We will fight Nazi-themed monsters in 3.0

"

torturo wrote:

I do know, but technology achievements aren't the only factor when defining gains, losses and the overall impact, in historical plan.

Well, the cultural gains are up to the person interpreting them.

The romans weren't exactly benevolent either. However they did play a role in the bloom that can be claimed to have a contribution on what lead to modern europe.

And that contribution was done while also having slaves, death matches and extreme amounts of cruelty and power abuse extremes.

Even the greeks, egyptians and indians, the 3 nations that are much more important than Rome to the growth of the west are not atrocities-free. Noone is.

In the end of the day, there are people who think that all of that was the worst thing to happen, that all colonialism is wrong and that we should still be banging coconuts after all. It's up to the individual to do the weighting, but that weighting should at least be factually correct.

Also Hitler was against the globalization that other governments began to expand. He was against the elite that rules us today and enslaves us until this day (incase you think you are free). At the moment the world is a modern roman empire but history showed us that the romans destroyed themselves because of their greed not techonological advancement. Hitler was against that and knew what the world might end up as eventually. He tried to fight against the globalists. Just like North Korea for example fights today ( they might be a tyrannical nation, but they prefer to enslave themselves rather then be enslaved.

"

torturo wrote:

Once again - there's no "if" when talking about historical events ;)

There's only end result.

That's true enough - for historians, their job is to interpret and document. Our job is to learn from it and you'll never learn anything without 'if'.

"

Kaizerbgr wrote:

Hitler was against the globalization that other governments began to expand.

You what...Globalization is a natural process, with its origins dating way before there even was a country named Germany on the world map. And there isn't even a single evidence that he was an actual anti globalist. What makes you think so?

"

He was against the elite that rules us today

He wanted to be the elite to rule us today. It was just the other team that won the war.

"

history showed us that the romans destroyed themselves because of their greed

There are numerous processes and events which brought the end of the roman empire, I can throw a couple if important. But in general, roman society collapsed as it lost its reasons to exist. Not because of greed, nor by external factors.

"

He tried to fight against the globalists. Just like North Korea for example fights today

This analogy is precise - in both of the cases we have an idiot behind an absurd doctrine, who use to sacrifice his own people at the oltar of his personal prosperity and ambitions.

"

raics wrote:

you'll never learn anything without 'if'

How can we learn anything from events which didn't happen? It's just wild imagination and nothing behind it. C'mon...

"

torturo wrote:

How can we learn anything from events which didn't happen? It's just wild imagination and nothing behind it. C'mon...

Is there any other way to get anywhere? People with imagination were always the driving force of change and no event ever was exactly the same every time... well, except Eurovision.

"

torturo wrote:

You what...Globalization is a natural process, with its origins dating way before there even was a country named Germany on the world map. And there isn't even a single evidence that he was an actual anti globalist. What makes you think so?

There are numerous processes and events which brought the end of the roman empire, I can throw a couple if important. But in general, roman society collapsed as it lost its reasons to exist. Not because of greed, nor by external factors.

It's that popular theory I mentioned that EU wouldn't be an American puppet province today if the Germans won. Don't expect we'd enjoy it much overall but it does make some sense.

I suppose we could call it greed if we oversimplify it, they probably just overstretched themselves, the cause of downfall of 90%+ empires.

"

torturo wrote:

You what...Globalization is a natural process, with its origins dating way before there even was a country named Germany on the world map. And there isn't even a single evidence that he was an actual anti globalist.

That is not true at all. Globalisation - and by that i mean patricular processess happening right now - is social engineering. Thats all. It has NOTHING incommon with naturall proces of growing consciousness in us, humans, about that we all are on this planet and we need to think as part of it not "rulers".

Hitler had the oldest idea ever - "One Great Nation/Country/Race/Whatever".

I thought people already notice the similiarities from the first trailer of FoO?
I certainly did, seeing them lined up and wearing caps, with Dominus giving speech ala the Fuhrer. Only when the artwork came out did confirm this.

For me it's not a problem. Bit jarring to see the clash of era styles. But hey, it's GGG fantasy world building.

"

SunL4D2 wrote:

https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/1830975

This handband, this helmet, this signs all over the place. They clearly intended to look like Nazis.

Because every game needs Nazi in their game, right?...even though PoE is aRPG that happens during medieval times, not World War Shooter...

If I would feel like I want to wreck some Nazis, I will probably play some Wolfenstein...why GGG. I don't want Nazis in Path of Exile, do you?

Wait, they are gonna implement firearms as well?...I hope they will limit their craziness with Nazis to crossbows like we see on second picture...

The clothing is nazi themed, calm your tits who cares? They arent nazis. Even if they are though... who cares? Stop being a snowflake.

"

de99ial wrote:

That is not true at all. Globalisation - and by that i mean patricular processess happening right now - is social engineering.

The globalisation began with the great geographical discoveries. And once started, it was impossible to get seized.
What you call globalisation are complex events related to the post war neoliberal socialistic movements plus multiculturalism. The new world order, if you wish. But globalisation was already there.

"

Hitler had the oldest idea ever - "One Great Nation/Country/Race/Whatever".

It's not an old idea, it never existed in the past. Nationalism and racism are recent. The former dates around 18-19th century. The latter never happened before the recent past (with mongols as an exception). The worst genocides in human history were inspired mostly by xenophobia and partially religion, but not by any doctrines of racial domination.
The worldwide domination of a certain race happened naturally due to cultural and genetical advantages and had to go a long way, but was never a systhematized process. Just happened. When indo-europeans wiped the continent in the most glorious genocide in human history, they didn't do it with racial motives in mind.

"

torturo wrote:

It's not an old idea, it never existed in the past. Nationalism and racism are recent.

Racism exists from day 1 of two or more civilizations meeting eachother, it just escalates with time.