Total War: Rome 2 devs respond to debate about the amount of women in game

A player claimed that the number of women showing up as recruitable generals was a bit much, ultimately leading to today's statement.

4

It's unfortunate that they even have to do so, but the team at Creative Assembly has made an official statement to get ahead of what seems like a non-controversy. The game under the microscope here is Total War: Rome 2 and the topic is how often women spawn in the game. 

Total War: Rome 2 was released in 2013, but has received a plethora of updates since launch. Some of those updates include the addition of the family tree feature and the inclusion of women as potential generals in specific factions. The game is being review bombed on Steam because some players claim to have higher rates for women generals in their games.

In response to the claims, a Creative Assembly community content editor stated that, if players weren't ok with how the mechanics were currently set up, they could use mods to remove women or just not play the game. As seen in the statement above, the team is leaving the game as is and won't be patching anything out. Stay tuned to Shacknews for additional updates.

Charles Singletary Jr keeps the updates flowing as the News Editor, breaking stories while investigating the biggest topics in gaming and technology. He's pretty active on Twitter, so feel free to reach out to him @The_CSJR. Got a hot tip? Email him at Charles.Singletary@Shacknews.com.

From The Chatty

  • reply
    September 25, 2018 12:45 PM

    Charles Singletary Jr posted a new article, Total War: Rome 2 devs respond to debate about the amount of women in game

    • reply
      September 25, 2018 12:54 PM

      IMHO!
      There's nothing wrong with wanting some historical accuracy in a game based on history.
      There's nothing wrong with wanting some better representation in your escapist entertainment.
      (and maybe one can quibble over what is actually accurate in the first place)
      Both opinions should be allowed, with reactions to a game that caters to one or the other hashed out in the marketplace of ideas. If someone doesn't like one way and says so in a review, someone who takes the other tack can read it as an endorsement of the game (and a denouncement of the reviewer)

      That said it would really only work if people actually read reviews instead of just looking at the percentage of up vs down votes.

      I'm a little hesitant to post this as it's obviously outside the orthodoxy. It sucks that "historicity!" and "free speech!" are becoming dogwhistles for a certain group

      • reply
        September 25, 2018 12:59 PM

        Did you even read their tweet.

        Sigh.

        • reply
          September 25, 2018 1:02 PM

          Actually I don't even know what you're getting at.

          If it's not a specific comment on their implementation, but rather a broad statement about the state of discourse on the internet, I have a single point to make. A marketplace of ideas still needs to curate for bad-faith actors. Right now we have, if at all, very simple and insufficient tools for that.

      • reply
        September 25, 2018 7:39 PM

        I agree, as a strategy gamer and history nerd, I appreciate the games that strive for period accuracy. There’s always compromises, though. I’ve read some of the recent wave of reviews for Rome, and they are pretty vile and full of rage. Didn’t see anything constructive. I wonder how much of that is real, or troll dog piling? Steam should clear most of those out.