look at my recommends dawg why do i even bother going onto that site
this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2023
74 points (100.0% liked)
the_dunk_tank
15918 readers
6 users here now
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to [email protected]
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm working on an indie advanced wars clone where one of my lead features is that users can create their own campaigns and share them.
One thing that discourages me is that I know there are people out there going to make pro-wrong-side-of-history campaigns and glorify fascists. It's easy enough to ban all pro-Hitler content, but every country, region, era, etc. has their own lesser-Hitlers to glorify.
My special skill set is programming, not historical literacy and lore mastery. These people will probably flank every fair and principled moderation stance I attempt. I'll probably both-sides something I shouldn't, or be on the wrong side of history on something. Not to mention the burden of moderation itself when my passion is to work on the non-content aspect of the game.
It's tempting to cancel that feature. Either way, just not looking forward to it. Thanks for reading my rant.
eh, banning nazis who say nazi things is the best you can do, depicting a conflict with a nazi-side, or a side nazis disproportionately like is unavoidable if you want the catharsis of cracking those nazis.
The fundamental cancer at the heart of the project is the glorification of war and conquest itself. If you're trying to make a game that Nazis aren't going to piss all over, you're going to end up with Undertale. Which is, of course, fine. Everyone loves Undertale. But its a game in which the conflict isn't always resolved by the guy who can push out bomber jets the fastest.
I think this is really good criticism, it's possible I need to double-check my pre-made single-player campaigns (which will all be cartoony goofyness) or even consider pivoting my project's aesthetics away from war gaming. There's going to be a lot to think about there and it's technically not too late for a lot of pivoting.
My intent with the campaigns though is to let historically literate individuals make campaigns that players will learn by playing. Make the USSR look good in some conflict, tell the story of a specific revolution, make up a new story without any historicalbaggage, etc., they'd be able to setup the maps/dialog to tell that story via my user friendly UI. There's an uphill battle in preventing reactionaries from doing the same though. Glorifying is not the intent, but I feel that I cannot refute your allegations, which is troubling.
I'm very unfamiliar with Undertale and don't know how to interpret this.
The main perks of undertale is that you can win « fights » without hurting your opponent by interacting with them and understanding them. If you get through the entire game without ever hurting anyone you get the very emotional good ending of the game.
Honestly, I would say that re-examining the things that make Advance Wars fun and seeing if you could make a turn based, strategic sort of game with similar sort of feel, only without the "war" part. Wargroove already exists as an "advance wars clone" so trying to recreate the core fun of the game without the emphasis on war could be a pretty interesting and unique experience. It is hard to do, as so many games are just focused on violence that it can be hard to create a game with conflict without it, but I think there is an ever increasing group of people who would like to play games that have fun strategy gameplay, but in a non-violent context.
I'd do an Ace Combat thing i.e. it's all set in a completely different world with different nations and I would think about what kinds of nations you are going to include, i.e. I'd avoid an implicit 'germanic' one.
That sounds tight AF. Advance wars has a dear place in my heart, would love to help out if you ever need beta testers.
As far as fash doing fash apoligia with design maps, Subtlety is dead. Lean on antifash and communist aesthetics, dialogue, themeing, ect. Just browbeat the player over and over with the idea of what makes violence revolutionary.
Best way to keep the shitheels out it to make them uncomfortable with the product to begin with.