Quantcast

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Customer Throws Tantrum About Female Generals, Is Completely Wrong

2456

Comments

  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    so one dude complaining about a history issue and authenticity in a game is review bombing? damn that game really is lacking review if only one review is enough to bomb it, or not that good for that matter

    now I wonder why post it here and not on steam....
    Go check the reviews if you like.  One review doesn't create Overwhelmingly Negative in Steam's system.  Gaming outlets are also reporting the review bombing, which I linked.  Not sure where you got the impression only one review was involved.

    image
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited September 2018
    Phry said:
    Spiider said:
    Female Roman generals are as authentic as black nazis.
    And authenticity is as authentic as white black panthers.

    Edit: It is interesting that this turned into a conversation about games and game mechanics. I think fundamentally we are very nerdy.
    Authenticity is a huge problem in games lately, take Battlefield V, people had a huge problem with having a cricket bat wielding female cyborg and a guy with a Katana being in the game. If people suspect there is an agenda being pushed on players, sometimes its very hard to see that as not being the case. :/
    Don't be obtuse.  The outrage over Battlefield V wasn't a katana being in the game, and it wasn't cyborgs.  It was a woman soldier.  DICE even responded with how stupid it was to try and point to historical authenticity with regards to gender in a game where three players can ride a horse together shooting Flamethrowers.

    Painting that controversy like it was about cyborgs or a katana is being disingenuous, unless there was some kind of second outrage that happened simultaneously or after the "female soldiers, go fuck yourselves!" one.  I don't remember seeing anything about another one.
    IselinZenJelly

    image
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Rhoklaw said:
    What? Someone skewed information, claiming it as fact in order to push an agenda? Gee, THAT has never happened before. No offense, but the folks on the "other side of the spectrum" have been doing this for years. Now it's suddenly a disturbing thing to see someone from the opposite side of their spectrum doing the same thing?

    Just looks to me like someone joined the bandwagon on fake news.
    Skewing is being generous.  There were no changes to female general spawn rates.  The facts weren't skewed, they were completely made up.
    gervaise1

    image
  • GutlardGutlard Member RarePosts: 1,019
    White men will just have to learn to unpucker their butts and continue to meet people halfway, more and more. That's being said by a white man...

    Sorry guys, the ride was smooth for a looooooong time. We have to evolve at some point.

    Gut Out!
    MadFrenchieSBFordTaneoncheyaneZenJellyKyleranFlyByKnightalkarionlogHiromantTuor7

    What, me worry?

  • FlyByKnightFlyByKnight Member EpicPosts: 3,967
    It's clear as day red hats have reached critical mass of ignorance and absurdity, BUT it's still a fact that there is silly agenda pushing by the other extremity. This type of stuff isn't effective. All it does is rile up and substantiate the ravings of idiots. Revising history or contrived attempts at repackaging long standing lore when no one requested is just lazy and instigating.

    I'm not saying there isn't room for creative shifts but everyone knows in their gut (again reasonable people, not knuckle dragging peons) when some cornball exec is making a crumby decision that doesn't help anything.

    All this sh!# needs to stop. ALL OF IT.
    "As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*" 

    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 19,934
    thunderC said:


    TLDR




    blueturtle13
    Fedora - A modern, free, and open source Operating System. https://getfedora.org/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly, iteration


  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 19,934
    edited September 2018

    I think that they deserve some amount of "DLC hate" personally. They are one of the most egregious development teams when it comes to the sheer volume of DLC. And it is, at least in my opinion, overpriced in most cases.

    But watching a game get review bombed for som RNG system where people think there are too many female generals per capita is just plain stupid.
    They also recycle a lot and that has put some fans off. Total War Saga: Thrones of Britannia was criticized for that. It can sort of feel like they're taking much of another game, reskinning it, and then selling it for a premium with a ton of DLC that should have been part of the full package.

    The social issue isn't going away. A demographic wants to dominate and they don't want to share any of that. They'll lash out irrationally whenever they even remotely feel that is threatened. They will burn the world before giving up what they feel entitled to. If they can't have it their way with them being the centerpiece, then no one can. We're not through dealing with that yet and it will get uglier and more pervasive and I think the backlash will be equally as ugly and brutal.

    I just move forward with life regardless. It's fine. This is fine.


    MadFrenchieSBFord
    Fedora - A modern, free, and open source Operating System. https://getfedora.org/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly, iteration


  • IselinIselin Member LegendaryPosts: 14,388
    Phry said:
    Spiider said:
    Female Roman generals are as authentic as black nazis.
    And authenticity is as authentic as white black panthers.

    Edit: It is interesting that this turned into a conversation about games and game mechanics. I think fundamentally we are very nerdy.
    Authenticity is a huge problem in games lately, take Battlefield V, people had a huge problem with having a cricket bat wielding female cyborg and a guy with a Katana being in the game. If people suspect there is an agenda being pushed on players, sometimes its very hard to see that as not being the case. :/
    I'm not saying that agendas don't sometimes get pushed but looking for it under every rock is pretty fucking paranoid.

    Learn to pick your spots and maybe have another look at The Boy Who Cried Wolf :)
    SBFordMadFrenchieKyleran
    “Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” 
    ― CD PROJEKT RED

    "... the "influencers" which is the tech name we call sell outs now..."
    __ Wizardry, 2020
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited September 2018
    It's clear as day red hats have reached critical mass of ignorance and absurdity, BUT it's still a fact that there is silly agenda pushing by the other extremity. This type of stuff isn't effective. All it does is rile up and substantiate the ravings of idiots. Revising history or contrived attempts at repackaging long standing lore when no one requested is just lazy and instigating.

    I'm not saying there isn't room for creative shifts but everyone knows in their gut (again reasonable people, not knuckle dragging peons) when some cornball exec is making a crumby decision that doesn't help anything.

    All this sh!# needs to stop. ALL OF IT.
    That's the thing, CA went out of their way to fit women in in a way that at least makes logical sense.  They examined the cultures of each, and only gave chances to spawn female generals for cultures that were not heavily patriarchical (this is why Rome, Greece, and some others have zero chance to spawn a female general) or had recorded instances of female leaders.

    Logic, though, is dangerously unpopular these days.

    EDIT- Not only that, but giving players female options is likely more a marketing thing than any kind of virtue signaling.  Much like Nike said to southern white Americans "we don't care you hate Kaepernick," moves of inclusion don't care if a subsection of white males dislike it because they aren't dominating the market like they did.  In addition to even THAT, adding female gender options is literally just adding customization options in the majority of cases.  But options are bad these days somehow, because us white men feel threatened by their very existence, apparently.
    TorvalSBFordKajidourden

    image
  • FlyByKnightFlyByKnight Member EpicPosts: 3,967
    It's clear as day red hats have reached critical mass of ignorance and absurdity, BUT it's still a fact that there is silly agenda pushing by the other extremity. This type of stuff isn't effective. All it does is rile up and substantiate the ravings of idiots. Revising history or contrived attempts at repackaging long standing lore when no one requested is just lazy and instigating.

    I'm not saying there isn't room for creative shifts but everyone knows in their gut (again reasonable people, not knuckle dragging peons) when some cornball exec is making a crumby decision that doesn't help anything.

    All this sh!# needs to stop. ALL OF IT.
    That's the thing, CA went out of their way to fit women in in a way that at least makes logical sense.  They examined the cultures of each, and only gave chances to spawn female generals for cultures that were not heavily patriarchical (this is why Rome, Greece, and some others have zero chance to spawn a female general) or had recorded instances of female leaders.

    Logic, though, is dangerously unpopular these days.
    No I get it, I'm just speaking in general (no pun). What I spoke to is why certain tards have the reactions they do to stuff like this. There is a silly poorly executed agenda that reasonable people will simply scoff at while the moron army gets all Alex Jones or Cliven Bundy over it.
    MadFrenchie
    "As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*" 

    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • alkarionlogalkarionlog Member EpicPosts: 3,363
    so one dude complaining about a history issue and authenticity in a game is review bombing? damn that game really is lacking review if only one review is enough to bomb it, or not that good for that matter

    now I wonder why post it here and not on steam....
    Go check the reviews if you like.  One review doesn't create Overwhelmingly Negative in Steam's system.  Gaming outlets are also reporting the review bombing, which I linked.  Not sure where you got the impression only one review was involved.
    I did saw that one most negative was for bugs and others problems, the owman on romans side was like one review, with can be by bug or some other since you are mentioning roman really can't get woman as generals.

    so there is any reason for this be here and not on steam? only think I can see is you saw one review and a note on kotaku with means both did get buthurt for his review and are now trying to portait this as a something I don't even know the name.

    that review is right anyway, romans never let woman be generals, I should get back there and give that dude props, because in some words he made a news and several people buthurt.
    FOR HONOR, FOR FREEDOM.... and for some money.
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    It's clear as day red hats have reached critical mass of ignorance and absurdity, BUT it's still a fact that there is silly agenda pushing by the other extremity. This type of stuff isn't effective. All it does is rile up and substantiate the ravings of idiots. Revising history or contrived attempts at repackaging long standing lore when no one requested is just lazy and instigating.

    I'm not saying there isn't room for creative shifts but everyone knows in their gut (again reasonable people, not knuckle dragging peons) when some cornball exec is making a crumby decision that doesn't help anything.

    All this sh!# needs to stop. ALL OF IT.
    That's the thing, CA went out of their way to fit women in in a way that at least makes logical sense.  They examined the cultures of each, and only gave chances to spawn female generals for cultures that were not heavily patriarchical (this is why Rome, Greece, and some others have zero chance to spawn a female general) or had recorded instances of female leaders.

    Logic, though, is dangerously unpopular these days.
    No I get it, I'm just speaking in general (no pun). What I spoke to is why certain tards have the reactions they do to stuff like this. There is a silly poorly executed agenda that reasonable people will simply scoff at while the moron army gets all Alex Jones or Cliven Bundy over it.
    I don't disagree there have been ham-fisted attempts that haven't added quality to a game, movie, or what have you..  But those things are usually critiqued regarding the ham-fisted dialogue/scenes/what have you as you would expect.  I'm all for critiquing things like that- no matter what the character or social preferences, poor dialogue/acting is poor and should be called out.  Like you say, though, many will ignore that issue to try and make it about the character sexual orientation or whatever trigger topic they find hidden away that they feel slights them.

    image
  • alkarionlogalkarionlog Member EpicPosts: 3,363
    Torval said:

    I think that they deserve some amount of "DLC hate" personally. They are one of the most egregious development teams when it comes to the sheer volume of DLC. And it is, at least in my opinion, overpriced in most cases.

    But watching a game get review bombed for som RNG system where people think there are too many female generals per capita is just plain stupid.
    They also recycle a lot and that has put some fans off. Total War Saga: Thrones of Britannia was criticized for that. It can sort of feel like they're taking much of another game, reskinning it, and then selling it for a premium with a ton of DLC that should have been part of the full package.

    The social issue isn't going away. A demographic wants to dominate and they don't want to share any of that. They'll lash out irrationally whenever they even remotely feel that is threatened. They will burn the world before giving up what they feel entitled to. If they can't have it their way with them being the centerpiece, then no one can. We're not through dealing with that yet and it will get uglier and more pervasive and I think the backlash will be equally as ugly and brutal.

    I just move forward with life regardless. It's fine. This is fine.


    yeah damn liberal :lol:
    FOR HONOR, FOR FREEDOM.... and for some money.
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited September 2018
    so one dude complaining about a history issue and authenticity in a game is review bombing? damn that game really is lacking review if only one review is enough to bomb it, or not that good for that matter

    now I wonder why post it here and not on steam....
    Go check the reviews if you like.  One review doesn't create Overwhelmingly Negative in Steam's system.  Gaming outlets are also reporting the review bombing, which I linked.  Not sure where you got the impression only one review was involved.
    I did saw that one most negative was for bugs and others problems, the owman on romans side was like one review, with can be by bug or some other since you are mentioning roman really can't get woman as generals.

    so there is any reason for this be here and not on steam? only think I can see is you saw one review and a note on kotaku with means both did get buthurt for his review and are now trying to portait this as a something I don't even know the name.

    that review is right anyway, romans never let woman be generals, I should get back there and give that dude props, because in some words he made a news and several people buthurt.
    The game doesn't allow female Roman generals.  The dude was either grossly confused or made shit up.

    If you're literally not gonna read, not sure why you insist on jumping in with posts.

    You can still go find multiple reviews that merely say "get woke, go broke" and/or mention this issue.  Additionally, I've already said there are legit concerns being swept behind (Red Shell, DLC ridiculousness) by a conjured, false issue.
    alkarionlog

    image
  • hfztthfztt Member RarePosts: 1,392
    Rhoklaw said:
    What? Someone skewed information, claiming it as fact in order to push an agenda? Gee, THAT has never happened before. No offense, but the folks on the "other side of the spectrum" have been doing this for years. Now it's suddenly a disturbing thing to see someone from the opposite side of their spectrum doing the same thing?

    Just looks to me like someone joined the bandwagon on fake news.
    Nope. You cannot rewrite the past like that.
    Even though some try to make it out like there is some same/same relation to what is happening now, and how things worked have worked prior, its is simply not so. Reporting always had strict ethical guide lines in major news outlets. Currently the side spewing bullshit has NO ethical guide lines, so not same/same. And thus, end of discussion.
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Gutlard said:
    White men will just have to learn to unpucker their butts and continue to meet people halfway, more and more. That's being said by a white man...

    Sorry guys, the ride was smooth for a looooooong time. We have to evolve at some point.

    Gut Out!
    I laughed so hard when I listened to Bo Burnham's "Straight White Male" song.  It so perfectly embodies our "plight." :D 
    Gutlardalkarionlog

    image
  • Panther2103Panther2103 Member EpicPosts: 5,569
    so one dude complaining about a history issue and authenticity in a game is review bombing? damn that game really is lacking review if only one review is enough to bomb it, or not that good for that matter

    now I wonder why post it here and not on steam....
    Go check the reviews if you like.  One review doesn't create Overwhelmingly Negative in Steam's system.  Gaming outlets are also reporting the review bombing, which I linked.  Not sure where you got the impression only one review was involved.
    I did saw that one most negative was for bugs and others problems, the owman on romans side was like one review, with can be by bug or some other since you are mentioning roman really can't get woman as generals.

    so there is any reason for this be here and not on steam? only think I can see is you saw one review and a note on kotaku with means both did get buthurt for his review and are now trying to portait this as a something I don't even know the name.

    that review is right anyway, romans never let woman be generals, I should get back there and give that dude props, because in some words he made a news and several people buthurt.
    The game doesn't allow female Roman generals.  The dude was either grossly confused or made shit up.

    If you're literally not gonna read, not sure why you insist on jumping in with posts.

    You can still go find multiple reviews that merely say "get woke, go broke" and/or mention this issue.  Additionally, I've already said there are legit concerns being swept behind (Red Shell, DLC ridiculousness) by a conjured, false issue.
    Yeah there are a ton of reviews I was seeing that were in relation to the female generals and go woke go broke. Also all you have to do is look at the graph of negative reviews. To see the reviews that are being review bombed, you have to turn off the review helpfulness filter. 

    The second I turn that off you see all kinds of reviews about SJW's, and female generals. 
    MadFrenchie
  • LokeroLokero Member RarePosts: 1,514
    Lokero said:

    I think that they deserve some amount of "DLC hate" personally. They are one of the most egregious development teams when it comes to the sheer volume of DLC. And it is, at least in my opinion, overpriced in most cases.

    But watching a game get review bombed for som RNG system where people think there are too many female generals per capita is just plain stupid.
    Not that I'm a fan of the practice, but to be fair to CA, their DLC history honestly is quite tame compared to their rival.
    The DLC milking is a trademark of Paradox with their strategy line-up.  Their games have literal hundreds of dollars of DLC and they steadily release more.

    I'm thinking CA was probably inspired by them to increase their own slice of the pie a bit.  Though CA's DLC milking is still much less(amount-wise), they get a lot more hate for it(probably just due to the popularity of the Total War franchise).

    More on topic, the whole "review bombing" phenomenon is pathetic altogether.  Nothing screams whiny tantrum like trying to take down a video game.
    ceratop001MadFrenchieKyleran
  • ceratop001ceratop001 Member RarePosts: 1,594
    Women in ancient Rome couldn't vote or hold office and were forbidden in the Army. Some liberal hack made them Generals in a video game. Who cares actually.
    LokeroKyleran
     
  • alkarionlogalkarionlog Member EpicPosts: 3,363
    Lokero said:
    Lokero said:

    I think that they deserve some amount of "DLC hate" personally. They are one of the most egregious development teams when it comes to the sheer volume of DLC. And it is, at least in my opinion, overpriced in most cases.

    But watching a game get review bombed for som RNG system where people think there are too many female generals per capita is just plain stupid.
    Not that I'm a fan of the practice, but to be fair to CA, their DLC history honestly is quite tame compared to their rival.
    The DLC milking is a trademark of Paradox with their strategy line-up.  Their games have literal hundreds of dollars of DLC and they steadily release more.

    I'm thinking CA was probably inspired by them to increase their own slice of the pie a bit.  Though CA's DLC milking is still much less(amount-wise), they get a lot more hate for it(probably just due to the popularity of the Total War franchise).

    More on topic, the whole "review bombing" phenomenon is pathetic altogether.  Nothing screams whiny tantrum like trying to take down a video game.
    or the whole whiny about the reviews they don't like
    Women in ancient Rome couldn't vote or hold office and were forbidden in the Army. Some liberal hack made them Generals in a video game. Who cares actually.
    true its kinda useless post a bad review for it, and complain about a bad review, but here we are
    FOR HONOR, FOR FREEDOM.... and for some money.
  • LokeroLokero Member RarePosts: 1,514
    edited September 2018
    Women in ancient Rome couldn't vote or hold office and were forbidden in the Army. Some liberal hack made them Generals in a video game. Who cares actually.
    I, for one, certainly couldn't care less about this.

    As far as taking historical liberties with the franchise goes, CA could always just consider adding in basic options toggles to disable anything historically out of place, in their future games. I doubt they care that much about such a triviality, but I guess it could give people one less thing to complain about.

    Though, as I understand it(I haven't played Rome 2), the game doesn't even allow them in the Roman faction, so it's a moot point.
    TorvalKyleran
  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,919
    edited September 2018
    So a game that doesn't have female Roman generals gets accused of having too many female Roman generals. For follow up see Fox and Friends.
    MadFrenchieTorvalKyleran
  • TillerTiller Member EpicPosts: 8,872
    So let me get this straight, the game is fun, but randomly forces doods to have to have female Generals?  Talk about a lot of angst over something stupid. It actually made me laugh. The old phrase "Cry more noob" comes to mind. Play the game or don't, it's not a hard decision.
    Hiromant
    SWG Bloodfin vet
    Elder Jedi/Elder Bounty Hunter
  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,919
    Tiller said:
    So let me get this straight, the game is fun, but randomly forces doods to have to have female Generals?  Talk about a lot of angst over something stupid. It actually made me laugh. The old phrase "Cry more noob" comes to mind. Play the game or don't, it's not a hard decision.
    Nope. Not only does the game not force you they (female Roman generals) are not in the game. Wouldn't be surprised if it turns up on Fox & Friends though - mustn't let facts get in the way of an agenda after all.
    alkarionlogYashaX
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited September 2018
    Women in ancient Rome couldn't vote or hold office and were forbidden in the Army. Some liberal hack made them Generals in a video game. Who cares actually.
    There are no Roman female generals in the game.


    Some of these responses are proof in the pudding of how grossly false narratives gain steam because folks don't want information, they want confirmation.
    Kyleranklash2defKajidourdenCazrielalkarionlog

    image
This discussion has been closed.