Andrew Jackson

Is there any particular reason that Andrew Jackson is called “American General”? Other leader units are named making this one seem odd.

12 Likes

Andrew Jackson has been cancelled by the woke brigade for not living up to modern standards (just like everyone else from 200 years ago). Too bad I guess

15 Likes

But why not giving him a fictitious name like to the other characters of the game?

3 Likes

Doesn’t surprise me seeing as all references to colonialism are deleted

8 Likes

What’s even funnier is that Sir Francis Drake isn’t censored, but Andrew Jackson is. Maybe I shouldn’t point this out or they’ll get rid of him too

13 Likes

If the devs are really censoring history to appease the woke brigade- this is creepy!

12 Likes

It’s too stupid. Denying racism (or mafia, poverty, pollution and so on) would be make it disappear?

3 Likes

I will make a mod that fixes his name, and all the other names that were implemented to appease the snow flakes.

5 Likes

Pity, he was one of the best presidents in US history, hated the banks and the money-lending scheme that destroys national economies.

1 Like

From your wording it remains unclear who is the snowflake. Anyways to me it seems everyone is a snowflake.

4 Likes

It’s a bit ironic that the only people complaining are the ones who seem agitated at such a name change, so it really makes one wonder who might be the snowflake?

It doesn’t really matter since he’s still mentioned although if he’s based on him, might as well just add his name properly or fictionalise the name further.

Dev’s choice either way, for whatever reason?

2 Likes

I personally dont care one way or another bout andrew nor the direction the devs are taking; but to play a bit of devils advocate; they should make a historically accurate game based on World Wars and have as playable characters or special units that buff your army like Hilter and Stalin; be sure in the description of said special characters list all their notable accomplishments…

I bet you guys would love that? It will be all fun and games.

4 Likes

I would love that, though it would be better if they were Generals and Admirals, rather than national leaders.

1 Like

I actually lilke your consistency if youre being serious; however I hope you see the major offense and PR nightmare among lawsuits and bans you’d that would insue such endeavor…

2 Likes

I think having actual historical figures, is more important than people being offended by stuff they are only ever so slightly educated on.

The base AoE3 campaign already caught flak back in the day, because it is ahistorical garbage.
Most AoE players want History based campaigns, with actual historical figures, not a fantasy storyline. Save those for Age of Mythology 2.

5 Likes

I’m all for historical accuracy, particularly in campaigns whenever possible. Weren’t too keen on the original AoE3 campaign for that very reason.

Though there also comes a time where certain things must be sacrificed for gameplay and/or balance reasons.

This is one of those things that don’t matter too much since, for the most part, this character is minor in the game’s (current) scenario offerings. Perhaps Bruce Shelley was right that AoE3 as it stands, shouldn’t have been a mainstream AoE title. Alas.

1 Like

Gameplay and balance does not exclude the name-dropping of historical people, customs or locations. No one asked for a historically accurate Early Modern Warfare simulator, but just some real historical names and battles.

1 Like

For sure, especially if the character in question was a major central character, then it’d be very jarring to just name him “American General” throughout the story. But since he’s not, I don’t think it’s that big a deal.

Name change or not, I don’t think this is a pressing issue at this time given the scenario.

1 Like

again your preferences are just that; your preferences; if you were making a game to be played by the masses and generate revenue and want to be SUCCESSFUL you’d weigh the cons to doing things one way vs another. This being a prime example “make a few ppl happy by depicting history in the most accurate recollection of things and potentially alienate a larger audience? Or realize this game is a fiction rendition of World events design for FUN and LIGHT HEART play?”

Again that would be up to you and your team on the direction you’d take and the backlash from whichever groups would dislike your take.

1 Like

As said before, AoE3 is a game intended to be a light hearted entertainment. If it would feature all time realistic rendition of the colonial times, it would disgust about everyone since 2005, cause slavery would be a big part of it.

No guys in aprons saying “commandment?” and little techs to improve their work, but minorities ripped from their homes for forced labor and the incentive to improve their workrate would be whipping, tortures and intimidation. You would not train people from the town hall, but breed them in inhumane slave quarters. Your workers would also literally rebel and flee more and more frequently as you age up, cause that’s how it went with the slavery in the real deal. Unless you’re an idiot, the game would make you feel bad for having a good economy.

This is just one little detail that would make the game a PR disaster, and would not even need the ghostly SJW patrol that manchilds love to mention to make Microsoft bury the franchise like it never existed. This is a game that is vying for a broad audience. Stop burning your pants and acting offended, cause this is really not a issue for trucking nobody except you. If this is enough to decolor the sky for you, act and pull your 20 bucks back from your preorder and enjoy the SJW-free vanilla AoE3.