There's a difference between asking for a review for promotional purposes vs asking for positive reviews specifically to attempt to drown out criticism (whenever you feel it's legitimate or not).
When I started to read the post I thought the same, but there's no desperate plea for good reviews, more of a reminder than those of us more interested in enjoying the damned game could send in a review.
Still a moral gray zone, and I don't think this thread should have been started, but you're putting words into the proverbial Beamdog's mouth.
No doubt the reviews will 'balance out' whether this post existed or not, anyway.
I did nothing of the sort:
"Hi everyone. I usually spend most of my time lurking here, but I'd like to ask a favour. It appears that having a transgendered cleric and a joke line by Minsc has greatly offended the sensibilities of some people. This has spurred these people into action, causing them to decide this is the worst game of all time and give it a zero review score on Steam, GoG and meta critic. Now, I'd like to ask for that favour. If you are playing the game and having a good time, please consider posting a positive review to balance out the loud minority which is currently painting a dark picture for new players.
Thank you. -Trent"
He's extremely specific in what he wants: he dislikes bad reviews that lean on the political side (which might or might not be legitimate criticism, that's besides the point I'm making) and he's asking to "balance out the loud minority" which is a very specific call to political action.
If anything is painting a dark picture for new players it's the bugs, which is the central point of contention everybody can see on the Steam page for example, yet he's calling on people's political sensibilities and flatout asking to basically censor dissent. This is fundamentally wrong, they do not own the steam platform and all users should have access to pertinent information like their incompetence in coding. This is not the first time people use what they admit is "a loud minority" to attempt to censor and silence even if it is by seer numbers.
Have you read any of the hate reviews? This is absolutely what they're complaining about. If you don't like LGBTQ friendly content or generally can't stand that it's no longer 1953, that's fine. But trying to sink a game that people put so much effort into over a few lines of dialogue is despicable.
I left my reviews and hope other people do the same.
Yes, there's a couple of those. Most of them are actually fair because they do mention either the political choices along with the technical issues or even just the technical issues. Overall there's just an overwhelming majority of technical issues being discussed that actually shouldn't be drowned out by positive comments instigated by a political agenda from either party: the devs or the reactionary people commenting on a very narrow view of the game.
Among the written reviews, there are also multiple 0 ratings without written accompaniment. A game has be pretty much broken in order to receive a 0/10...unless that rating is based on hateful politics.
There are 4 user reviews on metacritic. 2 of them are positive. 2 of them are negative. One discusses bugs, the other your SJW stuff. Just calm down. It is too soon to really judge anything. Fallout 4 tanked on metacritic and steam in the beginning too.
The CEO of the company thinks it might be significant enough to harm sales. Fallout 4 is still selling copies like hotcakes today - small games like SoD depend a lot more on early purchases.
Even if it's not going to influence sales one way or the other, I'm frustrated by the principle of the thing. I would never give a game a 0 rating for including something that offended me because I'm not a petulant child. Judging by the insane number of downvotes for positive reviews on Steam, there seem to be hundreds of gamerbros willing to do just that.
Did you forget to read my earlier post that described how most of the negative steam reviews are because of bugs and broken multiplayer? Let me paste that here for you:
Let's look at some of these reviews, shall we? There are currently 12 negative reviews. 10 of these are considered "helpful". 8 of those reviews focuses on bugs and multiplayer not working. A few of them state that there are SJW themes in the game, but state that they are not going to comment on them. 2 reviews are focused only on the so-called LGBTQ content. One is a quote from Amber Scott about the original BG had "lots" of sexism. The second is discussing how it is not natural for someone to immediately state their sexuality after meeting them.
Quote: "It is not natural for a person to just come flat out and tell you their sexuality when you meet them for the first time. This is the mark of poor writing and SJWs trying to "represent" a minority that they themselves don't even understand, which by itself is pretentious and shallow as..."
This can easily be seen as a criticism of the writing rather than a criticism of LGBTQ themes.
Next time, do your research and don't strawman people.
I just took my review off of Steam. I posted a good review I thought. It had all the good things I liked about the game and briefly mentioned that I only had 1 criticism, which had to do with the identity politics. The game was great I laughed, I cried, and the ending was very tragic and one I will never forget. Its a 10/10 for me. Its too bad that my review became a place of rage for people to hate on the game.
I will say this though. If you have the ability to make artistic content ( For you guys it's making video games) you don't have the right to push your views,( political or otherwise ) through that artistic format and then also try and justify it by ridiculing the other side. I think this is where the anger is coming from.
You have the right to say what you want, just make sure you can take the backlash eloquently and not try to silence the ones that don't agree with you.
It appears that having a transgendered cleric and a joke line by Minsc has greatly offended the sensibilities of some people. This has spurred these people into action, causing them to decide this is the worst game of all time and give it a zero review score on Steam, GoG and meta critic please consider posting a positive review to balance out the loud minority which is currently painting a dark picture for new players.
The first two sentences are uncalled for, but do not beg for good reviews, and tastefully (in italics here) he does just what I said he did, and not what you claim.
Does he want more good reviews? Duh, but he's hardly begging for it.
The reviews are very objective there and has nothing to do with the single post at GOG you have mentioned. Bugs, many inconsistencies, lack of originality, meaningless dialogues, very amateurish graphics made from the pieces of existing areas etc etc. It might be a mod but not what is expected from the official game-developing company. I like what Overhaul said about the future of BG3: "Baldur's Gate 3 would only be possible if the team demonstrates the ability to successfully make their own original content." Wish you good luck.
Bought the expansion directly from you guys, so no gog.com/steam review from me. I tend to think word-of-mouth is also effective though and have been recommending SoD to anyone I think would play it, because I do in fact think it's good. Unfortunately I think Krotos has a point, and this thread wasn't a very wise move. But hindsight helps noone.
Have you read any of the hate reviews? This is absolutely what they're complaining about. If you don't like LGBTQ friendly content or generally can't stand that it's no longer 1953, that's fine.
Have you read them? They are upset because there is this thing they really liked and someone suddenly decided on his own that this or that is sexist and needs to be changed. They are also upset because oh how poor the quality of those changes are. They feel shoved into the spotlight and forced instead of being written taste- and tactfully.
And how is tokenism "LGBTQ friendly content" exactly? We still havent moved past the point where black characters in a video game are past of just being the token black dude/chick and here we have a token transvestite.
The reviews are very objective there and has nothing to do with the single post at GOG you have mentioned. Bugs, many inconsistencies, lack of originality, meaningless dialogues, very amateurish graphics made from the pieces of existing areas etc etc. It might be a mod but not what is expected from the official game-developing company. I like what Overhaul said about the future of BG3: "Baldur's Gate 3 would only be possible if the team demonstrates the ability to successfully make their own original content." Wish you good luck.
They are also upset because oh how poor the quality of those changes are. They feel shoved into the spotlight and forced instead of being written taste- and tactfully.
That would be a more convincing argument if it weren't used for every single LGBT character who has ever appeared in a goddamn RPG. Dorian Pavus was forced. Steve Cortez was forced. Liara T'Soni was forced. Silk Fox was forced. Dorn il-Khan and Hexxat were forced. Undyne and Alphys were forced. Athena and Janey Springs were forced.
When the same "criticism" is applied across the board, you can absolutely call its authenticity into question.
Also he never directed people to post good reviews for the sake of good reviews. He merely asked that if we're enjoying the game, please share that in the form of a review to help offset the troll reviews, some from people who don't even own the game.
Have you read any of the hate reviews? This is absolutely what they're complaining about. If you don't like LGBTQ friendly content or generally can't stand that it's no longer 1953, that's fine. But trying to sink a game that people put so much effort into over a few lines of dialogue is despicable.
I left my reviews and hope other people do the same.
Yes, there's a couple of those. Most of them are actually fair because they do mention either the political choices along with the technical issues or even just the technical issues. Overall there's just an overwhelming majority of technical issues being discussed that actually shouldn't be drowned out by positive comments instigated by a political agenda from either party: the devs or the reactionary people commenting on a very narrow view of the game.
Among the written reviews, there are also multiple 0 ratings without written accompaniment. A game has be pretty much broken in order to receive a 0/10...unless that rating is based on hateful politics.
There are 4 user reviews on metacritic. 2 of them are positive. 2 of them are negative. One discusses bugs, the other your SJW stuff. Just calm down. It is too soon to really judge anything. Fallout 4 tanked on metacritic and steam in the beginning too.
The CEO of the company thinks it might be significant enough to harm sales. Fallout 4 is still selling copies like hotcakes today - small games like SoD depend a lot more on early purchases.
Even if it's not going to influence sales one way or the other, I'm frustrated by the principle of the thing. I would never give a game a 0 rating for including something that offended me because I'm not a petulant child. Judging by the insane number of downvotes for positive reviews on Steam, there seem to be hundreds of gamerbros willing to do just that.
Did you forget to read my earlier post that described how most of the negative steam reviews are because of bugs and broken multiplayer? Let me paste that here for you:
Let's look at some of these reviews, shall we? There are currently 12 negative reviews. 10 of these are considered "helpful". 8 of those reviews focuses on bugs and multiplayer not working. A few of them state that there are SJW themes in the game, but state that they are not going to comment on them. 2 reviews are focused only on the so-called LGBTQ content. One is a quote from Amber Scott about the original BG had "lots" of sexism. The second is discussing how it is not natural for someone to immediately state their sexuality after meeting them.
Quote: "It is not natural for a person to just come flat out and tell you their sexuality when you meet them for the first time. This is the mark of poor writing and SJWs trying to "represent" a minority that they themselves don't even understand, which by itself is pretentious and shallow as..."
This can easily be seen as a criticism of the writing rather than a criticism of LGBTQ themes.
Next time, do your research and don't strawman people.
Did someone just learn the word "strawman"?
I have researched the reviews quite extensively because this whole fiasco pisses me off to no end. It seems like you're conveniently leaving out those that attacked the game specifically for the inclusion of LGBTQ themes - I wonder why you would do that? As for the post you quoted, you can't possibly expect us to believe that a poster who uses the derisive term "SJW" would have been ok with the character if only she had MORE depth. And the hundreds of concentrated downvotes for positive reviews - those are because they're fired up about...technical issues? Is that right?
Sorry, but I'm not the one misrepresenting the other side's argument here.
I will say this though. If you have the ability to make artistic content ( For you guys it's making video games) you don't have the right to push your views,( political or otherwise ) through that artistic format and then also try and justify it by ridiculing the other side. I think this is where the anger is coming from.
You have the right to say what you want, just make sure you can take the backlash eloquently and not try to silence the ones that don't agree with you.
Sorry but not all opinions are of equal weight, and there is a difference between criticism and outright trolling. There are plenty of legitimate criticisms of SOD, and for me, that includes the UI, bugs, and narrative flow, but in the end, I'd expect people to judge SOD as a whole product. When a mob of people who doesn't even own the game starts to flood forums and complain about a relatively minor issue within the context of the game, I certainly question their motives and sincerity.
Those who write silly reviews over that one Minsc line are as relevant as those who complained about Sidney Pontier's skin color in the 1960s.
And the hundreds of concentrated downvotes for positive reviews - those are because they're fired up about...technical issues? Is that right?
I would like to say that there ARE already groups of people that are decisively anti-Beamdog and despise the EE, and some of the concentration undoubtedly comes from that rather than this issue. If anything, though, the issue is just compounding it.
They are also upset because oh how poor the quality of those changes are. They feel shoved into the spotlight and forced instead of being written taste- and tactfully.
That would be a more convincing argument if it weren't used for every single LGBT character who has ever appeared in a goddamn RPG. Dorian Pavus was forced. Steve Cortez was forced. Liara T'Soni was forced. Silk Fox was forced. Dorn il-Khan and Hexxat were forced. Undyne and Alphys were forced. Athena and Janey Springs were forced.
WOW! You are saying that people actually can tell the quality of writing on their very own and call it out?! Inconceivable!
By the way, nice going that you neither mentioned Arcade nor Veronica which people reference ALL. THE. TIME. when talking about doing diversity right.
EDIT: Dorian Pavus was forced Token flamboyant gay man, the only thing lacking to be more of a stereotype and a token was a fag-hag at his side. He also came with a quest that was literally about his dad not accepting him being gay. I am baffled that you would consider that good writing.
But then again, if you actually consider that a well written character then you hardly can tell bad writing at all.
Steve Cortez was forced Gay token written into the game at the very last minute. Stuck out like a vegan on a Sundays BBQ.
Liara T'Soni was forced CITATION NEEDED
Silk Fox was forced She was the lazy sort of BI that you also had in Dragon Age 2 aka "lets save time and just write the dialogue for both male and female the same"
Dorn il-Khan Didn't like the character and didn't have him in my group so I cant tell.
Hexxat Black lesbian vampire who dun need no man. Are you serious?
Undyne and Alphys were forced Alphys is the most blatant case of nerdbait I have ever seen.
Athena and Janey Springs were forced Are you implying that there is a single instance of good writing anywhere in the trash-heap that is Borderlands?
Funnily enough you are defending and claiming those are well written characters simply because they fall into your LGBTBBTHEQ-Safe space. If thats not sexism I dont know what else is.
Also he never directed people to post good reviews for the sake of good reviews. He merely asked that if we're enjoying the game, please share that in the form of a review to help offset the troll reviews, some from people who don't even own the game.
Not unreasonable or "begging".
Again, that's just not true, He specifically says he wants people to "balance out" the politically motivated points. Why? Everyone is entitled to hate the game for WHATEVER REASON they want to and express the opinion. There should not be a need to balance out an opinion just because is uncomfortable.
We still havent moved past the point where black characters in a video game are past of just being the token black dude/chick and here we have a token transvestite.
I don't think I've ever played an RPG that didn't have black characters in it, and I've also never read a single forum post complaining about, or even commenting on, the existence of said characters, or even commenting on their blackness. There is no ingrained bigotry or intolerance in the gaming community, that's not what this is about.
Also he never directed people to post good reviews for the sake of good reviews. He merely asked that if we're enjoying the game, please share that in the form of a review to help offset the troll reviews, some from people who don't even own the game.
Not unreasonable or "begging".
Again, that's just not true, He specifically says he wants people to "balance out" the politically motivated points. Why? Everyone is entitled to hate the game for WHATEVER REASON they want to and express the opinion. There should not be a need to balance out an opinion just because is uncomfortable.
He said " If you are playing the game and having a good time, please consider posting a positive review to balance out the loud minority which is currently painting a dark picture for new players."
If those are reasons for bad reviews, then that is truly an injustice.
If a character or situation isn't to your liking you can avoid it. For example, I've been sending Khalid out on solo wolf hunting expeditions for years.
Having more flavor and opportunities for representations of alternative characters is only a good thing.
Have you read any of the hate reviews? This is absolutely what they're complaining about. If you don't like LGBTQ friendly content or generally can't stand that it's no longer 1953, that's fine. But trying to sink a game that people put so much effort into over a few lines of dialogue is despicable.
I left my reviews and hope other people do the same.
Yes, there's a couple of those. Most of them are actually fair because they do mention either the political choices along with the technical issues or even just the technical issues. Overall there's just an overwhelming majority of technical issues being discussed that actually shouldn't be drowned out by positive comments instigated by a political agenda from either party: the devs or the reactionary people commenting on a very narrow view of the game.
Among the written reviews, there are also multiple 0 ratings without written accompaniment. A game has be pretty much broken in order to receive a 0/10...unless that rating is based on hateful politics.
There are 4 user reviews on metacritic. 2 of them are positive. 2 of them are negative. One discusses bugs, the other your SJW stuff. Just calm down. It is too soon to really judge anything. Fallout 4 tanked on metacritic and steam in the beginning too.
The CEO of the company thinks it might be significant enough to harm sales. Fallout 4 is still selling copies like hotcakes today - small games like SoD depend a lot more on early purchases.
Even if it's not going to influence sales one way or the other, I'm frustrated by the principle of the thing. I would never give a game a 0 rating for including something that offended me because I'm not a petulant child. Judging by the insane number of downvotes for positive reviews on Steam, there seem to be hundreds of gamerbros willing to do just that.
Did you forget to read my earlier post that described how most of the negative steam reviews are because of bugs and broken multiplayer? Let me paste that here for you:
Let's look at some of these reviews, shall we? There are currently 12 negative reviews. 10 of these are considered "helpful". 8 of those reviews focuses on bugs and multiplayer not working. A few of them state that there are SJW themes in the game, but state that they are not going to comment on them. 2 reviews are focused only on the so-called LGBTQ content. One is a quote from Amber Scott about the original BG had "lots" of sexism. The second is discussing how it is not natural for someone to immediately state their sexuality after meeting them.
Quote: "It is not natural for a person to just come flat out and tell you their sexuality when you meet them for the first time. This is the mark of poor writing and SJWs trying to "represent" a minority that they themselves don't even understand, which by itself is pretentious and shallow as..."
This can easily be seen as a criticism of the writing rather than a criticism of LGBTQ themes.
Next time, do your research and don't strawman people.
Did someone just learn the word "strawman"?
I have researched the reviews quite extensively because this whole fiasco pisses me off to no end. It seems like you're conveniently leaving out those that attacked the game specifically for the inclusion of LGBTQ themes - I wonder why you would do that? As for the post you quoted, you can't possibly expect us to believe that a poster who uses the derisive term "SJW" would have been ok with the character if only she had MORE depth. And the hundreds of concentrated downvotes for positive reviews - those are because they're fired up about...technical issues? Is that right?
Sorry, but I'm not the one misrepresenting the other side's argument here.
So there are no technical issues? This is just about politics and you're not misrepresenting one side's argument? Funny that if I go to the steam store page right now I can see the exact opposite: mostly people complaining about technical issues and poor writing. Respectfully and with opinionated but valid points. The fact that they use a term you do not like does not takes away from what you quoted, in fact you actually are misrepresenting his entire point which is the same I'm making: negative reviews are mostly related to technical issues and SHOULD have a right to exist and be read.
I have researched the reviews quite extensively because this whole fiasco pisses me off to no end. It seems like you're conveniently leaving out those that attacked the game specifically for the inclusion of LGBTQ themes - I wonder why you would do that? As for the post you quoted, you can't possibly expect us to believe that a poster who uses the derisive term "SJW" would have been ok with the character if only she had MORE depth. And the hundreds of concentrated downvotes for positive reviews - those are because they're fired up about...technical issues? Is that right?
Sorry, but I'm not the one misrepresenting the other side's argument here.
Exactly so. It's a bald-faced lie, because if you put those posters on the spot and ask them to name a single LGBT character who does meet that supposed standard of "quality writing", they'd stammer like a machine gun and come up blank. It's a convenient - and transparent - excuse.
I didn't even question Mizhena about her name. I'm at the castle and I almost never spoke to her. Who am I to question names? I seriously had to go check it out on purpose.
Also he never directed people to post good reviews for the sake of good reviews. He merely asked that if we're enjoying the game, please share that in the form of a review to help offset the troll reviews, some from people who don't even own the game.
Not unreasonable or "begging".
Again, that's just not true, He specifically says he wants people to "balance out" the politically motivated points. Why? Everyone is entitled to hate the game for WHATEVER REASON they want to and express the opinion. There should not be a need to balance out an opinion just because is uncomfortable.
He said " If you are playing the game and having a good time, please consider posting a positive review to balance out the loud minority which is currently painting a dark picture for new players."
Let me fix that for you:
He said " If you are playing the game and having a good time please consider posting a positive review to balance out the loud minority which is currently painting a dark picture for new players.,"
You choose to focus on the good time part, I choose to focus on the call to balance out the loud minority which is basically requesting to drown out legitimate criticism.
You can't really use a semantics arguments since it goes both ways.
You choose to focus on the good time part, I choose to focus on the call to balance out the loud minority which is basically requesting to drown out legitimate criticism.
You can't really use a semantics arguments since it goes both ways.
So, suddenly context doesn't matter?
Don't bold any of it and it doesn't support you whatsoever.
Comments
"Hi everyone. I usually spend most of my time lurking here, but I'd like to ask a favour. It appears that having a transgendered cleric and a joke line by Minsc has greatly offended the sensibilities of some people. This has spurred these people into action, causing them to decide this is the worst game of all time and give it a zero review score on Steam, GoG and meta critic. Now, I'd like to ask for that favour. If you are playing the game and having a good time, please consider posting a positive review to balance out the loud minority which is currently painting a dark picture for new players.
Thank you.
-Trent"
He's extremely specific in what he wants: he dislikes bad reviews that lean on the political side (which might or might not be legitimate criticism, that's besides the point I'm making) and he's asking to "balance out the loud minority" which is a very specific call to political action.
If anything is painting a dark picture for new players it's the bugs, which is the central point of contention everybody can see on the Steam page for example, yet he's calling on people's political sensibilities and flatout asking to basically censor dissent. This is fundamentally wrong, they do not own the steam platform and all users should have access to pertinent information like their incompetence in coding. This is not the first time people use what they admit is "a loud minority" to attempt to censor and silence even if it is by seer numbers.
Let's look at some of these reviews, shall we? There are currently 12 negative reviews. 10 of these are considered "helpful". 8 of those reviews focuses on bugs and multiplayer not working. A few of them state that there are SJW themes in the game, but state that they are not going to comment on them. 2 reviews are focused only on the so-called LGBTQ content. One is a quote from Amber Scott about the original BG had "lots" of sexism. The second is discussing how it is not natural for someone to immediately state their sexuality after meeting them.
Quote:
"It is not natural for a person to just come flat out and tell you their sexuality when you meet them for the first time. This is the mark of poor writing and SJWs trying to "represent" a minority that they themselves don't even understand, which by itself is pretentious and shallow as..."
This can easily be seen as a criticism of the writing rather than a criticism of LGBTQ themes.
Next time, do your research and don't strawman people.
You have the right to say what you want, just make sure you can take the backlash eloquently and not try to silence the ones that don't agree with you.
Does he want more good reviews? Duh, but he's hardly begging for it.
They are also upset because oh how poor the quality of those changes are. They feel shoved into the spotlight and forced instead of being written taste- and tactfully.
And how is tokenism "LGBTQ friendly content" exactly? We still havent moved past the point where black characters in a video game are past of just being the token black dude/chick and here we have a token transvestite.
When the same "criticism" is applied across the board, you can absolutely call its authenticity into question.
Not unreasonable or "begging".
I have researched the reviews quite extensively because this whole fiasco pisses me off to no end. It seems like you're conveniently leaving out those that attacked the game specifically for the inclusion of LGBTQ themes - I wonder why you would do that? As for the post you quoted, you can't possibly expect us to believe that a poster who uses the derisive term "SJW" would have been ok with the character if only she had MORE depth. And the hundreds of concentrated downvotes for positive reviews - those are because they're fired up about...technical issues? Is that right?
Sorry, but I'm not the one misrepresenting the other side's argument here.
Sorry but not all opinions are of equal weight, and there is a difference between criticism and outright trolling. There are plenty of legitimate criticisms of SOD, and for me, that includes the UI, bugs, and narrative flow, but in the end, I'd expect people to judge SOD as a whole product. When a mob of people who doesn't even own the game starts to flood forums and complain about a relatively minor issue within the context of the game, I certainly question their motives and sincerity.
Those who write silly reviews over that one Minsc line are as relevant as those who complained about Sidney Pontier's skin color in the 1960s.
By the way, nice going that you neither mentioned Arcade nor Veronica which people reference ALL. THE. TIME. when talking about doing diversity right.
EDIT:
Dorian Pavus was forced
Token flamboyant gay man, the only thing lacking to be more of a stereotype and a token was a fag-hag at his side. He also came with a quest that was literally about his dad not accepting him being gay. I am baffled that you would consider that good writing.
But then again, if you actually consider that a well written character then you hardly can tell bad writing at all.
Steve Cortez was forced
Gay token written into the game at the very last minute. Stuck out like a vegan on a Sundays BBQ.
Liara T'Soni was forced
CITATION NEEDED
Silk Fox was forced
She was the lazy sort of BI that you also had in Dragon Age 2 aka "lets save time and just write the dialogue for both male and female the same"
Dorn il-Khan
Didn't like the character and didn't have him in my group so I cant tell.
Hexxat
Black lesbian vampire who dun need no man. Are you serious?
Undyne and Alphys were forced
Alphys is the most blatant case of nerdbait I have ever seen.
Athena and Janey Springs were forced
Are you implying that there is a single instance of good writing anywhere in the trash-heap that is Borderlands?
Funnily enough you are defending and claiming those are well written characters simply because they fall into your LGBTBBTHEQ-Safe space. If thats not sexism I dont know what else is.
That being said, I wouldn't give the game a bad review just for that. So far, I've had lots of fun with it.
If a character or situation isn't to your liking you can avoid it. For example, I've been sending Khalid out on solo wolf hunting expeditions for years.
Having more flavor and opportunities for representations of alternative characters is only a good thing.
is this what people are flipping over? Big deal.
Oh, waitHe said " If you are playing the game and having a good time please consider posting a positive review to balance out the loud minority which is currently painting a dark picture for new players.,"
You choose to focus on the good time part, I choose to focus on the call to balance out the loud minority which is basically requesting to drown out legitimate criticism.
You can't really use a semantics arguments since it goes both ways.
Don't bold any of it and it doesn't support you whatsoever.