So I just finished my second playthrough and, um...Mizhena is one of the most developed NPCs in the entire game.
FIrst you meet her in the Fist camp, where she tells you all about her faith in the Lord of Battles. If you ask her about her name, she tells you that she was originally raised as a boy and created the name "Mizhena" when she claimed her new identity. Later, you return a stolen item to her and she points you in the direction of a traitor in the Coalition Camp. When a shady-looking fence asks you to procure some trinkets for him, you have to challenge Mizhena with a series of insults in order to prove your hardiness and obtain an item to complete the quest (even then, she only helps you get what you need if you do it in a fair and honest way). Finally, you meet a few followers of Tempus in the enemy camp and can choose to restore a holy seal to them with her help - she agrees despite the potential ramifications, explaining that the Lord of Battles does not discriminate between sides. Other than when you first ask her about it, she never mentions her gender ever again.
Excluding Charname, his companions, and the antagonists, I'll give a to anyone who can name another side character who is more fleshed out.
So I just finished my second playthrough and, um...Mizhena is one of the most developed NPCs in the entire game.
I don't disagree, which is why I understand that a number of people found it a bit odd that you get the info-dump so suddenly; to which people responded with (paraphrased) "You can't expect her to be fleshed out so the info-dump must be rapid because NPCs are hard", to which my response is basically (paraphrased) "It's not that hard with a few simple flags to make an NPC have new dialog options at different points in the game, which wouldn't be a bad thing for minor characters you're intended to repeatedly interact with".
It can be challenging to keep everyone's argument strait but I'm doing my best, I promise.
So I just finished my second playthrough and, um...Mizhena is one of the most developed NPCs in the entire game.
I don't disagree, which is why I understand that a number of people found it a bit odd that you get the info-dump so suddenly; to which people responded with (paraphrased) "You can't expect her to be fleshed out so the info-dump must be rapid because NPCs are hard", to which my response is basically (paraphrased) "It's not that hard with a few simple flags to make an NPC have new dialog options at different points in the game, which wouldn't be a bad thing for minor characters you're intended to repeatedly interact with".
It can be challenging to keep everyone's argument strait but I'm doing my best, I promise.
Don't get me wrong - I don't think Mizhena is fleshed out in the general sense, but she's definitely fleshed out by BG standards. The gamergate arguments that weren't blatantly transphobic were focused more subtly on Mizhena "existing to tell you she was trans" or having "nothing more to her", which revealed what little information most gamergaters were actually going on. If we accept that she is appropriately developed, then all that's left to argue about is whether she should tell you about her identity when you first encounter her or later on. That's a pretty minimal distinction if we're talking about review bombing developers and mobbing forums, that's all.
If these people had actually played the game and looked at her full content objectively, we could've saved a hell of a lot of time arguing about degrees of character development.
So I just finished my second playthrough and, um...Mizhena is one of the most developed NPCs in the entire game.
I don't disagree, which is why I understand that a number of people found it a bit odd that you get the info-dump so suddenly; to which people responded with (paraphrased) "You can't expect her to be fleshed out so the info-dump must be rapid because NPCs are hard", to which my response is basically (paraphrased) "It's not that hard with a few simple flags to make an NPC have new dialog options at different points in the game, which wouldn't be a bad thing for minor characters you're intended to repeatedly interact with".
It can be challenging to keep everyone's argument strait but I'm doing my best, I promise.
Don't get me wrong - I don't think Mizhena is fleshed out in the general sense, but she's definitely fleshed out by BG standards. The gamergate arguments that weren't blatantly transphobic were focused more subtly on Mizhena "existing to tell you she was trans" or having "nothing more to her", which revealed what little information most gamergaters were actually going on. If we accept that she is appropriately developed, then all that's left to argue about is whether she should tell you about her identity when you first encounter her or later on. That's a pretty minimal distinction if we're talking about review bombing developers and mobbing forums, that's all.
If these people had actually played the game and looked at her full content objectively, we could've saved a hell of a lot of time arguing about degrees of character development.
Yeah this is why I don't buy the argument that it's somehow Amber Scott's fault for aligning herself with social justice causes, the people who complained were complaining to complain in a way that showed they were lying when they said they played the game (unless they want to argue "Amber Scott made me lie because I hate her!" because the onus of responsibility is 100% on the person trying purposely to make an issue out of something they're not informed on, not on the writer or anyone at Beamdog).
Their complaints weren't about SoD, they were about hearing that a trans character was included at all and assuming that if it happened it must have been a political agenda for reasons internal to them that were there before they ever heard the name Amber Scott. And of course it wasn't at all a political agenda in the way it was implemented, which they'd have known if they played the game, making them look like even more obvious and ridiculous liars (trying to push a political agenda against inclusion, I might add) to anyone who plays SoD and reads their complaints.
I'm part of the Baldur's Gate fanbase since the year BG was released, and I've been a CRPG fan in large part because of Fallout 1 and 2, so I've been part of the CRPG fanbase for longer than Black Isle was a company, and nothing Amber said jabbed at me or anyone I've talked to about this game in my circles of gamer friends, and they run the range of people born in the 70s through to people born in the 90s (an 80s kid myself). If a particular subset of gamers felt jabbed at by a commitment to inclusion and social justice by Amber, that says more about them than it does about Amber or Beamdog, and them complaining about SoD in ways that show they didn't play it only says stuff about them too (and I'm only talking about those folks here, not the ones with legit complaints like the placement of the flag for revealing the name/transition info being too early and the lead-in dialogue being a bit stilted, which I very much agree with despite loving everything else about Mizhena including the explanation that was weakly linked to, just to pre-empt any "but not all us critics are like that!" objections).
I don't accept for one minute that Amber Scott's comments were somehow "irresponsible" if the responsibility being posited is the internal reactions to a trans character's existence by people willing to lie about playing the game, and their subsequent externalization of that b.s.
So I just finished my second playthrough and, um...Mizhena is one of the most developed NPCs in the entire game.
I don't disagree, which is why I understand that a number of people found it a bit odd that you get the info-dump so suddenly; to which people responded with (paraphrased) "You can't expect her to be fleshed out so the info-dump must be rapid because NPCs are hard", to which my response is basically (paraphrased) "It's not that hard with a few simple flags to make an NPC have new dialog options at different points in the game, which wouldn't be a bad thing for minor characters you're intended to repeatedly interact with".
It can be challenging to keep everyone's argument strait but I'm doing my best, I promise.
Don't get me wrong - I don't think Mizhena is fleshed out in the general sense, but she's definitely fleshed out by BG standards. The gamergate arguments that weren't blatantly transphobic were focused more subtly on Mizhena "existing to tell you she was trans" or having "nothing more to her", which revealed what little information most gamergaters were actually going on. If we accept that she is appropriately developed, then all that's left to argue about is whether she should tell you about her identity when you first encounter her or later on. That's a pretty minimal distinction if we're talking about review bombing developers and mobbing forums, that's all.
If these people had actually played the game and looked at her full content objectively, we could've saved a hell of a lot of time arguing about degrees of character development.
Wouldn't have changed much in the end, it's everything as a whole, that a good portion of gamers are angry about. The transsexual is just the target. Tho I guess if she was better at release then no target, then it more turns into the usual feminist crap which is far easier to deal with and far more common.
So yeh if she was better implemented this probably wouldv just floated by as a feminist hit which every game cops.
@Mephiston87 Do you object to Star Trek's multicultural ethos? Isn't the federation a stand in for the UN? Do you object to the political themes in the X men comics and movies? Professor X and Magneto represent two different positions on Israel-Palestine (and you can't get more controversial than that!).
Do you object to the gender politics of the first game? A medieval fantasy where women are equal to men?
I could go on -- the sci-fi / fantasy genre is full of political commentary both left and right. If you wait for politics free fantasy you will wait a very long time.
Ever read the forgotten realm books? Drizzt ones are my favourite. Yes according to the Lore the majority of races including humans are skewed towards one sex, males similar to how it was for our medieval period(not as bad tho) . Elves seem pretty balanced and equal(close to our current day), The drow are the extreme opposite super feminists. Other then bandits/rebel factions I can't really remember an extreme male dominant society to match up to the drow.
So yes the game is sexist in all respects, and that matches the Lore. Do I kick up a fuss that there is a supremely feminist race in FR? Nope it's the Lore. Why change the females when they are supposed to be how they are? Why add a transexxual when in this world it is a non issue due to magic, why get minsc talking about ethics when his intelligence is too low to even understand what picking the side of sjw's means. There is More about the writers comments etc, but that alone is a heavy a gender.
I Don't really follow star trek or xmen or the other stuff, so I have no idea.
1. Drow society isn't "ultra feminist." It's misandrist, which is (ideally) a different thing altogether. 2. Trans isn't negated by magic. Magic is rare and expensive. Note that there's only two proper magic shops in the first game, High Hedge and Sorcerous Sundries, both of which charge a premium for the preternatural. The average trans person simply couldn't afford to magically have their body altered.
@Mephiston87 Do you object to Star Trek's multicultural ethos? Isn't the federation a stand in for the UN? Do you object to the political themes in the X men comics and movies? Professor X and Magneto represent two different positions on Israel-Palestine (and you can't get more controversial than that!).
Do you object to the gender politics of the first game? A medieval fantasy where women are equal to men?
I could go on -- the sci-fi / fantasy genre is full of political commentary both left and right. If you wait for politics free fantasy you will wait a very long time.
Ever read the forgotten realm books? Drizzt ones are my favourite. Yes according to the Lore the majority of races including humans are skewed towards one sex, males similar to how it was for our medieval period(not as bad tho) . Elves seem pretty balanced and equal(close to our current day), The drow are the extreme opposite super feminists. Other then bandits/rebel factions I can't really remember an extreme male dominant society to match up to the drow.
So yes the game is sexist in all respects, and that matches the Lore. Do I kick up a fuss that there is a supremely feminist race in FR? Nope it's the Lore. Why change the females when they are supposed to be how they are? Why add a transexxual when in this world it is a non issue due to magic, why get minsc talking about ethics when his intelligence is too low to even understand what picking the side of sjw's means. There is More about the writers comments etc, but that alone is a heavy a gender.
I Don't really follow star trek or xmen or the other stuff, so I have no idea.
1. Drow society isn't "ultra feminist." It's misandrist, which is (ideally) a different thing altogether. 2. Trans isn't negated by magic. Magic is rare and expensive. Note that there's only two proper magic shops in the first game, High Hedge and Sorcerous Sundries, both of which charge a premium for the preternatural. The average trans person simply couldn't afford to magically have their body altered.
That truly is a horrible argument, "people can't afford it" the transsexual is a cleric cast it on yourself, or get a single use scroll, or ask the other temple consisting of hundreds of other casters, or from your profits as a trader buy one, or to but an item that gives it, the belt only sells for a gold coin. I bet her stores consist of more the a few hundreds gold worth of items. Remember she is middle class not lower class.
misandists are our day feminists haven't u noticed?
I think i'll stop read any message that contains the terms "sjw", "gg" or "agenda" from now. I'm a bit sad for this observation but ... seems like i have put a lot of hope on finally totaly useless conversation.
The most important question I can ask is: why?
Who do I think this conversation is pointless ?
Because you ask us to have a lot of human consideration for some group of people, but you definitly yourself doesn't have even an inch of it when it come to talk about group or people you dislike, the "sjw" who seems the darkest part of this world and Amber Scott.
Because it's seems you can't talk about this subject without using the "sjw" term to build a mental strawman you can accuse of everything. And at the same time you say harassors aren't to blame because "Hey it's how brain work".
Because you talk about the fact aggresivity is bad but keep liking the present concern troll on this very subject. A person who use a lot of dialogue jumping, random attack and never listen what the other people are saying.
Because you continue talking for the sake of all of us transpeople. But seems not take the basic fact that we don't all agree with you and a lot of trans people are for inclusivity and some of us find this a good thing. Yes you say "I can agree with that" but you definitly don't take that in account and continue to have the same dialogue without any change.
Because you keep calling Amber Scott writing an "agenda". But keep saying all the ******** aggresivity against her, against the game and all "not an agenda". Because you have to think it's an agenda. It's easier than understand the fact that yes all people have to work on their internal thinking for making things avance.
Because you definitly have an agenda for wanting so bad making the basic care of Amber Scott for inclusivity (which is basicaly the same as mine and other) look like an agenda.
Don't bother answer me. Up untill you'll start having the basic human consideration you ask other to have and stop using the whole "agenda" bullshit i'll definitly stop reading you. I only have 24 hours in a day, I have better use. And if we can't have a talking I prefer stop than rush in a conflict point.
I think i'll stop read any message that contains the terms "sjw", "gg" or "agenda" from now. I'm a bit sad for this observation but ... seems like i have put a lot of hope on finally totaly useless conversation.
The most important question I can ask is: why?
Who do I think this conversation is pointless ?
Because you ask us to have a lot of human consideration for some group of people, but you definitly yourself doesn't have even an inch of it when it come to talk about group or people you dislike, the "sjw" who seems the darkest part of this world and Amber Scott.
Because it's seems you can't talk about this subject without using the "sjw" term to build a mental strawman you can accuse of everything. And at the same time you say harassors aren't to blame because "Hey it's how brain work".
Because you talk about the fact aggresivity is bad but keep liking the present concern troll on this very subject. A person who use a lot of dialogue jumping, random attack and never listen what the other people are saying.
Because you continue talking for the sake of all of us transpeople. But seems not take the basic fact that we don't all agree with you and a lot of trans people are for inclusivity and some of us find this a good thing. Yes you say "I can agree with that" but you definitly don't take that in account and continue to have the same dialogue without any change.
Because you keep calling Amber Scott writing an "agenda". But keep saying all the ******** aggresivity against her, against the game and all "not an agenda". Because you have to think it's an agenda. It's easier than understand the fact that yes all people have to work on their internal thinking for making things avance.
Because you definitly have an agenda for wanting so bad making the basic care of Amber Scott for inclusivity (which is basicaly the same as mine and other) look like an agenda.
Don't bother answer me. Up untill you'll start having the basic human consideration you ask other to have and stop using the whole "agenda" bullshit i'll definitly stop reading you. I only have 24 hours in a day, I have better use. And if we can't have a talking I prefer stop than rush in a conflict point.
Have a nice day in all case.
There is nothing to answer to, you just put in your opinion I'm assuming of me. You didn't really try to put in any points. And I only jump around because people seem to endlessly jump around. Alot of new people have chimed in to "get the full story" from both sides. Even the devs have done an official statements saying that they are sad that adding a transsexual character has caused all this fuss. When they are wrong, even "paid official reviews" giving the game 8/9 out of 10 state that the drama is all only because a transsexual is in the game. When that is far from the truth.
So far not a single person has complained that the transsexual exists.
So far not a single person has complained that the transsexual exists.
Yes they have.
One post on this forum stated that transgender characters have no place in a mainstream computer game. Another post insulted transgender people as a whole by inferring they are 'abnormal'.
I have followed Baldurs-Gate-Gate on this forum since it started, so please don't try and rewrite the history of it in order to present a misrepresentation of what happened.
I am fully aware of what happened on this forum and elsewhere over the last two weeks.
So far not a single person has complained that the transsexual exists.
Yes they have.
One post on this forum stated that transgender characters have no place in a mainstream computer game. Another post insulted transgender people as a whole by inferring they are 'abnormal'.
I have followed Baldurs-Gate-Gate on this forum since it started, so please don't try and rewrite the history of it in order to present a misrepresentation of what happened.
I am fully aware of what happened on this forum and elsewhere over the last two weeks.
Wait people actually came in thus thread and said that? I must have missed it. Huh rewriting history and misrepresenting what happened? Your extremely dramatic, do you call an ambulance every time u get a papercut?
I haven't seen any bigots yet, some have said it doesn't fit etc, but that doesn't mean it can't be made to fit. I'm certain transsexuals exist in FR, its just much much easier to assist that person then in our world.
Mephiston87, the fact that you have missed all the bile and vitriol and abuse that has taken place on this forum over the last two weeks doesn't mean it didn't happen.
Similarly, the fact that you havn't seen any bigots doesn't mean they havn't been here. It just means that again, you must have somehow missed them.
Suffice to say the picture you paint of what has been going on in this forum over the last two weeks is not one I recognise.
And finally, as for your accusation that I am being extremely dramatic. You stated that not a single person had complained about the transgender character existing at all. I pointed out they had and that to suggest otherwise is misrepresenting what happened. Your response is to accuse me of being extremely dramatic.
I refer you back to my previous statement.... I am fully aware of what happened on this forum and elsewhere over the last two weeks.
Mephiston87, the fact that you have missed all the bile and vitriol and abuse that has taken place on this forum over the last two weeks doesn't mean it didn't happen.
Similarly, the fact that you havn't seen any bigots doesn't mean they havn't been here. It just means that again, you must have somehow missed them.
Suffice to say the picture you paint of what has been going on in this forum over the last two weeks is not one I recognise.
And finally, as for your accusation that I am being extremely dramatic. You stated that not a single person had complained about the transgender character existing at all. I pointed out they had and that to suggest otherwise is misrepresenting what happened. Your response is to accuse me of being extremely dramatic.
I refer you back to my previous statement.... I am fully aware of what happened on this forum and elsewhere over the last two weeks.
I was talking about this thread, not all of beamdog forums. So was the person I was replying to. We were not talking about all of beamdog.Com. His entire post was basically about me here in this topic. I have no clue how u ever thought he and I were talking about all of beamdog.Com
Alot of new people have chimed in to "get the full story" from both sides. Even the devs have done an official statements saying that they are sad that adding a transsexual character has caused all this fuss. When they are wrong, even "paid official reviews" giving the game 8/9 out of 10 state that the drama is all only because a transsexual is in the game. When that is far from the truth.
oh so you were talking about the paid official reviews happening in this thread? you were talking about the devs making official statements in this thread? you were talking about all the new people chiming in to get the full story from both sides in this thread?
If you weren't, you can kind of understand how @BGLover might misinterpret you as talking about stuff outside this thread given that most of your response was about stuff not in this thread.
I was talking about this thread, not all of beamdog forums. So was the person I was replying to. We were not talking about all of beamdog.Com. His entire post was basically about me here in this topic. I have no clue how u ever thought he and I were talking about all of beamdog.Com
How did I think you were talking about wider events (than just this thread)?
Because you wrote the following: ....even "paid official reviews" giving the game 8/9 out of 10 state that the drama is all only because a transsexual is in the game. When that is far from the truth. So far not a single person has complained that the transsexual exists.
The inference from what you wrote is clear. Some people reviewing the game are suggesting that the 'drama' exists solely because of a transexual in the game, and in the very next sentence you say this is not true, and you then go on to say not a single person has complained that the transexual exists.
I don't have anything new to say about the issues themselves (I'm a little weary of it all, truth be told), but presenting a false narrative of what has been going on over the last two weeks to support one's own position is disingenuous.
Alot of new people have chimed in to "get the full story" from both sides. Even the devs have done an official statements saying that they are sad that adding a transsexual character has caused all this fuss. When they are wrong, even "paid official reviews" giving the game 8/9 out of 10 state that the drama is all only because a transsexual is in the game. When that is far from the truth.
oh so you were talking about the paid official reviews happening in this thread? you were talking about the devs making official statements in this thread? you were talking about all the new people chiming in to get the full story from both sides in this thread?
If you weren't, you can kind of understand how @BGLover might misinterpret you as talking about stuff outside this thread given that most of your response was about stuff not in this thread.
No I don't even know how u can review in this thread little own be paid for it, and I haven't seen any reviewers post in beamdog. Com either little own paid ones. The devs put "official Statements" in many places. Neither points to beamdog. Coms entire forums.
I was talking about this thread, not all of beamdog forums. So was the person I was replying to. We were not talking about all of beamdog.Com. His entire post was basically about me here in this topic. I have no clue how u ever thought he and I were talking about all of beamdog.Com
How did I think you were talking about wider events (than just this thread)?
Because you wrote the following: ....even "paid official reviews" giving the game 8/9 out of 10 state that the drama is all only because a transsexual is in the game. When that is far from the truth. So far not a single person has complained that the transsexual exists.
The inference from what you wrote is clear. Some people reviewing the game are suggesting that the 'drama' exists solely because of a transexual in the game, and in the very next sentence you say this is not true, and you then go on to say not a single person has complained that the transexual exists.
I don't have anything new to say about the issues themselves (I'm a little weary of it all, truth be told), but presenting a false narrative of what has been going on over the last two weeks to support one's own position is disingenuous.
Yes all this from a person who has endlessly said "lies, propaganda, sjw's are bogeymen, your disingenuous, misrepresentation " etc. Many others have put forward good points but all yours have been basically calling people dishonest, liars and endlessly word picking. That seems to be your entire argument.
I haven't called a person a dishonest or anything close to it(unless they truly were) . I'm defensive, insulting people is offensive. It's also a bad way to put forward points. A Dismissal attitude doesn't work in public forums. He'll iv even apologised a few times to people for Misunderstanding them.
I think i'll stop read any message that contains the terms "sjw", "gg" or "agenda" from now. I'm a bit sad for this observation but ... seems like i have put a lot of hope on finally totaly useless conversation.
The most important question I can ask is: why?
Who do I think this conversation is pointless ?
No.
Because you ask us to have a lot of human consideration for some group of people, but you definitly yourself doesn't have even an inch of it when it come to talk about group or people you dislike, the "sjw" who seems the darkest part of this world and Amber Scott.
It was repeatedly said that SJWs don't exist, yet Amber Scott claimed to being one. Have I said anything half as horrible as what has been said or implied about those who aren't particularly happy with her attitude and/or writing? Have I called anyone names, or not give you a chance to share your perspective?
Have I? Because I'm pretty sure I haven't. I said that I don't like being lumped into the SJW movement because I disagree with them on a fundamental level and don't want to be associated with the stuff that they do, which is quite frankly, often stupid in the extreme, and by the large sexist, racist, and sexualist (or whatever the word is for discriminating against people based on sexual orientation), who create more problems than they fix because they try to organize people into priority groups based on a nonsensical stereotyping of "privilege"; constantly lie about statistics; and ignore scientific evidence whenever it doesn't suite their belief systems.
That is my understanding of SJWs, based on experience and observation. If I am wrong, show me how. I would be more than happy to compare notes with you, and discuss the merits of individual issues. I think that is very considerate, since most of the posts contrary to mine have been dripping with disdain and rudeness rather than points. Those that did have points, I've tried to address those points politely and honestly, without dismissing them, in hopes of coming to a better understanding.
Do I lie? If so, show me.
Because it's seems you can't talk about this subject without using the "sjw" term to build a mental strawman you can accuse of everything. And at the same time you say harassors aren't to blame because "Hey it's how brain work".
I did not say they are not to blame, I said aggression is not the answer. That is very different. Going in hot, fists flying and words whipping isn't the way to deal with things. It can cause more collateral damage than is a good idea. Transgendered people already walk a rather precarious edge in some places, so coming off cool headed and thick skinned gets more results, because the last thing we need is more conflict and more people thinking we're tantrum throwing, cis-hating, safespace-needing, whiny perverted child-people. It'd be cool if we could get away from that. (~_~)
Because you talk about the fact aggresivity is bad but keep liking the present concern troll on this very subject. A person who use a lot of dialogue jumping, random attack and never listen what the other people are saying.
He's not hurting me. Why should I be hostile to him? It's pretty clear he's not that great at expressing himself (sorry Mephistan), but I certainly don't think that he is transphobic or anything. If you don't agree with him, you can either explain why he's wrong, or just act like an adult and shrug it off without crying about it. He hasn't said anything mean to you. Hell, he's been downright friendly by comparison to a lot of people, because I haven't seen him insult anyone for disagreeing with him. The worst I've seen him say was that he thinks SJWs are evil, which isn't attacking a person as much as it is attacking an ideology. It's akin to saying "I think *insert a religion here* is evil because it *inserts thing it promotes, such as killing homosexuals*".
If he's wrong, show him why, if not for him, then for anyone else who reads the conversation. It's that simple. If you don't want to talk with him, that's fine, but know that unless you put forth the effort to explain why he's wrong, rather than just saying he's wrong, you're not very compelling.
Because you continue talking for the sake of all of us transpeople. But seems not take the basic fact that we don't all agree with you and a lot of trans people are for inclusivity and some of us find this a good thing. Yes you say "I can agree with that" but you definitly don't take that in account and continue to have the same dialogue without any change.
Hold up right there. I'm going to let you finish but...
"There are other trans people in the thread, and they have every right to voice their thoughts too, and some of those thoughts are contrary to my own, but I think we've been civil about it. We've even shared some stories and talked about stuff together. It's cool. We've shared some thoughts, maybe made some friends, and hopefully entertained a little (I still need to post more stuff about Victoria...), so everything can run smooth if we're cool about it." - Source.
So don't go there. If you want to go there, you'd better bring a map and citations where I said that I spoke on behalf of the transgendered community, as opposed to someone who just happens to be a member of the community and having an opinion on how this influences our social standing.
Because you keep calling Amber Scott writing an "agenda". But keep saying all the ******** aggresivity against her, against the game and all "not an agenda". Because you have to think it's an agenda. It's easier than understand the fact that yes all people have to work on their internal thinking for making things avance.
Go look up the definition of Agenda. Wait, I'll save you the trouble: Agenda. Amber Scott claimed the SJW title, insulted the game she was hired to work on, disrespected the community, and by admission set out to create additional characters based on race, sexuality, gender, etc. These are facts. This is the data we have currently. SJWs have an agenda, and Amber Scott actually claimed to be progressing an agenda for making non-white non-cisgendered non-male characters.
So when she's actively laying out her agenda for the public, do not presume to lecture me, or anyone else, on her not writing based on an agenda. The agenda has already been publicly established and is on record, so the data has shown. Do we have an understanding?
Because you definitly have an agenda for wanting so bad making the basic care of Amber Scott for inclusivity (which is basicaly the same as mine and other) look like an agenda.
Amber Scott explicitly said she was trying to write the social justice ideology into the game, noting that she didn't accept that the "normal" standard should be strait/white/cisgendered. Well, "white" no, but we are anything but "normal". We are a statistical minority. I'd be surprised if their was one transgendered person for every fifty cisgendered people (which would only be 2% of the population if our numbers were that high), but she says she's pushing that to make it "reflect the real world". Boo pellets.
I have nothing against including a diverse cast of characters in a game. I've pointed out some games that have done so with success, without seeming preachy about it, without insulting a large quantity of their fanbase, without claiming political agenda.
My "agenda" is very simple, and I pointed it out at the beginning of this thread. I am concerned that folks like my friends and I are going to be set back by these disputes and that bothers me, and I don't appreciate someone using one of my favorite games ever that I grew up playing as their soapbox to push a political ideology (especially one known for the levels of dishonesty, racism, sexism, genderism, xenophobia, violence, and oppression of basic freedoms such as speech, as SJWs).
Beyond that, I'm here to talk about the hows and whys with anyone who cares to have a rational conversation. And, I have for the most part become less incensed since my original post, which was written while the iron was hot so to speak. As a result, I've discussed things I'd like to see done better in games, gave ideas for how I'd like to see them done better, and just generally had a good time talking about stuff.
A bit further into the thread, my motivation shifted towards not letting anyone bully anyone else, and defending people's right to speak their minds, and pushing for people to tear down their walls and not get so angry at people because they have a different opinion.
Don't bother answer me. Up untill you'll start having the basic human consideration you ask other to have and stop using the whole "agenda" bullshit i'll definitly stop reading you. I only have 24 hours in a day, I have better use. And if we can't have a talking I prefer stop than rush in a conflict point.
Look, if you want to act like a child, throw a tantrum, and plug your ears up, go ahead. That is your right as a human being. As far as "the basic human consideration I ask others to have", I hold myself to a higher standard than I've held anyone else to in this thread.
I have provided citations for my claims, addressed any points and counterpoints brought up, have forgiven many indignities and slights, have honored everyone's right to speak and did not ignore them or pretend they were not there, have never once attempted to claim I was more moral or intelligent than anyone, and damn it, I've been putting up with people like you claiming bullshit on my posts without one shred of evidence or logical argument to back it up.
So if you have something useful to say, say it. I will take the time out of my 24 hours in a day to listen to it. Otherwise, S.T.F.U. Until then, I'll be sitting here with the rest of the thread, discussing Baldur's Gate and possible ideas for better avoiding these problems in future games.
Might I suggest everyone move to the general forum and start discussing things about baldurs gate that we like? Everyone here claims to be a big baldurs gate fan, so let's prove it through discussing what we like, not just what is disliked.
(This post is mostly aimed at people who only seem to want to discuss the 'controversy')
That truly is a horrible argument, "people can't afford it" the transsexual is a cleric cast it on yourself, or get a single use scroll, or ask the other temple consisting of hundreds of other casters, or from your profits as a trader buy one, or to but an item that gives it, the belt only sells for a gold coin. I bet her stores consist of more the a few hundreds gold worth of items. Remember she is middle class not lower class.
misandists are our day feminists haven't u noticed?
I'm not super familiar with AD&D spellcasting beyond what is present in the BG games, but in 3.5/Pathfinder you'd be looking at Alter Self, which is a 2nd level spell (so 3rd level Cleric minimum) that only lasts for 1 minute per level. Let's be generous and say Mizhena is 6th level, so she gets to be a biological woman for a whopping six minutes.
To make such magic permanent, you're looking for Permanency, a 5th level Wizard/Sorcerer spell (so like 9th level minimum, IIRC). Alter Self isn't listed by the rules as Permanency-able, but let's say the GM is allowing it as they probably should because it's a story thing. Even if you're the caster, you're looking at a bare minimum component cost of 500gp, the lowest gold cost on the Permanency list. More likely, it'd cost about 2000 to 2500, since that is the most common cost range for Permanency. That's astronomically out of the budget of the average person in the Forgotten Realms. If Mizhena has a store with several hundred gold worth of items, she had to buy those items at or around cost, and is marking them up to sell for a profit. Her profit margin likely isn't going to be large enough to raise 2000 gold that she can afford to not re-invest in her business any time soon. After all, she has to keep buying more goods to sell in order to stay in business.
The belt sells for 1gp because it's cursed and does nothing practical for anybody other than someone who is trans. Also, you can't remove it, so you'd be stuck wearing it 24/7 unless you're willing to pay the two-hundred or so GP for a Cleric to remove it every day. That doesn't really solve a trans person's condition having a permanent reminder that their transformation is incomplete, nevermind the annoyance of having an article of clothing on your body at all times. That'd make taking off and putting on pants a nightmare.
So far not a single person has complained that the transsexual exists.
I'm not going to get into a huge back and forth, but this is objectively untrue. I don't know who was here on April 1st-2nd when this whole nightmare started, but there was a SWATH of people on these forums and throughout review sites who virulently objected to her inclusion altogether. Most of them have been banned for rule violations or left after finally running out of hate fuel, but this has never been *just* an argument about whether Mizhena could have been "better written." EDIT: Apparently I missed a few other posts that have already addressed this.
Also: It's extremely frustrating as a person who has extensively studied feminism to see someone who hasn't just carelessly label it "misandry." I sometimes imagine its how a nurse who's studied for years must feel after hearing some guy in the waiting room claim that vaccines cause autism while everyone nods their heads. Ah well, off topic.
Finally, the whole sex-change-through-magic argument: I'm not trans, but from what I've gathered their myriad experiences are often about a hell of a lot more than a desire to change their outer sex characteristics. Gender is separate from sex - I happen to know a trans guy who wants to feel comfortable in his own skin and be accepted for who he is, but he'll be damned if he's going to let anyone mess with his clitoris. Trying to explain why Mizhena hasn't just used magic to change her body parts is like asking why a real trans person hasn't undergone surgery to radically alter their body; some can't afford it, but others don't want it. Attempting to find magical "solutions" to her "problem" only strips Mizhena of what little nuance she already has.
So I just finished my second playthrough and, um...Mizhena is one of the most developed NPCs in the entire game...
... If these people had actually played the game and looked at her full content objectively, we could've saved a hell of a lot of time arguing about degrees of character development.
I'm reaching back a bit here but I do think this is quite important to note: I haven't bought the expansion myself and thus cannot truly evaluate how the matter of including transsexualism, popular reference to the so called Gamer Gate hashtag movements or the changing of recruitable party members' personalities is handled. I do believe @Ashiel summed up my concerns pretty well, so I'll defer to those points in the matter. (Back on page 12)
I'D ALSO LIKE TO POINT OUT that I strongly believe that this issue with Baldur's Gate could have been avoided. It's a bit of a perfect storm. You've got a game franchise that people love (and if you don't **** it up, will probably continue to pay for until the apocalypse) but the new official edition was...
1. Riddled with bugs. 2. Messing with established characters. 3. Obviously pushing an agenda.
Perfect storm.
What is important to stress is that as consumers we only have one true voice to make ourselves heard and that voice isn't on the publisher's forum. Though it's rather convenient to get well educated on the matter.
No, the real power of a consumer is in our purchases. The very moment you buy a game, or expansion for that matter, you have lost that truly powerful voice.
You can after all easily be banned from forums as we have seen happen, regardless of justification, but they can never take a purchase away from you. With buying a game you are endorsing the company you bought it from and after doing so I believe you lost any real means of communicating any displeasure you might have with the product.
What I'm trying to say here is that it's rather unreasonable to expect everyone to play the game first and then voice any criticism they might have. I realise that going on the words of others is rather risky but in this day and age I believe that there is little alternative.
It is reasonable to expect people to play it before railing against it though on matters that require playing it.
Ex You can decide not to purchase Duke Nukem for its sexism. But don't flood the company with complaints about gameplay, as you aren't qualified to complain about that. Also acknowledge that criticism about the game's writing comes from screenshots and reviews, not first hand experience.
It is reasonable to expect people to play it before railing against it though on matters that require playing it.
Ex You can decide not to purchase Duke Nukem for its sexism. But don't flood the company with complaints about gameplay, as you aren't qualified to complain about that. Also acknowledge that criticism about the game's writing comes from screenshots and reviews, not first hand experience.
Yeah, and this is why it's super disingenuous for people complaining about how they're not going to buy the game because of Mizhena and the Minsc line switching tactics a few days later to talking about bugs...like, what bugs did you experience now, people who said you were boycotting the game? I'll admit I only played five or six hours (at a snail's pace exploring every corner of a map and talking to everyone like I tend to lmao) into SoD before starting from BG1 since it felt off to have a playthrough disconnected from the full experience, but I didn't encounter a single bug in my time playing, and the only people I know personally who've played it (two of whom have beaten it already) have discussed how ridiculous they find the "it's full of bugs!" complaints given that they never encountered game crashing bugs. I asked for no spoilers from them but did ask about bugs because I'd seen so much talk about it, and both of the people I know who've beaten SoD said there were a few bugged quests that didn't seem to complete or were missing something required to complete somehow, and a few minor bugs that didn't take away from the experience overall. Conversely, these two people also pre-ordered Fallout 4 and encountered TONS of bugs, including game-crashing bugs, even three or four updates after launch, and shrugged at those bugs too even though they were much worse (which matches with the reviews and ratings for F4 in the opening days after launch, most people shrugged off pretty debilitating bugs with "they'll get to it soon" sentiments, as buggy launches are just sort of par for the course these days).
Wer'e only 1 update post-launch and game crashing bugs are incredibly rare, so why didn't Fallout 4 get down-voted and review bombed into infinity like SoD? Oh wait, we know why and it had nothing to do with people playing the game and forming an opinion based on that, unlike with F4, where people actually played the game and formed opinions based on that, shrugging at launch bugs because everyone always shrugs at launch bugs unless they compound existing problems existing in the game itself.
And you can tell by the massive number of bad reviews on sites where you don't have to own the game, and the super high % of bad reviews on Steam coming from people with less than an hour of play logged (which isn't even enough time to have met Mizhena despite all the complaints about Mizhena coming from those reviewers) that people giving the bad reviews are, by and large, not actually playing the game.
Which isn't to say there aren't valid complaints, I've voiced some in this thread and elsewhere myself despite liking what I played of it enough to want to do it justice with a complete BG1 to Throne of Bhaal playthrough, and I've seen people cite specific bugs they encountered (rather than the vague "why don't they fix the bugs?!" style comments I just eye-roll at and scroll past). It's just that the 2.1 patch notes have specifically stated they've addressed a lot of those bugs (and more updates are coming), so I mean they are fixing the bugs, but again people who aren't playing aren't going to know that. Mizhena wasn't an agenda insert and her writing didn't read like one, the bugs are not as bad as people say they are and being addressed despite the uninformed "why aren't they fixing them?!" comments, and the only explanation for all the repeating of these points is that they haven't played the game (or logged just enough time for a crappy Steam review, like seriously some of those reviews are on playtime of less than an hour and spend two paragraphs ranting about problems they couldn't have encountered in the vaguest, broadest and most incorrect possible terms).
Honestly the complaints written about this game that I see repeated the most often are the things that seem forced, awkward, ill-informed, out of place, cringe-worthy and pre-loaded with an agenda, not Siege of Dragonspear or Beamdog's writing.
All I've got to say is: The Drow are analogous to black people; Elves to Asians; Dwarfs and Gnomes to midgets or dwarves. Most stories from role playing have been about racial prejudices, i.e. how different a person is from you. Hell, class warfare has been a topic in these great fantasies also. There have always been stories about things like this in D&D and other role playing companies... People are idiots. Ooh, God forbid if you read about crap that deals with daily life.
I never heard of gamergate. I skimmed the wikipedia article. How is the "ethics in heroic adventuring" line related to it? Would have went over my head.
It is reasonable to expect people to play it before railing against it though on matters that require playing it.
Ex You can decide not to purchase Duke Nukem for its sexism. But don't flood the company with complaints about gameplay, as you aren't qualified to complain about that. Also acknowledge that criticism about the game's writing comes from screenshots and reviews, not first hand experience.
Another difference: I would never review bomb Duke Nukem for its sexism or lie about its content in an attempt to harm the developer. Unlike gamergate, I believe that companies have a right to put just about whatever they want in their games.
Although I have never agreed with, well, anything gamergate has done, I am not opposed to them voicing their misinformed criticisms about cherry picked content from a game they've never played. That doesn't mean I'm not going to call them out on it.
Comments
So I just finished my second playthrough and, um...Mizhena is one of the most developed NPCs in the entire game.
FIrst you meet her in the Fist camp, where she tells you all about her faith in the Lord of Battles. If you ask her about her name, she tells you that she was originally raised as a boy and created the name "Mizhena" when she claimed her new identity. Later, you return a stolen item to her and she points you in the direction of a traitor in the Coalition Camp. When a shady-looking fence asks you to procure some trinkets for him, you have to challenge Mizhena with a series of insults in order to prove your hardiness and obtain an item to complete the quest (even then, she only helps you get what you need if you do it in a fair and honest way). Finally, you meet a few followers of Tempus in the enemy camp and can choose to restore a holy seal to them with her help - she agrees despite the potential ramifications, explaining that the Lord of Battles does not discriminate between sides. Other than when you first ask her about it, she never mentions her gender ever again.
Excluding Charname, his companions, and the antagonists, I'll give a
It can be challenging to keep everyone's argument strait but I'm doing my best, I promise.
If these people had actually played the game and looked at her full content objectively, we could've saved a hell of a lot of time arguing about degrees of character development.
(srsly, but also a joke as I figured you were serious but also kinda like "haha, I know there are but 'the controversy'")
I'm glad that she has an interesting story my biggest "whine" is that there are not NPC's more fleshed out like this
Their complaints weren't about SoD, they were about hearing that a trans character was included at all and assuming that if it happened it must have been a political agenda for reasons internal to them that were there before they ever heard the name Amber Scott. And of course it wasn't at all a political agenda in the way it was implemented, which they'd have known if they played the game, making them look like even more obvious and ridiculous liars (trying to push a political agenda against inclusion, I might add) to anyone who plays SoD and reads their complaints.
I'm part of the Baldur's Gate fanbase since the year BG was released, and I've been a CRPG fan in large part because of Fallout 1 and 2, so I've been part of the CRPG fanbase for longer than Black Isle was a company, and nothing Amber said jabbed at me or anyone I've talked to about this game in my circles of gamer friends, and they run the range of people born in the 70s through to people born in the 90s (an 80s kid myself). If a particular subset of gamers felt jabbed at by a commitment to inclusion and social justice by Amber, that says more about them than it does about Amber or Beamdog, and them complaining about SoD in ways that show they didn't play it only says stuff about them too (and I'm only talking about those folks here, not the ones with legit complaints like the placement of the flag for revealing the name/transition info being too early and the lead-in dialogue being a bit stilted, which I very much agree with despite loving everything else about Mizhena including the explanation that was weakly linked to, just to pre-empt any "but not all us critics are like that!" objections).
I don't accept for one minute that Amber Scott's comments were somehow "irresponsible" if the responsibility being posited is the internal reactions to a trans character's existence by people willing to lie about playing the game, and their subsequent externalization of that b.s.
So yeh if she was better implemented this probably wouldv just floated by as a feminist hit which every game cops.
2. Trans isn't negated by magic. Magic is rare and expensive. Note that there's only two proper magic shops in the first game, High Hedge and Sorcerous Sundries, both of which charge a premium for the preternatural. The average trans person simply couldn't afford to magically have their body altered.
misandists are our day feminists haven't u noticed?
Because you ask us to have a lot of human consideration for some group of people, but you definitly yourself doesn't have even an inch of it when it come to talk about group or people you dislike, the "sjw" who seems the darkest part of this world and Amber Scott.
Because it's seems you can't talk about this subject without using the "sjw" term to build a mental strawman you can accuse of everything. And at the same time you say harassors aren't to blame because "Hey it's how brain work".
Because you talk about the fact aggresivity is bad but keep liking the present concern troll on this very subject. A person who use a lot of dialogue jumping, random attack and never listen what the other people are saying.
Because you continue talking for the sake of all of us transpeople. But seems not take the basic fact that we don't all agree with you and a lot of trans people are for inclusivity and some of us find this a good thing. Yes you say "I can agree with that" but you definitly don't take that in account and continue to have the same dialogue without any change.
Because you keep calling Amber Scott writing an "agenda". But keep saying all the ******** aggresivity against her, against the game and all "not an agenda". Because you have to think it's an agenda. It's easier than understand the fact that yes all people have to work on their internal thinking for making things avance.
Because you definitly have an agenda for wanting so bad making the basic care of Amber Scott for inclusivity (which is basicaly the same as mine and other) look like an agenda.
Don't bother answer me. Up untill you'll start having the basic human consideration you ask other to have and stop using the whole "agenda" bullshit i'll definitly stop reading you. I only have 24 hours in a day, I have better use. And if we can't have a talking I prefer stop than rush in a conflict point.
Have a nice day in all case.
So far not a single person has complained that the transsexual exists.
One post on this forum stated that transgender characters have no place in a mainstream computer game. Another post insulted transgender people as a whole by inferring they are 'abnormal'.
I have followed Baldurs-Gate-Gate on this forum since it started, so please don't try and rewrite the history of it in order to present a misrepresentation of what happened.
I am fully aware of what happened on this forum and elsewhere over the last two weeks.
I haven't seen any bigots yet, some have said it doesn't fit etc, but that doesn't mean it can't be made to fit. I'm certain transsexuals exist in FR, its just much much easier to assist that person then in our world.
Similarly, the fact that you havn't seen any bigots doesn't mean they havn't been here. It just means that again, you must have somehow missed them.
Suffice to say the picture you paint of what has been going on in this forum over the last two weeks is not one I recognise.
And finally, as for your accusation that I am being extremely dramatic. You stated that not a single person had complained about the transgender character existing at all. I pointed out they had and that to suggest otherwise is misrepresenting what happened. Your response is to accuse me of being extremely dramatic.
I refer you back to my previous statement.... I am fully aware of what happened on this forum and elsewhere over the last two weeks.
If you weren't, you can kind of understand how @BGLover might misinterpret you as talking about stuff outside this thread given that most of your response was about stuff not in this thread.
Because you wrote the following:
....even "paid official reviews" giving the game 8/9 out of 10 state that the drama is all only because a transsexual is in the game. When that is far from the truth. So far not a single person has complained that the transsexual exists.
The inference from what you wrote is clear. Some people reviewing the game are suggesting that the 'drama' exists solely because of a transexual in the game, and in the very next sentence you say this is not true, and you then go on to say not a single person has complained that the transexual exists.
I don't have anything new to say about the issues themselves (I'm a little weary of it all, truth be told), but presenting a false narrative of what has been going on over the last two weeks to support one's own position is disingenuous.
I haven't called a person a dishonest or anything close to it(unless they truly were) . I'm defensive, insulting people is offensive. It's also a bad way to put forward points. A Dismissal attitude doesn't work in public forums. He'll iv even apologised a few times to people for Misunderstanding them.
Have I? Because I'm pretty sure I haven't. I said that I don't like being lumped into the SJW movement because I disagree with them on a fundamental level and don't want to be associated with the stuff that they do, which is quite frankly, often stupid in the extreme, and by the large sexist, racist, and sexualist (or whatever the word is for discriminating against people based on sexual orientation), who create more problems than they fix because they try to organize people into priority groups based on a nonsensical stereotyping of "privilege"; constantly lie about statistics; and ignore scientific evidence whenever it doesn't suite their belief systems.
That is my understanding of SJWs, based on experience and observation. If I am wrong, show me how. I would be more than happy to compare notes with you, and discuss the merits of individual issues. I think that is very considerate, since most of the posts contrary to mine have been dripping with disdain and rudeness rather than points. Those that did have points, I've tried to address those points politely and honestly, without dismissing them, in hopes of coming to a better understanding.
Do I lie? If so, show me. I did not say they are not to blame, I said aggression is not the answer. That is very different. Going in hot, fists flying and words whipping isn't the way to deal with things. It can cause more collateral damage than is a good idea. Transgendered people already walk a rather precarious edge in some places, so coming off cool headed and thick skinned gets more results, because the last thing we need is more conflict and more people thinking we're tantrum throwing, cis-hating, safespace-needing, whiny perverted child-people. It'd be cool if we could get away from that. (~_~) He's not hurting me. Why should I be hostile to him? It's pretty clear he's not that great at expressing himself (sorry Mephistan), but I certainly don't think that he is transphobic or anything. If you don't agree with him, you can either explain why he's wrong, or just act like an adult and shrug it off without crying about it. He hasn't said anything mean to you. Hell, he's been downright friendly by comparison to a lot of people, because I haven't seen him insult anyone for disagreeing with him. The worst I've seen him say was that he thinks SJWs are evil, which isn't attacking a person as much as it is attacking an ideology. It's akin to saying "I think *insert a religion here* is evil because it *inserts thing it promotes, such as killing homosexuals*".
If he's wrong, show him why, if not for him, then for anyone else who reads the conversation. It's that simple. If you don't want to talk with him, that's fine, but know that unless you put forth the effort to explain why he's wrong, rather than just saying he's wrong, you're not very compelling. Hold up right there. I'm going to let you finish but... So don't go there. If you want to go there, you'd better bring a map and citations where I said that I spoke on behalf of the transgendered community, as opposed to someone who just happens to be a member of the community and having an opinion on how this influences our social standing. Go look up the definition of Agenda. Wait, I'll save you the trouble: Agenda. Amber Scott claimed the SJW title, insulted the game she was hired to work on, disrespected the community, and by admission set out to create additional characters based on race, sexuality, gender, etc. These are facts. This is the data we have currently. SJWs have an agenda, and Amber Scott actually claimed to be progressing an agenda for making non-white non-cisgendered non-male characters.
So when she's actively laying out her agenda for the public, do not presume to lecture me, or anyone else, on her not writing based on an agenda. The agenda has already been publicly established and is on record, so the data has shown. Do we have an understanding? Amber Scott explicitly said she was trying to write the social justice ideology into the game, noting that she didn't accept that the "normal" standard should be strait/white/cisgendered. Well, "white" no, but we are anything but "normal". We are a statistical minority. I'd be surprised if their was one transgendered person for every fifty cisgendered people (which would only be 2% of the population if our numbers were that high), but she says she's pushing that to make it "reflect the real world". Boo pellets.
I have nothing against including a diverse cast of characters in a game. I've pointed out some games that have done so with success, without seeming preachy about it, without insulting a large quantity of their fanbase, without claiming political agenda.
My "agenda" is very simple, and I pointed it out at the beginning of this thread. I am concerned that folks like my friends and I are going to be set back by these disputes and that bothers me, and I don't appreciate someone using one of my favorite games ever that I grew up playing as their soapbox to push a political ideology (especially one known for the levels of dishonesty, racism, sexism, genderism, xenophobia, violence, and oppression of basic freedoms such as speech, as SJWs).
Beyond that, I'm here to talk about the hows and whys with anyone who cares to have a rational conversation. And, I have for the most part become less incensed since my original post, which was written while the iron was hot so to speak. As a result, I've discussed things I'd like to see done better in games, gave ideas for how I'd like to see them done better, and just generally had a good time talking about stuff.
A bit further into the thread, my motivation shifted towards not letting anyone bully anyone else, and defending people's right to speak their minds, and pushing for people to tear down their walls and not get so angry at people because they have a different opinion. Look, if you want to act like a child, throw a tantrum, and plug your ears up, go ahead. That is your right as a human being. As far as "the basic human consideration I ask others to have", I hold myself to a higher standard than I've held anyone else to in this thread.
I have provided citations for my claims, addressed any points and counterpoints brought up, have forgiven many indignities and slights, have honored everyone's right to speak and did not ignore them or pretend they were not there, have never once attempted to claim I was more moral or intelligent than anyone, and damn it, I've been putting up with people like you claiming bullshit on my posts without one shred of evidence or logical argument to back it up.
So if you have something useful to say, say it. I will take the time out of my 24 hours in a day to listen to it. Otherwise, S.T.F.U. Until then, I'll be sitting here with the rest of the thread, discussing Baldur's Gate and possible ideas for better avoiding these problems in future games.
Have a lovely day.
(This post is mostly aimed at people who only seem to want to discuss the 'controversy')
To make such magic permanent, you're looking for Permanency, a 5th level Wizard/Sorcerer spell (so like 9th level minimum, IIRC). Alter Self isn't listed by the rules as Permanency-able, but let's say the GM is allowing it as they probably should because it's a story thing. Even if you're the caster, you're looking at a bare minimum component cost of 500gp, the lowest gold cost on the Permanency list. More likely, it'd cost about 2000 to 2500, since that is the most common cost range for Permanency. That's astronomically out of the budget of the average person in the Forgotten Realms. If Mizhena has a store with several hundred gold worth of items, she had to buy those items at or around cost, and is marking them up to sell for a profit. Her profit margin likely isn't going to be large enough to raise 2000 gold that she can afford to not re-invest in her business any time soon. After all, she has to keep buying more goods to sell in order to stay in business.
The belt sells for 1gp because it's cursed and does nothing practical for anybody other than someone who is trans. Also, you can't remove it, so you'd be stuck wearing it 24/7 unless you're willing to pay the two-hundred or so GP for a Cleric to remove it every day. That doesn't really solve a trans person's condition having a permanent reminder that their transformation is incomplete, nevermind the annoyance of having an article of clothing on your body at all times. That'd make taking off and putting on pants a nightmare.
Also: It's extremely frustrating as a person who has extensively studied feminism to see someone who hasn't just carelessly label it "misandry." I sometimes imagine its how a nurse who's studied for years must feel after hearing some guy in the waiting room claim that vaccines cause autism while everyone nods their heads. Ah well, off topic.
Finally, the whole sex-change-through-magic argument: I'm not trans, but from what I've gathered their myriad experiences are often about a hell of a lot more than a desire to change their outer sex characteristics. Gender is separate from sex - I happen to know a trans guy who wants to feel comfortable in his own skin and be accepted for who he is, but he'll be damned if he's going to let anyone mess with his clitoris. Trying to explain why Mizhena hasn't just used magic to change her body parts is like asking why a real trans person hasn't undergone surgery to radically alter their body; some can't afford it, but others don't want it. Attempting to find magical "solutions" to her "problem" only strips Mizhena of what little nuance she already has.
No, the real power of a consumer is in our purchases. The very moment you buy a game, or expansion for that matter, you have lost that truly powerful voice.
You can after all easily be banned from forums as we have seen happen, regardless of justification, but they can never take a purchase away from you. With buying a game you are endorsing the company you bought it from and after doing so I believe you lost any real means of communicating any displeasure you might have with the product.
What I'm trying to say here is that it's rather unreasonable to expect everyone to play the game first and then voice any criticism they might have. I realise that going on the words of others is rather risky but in this day and age I believe that there is little alternative.
Edited for typo's and additional quotations.
Ex You can decide not to purchase Duke Nukem for its sexism. But don't flood the company with complaints about gameplay, as you aren't qualified to complain about that. Also acknowledge that criticism about the game's writing comes from screenshots and reviews, not first hand experience.
Wer'e only 1 update post-launch and game crashing bugs are incredibly rare, so why didn't Fallout 4 get down-voted and review bombed into infinity like SoD? Oh wait, we know why and it had nothing to do with people playing the game and forming an opinion based on that, unlike with F4, where people actually played the game and formed opinions based on that, shrugging at launch bugs because everyone always shrugs at launch bugs unless they compound existing problems existing in the game itself.
And you can tell by the massive number of bad reviews on sites where you don't have to own the game, and the super high % of bad reviews on Steam coming from people with less than an hour of play logged (which isn't even enough time to have met Mizhena despite all the complaints about Mizhena coming from those reviewers) that people giving the bad reviews are, by and large, not actually playing the game.
Which isn't to say there aren't valid complaints, I've voiced some in this thread and elsewhere myself despite liking what I played of it enough to want to do it justice with a complete BG1 to Throne of Bhaal playthrough, and I've seen people cite specific bugs they encountered (rather than the vague "why don't they fix the bugs?!" style comments I just eye-roll at and scroll past). It's just that the 2.1 patch notes have specifically stated they've addressed a lot of those bugs (and more updates are coming), so I mean they are fixing the bugs, but again people who aren't playing aren't going to know that. Mizhena wasn't an agenda insert and her writing didn't read like one, the bugs are not as bad as people say they are and being addressed despite the uninformed "why aren't they fixing them?!" comments, and the only explanation for all the repeating of these points is that they haven't played the game (or logged just enough time for a crappy Steam review, like seriously some of those reviews are on playtime of less than an hour and spend two paragraphs ranting about problems they couldn't have encountered in the vaguest, broadest and most incorrect possible terms).
Honestly the complaints written about this game that I see repeated the most often are the things that seem forced, awkward, ill-informed, out of place, cringe-worthy and pre-loaded with an agenda, not Siege of Dragonspear or Beamdog's writing.
Although I have never agreed with, well, anything gamergate has done, I am not opposed to them voicing their misinformed criticisms about cherry picked content from a game they've never played. That doesn't mean I'm not going to call them out on it.