[Serious Post] Controversy in Modding

[Firebug]

I'm not sure if many people have noticed. but discussions about controversial civilizations has appeared recently and I feel it doesn't belong in posts belonging to Modders like JFD and Sasquatch.

Mods have been made in the past, and some cultural group somewhere is likely to find it offensive, or not like it.
I'm upset by a recent mod to be released. A Jihadi John map. and as British, i hate that.
JFD's WW2 civs (Especially Hitler)
Rhodesia.
The Boers.
and a few more, i honestly cannot name, are all Civs that have received a backlash, big or small (mainly on Steam).

But Freedom is important in art. Modding in itself is an art, and let's not forget what happened to Charlie Hebdo. We need to make certain mods, we need to show that we have the creativity and the bravery to make what we want to make, what we think deserves its story to be told.
History deserves to be remembered, so as not to forget the mistakes and make them once more. But current affairs, terrorism, should never be entertainment.
However, personal opinions will change this.

That was my opinion, what's yours?

 

[Alganon]

Hitler, Stalin, the Boers, Mao Tse Tung etc. This leaders are all a special part of the history from a special country. They wasn´t nice guys, good leaders or humans who brings progress in their own countrys, but they lived on earth and we can delete the history in our mind. I think mods like JFD´s WWII civs are a good things to tell the storys of their regimes. They wake up interest for history from special country, from special cultere. They teach that we shouldnt be scared from history, we should learn to make it better. We should learn from this mistakes and shouldnt escape such things before us.


(Sorry for bad grammar)

 

[ThorHammerz]

I think this quote applies rather well:

You cannot live to please everyone else.

You have to edify, educate and fulfill your own dreams and destiny, and hope that whatever your art is that you're putting out there, if it's received, great, I respect you for receiving it.

If it's not received, great, I respect you for not.

 

[Firebug]

That's a great quote.

 

[JFD]

I don't really recall (nor can I find in a rudimentary search) the kind of controversy in my thread that matches the recent one on ISIS in Rawsasquatchs. Did you have something in mind?

 

[janboruta]

and a few more, i honestly cannot name, are all Civs that have received a backlash, big or small

A few angry comments are a backlash?

History deserves to be remembered, so as not to forget the mistakes and make them once more. But current affairs, terrorism, should never be entertainment.

I guess all the "World 2014/5" mods are all a no-go zone, right? Why then comedians would be allowed to use current affairs for entertainment, and not mod makers? Smells of hypocrisy.

To me it seems like a topic that is blown way out of proportion. There's a handful of mods that *might* come off as controversial, and then only according to a small portion their users. Very little controversy happened in Civ 5 modding over the years, and those isolated cases were caused not really by mods, but by some seriously butthurt and narrow-minded commenters on Steam (Russians and Poles mostly - Poles especially are serious killjoys).

Causing controversy on purpose is cheap, and making an IS civ would be cheap in that way. Causing controversy as a side effect of your mod is mostly incidental and most likely not done on purpose. Controversy caused despite lack of intent to do so cannot - or should not - be an excuse for censorship. Especially preventive self-censorship, which is crippling to any kind of author, and something the smell of I get from your post here.

 

[ThorHammerz]

Very little controversy happened in Civ 5 modding over the years, and those isolated cases were caused not really by mods, but by some seriously butthurt and narrow-minded commenters on Steam (Russians and Poles mostly - Poles especially are serious killjoys).

If you brought back Romans from the ~5th to 7th centuries into the present (and made them play CiV), I'm sure we would have some crybabies about "Fall of Rome".

In fact, any content about anything is going hurt someone from somewhere - that doesn't necessarily mean you shouldn't create it - unless you're breaking the laws in your resident country, of course (I would not want to create a roleplay Nazi Germany scenario while living in the EU, for example).

If you created any mods/scenario about the 1930's -early 1940's Japanese conquest of East Asia, you're definitely going to run into some stiff vocal opposition from Chinese/Koreans/every-other-ethnic/national-group-invaded. Especially if you made it using the Japanese point of view.

If you created a custom resource called "slaves" (I am aware slavery mods already exist) that were only found in cities built on desert/jungle terrain... you're are very likely going to infuriate a large subset of people.

The list goes on forever....

 

[GPuzzle]

I feel that the first step to be able to censor anything is to censor something by labeling it as "offensive" or "controversial", because those are subjective concepts. In the end, I'm playing a game for its mechanics, for what it offers towards gameplay, since I just can't get attached to it in the sense of "recreating history".

And I'd rather have a politically incorrect Civ that feels nice, plays well and feels fun, than a dull politically correct Civ.

Then again, I'm a centre-right liberal in the classical sense, I probably eat babies for lunch.

 

[JFD]

All this talking about ISIS has given me an idea for an ISIS-based UA - not to actually create as part of a civ, of course; the Caliph of ISIS is far too uninteresting. I suppose that would be irony

Capturing enemy cities deals damage to all cities in the enemy's empire and instantly heals 25 damage for nearby friendly units. Receive Golden Age points for every turn a city is being razed.

Oh, wait...

Seriously, though:

Spoiler :

All land Military Units may be used to spread your religion. When spreading your religion to a city with an artifact, that artifact is destroyed and the unit gains +15 XP.

 

[Firebug]

I made this thread as a way to keep people away from the main threads, allowing people not interested in discussion like this to ignore it.

Oh, and JFD, sorry i think i mixed up a Modcast where someone mentioned Hitler being a bit hated on with a thread.

 

[DoctorMcGann]

All this talking about ISIS has given me an idea for an ISIS-based UA - not to actually create as part of a civ, of course; the Caliph of ISIS is far too uninteresting. I suppose that would be irony

Capturing enemy cities deals damage to all cities in the enemy's empire and instantly heals 25 damage for nearby friendly units. Receive Golden Age points for every turn a city is being razed.

Oh, wait...

Seriously, though:

Spoiler :

All land Military Units may be used to spread your religion. When spreading your religion to a city with an artifact, that artifact is destroyed and the unit gains +15 XP.

Wow. That would be a really fun and interesting UA. Dammit, now I want an ISIS civ...

 

[ldvhl]

Hitler, Stalin, the Boers, Mao Tse Tung etc. This leaders are all a special part of the history from a special country. They wasn´t nice guys, good leaders or humans who brings progress in their own countrys, but they lived on earth and we can delete the history in our mind. I think mods like JFD´s WWII civs are a good things to tell the storys of their regimes. They wake up interest for history from special country, from special cultere. They teach that we shouldnt be scared from history, we should learn to make it better. We should learn from this mistakes and shouldnt escape such things before us.


(Sorry for bad grammar)

Just a thing on this point - I have relatives who not only play Civ (though primarily II), but were also alive in the time of Stalin and Hitler. They remember, first-hand, what the Holodomor and the Holocaust were. I do not tell them about CiV's modding community for a reason.

 

[COF]

Just make whatever mod you like and enjoy it, those who consider it offensive just shouldn't play it instead of acting like a moral guardian.

 

[DoctorMcGann]

Just a thing on this point - I have relatives who not only play Civ (though primarily II), but were also alive in the time of Stalin and Hitler. They remember, first-hand, what the Holodomor and the Holocaust were. I do not tell them about CiV's modding community for a reason.

Um, doesn't Civ II have Stalin as a default leader?

 

[EricNgui]

Just make whatever mod you like and enjoy it, those who consider it offensive just shouldn't play it instead of acting like a moral guardian.

I agree with you.

Just like Tojo Japan civ mod, i enjoyed playing with them, although "Japanese leaders" during WW2 is bad, and i know they have colonized other peoples, including my country, Malaysia. But, hey, like Alganon say, all happened in the past is a part of our history, an we should learn from past.
And just like George Santayana said:

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it"

Cheers.

 

[AW Arcaeca]

Just make whatever mod you like and enjoy it, those who consider it offensive just shouldn't play it instead of acting like a moral guardian.

This. ^

I work under the philosophy that if you don't like it, don't use it. What's the point getting upset about a mod that, seeing how you're so upset about it, you'll never use?
And what gives you the right to demand that someone else can't make a mod that interests them? (Not you specifically, COF)

Make whatever the heck mod you want. But no matter what you do, not only in modding but in life in general, someone's going to be offended, if just for the heck of being offended. So ignore them and live life anyway.

Is that to say it's wrong to be offended? No, but your being offended shouldn't prohibit someone else's interests.
...Or at least I say that. I tend to find that I make arguments like this and then realize that the exception lies in that I would want to prohibit something offensive and have to reluctantly admit to myself, "offensive progress shouldn't be stopped... unless I'm offended." It kind of brings the whole argument crashing down.

But to summarize: Don't be so easily offended, and if you don't like it, then ignore it and stop making a fuss over it.

I can think of one example, but one which will probably immediately spark an argument worthy of moderator action...

 

[JFD]

Just make whatever mod you like and enjoy it, those who consider it offensive just shouldn't play it instead of acting like a moral guardian.

Well, this topic is more about publishing whatever you want, and that should only be done in so far as one is willing to put up with and accept the consequences therein. Publishing an ISIS civ - for instance - to Steam or Reddit would invariably garner a lot of backlash, even if one believed it to be fallacious. Even if one were beholden to a sense of moral pride or expressive freedom, what you like and enjoy, when released to the public, will be met with opposition, and if that publication is highly contentious then that opposition will likely be stronger, more aggressive, and something you may regret having to deal with. One is entitled to their sovereignty, but that mustn't drive their actions when interacting with a public or social space.

 

[COF]

Yeah, but I am criticizing that opposition in the first place, if the mod doesn't appeal to them in it's core then they tell others that it's not OK for them to enjoy it. But I think that goes without saying.
AKA

Naturally, this is just wishful thinking.

 

[spendabuck]

I'm not sure if many people have noticed. but discussions about controversial civilizations has appeared recently and I feel it doesn't belong in posts belonging to Modders like JFD and Sasquatch.

Mods have been made in the past, and some cultural group somewhere is likely to find it offensive, or not like it.
I'm upset by a recent mod to be released. A Jihadi John map. and as British, i hate that.
JFD's WW2 civs (Especially Hitler)
Rhodesia.
The Boers.
and a few more, i honestly cannot name, are all Civs that have received a backlash, big or small (mainly on Steam).

But Freedom is important in art. Modding in itself is an art, and let's not forget what happened to Charlie Hebdo. We need to make certain mods, we need to show that we have the creativity and the bravery to make what we want to make, what we think deserves its story to be told.
History deserves to be remembered, so as not to forget the mistakes and make them once more. But current affairs, terrorism, should never be entertainment.
However, personal opinions will change this.

That was my opinion, what's yours?

What did the Boers do? Sorry, I'm not really an expert on African history during the Scramble for Africa; I know a few things about the Anglo-Zulu War, & a bit about Africa before Europe became heavily involved (Mali, Ethiopia, etc.). I don't support the Boers, but I didn't know they were bad either…

Anyway, I have to agree with some of the people here. I remember that the Days of Sadat mod had some controversy at the beginning due to the chosen leaders in the mod. But say someone made a civ about the State of Palestine. A lot of people would probably get offended by it, & even I may be slightly offended. However, if a mod offends you, then you shouldn't play it. But you have to remember that any mod could be offensive to someone.

Of course though, I don't turn my chin up to mods that may feature civilizations that were bad. For example, Nazi Germany. I do not support Nazi Germany in any way, shape, or form, but I may like to play JFD's Nazi Germany mod just for historical context; despite being a terrible, uncivilized man, Hitler was a political leader, and there isn't really a reason for there not to be a mod about Nazi Germany. However, if I was living in Germany then I may not make a mod based on Hitler due to the situation there. The same goes for other nations like the Confederate States; while a fairly large population of people would probably be offended by it (though an equally large population from what I've seen would like it), Jefferson Davis was a political leader, & there is no reason to not have a CSA mod. And remember; if we forget about what happened with Nazism, slavery, and other bad things that happened in history, then we will be doomed to repeat it.

 

[ldvhl]

Um, doesn't Civ II have Stalin as a default leader?

Yup. They're not happy about it, but it is what it is. I mainly brought it up because what some people consider history is memory others who are still around.