I am sorry, but I need to ask: what’s the purpose of going back on the names changes?
You say it yourself:
So if doing the changes was pointless, shouldn’t we conclude that going back to the original names would be equally meaningless?
Isn’t this more about making a statement than anything else?
I can’t think of anything remotely positive for the game if we follow your suggestion.
(though I am not saying we gained anything from the name change to begin with)
Age of Empires III covers the age of colonial empires, slave trade, the birth of nationalism, genocide, you name it. If it was up to me, I would make the game A LOT more racist. I don’t think any video-game could do that period justice or treat it with dignity. And as for names… Bro. Even calling Indians “Indians” is incorrect.
Can I use this quote as a signature or something?
I cant belive Relic didnt hire you as a dev… Such a SMART and BRILLIANT idea. With edgy statements like this a game would surely be a hit.
Hell yeah dude. Those times were so messed up that they’re still considered “recent”. And the consequences of that “age of empires” are still big talking points today: racism, ethnic tensions, ultra-nationalism, xenophobia, social strife, first world countries and third world countries etcetera. You have recent protests where people take down statues from “the age of adventure and exploration”. I’m not even trolling, how do you do justice to those times?
Maybe that’s why Age of Empires 4 goes back to a less complicated age. Hey guys, remember the Mongols?
It seems Christianity is not even gonna be referenced…
The issue is that many of the present day discrimination of minorities in the america still derives from the colonialist caste and slavery (it is true both in Brazil and USA for example, but the structure is similar for the reamaining countries).
Also, because of the slave trade and colonialism most civilizations in africa never evolved in the modern age as they evolved until that age (example of Mali that was one of the most advanced medieval kingdoms of the world at the time).
The issue is, you do not want to reeinforce those racist stereotypes in a world like the one you live. Games do have influence in how teens perceive the world, and puting slavery in a game not only could reinforce stupid ideas like “slavery is good” or “division by race” but also - due to the conflict focus of the game - could reinforce the idea of “europe civilizing the rest of the world” which again is a big big myth.
It goes to medieval times because not only the most marketable game of the franchise was on this age, but also, because the medieval times dont have the same impact in minorities today as events such as the colonization, or the division of china, etc.
If they are making campaigns it will be referenced as religious wars were the main way for the church to maintain its power/control in the european kingdoms at the time.
You know exactly what he meant. Don’t be obtuse.
I think the problem of racism and stuff is mostly US / America related. Europe seems to have found the perfect balance between minorities and majorities. But then again European people went through hundreds of years of racial oppression and simply evolved by learning from its own mistakes. While there sill currently are some minor incidents, the majority of european people don’t seem to bother nor care about racial things.
The US simply didn’t have the time, physically, to evolve in that way. And remember it was the European powers that put a stop to the slave trade and outlawed it, not the US.
As an European, I really don’t want to be bothered by either side of the US racism dispute. Both seem childish and immature, and both fail to see that humanity have really bigger problems than skin color.
IMHO, Africa does not belong to humans. All those living in Africa should relocate to other countries and leave Africa to nature. The climate and overall living conditions in Africa simply cannot allow countries to develop there. The reason why Africa was left behind is because they simply reached the hard stop in their development perspective. It is very difficult and very expensive to develop things in Africa further: food and water supplies are far more difficult to establish than in temperate zones, and from this on, everything crumbles and succumbs to civil war.
What do you mean by that ?
“Political Correctness” will never change what happened in the old days. Instead of renaming the Ages, buildings, civilizations, and units, they should do something else. A text while the game is loading would suffice - it would say that the European colonial powers have committed many crimes against the natives, but this game will only focus on harmless entertainment for anyone. Instead of renaming and playing with bizarre story enhancements, let the creators focus on improving entertainment. In the case of native civs names, it’s cool that their names are given in their native language, but I believe these names should be in parentheses. The English name should be this main civ name. I think it would be nice to do this for any civs, be it Native or Asian or European.
Besides, the original campaigns made it quite clear what was wrong with some of the colonizers. I even think that without changing the context of the plot, it showed us what is right and what is wrong. There the black family was a model of tolerance towards Native Americans, unlike the rest of the greedy colonizers.
Hopefully the African DLC will add us campaigns closer to TAD than the rest. Anyway, it would be funny if the black family appeared on the African mainland.
I think some original civs names could be renamed to be more precise. For example:
Remember that in those days empires were supranational and were inhabited by many other nations. Better names for AoE 3 civs are names based on a specific empire, not a specific nation.
There’s not a single reference/unit/scene on the campaigns showing the slavery, as it didn’t happen. the only thing is that european civs have random villagers and some of them are black.
Just historical scenarios that humanize African civs would be cool, instead of getting “primitive” or “exotic” nations. AoE III had a little bit of white savior, specially on the xpack, on the second act.
You forget, Plantation refers to slavery, oh my!
The Icon no longer has a picture of a cotton plant…Not to mention that Anative american civs didn’t have ‘estates’ but they did grow commercial crops.
Plantations are where commercial crops are made even today.