RocketDog

The best line was when the discussion turned to the options regarding the dealing with the sodomites in the game. Troy says: You can get to know your crew members. lol !

The terrain problem in space games is an old one. If the designers have no terrain, the distance between stars and ship range is the only limiting factor to player actions. As the game plays out, and the ship ranges increase, the map becomes less interesting. Player ships can reach so far that all star systems are threatened at all times. By the time a player pushes the enemy systems far enough away to create a buffer, the game is over. Mater of Orion 2 (1996) uses this system. This is the old Populous (1989) problem of the game becoming less interesting as you get more powerful. If the designers add space terrain that effects movement rates, etc, then the game becomes a terrestrial game, a re-skin of Interstel's Empire(1987-ish) or SSG's Warlords(1989), with star systems as cities and asteroid fields as mountains. Some players want terrain but hate space-lanes. Space lanes are abstracted terrain. Ascedancy (1995) used space lanes. All of these terrain ideas are well known by designers, and all work. So what is the real problem with Endless Space's generation of space 4x games? Is it the terrain model, the tech tree, or the quest rewards? The clue is that Master of Orion 2 is still a standard by which all 4x games have been measured since it's release in 1996. In the mid-1980s, when the Amiga was in homes with its bigger memory and faster processor, and games were made for these new abilities, an article was written wondering if with the increase in hardware capability, will the consumer get better games than Wizardry and it's 10 level dungeon, or simply get Wizardry with 1000 levels. Space 4x games since MOO2 reflect that concern. The problem with space 4x games, and strategy games, in general, is the computer opponent. The computer plays turn-based games about as well as it did in 1996. The RTS was created to combat this weakness, creating games that play to the computer's strengths of instant reaction to events. The RTS genre thrives with simpler designs because the player gets to play against a good opponent. Master of Orion 2 is filled with good ideas in a good package with the same level computer players as you get today. That games made today with similar ideas seem lesser is understandable. The agon and arete are what drives the strategy game, and no matter the depth of the system design, or the ease of the interface, or the scope of the setting, without a good opponent, any game will suffer. Master of Orion 2 will cast a long a shadow until the sun rises on the day of good computer opponents.

You misunderstand. My criticism is of the accusation, not of the game. Racist : prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior. I am not a racist. As far as wanting someone to shut up: "..you to make a forum account and repeatedly post about it, whether or not it's relevant to the conversation..." "Now, if you're willing to say that a professional reviewer of strategy games and a professional historian of the Holy Roman Empire in the Middle Ages are both wrong and that you're right, I'm willing to argue that you're the one being irresponsible..." I think you have not understood my previous post, because your response does not address my arguments. Not sure about jennegatron's post, as I am the one speaking of ideas through evidence and logic, whereas others are justifying their thoughts with their credentials.

Are we really going to count degrees? That's your lead argument? My criticism is of the accusation, not of the game. You see, I was using the Shadow Tactics as a foil, with which to draw out my opponent. A springboard to let not the sound die in the air, but to ring for all to hear. It is the lack of evidence with which you are Rob Zacny rest such a serious charge that I find reprehensible. " When a game omits that inclusivity, and then kind of tips its hand about other iffy positions and perspectives, it's way harder to ignore now. " From this, Rob Zacny condemns at least six people as racists, a charge that in the current cultural climate, ranks up there with pedophilia and rape. Rob shrugs of his discomfort though, "... but I don't find so off-putting that I cannot play the game." I find that juxtaposition reprehensible. "I do love the soup at this restaurant, but I do wish they would free their slaves. More tea over here please!"

I point this out because of the egregiousness of a professional reviewer of product branding a group of people as racists, a very serious charge, based solely upon their use of only Germanic faces in their game set in a fake medieval Germany. Such a declaration is irresponsible. Such a statement degrades the speaker and his target. That this topic is taken so lightly by the host infuriates me. It is an injustice. Rob Zacny set his standard. I only ask him to be consistent. Surely this champion, who can detect a racist with just a wisp of information, can continue the crusade.

I waited through the entire episode for Rob Zacny to be disturbed by all the pale faces. I guess the developers of Shadow Tactics gets a pass from Rob Zacny's summary judgment. Why does your brand of racism stay in the fire this week Rob?

I noticed in the post of Rob Zacny that you said "Also, I'm playing this alongside Darkest Dungeon where similarly simple character art is made to encompass a wide variety of skin tones." You may have forgotten the discussion in your podcast about the graphics in Battle Bros. The graphics seem plain and simple, but the character portraits are dynamic. Injuries and scars suffered by characters are reflected in their portrait. This makes adding a new look to be more resource intensive than would appear.

Do you think that games that are not inclusive of multiple races should be supported by buying them and playing them ?

My bad. I see now that my comments were completely off-base.

Should the episode title read "Rob Zacny and his all white panel suspect Battle Bros creators of being white supremacists"? Really shocking to get Rob's disapproving tone and statements in the middle of the game review. Maybe the title should be "Despite misgivings of its creators supporting racism and misogyny, 3MA recommends the Battle Bros". I can't wait to hear the next Civil War game review when Rob Zacny determines how racist the game designers are based on the South having "too good of chances" or "having an easy time of it".