justdrop wrote:

Alowishus wrote: Also...if this game is going to be historically accurate are they going to portray black people in slavery? I imagine that would not sit too well... It's not historically accurate..

Historical accuracy notwithstanding, I find it a bit hard to believe they wouldn't at least touch on the matter, given there were roughly half a million blacks in the Colonies during that time. There's also Dunsmore's Ethiopian regiment, Crispus Attucks, etc. To not touch on it, I think, would be a bit more offensive, to be honest. There were a fair amount of black soldiers on both sides; historically, it was more the ones fighting FOR the colonies that got shafted because their masters were like, "What? We said you could be free after you fought to help us out? Gosh, I don't remember that...". It'd be pretty powerful, I'd think, to have maybe a freed slave or the like assist Connor during a part of the storyline.

justdrop wrote:

When people disclude African Americans, it's racist. When people include African Americans, they're not shown in either a real enough or a too real light and it's racist. As someone who is part African American, I don't give a shit either way. I want a good game. Black, white, who gives a fuck. If they're not included, it's to avoid more opinionated duress that they'd receive from the majority of close-minded assholes.

I'm not saying it's racist, I'm just saying that if you're going into such painstaking detail to get things like period dress, weaponry and the like down, then you leave out something big like that, it just seems off-kilter; it'd be like having a game set during the British Raj and not showing a single Sikh.

Syd Lexia wrote:

I think Sagat should be in this game. Like maybe the British bring him in as a secret weapon.

Given the era, Dhalsim would be more appropriate. East India Trading Company and all.