I want to be a woman.
- Thread starter Spinfx
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
- Status
asbot6
Recruit
In your opinion. It's called a option for a reason.Kwal said:Alex_C said:Kwal said:asbot6 said:Find and replace:Kwal said:phantom67 said:
Relatively recent history. Not even in the entire recorded history. That's why feminists often picked examples from before the medieval or even Roman age to prove their point.
Playing a female () in WFaS would be cool, but I feel like there should be a different storyline based on it, because it would be really fake if everything happened to you as if you were playing a male. Taking into account how extraordinary it was back then and how all actions would really have to be changed, such a storyline would take up a lot of time and IMO it's better to not have the option at all than to have a half-arsed implement.
I would have the same opinion about male characters if it were the other way around
'king' 'queen'
There.
Yes. And then you'd have a really really fake story, even for a fictional game.
And if you don't like it, no one is forcing you to play as a female character.
You're missing a point. It would still be a half-arsed implement, in my opinion degrading the game.
I don't like instant respawns in TF2. Others do. I don't shout "instant respawn is bad, valve remove it for everyone it's degrading the game".
Bruck8
Recruit
This game is based on 19th century historical (not fantasy, note) novel about 17th century Eastern European history, so of course the developers had to try their best of replicate the age: all kings and lords are men and bear historical name, weapons, armour, cities and the whole atmosphere are made to look like their exact 17th century models. And there is no reason why gender presentation has to be different. Suppose if in the period, men had allowed women run amok as in modern time, thanks to plagues and devastating wars (Thirty Year War or the Khmelnysky Rebellion), you and I could not possibly exist to write in these posts. So I salute the devs for their sensible attachment to truth and reality, and not to feminist distorting imagination.asbot6 said:
Deluded feminism has spoon-fed some naive minds like you to believing that bull**** but just read this story http://observer.guardian.co.uk/osm/story/0,,543962,00.html. And if women had been allowed to join war as equal as men as in 17th century without any preference (unlike in modern armies), the female population would have been drastically reduced and would have led to social destruction as a whole.
Taleworlds are right and they don’t have to answer to blind, feminist fool like you with your crooked reason.
Typical feminist rabid response to anyone who disagree with their blasted worldview.
Every historical games have to deal with men, Total wars, hearts of Irons, Europa Universalis... and WFAS is not different. Man have made history and any media dealing with history has to revolve around man. It is nothing to do with discrimination, just don’t throw political correctness bull**** around. Grow a pair, for god’s sake.
Then goodbye and good ridden! I myself love this game, just bought some copies for a bunch of my friends and encourage everyone I know to buy it. One less feminist in the server, the better.
No, you are an adolescent girl for 99% (1% left is that you are totally brainwashed mangina.)
asbot6 said:Kwal said:asbot6 said:Find and replace:Kwal said:phantom67 said:
Relatively recent history. Not even in the entire recorded history. That's why feminists often picked examples from before the medieval or even Roman age to prove their point.
Playing a female (
I would have the same opinion about male characters if it were the other way around
'king' 'queen'
There.
Yes. And then you'd have a really really fake story, even for a fictional game.
No one is forcing you to play as female.
"I don't care about the other 50% of the population" - Kwal, 2011
Sigh. I'm saying they should make a storyline suiting a female character, if they would choose to implement it. If not, it's best left untouched. And that's probably how the developers felt.
Don't be offended, I never said or implied I didn't care about women
asbot6
Recruit
Apologies, I didn't read your first post correctly.Kwal said:asbot6 said:Kwal said:asbot6 said:Find and replace:Kwal said:phantom67 said:
Relatively recent history. Not even in the entire recorded history. That's why feminists often picked examples from before the medieval or even Roman age to prove their point.
Playing a female (
I would have the same opinion about male characters if it were the other way around
'king' 'queen'
There.
Yes. And then you'd have a really really fake story, even for a fictional game.
No one is forcing you to play as female.
"I don't care about the other 50% of the population" - Kwal, 2011
Sigh. I'm saying they should make a storyline suiting a female character, if they would choose to implement it. If not, it's best left untouched. And that's probably how the developers felt.
Don't be offended, I never said or implied I didn't care about women
I agree with you, however I feel that the developer shouldn't have untouched it. Adding another storyline would greatly enhance the replay value.
BenFree
Sergeant at Arms
Wow Bruck8, just wow - personally I'm reporting that, I mean there's a few pseudo-sexist posts about realism etc. but they don't touch your level of crazy. Not only are you rude, and very very sexist you've failed to make one original argument - my advice delete your post (it was ****) and read the thread!
Zhaker
Sergeant
For the WF&S without a female being a possible pick I am surprised, historical or accurate or what not, the "game" isnt supposed to be realistic, and I dont think players are going to try to make it realistic, as 95% of player who have WF&S would probably going to amass a large army in a month, take over the world, conquer all the lands and call themselves emperor and then make a fanfic about their adventures .
Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought WF&S was based upon a setting of a story, not based upon the story, because of its "multiple" branches of the story and such.
But I guess it might take more work to release the game if they have to add the female, as they would need to script maybe some of the speeches as a female character, make female armor, maybe female speeches and such. But now that is released, someone might just mod this to have a generated female character?
.Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought WF&S was based upon a setting of a story, not based upon the story, because of its "multiple" branches of the story and such.
But I guess it might take more work to release the game if they have to add the female, as they would need to script maybe some of the speeches as a female character, make female armor, maybe female speeches and such. But now that is released, someone might just mod this to have a generated female character?
asbot6
Recruit
There are already female clothing, voice, etc. We don't know, there could already have being a storyline for female characters but they could have took it out at the last minute.Zhaker said:For the WF&S without a female being a possible pick I am surprised, historical or accurate or what not, the game isnt supposed to be realistic, and I dont think players are going to try to make it realistic, as 95% of player who have WF&S would probably going to amass a large army in a month, take over the world, conquer all the lands and call themselves emperor and then make a fanfic about their adventures
But I guess it might take more work to release the game if they have to add the female, as they would need to script maybe some of the speeches as a female character, make female armor, maybe female speeches and such. But now that is released, someone might just mod this to have a generated female character?
It takes time to make games good. If developers don't do anything that takes time, then there will be no game.
ilikemilkshake
Regular
The argument i don't understand is that it would be unrealistic for a female character to lead an army in that day and age?
Y'know what's unrealistic? Some random dude leading 1 of 5 kings to victory in eastern Europe. Or some random dude putting a pretender on the throne of 1 of 5 countries in eastern Europe. Or some random dude forming his own faction and conquering eastern Europe.
This game is only historically accurate until you create your character. Once you're alive, you and your actions have an impact on history, and I'm pretty sure the AI isn't scripted to win/lose battles as history would dictate. Therefor why is it such a stretch to change history and have a woman do these things?
Y'know what's unrealistic? Some random dude leading 1 of 5 kings to victory in eastern Europe. Or some random dude putting a pretender on the throne of 1 of 5 countries in eastern Europe. Or some random dude forming his own faction and conquering eastern Europe.
This game is only historically accurate until you create your character. Once you're alive, you and your actions have an impact on history, and I'm pretty sure the AI isn't scripted to win/lose battles as history would dictate. Therefor why is it such a stretch to change history and have a woman do these things?
King Harkinian
Squire
As I said earlier, the fact that, in 99% of cases, women didn't go to war, is not a valid point; heroes are, by definition, exceptional characters; more often than not, the hero is, originally, an unlikely savior who rises to prominence by facing trials and defeating adversity -- he doesn't start out as a hero. The key word here is exceptional. Did women regularly take part in military action or achieve positions of leadership? No. Has it happened, throughout history, exceptionally? Yes.
ilikemilkshake said:
Arguments moved on abit now I think. I might be wrong I have no idea where its going anymore.
Its more so about why Taleworlds didn't include a female char and whether they are sexist or not I think.
Bruck8 said:
Since we're going for realism, I'd say there should be a set name-list, consisting only of names appropriate to period and place; a set number of faces you may use; certain weapon combinations should be outlawed as they weren't used at the time; certain troop combinations should be outlawed as they weren't used at the time; player interaction with the game should be limited as the player will only ruin the historical setting with their silly ideas about playing for fun, or the like.
Bruck8 said:
Argumentum ad hominem.
Bruck8 said:
Oh my god, two tennis players got beaten. This definitely proves some kind of point I'm sure.
Bruck8 said:
[citation needed]
Bruck8 said:
I'm right, and I don't have to answer to a arsehole like you, with crooked grammar and syntax.
Bruck8 said:
Typical moron's response to anyone who disagrees with their blasted (?) world-view.
Bruck8 said:
As I've said before, this is an argument about ideals, not actualities. Stop being such an utter moronic prick, for God's sake.
Bruck8 said:
I believe you meant 'riddance'.
To be honest, I could have done without this news. I kinda prefer not playing with complete twats.
tl;dr: Bruck8 is a ****-wit.
King Harkinian
Squire
Mind the quote pyramids folks, particularly with the absurd threads of "reporting" getting tossed around. Arch et al. won't have a problem throwing some warnings around.
As for the topic, defending the "historical" argument is more than a bit of a non-starter. Female mercenaries to be hired pretty much puts the nail on the coffin there.
As for the topic, defending the "historical" argument is more than a bit of a non-starter. Female mercenaries to be hired pretty much puts the nail on the coffin there.
- Status
Similar threads
