Jump to content
  • Latest updates

  • Newest Posts

    • While all of that may be true, I personally don't see the need to depict sexual dimorphism in an RTS game. We're not building an anthropology simulator after all. 
    • hello everyone please help me fix that problem,( 0. A.D. quit Unexpectedly.) whats happened about that what I need to do. Thank you
    • Judging nowadays society, 0 A.D must change all actors into genderless, non-binary Humans soon. 
    • There is at least one other way to represent women who lived in male-dominated societies (Granted, all were more or less that.), excluding more exceptional cases such as Sparta and the Celtic tribes.  Have them as actors in houses, sitting doing some task like weaving.  
    • It is true that the history of mankind is full of examples of extreme violence, slavery, sexism, misogyny, etc. If the game 0 A.D intends to be historic accurate, for good and for bad it will reflect these negative aspects that, sadly, are typical of human beings. So I think that if 0 A.D community wants to keep all of this at in-game (which does not seem like an absurd idea), I believe it would be important to shed light on the issue. And my solution here is the same as I proposed in other topics: whenever there is a descriptive box using plain text in order to describe a civilization, a hero, a construction, a weapon or whatever, it would be nice to have links to its Wikipedia articles. This will allow the game to have a much larger educational dimension, as there is no space in the game to describe any of these aspects as described in Wikipedia. Thus, whenever the theme "sexism" is relevant in the game, in an appropriate box, there could be a suggestion for reading articles such as: Sexism and video games - Wikipedia and Gender representation in video games - Wikipedia , for instance.
    • I must express some nuance regarding the discussion, history (aka the field of study) is not sexist but the "object of study" are human societies and human societies were very sexist for a long time. So the role of the women in past societies is far less known and recognized. Furthermore, AoE and other RTS are inheriting a culture built from wargaming. The scope of this kind of RTS is really restrictive, think about it, primary production and military forces. There is little room for anything not revolving around physical violence and industrial exploitation of the resources. Which further ostracize women and other civilians in the RTS. There is a physical dimorphism between men and women but that's not really the origin of the ostracization of women in RTS. The issue is the scope of such RTS where everything revolves around heavy physical activities and violence. Violence is the realm of the men, this is one of the strongest bias in the society. Most crimes are made by men and most of the physical violence is caused by men. The issue of this restrictive scope is not only causing difficulties about portraying women but also anything else not revolving on violence. Religion for example. Religion is a very very very important aspect of ancient societies and yet, how it has been portrayed by 0AD (or AoE)? Healing. As a support to the other real forces of the game: productive forces and military forces. Fundamentally, playing RTS and other strategical games are similar to little boys playing with small figurines imagining they are killing each others. I don't think we should consider it more of an issue than this example. This is mature boys playing with numeric figurines, there is no issue with girls playing the game but I think that if we question this kind of complex issue (portraying fairly women role in society), the basic core of rules and concepts on which the game is built became questioned as well. This is too much a challenge for an opensource project, already struggling with its simple goals. Edit: so my point is simply to say that it is pointless to reach a decent portrayal of women in 0AD. It will always be insufficient or at worst clumsy.
×
×
  • Create New...