By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - The sjw review by eurogamer on Kingdom Come: Deliverance

potato_hamster on 28 February 2018
HoloDust said:
Errorist76 said:

I've travelled a lot through all parts of Europe and people differ a lot. For example, Latvian girls look like a mixture between Swedes and Russians (deadly)...which is exactly what they are. You honestly come off as pretty ignorant (or seem to have a visual problem) if you refuse to admit that...No matter how much you travel. 

One just has to watch the Olympic games to understand what we are on about.

Of course there are differences, but they are not as pronounced as our distant friend from Brazil is making them to be.

Are you honestly want to tell me that just by looking at these pics (without knowing who they are) you can tell who's from were?



















Cause if you do...well, either you are hawk-eyed or for whatever reason you're deep into differences between European Caucasians.

I mean... can you do the same with any "race" of people? Can I post 12 different black people and you tell me which African countries they come from? How about 12 people from the middle east? How about 12 people from East Asia?

It isn't about specific people having specific traits that indicates which country they're from. It's about  trends among groups. Compare 100 random Canadians to 100 random Americans and I bet you could figure out which people belonged to which country based on the collective groups and comparing them as groups.



Around the Network
DonFerrari on 28 February 2018
potato_hamster said:
HoloDust said:

Of course there are differences, but they are not as pronounced as our distant friend from Brazil is making them to be.

Are you honestly want to tell me that just by looking at these pics (without knowing who they are) you can tell who's from were?



















Cause if you do...well, either you are hawk-eyed or for whatever reason you're deep into differences between European Caucasians.

I mean... can you do the same with any "race" of people? Can I post 12 different black people and you tell me which African countries they come from? How about 12 people from the middle east? How about 12 people from East Asia?

It isn't about specific people having specific traits that indicates which country they're from. It's about  trends among groups. Compare 100 random Canadians to 100 random Americans and I bet you could figure out which people belonged to which country based on the collective groups and comparing them as groups.

Well there are differences among some african tribes, like some that do have bigger nose and lips, or rounder/curvier bodies. I'm not specialist but I think there are about 5 easily distinguishable black ethinicities... and the shade of dark is quite different as well.

And it is usually easy to differentiate japan chinese and korean people to me.

Also I agree with you that it isn't about differentiating specific people (even more because they may be from mixed heritage) but the common traits among the several different "Caucasian" people.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

HoloDust on 28 February 2018
potato_hamster said:
HoloDust said:

Of course there are differences, but they are not as pronounced as our distant friend from Brazil is making them to be.

Are you honestly want to tell me that just by looking at these pics (without knowing who they are) you can tell who's from were?



















Cause if you do...well, either you are hawk-eyed or for whatever reason you're deep into differences between European Caucasians.

I mean... can you do the same with any "race" of people? Can I post 12 different black people and you tell me which African countries they come from? How about 12 people from the middle east? How about 12 people from East Asia?

It isn't about specific people having specific traits that indicates which country they're from. It's about  trends among groups. Compare 100 random Canadians to 100 random Americans and I bet you could figure out which people belonged to which country based on the collective groups and comparing them as groups.

If anyone's wondering these are prime ministers and presidents of various European countries, from all the way south (Cyprus) to north (Finland).

Point was to show that, although there are differences, one would be hard-pressed to pinpoint where are they exactly from without prior knowledge...but I'm getting really tired of all this nonsense, especially from people that are not from Europe, so I'll ignore all further post on the matter.



potato_hamster on 28 February 2018
HoloDust said:
potato_hamster said:

I mean... can you do the same with any "race" of people? Can I post 12 different black people and you tell me which African countries they come from? How about 12 people from the middle east? How about 12 people from East Asia?

It isn't about specific people having specific traits that indicates which country they're from. It's about  trends among groups. Compare 100 random Canadians to 100 random Americans and I bet you could figure out which people belonged to which country based on the collective groups and comparing them as groups.

If anyone's wondering these are prime ministers and presidents of various European countries, from all the way south (Cyprus) to north (Finland).

Point was to show that, although there are differences, one would be hard-pressed to pinpoint where are they exactly from without prior knowledge...but I'm getting really tired of all this nonsense, especially from people that are not from Europe, so I'll ignore all further post on the matter.

You cannot not tell what country anyone is from just by their photo. Literally no one. You have no point.



Pemalite on 01 March 2018
potato_hamster said:

You cannot not tell what country anyone is from just by their photo. Literally no one. You have no point.

You can tell what geographical region of the world someone or their ancestors originated from via just their photo.
Skin colour is a very good descriptor for that.

Of course things like colonialism and migration in the last few hundreds years has muddied that water significantly.

And there is actually a good, scientific reason for it.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Around the Network
Tulipanzo on 01 March 2018
Errorist76 said:
Tulipanzo said:


Let's put a huge [citation needed] on those "many historians", since you don't even know the ONE historian you need to know for your opinion on this topic to be worth a toss

https://research.uni-leipzig.de/gwzo/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=192&Itemid=381

This guy was interviewed by GameTwo, the biggest German gaming channel, according to the subject. He's teaching at Leipzig university and is specialized on eastern and middle European history, Leipzig is just around the corner to Czech republic and former Bohemia, which even was German at some point.

If he says it's highly unlike, I will believe him....

Of course you SJW people won't believe anything he says anyway. 

I can't believe someone would even have preferred to put ONE quota black in the game, just because there was a vague possibility that some Mauro merchant once fell ill and got stuck in some bohemian village. It's embarrassing.

So, your "many historians" became one guy's general info page. In German...
This is just a bit sad tbh, I thought you could do better research.

I'll save you the trouble and just spell it out: the problem isn't the historical position of the dev (even though it is shaky), it's that he directly antagonized fans and historians that pointed out (and I'd like to stress, just pointed out) that he is most likely wrong, and generally acted like a thoroughly crass individual.
Ain't no amount of historical evidence to justify being a twat



Tulipanzo on 01 March 2018
DonFerrari said:
Tulipanzo said:
My two cents:
A review is supposed to be communicating to readers information that may be of interest regarding purchase. Now, since not every person thinks the same, those standard may vary.

To me, the fact that this dev let his own politics come in the way of the mission statement of the game, historical realism, is enough to give me pause. That the guy aligned himself with a known hate group leads me to avoid the game completely.
To you, this is not a problem.
This is fine.

What is not fine is you demanding the reviewer avoid mentioning the head honcho's politics, despite those directly affecting the resulting game, because you feel they are not a selling point.
It would be akin to ignoring that, say, MG Survive was mostly based on the work of a previous team, unceremoniously fired after their last project, because it makes Konami look bad.
The only difference here is you think him right


There are many reviews which completely ignore this; I dare say that Eurogamer are in the minority by just mentioning this.
It makes it all the more laughable that one review sent you crying back to the forums about the mean sjws.

1) the game isn't the creator, so saying the game is racist because the creator is, is a fallacy. He would have to prove the racism in the game, which he wasn't able.

2) The one with political agenda is the reviewer.

3) Aligning on Gamergate is a problem?

4) His historical narrative is very badly made, based on if cases of if cases, and with inaccuracy.

5) and very good personal attacks

Tulipanzo said:


Let's put a huge [citation needed] on those "many historians", since you don't even know the ONE historian you need to know for your opinion on this topic to be worth a toss

So you are going to use an authority argument? And worse yet the reviewer didn't even name the historian he said is a specialist, so who can say it really is?

I like bullet-points, like a tacit admission you can't come up with one coherent argument.

1) The reviewer never claimed the game is racist. In fact, he directly states the game isn't racist.
    This leads me to believe you have no idea what you're talking about. 
2) He is stating facts, and directly reporting the clearly political motivation of the lead dev. I guess reporting truth is political now, but you should try to justify       why he shouldn't have 
3) I'm sorry you had to find out this way, you must be shocked
4-5) It seems harsh on Vavra, I wouldn't say the historical narrative is very badly made, just inaccurate at points. Which is fine, "historically accurate Middle           Ages" is a fictional setting after all.
     It's his inane responses to criticism that make this worth discussing.
6?) I'm going to say, maybe don't mention "many historians" if you have none, and know the one historians that the dev railed against. 
      This is base knowledge of the topic; makes you look bad when you don't even have that 



Tulipanzo on 01 March 2018
Aeolus451 said:
Tulipanzo said:
My two cents:
A review is supposed to be communicating to readers information that may be of interest regarding purchase. Now, since not every person thinks the same, those standard may vary.

To me, the fact that this dev let his own politics come in the way of the mission statement of the game, historical realism, is enough to give me pause. That the guy aligned himself with a known hate group leads me to avoid the game completely.
To you, this is not a problem.
This is fine.

What is not fine is you demanding the reviewer avoid mentioning the head honcho's politics, despite those directly affecting the resulting game, because you feel they are not a selling point.
It would be akin to ignoring that, say, MG Survive was mostly based on the work of a previous team, unceremoniously fired after their last project, because it makes Konami look bad.
The only difference here is you think him right


There are many reviews which completely ignore this; I dare say that Eurogamer are in the minority by just mentioning this.
It makes it all the more laughable that one review sent you crying back to the forums about the mean sjws.

Crying to? This forum has alot of lefties. Hardly sounds like a place an anti-sjw would seek protection. There's more than a few reviews bitching about the silly crap.

I'm sorry the leftists are being mean to you on the internet, must be rough



DonFerrari on 01 March 2018
HoloDust said:
potato_hamster said:

I mean... can you do the same with any "race" of people? Can I post 12 different black people and you tell me which African countries they come from? How about 12 people from the middle east? How about 12 people from East Asia?

It isn't about specific people having specific traits that indicates which country they're from. It's about  trends among groups. Compare 100 random Canadians to 100 random Americans and I bet you could figure out which people belonged to which country based on the collective groups and comparing them as groups.

If anyone's wondering these are prime ministers and presidents of various European countries, from all the way south (Cyprus) to north (Finland).

Point was to show that, although there are differences, one would be hard-pressed to pinpoint where are they exactly from without prior knowledge...but I'm getting really tired of all this nonsense, especially from people that are not from Europe, so I'll ignore all further post on the matter.

your ad hominem and argumentation fallacies are very pretty.

Pemalite said:
potato_hamster said:

You cannot not tell what country anyone is from just by their photo. Literally no one. You have no point.

You can tell what geographical region of the world someone or their ancestors originated from via just their photo.
Skin colour is a very good descriptor for that.

Of course things like colonialism and migration in the last few hundreds years has muddied that water significantly.

And there is actually a good, scientific reason for it.

Still there is someone that can't accept that the population from 1400 Bohemia would look different from a mixed population of today, and that 1400 Europe tribes would be reasonably differentiable from one another.

Tulipanzo said:
DonFerrari said:

1) the game isn't the creator, so saying the game is racist because the creator is, is a fallacy. He would have to prove the racism in the game, which he wasn't able.

2) The one with political agenda is the reviewer.

3) Aligning on Gamergate is a problem?

4) His historical narrative is very badly made, based on if cases of if cases, and with inaccuracy.

5) and very good personal attacks

So you are going to use an authority argument? And worse yet the reviewer didn't even name the historian he said is a specialist, so who can say it really is?

I like bullet-points, like a tacit admission you can't come up with one coherent argument.

1) The reviewer never claimed the game is racist. In fact, he directly states the game isn't racist.
    This leads me to believe you have no idea what you're talking about. 
2) He is stating facts, and directly reporting the clearly political motivation of the lead dev. I guess reporting truth is political now, but you should try to justify       why he shouldn't have 
3) I'm sorry you had to find out this way, you must be shocked
4-5) It seems harsh on Vavra, I wouldn't say the historical narrative is very badly made, just inaccurate at points. Which is fine, "historically accurate Middle           Ages" is a fictional setting after all.
     It's his inane responses to criticism that make this worth discussing.
6?) I'm going to say, maybe don't mention "many historians" if you have none, and know the one historians that the dev railed against. 
      This is base knowledge of the topic; makes you look bad when you don't even have that 

You know you are the one without coherence when you need to say it to others to hide yourself.

1) Read the review, he says the game isn't racist, but that it should include more diversity (but go there to attack the game maker)

2) He isn't stating facts, he is muddling the waters because the creator have a position in gamergate and used a shirt in an event. Still, The whole second part of the review show political agenda of the reviewer and not from the fame designer.

3) Yes I see no problem on someone taking a stand on not defending bad practices from the press

4-5) You are totally out, the point on the review talking about the accuracy is saying that he could keep accuracy (meaning he acknowledge it as precise) even if including black people based on a very iffy "what if" scenario made of incorrect assumptions.

6) The dev haven't railed against any historian. Reviewer said he consulted with ONE specialist (which he didn't named). And when you look at the mirror you'll know who looks bad.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Errorist76 on 01 March 2018
Aeolus451 said:
Tulipanzo said:
My two cents:
A review is supposed to be communicating to readers information that may be of interest regarding purchase. Now, since not every person thinks the same, those standard may vary.

To me, the fact that this dev let his own politics come in the way of the mission statement of the game, historical realism, is enough to give me pause. That the guy aligned himself with a known hate group leads me to avoid the game completely.
To you, this is not a problem.
This is fine.

What is not fine is you demanding the reviewer avoid mentioning the head honcho's politics, despite those directly affecting the resulting game, because you feel they are not a selling point.
It would be akin to ignoring that, say, MG Survive was mostly based on the work of a previous team, unceremoniously fired after their last project, because it makes Konami look bad.
The only difference here is you think him right


There are many reviews which completely ignore this; I dare say that Eurogamer are in the minority by just mentioning this.
It makes it all the more laughable that one review sent you crying back to the forums about the mean sjws.

Crying to? This forum has alot of lefties. Hardly sounds like a place an anti-sjw would seek protection. There's more than a few reviews bitching about the silly crap.

Why do people keep up mixing up being left and SjWs? The one has nothing to do with the other!