I think something we all need to remind ourselves of is that both sides of this argument love games. One side wants games to include things that they feel more comfortable with while the other is already comfortable and is worried that they might not be in the future. We are all here on a forum for an updated version of a ridiculously old videogame because we love games so much that we want to talk about them with others. Nobody wants to ruin videogames for anyone else, we all just want the Baldur's Gate that feels right to us in our hearts. I think thats a good thing. So lets be good fellows and figure our how we can all do this noble thing. Thank you for reading my thoughts.
I'm absolutely 100% perfectly fine with games SJW's want existing. Holy sheet I don't want to remove games they like from the market, far from it. However, what I'm against is them changing an already existing (and beloved) franchise to suit their agenda. Make your own IP!
It is their IP at the moment, they have the rights to make games within the universe, bestowed upon them by Wizards of the Coast. If they want to throw Big Bird in as a boss at the end of a dungeon and Wizards of the Coast signs off on it they can....
Yes they "own" the IP, but they didn't "create" it as far as I know. Am I mistaken?
Trent Oster, the CEO, was part of the team that created the originals. Several employees did as well, including the newly hired creative director.
KiA=Kotaku in Action. A subreddit where a lot of GG stuff happens. I don't really frequent it myself, I'm not an "active GG'er". I just sympathize heavily with them. An easy way to prove it's happening would be to find a giant thread there organizing review bombing.
Ah, I see. And it would also be very easy to prove that an apartment is a drug sot if the hang a sign out the window saying "COKE 4 SALE HERE." Of course someone getting people together for a dishonest review-bombing campaign would make that public. Right? Hmm...
"People have admitted it"? How does anyone saying it's happening in this thread equate to proof that it's happening? I'm not sure I follow.
I don't know what else to say... it's been confirmed in numerous ways and times that there is a concerted review-bombing effort by GamerGate members. It's not actually in dispute. If you close your eyes to the obvious... then you really don't have much credibility in this conversation.
Dude, it's not like the GG "operations" are a secret. Most of them are fully public, and I see no reason why this one wouldn't be if GG truly organized a review bombing against this game.
This. The game does not belong to you, it belongs to Beamdog and Wizards of the Coast. It's their IP and they can do with it whatever they please.
Luckily, that doesn't have to destroy your life. You can head over to GoG and buy the unaltered original masterpiece for $9.99 and play it *right now*.
Yep, I don't disagree that they LEGALLY can't do it. I'm saying that it feels like a kick in the nuts.
Also, like I showed in my post (which nobody replied to :c )on the bottom of the last page, I have a physical copy of the game. So that's no problem m8.
That's because it wasn't directed at you, but it hardly matters. They've been anything but subtle about it: they've given interviews to an SJW journalist for an SJW publication saying that they're proud SJWs who do not care if anyone has a problem with that, they've said that we're not real fans if we don't like what they're doing, etc. etc.
The cat is well and truly out of the bag, if you either genuinely don't see what's happening or prefer not to think that the company would behave in this fashion, then that's fine. If you understand what's happening and are just yanking my chain then that's fine too. I'm not unsure about what's going on.
Huh. Imagine that. One person on the Beamdog team becomes an issue to GG and they take it out on the entire community; fans and the company itself.
Where IS the justice in that, anyway?
I think you're assuming some form of retaliation that is not in evidence. I don't blame any one particular person at Beamdog any more than any of the others, this has been a collective venture from a small company.
All that's happened in response is that people have given their opinions of the game to some places that ask for people to do that. You're assuming that this is some form of organised campaign, but your assumption is all that you've got. It may be partially true (in so far as some people may've seen excerpts from the game that offended them and passed judgement on the basis of that alone, spontaneously and without being told to do so), and if it is then I don't agree with anyone who left a review without playing the game... but plenty of people who've bought and played the game on sites that require purchase confirmation have expressed the exact same sentiments. That's not some form of dastardly revenge.
On steam we have more positive reviews than negative yet every positive review is massively downrated (since that doesnt require purchase) and every negative review uprated. When someone posted a negative rating because of mod support it initially had 86%, he switched it to positive since it was fixed with an edit and within a few hours it dropped to 90% negative. If that doesnt scream review manipulation to you then your trolling.
"Risk"? The anti-SJW crowd likes to talk themselves up like they're capable of doing anything besides filling forum pages, but last I checked, their actual accomplishments can be summed up with a big fat zero. Nothing's changed in game journalism, women are still having opinions on the Internet, and Toby Fox is laughing all the way to the bank.
Rage on if you want to, but don't delude yourself into thinking that's ever going to get you what you want.
Actually I was just giving out my pov, I wasn't asking for anything... I'm not into this much at all, but I can tell you are, since you were hatin' on what I was saying... Feel sorry for you...
I think something we all need to remind ourselves of is that both sides of this argument love games. One side wants games to include things that they feel more comfortable with while the other is already comfortable and is worried that they might not be in the future. We are all here on a forum for an updated version of a ridiculously old videogame because we love games so much that we want to talk about them with others. Nobody wants to ruin videogames for anyone else, we all just want the Baldur's Gate that feels right to us in our hearts. I think thats a good thing. So lets be good fellows and figure our how we can all do this noble thing. Thank you for reading my thoughts.
I'm absolutely 100% perfectly fine with games SJW's want existing. Holy sheet I don't want to remove games they like from the market, far from it. However, what I'm against is them changing an already existing (and beloved) franchise to suit their agenda. Make your own IP!
It is their IP at the moment, they have the rights to make games within the universe, bestowed upon them by Wizards of the Coast. If they want to throw Big Bird in as a boss at the end of a dungeon and Wizards of the Coast signs off on it they can....
Yes they "own" the IP, but they didn't "create" it as far as I know. Am I mistaken?
Trent Oster, the CEO, was part of the team that created the originals. Several employees did as well, including the newly hired creative director.
Not the mention the absurd notion that this team wants to "ruin" the legacy of a game and engine they clearly love down to their core. You may not know this if you joined in the last few days, but Beamdog DOES give a shit about the Baldur's Gate series, so much so that they risked the future of their studio on giving us all something we never had any right to expect would ever exist, more content in the BG universe and Infinity Engine on a grand scale.
Trent Oster, the CEO, was part of the team that created the originals. Several employees did as well, including the newly hired creative director.
Does this go for whoever is responsible for the atrocious writing as well? Because if that's the case I'll begrudgingly admit that they can do what they want with the franchise. However, I'll still despise the direction it took, kind of like what happened with Warcraft after World of Warcraft.
Trent Oster, the CEO, was part of the team that created the originals. Several employees did as well, including the newly hired creative director.
Does this go for whoever is responsible for the atrocious writing as well? Because if that's the case I'll begrudgingly admit that they can do what they want with the franchise. However, I'll still despise the direction it took, kind of like what happened with Warcraft after World of Warcraft.
I don't think people play WoW for the writing....at least I hope not. I hope they didn't play the RTS games for the writing either. And we can also dispense with the idea and rose-colored glasses of the original Baldur's Gate writing. It's perfectly fine and often good, but it isn't Shakespeare, and is often repetitive.
Not the mention the absurd notion that this team wants to "ruin" the legacy of a game and engine they clearly love down to their core. You may not know this if you joined in the last few days, but Beamdog DOES give a shit about the Baldur's Gate series, so much so that they risked the future of their studio on giving us all something we never had any right to expect would ever exist, more content in the BG universe and Infinity Engine on a grand scale.
Personally I would never accuse them of wanting to "ruin" the series unless I saw actual proof of it. However, it's quite obvious they want to inject a certain agenda into it. Maybe they believe that agenda would help the game. Maybe they believe it wouldn't help or hinder the game, but it would let them push their agenda. I don't know.
That's because it wasn't directed at you, but it hardly matters. They've been anything but subtle about it: they've given interviews to an SJW journalist for an SJW publication saying that they're proud SJWs who do not care if anyone has a problem with that, they've said that we're not real fans if we don't like what they're doing, etc. etc.
The cat is well and truly out of the bag, if you either genuinely don't see what's happening or prefer not to think that the company would behave in this fashion, then that's fine. If you understand what's happening and are just yanking my chain then that's fine too. I'm not unsure about what's going on.
Huh. Imagine that. One person on the Beamdog team becomes an issue to GG and they take it out on the entire community; fans and the company itself.
Where IS the justice in that, anyway?
I think you're assuming some form of retaliation that is not in evidence. I don't blame any one particular person at Beamdog any more than any of the others, this has been a collective venture from a small company.
All that's happened in response is that people have given their opinions of the game to some places that ask for people to do that. You're assuming that this is some form of organised campaign, but your assumption is all that you've got. It may be partially true (in so far as some people may've seen excerpts from the game that offended them and passed judgement on the basis of that alone, spontaneously and without being told to do so), and if it is then I don't agree with anyone who left a review without playing the game... but plenty of people who've bought and played the game on sites that require purchase confirmation have expressed the exact same sentiments. That's not some form of dastardly revenge.
On steam we have more positive reviews than negative yet every positive review is massively downrated (since that doesnt require purchase) and every negative review uprated. When someone posted a negative rating because of mod support it initially had 86%, he switched it to positive since it was fixed with an edit and within a few hours it dropped to 90% negative. If that doesnt scream review manipulation to you then your trolling.
I am certainly not, because people who find negative reviews helpful tend to be people who came to the decision not to make the purchase.
Furthermore, even if you are right then the only manipulation that's taking place is that people who agree with the negative reviews from game owners are upvoting those reviews. That's what they're supposed to do. That's how the system works.
The thread is too long for me to go through everything, but has anyone actually tried to demonstrate an example of bad writing except the cleric? I have completed the game and have found the writing perfectly acceptable.
Not to mention that the writing of Baldur's Gate (especially the first game) wasn't consistently high quality as well.
Trent Oster, the CEO, was part of the team that created the originals. Several employees did as well, including the newly hired creative director.
Does this go for whoever is responsible for the atrocious writing as well? Because if that's the case I'll begrudgingly admit that they can do what they want with the franchise. However, I'll still despise the direction it took, kind of like what happened with Warcraft after World of Warcraft.
Well, Trent Oster, Cam, and David Gaider sign off on everything, so yeah.
That's not true. It was backer content that the original author decided to tweak. I was actually there and in the forums when this happened, and the change didn't happen overnight. In the meantime, the so-called SJWs didn't even begin to take action like what is being taken against Beamdog now.
I think you may be remembering selectively...
Less than three hours after the first "SJW" complained about the poem on twitter, the Lead Designer of the game publicly stated that they'd look into it, making it clear he took the concerns seriously and agreed with the complainants in principle, which appeased all but the most fanatical and impatient of them.
In comparison, Trent Oster's responses to the current kerfluffle wasn't very diplomatic or olive-branch'y. He basically told the upset fans (paraphrased): "You all just hate trans people, you're not real Baldur's Gate fans". It is no surprise that this heated up the whole thing further.
So, not quite the same situation...
PS: I think Trent had his heart in the right place, but he didn't handle this awesomely.
The thread is too long for me to go through everything, but has anyone actually tried to demonstrate an example of bad writing except the cleric? I have completed the game and have found the writing perfectly acceptable.
Not to mention that the writing of Baldur's Gate (especially the first game) wasn't consistently high quality as well.
The "bad writing" criticism is a mask for the real issue that has tanked the game reviews, which is belief in some sort of grand social justice conspiracy that apparently rivals the Kennedy Assassination. I could understand if people are pissed about the bugs (but any gamer playing a game on release in this day and age and not expecting them....well, I don't know what to tell you, that's how games are). But the bugs will be fixed, of course they will. That isn't what's going on.
I guess I'm the only one who liked the original's story/writing? Well fuck me.
I think people just mean some parts of the writing were a little rough in places, which is fine. I think we all like the story or we wouldn't be here. Hope that clears things up friend.
I guess I'm the only one who liked the original's story/writing? Well fuck me.
I think people just mean some parts of the writing were a little rough in places, which is fine. I think we all like the story or we wouldn't be here. Hope that clears things up friend.
The thread is too long for me to go through everything, but has anyone actually tried to demonstrate an example of bad writing except the cleric? I have completed the game and have found the writing perfectly acceptable.
Not to mention that the writing of Baldur's Gate (especially the first game) wasn't consistently high quality as well.
The "bad writing" criticism is a mask for the real issue that has tanked the game reviews, which is belief in some sort of grand social justice conspiracy that apparently rivals the Kennedy Assassination. I could understand if people are pissed about the bugs (but any gamer playing a game on release in this day and age and not expecting them....well, I don't know what to tell you, that's how games are). But the bugs will be fixed, of course they will. That isn't what's going on.
It's not a mask, the quality of the writing is an additional problem to the social justice agenda, which is less of a conspiracy and more of something that one of the writers freely and openly admitted to... not that it requires a conspiracy for a small group of people to write something governed by their political beliefs...
I guess I'm the only one who liked the original's story/writing? Well fuck me.
I think people just mean some parts of the writing were a little rough in places, which is fine. I think we all like the story or we wouldn't be here. Hope that clears things up friend.
I guess I'm the only one who liked the original's story/writing? Well fuck me.
I think people just mean some parts of the writing were a little rough in places, which is fine. I think we all like the story or we wouldn't be here. Hope that clears things up friend.
Right, that's what I mean. For example, the dream sequences and the chapter introductions were generally of high quality.
Many of the sidequests where acceptable, but rather trite like the Narcillus dialogue.
Other parts, like some journal entries in the prologue depend more on your taste, including the one where the PC considers joining the Candlekeep People's Liberation Front.
It's not a mask, the quality of the writing is an additional problem to the social justice agenda, which is less of a conspiracy and more of something that one of the writers freely and openly admitted to... not that it requires a conspiracy for a small group of people to write something governed by their political beliefs...
I would still like to have an example of that beside the cleric you seem to dislike.
It's not a mask, the quality of the writing is an additional problem to the social justice agenda, which is less of a conspiracy and more of something that one of the writers freely and openly admitted to... not that it requires a conspiracy for a small group of people to write something governed by their political beliefs...
I would still like to have an example of that beside the cleric you seem to dislike.
You just opened up a can of worms, my friend. Prepare to hear about how the entire game is pushing a "hamfisted" liberal agenda. Apparently there's even a little girl at the beginning who makes you lick her mother's boots because you're a man. It's all very terrifying and threatening.
I guess I'm the only one who liked the original's story/writing? Well fuck me.
You're not alone here, mate.
I feel the original story/writing was nice and simple. Like Star Wars and Lord of the Rings. It was easy to follow. The first time I played Baldur's Gate, I was 12 years old and my english was terrible. I didn't understand half of the conversations. My uncle was occasionally explaining the iron crisis for me. But it became clear to me on my own why Baldur's Gate was closed until Chapter 5. Why I had to return to Candlekeep. Who was Sarevok. What was my true heritage. Why Jon Irenicus captured me, etc etc.
Comments
Yep, I don't disagree that they LEGALLY can't do it. I'm saying that it feels like a kick in the nuts.
Also, like I showed in my post (which nobody replied to :c )on the bottom of the last page, I have a physical copy of the game. So that's no problem m8.
Furthermore, even if you are right then the only manipulation that's taking place is that people who agree with the negative reviews from game owners are upvoting those reviews. That's what they're supposed to do. That's how the system works.
Not to mention that the writing of Baldur's Gate (especially the first game) wasn't consistently high quality as well.
Less than three hours after the first "SJW" complained about the poem on twitter, the Lead Designer of the game publicly stated that they'd look into it, making it clear he took the concerns seriously and agreed with the complainants in principle, which appeased all but the most fanatical and impatient of them.
In comparison, Trent Oster's responses to the current kerfluffle wasn't very diplomatic or olive-branch'y. He basically told the upset fans (paraphrased): "You all just hate trans people, you're not real Baldur's Gate fans". It is no surprise that this heated up the whole thing further.
So, not quite the same situation...
PS: I think Trent had his heart in the right place, but he didn't handle this awesomely.
Many of the sidequests where acceptable, but rather trite like the Narcillus dialogue.
Other parts, like some journal entries in the prologue depend more on your taste, including the one where the PC considers joining the Candlekeep People's Liberation Front.
A few things about Safana's change of character too.
I feel the original story/writing was nice and simple. Like Star Wars and Lord of the Rings. It was easy to follow. The first time I played Baldur's Gate, I was 12 years old and my english was terrible. I didn't understand half of the conversations. My uncle was occasionally explaining the iron crisis for me. But it became clear to me on my own why Baldur's Gate was closed until Chapter 5. Why I had to return to Candlekeep. Who was Sarevok. What was my true heritage. Why Jon Irenicus captured me, etc etc.
Grow up.
Not all people who like what you hate are bad.
Not all people who hate what you like are bad.
(And yes, this applies to both sides of this controversy.)