Kingdom Come: Deliverance Kickstarter

[Bryy]

 

Agreed.  Realism and accuracy are great so long as they don't detract from the fun of the game.

Bah, people like you killed Rainbow Six!

 

Inclusion is important to me. Devs making as much money as possible (especially post-KS income) is important to me.

Heh, I am correct then. Not too sure on it actually affecting their income that much, myself.

 

No, you're not. I back projects I want to back.

 

If I didn't want to support Kingdom, I'd give less of a carp about the female stretch goal. Same with Mighty No. 9 and the console ports. Not because I don't care if they succeed or not, but my money is not going to go towards things I'm willy-nilly about if I have more important things to purchase.

 

It just so happens that right now is Con Season Prep for me, so I would be willing to sacrifice Kingdom Come in order to do other, more important things. I siimply do not have the resources to be pitching in to every project that I would like to right now.

Edited February 2, 2014 by Bryy

[pmp10]

Related to the historical accuracy thing, but actually as much as well due to genuine historic curiosity: were wandering bards an actual thing, as in, a legitimate profession? I mean obviously there's Shakespeare the bard, but he'd probably make a poor adventurer.

Of course they were.

That said the term eventually gets hopelessly confused even referring to playwrights like Shakespeare.

[Malcador]

No, you're not. I back projects I want to back.

Indeed, but you had mentioned inclusion as being important, which was what I was getting at.

[alanschu]

To be fair, you suggested that it might be essential when you framed the statement as being one that does not take gambles on games with male only protagonists.

[Malcador]

To be fair, you suggested that it might be essential when you framed the statement as being one that does not take gambles on games with male only protagonists.

 

That was the first question I asked, was curious if that was his stance as I've read plenty of comments online that take it. 

[Bryy]

Breached $600k.

 

Am happy.

 

Now on to...

 

PERFORMANCE MOTION CAPTURE!

Edited February 3, 2014 by Bryy

[AGX-17]

Sick of killing rats in the basement? Or being treated like a messenger, transporting stuff

from point A to point B? So are we! That’s why our quests are different. Play as a medieval

investigator searching for a mass murderer, lay siege to a bandit fort with an army at your

back, experience epic battles between armored knights, interrogate, bribe, threaten, love,

help, fight… It’s up to you to decide what to do.

 

....I'm pretty sure I did all that stuff in bold in Skyrim. And we all know what kind of "RPG" Skyrim was.

Edited February 3, 2014 by AGX-17

[Nonek]

Character customisation, my digestive fell in my cup I was so enthralled, looks very impressive.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWQn10s_QJM

[Bryy]

Aaaaaaaaaaaand right on the heels of Femalegate comes Whitegate. 

 

http://www.dailydot.com/gaming/reddit-tumblr-medieval-video-game-poc/

[alanschu]

Aaaaaaaaaaaand right on the heels of Femalegate comes Whitegate. 

 

http://www.dailydot.com/gaming/reddit-tumblr-medieval-video-game-poc/

Interesting. I think that those that disagree do themselves a disservice when they respond with such vitriol (on top of granting exposure to a topic and increasing awareness of it, when they may not actually want that). I agree with the one commenter that said they find it disappointing that people would react to the idea that Medieval Europe may not have been as white as many think with anger rather than curiosity. Though I suspect (given comments like "Idiot SJW") there's an innate disbelief for whatever reasons that would need to be overcome.

 

As I said, I have no beef if the developers want to have only a male character, or only white people. As the article you link messages, it takes place in a pretty small area so "realism" arguments can go both ways. If the game completely lacks POC, that doesn't make it unrealistic. Nor does the inclusion of POC innately make it less realistic either.

 

 

Which boils down to the issue: claiming that a game is "realistic" is going to really bring in people's notions of what they think is considered realistic, and when those notions are challenged then fighting cognitive dissonance is going to be a huge barrier to overcome.

[Keyrock]

This is one really worrying aspect of crowdsourcing.  The vast majority of the people pledging just want a cool game and are fine with the developer following their vision as they see fit, and may offer constructive criticism, but in a non-pushy manner and with the complete understanding that the developer likely knows better how to make a game.  Unfortunately, you get the small loud minority (the loud minority ruins so mauch goodness in the world) of people that feel their $20 pledge means they can hijack the direction of the game.  Then you get the unreasonable and misguided backlash to the loud minority, and then this happens.

 

*sigh*

[BruceVC]

 

Aaaaaaaaaaaand right on the heels of Femalegate comes Whitegate. 

 

http://www.dailydot.com/gaming/reddit-tumblr-medieval-video-game-poc/

Interesting. I think that those that disagree do themselves a disservice when they respond with such vitriol (on top of granting exposure to a topic and increasing awareness of it, when they may not actually want that). I agree with the one commenter that said they find it disappointing that people would react to the idea that Medieval Europe may not have been as white as many think with anger rather than curiosity. Though I suspect (given comments like "Idiot SJW") there's an innate disbelief for whatever reasons that would need to be overcome.

 

As I said, I have no beef if the developers want to have only a male character, or only white people. As the article you link messages, it takes place in a pretty small area so "realism" arguments can go both ways. If the game completely lacks POC, that doesn't make it unrealistic. Nor does the inclusion of POC innately make it less realistic either.

 

 

Which boils down to the issue: claiming that a game is "realistic" is going to really bring in people's notions of what they think is considered realistic, and when those notions are challenged then fighting cognitive dissonance is going to be a huge barrier to overcome.

 

 

I agree, its probably easier just to say " this game is the developers interpretation of Medieval Europe and will try to be as realistic as possible" or something similar. But the word "realistic" does seem to  create some kind of contention

[BruceVC]

This is one really worrying aspect of crowdsourcing.  The vast majority of the people pledging just want a cool game and are fine with the developer following their vision as they see fit, and may offer constructive criticism, but in a non-pushy manner and with the complete understanding that the developer likely knows better how to make a game.  Unfortunately, you get the small loud minority (the loud minority ruins so mauch goodness in the world) of people that feel their $20 pledge means they can hijack the direction of the game.  Then you get the unreasonable and misguided backlash to the loud minority, and then this happens.

 

*sigh*

 

I find some of the same minority fans vociferous and rude when any suggestion around inclusivity comes up, so I suppose it goes both ways.

[alanschu]

This is one really worrying aspect of crowdsourcing.  The vast majority of the people pledging just want a cool game and are fine with the developer following their vision as they see fit, and may offer constructive criticism, but in a non-pushy manner and with the complete understanding that the developer likely knows better how to make a game.  Unfortunately, you get the small loud minority (the loud minority ruins so mauch goodness in the world) of people that feel their $20 pledge means they can hijack the direction of the game.  Then you get the unreasonable and misguided backlash to the loud minority, and then this happens.

 

*sigh*

Most people want a "cool game" but I wouldn't be surprised if there's no majority (i.e. 50%+1) consensus on what is essential for a cool game. I'm sure many of the people that "just want a cool game" are perfectly okay with many of the things that the various minorities want, because ultimately it doesn't affect them.

 

In my opinion, the only legitimate reason to be upset at someone asking or suggesting something like this is if you think that it'll ultimately deliver a less than satisfactory experience. To me, this means that you're either upset at the specific content request, or at the perceived opportunity cost of implementing the request (i.e. it'll take away from something else you consider more important).

 

 

 

The problem I have with the defense of "people just want a cool game" is that, if that's the case, then really should it not matter at all with respect to whether or not you can play as a female player character, or what have you? Or would the inclusion be something that makes the setting unsatisfying for you? If so, what exactly does that say?

 

In the world of RPGs there's definitely that group of people that want the "edgy and mature" topics with things like rape and all those dark things to make the world more vicious and seem more real. These threads inevitably popped up on DAI forums, and I responded with an idea of "Okay, how about the notion that the player character gets captured at one point, and if the player is male he gets raped by the homosexual jailer." The response was that that would just be a clear attempt at being subversive and would be frankly, lame. So to that poster, it wasn't just the inclusion of rape he wanted, it was an inclusion of rape of a specific nature (i.e. of a woman). Whatever his reasons are for doing that, I do find it an interesting point that for that person, having a woman get raped would be perfectly acceptable while having a man get raped would be out of the question.

 

 

There's no real definition of what it means to "have a cool game" and for some people, adding something like this is just something that makes the game that much cooler.

[IndiraLightfoot]

If the guys at Warhorse stand by their vision of KC:D as "historically accurate", "realistic", etc, they really ought to research the subject thoroughly, and I promise you that they will be surprised how varied and diverse Central Europe could be in those times: using several languages in the same areas, people with varied ethnic backgrounds, especially in and around courts (and there are indeed two castles in the KC:D map). The same goes for women, having two courts in the game, along with all artisans, merchants and guilds supporting them; and you'll get a plethora of interesting roles for women to occupy and flourish in. Interestingly, most people don't have this in mind when they thing of "realistic medieval times" - they seem to think of an all-male battle ground, where the strongest men got to rise to the top, build up a rule of power and oppression, and be surrounded by all other social roles as if they were insignificant slaves. That comes across as slightly fascist and very unpleasant indeed. I'm not saying that one or two medieval kingdoms in Europe could have been that bad, but I wonder how common it was, and for how long it lasted. Some researchers say about the Vikings that they were raider parties organized a bit like the mob on Sicily. However, they were never fully integrated into the agricultural life of the Viking Age, where women and other ethnicities had quite distinguished roles. They were woven into its fabrics, but rather loosely.

[Bryy]

If the guys at Warhorse stand by their vision of KC:D as "historically accurate", "realistic", etc, they really ought to research the subject thoroughly, and I promise you that they will be surprised how varied and diverse Central Europe could be in those times: using several languages in the same areas, people with varied ethnic backgrounds, especially in and around courts (and there are indeed two castles in the KC:D map). The same goes for women, having two courts in the game, along with all artisans, merchants and guilds supporting them; and you'll get a plethora of interesting roles for women to occupy and flourish in. Interestingly, most people don't have this in mind when they thing of "realistic medieval times" - they seem to think of an all-male battle ground, where the strongest men got to rise to the top, build up a rule of power and oppression, and be surrounded by all other social roles as if they were insignificant slaves. That comes across as slightly fascist and very unpleasant indeed. I'm not saying that one or two medieval kingdoms in Europe could have been that bad, but I wonder how common it was, and for how long it lasted. Some researchers say about the Vikings that they were raider parties organized a bit like the mob on Sicily. However, they were never fully integrated into the agricultural life of the Viking Age, where women and other ethnicities had quite distinguished roles. They were woven into its fabrics, but rather loosely.

 

You just exemplified why I have to roll my eyes when people justify the ridiculous amount of sex and sexism in The Witcher (books or games) with "you mean women were treated as they would be in that time frame"?

 

It's a damn fictional setting. 

[Chilloutman]

And creator can make it as sexist as he wants, we still have some kind of freedom at least in art its like crying that most acts (nude paitings) were of womens. Damn you you sexist pigs (looking at you Alfons Mucha....)

Edited February 6, 2014 by Chilloutman

[Bryy]

And creator can make it as sexist as he wants, we still have some kind of freedom at least in art its like crying that most acts (nude paitings) were of womens. Damn you you sexist pigs (looking at you Alfons Mucha....)

 

Well, if they were sexist, they were sexist. Not really sure what you're getting at. Being popular doesn't make something any less of what it is. You're honestly not arguing that we should shut up about bull**** just because it's art, are you?

 

Either way, you completely miss the point of what I was saying. 

Edited February 6, 2014 by Bryy

[Mamoulian War]

Art is art, you don't like, you don't buy, but don't tell anyone else, that he should be ashamed to like some specific types of art, because you might find it offending...

[IndiraLightfoot]

Warhorse Studios has just replied what their stance is on having multiple ethnicities in their game, and I really appreciate their response:

Ahmad Khan: "I am a person of color and here's my take, if its logical and historically sensiable then do it, north-african traders,berber mercenaries,turkish schlors, jewish refugees escapping presecution, Slavic orthodox priests,the Roma people, are all logical and historically verified minorites. The rest of the world not as much."

 

Warhorse: "Very well said. This is exactly how we see it."

 

This is great news, I reckon!

[Malcador]

Aaaaaaaaaaaand right on the heels of Femalegate comes Whitegate. 

 

http://www.dailydot.com/gaming/reddit-tumblr-medieval-video-game-poc/

 

 

Sure is a minefield making games these days

[Malcador]

You just exemplified why I have to roll my eyes when people justify the ridiculous amount of sex and sexism in The Witcher (books or games) with "you mean women were treated as they would be in that time frame"?

 

It's a damn fictional setting.

Pretty much, why it needs no justification in the first place, really. If they wanted to make the world a bit more bleak by having rampant sexism and racism, that's not that bad. Not as if the PC is compelled into partaking in it.

[Keyrock]

 

This is one really worrying aspect of crowdsourcing.  The vast majority of the people pledging just want a cool game and are fine with the developer following their vision as they see fit, and may offer constructive criticism, but in a non-pushy manner and with the complete understanding that the developer likely knows better how to make a game.  Unfortunately, you get the small loud minority (the loud minority ruins so mauch goodness in the world) of people that feel their $20 pledge means they can hijack the direction of the game.  Then you get the unreasonable and misguided backlash to the loud minority, and then this happens.

 

*sigh*

Most people want a "cool game" but I wouldn't be surprised if there's no majority (i.e. 50%+1) consensus on what is essential for a cool game. I'm sure many of the people that "just want a cool game" are perfectly okay with many of the things that the various minorities want, because ultimately it doesn't affect them.

 

In my opinion, the only legitimate reason to be upset at someone asking or suggesting something like this is if you think that it'll ultimately deliver a less than satisfactory experience. To me, this means that you're either upset at the specific content request, or at the perceived opportunity cost of implementing the request (i.e. it'll take away from something else you consider more important).

 

 

 

The problem I have with the defense of "people just want a cool game" is that, if that's the case, then really should it not matter at all with respect to whether or not you can play as a female player character, or what have you? Or would the inclusion be something that makes the setting unsatisfying for you? If so, what exactly does that say?

 

In the world of RPGs there's definitely that group of people that want the "edgy and mature" topics with things like rape and all those dark things to make the world more vicious and seem more real. These threads inevitably popped up on DAI forums, and I responded with an idea of "Okay, how about the notion that the player character gets captured at one point, and if the player is male he gets raped by the homosexual jailer." The response was that that would just be a clear attempt at being subversive and would be frankly, lame. So to that poster, it wasn't just the inclusion of rape he wanted, it was an inclusion of rape of a specific nature (i.e. of a woman). Whatever his reasons are for doing that, I do find it an interesting point that for that person, having a woman get raped would be perfectly acceptable while having a man get raped would be out of the question.

 

 

There's no real definition of what it means to "have a cool game" and for some people, adding something like this is just something that makes the game that much cooler.

 

My problem isn't with people making suggestions and questioning aspects of a crowdfunded game, as long as the suggestions are done in a constructive, non-pushy manner.  My problem is with people that feel their pledge gives them a right to dictate the direction of a project, make demands, and kick and scream because something isn't exactly to their liking, and threaten to remove their pledge or whatever else (if you want to remove your pledge, just do it, no need to make a spectacle of it).  I also have a problem with the people that get too aggressive and extreme with their backlash against those types of people, that's not helping anybody.

 

The moderate majority, providing polite, reasonable, and constructive criticism are fine, in fact they're contributing to a healthy somewhat open development process.  It's the people on the extreme ends that **** everything up, as they generally do in all manner of things.

Edited February 6, 2014 by Keyrock

[Maria Caliban]

I'm all for more racially diverse medieval Europe. I'm also for colorful medieval clothing - historical records show that per-modern people knew about things like dyes and didn't just wear black and brown. 

 

There's something very wrong when medieval Europe looks like a goth nightclub.

[BruceVC]

Warhorse Studios has just replied what their stance is on having multiple ethnicities in their game, and I really appreciate their response:

Ahmad Khan: "I am a person of color and here's my take, if its logical and historically sensiable then do it, north-african traders,berber mercenaries,turkish schlors, jewish refugees escapping presecution, Slavic orthodox priests,the Roma people, are all logical and historically verified minorites. The rest of the world not as much."

 

Warhorse: "Very well said. This is exactly how we see it."

 

This is great news, I reckon!

 

I like that response, that makes sense