Actually, it’s a mix of both. A historical story bent a bit here and there, filled with our stuff where gaps were left by the time. The hero is not nameless technically speaking, his name is Jindřich/Henry. But I guess 213 is talking about his historical existence. I am not sure if we confirmed whether Henry is or isn’t a historical figure si I will leave that question unanswered.
3 Likes
My opinion, take it or leave it, but I think that we need to we careful that we are not stereotyping in order to create a digital reality. If we want to create realism it needs to be appropriate for the playing audience and represent fairly the period in which it is intended to be set. Making broad assumptions about the way that society was may be relatable to our modern perception of living, but will not necessarily throw players into the ‘real’ 15th century world. Cancer and homosexuality ‘didn’t exist’ in that time. Not because they were not happening, but because there was often no stigma or understanding attached to them. Fundamental Christians - particularly the Catholic religion would have been hugely supportive of anything that was ‘written in stone’ in the Bible including ideas such as Leviticus’ ‘Do not lie with a man’ but at the same time the rise of Protestantism at the beginning of the 16th Century must have been a backlash at the strict and controlling preaching of the Church, hence the more liberal ideas about marriage and social relations that developed. Cancer was not formally recognised until the 18th century, but has been technically recorded for almost 3000 years.
Including all the aforementioned ideas into the game is neither a positive nor negative thing, provided they are treated appropriately and help create the immersive word that the developers are trying to provide. If you are going to claim it to be a natural and realistic world then these things ought at least be considered and appropriated into the possibilities within the engine. I don’t want to see rape, ever, whether in reality or a game, but it would certainly provide me with an interesting and immersive moral conundrum that would set the game aside from anything I have ever played before…
Incidentally by ‘avoiding’ topics like homosexuality or failing to include them because it would ‘complicate’ the reality that is being created, you are actually raising a greater issue that we assume that topics such as religious motivation or sexuality are not or were not part of a ‘normal’ day to day world, which they are. Homosexuality does not complicate the reality that is being created, it is a natural dimension that by all rights and purposes of an augmented-reality game, should just be there without question. This does not mean that you need to have stereotypically camp or overtly forward ‘gay’ characters (why is it that people seem to imagine gay people as sexual predators?!) to make things ‘equal’ but character profiles, including NPCs should have the possibility (perhaps with low percentage to represent realistic statistics?) of carrying a particular sexuality/religious trait, just as they should have a particular temperament, skill or social status (perceived or otherwise)
That’s my thought anyway. I’m interested to know what people think.
3 Likes
your reasoning for why homosexuality should “just be there” is rather tenuous.
it’s not about complication, but time and resource management. why spend time on that when there are so much other more interesting facets of the medieval setting?
i just see people applying modern understanding of homosexuality. like people made signals at corners to have gay encounters or such. very doubtful homosexuality was practiced in any way that would lend itself to meaningful portrayal beyond “social issue”, and life-long closet cases would be far likelier.
I agree with everything @ltdew said. That’s exactly what I believe as well, except said much more eloquently than I could say myself. Especially the points about how avoiding the topic altogether is an even greater issue.
@213 seems to not be reading anything anyone has said so far though. I haven’t seen anyone advocate for openly gay characters. I don’t see how something like an optional side quest dealing with homosexuality would take any extra time or resources. It would take the same amount of time as any other side quest dealing with a facet of medieval society.
This game is set in 1403, a period in Czech history rife with religious and social tensions. If they were going to make a game trying to avoid social issues, they should have set it in a different time.
And anyways, medieval treatment of homosexuality is extremely relevant to the modern controversies surrounding homosexuality. It’s in fact the historical predecessor to them. There was very little stigma attached to homosexuality in the western world before the rise and spread of christianity and monotheism in general (There was still some - but that’s a different topic). Most of the modern preconceptions and anti-homosexual sentiments come from these periods of religious dominance of society.
Speak for yourself of about how interesting it is or isn’t. For those of us interested in all facets of past societies, it would be very interesting.
Really, if homosexuality had been a non-issue at the time, there would be no need to write write religious and secular laws detailing punishments for it. Or any reason for historical sources to mention it at all.
While I understand to an extent where you are coming from, you have to remember that speaking or writing about sexuality was taboo until very recently - so unless you have been reading only primary historical documents about the period, any more modern sources would be heavily biased against historical sexuality based topics. It’s a comparatively new scholarly field.
EDIT: Some small changes. Also, wanted to link to this old but interesting article on this very subject: http://h2g2.com/edited_entry/A7715315
Interesting points from the article:
- Homosexuality as a word seems to have first been used in the 19th century. Before that, homosexual acts were lumped in with the rest of sodomy.
- “Interestingly, it was thought that any man was capable of performing a homosexual act, a view very different to the idea of innate sexuality that we tend to think today.”
The author of the article is supposedly a historian. It would have been nice if they included a better bibliography though. Still worth a read.
1 Like
This thread used to not be a clone of [homosexuality in game][1] but than people stated to suggest it was and it became one. Funny enough I don’t think it’s Madras doing at all.
So now i’m considering quoting myselfe from over there.
there i actually did it!
[1]: Homosexuality in gaming
1 Like
What if combat were something like this?
http://forum.kingdomcomerpg.com/uploads/default/10096/b07527561e60bb8e.png
2 Likes
that would be some realistic combat 
in all seriousness, as a suggestion for realism regarding weapons in the game; a longsword at this period should be rather inexpensive, but you shouldn’t be allowed to wear it in towns as it was the high status symbol of a knight.
EDIT: unless there was a way to be knighted in game, you shouldn’t be allowed to wear them. my mistake
Have you guys watched AC Unity?
The crowd is so real…there was a bunch of 4 ppl draggin a body to sell it in the mortuary
that’s sarcasm right?
nope, its just a thumbs up
There are good crowd systems out there, so it can be done (apart from what game has it).
The point is to make it immersive so the player can feel it.
a lot lacks from AC unity amazing game but nothing really happens in the day to day life of the people its all repetitive so i wouldnt take much from unity apart from the advances in graphics
whatever you guys are arguing about realism and specific in game actions: chill out, there’s gonna be a mod for it 
Technically No homosexuals did not exist back then, the term itself didn’t exist until the early 1900’s.
There is very little to zero evidence that people even defined themselves sexually until the 19th century.
History of homosexual terminology, Ancient Rome
During the time period in which our game takes place the Church and its political views were in place so those caught performing same sex acts or other sexual acts deemed sinful were punished harshly.
The Middle Ages, Homosexuality in medieval Europe, Punishment in medieval times
So based on the above information we can develop an understanding of the potential mentality our Character would have had in the time/setting of our game.
A. would not feel a social need to define his sexual practices
B. if he was interested in a same sex relationship he would have to hide it for fear of potentially being killed.
C. would more then likely have be indoctrinated since youth to share the same opinions as the church and the rest of society at large.
the above statement (although insensitive) is very true, especially with the arguments that have been presented by some.
5 Likes
As a concept no then rain would not have existed.
No quite the opposite I proved the point that you are approaching the concept of homosexuality 611 years ago with modern concepts that would have not been applicable to the time period.
Persons in that time who had same sex relationships would not have had a term for it ( at-least not historically recorded ), the church however used the term Sodomite in a derogatory sense to explain those who performed oral, anal, or acts of bestiality.
Any same sex relationships would have been kept away from public attention for fear of persecution.
So no I never said it didn’t exist I merely pointed out your understanding of the concept did not exist.
to what extent we will have relationships in this game is not yet fully known so to argue whether or not we should have the choice to be with a same sex partner is pointless.
I personally don’t care if its implemented I just want it to be historically accurate which means that:
A. it would have been kept so secret its not noticed, thus being pointless.
B. the individuals whose relationship became public knowledge more then likely would have been publicly punished for it, and frankly I don’t think public executions of homosexuals in a game will go over to well for WarHorses PR.
Human rights and equal rights are concept of the 20th century so lets stop trying to be time police.
If you choose to respond I suggest reading these to posts that happen to only be just a lil north of mine.
Post 53, Itdew
Post 55, abinhof
4 Likes
work on your reading comprehension.
5 Likes
This is exactly why it’s importaint that the term didn’t exist because sodomy would not extend to same sex kissing. It may depend on regional costums too but generally a kiss could just as likely be a sign or statment of friendship. There also was no consept of homosexuals meaning people would not definde themself by a sexual orientation. As a result people wouldn’t constently avoide touching people of the same sex or be aware of whether or not they look “gay” doing so.
WH could include characters in a homosexualrelationship and not tell the player about it at any point. It still might be relevent for why they choose to make their decitions, even if there are no clues about the relationship itselve at all.
I don’t think portrayal of homosexuelity is something that makes or breakes the game at all and this definitly is becoming pointless because this is at least the third thread that discusses homosexuelity. It’s countless posts keep reapeating themselves so I doubt WH is following all of this closly. But the discusses itselve can still be fun even if you don’t care how it’s implementde in the game.
Hi. First time posting here (can’t really count the post to test my badge ).
I think this is an extremly interesting thread with some very thought provoking comments. The main problem I have with the whole concept though is that we are all incapable of seeing a 15th century world through 15th century eyes. I’m pretty sure that there were many things taken as being every day happenings that would abhore us when viewed with our 21st century values. For instance, even using the very baseline of the concept for this game I doubt ANY of us would have the stomach for witnessing, let alone partaking in combat without it having a deep psychological effect on us. If we can accept that as part of the game, then we should also accept that many things we see as unpalatable today would be unremarkable then. I don’t think it’s the acts that are in question, it’s our inability to see it in context for the time period and make our character respond in the correct manner. We are therefore all in danger of taking a carefully crafted world and applying inappropriate moral values based on 700 years of concept based on novels, plays, illustrations and ultimately films to provide fuel for our imagination on which to make a judgement.
It’s really an impossible situation. For day-to-day living in-game I think the best we can hope for is gameplay that doesn’t involve extreme acts, and that it is best left to the imagination, along with all the other mundane habits our character would perform in his virtual existence.
Personally, I would love the game to try to educate the player to appreciate the period, for instance a career choice with all the training and experience required, rather than letting us be a jack of all trades. Surely that is more important than it trying to be a social simulator of the 15th century? 
2 Likes
Greatest first post and is very pertinent to this debate and the point I have attempted to get across.
No they do not, however Words Define concepts and our perceptual understanding with them. the whole Point I have been trying to make.
the whole argument 213 was making that you responded to that I then got myself involved in wasn’t whether or not Homosexual acts took place in the time period, its people applying their modern conceptual understandings of homosexuality to what should or should not be implemented and in what way.
Luckly not in a long time and ofcourse never compleatly. there is better fantasy out there, as there are better sorces for what happend in 15th century Bohemia. Since it’s so hyped i’ve had to hear some quotes before though. But I don’t have to tell you this because…
…clearly you know better than I what I did and didn’t read.
I know exactly that I was rephrasing and repeating I worte this because I was repeating myselfe possibly even from the same thread, it just wasn’t recently.
When someone doesn’t arrive at the same conclution do you really have to assume they couldn’t have read your posts because your argument is so flawless? Clearly there is always some missunderstanding going on, I just expirienced this myselfe when I read your reply to my post. Rephrasing and further explainations are the only option to get rid of the missunderstanding.
This is exectly why consepts and words are importaint. “Love” is one of the stupid poorly defined words with multiple if not countless meanings. Plus the meaning of words changes overtime and depends on the context. I don’t know or care what is ment here but it could be anything and if it was refering to “romantic love” in the original text that is compleatly irrellevent for medival Bohemia because it’s about two thousend years later.
This is exectly what I mean why the difference between the concepts is so importaint. You assume I was refering to sex when I talk about not avoiding to touch people because it might “look gay”. What I was saying is that sex would not nessecerily have been connected to every physical conntact in everyday live, less so than it is presently where people are aware of homosexuality (in the sense of the actuel term homosexuality) and people are avoiding to “look gay”.