Civil War multiplayer shooter War of Rights has been Kickstarted successfully

    
90

Civil War reenactment fans rejoice! War of Rights, the multiplayer shooter set in the Maryland Campaign of 1862, has reached its Kickstarter funding goal and then some. The game was asking for $107,000 but raked in over $118,000 when all was said and done.

“After a month on Kickstarter, our campaign for War of Rights is now over and we’ll get the funds needed to complete the game!” Campfire Games announced over the weekend. “We want to thank all of you for your support because thanks to you we’ll now be able to continue working on War of Rights!”

The title even managed to hit a few stretch goals along the way, funding additional foliage, a single-player battlefield tour, and more detailed interiors.

Source: Kickstarter
newest oldest most liked
Subscribe to:
MissingLynx
Guest
MissingLynx

…… It was some white guys yelling. Doesn’t really take a hyper active imagination to figure out what it sounded like.

groo the wanderer
Guest
groo the wanderer

melissaheather groo the wanderer Actually its not . Yeehaw is associated with old movies about cowboys . The rebel yell was a battle cry used by the confederate army to install fear in the enemy . There are written accounts of it as being that maniacal maelstrom of sound; that penetrating, rasping, shrieking, blood-curdling noise 

There are a few pieces of film from the early 20 th century that exist that are supposed to be of veterans of the civil war doing the rebel yell but the origins of these seem to doubtful . 

The actual sound of the rebel yell has been lost to living memory .

MissingLynx
Guest
MissingLynx

Estranged You’re numbers are off, again. First of all, you pulled the “milliion’s of southerners” straight out of your own butt yesterday, which we all know already anyway and you should probably just own up to that already. Secondly, it wasn’t even a million. It was likely no more than 750,000, and that is from revised estimates from four years ago. You really need to do some actual reading on the subject. Less than 50,000 at most happened during the war. And again, that’s only after revised upwards estimates. 

Was that worth ending slavery? Of course it was. Why? Because unlike you, I don’t weigh generations of black lives spent in chattel slavery, and generations to come, as less than the lives and property of a few nearby white people who were defending that right to own them. You talk about the four million slaves still alive at the time, but you don’t talk about the ones that came before them, nor the ones that would have existed after them, had slavery continued. 

It’s utterly hilarious that you argue their stations in life didn’t change enough after the war, because in so doing you are arguing that radical Reconstruction should have continued until your precious south had been fully integrated and reshaped culturally. I mean….. You literally have no idea the subject matter you are arguing about. You’re reciting provincial myths from the Lost Cause era that have been refuted so many times it makes my head spin. I couldn’t have invented a more fitting caricature if I had tried.

“Restricted voting to land owners and men”? What the blue hell are you talking about? The country as it was founded? This country was founded 240 years ago by rich white men, most of whom owned slaves and property. I am confused as to how this is a northern or southern thing as opposed to an objective reality. Do you even know what you are talking about? For the love of God, the south literally needed to have troops and court cases put in place to let black people… in the 1960’s! Where is your head?

It’s ultimately bemusing watching you pretend the whole course of collective US history is dictated by the north. Not only is the exact opposite true in antebellum America, after the war, the south was more or less reinstated to pre-war positioning in the House and Senate. There is a real good reason why late 19th century and early 20th century is a big gaping hole in modern American learning, because it was a very dark time for the country as Reconstruction was an utter failure and the Gilded Age came into being because of this.

 I mean, you clearly don’t have the foggiest idea about US history at all whatsoever, so watching you fumble about in some kind of fog while hitting every standard bad point in our collective history and use rote cynicism is hilarious. Literally, I am just laughing. 

What is it you think that would do? That I would try to defend America’s ugly spots? Please, I am an America hating liberal! I would add in ones you forgot! Like the Jim Crow era….oops….

At this point, the only thing I am wondering anymore is if you realize how dumb you sound saying this stuff. By damning America (correctly) for an ugly, brutish past, you are proving the point that, of course, the most deadly war in history was fought over whether or not they could own people. That’s the kind of people American’s are. 

You’re titling at northern windmills, and it is very cute, because it renders bare that your point here is nothing more than dogged tribalism in service of your “southern heritage”. You guys owned slaves, you kept slaves for generations, you fought an entire war predicated on keeping those chattel slaves forever, lost, and proceeded to spend the next one hundred years removing black people from any sort of public life. Just accept it and integrate it into what you are. It’s not that hard.

Estranged
Guest
Estranged

Hope you didn’t miss me…
600,000 soldiers and untold citizens died, approximately 1 million total. This is from both sides.
This was to “free” 4 million slaves. People that basically went back to doing what they had performed before the conflict.
So, that was worth 1 million deaths?
I’m sure the women and children that were butchered would agree.
Was pondering today about the superior Northern government and intellect.
You mean the one that restricted voting to land owners and only men?
The one that imprisoned Japanese citizens in concentration camps during WW2.
The one that massacred natives? Broke treaties with them? Gave them blankets laced with disease? Basically stole Manhattan from them? Really stole all of their land and put them on reservations?
Yes, this is that benevolent northern government. The one that has been in control, just due to population.
A warmonging government that has sent thousands upon thousands to die for business interests.
An imperialist government. Controlled by that superior Northern Intellect, right?
You have to own it all, oh benevolent emanating government!

fluffymagicalunicorn
Guest
fluffymagicalunicorn

MissingLynx melissaheather Estrangednged

Thanks again for owning this discussion, Lynx. xD

alexhurlbut
Guest
alexhurlbut

MissingLynx alexhurlbut fluffymagicalunicorn Yeah. For the South in that time period, the more wealthy you are, the more slaves you own, and the more land you can work. It was the way to move up in the Sourthern Society. That’s why yoemen and poor men support the southern cause because it was the only way of life they knew.

MissingLynx
Guest
MissingLynx

alexhurlbut fluffymagicalunicorn By “way of life” you mean the ability to own black people as property.

MissingLynx
Guest
MissingLynx

Estranged Yes, of course, the white people were the real victims here….

Estranged
Guest
Estranged

You put this better than me, no doubt. Just another case of rich men using the poor to fight their battles. What happened in Josey Wales wasn’t fiction.

MissingLynx
Guest
MissingLynx

melissaheather Estranged That is accurate only if you ignore virtually everything the Confederacy ever said about itself at the time. You have to ignore all of their declarations of secession, their constitution, political statements of the time (“Cornerstone Speech” for example), and the initial call to arms to pretend it wasn’t about the continuation and protection of chattel slavery. I mean… how much clearer would they have needed to make it for you people what they were doing? Talk about “blind stubborn stupidity”…

It’s always so bemusing to see Confederate soldiers portrayed as gallant heroes. They were fighting for a country whose entire reason for existence was the defense of white people getting to own black people as property. That’s it, full stop. And of course, the Confederacy instigated the war by seceeding due to Lincoln’s election (literally, they left the country cause they couldn’t dictate the presidency anymore) and escalating the Sumter crisis by firing on the federal garrison there. I also am constantly befuddled as to how Confederate soldiers being too poor to own slaves somehow equates to them not believing slavery was ok. The logic is totally fallacious. 

It is rather telling that anyone doing a Confederacy defense always denies agency to the Confederacy itself, never speaks directly to the reality of slavery, and instead interjects their own view points backwards on then current events. Whenever you read one, just ask yourself why they can’t seem to quote directly from any contemporary source for their rationale? Or why they feel the need to portray the white people as the victims in all this. There is a very obvious agenda to their meanings. 

And yes indeed, I am very “smug” about my ancestors winning a war that ended the unjust slavery of an entire race of people. Seems like the appropriate kind of thing to be proud of. Do you even have a point?