagonist, that is their choice and that is their right. 

I agree. It's a huge and expensive undertaking, so like Nonek, I'd much prefer that they did it big and in an expansion instead of some short prequel.

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

19th century is not 15th. What is so shocking about it? You want to rewrite history because its now 2000+ and womens are equal now? 

... you really, really need to think before you post. You're coming off as not just a historical purist, but you're dangling on the edge of sexism.

 

"Woman thing again?"

 

Implying that you've had this argument before. Were you one of the people that wanted to pull their funding from Torment because you could choose genders at character creation?

 

It's a game, and guess what? Women play games.

 

Nobody is trying to "rewrite history" with a game.

 

It's a game.

 

Women play games.

 

Heh, I know. Chilloutman, unlike his name, gets really carried away. What's he talking about here? History, when this thread is about an CRPG? I'm not entirely sure, but some of it is like staring into a bottomless pit, like that one in Moria. You don't want to get to close.

[Bryy]

Another thing: 

 

I'm sick to death of the "that's how things were back then" excuse when people are racist, sexist, or just plain bigots.

 

We live in the now. Not back then.

 

And even then, that phrase seems to sugarcoat the entire time period. Just because it was the zeitgeist does not mean that everyone was racist or sexist or a bigot. It doesn't even mean it was okay. 

 

Sufferage and the Civil Rights Movement did not pop up out of thin air.

[Tigranes]

I don't see how the argument that it's hard to have a female PC who does exactly the same things a male PC does in a game which tries hard to be historically accurate to medieval Europe - is sexist, regressive, or whatever.

 

Indeed, suggesting that opposing female PCs in the game is an act of ignorance, sexual discrimination, crawling out of a permafrost cave, etc. I would say is the only part of the entire discussion that seems aggressive and disrespectful.

 

If you wanted to argue that the 'no woman' stance is historically regressive, technically, to argue that women should be equally represented anywhere and in whatever form is, from the perspective of contemporary philosophy and feminist debates, outdated and quaint. It would also be very easy for me to point out, in that case why can't I play as an old man, or as a gay person, or as an Asian? Why is being female privileged above other historically repressed groups that development resources must always be siphoned off to them?

 

But in fact, neither line of argument would be really a constructive one to make. The heart of the matter is, what kind of representation of history do you want this game to have? Do you believe that recreating the gender differences in history in this context contributes to sexism today? I don't. You might. But the moment you make this a question of ARE YOU SEXIST, you're cheapening the discussion.

 

This addresses Brry's last post. Basically: is a historically accurate game primarily a work of history or a work of popular culture? Well, obviously, both. But one might argue that every cultural form produced today should reflect the political norms of today. I tend to believe that there is value in accurate depictions of bygone or now rejected political norms. And I think the argument that 'being historically accurate can't be an excuse for bigotry' is essentially a strawman and has no relevance. It's not like anyone wants the game to not have a female PC because they want to play the game to live out their misogynistic fantasies or continue to repress women. The pro-female PC side might have a stake in the game reflecting and advancing their political beliefs, but the anti-side generally does not.

[Mamoulian War]

I am just shaking my head about some of the people here... Arguing about equality of women in a medieval game is the same bull**** as complaining about racism in Django Unchained...

[IndiraLightfoot]

For example:

I am saying that having women blacksmithing and fighting bandits, soldiers and ploting with/against kings in armor during this period in central europe is plain stupid

 

This does come across as a tad aggressive and disrespectful (apart from the fact that is in fact wrong. Women were on occasion soldiers back then, as well as plotting leaders. Although rarely blacksmiths, actually. However, to us trying to argue against this folly, we get this: 

 

I don't see how the argument that it's hard to have a female PC who does exactly the same things a male PC does in a game which tries hard to be historically accurate to medieval Europe - is sexist, regressive, or whatever.
 

Nobody has said that they want female PCs doing exactly the same thing, but others here often refer to "historically accurate" when its not, and this is about a game in the 21st cy.

Indeed, suggesting that opposing female PCs in the game is an act of ignorance, sexual discrimination, crawling out of a permafrost cave, etc. I would say is the only part of the entire discussion that seems aggressive and disrespectful.

Only? That was selective of you. See citation above in this post as an example.

It would also be very easy for me to point out, in that case why can't I play as an old man, or as a gay person, or as an Asian? Why is being female privileged above other historically repressed groups that development resources must always be siphoned off to them?

I'd love to play like any of those, that would be the optimal RPG. However, here we are discussing just the inclusion of the other sex (not even social gender, actually, or third or more sexes) and that's still half of the world's population. This kind of argument would be very hard to explain to my daughter, who's an avid gamer.

But in fact, neither line of argument would be really a constructive one to make.

 

What can be more constructive than discussing more options in an RPG?

 

Edited January 30, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[IndiraLightfoot]

I am just shaking my head about some of the people here... Arguing about equality of women in a medieval game is the same bull**** as complaining about racism in Django Unchained...

Nobody has ever said there were any equality back then, so what do want to say with that, really?