I don't think it's so much a coincidence when you can quite easily to go places like reddit and see the threads where fans of gamergate organised review bombing the game. Reddit's quite a good example, because for the first couple of days it was being bombarded with lots of new posters with negative views about "SJWs" that dominated the discussion until enough of the regulars took a break from actually playing Siege of Dragonspear to bring the discussion back to the actual game.
And yet again you've failed to articulate anything wrong with the game. Talking about SJWs and agendas doesn't count if you can't spell out and criticise what an SJW is and what's wrong with their agenda, and why it doesn't belong in Siege of Dragonspear. You should be able to at least list some of the occurrences in the game that you considered to be part of this agenda pushing - perhaps you could try again and construct an actual argument this time? Maybe expand on what exactly this trick that's been played?
Also, if Beamdog are "stopped", I would imagine that would be the end of the Baldur's Gate IP. No-one else will want to pick up a 20 year old engine and try and keep it relevant in today's gaming world. If you don't like the direction BG has gone - sorry, but don't try ruin it for the rest of us, cos this is all we're getting.
I don't think it's so much a coincidence when you can quite easily to go places like reddit and see the threads where fans of gamergate organised review bombing the game. Reddit's quite a good example, because for the first couple of days it was being bombarded with lots of new posters with negative views about "SJWs" that dominated the discussion until enough of the regulars took a break from actually playing Siege of Dragonspear to bring the discussion back to the actual game.
And yet again you've failed to articulate anything wrong with the game. Talking about SJWs and agendas doesn't count if you can't spell out and criticise what an SJW is and what's wrong with their agenda, and why it doesn't belong in Siege of Dragonspear. You should be able to at least list some of the occurrences in the game that you considered to be part of this agenda pushing - perhaps you could try again and construct an actual argument this time? Maybe expand on what exactly this trick that's been played?
Also, if Beamdog are "stopped", I would imagine that would be the end of the Baldur's Gate IP. No-one else will want to pick up a 20 year old engine and try and keep it relevant in today's gaming world. If you don't like the direction BG has gone - sorry, but don't try ruin it for the rest of us, cos this is all we're getting.
You think stopping beamdog pushing an a gender would mean the end of the baldure's gate ip? It had no agender to begin with how can it ruin the ip? The trick is when u go to play a baldure's gate game u expect peace, you expect to be immersed, you expect to find your team with which you have grown to love to still be there as they were. Minsc and aerie are my favourites(thank God they didn't touch aerie) and yet I come to minsc who apparently has already chosen a side in gamer gate and is vocal about it. I bump into a random transsexual who's only reason to exist is to tell me they have/want the opposite gentles and to be called a racist etc. And the poor female characters, Jaheira who was clearly the strongest of the female characters has been butchered. I didn't really use the other chick much tho.
Pushing agendas is killing gaming.
Sjw's are people who get offended by everything if all nationalities/sexes/races/religions aren't in a game they kick up a huge fuss. They are racists/bigots/sexists in disguise, a game is a game if it's lacking something who cares? A normal gamer doesn't give a crap. Sjw's fight tooth and nail for what they call "equality" in gaming even if it breaks the immersion/lore of the game. And in doing so sjw's actually use the people they are "fighting" for as a weapon.
You know, I strongly believe that part of the reason it feels wrong in Baldur's Gate for a lot of people is because of the ideological warfare going on everywhere in the media. When you can't pick up a newspaper without hearing people's opinions about Caitlyn Jenner, or whether or not North Carolina (my home state) is just a bunch of backwards redneck assholes because there's controversy over where you can use the toilet, well...you don't want to open up Baldur's Gate and get slapped with an NPC who feels really forced on you (especially given the fact you cannot be rude to the NPC concerning her story).
People have posted numerous other examples from the original game where charname doesn't get a dialogue option to be rude to NPCs talking to them. Why, pray tell, is this one so different?
Because people feel that if they find out someone is transgendered and they can't be rude to them, they're being forced to accept this person as a PC and in real life.
Boo. Effing. Hoo.
But you frequently do get dialog options, especially when given a rather big wall of text and such. And, as I noted before, there are other factors contributing to the perception. Likewise, your attitude is unnecessarily antagonistic. What do you hope to accomplish other than making yourself feel better about fighting the good fight and giving yourself a pat on the back?
You are being needlessly dismissive and you openly mock others for feeling differently than you do. Nobody here has done the same, so why not leave that crap at the door?
There is no need to treat "people who are comfortable with trans characters being in a game" and "people who are uncomfortable with trans characters being in a game" as moral and intellectually equal sides. They aren't. The first side is right, and the second side is wrong. Period.
Now, the world is what it is, popular media is what it is, and I don't feel being in the second group makes you or anyone else necessarily a terrible person. You are quite possibly, even likely, not "evil". But you are in the wrong.
Except things aren't so binary. For example, a some people are uncomfortable with what they perceive as a token character (and are no more wrong than disliking the notion of a token *insert subgroup* in anything). Further, some people are uncomfortable with the way that responses were initially responded to (yeah, it's doing us no favors). Some people are uncomfortable with seeing what feels like an agenda jab rather than something that seems natural, and when we've already had cases where companies like Obsidian were harassed because of a short goofy poem (I read the poem, it's actually kind of funny) and got the content changed/removed (also not good for us, IMHO), it makes it feel uncomfortable (which is exactly why it's not good for us). Some people feel let down by the inclusion and are of the mindset of "If you won't do it well, please just don't do it", which is a fair criticism.
Trying to make these things so binary discourages real discussion and understanding. You're doing no one any favors. You're only making things more hostile, needlessly.
It's true that not everyone is very nice and considerate in pointing this out. I am sorry if you feel like people are turning you into a bigot, because I don't assume in real life you're actively anti-trans simply due to your posts here. But if you're going to be honest with yourself, you know perfectly well which side got ugly and nasty first and to a much greater degree. And if you are uncomfortable, just imagine how uncomfortable a trans person might feel seeing the sort of things that have been and continue to be said just on this forum, to say nothing of the wider internet, in the past week. Like the video of killing Mizhena that got so much support on Youtube, or various posters who keep coming in here and saying awful things until they get banned.
Your posting is pretty much indicative of what I'm talking about. You're talking past me. If you were even reading what I was saying, or not assuming deceit, it'd be quite obvious I'm not anti-trans. You'd have to be trying to conclude "simply due to your posts here", when I've said nothing anti-tg in the slightest, and am (including in my posts here) discussing things for the benefit of transgendered people.
It's very uncomfortable to be treated this way, so there is no reason to imagine.
That is a lot of bad juju, and in the midst of that, can you blame progressive and moderate posters for not really paying a lot of heed to your feelings? Particularly when it wasn't until this post that you even started talking about your personal situation and why it feels that you're unfairly under attack?
Who are you talking about, here? Just who do you think I am? I'm not blaming anyone, but you're not doing me any favors either. Why is it that the only people that make me feel like I'm under attack at the people claiming they're defending me!?
Anyway, I do feel for you. I'm sure it sucks feeling under attack just for where you live, and I can understand why you'd feel a trans character in a classic old-school-style game would be unexpected and unwelcome to you, under these circumstances. But regardless of those reasons, you are still wrong to feel uncomfortable. It doesn't make you the worst person in the world, a Nazi, or a bigot... but you are still wrong, and I can't compromise on that just because I sympathise with your situation.
I feel uncomfortable because I feel like the ****ing rope in a game of tug of war. I don't feel like I'm under attack because of where I live. I get that there are two sides to everything. I'd rather we could just use whatever toilet happens to coincide with our personal preferences, but I likewise understand that not everyone else understands us, and it would make them feel just as awkward or uncomfortable as my not being able to just walk into the women's bathroom because I don't have a vagina.
Is it that hard to understand other people? Is it so hard to understand that other people are human beings to, and even if we don't agree with each other, trying to climb on the highest horse doesn't help us see any better?
How am I so wrong for wanting people to stop talking past each other and understand each other? Why is it that I'm likened, even vaguely, to nazis and bigots because I don't want your help because I feel like you're doing more harm to use than not?
Can you explain instead of just telling me how wrong and non-progressive I am, for just wanting to not feel like the elephant in the room being forced on people?
But you frequently do get dialog options, especially when given a rather big wall of text and such.
And yet you're ignoring Ayiekie's point (which, just FYI, probably explains your perception of being dismissed) - that's not a hard rule that Mizhena is somehow an exception to. There are dialogues in the original games that aren't split along alignment lines and "railroad" you to a certain endpoint. So why is this particular exchange so noteworthy that it has to be one and not the other?
But you frequently do get dialog options, especially when given a rather big wall of text and such.
And yet you're ignoring Ayiekie's point (which, just FYI, probably explains your perception of being dismissed) - that's not a hard rule that Mizhena is somehow an exception to. There are dialogues in the original games that aren't split along alignment lines and "railroad" you to a certain endpoint. So why is this particular exchange so noteworthy that it has to be one and not the other?
I said that a large part of it very well may be the pollution from outside of the game. I didn't ignore Ayiekie's point, I explained why it comes across as suspect even though there could be a reason for it. That's not ignoring, that's actually answering it.
1. You frequently get mixed options when X is true, not always but frequently. 2. When combined with the thought pollution from outside, it's it makes it seem suspect, even if it were innocuous. In which case, it may just be an "unfortunate implication".
Because I'm benevolent I'll summarise, a 20 year old game is art it's also a legacy, I grew up with it. The statue of David is a naked guy with his penis flapping in the Wind, an endless source of sjw's complain about it. As weird as it may be it's still art, they don't change it because it's old and meant something(I'm guessing). If a sjw bought that statue and gave him a bigger penis or added pants that is wrong. Same goes for bg games, they are art. sure beamdog can spruce them up and restore them with "enhanced editions" as restorers maintain the statue of David. But they don't go changing things like adding pants and covering up the penis which is what beamdog is doing. They maintain the lore.
Typing this made me laugh.
So what are the changes that constitute the pants on David? Give me the meat of your argument - it's all very well to say "they changed some things and I don't like those changes", but a real argument would be to list all the things you disliked to this extent, the reasons why you disliked them, and why you think they are inappropriate to a Baldur's Gate game. I already know you don't like some things, you don't need to tell me that again with a tortured metaphor.
I think 90% of what Beamdog has done has been excellent, and I'm really pleased they've resurrected the game I also grew up with. I'd like to see them produce more IE/BG games.
The biggest problem I had with SoD was
the Temple of Bhaal quest. I thought this was a really good opportunity to tell a really interesting story that would give real insight into the protagonist's history
but it ended up being dull and going nowhere. I like the Shaman class but it could do with a bit more tweaking. I thought the scenes with
Irenicus were really good - at first I thought it was a terrible idea to introduce him before BG2 because part of what makes him such a compelling villain is that he comes out of nowhere, but the writing for him was great
and that justified the earlier inclusion to me.
Don't bother, he already admitted in an earlier thread that he hadn't even played SOD.
Ashiel made better points then me I'm too lazy, but ultimately whether it's a transexual/female/guy/religion. If it's not included in a game that's fine they are people they don't mind, but going back and injecting those items that were never there just alienates them. Iv never met a transsexual but I dont judge people on their genatles /sexual preference. Changing things in a game that is "art" and injecting in those things is wrong. They want to escape into this world too not be reminded about reality constantly.
Because I'm benevolent I'll summarise, a 20 year old game is art it's also a legacy, I grew up with it. The statue of David is a naked guy with his penis flapping in the Wind, an endless source of sjw's complain about it. As weird as it may be it's still art, they don't change it because it's old and meant something(I'm guessing). If a sjw bought that statue and gave him a bigger penis or added pants that is wrong. Same goes for bg games, they are art. sure beamdog can spruce them up and restore them with "enhanced editions" as restorers maintain the statue of David. But they don't go changing things like adding pants and covering up the penis which is what beamdog is doing. They maintain the lore.
Typing this made me laugh.
So what are the changes that constitute the pants on David? Give me the meat of your argument - it's all very well to say "they changed some things and I don't like those changes", but a real argument would be to list all the things you disliked to this extent, the reasons why you disliked them, and why you think they are inappropriate to a Baldur's Gate game. I already know you don't like some things, you don't need to tell me that again with a tortured metaphor.
I think 90% of what Beamdog has done has been excellent, and I'm really pleased they've resurrected the game I also grew up with. I'd like to see them produce more IE/BG games.
The biggest problem I had with SoD was
the Temple of Bhaal quest. I thought this was a really good opportunity to tell a really interesting story that would give real insight into the protagonist's history
but it ended up being dull and going nowhere. I like the Shaman class but it could do with a bit more tweaking. I thought the scenes with
Irenicus were really good - at first I thought it was a terrible idea to introduce him before BG2 because part of what makes him such a compelling villain is that he comes out of nowhere, but the writing for him was great
and that justified the earlier inclusion to me.
Don't bother, he already admitted in an earlier thread that he hadn't even played SOD.
That was days ago and I already posted my intention that I was going to buy it and most likely refund it(pending bugs) .
The hard part is I don't want to reward sjw behaviour.
Iv never met a transsexual but I dont judge people on their genatles /sexual preference.
You might have (met them, I mean), just not known it. Like I said before, I don't even try to pass because it just makes my life more difficult than it already is or needs to be, and only a few close individuals know about it in my personal life. It's easier to talk about these things online because it's distant from day to day life. Talking about how you feel online doesn't involve trying to make your dad have to make heads or tails of it. It doesn't involve wandering around the bible belt, getting lectured by people trying to make sense of laws that were out of style in the iron age. It doesn't involve having to explain to people that you personally don't have a side in some stupid urinal argument, even though they automatically think you do and react accordingly.
No...you just have to listen to people preach about how much they're helping you, while shouting you down, speaking over you, calling you a bigot, calling you anti-trans, and making gosh darn sure that if someone, like you Mephiston87, ever does meet a transgender person who's livin' the dream, you have tons and tons of negative experiences and feelings built up to help color your opinion of them.
Iv never met a transsexual but I dont judge people on their genatles /sexual preference.
You might have (met them, I mean), just not known it. Like I said before, I don't even try to pass because it just makes my life more difficult than it already is or needs to be, and only a few close individuals know about it in my personal life. It's easier to talk about these things online because it's distant from day to day life. Talking about how you feel online doesn't involve trying to make your dad have to make heads or tails of it. It doesn't involve wandering around the bible belt, getting lectured by people trying to make sense of laws that were out of style in the iron age. It doesn't involve having to explain to people that you personally don't have a side in some stupid urinal argument, even though they automatically think you do and react accordingly.
No...you just have to listen to people preach about how much they're helping you, while shouting you down, speaking over you, calling you a bigot, calling you anti-trans, and making gosh darn sure that if someone, like you Mephiston87, ever does meet a transgender person who's livin' the dream, you have tons and tons of negative experiences and feelings built up to help color your opinion of them.
Some days, I'd rather have the 'belters.
Obviously there is no way I can fully understand what it's like, but I do have a knack of being able to put myself in other peoples shoes no matter their circumstances. I was very small when I was younger and because of that I got bullied alot till highschool when I endlessly got into fights, unlike the variety of the bullies I was endlessly getting into fights and I got good at it. So in highschool I saw the nerd/geek group endlessly being terrorised, since I eventually grew to enjoy beating up bullies I started hanging with the nerds/geek's and they were the ones who introduced me to DND and baldure's gate, I protected them and they taught me a bit of genius and they were nice. I'll always fight for what's right and generally that's fighting for the little man/woman.
Because I'm benevolent I'll summarise, a 20 year old game is art it's also a legacy, I grew up with it. The statue of David is a naked guy with his penis flapping in the Wind, an endless source of sjw's complain about it. As weird as it may be it's still art, they don't change it because it's old and meant something(I'm guessing). If a sjw bought that statue and gave him a bigger penis or added pants that is wrong. Same goes for bg games, they are art. sure beamdog can spruce them up and restore them with "enhanced editions" as restorers maintain the statue of David. But they don't go changing things like adding pants and covering up the penis which is what beamdog is doing. They maintain the lore.
Typing this made me laugh.
So what are the changes that constitute the pants on David? Give me the meat of your argument - it's all very well to say "they changed some things and I don't like those changes", but a real argument would be to list all the things you disliked to this extent, the reasons why you disliked them, and why you think they are inappropriate to a Baldur's Gate game. I already know you don't like some things, you don't need to tell me that again with a tortured metaphor.
I think 90% of what Beamdog has done has been excellent, and I'm really pleased they've resurrected the game I also grew up with. I'd like to see them produce more IE/BG games.
The biggest problem I had with SoD was
the Temple of Bhaal quest. I thought this was a really good opportunity to tell a really interesting story that would give real insight into the protagonist's history
but it ended up being dull and going nowhere. I like the Shaman class but it could do with a bit more tweaking. I thought the scenes with
Irenicus were really good - at first I thought it was a terrible idea to introduce him before BG2 because part of what makes him such a compelling villain is that he comes out of nowhere, but the writing for him was great
and that justified the earlier inclusion to me.
Don't bother, he already admitted in an earlier thread that he hadn't even played SOD.
Thanks for the heads up, but I already knew that. I was just curious how long they'd play this game of pretend or if they'd ever own up.
Mephiston87, don't be a chump forever. Play SoD and make your own mind up about it. People who yell about "SJW agendas" being forced on people are just trying to use you for a bit of attention and maybe the cash from the youtube hits.
Because I'm benevolent I'll summarise, a 20 year old game is art it's also a legacy, I grew up with it. The statue of David is a naked guy with his penis flapping in the Wind, an endless source of sjw's complain about it. As weird as it may be it's still art, they don't change it because it's old and meant something(I'm guessing). If a sjw bought that statue and gave him a bigger penis or added pants that is wrong. Same goes for bg games, they are art. sure beamdog can spruce them up and restore them with "enhanced editions" as restorers maintain the statue of David. But they don't go changing things like adding pants and covering up the penis which is what beamdog is doing. They maintain the lore.
Typing this made me laugh.
So what are the changes that constitute the pants on David? Give me the meat of your argument - it's all very well to say "they changed some things and I don't like those changes", but a real argument would be to list all the things you disliked to this extent, the reasons why you disliked them, and why you think they are inappropriate to a Baldur's Gate game. I already know you don't like some things, you don't need to tell me that again with a tortured metaphor.
I think 90% of what Beamdog has done has been excellent, and I'm really pleased they've resurrected the game I also grew up with. I'd like to see them produce more IE/BG games.
The biggest problem I had with SoD was
the Temple of Bhaal quest. I thought this was a really good opportunity to tell a really interesting story that would give real insight into the protagonist's history
but it ended up being dull and going nowhere. I like the Shaman class but it could do with a bit more tweaking. I thought the scenes with
Irenicus were really good - at first I thought it was a terrible idea to introduce him before BG2 because part of what makes him such a compelling villain is that he comes out of nowhere, but the writing for him was great
and that justified the earlier inclusion to me.
Don't bother, he already admitted in an earlier thread that he hadn't even played SOD.
Thanks for the heads up, but I already knew that. I was just curious how long they'd play this game of pretend.
Mephiston87, don't be a chump forever. Play SoD and make your own mind up about it. People who yell about "SJW agendas" being forced on people are just trying to use you for a bit of attention and maybe the cash from the youtube hits.
Actually I didn't notice it was on YouTube till like 12hrs ago when I was watching an angry Joe review, iv been against the sjw's for awhile now.
I didn't think it had gotten that big honestly
They are in the middle of sorting it mostly, I'll pick it up then when even if it was an "unintended agenda" atleast it's gone then and no problems. Playing it now I would probably be sour, safer to remain as unbiased as I can.
Because I'm benevolent I'll summarise, a 20 year old game is art it's also a legacy, I grew up with it. The statue of David is a naked guy with his penis flapping in the Wind, an endless source of sjw's complain about it. As weird as it may be it's still art, they don't change it because it's old and meant something(I'm guessing). If a sjw bought that statue and gave him a bigger penis or added pants that is wrong. Same goes for bg games, they are art. sure beamdog can spruce them up and restore them with "enhanced editions" as restorers maintain the statue of David. But they don't go changing things like adding pants and covering up the penis which is what beamdog is doing. They maintain the lore.
Typing this made me laugh.
So what are the changes that constitute the pants on David? Give me the meat of your argument - it's all very well to say "they changed some things and I don't like those changes", but a real argument would be to list all the things you disliked to this extent, the reasons why you disliked them, and why you think they are inappropriate to a Baldur's Gate game. I already know you don't like some things, you don't need to tell me that again with a tortured metaphor.
I think 90% of what Beamdog has done has been excellent, and I'm really pleased they've resurrected the game I also grew up with. I'd like to see them produce more IE/BG games.
The biggest problem I had with SoD was
the Temple of Bhaal quest. I thought this was a really good opportunity to tell a really interesting story that would give real insight into the protagonist's history
but it ended up being dull and going nowhere. I like the Shaman class but it could do with a bit more tweaking. I thought the scenes with
Irenicus were really good - at first I thought it was a terrible idea to introduce him before BG2 because part of what makes him such a compelling villain is that he comes out of nowhere, but the writing for him was great
and that justified the earlier inclusion to me.
Don't bother, he already admitted in an earlier thread that he hadn't even played SOD.
Thanks for the heads up, but I already knew that. I was just curious how long they'd play this game of pretend.
Mephiston87, don't be a chump forever. Play SoD and make your own mind up about it. People who yell about "SJW agendas" being forced on people are just trying to use you for a bit of attention and maybe the cash from the youtube hits.
Actually I didn't notice it was on YouTube till like 12hrs ago when I was watching an angry Joe review, iv been against the sjw's for awhile now.
Yeah, don't get too hung up about youtube, I meant that in a more general sense. There is no conspiracy of SJWs, just people with different beliefs to you.
Doesn’t mean you have to like those beliefs, but if you carry on talking about SJWs, noone is going to care about your opinion because they'll assume you're stupid or crazy.
Because I'm benevolent I'll summarise, a 20 year old game is art it's also a legacy, I grew up with it. The statue of David is a naked guy with his penis flapping in the Wind, an endless source of sjw's complain about it. As weird as it may be it's still art, they don't change it because it's old and meant something(I'm guessing). If a sjw bought that statue and gave him a bigger penis or added pants that is wrong. Same goes for bg games, they are art. sure beamdog can spruce them up and restore them with "enhanced editions" as restorers maintain the statue of David. But they don't go changing things like adding pants and covering up the penis which is what beamdog is doing. They maintain the lore.
Typing this made me laugh.
So what are the changes that constitute the pants on David? Give me the meat of your argument - it's all very well to say "they changed some things and I don't like those changes", but a real argument would be to list all the things you disliked to this extent, the reasons why you disliked them, and why you think they are inappropriate to a Baldur's Gate game. I already know you don't like some things, you don't need to tell me that again with a tortured metaphor.
I think 90% of what Beamdog has done has been excellent, and I'm really pleased they've resurrected the game I also grew up with. I'd like to see them produce more IE/BG games.
The biggest problem I had with SoD was
the Temple of Bhaal quest. I thought this was a really good opportunity to tell a really interesting story that would give real insight into the protagonist's history
but it ended up being dull and going nowhere. I like the Shaman class but it could do with a bit more tweaking. I thought the scenes with
Irenicus were really good - at first I thought it was a terrible idea to introduce him before BG2 because part of what makes him such a compelling villain is that he comes out of nowhere, but the writing for him was great
and that justified the earlier inclusion to me.
Don't bother, he already admitted in an earlier thread that he hadn't even played SOD.
Thanks for the heads up, but I already knew that. I was just curious how long they'd play this game of pretend.
Mephiston87, don't be a chump forever. Play SoD and make your own mind up about it. People who yell about "SJW agendas" being forced on people are just trying to use you for a bit of attention and maybe the cash from the youtube hits.
Actually I didn't notice it was on YouTube till like 12hrs ago when I was watching an angry Joe review, iv been against the sjw's for awhile now.
Yeah, don't get too hung up about youtube, I meant that in a more general sense. There is no conspiracy of SJWs, just people with different beliefs to you.
Doesn’t mean you have to like those beliefs, but if you carry on talking about SJWs, noone is going to care about your opinion because they'll assume you're stupid or crazy.
If being an sjw is becoming normal, I'll happily be both stupid and crazy.
I don't think it's so much a coincidence when you can quite easily to go places like reddit and see the threads where fans of gamergate organised review bombing the game. Reddit's quite a good example, because for the first couple of days it was being bombarded with lots of new posters with negative views about "SJWs" that dominated the discussion until enough of the regulars took a break from actually playing Siege of Dragonspear to bring the discussion back to the actual game.
And yet again you've failed to articulate anything wrong with the game. Talking about SJWs and agendas doesn't count if you can't spell out and criticise what an SJW is and what's wrong with their agenda, and why it doesn't belong in Siege of Dragonspear. You should be able to at least list some of the occurrences in the game that you considered to be part of this agenda pushing - perhaps you could try again and construct an actual argument this time? Maybe expand on what exactly this trick that's been played?
Also, if Beamdog are "stopped", I would imagine that would be the end of the Baldur's Gate IP. No-one else will want to pick up a 20 year old engine and try and keep it relevant in today's gaming world. If you don't like the direction BG has gone - sorry, but don't try ruin it for the rest of us, cos this is all we're getting.
SJWs at heart are modern day socialists/facists who seek to advocate and impose their views at the expense of the masses. Resorting to shaming and censorship of opinions and thoughts that fail to correspond with thier own. There's a reason for all this backlash. This nonsense has no place in gaming.
I don't think it's so much a coincidence when you can quite easily to go places like reddit and see the threads where fans of gamergate organised review bombing the game. Reddit's quite a good example, because for the first couple of days it was being bombarded with lots of new posters with negative views about "SJWs" that dominated the discussion until enough of the regulars took a break from actually playing Siege of Dragonspear to bring the discussion back to the actual game.
And yet again you've failed to articulate anything wrong with the game. Talking about SJWs and agendas doesn't count if you can't spell out and criticise what an SJW is and what's wrong with their agenda, and why it doesn't belong in Siege of Dragonspear. You should be able to at least list some of the occurrences in the game that you considered to be part of this agenda pushing - perhaps you could try again and construct an actual argument this time? Maybe expand on what exactly this trick that's been played?
Also, if Beamdog are "stopped", I would imagine that would be the end of the Baldur's Gate IP. No-one else will want to pick up a 20 year old engine and try and keep it relevant in today's gaming world. If you don't like the direction BG has gone - sorry, but don't try ruin it for the rest of us, cos this is all we're getting.
SJWs at heart are modern day socialists/facists who seek to advocate and impose their views at the expense of the masses. Resorting to shaming and censorship of opinions and thoughts that fail to correspond with thier own. There's a reason for all this backlash. This nonsense has no place in gaming.
Sounds familiar. So how do we stop these SJWs from censoring Beamdog's wonderful game?
I do have a knack of being able to put myself in other peoples shoes no matter their circumstances. I was very small when I was younger and because of that I got bullied alot till highschool when I endlessly got into fights, unlike the variety of the bullies I was endlessly getting into fights and I got good at it. So in highschool I saw the nerd/geek group endlessly being terrorised, since I eventually grew to enjoy beating up bullies I started hanging with the nerds/geek's and they were the ones who introduced me to DND and baldure's gate, I protected them and they taught me a bit of genius and they were nice. I'll always fight for what's right and generally that's fighting for the little man/woman.
Let me get this straight. You have a special gift for empathy and understanding, as demonstrated by routinely beating kids up and excusing it by saying that they were the bullies? And you think you fight for what's right and defend the vulnerable, but you have a special loathing for "warriors" for justice who try to defend minorities?
As a trans person I think the problem is the harassor and the hainous people. Not the people who trying to help and give us kind representation & visibility.
I don't think it's so much a coincidence when you can quite easily to go places like reddit and see the threads where fans of gamergate organised review bombing the game. Reddit's quite a good example, because for the first couple of days it was being bombarded with lots of new posters with negative views about "SJWs" that dominated the discussion until enough of the regulars took a break from actually playing Siege of Dragonspear to bring the discussion back to the actual game.
And yet again you've failed to articulate anything wrong with the game. Talking about SJWs and agendas doesn't count if you can't spell out and criticise what an SJW is and what's wrong with their agenda, and why it doesn't belong in Siege of Dragonspear. You should be able to at least list some of the occurrences in the game that you considered to be part of this agenda pushing - perhaps you could try again and construct an actual argument this time? Maybe expand on what exactly this trick that's been played?
Also, if Beamdog are "stopped", I would imagine that would be the end of the Baldur's Gate IP. No-one else will want to pick up a 20 year old engine and try and keep it relevant in today's gaming world. If you don't like the direction BG has gone - sorry, but don't try ruin it for the rest of us, cos this is all we're getting.
SJWs at heart are modern day socialists/facists who seek to advocate and impose their views at the expense of the masses. Resorting to shaming and censorship of opinions and thoughts that fail to correspond with thier own. There's a reason for all this backlash. This nonsense has no place in gaming.
Sounds familiar. So how do we stop these SJWs from censoring Beamdog's wonderful game?
Voice or opinions as many already have and abstain from purshashing in the extreme. Transgender chars are fine and dandy and all but players should by no means be conditioned to accept it. If Beamdog wanted to balance it out they should've made a bigotted, intolerant, char to balance it out if they truly desired diversity. At the very least a decent backstory to the char is question.
I do have a knack of being able to put myself in other peoples shoes no matter their circumstances. I was very small when I was younger and because of that I got bullied alot till highschool when I endlessly got into fights, unlike the variety of the bullies I was endlessly getting into fights and I got good at it. So in highschool I saw the nerd/geek group endlessly being terrorised, since I eventually grew to enjoy beating up bullies I started hanging with the nerds/geek's and they were the ones who introduced me to DND and baldure's gate, I protected them and they taught me a bit of genius and they were nice. I'll always fight for what's right and generally that's fighting for the little man/woman.
Let me get this straight. You have a special gift for empathy and understanding, as demonstrated by routinely beating kids up and excusing it by saying that they were the bullies? And you think you fight for what's right and defend the vulnerable, but you have a special loathing for "warriors" for justice who try to defend minorities?
Umm sjw's don't defend minorities they put minorities in the firing line, doing far more damage then the majority ever could. Have u read a single part of this? Minorities I would imagine don't like being the centre of everyone's conversation, they don't like to be alienated no one does. Treat a minority like everyone else, they want that. They want to be a part of the masses. Or left alone, never alienated or put in the firing line.
I do have a knack of being able to put myself in other peoples shoes no matter their circumstances. I was very small when I was younger and because of that I got bullied alot till highschool when I endlessly got into fights, unlike the variety of the bullies I was endlessly getting into fights and I got good at it. So in highschool I saw the nerd/geek group endlessly being terrorised, since I eventually grew to enjoy beating up bullies I started hanging with the nerds/geek's and they were the ones who introduced me to DND and baldure's gate, I protected them and they taught me a bit of genius and they were nice. I'll always fight for what's right and generally that's fighting for the little man/woman.
Let me get this straight. You have a special gift for empathy and understanding, as demonstrated by routinely beating kids up and excusing it by saying that they were the bullies? And you think you fight for what's right and defend the vulnerable, but you have a special loathing for "warriors" for justice who try to defend minorities?
Umm sjw's don't defend minorities they put minorities in the firing line, doing far more damage then the majority ever could. Have u read a single part of this? Minorities I would imagine don't like being the centre of everyone's conversation, they don't like to be alienated no one does. Treat a minority like everyone else, they want that.
Have u read this topic at all?
So if a minority wants to be represented in games sometimes, like most people who play games would, that's cool with you?
If you don't want minorities to be discussed, don't argue that they shouldn't be put in a game. Just accept that people different to you exist and move on.
I do have a knack of being able to put myself in other peoples shoes no matter their circumstances. I was very small when I was younger and because of that I got bullied alot till highschool when I endlessly got into fights, unlike the variety of the bullies I was endlessly getting into fights and I got good at it. So in highschool I saw the nerd/geek group endlessly being terrorised, since I eventually grew to enjoy beating up bullies I started hanging with the nerds/geek's and they were the ones who introduced me to DND and baldure's gate, I protected them and they taught me a bit of genius and they were nice. I'll always fight for what's right and generally that's fighting for the little man/woman.
Let me get this straight. You have a special gift for empathy and understanding, as demonstrated by routinely beating kids up and excusing it by saying that they were the bullies? And you think you fight for what's right and defend the vulnerable, but you have a special loathing for "warriors" for justice who try to defend minorities?
Umm sjw's don't defend minorities they put minorities in the firing line, doing far more damage then the majority ever could. Have u read a single part of this? Minorities I would imagine don't like being the centre of everyone's conversation, they don't like to be alienated no one does. Treat a minority like everyone else, they want that.
Have u read this topic at all?
So if a minority wants to be represented in games sometimes, like most people who play games would, that's cool with you?
The minority has no choice in the matter, the game has lore it is built a certain way like art. Politics stays out of gaming.
@feersum_endjinn: Regarding your irony level question, the commenter you're asking about posted a link to a white power site the other day. It got deleted.
Minorities I would imagine don't like being the centre of everyone's conversation
That explains why there are never minority activists.
Look, I understand the feeling that it would be safer to be invisible and that any attention is unwelcome. I think it's misguided, but it's a valid feeling. My question was how you can say you think it's important to fight for -- not ignore -- the vulnerable, and then immediately turn around and condemn people who are trying to do exactly that. Criticize their techniques if you want, but you should recognize that they're trying to embrace the same values that you claim.
@feersum_endjinn: Regarding your irony level question, the commenter you're asking about posted a link to a white power site the other day. It got deleted.
Hah. Thanks. I suppose it was only a matter of time before that lot latched onto the hate bandwagon.
Minorities I would imagine don't like being the centre of everyone's conversation
That explains why there are never minority activists.
Look, I understand the feeling that it would be safer to be invisible and that any attention is unwelcome. I think it's misguided, but it's a valid feeling. My question was how you can say you think it's important to fight for -- not ignore -- the vulnerable, and then immediately turn around and condemn people who are trying to do exactly that. Criticize their techniques if you want, but you should recognize that they're trying to embrace the same values that you claim.
No sjw's are using minority groups as tools, tools to their own agenda(agenda varies) but ultimately it's to include every race, every religion, every sex basically to include everything in every game. So each game does not have individuality and control the original creators. Eventually sjw will go far enough to say "I counted 50 white people and only 49 black people and 48 Asians in this game, that's unfair!) that is what fighting against sjw people is all about, if people don't put their foot down at some point it will just get far worse.
At the moment it's under control. It needs to stay that way, and baldure's gate is not where it's going to start.
No sjw's are using minority groups as tools, tools to their own agenda(agenda varies) but ultimately it's to include every race, every religion, every sex basically to include everything in every game. So each game does not have individuality and control the original creators. Eventually sjw will go far enough to say "I counted 50 white people and only 49 black people and 48 Asians in this game, that's unfair!)
Really, you think the end goal of this "movement" is exact numerical racial parity in videogames? Have you asked yourself why anyone would want to pursue that insane and bizarrely narrow agenda?
Minorities I would imagine don't like being the centre of everyone's conversation
That explains why there are never minority activists.
Look, I understand the feeling that it would be safer to be invisible and that any attention is unwelcome. I think it's misguided, but it's a valid feeling. My question was how you can say you think it's important to fight for -- not ignore -- the vulnerable, and then immediately turn around and condemn people who are trying to do exactly that. Criticize their techniques if you want, but you should recognize that they're trying to embrace the same values that you claim.
No sjw's are using minority groups as tools, tools to their own agenda(agenda varies) but ultimately it's to include every race, every religion, every sex basically to include everything in every game. So each game does not have individuality and control the original creators. Eventually sjw will go far enough to say "I counted 50 white people and only 49 black people and 48 Asians in this game, that's unfair!) that is what fighting against sjw people is all about, if people don't put their foot down at some point it will just get far worse.
At the moment it's under control. It needs to stay that way, and baldure's gate is not where it's going to start.
As usual, you're not talking about real people but instead straw men you've chosen to label "SJW."
I understand the impulse, to find a way to paint "SJWs" as enemies of "real minorities" by claiming they use such groups as "tools." That's certainly easier than engaging what real people have to say about their real lived experiences.
What you describe simply isn't reality. If you think you've seen it in action, you're mistaken.
Comments
And yet again you've failed to articulate anything wrong with the game. Talking about SJWs and agendas doesn't count if you can't spell out and criticise what an SJW is and what's wrong with their agenda, and why it doesn't belong in Siege of Dragonspear. You should be able to at least list some of the occurrences in the game that you considered to be part of this agenda pushing - perhaps you could try again and construct an actual argument this time? Maybe expand on what exactly this trick that's been played?
Also, if Beamdog are "stopped", I would imagine that would be the end of the Baldur's Gate IP. No-one else will want to pick up a 20 year old engine and try and keep it relevant in today's gaming world. If you don't like the direction BG has gone - sorry, but don't try ruin it for the rest of us, cos this is all we're getting.
Pushing agendas is killing gaming.
Sjw's are people who get offended by everything if all nationalities/sexes/races/religions aren't in a game they kick up a huge fuss. They are racists/bigots/sexists in disguise, a game is a game if it's lacking something who cares? A normal gamer doesn't give a crap. Sjw's fight tooth and nail for what they call "equality" in gaming even if it breaks the immersion/lore of the game. And in doing so sjw's actually use the people they are "fighting" for as a weapon.
You are being needlessly dismissive and you openly mock others for feeling differently than you do. Nobody here has done the same, so why not leave that crap at the door? Except things aren't so binary. For example, a some people are uncomfortable with what they perceive as a token character (and are no more wrong than disliking the notion of a token *insert subgroup* in anything). Further, some people are uncomfortable with the way that responses were initially responded to (yeah, it's doing us no favors). Some people are uncomfortable with seeing what feels like an agenda jab rather than something that seems natural, and when we've already had cases where companies like Obsidian were harassed because of a short goofy poem (I read the poem, it's actually kind of funny) and got the content changed/removed (also not good for us, IMHO), it makes it feel uncomfortable (which is exactly why it's not good for us). Some people feel let down by the inclusion and are of the mindset of "If you won't do it well, please just don't do it", which is a fair criticism.
Trying to make these things so binary discourages real discussion and understanding. You're doing no one any favors. You're only making things more hostile, needlessly. Your posting is pretty much indicative of what I'm talking about. You're talking past me. If you were even reading what I was saying, or not assuming deceit, it'd be quite obvious I'm not anti-trans. You'd have to be trying to conclude "simply due to your posts here", when I've said nothing anti-tg in the slightest, and am (including in my posts here) discussing things for the benefit of transgendered people.
It's very uncomfortable to be treated this way, so there is no reason to imagine. Who are you talking about, here? Just who do you think I am? I'm not blaming anyone, but you're not doing me any favors either. Why is it that the only people that make me feel like I'm under attack at the people claiming they're defending me!? I feel uncomfortable because I feel like the ****ing rope in a game of tug of war. I don't feel like I'm under attack because of where I live. I get that there are two sides to everything. I'd rather we could just use whatever toilet happens to coincide with our personal preferences, but I likewise understand that not everyone else understands us, and it would make them feel just as awkward or uncomfortable as my not being able to just walk into the women's bathroom because I don't have a vagina.
Is it that hard to understand other people? Is it so hard to understand that other people are human beings to, and even if we don't agree with each other, trying to climb on the highest horse doesn't help us see any better?
How am I so wrong for wanting people to stop talking past each other and understand each other? Why is it that I'm likened, even vaguely, to nazis and bigots because I don't want your help because I feel like you're doing more harm to use than not?
Can you explain instead of just telling me how wrong and non-progressive I am, for just wanting to not feel like the elephant in the room being forced on people?
1. You frequently get mixed options when X is true, not always but frequently.
2. When combined with the thought pollution from outside, it's it makes it seem suspect, even if it were innocuous. In which case, it may just be an "unfortunate implication".
That was the answer to the point.
The hard part is I don't want to reward sjw behaviour.
No...you just have to listen to people preach about how much they're helping you, while shouting you down, speaking over you, calling you a bigot, calling you anti-trans, and making gosh darn sure that if someone, like you Mephiston87, ever does meet a transgender person who's livin' the dream, you have tons and tons of negative experiences and feelings built up to help color your opinion of them.
Some days, I'd rather have the 'belters.
It's been a pleasure fighting by your side haha
Mephiston87, don't be a chump forever. Play SoD and make your own mind up about it. People who yell about "SJW agendas" being forced on people are just trying to use you for a bit of attention and maybe the cash from the youtube hits.
I didn't think it had gotten that big honestly
They are in the middle of sorting it mostly, I'll pick it up then when even if it was an "unintended agenda" atleast it's gone then and no problems. Playing it now I would probably be sour, safer to remain as unbiased as I can.
Doesn’t mean you have to like those beliefs, but if you carry on talking about SJWs, noone is going to care about your opinion because they'll assume you're stupid or crazy.
Just my 2 cents.
Have u read this topic at all?
If you don't want minorities to be discussed, don't argue that they shouldn't be put in a game. Just accept that people different to you exist and move on.
Look, I understand the feeling that it would be safer to be invisible and that any attention is unwelcome. I think it's misguided, but it's a valid feeling. My question was how you can say you think it's important to fight for -- not ignore -- the vulnerable, and then immediately turn around and condemn people who are trying to do exactly that. Criticize their techniques if you want, but you should recognize that they're trying to embrace the same values that you claim.
At the moment it's under control. It needs to stay that way, and baldure's gate is not where it's going to start.
I understand the impulse, to find a way to paint "SJWs" as enemies of "real minorities" by claiming they use such groups as "tools." That's certainly easier than engaging what real people have to say about their real lived experiences.
What you describe simply isn't reality. If you think you've seen it in action, you're mistaken.