Prora's Construction Quote Biased?
- Thread starter MantaRevan
- Start date
- Status
Giving Prora as a wonder to Autocracy can be seen biased already. It's a derelict ruin, torn apart by Soviet and East-German soldiers, scavenged by looters of all sorts.
You know it's really hard to champion autocracy in any sense or way. How many great things has it given to humanity? Nazi Germany, Red Khmer rule, Pinochet's Chile, Franco's Spain and list goes long...
Whether or not you feel offended by devs' choice depends on your own views, nothing else. In my view both the wonder and the quote give A FITTING PICTURE.
So it breaks a tradition of fairness and neutrality? Let me give two examples which can be seen just as grim if you know a lot about the ideas and history behind them (which I'm sorry but I can't assume given your comment on the Kremlin).
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use." - Galileo Galilei (Civ4 - scientific theory)
"If the radiance of a thousand suns were to burst at once into the sky, that would be like the splendor of the Mighty One... I am become Death, the Destroyer of Worlds." J. Robert Oppenheimer (Civ 4-5 - Fission)
Both of those have a delicately put but still hery heavy bias against either religion's denial towards intellectual development, or the possible (or sole) destructive use of technological advancements. Plus they are quotes from people who had those same opinions.
Why does Prora not fit into that line? Is it because it judges a political ideology and not religion or humane ethics in general like the other two? Do you feel that judging an ideology is bad and unfair, while judging religion or ethics is alright? Or do you feel that an ideology is superior to ethics or religion?
You know it's really hard to champion autocracy in any sense or way. How many great things has it given to humanity? Nazi Germany, Red Khmer rule, Pinochet's Chile, Franco's Spain and list goes long...
Whether or not you feel offended by devs' choice depends on your own views, nothing else. In my view both the wonder and the quote give A FITTING PICTURE.
So it breaks a tradition of fairness and neutrality? Let me give two examples which can be seen just as grim if you know a lot about the ideas and history behind them (which I'm sorry but I can't assume given your comment on the Kremlin).
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use." - Galileo Galilei (Civ4 - scientific theory)
"If the radiance of a thousand suns were to burst at once into the sky, that would be like the splendor of the Mighty One... I am become Death, the Destroyer of Worlds." J. Robert Oppenheimer (Civ 4-5 - Fission)
Both of those have a delicately put but still hery heavy bias against either religion's denial towards intellectual development, or the possible (or sole) destructive use of technological advancements. Plus they are quotes from people who had those same opinions.
Why does Prora not fit into that line? Is it because it judges a political ideology and not religion or humane ethics in general like the other two? Do you feel that judging an ideology is bad and unfair, while judging religion or ethics is alright? Or do you feel that an ideology is superior to ethics or religion?
I'm with you on the idea that not all of the game's quotes follow the pattern of adopting the point of view of the quote's subject...but these two quotes are not examples of this deviation. To the contrary, they follow the "adoption" pattern precisely. Scientific Theory is of course about science, so naturally the accompanying quote is going to champion science. That's the pattern; the quote is from science's "point of view". Oppenheimer's quote is a bit more complicated, but it also follows the pattern: the immediate and intended consequence of nuclear fission technology was to achieve the atomic bomb, and an atomic bomb's sole purpose is to cause death on a massive scale. Thus this quote also adopts the bomb's point of view, which matches the pattern.
The objectivity or neutrality of the game's pattern has nothing to do with adopting a consistent stance toward science/religion/warfare/ideology/whatever. It is the opposite of this: the consistency is in adopting a positive stance toward whatever the quote is describing. We should be describing this pattern as a relative one, actually, not an objective one, because relativity is what we've got here: the game shifts its stance to match the view of whatever has been built or discovered or achieved. It is from this pattern that the Prora quote deviates. (It is not the game's only such deviation, again; just, these two quotes are not deviations.)
Wow, you're serious.
Okay, look, the people who programmed this game are professional programmers and game developers, right? That's their job, that's what they are experts at: creating game balance and interest and fun. Yet here we come, day in and day out, and constantly challenge and contradict the developers on exactly the things they are experts at. We claim to know better than they do about exactly the things they are professionals at.
Given that this is okay--and of course it is!--the idea that we would also challenge the developers on something they are NOT experts at is...well, it's even more okay. The developers are professional programmers; they are not professional philosophers or balancers of cultures and ideologies. Their field of expertise is not maintaining total objectivity to each of the myriad ideologies and beliefs and points of view throughout the entire world's history. They've done a pretty fine job of it, to their credit, but this isn't their primary role as game developers.
My point is, it's hypocritical to accuse the OP of claiming to know more about the developers because he's challenging this minor issue. Every day, tons of people come to these boards specifically arguing that they more about the developers concerning the devs' actual field of expertise. You're basically criticizing an oven for being hot while standing next to a raging forest fire.
You are right, however I did not bring up the examples to show ones which take a stand against whatever they are attached to, I provided them because the OP states that the loss of neutrality is vexing and incosistent with the developers' intentions this far. I wanted to show that there has never been total neutrality in the first place, so that statement is false.
You on the other hand state that the quote doesn't praise its target so to say and that is the loss of consistency, there you are absolutely right
.
For this argument even "Panem et circenses" would be a better quote
.
You on the other hand state that the quote doesn't praise its target so to say and that is the loss of consistency, there you are absolutely right
.For this argument even "Panem et circenses" would be a better quote
.
MantaRevan
Emperor
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2011
- Messages
- 1,537
Yes, but the game uses it as a symbol of communism by making it exclusive to the order branch.
Yep, I agree, as long as we're defining "neutral" as "equally complimentary of whatever has been built/discovered/followed". Actual neutrality is the opposite of what we're talking about; there's nothing neutral about championing everything equally. "Equal" is probably better here.
I do think the developers' intentions are to be equal; just, they haven't always been 100% successful with that. (See the list of quotes I provided earlier that truly do not support their source tech/whatever.) Which I personally find totally understandable and forgivable, and even laudable insofar as it has provided us with an interesting conversation.
And again, you've spectacularly missed the point. Intentionally so, I begin to feel. (Sorry all; I'm done with the troll-baiting.)Cakes said:
leadtothehead
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2013
- Messages
- 64
My personal opinion is that the Brandenburg Gate should have shifted over to take over the Prora's spot and then include West Point as a wonder to take over the Brandenburg Gates bonuses. I know the Brandenburg gate isn't a perfect fit for a happiness wonder but the Brandenburg gate is a cultural monument and the wonders bonuses are based on the number of social policies so its not completely out of place.
Pythakoreas
Chef Tain
Pentagon's abilities are useless. Make that give extra XP for units...
I meant "neutral" not like equally praising towards an idea/building/discovery, I meant it as not being offensive or judgmental towards an idea/belief/philosophy/etc.
Galilei's quote doesn't represent a neutral view, so does Oppenheimer's and Prora's.
I'd say it does not break a pattern of the dev's neutrality (because it does not really exist) but it breaks a pattern of promoting or praising quotes. We can however argue if that exists
.
All in all, I'd say change is refreshing and total neutrality or unquestioning praise is dull. I like the way the quotes as a whole fall in neither of the above.
On a sidenote, Civ4 was even more daring and fun with Hitler's or Al Capone's quotes.
Galilei's quote doesn't represent a neutral view, so does Oppenheimer's and Prora's.
I'd say it does not break a pattern of the dev's neutrality (because it does not really exist) but it breaks a pattern of promoting or praising quotes. We can however argue if that exists
.All in all, I'd say change is refreshing and total neutrality or unquestioning praise is dull. I like the way the quotes as a whole fall in neither of the above.
On a sidenote, Civ4 was even more daring and fun with Hitler's or Al Capone's quotes
.
This is what you said before:
Carefully note the mistake you made, and carefully realise that whatever mechanics they added to Brave New World, the Kremlin has been in the game since before it was locked to the order tree. Yes, a lot of people associate the Kremlin with the Soviet Union, but contrary to what you initially said, it was not built by them.
cakes
Prince
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2012
- Messages
- 481
no, the point of this thread is not about game mechanics. the prora quote is not about game mechanics. if i say that he is correcting the devs on their own product, it's obvious i'm not talking about game mechanics. game mechanics literally have nothing to do with this topic but the only way you find fault with my post is by bringing up game mechanics. he thinks he knows better about the devs at their own product, which in this context refers to the choice of quote and not GAME MECHANICS. you're missing my point in that if there is consistency with the quotes in the first place then why would you assume that the devs have not considered their quote for prora more closely? do you actually have anything to say along this line of argument, or do you want to bring up game mechanics again?
MantaRevan
Emperor
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2011
- Messages
- 1,537
Alright good point. But the argument isn't invalidated by the Kremlin's absence.
KrikkitTwo
Immortal
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2004
- Messages
- 12,418
Because there is NOTHING wrong or unusual with thinking you know better than the devs.
They are not God, and therefore the game may be improved with the ideas of other people. This Includes game mechanics, but also, UI, programming methodology, graphics, historical accuracy, and even marketing.
All of those things have been criticized, discussed, defended, or suggested ideas on this forum. There is no reason why Prora quotes would not be included.
GreenThings
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2013
- Messages
- 44
You can't mention God online, it's offensive.
Arachnofiend
Perturbed Pugilist
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2012
- Messages
- 1,950
I am agnostic and I am offended by the idea that I would be this easily offended
cakes
Prince
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2012
- Messages
- 481
for the third time, if the quotes have been consistent before, then why assume that there is a mistake with the prora quote?
No, it's invalidated by the fact that they numerous quotes like that about various things within the game, not only in Civ V, but the whole series. Not to mention a number of tongue in cheek quotes throughout the series. I don't know if you're a fascist or something, but that kind of thing is not unique to it within the expansion, the game or the series.
Moderator Action: Don't troll around.
This is actually quite a funny thing to say. I've never actually met someone who is honestly offended by hearing a God mentioned, the only way I've seen it offend people is with forced worship or ignoring the good deeds of others to merely reference their own God or Gods. Normally it's the religious who tend to get a bit huffy, hence why it's a good idea to avoid the topic. True believers can get in a real strop when people reference the topic, particularly fundamentalists who try and make scientific research and development try and fit their own particular brand of it.
The funniest part of this whole topic though is to do with what some people tend to get offended by. Circular offence is my favourite, where an action performed by a particular group ends up offending themselves. My favourite is the use of 'Xmas' these days, which is actually an old Christian shorthand, with the 'X' being an approximation of the 'chi' from Christ in Greek: Χριστός. I can't help but chuckle when people get offended by it's use for this reason.
Oh well...
Cakes, you are really really missing the point here.
You are right in saying that the OP is correcting the devs on their own product. Yes. I'm not disagreeing with that.
What I am disagreeing with is your view that there is something WRONG with "correcting the devs on their product". That view is absurd and hypocritical, because "correcting the devs on their product" is what everyone here does, every single day, in almost every single post. Do you really not get that?
Furthermore, the correction that occurs all the time here usually concerns game mechanics, which as I explained before is a much BIGGER form of "correction" than what we're talking about in this thread. It is beyond ridiculous for you to criticize this minor form of "correction", concerning simple flavor quotes, while ignoring the much bigger correction of game mechanics that forms the main bulk of the threads on the forum. (And if you also criticize that other, bigger, form of "correcting the devs on their product", fair enough...but this thread is a hell of a bizarre molehill to focus on.)
Again: "correcting the devs on their product" is literally one of the reasons these forums exist. Do you truly not understand that? I mean...seriously? Krikkit, thanks for chiming in, I was beginning to believe this was some huge troll joke. I'm still not convinced it's not.
- Status
Similar threads
