Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Legalizing gay marriage in Crusader Kings III with Ghidra

waffleironer.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 183 posts

Re: Legalizing gay marriage in Crusader Kings III with Ghidra

#51

Post by Guthur »

mabbo wrote: post #2

It seems odd to me. Paradox is a Swedish company, and Sweden is a fairly liberal country. Same-sex marriage was legalized in 2009, and even the Church of Sweden gave the go-ahead on performing same-sex marriages the same year. The game logic around this is simple enough that changing two byes fixes it, so it's not a technical issue. What gives?

Balancing this in a dynasty simulator would be an absolute nightmare.

Presumably the AI would have the ability as well, and then you would have to start coding some restrictions to avoid a dynasty simulator spanning 100s of years going off the rails and then you'll be in for all sorts of progressive political wrangling.

Frankly if it was me I'd have stayed well away from it as well.

Also, Paradox have not a great track record of balancing things or maintaining quality straight out of the gate with their games anyway. I do love their games though.

Re: Legalizing gay marriage in Crusader Kings III with Ghidra

#52

Post by ttt0 »

Rebelgecko wrote: post #38
ttt0 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd also add furries and dragonkins while we're at it, because why not, it might as well be a fantasy game

CK2 let put a horse named Glitterhoof on your council and then have sex with it, so that would be par for the course.

A reference to Caligula?

Re: Legalizing gay marriage in Crusader Kings III with Ghidra

#53

Post by psychtrauma »

kergonath wrote: post #47
psychtrauma wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Occam's razor suggests to me that some people in the design process defined marriage as being strictly between a man and a woman, and nobody else cared enough to change this. It doesn't fill me with joy that a 2020 game would make that choice. Also the choice to have characters default to open homophobia, and for that to be used as a positive in promotional material, is not an indicator of a gay-friendly organisation…

> Occam's razor suggests to me that some people in the design process defined marriage as being strictly between a man and a woman, and nobody else cared enough to change this. Occam’s razor suggests they built a historical game and just ended up embedding some in-game cultural background in the game engine. As others pointed out, dealing with same-sex marriages affects several aspects of the game, particularly dynas…

> It doesn't fill me with joy that a 2020 game would make that choice.

> You are working from your assumption, here.

I can rephrase: "It doesn't fill me with joy that any game company in 2020, particularly one known for encouraging modding, would hard-code marriage as between a man and a woman"

Re: Legalizing gay marriage in Crusader Kings III with Ghidra

#54

Post by sjburt »

COGlory wrote: post #43
cafemachiavelli wrote: post #12

For a second that title made me remember early SEO tactics of stuffing your H1 tags with as many relevant keywords as possible, except here it's optimizing for my queer nerd interests. I'm a bit surprised by the reaction from Paradox - I assume the standard forum mod has neither the time nor skillset to assess whether any game binary patch is going to be safe, so banning them by default seems like a safe way to go, b…

That's considered SEO stuffing? I thought it was just so I know what the article is about.

I think the joke was that the words in the headline couldn't possibly be related. Except that they were.

Re: Legalizing gay marriage in Crusader Kings III with Ghidra

#55

Post by fshbbdssbbgdd »

maxander wrote: post #25
sudosysgen wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Crusader Kings III has you live on as your daughter/son when you die. As there is no adoption mechanic, same-sex relationships will lead to a game over unless you are one of the few countries that can use the House Seniority mechanic. So I guess they never got around to implementing adoption. Banning though...? That was weird.

> So I guess they never got around to implementing adoption. If you think about this, it seems pretty obvious the reason they didn’t include adoption was that it’s overpowered . The CK series is all about managing dynasties, so the randomness of reproduction is a major game mechanic, one of the primary sources of problems and challenges. Adoption would totally negate all of that. Like, if Henry VIII could just have a…

They could make adoption produce a weaker claim to the title, with greater risk of usurpers leading a rebellion. I think this mechanic could be balanced and would add realism (it happened in history).

Re: Legalizing gay marriage in Crusader Kings III with Ghidra

#56

Post by sudosysgen »

COGlory wrote: post #41
sudosysgen wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have we read the same post? It's a one-byte modification, and they ban for mentioning the patch.

That will introduce game breaking behavior when you can't have kids...

Yes, of course. That's the cost of same-sex marriage in such a game, unless you use the House Seniority mechanic you will eventually have a game over. That doesn't make this anymore difficult than switching a false to a true in an optional fun feature, it'll just be very difficult to play the game (but not impossible!)

Re: Legalizing gay marriage in Crusader Kings III with Ghidra

#57

Post by meibo »

comagoosie wrote: post #45
cafemachiavelli wrote: post #12

For a second that title made me remember early SEO tactics of stuffing your H1 tags with as many relevant keywords as possible, except here it's optimizing for my queer nerd interests. I'm a bit surprised by the reaction from Paradox - I assume the standard forum mod has neither the time nor skillset to assess whether any game binary patch is going to be safe, so banning them by default seems like a safe way to go, b…

I reverse engineered Paradox's binary format for their save files. Part of this process is extracting a table of 16 bit ids to text representations. I asked Paradox if I could open source this table, but they replied that I was already breaking the ToS. The solution I've come up with is to open source the logic but commit the table as a gpg encrypted payload (for which only I have the key). So you could say that Para…

ToS are irrelevant and you should have published it anyways, under a name different from the one you use on the forums and in-game.

Open knowledge is important, especially in video game scenes where elitism is a real issue, stopping people from getting into great hobbies that I'm sure many only got into due to that one person that didn't give in to elitism and bothered to listen and to answer questions.

Re: Legalizing gay marriage in Crusader Kings III with Ghidra

#58

Post by michaelpb »

kergonath wrote: post #35
krapp wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Although were there really no cultures in that era that allowed same sex marriage? No Christian cultures, obviously.

Was there any historical culture in which same-sex marriage was common or accepted? I can’t think of one, Christian or otherwise (though I can think of a couple of examples of same-sex people got married by subterfuge).

Yep, many! Today's era is quit unusual in how few open gay and bisexual relationships are had by public officials (which are the unions that are typically best recorded). In many other historical periods across different regions, today's standards would be considered unusually heterosexual. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_same-sex_unions

Re: Legalizing gay marriage in Crusader Kings III with Ghidra

#59

Post by dudul »

sudosysgen wrote: post #30
dudul wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or they did notice, figured out it would be complex to modify the engine to handle this case, found data indicating that having this feature or not would have zero impact of the marketability/sales of the game, and just decided to use the bandwidth on something more valuable.

Have we read the same post? It's a one-byte modification, and they ban for mentioning the patch.

The author acknowledges themselves: "The patch that I made was only good for the current Steam version of CK3, on my operating system, with my cpu architecture."

Not counting the fact that a change like that would need to be more thoroughly QA-ed to make sure it doesn't break something at some point.

Re: Legalizing gay marriage in Crusader Kings III with Ghidra

#60

Post by meibo »

josefx wrote: post #22
mabbo wrote: post #2

It seems odd to me. Paradox is a Swedish company, and Sweden is a fairly liberal country. Same-sex marriage was legalized in 2009, and even the Church of Sweden gave the go-ahead on performing same-sex marriages the same year. The game logic around this is simple enough that changing two byes fixes it, so it's not a technical issue. What gives?

Take a look at the screenshot of that same sex marriage, do you notice something odd? The gender symbols at the bottom are male/female not male/male. The patch only disables the gender check, it does not fix the game content or any other logic related to marriage. There are probably dozens of follow up bugs waiting, some of which will need new game logic and art to fix.

That just means someone in charge made a bad choice during planning and either no dev or designer ever dared to speak up against it or many of them supported said bad choice.
Post reply on HN