This is what happens when I get bored at work, I write silly things like this......
We here at AGE are all about gender and race equality, we don't care if you stand or squat or what country you hail from, If you want to play games with us we'll probably be pals forever. However, a recent review of Assassins Creed: Syndicate by a certain leader of a Feminist movement has come to my attention and a couple of things leave me questioning whether historical fact should be sacrificed for the supposed need for a completely political correct society.
Said feminist will remain unnamed due to me being frustrated and not wanting to give this person any extra exposure.
The review in question was in no way bashing the game, in fact the reviewer seemed to like it, saying the game play was pretty standard Assassins Creed stuff but found the characters to be quite deep and refreshing and the whole experience was enjoyable, with somewhat of a good story. When it came to certain aspects of the game however, all non bias historical fact went out the window.
Syndicate is set in early 1800's London, a time of top hats, industry and the Penny Farthing. Then there's the gangs, prostitutes and the birth of opium dens. So naturally while exploring this game, which while containing some fictional characters and events, is heavily set in an as accurate as possible historic period, you would expect to run into all of these things. Wrong.
Much to the delight of the reviewers personal opinion there are no longer groups of prostitutes or "courtesans" in the streets for you to hide among. When the reviewer said she was glad Ubisoft had taken them out of the game the logic center of my brain had a spasm. If we are playing a game trying to be as historically correct as possible, outside of its fictional sci-fi/adventure main story, then shouldn't we be seeing at least a few 'ladies of the night' getting around the streets?
When it came to people of colour however, this reviewer was upset there wasn't many people who weren't white. While there is an Indian character who plays a big enough role it was a good point to make, there really aren't any characters from African or Asian descent. The thing that gets me at this point is that the feminist wanted to see more black people in the game, who at the time were treated horribly and forced into slavery, yet there was joy over hiding the fact that some women had no choice but to sell their bodies to make a living in those hard times.
So while having no problem saying "where are the slaves" the reviewer wants to hide the fact that prostitution ever even existed. Is it just me seeing the issue here or are we seeing increasing amounts of people who I can respect for standing up for what they believe in, yet they allow their credibility to collapse when it comes to other issues via their own hypocrisy?
We here at AGE are all about gender and race equality, we don't care if you stand or squat or what country you hail from, If you want to play games with us we'll probably be pals forever. However, a recent review of Assassins Creed: Syndicate by a certain leader of a Feminist movement has come to my attention and a couple of things leave me questioning whether historical fact should be sacrificed for the supposed need for a completely political correct society.
Said feminist will remain unnamed due to me being frustrated and not wanting to give this person any extra exposure.
The review in question was in no way bashing the game, in fact the reviewer seemed to like it, saying the game play was pretty standard Assassins Creed stuff but found the characters to be quite deep and refreshing and the whole experience was enjoyable, with somewhat of a good story. When it came to certain aspects of the game however, all non bias historical fact went out the window.
Syndicate is set in early 1800's London, a time of top hats, industry and the Penny Farthing. Then there's the gangs, prostitutes and the birth of opium dens. So naturally while exploring this game, which while containing some fictional characters and events, is heavily set in an as accurate as possible historic period, you would expect to run into all of these things. Wrong.
Much to the delight of the reviewers personal opinion there are no longer groups of prostitutes or "courtesans" in the streets for you to hide among. When the reviewer said she was glad Ubisoft had taken them out of the game the logic center of my brain had a spasm. If we are playing a game trying to be as historically correct as possible, outside of its fictional sci-fi/adventure main story, then shouldn't we be seeing at least a few 'ladies of the night' getting around the streets?
When it came to people of colour however, this reviewer was upset there wasn't many people who weren't white. While there is an Indian character who plays a big enough role it was a good point to make, there really aren't any characters from African or Asian descent. The thing that gets me at this point is that the feminist wanted to see more black people in the game, who at the time were treated horribly and forced into slavery, yet there was joy over hiding the fact that some women had no choice but to sell their bodies to make a living in those hard times.
So while having no problem saying "where are the slaves" the reviewer wants to hide the fact that prostitution ever even existed. Is it just me seeing the issue here or are we seeing increasing amounts of people who I can respect for standing up for what they believe in, yet they allow their credibility to collapse when it comes to other issues via their own hypocrisy?