Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2014/09/04 04:40:22
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
Truly, this is a revelation that will change the world forever.
Swastakowey wrote: I prefer to learn about the average joe, and have accurate representations.
I disagree.
You want to play your fantasy ideal of what the era looked like, and you don't want to be "the average joe", whom died from dysentery or some other ailment rather than being shot by the enemy. Because a truly accurate historical representation would make for a really crappy game. You want to skip the parts you think are boring, and get to the exciting parts.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
2014/09/04 04:43:11
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
My biggest problem with women in games is they have no character development and are completely flat. I personally couldn't care less if my protagonist was female and her nemesis or partner was male, or vice versa. The gender doesn't matter to me, but how you use the character, give them nuances, develop their personality, that's what matters. You wanna give her boob plate? Go ahead, but at least make her interesting. You want Duke to wear a banana hammock? Fine, but at least make me like him for more than being a Rambo archetype (not that that role can't be entertaining, but there is more to life than cheap one liners).
I love Arnold Schwarzenegger and all his 90's movies. They're easy, stupid, and actiony. They don't sell you on being anything more than that and thats what makes them great. Don't put in a female character just to fill the status quo, put them in the game and make me care about them.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/04 04:43:52
SneakyMek wrote: Well there where so called cantinières that where females that had followed regiments to the battlefield,they did however not take part in the battles themselves.
Nadezhda Durova served in the Russian cavalry, Anna Anna Lühring served in the Lützow Free Corps, Joanna Żubr served as a soldier for Poland and was the first woman to ever get the Polish equivalent of the Medal of Honor (Virtuti Militari).
We have similar tales in the US Civil War in the same time period, as well as throughout history in general.
SneakyMek wrote: In any case..lets not get too side tracked from the main focus on this thread.
The desire to claim "no women ever participated in these wars" or "the women who participated don't deserve to be represented" is in fact a part of this thread's focus, since it is a problem that I, a gamer, have with the depiction of women in games
Ok, so some very rare examples. Very rare. Out of the hundreds of thousands of soldiers we have some ish stories of women in combat. They do not, outside of exceptional circumstance, deserve to be represented in most wars, due to their tiny minimal combat presence.
Im sorry if its offensive that people dont want to see women all over the front lines in a Nepolionic setting, when there shouldnt be.
Some exceptional examples, are not evidence for massed female ranks of soldiers. In any war really, even today. Fantasy and sci fi is fine to have such representation, but not history. Unless the story is specifically on the exceptional case of a female soldier.
Some of the bits I have read suggest it's not as rare as people think. There was a essay that involved man eating lamas I might be able to dig up. Basically it was about how our perceptions some times overwrite reality. We assume women didn't fight (or do anything in those times) that we don't even look. Like they found some tombs of warriors and simply neglected to check their gender because they assumed they were all men. After they tested, turned out a lot of them were women.
The sci-fi thing is actually a interesting thing to being up because I have seen people make arguments that you can't include women in combat even there. The example I am recalling was actually a little silly. They were trying to argue that women couldn't fight because they didn't have the muscle mass, but it was a cyber punk setting so you know all the fighters had most of their body replaced with cybernetics. The argument was not only silly it flew right in the face of the themes of the setting.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/04 04:51:27
2014/09/04 04:46:13
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
jreilly89 wrote: I love Arnold Schwarzenegger and all his 90's movies. They're easy, stupid, and actiony. They don't sell you on being anything more than that and thats what makes them great. Don't put in a female character just to fill the status quo, put them in the game and make me care about them.
So why would a woman playing the same role, in a straight up easy, stupid action flick, bother you?
Why is it okay for a man to be boring and one dimensional, but not a woman?
I find that rather bizarre.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/09/04 04:49:03
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
2014/09/04 04:48:49
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
Truly, this is a revelation that will change the world forever.
Swastakowey wrote: I prefer to learn about the average joe, and have accurate representations.
I disagree.
You want to play your fantasy ideal of what the era looked like, and you don't want to be "the average joe", whom died from dysentery or some other ailment rather than being shot by the enemy. Because a truly accurate historical representation would make for a really crappy game. You want to skip the parts you think are boring, and get to the exciting parts.
No actually, I wish I could play a game where you can randomly die of disease etc on the go.
There is a reason I play about 4 games, because not even those games satisfy my desire for realism.
There is a reason why I play IL2 Sturmovik the most, I spend 99% of the mission flying over kilometers and kilometers of landscape with limited ammo, fuel and weather in the hopes of maybe scoring a kill. If I die, or crash or anything, i have to do it all over. Pilots being usually the most well fed and safe from common ways of dying means that its not reasonable to expect you will be alive for the next sortie. Most sorties are very long and "boring".
My ideal game is one where I get to be put in the shoes of people before me, something only history books can achieve (if that). My friends hate it (because I dont play games with them for this reason).
So you have no idea what my ideal game is. My friend tried telling me id find it boring to die of disease on the march, but frankly disease (unlike women in combat) have actually had a major role in warfare and should be represented with huge importance. In my opinion.
But I know one thing, a HISTORY GAME where you fight on the battle field, shouldnt not include women outside of special circumstance.
Sci fi and fantasy is all fine and good to have them, because its not real etc.
2014/09/04 04:50:16
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
2014/09/04 04:55:14
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
The point I was getting at was that he still had acceptable breaks from reality in order to make the game be playable.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
2014/09/04 04:59:02
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
jreilly89 wrote: I love Arnold Schwarzenegger and all his 90's movies. They're easy, stupid, and actiony. They don't sell you on being anything more than that and thats what makes them great. Don't put in a female character just to fill the status quo, put them in the game and make me care about them.
So why would a woman playing the same role, in a straight up easy, stupid action flick, bother you?
Why is it okay for a man to be boring and one dimensional, but not a woman?
I find that rather bizarre.
To me, it depends on the movie. In Aliens Vasquez is like that, but she is awesome.
Like i said, sexualization doesnt bother me, men are often stupid in proportions to. What I hate is that too often character archetypes are what i see. The Tough girl, the Bubbly one, and others. Unless it is meant to be that way. But some games just shoe in the "Tech Girl who knows everything about computers" kinda gak with no ryme or reason.
5000pts 6000pts 3000pts
2014/09/04 04:59:27
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
jreilly89 wrote: I love Arnold Schwarzenegger and all his 90's movies. They're easy, stupid, and actiony. They don't sell you on being anything more than that and thats what makes them great. Don't put in a female character just to fill the status quo, put them in the game and make me care about them.
So why would a woman playing the same role, in a straight up easy, stupid action flick, bother you?
Why is it okay for a man to be boring and one dimensional, but not a woman?
I find that rather bizarre.
me too, and I find most characters in games to be flat and 1 dimensional with hardly any character development.
Manchu - "But so what? The Bible also says the flood destroyed the world. You only need an allegorical boat to tackle an allegorical flood."
Shespits "Anything i see with YOLO has half naked eleventeen year olds Girls. And of course booze and drugs and more half naked elventeen yearolds Girls. O how i wish to YOLO again!"
Rubiksnoob "Next you'll say driving a stick with a Scandinavian supermodel on your lap while ripping a bong impairs your driving. And you know what, I'M NOT GOING TO STOP, YOU FILTHY COMMUNIST"
2014/09/04 05:03:29
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
hotsauceman1 wrote: To me, it depends on the movie. In Aliens Vasquez is like that, but she is awesome.
I would love to see a Vasquez style character get her own video game series.
Certainly she'd be no worse a character than Duke Nukem at any rate, and I'm one of the oddballs that actually liked DNF.
hotsauceman1 wrote: What I hate is that too often character archetypes are what i see. The Tough girl, the Bubbly one, and others. Unless it is meant to be that way. But some games just shoe in the "Tech Girl who knows everything about computers" kinda gak with no ryme or reason.
I find it annoying when the girl is shoehorned in to that position because the devs apparently don't seem to want to have her be holding a damn rifle instead.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
2014/09/04 05:05:14
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
jreilly89 wrote: I love Arnold Schwarzenegger and all his 90's movies. They're easy, stupid, and actiony. They don't sell you on being anything more than that and thats what makes them great. Don't put in a female character just to fill the status quo, put them in the game and make me care about them.
So why would a woman playing the same role, in a straight up easy, stupid action flick, bother you?
Why is it okay for a man to be boring and one dimensional, but not a woman?
I find that rather bizarre.
I think you are reading too much into my comment. I would absolutely LOVE a Rambo-esque female protagonist. But guess what, in the 90's they just didn't make them. That, and no one can match Arnold's unique slur/yells
My point was that I think it's stupid to have female characters just for the sake of having them. Multi-gender/class combinations work in games like WoW and Mass Effect because the narrative focuses on the protagonist regardless of what/who they are and also does not require any character development to advance the story. But in games like say Final Fantasy or Silent Hill, throwing in female side characters just to have them doesn't make sense. Take for example Silent Hill 2. IIRC all of the side characters are female, but they all have great character development and add to the story by being female. They aren't just thrown in for the sake of equality, they are there because they add depth to the narrative and you are genuinely invested in them.
If you can do this with either gender, more power to you, but don't give characters race or gender just to say you're diversifying the cast
SneakyMek wrote: Well there where so called cantinières that where females that had followed regiments to the battlefield,they did however not take part in the battles themselves.
Each French regiment had women authorized to accompany it on campaign. Designated cantinières or vivandières, they wore clothes of at least partly military design. Their official function within the regiment was to sell tobacco and refreshments such as cognac from their carts and care for the wounded. In the latter role, some inevitably ventured into harm's way and became casualties. Marie Tête-du-bois, the cantinière of the 1st Grenadiers of the Guard, was cut in two by a cannonball at Waterloo.
Anyone is of course free to provide facts that proves that there where female soldiers in the front like during Waterloo and during the Russian expedition.
In any case..lets not get too side tracked from the main focus on this thread.
So they were a little like battlefield waiters/merchants. That is actually kind of cool. That could actually be a cool feature to see in a game.
Camp Followers they're called. They make up huge numbers of armies as they travel between battles etc. Many being families of the soldiers or those looking to profit through trade (of various things) etc.
They are in mount and blade ish which is kind of cool.
In mount and blade they are more magickarp solders. I do kind of like how M&B handles women in a setting that wouldn't really be friendly to women warriors. It lets you be one and then has you face challenges that make sense. (I say makes sense because it's not a real life setting and I am not a history professor. I don't know if it is realistic. It just matched what I expect the setting to be like.) Like how you have to get married to become a vassal. (You know unless you just do what I do were you get fed up with a kings sexism and just take a castle for yourself )
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/04 05:18:17
2014/09/04 05:18:30
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
jreilly89 wrote: My point was that I think it's stupid to have female characters just for the sake of having them.
You really didn't make that point very well though.
That basically assumes that male should be default, and that women should only exist when there is an explicit narrative reason for them-- an argument I disagree with. Why not assume women as default and only include men when there's an explicit narrative reason? Or not assume either one, and just flip a coin each time to determine gender?
Working off of the assumption that "unless you have a reason for them to be female, assume they're a male" isn't the only way you can make games. And I would argue it isn't even a good way to do it, certainly not the way we should be doing it.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/09/04 05:20:32
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
2014/09/04 05:18:31
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
SneakyMek wrote: Well there where so called cantinières that where females that had followed regiments to the battlefield,they did however not take part in the battles themselves.
Each French regiment had women authorized to accompany it on campaign. Designated cantinières or vivandières, they wore clothes of at least partly military design. Their official function within the regiment was to sell tobacco and refreshments such as cognac from their carts and care for the wounded. In the latter role, some inevitably ventured into harm's way and became casualties. Marie Tête-du-bois, the cantinière of the 1st Grenadiers of the Guard, was cut in two by a cannonball at Waterloo.
Anyone is of course free to provide facts that proves that there where female soldiers in the front like during Waterloo and during the Russian expedition.
In any case..lets not get too side tracked from the main focus on this thread.
So they were a little like battlefield waiters/merchants. That is actually kind of cool. That could actually be a cool feature to see in a game.
Camp Followers they're called. They make up huge numbers of armies as they travel between battles etc. Many being families of the soldiers or those looking to profit through trade (of various things) etc.
They are in mount and blade ish which is kind of cool.
In mount and blade they are more magickarp solders. I do kind of like how M&B handles women in a setting that wouldn't really be friendly to women warriors. It lets you be one and then has you face challenges that make sense. (I say makes sense because it's not a historical setting and I am not a history professer. I don't know if it is realistic. It just matched what I expect the setting to be like.) Like how you have to get married to become a vassal. (You know unless you just do what I do were you get fed up with a kings sexism and just take a castle for yourself )
I agree, they fit into the setting, while giving you the option to play as one being an exception. Rather than having female warriors all over the place, they are exceptions. Women are still a huge part of the game too.
Although there is a female who enters all the tournaments and always wins when no king is present. I make it my goal to find her outside of the tournament and kill her for good. Although I can never find her.
2014/09/04 05:25:39
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
SneakyMek wrote: Well there where so called cantinières that where females that had followed regiments to the battlefield,they did however not take part in the battles themselves.
Each French regiment had women authorized to accompany it on campaign. Designated cantinières or vivandières, they wore clothes of at least partly military design. Their official function within the regiment was to sell tobacco and refreshments such as cognac from their carts and care for the wounded. In the latter role, some inevitably ventured into harm's way and became casualties. Marie Tête-du-bois, the cantinière of the 1st Grenadiers of the Guard, was cut in two by a cannonball at Waterloo.
Anyone is of course free to provide facts that proves that there where female soldiers in the front like during Waterloo and during the Russian expedition.
In any case..lets not get too side tracked from the main focus on this thread.
So they were a little like battlefield waiters/merchants. That is actually kind of cool. That could actually be a cool feature to see in a game.
Camp Followers they're called. They make up huge numbers of armies as they travel between battles etc. Many being families of the soldiers or those looking to profit through trade (of various things) etc.
They are in mount and blade ish which is kind of cool.
In mount and blade they are more magickarp solders. I do kind of like how M&B handles women in a setting that wouldn't really be friendly to women warriors. It lets you be one and then has you face challenges that make sense. (I say makes sense because it's not a historical setting and I am not a history professer. I don't know if it is realistic. It just matched what I expect the setting to be like.) Like how you have to get married to become a vassal. (You know unless you just do what I do were you get fed up with a kings sexism and just take a castle for yourself )
I agree, they fit into the setting, while giving you the option to play as one being an exception. Rather than having female warriors all over the place, they are exceptions. Women are still a huge part of the game too.
Although there is a female who enters all the tournaments and always wins when no king is present. I make it my goal to find her outside of the tournament and kill her for good. Although I can never find her.
They even have female rulers. Well after you lead a rebellion that is.
That tournament thing sounds.. odd.
2014/09/04 05:27:10
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
jreilly89 wrote: My point was that I think it's stupid to have female characters just for the sake of having them.
You really didn't make that point very well though.
That basically assumes that male should be default, and that women should only exist when there is an explicit narrative reason for them-- an argument I disagree with. Why not assume women as default and only include men when there's an explicit narrative reason? Or not assume either one, and just flip a coin each time to determine gender?
Working off of the assumption that "unless you have a reason for them to be female, assume they're a male" isn't the only way you can make games. And I would argue it isn't even a good way to do it, certainly not the way we should be doing it.
Again, misreading my post, or more likely, I am not clarifying it enough. I am all for female protagonists, I just feel that in too many games, female side characters are added to round out the cast rather than serving as interesting characters with depth. I am currently playing Tomb Raider, and being Lara Croft is a blast. She's interesting, she shows depth, and she changes as the game continues. There are side characters that are male and female, and half of them are flat and meaningless. I feel they were thrown in to round out the cast, because I could really not give two gaks about them dying.
Honestly, I'm not trying to insult you, but I feel like you are intentionally trying to find something offensive in my post.
Yea, shes like my Nemesis. I make sure to knock all the women out of the tournament early because of her. I dont know whats up with her stats, but its pretty predictable now.
2014/09/04 05:27:52
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
Swastakowey wrote: Although there is a female who enters all the tournaments and always wins when no king is present. I make it my goal to find her outside of the tournament and kill her for good. Although I can never find her.
Swastakowey wrote: Although there is a female who enters all the tournaments and always wins when no king is present. I make it my goal to find her outside of the tournament and kill her for good. Although I can never find her.
Wait, what.
Does nobody else have this problem?
It happens in all my games.
2014/09/04 05:30:29
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
jreilly89 wrote: I just feel that in too many games, female side characters are added to round out the cast rather than serving as interesting characters with depth
Which is a result of the problem I described, really.
"Assume male as default" means that they create characters with interesting personalities, and then think "wait, we need a woman", and then make a character who has no personality afterwards. I really do think the coinflip idea is the best solution here. Make interesting characters, and assign their gender after the characters are made interesting. You'll get some interesting combinations to be sure, much more so than how most games write characters anyway.
jreilly89 wrote: Honestly, I'm not trying to insult you, but I feel like you are intentionally trying to find something offensive in my post.
I'm not. That was honeslty the impression I'm getting from your posts. I think I get what you're getting at though.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
2014/09/04 05:34:33
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
Swastakowey wrote: Although there is a female who enters all the tournaments and always wins when no king is present. I make it my goal to find her outside of the tournament and kill her for good. Although I can never find her.
Wait, what.
Does nobody else have this problem?
It happens in all my games.
Sword sisters tend to do well in the tournaments because they are some of the more powerful units. It's just your response to it sounds crazy.
2014/09/04 05:37:15
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
jreilly89 wrote: I just feel that in too many games, female side characters are added to round out the cast rather than serving as interesting characters with depth
Which is a result of the problem I described, really.
"Assume male as default" means that they create characters with interesting personalities, and then think "wait, we need a woman", and then make a character who has no personality afterwards. I really do think the coinflip idea is the best solution here. Make interesting characters, and assign their gender after the characters are made interesting. You'll get some interesting combinations to be sure, much more so than how most games write characters anyway.
Agreed. I would much rather have an equal amount of male/female protagonists, but I think when people try to write characters for a game, it's much easier to go "Hey, I'm a boy, I identify with boys, I'll write up my main character as a boy". As for the coin flip, eh, I'm torn. It would add diversity, but I'd want to see more examples of how it turned out. I feel a lot of protagonists could be gender swapped, but for some narratives it may not make sense and they'd have to be altered.
jreilly89 wrote: Honestly, I'm not trying to insult you, but I feel like you are intentionally trying to find something offensive in my post.
I'm not. That was honeslty the impression I'm getting from your posts. I think I get what you're getting at though.
Good. I'm not trying to be insulting, I just feel that sometimes on these forums, it's too easy to be vague on posts and accidentally offend people. That, or some people are intentionally looking for something to be insulted by. I'd like to think it's the former
jreilly89 wrote: Agreed. I would much rather have an equal amount of male/female protagonists, but I think when people try to write characters for a game, it's much easier to go "Hey, I'm a boy, I identify with boys, I'll write up my main character as a boy". As for the coin flip, eh, I'm torn. It would add diversity, but I'd want to see more examples of how it turned out. I feel a lot of protagonists could be gender swapped, but for some narratives it may not make sense and they'd have to be altered.
The only narrative I can think of where it wouldn't make sense would be motherhood. But then again, games never touch that anyway so...
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/09/04 05:43:20
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
2014/09/04 05:43:25
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
Melissia wrote: That basically assumes that male should be default, and that women should only exist when there is an explicit narrative reason for them-- an argument I disagree with. Why not assume women as default and only include men when there's an explicit narrative reason? Or not assume either one, and just flip a coin each time to determine gender?
Most likely because male is overwhelmingly the default for the sort of professions that a lot of games tend to include. Special operations soldier, fighter pilot, 17th century swashbuckler, whatever. If your argument is "use the rare examples instead of the common ones," that's fine, but asking why woman isn't assumed as default seems a little basic.
2014/09/04 05:57:45
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
Seaward wrote: Most likely because male is overwhelmingly the default for the sort of professions that a lot of games tend to include.
They're games, there's no reason this should be the case. Your player character is by definition exceptional over the non-player characters to begin with, even if for no other reason than they can keep trying after they die through reloading the stage/restarting the game, where NPCs generally can't (or at least only ever do so at the whims of the player), and through the player's improving skill or luck, they can make it further than last time.
Also, I think my position on historical accuracy as it applies to games is fairly well known by now (in that I feel that it's nothing more than a lame excuse to make crappy games), so that's probably not a productive line of discussion with me.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/09/04 06:01:36
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
2014/09/04 06:01:52
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
Seaward wrote: Most likely because male is overwhelmingly the default for the sort of professions that a lot of games tend to include.
They're games, there's no reason this should be the case. Your player character is by definition exceptional over the non-player characters to begin with, even if for no other reason than they can keep trying after they die through reloading the stage/restarting the game, where NPCs generally can't.
Also, I think my position on historical accuracy as it applies to games is fairly well known by now (in that I feel that it's nothing more than a lame excuse to make crappy games), so that's probably not a productive line of discussion with me.
That's true, they are games. And I could certainly make an American Civil War strategy game that included Sukhois and Super Hornets on the, "It's a game, lol" basis, but I suspect a lot of other players wouldn't necessarily share your view that anything goes at any time. No game is completely realistic, but many games do try to cleave close to it when possible. Some more than others. In the ones that try harder, you'll see more "default" males, because, well, that's what reality tends to reflect.
2014/09/04 06:04:52
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
Seaward wrote: That's true, they are games. And I could certainly make an American Civil War strategy game that included Sukhois and Super Hornets on the, "It's a game, lol" basis
I think I played that game. Was about time traveling or something. Lame excuse for a plot, but gunning down confederate soldiers iwith a minigun was cathartic.
Seaward wrote: No game is completely realistic, but many games do try to cleave close to it when possible.
And I feel they are invariably worse off for it, especially since most of the time the ones that try to be realistic often end up failing to be realistic at all anyway.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
~1.5k
5000pts 
6000pts 
3000pts
