Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

'AAA Games at EA Are Dead for the Time-Being' & Microtransactions Are Why

145679

Comments

  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Xasapis said:
    I didn't even know that Exodus existed. What's the target audience for that film anyway?
    I'm not sure.  It wasn't Christians, as God is depicted speaking through (literally) a tantrum-throwing child.  It's not atheists, as it very clearly shows God creating catastrophes and assisting Moses in parting the Red Sea, though Moses begins the movie as an atheist himself (or heavily atheist-leaning agnostic at most).  

    It is a pretty baffling movie in general.  Some good special effects, though.

    image
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Kootur said:
    Kootur said:


    This dude is also racist as fuck. Either that or he just tries to be controversial. Regardless hes probably full of shit and anything he say should be taken with a grain of salt.
    As a white guy myself, I think he's a little bit of both.

    I was looking through google image search at some of the tweets folks put up as examples of his racism.  It's about half bigotry, half accurate social commentary that's presented in an overly abrasive manner.
    "social commentary" is that what spouting off far-left anti-white talking points is called today?


    Why the hell would Christian Bale be cast as Moses, and Joel Edgerton as Ramses.  Da fuq?
    How is that white washing? 
    I'm assuming you're being facetious with this post.  Otherwise, you, again, seemed to read one part you took issue with and posted, ignoring the rest of my post (specifically, the portions directly preceding the quoted stament and directly succeeding the part about whitewashing).

    image
  • OnecrazyguyOnecrazyguy Member UncommonPosts: 99
    SEANMCAD said:
    gervaise1 said:
    SEANMCAD said:
    Torval said:
    gervaise1 said:
    ... game companies don't want to pay to use Unity ...

    ....
    guys...

    Unity is free, they just take profits from you sales what the fuck are you talking about?
    Not free for studios.

    Unity's published prices are: Free for beginners, students and hobbyists. Otherwise its a subscription model which they introduced mid-2016. 

    Prior to introducing their subscription model  John Riccitiello (took over as CEO in late 2014) spoke "extensively" about the difficulty of getting developers to pay for using Unity. And his basic message was that if things continued as was - with restricted finances - the Unity engine was going nowhere; that Unity Technologies were heading for a cliff edge, would be finished at some point down the line etc. Which would be bad for developers.

    He also spoke about how he understood why developers pushing back / didn't want to pay for using Unity. They were struggling to get players to pay and - to paraphrase - were rubbish at getting alternative funding like advertising. 

    I assume this is the background to them introducing their current model subscription model. Which Unity Technologies "believe" is fair - Pro (for studios) being only $125/month list price. (There is also a "serious creator" $35/month option.)
    actually I dont think that is true either.

    a studio CAN use the personal editions if they so desire.
    Actually no they can't. If they've raised more than $100k in funding or earned more than that in a year they HAVE to use the pro license.
  • KooturKootur Member UncommonPosts: 352
    Kootur said:
    Kootur said:


    This dude is also racist as fuck. Either that or he just tries to be controversial. Regardless hes probably full of shit and anything he say should be taken with a grain of salt.
    As a white guy myself, I think he's a little bit of both.

    I was looking through google image search at some of the tweets folks put up as examples of his racism.  It's about half bigotry, half accurate social commentary that's presented in an overly abrasive manner.
    "social commentary" is that what spouting off far-left anti-white talking points is called today?


    Why the hell would Christian Bale be cast as Moses, and Joel Edgerton as Ramses.  Da fuq?
    How is that white washing? 
    I'm assuming you're being facetious with this post.  Otherwise, you, again, seemed to read one part you took issue with and posted, ignoring the rest of my post (specifically, the portions directly preceding the quoted stament and directly succeeding the part about whitewashing).
    No I'm asking why a man with jewish heritage couldn't play moses and why Joel Edgerton couldn't play Ramses?
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Kootur said:
    Kootur said:
    Kootur said:


    This dude is also racist as fuck. Either that or he just tries to be controversial. Regardless hes probably full of shit and anything he say should be taken with a grain of salt.
    As a white guy myself, I think he's a little bit of both.

    I was looking through google image search at some of the tweets folks put up as examples of his racism.  It's about half bigotry, half accurate social commentary that's presented in an overly abrasive manner.
    "social commentary" is that what spouting off far-left anti-white talking points is called today?


    Why the hell would Christian Bale be cast as Moses, and Joel Edgerton as Ramses.  Da fuq?
    How is that white washing? 
    I'm assuming you're being facetious with this post.  Otherwise, you, again, seemed to read one part you took issue with and posted, ignoring the rest of my post (specifically, the portions directly preceding the quoted stament and directly succeeding the part about whitewashing).
    No I'm asking why a man with jewish heritage couldn't play moses and why Joel Edgerton couldn't play Ramses?
    Christian Bale doesn't have a Jewish heritage.

    And Joel Edgerton is Australian.  Neither were even tangentially related to the ethnicities of the roles they were playing.

    image
  • KooturKootur Member UncommonPosts: 352
    Kootur said:
    Kootur said:
    Kootur said:


    This dude is also racist as fuck. Either that or he just tries to be controversial. Regardless hes probably full of shit and anything he say should be taken with a grain of salt.
    As a white guy myself, I think he's a little bit of both.

    I was looking through google image search at some of the tweets folks put up as examples of his racism.  It's about half bigotry, half accurate social commentary that's presented in an overly abrasive manner.
    "social commentary" is that what spouting off far-left anti-white talking points is called today?


    Why the hell would Christian Bale be cast as Moses, and Joel Edgerton as Ramses.  Da fuq?
    How is that white washing? 
    I'm assuming you're being facetious with this post.  Otherwise, you, again, seemed to read one part you took issue with and posted, ignoring the rest of my post (specifically, the portions directly preceding the quoted stament and directly succeeding the part about whitewashing).
    No I'm asking why a man with jewish heritage couldn't play moses and why Joel Edgerton couldn't play Ramses?
    Christian Bale doesn't have a Jewish heritage.

    And Joel Edgerton is Australian.  Neither were even tangentially related to the ethnicities of the roles they were playing.
    Christian Bale does have jewish heritage. On his fathers side.

    Either way both are Caucasoid males playing the roles of Caucasoid males.
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    His father remarrying to a half-Jewish woman when Christian was already an adult isn't a Jewish heritage any more than someone mishearing my real name one time and calling me "Jeshub" gives me a Jewish heritage.

    Lol at your Causasoid comment.

    image
  • KooturKootur Member UncommonPosts: 352
    His father remarrying to a half-Jewish woman when Christian was already an adult isn't a Jewish heritage any more than someone mishearing my real name one time and calling me "Jeshub" gives me a Jewish heritage.

    Lol at your Causasoid comment.
    If I recall it was his grandparents or great grandparents either way it's irrelevant.

    I'm just calling out your ridiculous white washing theory especially one as silly as exodus. But this all stemmed from your defense of a massive racist.
    MadFrenchie
  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,919
    gervaise1 said:

    There's nothing to support the idea that gamers simply don't want to spend.  Consumers spent over $23 billion dollars on gaming in 2015.  You don't get to that number via a high aversion to spending on a product.

    In 2016, that number increased to over $30 billion, per the ESA.  The idea that gamers don't want to spend money on their hobby doesn't hold water.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.polygon.com/platform/amp/2016/4/29/11539102/gaming-stats-2016-esa-essential-facts

    http://www.theesa.com/about-esa/essential-facts-computer-video-game-industry/

    EDIT- For clarity, that's solely the U.S..  Revenue is growing at a breakneck pace in the U.S., despite the Asian market dwarfing it.
    Well the links are to a survey but lets assume its true.

    What I listed was a) things JR said - ex-CEO of EA and now CEO of Unity Technologies so ...... he should have a handle on things.

    Coupled with the fact that EA in their current 12 month period are hardly releasing anything. Sure they are just one company but the same trend can be seen with Ubisoft and Activision.


    I think revenue is (probably) up because there are many, many more people playing. Pretty sure it wasn't 65% of US households (number from survey linked above) playing! Probably paying less per person though - haven't bothered to search to verify this.

    We also have many, many, many more games - survey includes mobile. A few blockbusters like Pokemon Go but otherwise you have a vast number of games and studios fighting for revenue. Existing studios struggling -  Zynga, King, PopCap, Rovio. New entrants arriving and every now and then occasionally a new huge blockbuster. 
    The links are to the ESA's data.  The survey they report on has nothing to do with revenue numbers mentioned.  So no, the numbers I quoted are not the result of a survey.
    Not what the link says. http://www.theesa.com/about-esa/essential-facts-computer-video-game-industry/

    And since publishers provide very only limited data on how much their games make - if they provide any at all - I am not sure how you think ESA comes up with revenue numbers.

    Either way I still suggest that growth in revenue is driven by more people playing. Nor does it take away from the fact that multiple industry heads have talked about the problem of what is often called the "race to the bottom".
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,499
    I've long held the view that games at EA are dead for the time being.  AAA has nothing to do with it.
  • someforumguysomeforumguy Member RarePosts: 4,088
    Could you guys let go of the race card? Science is slowly letting go of the human race classification because it has never been scientifically classified in biology (unlike species).

    Race is a human classification that originates from a time when humans as species were divided in races along arbitrary characteristics. It is outdated now because genetically there is too much overlap to divide the human species into groups based on these characteristics.

    Nowadays it is mainly used in the context of protests or racism, both of which have no place in this topic imo.

    Oh and on topic : EA is just about catering to shareholders. That is their focus group . All passion about game developing is gone in that company. Just look at the background of their CEO and other top people. Max return on investment is the key with EA.
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Kootur said:
    His father remarrying to a half-Jewish woman when Christian was already an adult isn't a Jewish heritage any more than someone mishearing my real name one time and calling me "Jeshub" gives me a Jewish heritage.

    Lol at your Causasoid comment.
    If I recall it was his grandparents or great grandparents either way it's irrelevant.

    I'm just calling out your ridiculous white washing theory especially one as silly as exodus. But this all stemmed from your defense of a massive racist.
    Only, you recall wrong.  But hey, don't let being wrong stop you from asserting you're right!
    klash2def

    image
  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,919
    SEANMCAD said:
    gervaise1 said:
    SEANMCAD said:
    Torval said:
    gervaise1 said:
    ... game companies don't want to pay to use Unity ...

    ....
    guys...

    Unity is free, they just take profits from you sales what the fuck are you talking about?
    Not free for studios.

    Unity's published prices are: Free for beginners, students and hobbyists. Otherwise its a subscription model which they introduced mid-2016. 

    Prior to introducing their subscription model  John Riccitiello (took over as CEO in late 2014) spoke "extensively" about the difficulty of getting developers to pay for using Unity. And his basic message was that if things continued as was - with restricted finances - the Unity engine was going nowhere; that Unity Technologies were heading for a cliff edge, would be finished at some point down the line etc. Which would be bad for developers.

    He also spoke about how he understood why developers pushing back / didn't want to pay for using Unity. They were struggling to get players to pay and - to paraphrase - were rubbish at getting alternative funding like advertising. 

    I assume this is the background to them introducing their current model subscription model. Which Unity Technologies "believe" is fair - Pro (for studios) being only $125/month list price. (There is also a "serious creator" $35/month option.)
    actually I dont think that is true either.

    a studio CAN use the personal editions if they so desire.
    According to the Unity page https://unity3d.com/unity Personal editions are for beginners, students and hobbyists.

    If a Studio is using Unity without paying maybe they have done some other deal or it was something they entered into prior to mid-2016. That wouldn't be the Personal edition though.

    Now if there are "studios" using the Personal edition of Unity to avoid paying the $125/month for the Studio edition that would support the view that developers are doing all they can to save money. 
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    gervaise1 said:
    gervaise1 said:

    There's nothing to support the idea that gamers simply don't want to spend.  Consumers spent over $23 billion dollars on gaming in 2015.  You don't get to that number via a high aversion to spending on a product.

    In 2016, that number increased to over $30 billion, per the ESA.  The idea that gamers don't want to spend money on their hobby doesn't hold water.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.polygon.com/platform/amp/2016/4/29/11539102/gaming-stats-2016-esa-essential-facts

    http://www.theesa.com/about-esa/essential-facts-computer-video-game-industry/

    EDIT- For clarity, that's solely the U.S..  Revenue is growing at a breakneck pace in the U.S., despite the Asian market dwarfing it.
    Well the links are to a survey but lets assume its true.

    What I listed was a) things JR said - ex-CEO of EA and now CEO of Unity Technologies so ...... he should have a handle on things.

    Coupled with the fact that EA in their current 12 month period are hardly releasing anything. Sure they are just one company but the same trend can be seen with Ubisoft and Activision.


    I think revenue is (probably) up because there are many, many more people playing. Pretty sure it wasn't 65% of US households (number from survey linked above) playing! Probably paying less per person though - haven't bothered to search to verify this.

    We also have many, many, many more games - survey includes mobile. A few blockbusters like Pokemon Go but otherwise you have a vast number of games and studios fighting for revenue. Existing studios struggling -  Zynga, King, PopCap, Rovio. New entrants arriving and every now and then occasionally a new huge blockbuster. 
    The links are to the ESA's data.  The survey they report on has nothing to do with revenue numbers mentioned.  So no, the numbers I quoted are not the result of a survey.
    Not what the link says. http://www.theesa.com/about-esa/essential-facts-computer-video-game-industry/

    And since publishers provide very only limited data on how much their games make - if they provide any at all - I am not sure how you think ESA comes up with revenue numbers.

    Either way I still suggest that growth in revenue is driven by more people playing. Nor does it take away from the fact that multiple industry heads have talked about the problem of what is often called the "race to the bottom".
    Even if it is driven by more gamers, growth in revenue still doesn't support the idea that gamers are overly averse to paying.  At best, you could try to make the argument that they're simply paying for different things than they used to.

    image
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    edited October 2017
    And the total revenue by ESA comes from NPD Group's market research.  Not from its (EDIT- by it, I mean ESA) survey.

    image
  • klash2defklash2def Member EpicPosts: 1,949
    Kootur said:
    Kootur said:
    Kootur said:


    Why the hell would Christian Bale be cast as Moses, and Joel Edgerton as Ramses.  Da fuq?
    How is that white washing? 
    I'm assuming you're being facetious with this post.  Otherwise, you, again, seemed to read one part you took issue with and posted, ignoring the rest of my post (specifically, the portions directly preceding the quoted stament and directly succeeding the part about whitewashing).
    No I'm asking why a man with jewish heritage couldn't play moses and why Joel Edgerton couldn't play Ramses?
    Christian Bale doesn't have a Jewish heritage.

    And Joel Edgerton is Australian.  Neither were even tangentially related to the ethnicities of the roles they were playing.
    Christian Bale does have jewish heritage. On his fathers side.

    Either way both are Caucasoid males playing the roles of Caucasoid males.

     
    Let me help you out. TLDR: Egypt has 1000s of years of African culture before a Caucasian even stepped foot in the nile.


    Exodus is beyond whitewashed. You are trying to imply that Egypt a Country on Africa is in fact a Caucasian country? Again, nothing surprises me anymore but let me help you. I love educating people like yourself. I take pride in it. 

    Egypt was actually known as Kemet or Ptah. Wasn't called "Egypt" until the Ptolemaic dynasty, that ended with Cleopatra VII at the end of the Dynastic Era. Nothing about Kemet, Ptah, or Misir was "Caucasian" until greek/rome conquers it 1000s of years later. I suggest you look this up before you start making these types of claims. 

    Kemet, and Hwt-ka-Ptah. Look these names up. Two different names with different meanings. No one from that part of North Africa during the Dynastic eras would have called Kemet or Ptah, "Egypt". The Rome, Libya, Persia, Syria and Greece invasions of Kemet is how we have the mixed race "Egyptians" today, but the true people of the nile are the Khemitian people. Intelligent, mystical, brown skinned people who would influence world cultures including the Greeks and Romans (whom the world attributes with starting modern day culture but they actually took it from the Khemitian people) with their trading, education, Arts, commerce systems, customs, farming and even their Gods. Contrary to popular belief , the descendants of those people also still live in what is called modern day Egypt.

    Kemet suffered centuries worth of conquests, and these came after the already troublesome invasions of its Libyan neighbors. Each time it was conquered, it received a new name, part of its invaders' psychology of subjugation. The name Egypt came from the Greeks. The Romans/Greeks were the last to show up and when they conquered Kemet establishing the 300 or so year rule of the Ptolemaic dynasty, they named it Egypt. There are years worth of Political strife and back stabbing here that set this up but please don't forget It was already an ancient civilization with thousands of years of history by the time Alexander the great shows up to conquer, rewrite and plunder the great culture there.

    Although nobody is sure of exactly when the Exodus happened, researchers are confident that it wasn't the Ptolemaic dynasty, which ends with Cleopatra VII. This means that there is no way that Rameses 1,2,3, ETC was of Caucasian descent and likely of African Origin as in Kemet or another nearby civilization (Kemet was never a country).

    Movies like Exodus, Cleopatra (with Elizabeth Taylor) are white washed because they portray historical African figures but ignore the "African" part. 


    Also btw, at some point during this time period it became Misir, then later Egypt its final name..erasing much of history before the greek era. The greeks got there saw all this amazing history, art, education and pretty much decided to rewrite the story of how it got there starting with their rule. So although people like yourself want to believe Egypt's history starts with the Greeks, you are sadly mistaken and need to do some research.

    Egypt has 1000s of years of African culture before a Caucasian even stepped foot in the nile. 

    May I suggest people on this website keep racial comments to themselves..there is a difference between debating and just saying baseless things because you think you heard it before..

    To debate something you need full knowledge of it. 


    Shaigh
    "Beliefs don't change facts. Facts, if you're reasonable, should change your beliefs."


    "The Society that separates its scholars from its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting by fools."



     
    Currently: Games Audio Engineer, you didn't hear what I heard, you heard what I wanted you to hear. 


  • dukemagusdukemagus Member UncommonPosts: 9
    Manveer Heir, out of all people, speaking in name of BioWare?

    This is more reason for ruin than microtransactions: the man feeds on hatred and tries to paint it as "justice"

    Kootur
  • DrewgDrewg Member UncommonPosts: 97
    edited October 2017
    Witcher 3 sold well because it is a good game. Their DLC is actually expansions. The other DLC was free. Plus it's not a linear game. Actions actually have consequences, and not just at the end of the game.

    EA are money grubbers. Have been for ages.
    They turn good game studios into shit.
  • DavodtheTuttDavodtheTutt Member UncommonPosts: 415
    I just had to react: "... not uncommon to see players spend $15,000..." What?
    WHAT?
    WHAT?
    ARE they CRAZY?
    HAS THE WHOLE WORLD GONE CRAZY?
  • KooturKootur Member UncommonPosts: 352
    edited October 2017
    klash2def said:
     
    Let me help you out. TLDR: Egypt has 1000s of years of African culture before a Caucasian even stepped foot in the nile.


    Exodus is beyond whitewashed. You are trying to imply that Egypt a Country on Africa is in fact a Caucasian country? Again, nothing surprises me anymore but let me help you. I love educating people like yourself. I take pride in it. 

    Egypt was actually known as Kemet or Ptah. Wasn't called "Egypt" until the Ptolemaic dynasty, that ended with Cleopatra VII at the end of the Dynastic Era. Nothing about Kemet, Ptah, or Misir was "Caucasian" until greek/rome conquers it 1000s of years later. I suggest you look this up before you start making these types of claims. 

    Kemet, and Hwt-ka-Ptah. Look these names up. Two different names with different meanings. No one from that part of North Africa during the Dynastic eras would have called Kemet or Ptah, "Egypt". The Rome, Libya, Persia, Syria and Greece invasions of Kemet is how we have the mixed race "Egyptians" today, but the true people of the nile are the Khemitian people. Intelligent, mystical, brown skinned people who would influence world cultures including the Greeks and Romans (whom the world attributes with starting modern day culture but they actually took it from the Khemitian people) with their trading, education, Arts, commerce systems, customs, farming and even their Gods. Contrary to popular belief , the descendants of those people also still live in what is called modern day Egypt.

    Kemet suffered centuries worth of conquests, and these came after the already troublesome invasions of its Libyan neighbors. Each time it was conquered, it received a new name, part of its invaders' psychology of subjugation. The name Egypt came from the Greeks. The Romans/Greeks were the last to show up and when they conquered Kemet establishing the 300 or so year rule of the Ptolemaic dynasty, they named it Egypt. There are years worth of Political strife and back stabbing here that set this up but please don't forget It was already an ancient civilization with thousands of years of history by the time Alexander the great shows up to conquer, rewrite and plunder the great culture there.

    Although nobody is sure of exactly when the Exodus happened, researchers are confident that it wasn't the Ptolemaic dynasty, which ends with Cleopatra VII. This means that there is no way that Rameses 1,2,3, ETC was of Caucasian descent and likely of African Origin as in Kemet or another nearby civilization (Kemet was never a country).

    Movies like Exodus, Cleopatra (with Elizabeth Taylor) are white washed because they portray historical African figures but ignore the "African" part. 


    Also btw, at some point during this time period it became Misir, then later Egypt its final name..erasing much of history before the greek era. The greeks got there saw all this amazing history, art, education and pretty much decided to rewrite the story of how it got there starting with their rule. So although people like yourself want to believe Egypt's history starts with the Greeks, you are sadly mistaken and need to do some research.

    Egypt has 1000s of years of African culture before a Caucasian even stepped foot in the nile. 

    May I suggest people on this website keep racial comments to themselves..there is a difference between debating and just saying baseless things because you think you heard it before..

    To debate something you need full knowledge of it. 


    Oh look a Hotep.

    First of all caucausians a people of caucasoid descent. Those include people from north Africa and the middle-east.

    Second There is scientific data to confrim this. In fact recently a study proved this to be true.

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/05/170530115141.htm 

    Source: Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History
    Summary:
    An international team has successfully recovered ancient DNA from Egyptian mummies dating from approximately 1400 BCE to 400 CE, including the first genome-wide nuclear data, establishing ancient Egyptian mummies as a reliable of ancient DNA. The study found that modern Egyptians share more ancestry with Sub-Saharan Africans than ancient Egyptians did.

    Egypt is a promising location for the study of ancient populations. It has a rich and well-documented history, and its geographic location and many interactions with populations from surrounding areas, in Africa, Asia and Europe, make it a dynamic region. Recent advances in the study of ancient DNA present an intriguing opportunity to test existing understandings of Egyptian history using ancient genetic data.

    The study found that ancient Egyptians were most closely related to ancient populations in the Levant, and were also closely related to Neolithic populations from the Anatolian Peninsula and Europe. “The genetics of the Abusir el-Meleq community did not undergo any major shifts during the 1,300 year timespan we studied, suggesting that the population remained genetically relatively unaffected by foreign conquest and rule,” says Wolfgang Haak, group leader at the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History in Jena. The data shows that modern Egyptians share approximately 8% more ancestry on the nuclear level with Sub-Saharan African populations than with ancient Egyptians. “This suggests that an increase in Sub-Saharan African gene flow into Egypt occurred within the last 1,500 years,” explains Stephan Schiffels, group leader at the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History in Jena. Possible causal factors may have been improved mobility down the Nile River, increased long-distance trade between Sub-Saharan Africa and Egypt, and the trans-Saharan slave trade that began approximately 1,300 years ago.


    http://uk.reuters.com/article/oukoe-uk-britain-tutankhamun-dna/half-of-european-men-share-king-tuts-dna-idUKTRE7704OR20110801


    As for Cleopatra she most definitely was of Greek descent. 


    https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/who-was-cleopatra-151356013/


    Caucasoid does not mean strictly from europe but it does mean a certain genetic and facial structure. MENA and Middle-eastern people are by definition Caucasians.


    Or are you trying claim that Egyptians were sub-sharan Africans? Because the dna evidence has debunked that time and time again.


    To yes exodus could have cast middle-eastern people but for the most it didn't matter and don't spout afro-centric nonsense. You're not educated on the matter it seems. I also find it hilarious that you claim the Greek "erased" their history. They left almost all of it in tact. They in fact built many large and grander cities like Alexandria.

    ConstantineMerus
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    You're using Causasoid as if that denotes any kind of similar cultural or ethnic background.  It doesn't, so it really isn't applicable here.

    Please stop misapplying the term to situations in which it isn't relevant to try and prove a point.

    image
  • KooturKootur Member UncommonPosts: 352
    edited October 2017
    You're using Causasoid as if that denotes any kind of similar cultural or ethnic background.  It doesn't, so it really isn't applicable here.

    Please stop misapplying the term to situations in which it isn't relevant to try and prove a point.
    I'm applying it correctly in that they are of similar racial background, not ethnic. We've seen Italians play Latinos and Irish play Germans. The original issue was "whitewashing" actors in a movie where those actors fit in marginally.
    ConstantineMerus
  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    Kootur said:
    You're using Causasoid as if that denotes any kind of similar cultural or ethnic background.  It doesn't, so it really isn't applicable here.

    Please stop misapplying the term to situations in which it isn't relevant to try and prove a point.
    I'm applying it correctly in that they are of similar racial background, not ethnic. We've seen Italians play Latinos and Irish play Germans. The original issue was "whitewashing" actors in a movie where those actors fit in marginally.
    You're still misapplying the term to support your argument.  "Caucasoid" isn't really relevant when considering race in this context; indeed, it's only really useful in biological anthropology.  It's a very general term, and casts a wide net that does not recognize the differences of ethnicity and cultural background that this issue is addressing.

    In short: you should've bolded and underlined "marginally" to the point that it was a hilarious bit of sarcasm, not a serious assertion.

    [Deleted User]

    image
  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 17,653
    I clicked on this thread to read about micro transactions and EA...

    I jumped to the last 2 pages...

    I dunno WTF I read but somewhere along the line this turned into a thread about the Exodus movie and the DNA of Egyptians.   


    .... only on MMORPG.com...


    DavodtheTutt

    All time classic  MY NEW FAVORITE POST!  (Keep laying those bricks)

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

  • MadFrenchieMadFrenchie Member LegendaryPosts: 8,505
    I clicked on this thread to read about micro transactions and EA...

    I jumped to the last 2 pages...

    I dunno WTF I read but somewhere along the line this turned into a thread about the Exodus movie and the DNA of Egyptians.   


    .... only on MMORPG.com...


    Started with comments about Heir (quoted in the article), progressed from there.

    image
Sign In or Register to comment.