Paradox Interactive - New Images for Vampire Game

The problem with lable like "SJW" or "Racist" is that they are often thrown around for things people don't like. A lot of it has to do with lack of empathy in my opinion. For example, I do not see any overt racism in Kingdom Come: Deliverance. Yes everyone is white and there is a protagonist who you must play who is a white male. But in medieval Bohemia you wouldn't find a weaponsmith who wasn't a white male so it makes sense from a historical perspective. So do the invaders from the east from another culture. The attacks on the game seem out of whack. Yes the developer is politically conservative, but that has little to do with the game. Grimoire is a great game, with no overt political content, yes the developer is a far right conservative, but I don't see what that has to do with the game. Dragon Age: Inquisition, which I'm playing through at the moment has homosexuals and people of all skin colours. It was developed by politically left wing people. The romancable females aren't playboy bunnies. But they are, in my opinion, well developed characters that fit into the story and themes of the game. For that matter the male companions aren't Chippendales dancers either. I haven't seen any overt propoganda in the game at the 15 hours point, maybe some will come later, but I somehow doubt it. There are a wide variety of people in the world, so there obviously can be a wide variety of characters in the game. Before that I played Tales of Bersia which had very different female characters, which for me is okay too. Both the male and female characters were obviously designed to look like human ideals. And on to films I saw "Captain Marvel" with my daughter on Friday, which some conservatives are trying to sink, because of some things Brie Larson said in an interview. Its a good superhero film in my book, and I don't see it as propoganda. Not everyone thinks like me or is like me. I think people should try to see things from the perspectives of others and not be so sensitive.

Originally Posted by TheRealFluent
So now Warhorse "didn't bow to an ideology" ? What ideology is that, the truth? The truth that there were black people in Bohemia during that time period but since Daniel Vavra "lived there" he "knew that wasn't true"? It's funny how alt-righters turn truth into an ideology now. You guys clearly don't bow to the truth, that much is certain.

Fluent, as someone who studied medieval history, I can tell you that most people living in medieval Bohemia probably never saw a black person. That doesn't mean that a delegation might not have reached Prague, but that would be as exotic back then, as if you saw some celebrity walking down the street. To include it in a standard picture of the age just wouldn't be appropriate.

Nothing to add except this as the whole thread is going circles again.

Surveys show that liberals see themselves, anyway, as more empathetic and kindhearted than conservatives, a self-conception reinforced by political rhetoric. But in a recent paper, the psychologist Adam Waytz and his colleagues report a more nuanced finding: The main thing distinguishing liberals and conservatives in this regard isn’t how empathetic they are overall; rather, the key difference is how much empathy they feel for specific groups. Where conservatives empathize foremost with family members and country, liberals extend the bounds of empathy to include friends, the socially disadvantaged and citizens of the world, to whom they’d like government to lend a hand.

I'm proud to be a diehard conservative.

@forgottenlor

I don't personally think that Vavra has done anything bad enough to warrant censure, and I think that's one of many cases that are overblown. I only discussed him as someone on that side of the fence who also has clear activist tendencies.

I think, though, that most people, if they are being honest, do draw a line in the sand at some point, on some issues, and say: "No, this particular thing is beyond the pale - I won't support that. I fact, I'll oppose them." To give extreme examples, if someone set their forum avatar as the black flag of ISIS, with links to jihadist websites, or someone posted that they are proud supporters of NAMBLA, a lot of people would refuse to do business with them. And, although those examples are so extreme that I think the majority would respond negatively, it is still a question of where we indivually draw those lines. Personally, I would include Nazi and far-right material in the same bracket, whereas others are more sympathetic. But, when people claim that they would never let politics influence their buying decisions, I don't generally believe them.

In general, I do think that many people have set the bar for what is beyond the pale far too low, and there is far too much outrage culture, all around. The vast majority of it I think is best ignored. But, I do think it is worth bearing in mind that most of us draw these lines somewhere, and it's a matter of political and moral persuasion on where they should be. Would you agree that there is a limit to what we should tolerate in the name of respecting other people's politics, and that, at a certain point, refusal to deal with them is appropriate?

Originally Posted by Farflame
That is false argument. Attack on Warhorse was to harm developers in the eyes of the public so they were falsely called rasists or xenophobes ignoring any arguments about their decisions or history etc.

I think the same is happening here, just with different kinds of accusations. The intent is to harm the developers in the eyes of the public. Not by every critic, of course, some are just riled up by bits and pieces of text that are blown out of proportion and context.

Originally Posted by Farflame
It was also about the demand to change the game otherwise there will be smear campaign against them. And the campaign happened in media. The game was censored on some sites in order to harm devs medially and financially. They also tried to censor Vavra's lectures on different GDC shows etc. So he was invited somewhere but later influence of his haters make the organiser to take the invitation back.
Where do you see such attack on VtM2 devs?

Yes, I agree that's where the situation is a bit different. And it has to be, because it is a different group of people who attack VtM2. Yet, that is not a difference in intent, it is a difference in opportunity to act on that intent. Hypocrisy does not require ability.

Moreover, if you check the usual youtube channels, you might reconsider whether there is some kind of smear campaign going on or not. That, too, is part of the media nowadays.

Originally Posted by Ripper
@forgottenlor

I don't personally think that Vavra has done anything bad enough to warrant censure, and I think that's one of many cases that are overblown. I only discussed him as someone on that side of the fence who also has clear activist tendencies.

I think, though, that most people, if they are being honest, do draw a line in the sand at some point, on some issues, and say: "No, this particular thing is beyond the pale - I won't support that. I fact, I'll oppose them." To give extreme examples, if someone set their forum avatar as the black flag of ISIS, with links to jihadist websites, or someone posted that they are proud supporters of NAMBLA, a lot of people would refuse to do business with them. And, although those examples are so extreme that I think the majority would respond negatively, it is still a question of where we indivually draw those lines. Personally, I would include Nazi and far-right material in the same bracket, whereas others are more sympathetic. But, when people claim that they would never let politics influence their buying decisions, I don't generally believe them.

In general, I do think that many people have set the bar for what is beyond the pale far too low, and there is far too much outrage culture, all around. The vast majority of it I think is best ignored. But, I do think it is worth bearing in mind that most of us draw these lines somewhere, and it's a matter of political and moral persuasion on where they should be. Would you agree that there is a limit to what we should tolerate in the name of respecting other people's politics, and that, at a certain point, refusal to deal with them is appropriate?

I think you are right. Its just where our bars rest have to do with our world view. I think you just need to look on any story on Yahoo and you see most of the commenters (many of whom I think are political extremists) view 50% of the world and their views as monsters, which is just in my opinion extremely sad. The world has changed, we now live in a global world, with all the good and bad things that brings. Some people see their traditional views and the things they grew up with under siege. Others embrace change, but don't want to look at the disadvantages those changes brings others. When I read comments from both liberals and conservatives I can see where they are coming from. We have a lot of problems in the world and most normal people want to solve them in a good way, but we don't agree on what that is.
I agree that I wouldn't buy a game that preached (what I consider) political extremism. Or any other kind of extremism for that matter. However, I would venture to say that neither Steam, Epic Store, or GOG would want to be selling any of those kinds of games either. They want to make money and not draw controversy. And the games that people think should be banned from these stores for political reasons have their bar in many cases set rather low for developers whose political views differ from their own. I have no problems with them not buying the games for themselves. Or even discussing what they don't like about a specific game, but many of these attacks are about something that is in my opinion hardly worth commenting on, because its not what the game is about.

Yikes… wtf happened here while I was away?

Originally Posted by JDR13
Yikes… wtf happened here while I was away?

They're trying to tip me over the edge again. I've got to the point of invoking ISIS and NAMBLA is the same sentence.

Originally Posted by Cacheperl
I think the same is happening here, just with different kinds of accusations. The intent is to harm the developers

No, its not happening here. Did somebody call VtM2 devs racists or something here? Did RPGWatch stuff start campaing and write series of articles about them? No and I hope they dont start. And how many critics did you see here? Keep in mind that this is only ONE topic in the forum. I dont see ppl in rage here spamming about VtM2 devs. So…

Originally Posted by TheRealFluent
The truth that there were black people in Bohemia during that time period

Im afraid you believed ideological lie, Fluent. A pity. Forgottenlor already replied to you. I only add that there was historical research. With historians from the same country where the game take place.

Originally Posted by Ripper
You think the right doesn't attempt boycotts, smearing, blacklisting

Yes, they try but their options are more limited. Did you see right wing campaign on some mainstream site? They do it on social media, but there are also many (and probably more) campaigns from their opponents. And some ppl got banned there. Or do you mean campaigns on some niche forum that is widely unknown? That would be funny example of equality… And YT is not that great for campaigns. Ok, maybe YT, but its still not on the level of attack on Warhose imho.

But its not all. You already said that so called "propaganda" from diff devs is just different opinion, right? So why do you call "propaganda" from diff ppl as "campaign"? Sorry, but it sounds like hypocrisy. Just because you dont like their opinion it doesnt mean its "campaign". Just different opinion.

Originally Posted by Ripper
review-bombings,

Heh. Why do you attribute review bombing to one side? Do you think that for example group of Vavra haters never gave low marks to Kingdom Come? Its false claim again. Review-bombing can be in small or bigger scale done by ANYONE and probably was.

Originally Posted by Ripper
As they are so fond of claiming, "get woke, go broke".

So what? If they think so… They are as fond of it as others are so fond of "gamers are dead".

Originally Posted by Ripper
How does that work if their side doesn't also have the power to exert pressure, and help to determine the success and failure of a product based on politics?

Do you want to say that one group of gamers miraculously "exert pressure" over all gamers? Really? And what do you mean by "exert pressure"? Again you juggle with fancy words but hide real meaning. Mainstream sites and other groups with different opinions strangely dont have any influence over sales now? Its nonsense. It has nothing to do exclusively with right wing.

There is one important fact that you "strangely" omitted - that there is one far more powerfull "group" that can really influence all gamers. Yes, there is. Its PR and marketing of publisher/devs! It has much bigger influence than any gamer group. And this power obviously favor product be it pro-sjw or not. Anti-sjw alone couldnt massively influence sales against massive PR UNLESS the game has more problems, bugs, questionable quality… or there is much bigger player base that share some of their opinions. So, not its not like one side (right wing) has some special power over sales. That is clearly not true again.
Or… are you just angry that customers have still the right to determine what they buy?

Regarding "equality" I would also like to ask which mainstream game devs bowed down to demands of right wing? Just to see some "balance". Which mainstream game devs responded to right wing that they agree and will adopt some right wing idea or anti-sjw theme into their game? Which one?

Originally Posted by Ripper
many people have set the bar for what is beyond the pale far too low, and there is far too much outrage culture, all around.

I agree with that.

One more thing - many ppl somehow forgot that player activists are common people. With bad habits too. They are not paid or PR experts. Its media guys who should be professionals, educated writers with ethics and paid to do the right job! They are not paid to act like amateur activists, angry mob or liers. So the responsibility is first and foremost on professional media writers, not on gamers!

Originally Posted by Farflame
You already said that so called "propaganda" from diff devs is just different opinion, right? So why do you call "propaganda" from diff ppl as "campaign"? Sorry, but it sounds like hypocrisy. Just because you dont like their opinion it doesnt mean its "campaign". Just different opinion.

Nope, that is misrepresenting the form of the argument.

It’s obvious that the left conducts campaigns against certain games – I’m saying that it is obvious the right does ALSO. I’m not saying that when the right does it then it’s a campaign, and that when the left does it it’s somehow something categorically different. My point, as it has been throughout this thread, is about balance – they BOTH do it.

My point about the propaganda claim is that it attempts to portray something the other side does as something categorically different and problematic, which is NOT the point I’m making here.

Originally Posted by Farflame
Heh. Why do you attribute review bombing to one side? Do you think that for example group of Vavra haters never gave low marks to Kingdom Come? Its false claim again. Review-bombing can be in small or bigger scale done by ANYONE and probably was.

And again, misrepresenting what I’m saying. The first line of my post, which you have conveniently omitted, reads, “This idea that all the political force with RL consequences comes from one side seem to me evidently untrue.” Easier to remove context by quoting down to individual words in sentences, I suppose. I am not attributing review bombings to one side, I’m making the point that it is ALSO something the right does to exert pressure (which is a very commonplace term, BTW – hardly ”fancy words”. )

Originally Posted by Farflame
Do you want to say that one group of gamers miraculously "exert pressure" over all gamers? Really? And what do you mean by "exert pressure"? Again you juggle with fancy words but hide real meaning. Mainstream sites and other groups with different opinions strangely dont have any influence over sales now? Its nonsense. It has nothing to do exclusively with right wing.

There is one important fact that you "strangely" omitted - that there is one far more powerfull "group" that can really influence all gamers. Yes, there is. Its PR and marketing of publisher/devs! It has much bigger influence than any gamer group. And this power obviously favor product be it pro-sjw or not. Anti-sjw alone couldnt massively influence sales against massive PR UNLESS the game has more problems, bugs, questionable quality… or there is much bigger player base that share some of their opinions. So, not its not like one side (right wing) has some special power over sales. That is clearly not true again.
Or… are you just angry that customers have still the right to determine what they buy?

Seriously, you have enough strawmen to start a scarecrow store. I’M NOT SAYING THAT EXERTING PRESSURE DUE TO POLITICAL VIEWS IS EXCLUSIVELY RIGHT WING – I’m saying THEY DO IT TOO!!! I’m also not saying that they have more power than any group. You are simply making this stuff up, and arguing against points I haven’t made.

The most well-known gaming-related campaign of recent times was, of course, gamergate, which specifically targeted advertisers to, yes, exert pressure.

Originally Posted by Farflame
Regarding "equality" I would also like to ask which mainstream game devs bowed down to demands of right wing? Just to see some "balance". Which mainstream game devs responded to right wing that they agree and will adopt some right wing idea or anti-sjw theme into their game? Which one?

My point, again all throughout this thread, is that we SHOULDN’T bow down to such campaigns and pressures. I’m simply saying that both sides attempt it. If the left-wing exponents are having more success pursuing their agenda, that doesn’t necessarily mean they have more power – it might simply be that they are winning the argument within current society. Equality doesn’t mean that you get to win half the time. Unless you believe in equity of outcome, of course.

Originally Posted by Farflame
No, its not happening here. Did somebody call VtM2 devs racists or something here?

Of course not, what's the point of that remark? I specifically said they did not use the same accusations. In the very text you quoted.

Originally Posted by Farflame
Did RPGWatch stuff start campaing and write series of articles about them? No and I hope they dont start. And how many critics did you see here? Keep in mind that this is only ONE topic in the forum. I dont see ppl in rage here spamming about VtM2 devs. So…

So where is the RPGwatch campaign against Warhorse? I seem to have missed that. So that remark is also completely missing the point.

My bottom line: In both cases, some people want to restrict what writers/devs can or can not write about in their games. And if they complain in one case, yet join in in the other one, they are hypocrites.

Originally Posted by JDR13
Yikes… wtf happened here while I was away?

Oh, so you have not got the update then! Well, here you go: There is irrefutable proof that in the new VtM Game you will be forced to ask for consent everytime you suck blood. Which is fine, because the vampire character that you play is a pink haired chubby vegan.

And some people actually believe that's what will be happening.

Originally Posted by Ripper
Seriously, you have enough strawmen to start a scarecrow store. I’M NOT SAYING THAT EXERTING PRESSURE DUE TO POLITICAL VIEWS IS EXCLUSIVELY RIGHT WING – I’m saying THEY DO IT TOO!!! I’m also not saying that they have more power than any group. You are simply making this stuff up, and arguing against points I haven’t made.

I just want to comment on this because its hilarious. You were certainly arguing against points I hadn't made all through our exchanges. I suspect there is little point in pointing them out as you would just tell me what I meant by it or something like that.

Originally Posted by Silver
I just want to comment on this because its hilarious. You were certainly arguing against points I hadn't made all through our exchanges. I suspect there is little point in pointing them out as you would just tell me what I meant by it or something like that.

Yes, let's attempt to divert from the point with new assertions, without the need for any backing. No, I really don't try to strawman people. If you felt I was, perhaps I was confused by your "my comments are not connected entities" school of argument.

Originally Posted by Ripper
Yes, let's attempt to divert from the point with new assertions, without the need for any backing. No, I really don't try to strawman people. I you felt I was, perhaps I was confused by your "my comments are not connected entities as I refine the conversation" school of argument.

What I meant by that: I can't really elaborate on my answers if you can't/won't tell me what you mean and answer some of my questions, so I'll tell you what. Treat each post as its own topic. Maybe I'll get some clarity out of you then.

I didn't want to straight out say it because you wanted to argue things I hadn't put out there for pages and it was too much effort to backtrack through it and go woah wait a second. Plus I was tired - happy now

Originally Posted by Silver
Plus I was tired - happy now

Not really, because you are still saying that I've been strawmanning you, to a hilarious degree, without any support for that at all. If you're suggesting that it's strawmanning you by trying to follow your meaning from one comment to the next, as we tend to do in conversations, that's not what I was trying to do. If I misunderstood you, I think understandably, that's not the same thing.

Not accusing you of Strawmanning Ripper. It seems like you misunderstand me in ways that baffle me at times. But all good otherwise.

Just to move away from the political commentary slightly and to resume focusing on the actual game based upon what we know so far; I do find it curious that the whole notion of "consent" that is being emphasized at this point appears to greater connect with light BDSM Dom/Sub human relationships than it does with actual vampirism and the original dark romantic themes from WoD.

I'm mildly concerned that the game's desire for greater accessibility is going to diminish it's anti-establishment potential and lessen the liberating fun of role-playing an anarchic character who is not interested in the slightest in remaining politically correct. That said, it'd be nice to be proven wrong in these reflections. We'll see.

Originally Posted by Silver
Not accusing you of Strawmanning Ripper. It seems like you misunderstand me in ways that baffle me at times. But all good otherwise.

Oh man…

You quoted me explaining how someone was strawmanning me – making up arguments that I didn’t make, and arguing against them instead. You said this was hilarious (presumably ironic) because, “You were certainly arguing against points I hadn't made all through our exchanges.”

How the fuck else am I supposed to read it?! I'm happy to let this drop if you want to, but seriously…

Originally Posted by Ripper
Oh man…

You quoted me explaining how someone was strawmanning me – making up arguments that I didn’t make, and arguing against them instead. You said this was hilarious (presumably ironic) because, “You were certainly arguing against points I hadn't made all through our exchanges.”

How the fuck else am I supposed to read it?! I'm happy to let this drop if you want to, but seriously…

I thought me finding it hilarious instead of stamping my feet would of tipped you off. Anyways no worries and sorry if you have been feeling besieged.