Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

Dark Dreams of Furiae - a new module for NWN:EE! Buy now
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

User Ratings on Metacritic (*SPOILERS*)

145791035

Comments

  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,695
    edited April 2016
    Joey said:

    Envygames said:

    There is NOTHING that justifies the amount of reviews this game has on Metacritic outside of a coordinated Gamergate smear job. 219 reviews. By contrast the new FALLOUT 4 DLC, which came out at roughly the same time, has 69. Fallout 4. Bethesda. Possibly the most popular gaming franchise in the world at the moment. And it has a 1/4th of the reviews of Siege.

    The amount is one thing...the score another. I have played it twice already, i didnt even know about that transgender char, or the Minsc-Line up till earlier today. I wouldnt score the Addon much higher honestly. A bit higher...probably even arround 5/10 but more would realy stretch it.
    The point is, there is no way the first DLC to the biggest selling console game of the last year should have a fraction of the reviews of a obscure expansion to a game that is nearly 20 years old. Not in any rational universe.
    Unless the devs make a point of enthusiastically stepping into the biggest cultural debate of their times. That'll do it.
    And your response basically admits my point....that the reviews are obviously being manipulated by people who have a problem with the "political" content of a game they haven't even played it (if, once again, you can call a merchant NPC "content").

    By the way, for the record, it's no longer a "debate" in culture. Gay marriage isn't going anywhere, trans people aren't going anywhere. You lost this one, which I suspect is the major underlying issue here....

    PurudayaSayaki
  • JoeyJoey Member Posts: 201
    Purudaya said:

    Joey said:

    Envygames said:

    There is NOTHING that justifies the amount of reviews this game has on Metacritic outside of a coordinated Gamergate smear job. 219 reviews. By contrast the new FALLOUT 4 DLC, which came out at roughly the same time, has 69. Fallout 4. Bethesda. Possibly the most popular gaming franchise in the world at the moment. And it has a 1/4th of the reviews of Siege.

    The amount is one thing...the score another. I have played it twice already, i didnt even know about that transgender char, or the Minsc-Line up till earlier today. I wouldnt score the Addon much higher honestly. A bit higher...probably even arround 5/10 but more would realy stretch it.
    The point is, there is no way the first DLC to the biggest selling console game of the last year should have a fraction of the reviews of a obscure expansion to a game that is nearly 20 years old. Not in any rational universe.
    Unless the devs make a point of enthusiastically stepping into the biggest cultural debate of their times. That'll do it.
    So you think its justified to skew reviews downward over this? To try and sink the game, ruin it for fans that enjoy it, and harm the developer because it contains something you don't like? I'm really curious, because every time a point is made you take it in another direction.
    Justified? I don't know whether it's justified or not. But entirely predictable, yes. Devs need to be very careful around politics in their game, hell everyone in the creative industry does.

    Qbert
  • EnvygamesEnvygames Member Posts: 57
    Purudaya said:

    Envygames said:

    There is NOTHING that justifies the amount of reviews this game has on Metacritic outside of a coordinated Gamergate smear job. 219 reviews. By contrast the new FALLOUT 4 DLC, which came out at roughly the same time, has 69. Fallout 4. Bethesda. Possibly the most popular gaming franchise in the world at the moment. And it has a 1/4th of the reviews of Siege.

    The amount is one thing...the score another. I have played it twice already, i didnt even know about that transgender char, or the Minsc-Line up till earlier today. I wouldnt score the Addon much higher honestly. A bit higher...probably even arround 5/10 but more would realy stretch it.
    That's funny, I've been playing BG for 18 years and I'd rate SoD a 9 or a 10. 71% of Steam reviews, which require that you purchase the game, seem to agree.

    I think we need to stop pretending that the 20+ pages of 0-1 star reviews on other sites are anything other than what they are.
    Realy? 9 out of 10? Wow...i only played BG for now 16 years, but man...9 of 10 seems to me quite the stretch. I had about 10 hard-crashes during the first playthrough, the Story is average at best, most of the twists felt quite unnatural, the most interesting questions the Addon had are solved in Chapter 2 or 3. Personaly i felt the difficulty of the encounters was all over the place. I would realy like to know how you would justify 9 out of 10 beyound "still hyped".

  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,695
    edited April 2016
    Archaos said:

    Joey said:



    Edwin's change is played for laughs. The transexual's is not, as far as I know.

    So? I'm still expecting an answer about my question in the comment about magical vs mundane gender change, above.

    I'm honestly curious about the actual issue here.
    Unless the issue is really "I don't like transexuals".
    That is absolutely, 100% the issue. They can't admit it, it has to be masked in psuedo-intellectual nonsense, but yes, in the end it can be boiled down to "trans people gross me out".

  • JoeyJoey Member Posts: 201

    Archaos said:

    Joey said:



    Edwin's change is played for laughs. The transexual's is not, as far as I know.

    So? I'm still expecting an answer about my question in the comment about magical vs mundane gender change, above.

    I'm honestly curious about the actual issue here.
    Unless the issue is really "I don't like transexuals".
    That is absolutely, 100% the issue. They can't admit it, it has to be masked in psuedo-intellectual nonsense, but yes, in the end it can be boiled down to "trans people gross me out".
    Bang on! Even the transexuals who've come out against Beamdog's SJW love-in clearly hate other transexuals.

    ArdulQbert
  • Diogenes42Diogenes42 Member Posts: 597
    The original Baldur's Gate said there was no real difference between the sexes and women could succeed at anything a man can. Typical SJW agenda, travelling back in time to ruin a classic game. Sickening.

    Sayaki
  • PurudayaPurudaya Member Posts: 816
    Joey said:

    Purudaya said:

    Joey said:

    Envygames said:

    There is NOTHING that justifies the amount of reviews this game has on Metacritic outside of a coordinated Gamergate smear job. 219 reviews. By contrast the new FALLOUT 4 DLC, which came out at roughly the same time, has 69. Fallout 4. Bethesda. Possibly the most popular gaming franchise in the world at the moment. And it has a 1/4th of the reviews of Siege.

    The amount is one thing...the score another. I have played it twice already, i didnt even know about that transgender char, or the Minsc-Line up till earlier today. I wouldnt score the Addon much higher honestly. A bit higher...probably even arround 5/10 but more would realy stretch it.
    The point is, there is no way the first DLC to the biggest selling console game of the last year should have a fraction of the reviews of a obscure expansion to a game that is nearly 20 years old. Not in any rational universe.
    Unless the devs make a point of enthusiastically stepping into the biggest cultural debate of their times. That'll do it.
    So you think its justified to skew reviews downward over this? To try and sink the game, ruin it for fans that enjoy it, and harm the developer because it contains something you don't like? I'm really curious, because every time a point is made you take it in another direction.
    Justified? I don't know whether it's justified or not. But entirely predictable, yes. Devs need to be very careful around politics in their game, hell everyone in the creative industry does.
    You don't know whether it's justified or not? Surely you've been around these forums enough in the past 24 hours to have formed an opinion.

    Is it acceptable or not to bomb a small developer with negative reviews in order to sink their game, hurt their fans, and damage the company by trying to influence sales because the game contains something you don't like?

    Sayaki
  • ArchaosArchaos Member Posts: 1,421
    edited April 2016
    Joey said:



    ...you should be able to tell the difference between whimsically altering someone's gender for a tongue-in-cheek side quest, and SJW-era transexuals being commended for their bravery.

    And what's the difference? One is a fun event, the other a serious one.
    Are you referring to commended bravery in the game?

    Because ingame, I didn't notice any dialogue that said "You are brave" or "I gathered bravery".
    The game's dialogue basically goes:
    -I changed my name.
    -Why did you change your name?
    -Because I felt more like a woman growing up.
    -Okay, bye.

    And people liking it or not, it does take bravery to come out as a transexual in the real world.
    As it actually took bravery to come out as a gay man or lesbian.
    Or it took actual bravery for women or black people to claim more rights.

    So again, I'm honestly confused.

    Sayaki
  • BGLoverBGLover Member Posts: 549
    UltraB00n said:

    shawne said:

    You find the transgender character offensive? You find Beamdog's politics offensive? Don't buy the goddamn game. That's fine, no one's going to chastise you for that beyond pointing out that you might be missing out on a solid RPG. But that's your choice, and no one can take it away from you. Just don't expect to push your agenda on other people and be welcomed with open arms.

    No, sorry, it's bigger than the invidiual choice to buy or not to buy. It's about drawing a line in the sand. It's about actively fighting the SJW entryism into my hobby. It's about pushing back against the drive to sanitize the medium of video games and make it comply with the ever-changing and ever-expanding demands of a radical but loud political minority group, which Amber Scott apparentely identifies with.

    SJWs are to the left what teabaggers are to the right. The SJWs and indentity politics have destroyed my political home (the left), I'll not let them destroy my hobby without a fight. This is a front in the culture wars and it's dead serious.

    And let's not mince words here. Beamdog brought this upon themselves. THEY have decided to jump headfirst into the minefield of the video games culture wars. No one forced them to. No one forced Amber Scott to tell Nathan Grayson of Kotaku that the supposedly horrendous sexism of Baldur's Gate needs to be rectified and if the fans don't like it, well, that's just too bad. No one forced them to take a jab at GamerGate. They CHOSE to do this and now that they're reaping what they have sowed, they whinge about it.

    I guess Amber Scott was just too damn occupied with virtue signalling to her SJW peers to just stop for a moment and consider the broader implications of her actions. Aside from the personal emotional gratification she got from absuing this beloved franchise as her personal pulpit for poisonous, venomous, noxious and virulent grievence politics, what good did it do? It's not like it is a big secret that the culture wars in the video gaming word have turned utterly toxic. Why jump into the fray?

    Or maybe beamdog really have swallowed the Kool-Aid that "gamers are over" and that "gamers don't have to be your audience". They certainly show a certain degree of disdain for those who do not wish a beloved franchise turned into a SJW propganda megaphone. Well, I guess Beamdog can now chase that elusive "diverse" customer base that would never buy their games anyway, even if it actually existed. Good job, Amber and good job Beamdog for doubling down on the SJW crap.
    You know the stage when reality becomes stranger than fiction. For me, the above post is it. The above post acknowledges its not about Siege of Dragonspear. For one person at least, its about pursuing a certain agenda. Its about, in their words, a games culture wars.... about 'punishing' the opposition, about making sure those you disagree with reap what they have sowed. It uses insidious terms like whinging, personal emotional gratification... abusing.... posinous venomonous noxious virulent grievance politics.... it names an individual they disagree with and insults them.... its an unattractive post in every way.

    Previously, I have been suggesting to people that maybe they should play the game and see if they like it and enjoy it, and suggesting that if they do they should tell people about it and play it some more. And if they don't enjoy it they should tell people why and stop playing it.

    I won't suggest that again, because its quite clearly not about Siege of Dragonspear.

    NightRevanpekoSayaki
  • PurudayaPurudaya Member Posts: 816
    Purudaya said:

    Joey said:

    Purudaya said:

    Joey said:

    Envygames said:

    There is NOTHING that justifies the amount of reviews this game has on Metacritic outside of a coordinated Gamergate smear job. 219 reviews. By contrast the new FALLOUT 4 DLC, which came out at roughly the same time, has 69. Fallout 4. Bethesda. Possibly the most popular gaming franchise in the world at the moment. And it has a 1/4th of the reviews of Siege.

    The amount is one thing...the score another. I have played it twice already, i didnt even know about that transgender char, or the Minsc-Line up till earlier today. I wouldnt score the Addon much higher honestly. A bit higher...probably even arround 5/10 but more would realy stretch it.
    The point is, there is no way the first DLC to the biggest selling console game of the last year should have a fraction of the reviews of a obscure expansion to a game that is nearly 20 years old. Not in any rational universe.
    Unless the devs make a point of enthusiastically stepping into the biggest cultural debate of their times. That'll do it.
    So you think its justified to skew reviews downward over this? To try and sink the game, ruin it for fans that enjoy it, and harm the developer because it contains something you don't like? I'm really curious, because every time a point is made you take it in another direction.
    Justified? I don't know whether it's justified or not. But entirely predictable, yes. Devs need to be very careful around politics in their game, hell everyone in the creative industry does.
    You don't know whether it's justified or not? Surely you've been around these forums enough in the past 24 hours to have formed an opinion.

    Is it acceptable or not to bomb a small developer with negative reviews in order to sink their game, hurt their fans, and damage the company by trying to influence sales because the game (which you've never played) contains something you don't like?

  • Xerxes1811Xerxes1811 Member Posts: 62
    All I have to say is that this really saddens me, I've been looking forward to SOD since the day it was announced. I've purchased all the EE editions along with the originals, I LOVE baldur's Gate. Having all of this controversy at launch really took the wind out of my sails. Hindsight being 20/20, Beamdog should have just left politics out of the game.....period. I WANT this game to succeed, I WANT BG3 to be made. Doesn't matter which side you fall on, the fact reamins now SOD has had a controversial launch and will likely hurt the game's sales, which didn't need to happpen, that's what makes me so bummed out. Granted I haven't played the game yet, just got my Steam key yesterday, (purchased the CE) and I look forward to playing it and I will reserve judgement on political agendas or whatever until then. But in the end, it still makes me sad that we are here at this point.

    Qbert
  • shawneshawne Member Posts: 3,239
    Joey said:

    Justified? I don't know whether it's justified or not. But entirely predictable, yes. Devs need to be very careful around politics in their game, hell everyone in the creative industry does.

    Sounds like censorship to me. *shrug*

    [Deleted User]Sayaki
  • CaradocCaradoc Member Posts: 92
    edited April 2016
    UltraB00n said:



    No, sorry, it's bigger than the invidiual choice to buy or not to buy. It's about drawing a line in the sand. It's about actively fighting the SJW entryism into my hobby. It's about pushing back against the drive to sanitize the medium of video games and make it comply with the ever-changing and ever-expanding demands of a radical but loud political minority group, which Amber Scott apparentely identifies with.

    SJWs are to the left what teabaggers are to the right. The SJWs and indentity politics have destroyed my political home (the left), I'll not let them destroy my hobby without a fight. This is a front in the culture wars and it's dead serious.

    Take a deep breath there young freedom fighter. Its just a videogame.

    And let's not mince words here. Beamdog brought this upon themselves. THEY have decided to jump headfirst into the minefield of the video games culture wars. No one forced them to. No one forced Amber Scott to tell Nathan Grayson of Kotaku that the supposedly horrendous sexism of Baldur's Gate needs to be rectified and if the fans don't like it, well, that's just too bad. No one forced them to take a jab at GamerGate. They CHOSE to do this and now that they're reaping what they have sowed, they whinge about it.
    So this kind of defame campaign is justified because they dared to create content you didn't like? Posting fake reviews and trying to undermine their launch is accepted because the holy gamergate was insulted? Now can you explain is this whole gamegate is some kind of religion or a holy thing which should not be joked about? Is it forbidden to make fun of gamergate? Where can I read the tennets of your fate? Please educate me. ;)
    I guess Amber Scott was just too damn occupied with virtue signalling to her SJW peers to just stop for a moment and consider the broader implications of her actions. Aside from the personal emotional gratification she got from absuing this beloved franchise as her personal pulpit for poisonous, venomous, noxious and virulent grievence politics, what good did it do? It's not like it is a big secret that the culture wars in the video gaming word have turned utterly toxic. Why jump into the fray?
    Perhaps she just wrote small little thing which she liked and never expected people to get so mad over it. Perhaps she wanted make a bit fun of you deadly serious gamergate people. I mean who knew that videogaming was such a serious thing.

    But please educate us sinners about the holy tennets of your fate. So that we would never transgress against the holy gamergate.

    pekoSayaki
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,695
    Joey said:

    Archaos said:

    Joey said:



    Edwin's change is played for laughs. The transexual's is not, as far as I know.

    So? I'm still expecting an answer about my question in the comment about magical vs mundane gender change, above.

    I'm honestly curious about the actual issue here.
    Unless the issue is really "I don't like transexuals".
    That is absolutely, 100% the issue. They can't admit it, it has to be masked in psuedo-intellectual nonsense, but yes, in the end it can be boiled down to "trans people gross me out".
    Bang on! Even the transexuals who've come out against Beamdog's SJW love-in clearly hate other transexuals.
    I'm fairly certain it isn't the trans community embarking a coordinated mission to torpedo the game's reviews, and the only reason to partake in such a stupid and juvenile exercise is a deep-seated fear or hatred of said subject....

    [Deleted User]Sayaki
  • PurudayaPurudaya Member Posts: 816
    edited April 2016

    All I have to say is that this really saddens me, I've been looking forward to SOD since the day it was announced. I've purchased all the EE editions along with the originals, I LOVE baldur's Gate. Having all of this controversy at launch really took the wind out of my sails. Hindsight being 20/20, Beamdog should have just left politics out of the game.....period. I WANT this game to succeed, I WANT BG3 to be made. Doesn't matter which side you fall on, the fact reamins now SOD has had a controversial launch and will likely hurt the game's sales, which didn't need to happpen, that's what makes me so bummed out. Granted I haven't played the game yet, just got my Steam key yesterday, (purchased the CE) and I look forward to playing it and I will reserve judgement on political agendas or whatever until then. But in the end, it still makes me sad that we are here at this point.

    Remember that just because people are saying there are political agendas doesn't mean there are political agendas. These people could find a political agenda in a jar of peanut butter. I hope you have fun playing SoD.

  • PurudayaPurudaya Member Posts: 816
    Purudaya said:

    All I have to say is that this really saddens me, I've been looking forward to SOD since the day it was announced. I've purchased all the EE editions along with the originals, I LOVE baldur's Gate. Having all of this controversy at launch really took the wind out of my sails. Hindsight being 20/20, Beamdog should have just left politics out of the game.....period. I WANT this game to succeed, I WANT BG3 to be made. Doesn't matter which side you fall on, the fact reamins now SOD has had a controversial launch and will likely hurt the game's sales, which didn't need to happpen, that's what makes me so bummed out. Granted I haven't played the game yet, just got my Steam key yesterday, (purchased the CE) and I look forward to playing it and I will reserve judgement on political agendas or whatever until then. But in the end, it still makes me sad that we are here at this point.

    Remember that just because people are saying there are political agendas doesn't mean there are political agendas. These people could find a political agenda in a jar of peanut butter. I hope you have fun playing SoD.

    Sayaki
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,695

    The original Baldur's Gate said there was no real difference between the sexes and women could succeed at anything a man can. Typical SJW agenda, travelling back in time to ruin a classic game. Sickening.

    It's a completely separate game that doesn't do a damn thing to ruin anything. Unless you conclude that Godfather III "ruined" the first two. Or that Alien 3 makes the original less effective.

  • JoeyJoey Member Posts: 201
    Purudaya said:

    Joey said:

    Purudaya said:

    Joey said:

    Envygames said:

    There is NOTHING that justifies the amount of reviews this game has on Metacritic outside of a coordinated Gamergate smear job. 219 reviews. By contrast the new FALLOUT 4 DLC, which came out at roughly the same time, has 69. Fallout 4. Bethesda. Possibly the most popular gaming franchise in the world at the moment. And it has a 1/4th of the reviews of Siege.

    The amount is one thing...the score another. I have played it twice already, i didnt even know about that transgender char, or the Minsc-Line up till earlier today. I wouldnt score the Addon much higher honestly. A bit higher...probably even arround 5/10 but more would realy stretch it.
    The point is, there is no way the first DLC to the biggest selling console game of the last year should have a fraction of the reviews of a obscure expansion to a game that is nearly 20 years old. Not in any rational universe.
    Unless the devs make a point of enthusiastically stepping into the biggest cultural debate of their times. That'll do it.
    So you think its justified to skew reviews downward over this? To try and sink the game, ruin it for fans that enjoy it, and harm the developer because it contains something you don't like? I'm really curious, because every time a point is made you take it in another direction.
    Justified? I don't know whether it's justified or not. But entirely predictable, yes. Devs need to be very careful around politics in their game, hell everyone in the creative industry does.
    You don't know whether it's justified or not? Surely you've been around these forums enough in the past 24 hours to have formed an opinion.

    Is it acceptable or not to bomb a small developer with negative reviews in order to sink their game, hurt their fans, and damage the company by trying to influence sales because the game contains something you don't like?
    I'm sure the world isn't waiting to hear my moral judgements on internet crusades. And it's irrelevent anyway - Beamdog knew what they were getting into, and now they will reap what they sowed.

    EnvygamesGodKaiserHell
  • ArchaosArchaos Member Posts: 1,421
    edited April 2016



    That is absolutely, 100% the issue. They can't admit it, it has to be masked in psuedo-intellectual nonsense, but yes, in the end it can be boiled down to "trans people gross me out".

    I'm reaching to the same conclusions, in all honesty but I'm a logical person.
    I may or may not like something for my own reasons but it's different from calling it something more than it actually is.

    To me, it's more like:
    "I didn't like being a brunette growing up, so I dyed my hair blonde."
    I'm not a huge fan of dyed blonde hair but I'm not making an issue about it or calling it something else.

    It's practically the same thing. People changing themselves to be more like the ones they like and feel better.
    Whether that's contact lenses, dyed hair, breast implants or gender-change.

    Someone dying their hair blonde from black, is biologically a brunette but now they're blonde.
    How is this any different or making it a political agenda?

    ...And why is it important in the least?

    Sayaki
  • DeeDee Member Posts: 10,447
    I don't know, I may be poking the hornet's nest again here, but to me that sounds like "I punched you in the face, so you probably deserved it."

    InconnuKrotosbyrne20Sayaki
  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,695
    Joey said:

    Purudaya said:

    Joey said:

    Purudaya said:

    Joey said:

    Envygames said:

    There is NOTHING that justifies the amount of reviews this game has on Metacritic outside of a coordinated Gamergate smear job. 219 reviews. By contrast the new FALLOUT 4 DLC, which came out at roughly the same time, has 69. Fallout 4. Bethesda. Possibly the most popular gaming franchise in the world at the moment. And it has a 1/4th of the reviews of Siege.

    The amount is one thing...the score another. I have played it twice already, i didnt even know about that transgender char, or the Minsc-Line up till earlier today. I wouldnt score the Addon much higher honestly. A bit higher...probably even arround 5/10 but more would realy stretch it.
    The point is, there is no way the first DLC to the biggest selling console game of the last year should have a fraction of the reviews of a obscure expansion to a game that is nearly 20 years old. Not in any rational universe.
    Unless the devs make a point of enthusiastically stepping into the biggest cultural debate of their times. That'll do it.
    So you think its justified to skew reviews downward over this? To try and sink the game, ruin it for fans that enjoy it, and harm the developer because it contains something you don't like? I'm really curious, because every time a point is made you take it in another direction.
    Justified? I don't know whether it's justified or not. But entirely predictable, yes. Devs need to be very careful around politics in their game, hell everyone in the creative industry does.
    You don't know whether it's justified or not? Surely you've been around these forums enough in the past 24 hours to have formed an opinion.

    Is it acceptable or not to bomb a small developer with negative reviews in order to sink their game, hurt their fans, and damage the company by trying to influence sales because the game contains something you don't like?
    I'm sure the world isn't waiting to hear my moral judgements on internet crusades. And it's irrelevent anyway - Beamdog knew what they were getting into, and now they will reap what they sowed.
    Indeed....maybe they should have realized that many gamers are sadly the EXACT cliche they are portrayed as....

  • jjstraka34jjstraka34 Member Posts: 9,695
    edited April 2016
    Dee said:

    I don't know, I may be poking the hornet's nest again here, but to me that sounds like "I punched you in the face, so you probably deserved it."

    The aggrievement complex and sense of victimhood is staggering....anyone who can view themselves as being personally negatively affected by this enough to want to sink the game's reviews in a coordinated effort on multiple sites has serious, serious issues....

    VyrulisseCoffeethrallKrotosSayaki
  • EnvygamesEnvygames Member Posts: 57
    Btw is it true that "Gametime played" was deactivated for Steam Reviews on SoD?

  • JoeyJoey Member Posts: 201
    Dee said:

    I don't know, I may be poking the hornet's nest again here, but to me that sounds like "I punched you in the face, so you probably deserved it."

    I am old school and of the belief that if you go out of your way to insult someone and piss them off, then yeah you do deserve a punch to the face. That's life.

    Want to stay out of controversy? Then don't court *either side* of the most controversial...thing...that's ever happened to gaming.

  • Diogenes42Diogenes42 Member Posts: 597
    Here is a controversial opinion: nobody should be punching anyone in the face.

    joluvcraymond727KrotosSayaki
  • JoeyJoey Member Posts: 201
    Purudaya said:


    Wow. Why are you so scared to answer this question?

    If I made a decision to wear a "this is what a feminist looks like" t-shirt and then get beaten half to death by people at a bar for wearing it, will I have "reaped what I have sowed?" No, because the behavior isn't on me, it's on them.

    One last try: Is it acceptable or not to bomb a small developer with negative reviews in order to sink their game, hurt their fans, and damage the company by trying to influence sales because the game contains something you don't like?

    I find it strange that you're so interested in my moral position. I have explained to you that opinion on this is *irrelevent*, as this series of events could have been easily anticipated. And actually yes - most people know how toxic and unpopular feminism is. If you choose to go out in public openly endorsing it...on your head be it. Hell there's tonnes of unpopular stuff I support, but I make a point of not wearing it on my sleeve (or shirt).

    I feel like you're clinging to the morality of this because the actual issue is so simple. The devs chose to court SJW politics, and they're paying the price for it. Rather than publically apologising for bringing politics into their game, they're doubling down on it, deeper and deeper down the rabbit hole they go. But tragically, few consumers will follow.

  • silveralensilveralen Member Posts: 15
    Purudaya said:

    Congrats, everyone – we might not get future BG content because people are actively trying to tank this game. If you've actually PLAYED SoD, I would strongly encourage you leave a review of your own.

    A few years ago this would've bothered me.

    Currently i'm comparing the newest BG expansion vs PoE and the new torment game, and I'm struggling to determine why I should care.

    BG under beamdog is... decidedly mediocre. The writing is flat and one dimensional, the characters are surprisingly dull (how you make a goblin party member dull I do not know, but they did it so kudos there), and the nostalgia of old 2nd ed dnd combat is struggling to stand up to a much more interesting and varied systems the others are exploring.

    In short, there needs to be something of particular merit here for me to worry about its loss. All that is here is a decidedly mediocre set of developers trying to live off a franchise made by others with far more skill, as becomes obvious when comparing what black isle has gone on to do.

    Now, when i see developers at beamdog trashing the original BG as well as the people who made it and those who loved it, I go from apathy to actually thinking it'd be preferable. They clearly lack respect for the game and series, and it would be best if they didn't make any more games within it (or, if i let a bit of my more unpleasant side out, any more games at all).

  • VyrulisseVyrulisse Member Posts: 108

    Here is a controversial opinion: nobody should be punching anyone in the face.

    Now now, let's not get crazy here!

    Sayaki
  • DetectiveMittensDetectiveMittens Member Posts: 235
    Envygames said:

    Btw is it true that "Gametime played" was deactivated for Steam Reviews on SoD?

    If it was I am very upset, I was gonna set up a script to data-mine the review page and use my data-science skills to produce some cool plots. Looks like that idea is out the window.

This discussion has been closed.