Regarding King Oswald, I also think you judge too harshly. There is an ending you did not see in which Finnr is so impressed with Oswald's Christian compassion that he decides to stay with Oswald, and not Eivor.
-
More broadly, I suspect from of the disconnect here comes from straying into an old trope without realizing it. What I term the 'Fremen Mirage' (see https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/05/02/hard-times-dont-make-strong-soldiers-warrior-myth/ … and of course https://acoup.blog/2020/01/17/collections-the-fremen-mirage-part-i-war-at-the-dawn-of-civilization/ …) is an old trope.
And I think the game, intentionally or not, utilizes that trope, building a contrast between the hard, strong Norse from their hard lands and hard times and the soft, weak Saxons from their soft lands.
-
-
And the problem is, as I get into in the longer sets of posts on the Fremen Mirage and my Foreign Policy article on it, that particular trope in its modern form has often come as a handmaiden for justifying scientific racism and imperialism.
-
On that you may note C.B. Krebs, A Most Dangerous Book (2012) on the use and mostly abuse of Tacitus - one of the original purveyors of this trope - in Hitler's Germany.
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
So, from a luddic point of view, yes, this will probably always remain problematic in the game. We designed it in such a way as to make the player begin as a powerful viking and grow stronger as time goes on. The raids, the assaults, the battles are fun. Hard to disagree here.
-
From a narrative POV, we try to overcorrect by showing a gradual weakening of the Norse's dominance. Early territories lean into battles for conquest, but later territories move away from it, giving greater exposure to Saxons and their strengths.
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.