A fuckin CENSORED greentext? Really? Never thought I'd see the day 4chan got whitewashed lol
Assuming OOP said 'retarded', that doesn't fit their message well does it?
It's so social media AI doesn't block the image. Yeah, that's our world now.
Wasn't that just Reddit?
#NotMy4chan
I love the fact that the slave owner is not only the one unarmed person you don't lose honor for killing, but you actually gain honor for killing him.
You also don’t lose honor for killing this guy, and can do it right in front of the police without them reacting
I can shoot that dude without getting a bounty? :O
I would never have guessed. I can't even walk down the street in Saint Denis without getting bullshit "disturbing the peace" bounties. I like to pretend it's because they're jealous of Arthur's awesome mustache.
That guy was, I think, intended as a stand-in for real-life eugenicist and all-round villain Henry Laughlin. Killing him in-game was quite the treat.
I'm going to remember that for my next playthrough. I always just punched him and made him run away.
Hmm, I'll have to give that a try
Because attacking Norris will not affect the player's honor, nor gain the player a wanted level, the player can hogtie Norris and drag him across the map to achieve the Rank 4 Horseman Challenge.
> You will not be able to play multiplayer without hackers ruining the experience
Is it as bad as GTA Online?
Worse. I’m convinced that Rockstar only keeps the servers running because nobody knows which ones they are among the sea of GTA5 servers. The game has been entirely abandoned by the devs, because it never took off like GTA5 did.
Hacking in RDO isn’t just rampant; It’s downright expected. If you’re not hacking, you’ll constantly get blown up from across the map by people with unlimited explosive ammo, no reloads, and auto-aim. The bare minimum requirement is an unlimited health hack, just so you can survive the cross-map snipes long enough to finish a mission or two.
It seems worse. Though now days whenever I play GTA Online, it's in private friends only mode.
Worse.
If you play on PC you can change 1 file in a text editor and get solo lobbies every time. Share the file or the changes with friends and you'll all join each other, I assume it's got something to do with file hashing
I made a YouTube video on it years ago when I noticed the load screen skip mod produced interesting results in lobbies and started testing and occasionally people comment that it still works lol
Article + video here: https://www.grunch.com/trick-play-red-dead-online-in-a-solo-private-session/
I'm honestly surprised that no one calls this game woke
Because the game sold and reviewed well, so it goes against the narrative of “get woke go broke”
I think literally every business in the world has managed to tow that line. It's not like the right stopped drinking bud light. Although they probably should have.
Nobody except the craziest of crazy thinks negatively about woke stuff if the actual content is good. Examples of good ones from the top of my hat: Arcane S1, Last of Us S1E3, Twin Peaks S3E4.
This is how you actually influence opinions to a good direction.
When the wokeism was apparently more important to the producers than the quality of the actual product is when shit gets irritating and from the pov of activism, counter-productive.
Mainly because you can shove “woke” shit down peoples throats and they won’t care as long as they get to play a manly man or stacked chick and the story and characters are well developed. It’s just when the game is really bad that people care about it and then the studios can blame the poor performance on the alt-right as a cop out for their shitty game. I.e. Star Wars outlaws and Concorde
people have been very uppity about the new dragon age even though i hear that's good.
Outlaws is a good game though
I feel like people might have. I vaguely remember when it first came out that there was someone on youtube uploading videos of them assaulting the woman's suffrage protester and they got taken down after blowing up.
Can't even bang prostitutes, cowboy gta 1/5 stars
You can? Tho they are quite expensive, still cheaper than a gf tho!
But what does that have to do with this game?
Nah if you say yes it's a set up. Why code something that isn't available. It's like making a door that never opens. Or a war game with no blood. Or an empty building. Immediate world breaking. Those nice honorable cowboys who have killed hundreds of men lol. The game just seemed lazy and repetitive to me. Good job Rock $tar. Also fuck you for having your own loader.
instance checks out
And somehow this game is never part of the examples that some bigots are listing when talking about woke games.
Similarly with Cyberpunk 2077 and Baldur's Gate 3. Both of those games are gay as fuck.
Cyberpunk got a lot of hate by that crowd leading into release, and they dunked on the release a ton as if it vindicated them.
Which ones are they listing? I'm a bit out of the bigotry loop.
Usually it is any game that has a woman as a main protagonist.
The biggest examples are:
Horizon Zero Dawn
There was "controversy" where devs were releasing promotional material for the game and they released a video where they showcased graphical advancements and they zoomed in really close on the MC and you can see the very thin hair on her face that literally every person has. Some people didn't like that.
The Last of Us 2 - very masculine woman
Fable - Not released yet, but the trailer had a woman that is not conventionally attractive.
Dragon Age Vanguard
Life is strange
Intergalactic The Heretic Prophet - new Naughty Dog's game, Black Woman as MC
This is just from the top of my head.
The first time I ran into the KKK in the woods, I was really glad I had a stick of dynamite on me.
It's funny if you watch them for a minute too, their burning cross catches its surroundings on fire, burning many of them to death.
Interesting. Muuuch more satisfying to blow them up, though.
There was that other thread talking about Ubisoft games and how theyre putting a black samurai in there. I wrote a comment about how ubisoft marketing is so controversial but then they deliver these milquetoast Ubisoft games.
Just imagine if Farcry 5 actually went the route of RDR2 and had some fucking balls. Instead of try to appeal to both sides.
That's what I don't get, out of millions and hundreds of thousands gamers, how many are actually that stupid and bigoted to rage on anything they don't like? These incel gamers always accuse many games as being woke, but then these games are blockbusters. Devs listen to a loud minority who don't represent the entire community of gamers. The rest are silent majority who, have varying interest of games, like a game for being a good game, not because it is "woke". And hate a bad game, because it is a bad game. It's simple as.
Devs fall into the faux outrage bait from tiny minority of unthinking hordes, and it actually makes them bad than if they just ignore ridiculous baseless cries.
Edit: grammar
As someone who has been reading about gaming for a long time, it’s the console wars but now that gaming has become mainstream, it became political.
There has always been drama in gaming, there used to be PlayStation and Xbox fanboys that clearly wanted to be part of a team and for their team to win, it’s what makes it social for some people.
Then gaming became huge, the industry shifted and now we have a lot more diversity in types of games. So now you have these teams but it’s about other things (I’m on the story mode and no microtransaction team myself).
One team really benefits right wing media, and that’s the ones complaining about games being woke (and whatever that means). It’s amplified and hence why even though we live in the golden age of gaming choice, we keep hearing this loud minority.
Much people forget before black slavery there was white slavery... So its just good if there is none slavery.
Are you saying white slavery was as systemic and width spread as black slavery in America? If so I’ve missed a big part of the American slave history.
No, I'm just saying what I wrote. It is not meant to be an equality or anything else but just a statement that it is good without any slavery no matter what origin, skin color and (even if I am an atheist and despise any religion) religious affiliation. It was also not referring to Americans but a general statement.
before black slavery there was white slavery
bzzt wrong. Portuguese slave traders worked out deals with african tribal leaders in the 1400s. Unless you're going to relabel feudalism as slavery.
Suddenly this has me wondering if the south is playing a whole'nother game.
It's funny because moron used to be a medical term as well.
These actually had distinction:
Defectives was generally the term prior to like 1845, which is when Howe published “on the causes of idiocy”. That led to more classification
Idiot was what we could call severe intellectual disability. Requiring 24 hour care but some muscular control, cognitive, and speech capabilities. Use was phased out in the late 19th century because it had become pejorative
Fool was a subcategory of idiot with more significant impairment of reasoning and speech skills. This became pejorative and was phased out.
Simpleton was moderate intellectual disability. Some degree of functioning, capacity for speech, motor and reasoning skills, but required assistance with tasks. This also become pejorative and was phased out (see a pattern). This was replaced with several terms, including feeble minded, imbecile, and moron, which were also in turn phased out.
at one point in the 19th century there was a distinction when symptoms of dementia set in. If you got what we would now call early onset dementia, it was called “amentia”. By the early 20th century “ament” was kind of a catch all for “idiots, imbeciles, and feeble minded”
There was also “cretin” which was originally supposed to be a kindness for all intellectually disabled people as it means “Christian” in French or something, but it also became pejorative
Another super racist one was mongoloid/mongolism which was specifically for Down’s syndrome. This is because, no joke, John Down thought people with down syndrome looked like Mongolians. His reward for his racism was the condition bears his name forever, apparently. This was only changed because Mongolia had to petition the WHO to change it because it was offensive
Imo instead of policing language we should maybe recognize that the intentionality behind the use of these terms is what the problem is.
Saying the word “retarded” does not have to be inherently offensive. Describing something that is slowed or hindered as retarded is accurate. Using retarded as a pejorative term makes you a dick, sure. But if I go through all the effort to change “retarded” to “intellectually disabled” guess what happens? The same thing that has happened for the past 175+ years. The people who have used the terms in the pejorative sense will quickly adapt, making your efforts to police language pointless unless you intended to enrich their lexicon.
If you consider actions that could actually be meaningful for the individual it would be something that would address the harm caused by pejorative use. That’s a challenging road to go down (imagine criminal penalties: middle schools would be ghost towns!). we want to feel like we do something though so we instead do this, which is pointless.
That said if the disorder was named by an old racist based on his racism then by all means change it up but maybe don’t memorialize him when you do it. That doesn’t come up as much anymore, thankfully
Saying the word “retarded” does not have to be inherently offensive. Describing something that is slowed or hindered as retarded is accurate. Using retarded as a pejorative term makes you a dick, sure. But if I go through all the effort to change “retarded” to “intellectually disabled” guess what happens? The same thing that has happened for the past 175+ years. The people who have used the terms in the pejorative sense will quickly adapt, making your efforts to police language pointless unless you intended to enrich their lexicon.
I have addressed this argument elsewhere in this post, but please forgive me rehashing the message here, because your comment is prominent, informative, and based in historical fact.
The word "retard" was used and is used to cause harm to vulnerable people. So was idiot, cretin, and moron. The difference is it is the last and likely immortalized step of this particular euphemism treadmill.
The treadmill appears to have stopped. There is no one-size-fits-all diagnosis to replace “mental retardation” because that was a terrible diagnosis to begin with. That’s why something is wrong with the word. The people whose lives were ground up beneath the turning of the wheels that powered that euphemism treadmill are still alive today.
Yes, if the treadmill had continued for one more step before we stopped using such horribly broad diagnosis criteria to lump together vulnerable people with wildly different needs, the word would lose its weight and implications.
Whatever diagnosis that might have replaced it would be regarded with the same moral repugnance as this word is today, and this word would be used as casually and apathetically as we use the word “idiot” - because we can be reasonably certain that nobody in the room has any memories of themselves or someone they love being excluded, humiliated, and diagnosed by the word “idiot”.
Will other diagnostic terms be weaponized? Certainly. Will they ever be as prevalent or as ignorant in their origin and usage? Unlikely. I certainly hope not. And each new vernacular replacement is more awkward and holds less power than the last. That’s why you’re not here defending any term that came after this one.
That's why - despite you mentioning it specifically as a spiritual successor to the word "retarded" - "intellectually disabled" is not successfully replacing it. It doesn't bear the same emotional connotations, it never experienced the same popularity, and it shows no signs of ever coming close. Is it used in problematic ways, by people in good faith and bad? Yes. But terms like it are unlikely to ever even approach the moral repugnance of "retard" because they won't carry quite the same history of professional ignorance and casual abuse.
The word "retard" - alone among these ableist terms we're discussing - will forever bear the moral weight of all of them. Because it will be remembered as the last term used to humiliate and exclude a vulnerable group of people by a society that should have known better. A society that should have done better. A society that still needs to do better.
Other terms won't be promoted to the same level of societal consciousness, because they hopefully won't be promoted to the same level of professional malpractice at such a staggering scale. The word was misused and caused harm by doctors, and parents, and peers, some who used the word in good faith and watched helplessly as it became twisted, and others who used the word from a place of ignorance and later learned how much harm could be done by a simple word.
By a diagnostic label that was never enough to even describe the people it hurt, let alone help them.
Is it okay to use the term for purposes other than causing pain and perpetuating discrimination against vulnerable people? No. Because those vulnerable people are still alive and with us, and those wounds are still fresh. Will it ever be okay, long after they're gone? Perhaps, but probably not.
The word's abandonment will be a milestone on a path fraught with systemic and systematic abuses, and will probably never recover it's original meaning. But that's okay, because language constantly evolves, and we have plenty of old words to say what we mean, and we will find plenty of new ones along the way.
The treadmill stopped. It’s okay. You can join the rest of the world and step off of it now, knowing that we are better equipped to understand and protect our most vulnerable, while also knowing that there is still so much more work to be done.
Wow, that was their takeaway from that game? I honestly didn't think about it once the whole playthrough, why are they so desperate to role play racism/sexism?
Oh we're they saying these things like how much they hate Wokeness or something?
I thought this was an endorsement!
I thought OOP was saying it's a good thing too
Coming from 4chan, I read it as loser whinging about "woke".
"Women voting? Sure why not. Anyone dumb enough to want to vote should be able to”
I need to fire this game up again when I get home
Anon wants to play as Micah
Now that I think about it, RDR2 is set in the past. I don't think people tend to question the past; the values set by the past is taken for granted today. Anyone who might complain about it makes them look outwardly supportive of regression.
The wild west was largely a myth sold to people who stopped in remote towns and the people there put on a wild west show. So whatever you think of the game, it's based on a myth.
Is it OK to do the opposite?
