That's why you don't use such flimsy starting point. It distracts from the larger point and becomes about something else entirely. If you're using an argument that completely distracts from the actual point you're trying to make, then it's a bad argument. You can hide behind the "lol ppl be dumb" excuse, but these are the people that you are appealing to and if you have no means of communicating with them in a genuine, non-distracting way then what is it that you're trying to do?
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
"But It's Not Historically Accurate!"
- Thread starter jmood88
- Start date
That's why you don't use such flimsy starting point. It distracts from the larger point and becomes about something else entirely. If you're using an argument that completely distracts from the actual point you're trying to make, then it's a bad argument. You can hide behind the "lol ppl be dumb" excuse, but these are the people that you are appealing to and if you have no means of communicating with them in a genuine, non-distracting way then what is it that you're trying to do?
Count of Monte Sawed-Off
un33dab@dpu$$y
Ha, maybe they should have put that on the box.
You have completely misunderstood what the thread is about. The point of the article was to present a counter to the frequent argument that games during certain time periods in the past are being historically by erasing all traces of non-white people.
This is a good summation, yes.
As was said, any sequel would likely feature said character prominently in advertising. Especially considering the ending in which
their freaking main character has seen the error of his closed-minded ways and is now aligned with her.
AmuroChan
Member
You don't need to. We just told you. We live in an age where you can find out every detail about a game without ever playing it.
Would you care to give some non-Order examples of where this has happened?
Well sure, that'd be a good argument if the game had done a better job of addressing those kind of issues. Like if you're going to do something unequal to illustrate and actually grapple with those topics in a weighty way, fair enough, but otherwise it just feels like a cop out to say, "Yes, it's all very unbalanced, but so was life back then" when the technology exceeds what was possible. Why have one vast improvement and not another? Why is disenfranchisement a necessary part of background detail?
It just sometimes feels like a bit of a lazy default assumption.
I'm not sure why you are so certain these are assumptions. There are NPCs you encounter on the streets who talk about how impressive members of The Order look and how they shouldn't worry, you're here now. (Mixed with speculation that the danger is much worse than they had realized, if they had to call you in.) Obviously we're meant to understand that this once noble group has seen better days and is less important than they once were -- this is well worn ground in storytelling -- but I don't think I suggested anywhere that they were the very best, the most noble, the greatest. I said that they are a representation of these things and for them to have fallen at all it is sort of necessary that we agree that, yes, the Order is meant to represent these things. Whether or not you want to debate semantics over whether or not they can be said to be any of these things in anyone's eyes at any point in the course of this game is I guess up for debate, but I don't see how it's super productive.
I would think we both understand the point one another is making by now, but maybe I'm being unclear.
And no, I'm not passive aggressively implying anything about you. I think it's rather clear the game intends this as a twist. It is a reveal. Reveals are meant to seem clever, or otherwise there is no point in concealing the information. That's just basic narrative structure.
Not trying to suggest anything about you whatsoever; I'm not nearly invested enough in this conversation to try to take petty jabs at you for no particular reason. I am under the impression the game thinks this reveal is clever. It isn't. You are under the impression I cannot comprehend the rather standard plot of this game. I disagree. That's it. No need to be so annoyed about it, seriously. If I have done something to make you think there's any need for such annoyance, I sincerely apologize.
Pointing out something troubling or problematic isn't the same thing as calling an entire video game racist, though I understand why some people don't see the difference. It's a disagreement on semantics that results in the kind of unproductive rabbit hole all these conversations become lost in.
ACTUALLY, You implied racisim because you said they didn't show her in the trailer because she was brown.
yes, yes they did. They represented a 'brown' character who is very important to the story.
You're implying, they show EVERY RACE/NATIONALITY in a game trailer and marketing to prove that they are NOT being racist. That's ridiculous.
akidnamededdy
Banned
You mentioned the Order twice in the first post, man, and in most of the rest of your posts ITT. Lead the charge if you want to move on.
To answer your everything.
No because of the last several hundred years of human history exist.
Mass_Pincup
Banned
They had a reason to though, as CrossingEden said they kept away other stuff to avoid spoiler, not because they didn't want to show brown people.
It also totally fits what happened with the marketing of the game, they showed several times the same gameplay section to avoid spoiler because the game is short.
Spring-Loaded
Member
It's hard to talk about this kind of stuff for me, especially when English is a 2nd language to me. But would a brown skinned person in Britain really be that absurd a sight as a vampire? Considering India was under British colonial rule at the time?
Brown skinned people in video games are mainly shown as terrorists or as the 'other'.
Probably not, dudes still a hardcore gamergator last time I checked
akidnamededdy
Banned
Haunted
Member
I hate whitewashing in media.
I'm also not particularly fond of token minority characters in media (the key word here being "token", i.e. including them for inclusion's sake or to fulfil a perceived quota). Though if I had to choose one, I'd certainly take the latter route over fucking whitewashing. The argument never made sense to me, since if you're arguing from a standpoint which considers historical accuracy as the most important feature, whitewashing makes even less sense then the inclusion of minorities who may not have been super widespread at the time. You'll always have an easier time making an argument for a non-caucasian character appearing in a story that's set in a certain time period where the population was made up of mostly caucasians than you'll have telling me that the fucking PHARAOH should be caucasian. I mean, c'mon. The casting for that movie is abhorrent.
edit: another random thought I had in other threads related to this topic (because the general talking points in these debates often narrows it down to the particular issue of black representation) - for those of you arguing out of the US, it's important to note that the ethnicity that comes to mind if you think of "who should be represented" is entirely dependent on where you are in the world. For the US, I suppose it'd be black people (12,4%). Here in Germany however, the biggest "non-white" minority are people with a Turkish background (3,7%). I believe wikipedia classifies them as "middle eastern". Just something to keep in mind.
I'm also not particularly fond of token minority characters in media (the key word here being "token", i.e. including them for inclusion's sake or to fulfil a perceived quota). Though if I had to choose one, I'd certainly take the latter route over fucking whitewashing. The argument never made sense to me, since if you're arguing from a standpoint which considers historical accuracy as the most important feature, whitewashing makes even less sense then the inclusion of minorities who may not have been super widespread at the time. You'll always have an easier time making an argument for a non-caucasian character appearing in a story that's set in a certain time period where the population was made up of mostly caucasians than you'll have telling me that the fucking PHARAOH should be caucasian. I mean, c'mon. The casting for that movie is abhorrent.
edit: another random thought I had in other threads related to this topic (because the general talking points in these debates often narrows it down to the particular issue of black representation) - for those of you arguing out of the US, it's important to note that the ethnicity that comes to mind if you think of "who should be represented" is entirely dependent on where you are in the world. For the US, I suppose it'd be black people (12,4%). Here in Germany however, the biggest "non-white" minority are people with a Turkish background (3,7%). I believe wikipedia classifies them as "middle eastern". Just something to keep in mind.
The point at which I stopped discussing The Order with people on this site included all kinds of nonsense arguments for why the world in which the game is set would only include white people. Whatever has come out post-release is irrelevant because this isn't about going into deep detail about The Order's story, it was about how people see things like a group of all-white Knights and will argue that there is nothing wrong with it because they don't know the true history of the era.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
Noooooo, just saying that in the context of the story, showing the two major characters who happen to be a minority is showing a spoiler. Just like
showing vampires.
vampires.
Uncle Rupee
Banned
I get what the thread is about, it is you who cannot see the same is true when applied to games set in feudal China or Japan, despite the fact that both countries had minority populations that aren't shown in games with those settings. In other words, it is not an issue of erasing traces of non-white people, but erasing traces of minorities in games, regardless of where on Earth they are set.
Perhaps Western examples stand out more to you and this author because those are the games you are exposed to, but framing this as a "Western problem" is not only inaccurate, it is in itself discriminatory.
akidnamededdy
Banned
Exactly. Which is why it's borderline ridiculous that some people ITT are so hung up on The Order. It's like you're trying to really really force it to be racist or something when you could throw a rock in a Gamestop and hit a better example.
Yeah please also label if any LGBT characters main, protag or other. Ideally we would like to see these represented also in a trailer. Perhaps for each game we can have a "diversity trailer" just so everyone has a heads up on what kind of minorities are represented in the game. Should be good...
I hate this argument.
Historical accuracy is a thing. Even trying to have characters that make sense in a certain context.
But if the pursuit of historical accuracy doesn't matter then I don't see why anyone wouldn't just make judgements on the creators and leave it at that. For instance, if your looking for diversity and an all-white cast turns you off, then you can label that game racist and ignore it. But the basis for wanting diversity seems to be making people of all races and genders feel like they aren't being ignored, and that they could be someone like the protagonist, or another character. But if you believe that all of the characters could just as well be Taiwanese, then it doesn't actually matter what race they are, it isn't saying anything other than what characters the creators wanted to use or not use. So, at that point, why does it even matter?
The Order: 1886 isn't nearly as bad as the League of Extraordinary White People, though. Holy shit, that movie. Kingsman is fun, but that was something that really had no good reason.
Historical accuracy is a thing. Even trying to have characters that make sense in a certain context.
But if the pursuit of historical accuracy doesn't matter then I don't see why anyone wouldn't just make judgements on the creators and leave it at that. For instance, if your looking for diversity and an all-white cast turns you off, then you can label that game racist and ignore it. But the basis for wanting diversity seems to be making people of all races and genders feel like they aren't being ignored, and that they could be someone like the protagonist, or another character. But if you believe that all of the characters could just as well be Taiwanese, then it doesn't actually matter what race they are, it isn't saying anything other than what characters the creators wanted to use or not use. So, at that point, why does it even matter?
The Order: 1886 isn't nearly as bad as the League of Extraordinary White People, though. Holy shit, that movie. Kingsman is fun, but that was something that really had no good reason.
I do agree with what you're arguing here but I just thought the game wanted to show how corrupt much of the white upper class was during the time that they became blind to other clear issues. I did think that they were othered due to class lines more than race lines but there is something to be said of the more racial reading of it too.
I do think that with the locations hinted at for a sequel and the nature of the class aspect of the game, race will be something addressed in future titles.
Jackben
bitch I'm taking calls.
This and the idiots whining about "social justice warriors" or screaming "STOP ACCUSING US OF RACISM" are some of the most ignorant posts I've read all day, which is quite an accomplishment because this is the gaming side of NeoGAF we're talking about. Typical that when female and minority issues in gaming get brought up suddenly all these ad-hoc excuses to stop talking about them come up.
This is complete bull. He brought up the Order justifiably because the historical accuracy argument was specifically used on NeoGAF quite prolifically in the defense of the game not including minority characters as if their existence would disrupt the plot more than the magical werewolves running around in the game. Some people disagree with using the Order as an example because a few minority characters exist in the game that are important to the plot. That doesn't excuse bad representation, but now everyone is focused on bashing the OP for including the Order as an example rather than actually discussing the very issue the thread is concerning.
Whether you consciously realize this or not, what you and others are doing is a technique known as FUD. Rather than actually facing the issue at hand and grapple with the ramifications brought up in the article OP has linked, you're changing the discourse to only focus on the Order being used as an example and claiming that its inclusion proves everything else he has said is wrong. This is ignorant at best, and completely disingenuous at worst.
As far as I can tell, their stance makes perfect sense though. That game takes place in the Central/ Eastern European countryside, no?
You think there is enough? So no game from now on should have an all white cast? When white people are in the majority in Europe and the US I don't see why we can't have a few games with only white people while others have people of every skin color. It's not that weird.
BUT, you somehow managed to misunderstand my post.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
User 73706
Banned
It's only fitting that The Order apologists are the first to miss the point of interaction, eager to pivot and then quick to finish once their buttons are pushed.
No, you are making an argument that I never made because you don't actually care about diversity in games, you want to turn me into some kind of hypocrite who you can claim hates white people. Again, feel free to discuss your problems with those games but it's not my responsibility to make that argument just because you demand it.
>-Baron-Spamedi-<
Member
She is a main character. She looks set to be very important to a sequel. Her introduction into the story and the role she plays would have been spoilt by featuring her in promotional material.
This just sounds like a pathetic attempt to make controversy for the sake of it.
Because pointing those things out wasn't plot relevant. It wasn't trying to make some grand commentary on racial injustice, and we don't know that just because technology improved in an alternate fantasy setting that for some reason racial equality would follow.
You're thinking of this as a modern person where science and technology is synonymous with progress and acceptance. In The Order, science could just as easily be used to subjugate minorities even further, and likely would considering that The Order are unsavory.
The NPC comments are a reflection of the "face" of The Order- noble, just heroes who will save the day! This is illusion and a facade as the game shows. The people are only seeing a veil of a positive impression. Galahad realizes this later.
I find it to be more of a commentary on how we are deluded into think we are "the good guys", when in actuality, we can blindly serve evil causes out of tradition.
The Order is intriguing because obviously some are corrupt, but quite a few clearly are not, causing tension.
It's like what Haze was trying to do, except not stupid.
Edit: I generally agree with you by the way, but I think the idea is to show how out of touch, backwards, and completely tone-deaf The Order is.
ArkkAngel007
Member
The in-game Lucan is not afaik. We're not sure exactly what his background is.
Pretty simple stuff. Her background itself plays into the plot too, so not sure what more needs to be said. Maybe watch the game on Youtube to at least get some context.
Really?
I think you're asking too much from the story in the Order. They couldn't even provide a satisfying narrative arc, forget about more weighty topics.
Mass_Pincup
Banned
Why aren't you discussing the point of interaction then?
And lol at "the Order apologists" I didn't even liked the game.
Wiktor
Member
I agree. Plus it's clearly slavic fantasy. It's a cultue/ethicity that's been discriminated pretty heavily in the past and even today can be (altough of course nowhere near as bad). And it's culture that's extremely rarely been used in videogames. So the whole argument sometimes feels like "no you dirty slaves, you can't have even one game dedicated to yourself"
Haunted
Member
Early 15th century Bohemia iirc.
Messofanego
Banned
Yeah, definitely when taking major cities into account where lots of racial and ethnic diversity was encountered cause there be jobs here for the taking no matter which century you're in.
Uncle Rupee
Banned
And again, framing this discussion as a Western problem is what I take issue with. It seems to me this is what happens regardless of where a game is made. People tend to simplify things, gloss over things, and often are simply ignorant of things. It is not just whitey trying to get rid of non-whites in European games.
Wait, who is trying to turn someone into something they are not? I enjoy diversity in gaming characters and the game I am working on includes multiple skin color options and genders, so fuck you.
I'm not sure what you are saying or if you are serious.
Did you EVEN read the whole thread before you start accusing us as well? Or are you simply defending him because he has the same opinion as you?
The OP brought up good argument, NO ONE is denying that. The examples the OP was using wasn't good and people SIMPLY corrected it. NOTHING MORE.
And the OP argues back with these arguments.. accusing all of us for simply correcting him?
Please re-read the whole thread before you make a general criticism on everyone.
Give War A Chance
Member
He be a pirate, and as such, he only has one eye, so his vision is not to be trusted.
Ghost Rider
Member
It mentions that in the original source material some of the nights are described as black.
What original source material are we talking about? The story of King Arthur is not like Beowulf or the Odyssey in which we have this definitive version. Le Morte D'Arthur is often cited but it is neither original or solo. Lancelot, one of the most well-known knights was not in early versions of the stories and was the creation of a French author I believe.
Just curious as to what the article author is citing
What original source material are we talking about? The story of King Arthur is not like Beowulf or the Odyssey in which we have this definitive version. Le Morte D'Arthur is often cited but it is neither original or solo. Lancelot, one of the most well-known knights was not in early versions of the stories and was the creation of a French author I believe.
Just curious as to what the article author is citing
If you actually cared, then you would talk about it, not quote some of my posts talking about a different game and demand that I talk about whatever issue you're having.
GiantEnemyCrab
Banned
If I'm playing a game based on famous battles which actually took place in ancient Japan, I'd prefer to see a historically accurate cast of all-Japanese characters, sorry.
Wildarmsjecht
Member
What the hell is even happening in this thread?
Uncle Rupee
Banned
It's the same exact issue, you just choose not to see it because you insist on framing this as a Western problem. It is a problem you will encounter everywhere because creators tend to create images of themselves and their audience while ignoring others.