How to Circumvent the not depicting Mohammed thing

[chelvo]

It would be possible to model the rise of Islam in a game without making Muslims angry by this simple trick:
Start the game around a lifetime earlier.
Have a random character be born that is that worlds prophet of Islam
Have

After all, the people that could have a problem with the depiction of that character are the ones that are virtual, as the generated one isn't the prophet of our timeline.

That at least would be a possibility to experience the Rise of Islam in a Grand Strategy Game without having to deal with the problems of depicting Mohammed.

 

[DystopianAlphaOmega]

It’s a difficult topic to find a good answer on. A lot would depend on what the game focuses on. If it’s nation/tribe-based like EUIV it’s probably easier/less controversial to depict than a character-focused game like CKII. I mean, your suggestion is basically how EUIV creates a “Martin Luther” to start the reformation iirc (definitely how EUIII did it anyways), but he wasn’t actually a ruler.

Honestly though, the safer bet may be to just depict him through events. Muhammad was only a “ruler” for about the final decade of his life and of Mecca for the final two. You could thus probably depict him through events, with the player able to play as one of his companions/followers/generals squabbling over governorships and the caliphate after his death. Then again, fleeing Mecca, uniting Medina, and raising a host to take back your home city does sound like an interesting campaign that we would miss out on in such a scenario (or at least not be able to be the leader of).

 

[RAID186]

Or depict it anyway and just not care what anyone thinks.

Catering to anyone besides those who genuinely want to see a project succeed is pathetic, imo. Same with the whole Deus Vult thing in CK3.

 

[8816boo]

I'm pretty sure Muhammad is in CK2, he just has arabic writing as his portrait (in fact I think he has a bloodline).

Second, I think the issue with the rise of Islam is the aggressive nature of their expansion, as well as modern political connotations this has for some people. Some events (Like Dathin for example) are very delicate subjects to this very day. Maybe they could have it be like HOI where unpleasant events just aren't mentioned or EU4 where they're abstracted, but the demographic shifts that occurred in that era still very much define what the middle east is now well over a thousand years later and would probably need to be depicted somehow. At least this is my take on why a fall of Rome/rise of Islam game has never been made, could be wrong though.

 

[Tullaris]

Not to cater to extremists, I would say just depict him with a generic random generated portrait.

However, it is not worth the hassle really. It doesn't affect gameplay and has the potential for a lot of negative publicity.

 

[safe-keeper]

Muhammed is already in CK2, portait and all, so I don't see what the problem is.

Eta: I stand corrected . Still, don't see the problem.

 

[SolSara]

This is how we choose to depict him in CK2:

 

[Liquid Ghost]

I think OP means having Muhammad as an active character in a time-appropriate setting, not just his portrait.

 

[safe-keeper]

Depict him like any other character. Those who are ethno-centric enough to be offended that non-Muslims don't follow Muslim rules shouldn't be catered to.

 

[Lys91]

Second, I think the issue with the rise of Islam is the aggressive nature of their expansion, as well as modern political connotations this has for some people. Some events (Like Dathin for example) are very delicate subjects to this very day.

What is particularly unpleasant about this battle? (genuine question)

 

[th3freakie]

Why is this even an issue? Is this a CK3 thing?

 

[DystopianAlphaOmega]

Why is this even an issue? Is this a CK3 thing?

I believe the way the OP is worded and location in the general forum it’s more for if Paradox ever created a game (or extended a timeline of an existing game to cover the period). One argument to be wary of the period/depictions of it is the sensitivity around the topic.

For example, the current use of a calligraphic portrait works well enough to depict Muhammad on a family tree, but depicting him as a playable/interactable character could be more problematic. CKII is the closest game timeline wise and in it you can do some pretty nasty stuff to ai or your own characters for instance.

 

[Red Earth]

Is anyone really itching for a pic of Mohamed? Is there a reason to want it other than being told you can't have it? Calligraphy is significant in Islamic art due to not depicting religious figures, so this is consistent. If it ain't broke don't fix it.

 

[AsdfeZxcas]

I don't feel like it's unreasonable to put out a little effort to accommodate basic religious sensibilities. It's really not a big deal to not depict Mohammad as a character.

 

[Matoro_TBS]

You haven't heard of Charlie Hedbo? I mean, people have gotten killed because of picturing Muhammed. It's not just a matter of "respecting religious sensibilities", it's matter of protecting the people who work in the game. Sure, you can argue stuff like "Paradox shouldn't cave in to terrorists", but uh that's pretty dumb to be honest. If your options are to either use a picture of Muhammed, which will probably draw the ire of some Islamic extremist groups and with high probability lead to threat to the people working on the project... or not to do it, and not have any of these problems, which one sounds better? It's not Paradox's job to keep up some sort of crusade against Islamist extremism. There's real life danger involved in this kind of stuff.

 

[Streletz]

He should be depicted as any other character. In CK2 there is plenty of characters revered as national heroes of certain countries or saints in Christianity. All of them are playable and may suffer any misfortune as any other character in the game, from an horrible death to becoming a lustful, drunkard, Satanist.

Any other approach is just double standards.

 

[Meneye]

I don't see any problem with how he's depicted in the game right now, or know of any legitimate reason that he needs to have a face in the game.

Changing it will probably lead to some unnecessary and completely avoidable controversy.

 

[maximus1312]

Frankly its just not worth it. CK2 did it right, by having him just as a bloodline character, and like an easter egg for people willing to go through decades worth of family trees. The topic is just too sensitive, and it will almost guaranteed end badly for Paradox, in terms of publicity and maybe even harm (people got harmed for a lot less). The issue isnt about the right or wrong portrayal of Muhammad, but any portrayal at all. Its deeply offensive to muslims, and we should respect that. If Paradox was willing to remove Deus Vult just because some christian trump rallies used it, this is a much more deeper and sensitive issue.

The best way to tackle that in games like EU4 is just a simple event notification like "A new religion is born", and a tag+religion switch in Arabia, leave it to modders to fill in the blanks, as that wont get much publicity. It took the muslims some time to actually gain some momentum and grow into an empire, so one event notification is good enough.

In a game like CK2, mention him once he dies, and the muslim rashidun caliphate begins, and just keep the current arabic text portrait in the family trees. Like other posters already noted, he was mostly significant in his last years of his life, when he actually had real power, which was very short lived, and had minimal impact in world politics. It was his expansionist successors who actually built the muslim empire, and would be more relevant to other nations. I will even venture to say that dont even show Jesus, or any other major prophet if the game keeps pushing back the timeline. Just keep them in events.

 

[pheonicia]

He should be depicted as any other character. In CK2 there is plenty of characters revered as national heroes of certain countries or saints in Christianity. All of them are playable and may suffer any misfortune as any other character in the game, from an horrible death to becoming a lustful, drunkard, Satanist.

Any other approach is just double standards.

Pretty sure people would get violently upset if you depicted jesus or buddha as a drunkard lunatic satanist.

 

[AndrewT]

A reminder that swearing is not permitted in these forums, regardless of context. Posts deleted; no infraction issued this time.

Please continue to keep this discussion civil. Thank you.