About the changes made to portray native American civilizations more respectfully and with higher historical accuracy and other political changes

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

7 Likes

This cancel culture of last couple of years end up being implemented in game. I thought at least games will be spared from political correctness but here were are in 2020 being offended about dancing around fire pit or being able to convert animal treasure guardians.

2 Likes

Im political left, but im totally agree with u, not real, not historical, and not fair.

3 Likes

Nice to hear. I’d like to add to my post that I acknowledge that there’s of course nuance amongst the left just like there is everywhere and I’m not against all left policies per se but the growth in social pressure for compliance and the politicization seeping into every last corner of our lives has become unbareable…

2 Likes

My guess is, honestly, that they just implemented a few extra models to account for Portuguese and Spanish characters having naturally darker skin and just left it as a randomizer for all European civs.

As for the “virtue signalling,” well… as a Native American (Lakota), I can assure you that this is in no way virtue signalling. The AoE franchise is known for its entertainingly inaccurate (yet accurate) representations of historical cultures - this has been true for most of the game. Where this falls apart completely is with the Native American civs. The changes they made were an effort to put the Lakota and the Haudenosaunee on the same level of comedically inaccurate as the rest of the nations while not employing offensive stereotypes to do so.

They are still hilariously inaccurate. My most prominent gripe is the Dog Soldier - Dog Soldiers were Cheyenne, not Lakota. They basically made the Lakota special heavy cavalry the equivalent of making the Spahi the Russian unique cavalry unit. Do you understand what I mean by that?

3 Likes

But of course! How could I not think of this… Also the renaming of the Colonial Age to Commerce Age and the plantation to grange or something (idk only saw it in German) were just very long and very consistent typing errors by some programmer and completely apolitical. One would truly have to be some butthurt white supremacist to suggest a very strong correlation of this and the strongly pushed “narrative” (to not call it a blatantly impudent lie) of today’s left that Europe has ALWAYS been “culturally diverse” (but not Asia, Australia, Africa and of course North and South America somehow… and also, before calling me ridiculous, yes that’s what’s being pushed)… Oh and also at the night of the 24th of December Santaclaus is flying his reindeer sledge from the north pole to my house, climbing through my chimney and placing gifts in my socks.

Now maybe you actually believe what you wrote and I don’t mean to be insulting or provoking quarrel but your suggestion is, excuse me, …umm rather far-fetched and very naive.
First of all, I’m a construction worker in Switzerland and 95% (not exaggerating here) of my co-workers are Portuguese and Spansih (and Italian) and their skin is not this dark, not even in the midst of summer on high altitude.
Secondly, “they left it as a randomizer”, say what? Appart from the fact that they had to actually design a 3D model of a NORTHERN settler with dark skin, why would they make three very distinct architecture and clothing styles for euro civs (and didn’t just leave it) yet completely randomize skin color? No no my friend, stop to knowingly fool yourself.

And about the changes to the Native Amercian civs, well I don’t care too much that they did what they did as it moved the game closer to history (instead of distorting it like they did with the settlers) as long as it doesn’t obstruct gameplay, wich it does with the need to build fur trading stations (if you play the game on a competitive level that is). However it is still absolutely obvious that they had employed double standards. An example? The Iroquois had their very iconic name changed to something the vast majority of AoE3 players had never in their lifes heared about because they didn’t call themselves Iroquois… well I am German and we Germans don’t call ourselves Germans we call us Deutsche, as you can see a completely different name. Now there is the word Germanen in German but it describes the ancient peoples and includes also peoples such as Scandinavians, so therefore the name Germans is very inaccurate and I feel strongly offended by it (cough).
And lastly, yes of course I understand what you mean by that: Native American tribes were very distinct ethnicities and cultures just like eg. European peoples were and are. Hmm maybe they just left the Dog Soldiers as a randomizer? :wink:

3 Likes

Also since I have seen this ridiculous suggestion now many times: No, the black villagers among European civs are 100% not meant to represent black slaves as the developers are desperately trying to stay away from the whole colonial slave trade/labour, see the renaming of the Colonial Age and the plantations. Aaand of course everyone has heared about the big German, Swedish and Russian slave trade, right?
So again I can only say: Stop deliberately defending cowardly subversive historical revisionism. People see through it and don’t like being lied to.

Note: This comment is not aimed at FireCorn.

2 Likes

Looking into it, the darker complexion for villagers has always been a randomizer. It was present in the base game. This isn’t something the new devs through in for virtue signalling, it’s just something they didn’t change.

I can’t say anything about the Haudenosaunee, but I can say this about the name change of the Lakota - the Lakota, Dakota, and Nakota are about as different as Portuguese is from Spanish and Catalan is from those two. Calling the clearly Lakota-inspired units and art in the game “Sioux” is just weird. It’d be like making a southeast Asian civilization that speaks Vietnamese, uses Vietnamese architecture, and has Vietnamese-inspired units the Southeast Asians.

1 Like

But there’s a big catch: villagers are still named “settlers”, which is still translated in Italian as “colono”…

Lot’s of frustrations here bro, for… what? too many black people in a colony? Feeling oppressed?

There’s no need to radicalise over a game or your worries that you’re losing something from your youth. The game is still there, in all its historic glory, white soldiers strutting the fields, European nations conquering the world – you’ll be fine ;).

There’ve just been just slight alterations to correct some mistakes in the past (as someone here with Lakota origin already explained – they’ve been outright wrong in their depiction op these civs, and although there’s still a lot room for improvement, theirs nothing wrong with trying).

History is not something that’s objectively set in stone. It’s in flux all the time, and you can never escape the fact that it’s a modern day projection of things that can never be retrieved again.

Not everything and everyone is against you, mate. No need to place every small thing that’s changing in today’s society in some kind of black-and-white, good-vs-evil narrative. Some life advice: channel that anger somewhere else, it’s neither helping you nor the people around you :slight_smile:

4 Likes

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

2 Likes

I agree so hard with OP it’s insane. And everyone trying to say that it doesn’t matter, it does. Because it apparently matters in the other way.

But this is just the world we live in. Inclusion is far more important than historical accuracy. And if you say anything against it, people are quick to attack your character. It hurts me even more as a historian. Wait 5 years. Age of Empires 4 will probably have female units as well. You know, the heavy medieval female knights of all color in the French armies.

3 Likes

Like, you do realize that the colourations were the same in the base game, right? I went through and checked it out. They were roughly half and half. It isn’t something new they put in DE, it was just something that apparently never bothered you before.

1 Like

No, they had color variations from pale to tanned not from white to clearly black.

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

3 Likes

Darker skin toned settlers have been in the game since vanilla.

I dont know however if they changed the chance of them having it tho.

I also like to state the devs are hypocritycal, they added literaly conversion to the Incas with the priestes which is magical, not authentic, which where both reasons why coin mining and fire pit were removed from the natives, like come on.

1 Like

Well i won’t go into detail about immigrants. Because that is a purely political issue, which like the counterparts have no place in this game. And i don’t know what the point is of all this. I really don’t. Cause it makes no sense to me, so it’s not my place to comment on it.

But from a purely game-perspective, it’s very sad. Also, like a wrote a post about, nobody seems to care that the Indians are portrayed completely wrong. They basically represent a nation of 2. billion if you add pakistan and bangladesh, and are a fairytale nation that is a combination of the British Raj and insane amount of elephants, while ignoring everything that made the Mughal Empire, well, Mughal.

1 Like

Don’t discuss controversial topics such as religion or politics in a way that is not directly related to the Age of Empires games and their historical context. For this reason I am closing this topic.