I'm owner of the BG:EE, BG2:EE and IWD:EE, i was very hyped with this expansion, because BG is my favourite not only game, but story carring medium of all time, but I won't buy expansion until the writing is fixed. As I've heard it is strictly subpar compared to original. Not having a problem with trans character, just make dialogs appealing, and don't change the lore to fit your nasty agenda.
it's funny to see SJWs like abentwookie try to blame this on gamergaters, when literally beamdog are the ones who brought them into the discussion. And apparently everybody who uses the term SJW is a gamergater lol. As if that is a membership card. Strange how none-gamers use the term just as well to describe these extremists. And seing how the writers of this game describe themselves as SJW, i don't even know what you complain about. Extremist leftwingers who take choices away from people and start their hate campaigns are SJWs, whever or not you like it.
And the first thread on the gamergate reddit says gamergaters didnt want the line removed because they are against censorship. seems very consistent with their ideology of no censorship. apparently everybody who doenst like extremist propaganda put into our video-games must be a gamergater. nobody else would do that. it's strange how SJWS on one hand say gamergate is a small minority, but on the other hand everybody who dislikes the game, which are thousands of people, are gamergaters. it's nice to see sjws being hypocritical like crazy and never changing.
Racism is not particular to the 1990s... Racism goes as far back as the rise of Christianity, and the advent of antisemitism (arguably).
Eeh.. no.
Racism isn't only tied to religion, although religion might of course spur racism. Racism is probably as old as humanity, but it's argued by some that the structural racism we see today is based on the white/west society being the norm and the number one power factor everyone else is judged by.
OK let me ask you this, is racism not even thirty years old?
I'm curious what you aim to prove with your posts about racism.
Not trying to prove anything in particular. Racism, as we know it today, goes (as I learned in social science) at least as far back as Christianity and the doctrine of deicide. The claim that it is 'as old as humanity' is unfalsifiable (cannot be proven or disproved) because we don't know for sure how old humanity is. However we have evidence that points to the origins of systemic racism (mentioned above). Anyway, that is off topic, the problem is that Ayiekie did not read my full conversation with Diogenes42. Which was not about Baldur's Gate being apolitical, but that Baldur's Gate did not have statements about political issues particular to the 90s epoch (the time in which it was made); which differentiates it from SOD. Something that Ayiekie in all likelihood did not read. I was trying to be Socratic with my explanation.
It seems convenient here for you to determine (not sure how) that KiA is not "synonymous" with GG.
I'm just trying to be fair; my understanding is that it is not required to be in GG to be on KiA, though obviously there's a strong correlation since it's the "official" GG hub on reddit. Stuff that comes out of there nowaways is often related to other movements like MRAs.
(I notice at a glance that "Gaming", "Ethics", and "Journalism" are the first three out of four words on their title bar, so it's not like the meme is so insulting to them as people have argued it is here.)
OK let me ask you this, is racism not even thirty years old?
Let me remind you of what you said:
"As for the rest, I'll make this simple, do you think that the original Bladur's Gate made references to real life political problems in the 90s or not?"
So, let's keep this simple: Yes, the original Baldur's Gate made references to real life political problems in the 90s - specifically, racism.
You cannot just change the question because you don't like that somebody gave you an answer.
Racism was a real life political problem (in the US) in the 90s. And not a small one. Rodney King was beaten by police in 1991, and the acquittal of his attackers caused riots that ended in 53 dead and over a billion dollars in property damage. The OJ Trial was in 1995, and the subsequent civil case in 1997. Those are just two of the most notable incidents of that decade, incidents that almost literally everybody knew about, whether they were young or old, whether they followed the news or not.
And then there's Viconia, being attacked by law enforcement just because of her race, having not even done anything wrong besides being a drow. And saving her from this unjust fate actually LOWERS your reputation... because she's a drow.
That is something way more political and topical for the 90s than a throwaway reference to the "ethics in X" meme is in 2016.
So you're the type of person that likes to 'butt into' finished conversations without having read all the information?
It seems convenient here for you to determine (not sure how) that KiA is not "synonymous" with GG.
I'm just trying to be fair; my understanding is that it is not required to be in GG to be on KiA, though obviously there's a strong correlation since it's the "official" GG hub on reddit. Stuff that comes out of there nowaways is often related to other movements like MRAs.
(I notice at a glance that "Gaming", "Ethics", and "Journalism" are the first three out of four words on their title bar, so it's not like the meme is so insulting to them as people have argued it is here.)
Where are all the MRA posts? i wonder...not a word about MRA here.
And pretending that gamergate is not about ethics, like beamdog tried might just not sit well with people who fought for years now for opjectivity and transparency in the media. you may thank them later, since because of gamergate you have better media now.
today in gaming media, you actually once in a while see journalists disclosing their relations to their sources. when collusion might be a factor.
It seems convenient here for you to determine (not sure how) that KiA is not "synonymous" with GG.
I'm just trying to be fair; my understanding is that it is not required to be in GG to be on KiA, though obviously there's a strong correlation since it's the "official" GG hub on reddit. Stuff that comes out of there nowaways is often related to other movements like MRAs.
(I notice at a glance that "Gaming", "Ethics", and "Journalism" are the first three out of four words on their title bar, so it's not like the meme is so insulting to them as people have argued it is here.)
Alright, though I don't recall seeing MRA stuff on there and I check it pretty regularly.
And the first thread on the gamergate reddit says gamergaters didnt want the line removed because they are against censorship. seems very consistent with their ideology of no censorship.
That doesn't mean that they weren't instrumental in causing it to be removed.
When lots of people vocally complain about something on the Internet and cause a snowball effect of angry shares/retweets/reblogs, then it always also draws the kind of people into it who are willing to hurt others (in this case using review bombing) in the name of the "cause".
It seems to me that GG doesn't quite understand their own Internet-mob dynamics. They enjoy it when the avalanche is going their way, but then when it turns ugly they say "What, we? We didn't explicitly plan this outcome, our hands are clean!"
(And again, the same goes for the "tumblr/twitter feminist" scnene which is governed by similar angry-Internet-mob dynamics and similarly lacks self-awareness about it.)
It seems to me that GG doesn't quite understand their own Internet-mob dynamics. They enjoy it when the avalanche is going their way, but then when it turns ugly they say "What, we? We didn't explicitly plan this outcome, our hands are clean!"
Things turn ugly = GG actually getting their way? Sorry, I know you are trying to be fair to both sides here, but... yea. A lot of folks here would be quick to think they would all be collectively jumping up and down on their beds with glee instead of being concerned with devs removing content.
Sorry, but it wasn't just GG that complained about a beloved character using a line connected to them. I saw a good handful of posts on this very forum from people complaining that Minsc had been turned into a "GG Dudebro".
Frankly, had the line come from one of the Beamdog created characters, well, there would still have been a backlash against it, but it wouldn't have been as bad. Instead, it was put in the mouth of Minsc, an established character who is pretty universally loved no matter what side of the political divide/culture war you are on.
Add in the fact that using that line is completely against Minsc's personality (If Minsc thinks you're evil or doing something wrong, he wouldn't make snide, mocking remarks, instead, he'd be in your face ready to commit some "Butt kicking for Goodness!") I absolutely think Beamdog were in the right for taking another look at it and deciding to remove the line due to the complaints they received.
it's funny to see SJWs like abentwookie try to blame this on gamergaters, when literally beamdog are the ones who brought them into the discussion. And apparently everybody who uses the term SJW is a gamergater lol. As if that is a membership card.
.. and apparently everyone who aren't a "gamer gater" is a "SJW". Luckily for most of us, the world isn't binary and you can be both, either or neither.
Extremist leftwingers who take choices away from people and start their hate campaigns are SJWs, whever or not you like it.
.. "Go Trump!" ? It's so funny how you start your post by stating that it's "funny" how people lump other people into categories, then proceed by doing the exact same thing yourself.
And the first thread on the gamergate reddit says gamergaters didnt want the line removed because they are against censorship. seems very consistent with their ideology of no censorship. apparently everybody who doenst like extremist propaganda put into our video-games must be a gamergater
.. isn't this exactly what that line is mocking? That so called gamer gaters always hide their misogynic opinions behinds ridiculous statements of "ethics" and and "censorship"? Now THAT is funny!
Hello friends. Let's take a minute to stop and realise what a cool and ridiculous universe we live in that a videogame, let alone a sequel to an 18 year old videogame can inspire such a lively and passionate debate. Isn't that so great? Life is amazing.
(Still wondering what the fork is here a full "GG&SJW"-term debat and screenshot from other site on this debate when 1) it's not the subject of the official statement 2) it's not the subject of the thread 3) it's not the subject of the forum 4) it's not the subject of any forum on this site 5) a team member ask multiples times to stop using this term and focus on the subject)
And the first thread on the gamergate reddit says gamergaters didnt want the line removed because they are against censorship. seems very consistent with their ideology of no censorship.
That doesn't mean that they weren't instrumental in causing it to be removed.
When lots of people vocally complain about something on the Internet and cause a snowball effect of angry shares/retweets/reblogs, then it always also draws the kind of people into it who are willing to hurt others (in this case using review bombing) in the name of the "cause".
@ineth aha so basically everytime gamers have a complaint about writing, it was gamergate..thaks for your wonderful insights. only sjws like you can think so one dimensionally stupid.
gamergaters were not "instrumental" in removing anything. otherwise you would have found their spokespeople calling for a rallying cry to remove it. you would have found plenty of statements on gamergate websites and from noteable gamergates to force the devs to remove it.
individual people who played the game hate it for what it delivered. deal with it.
just calling every critic gamergate is only trying to swep the fact under the rug that the writing in this game is abysmal and full of shoehorned propaganda.
saying that you bad reviews are part of a snowball effect is not helping you whitewash this dismemberment of the good name of baldurs gate that beamdog delivered here. the fact that the wave is going in favor for anti-sjws (which are not even gamergaters btw.) should show you that this is actually what the audiance likes. the audiance is obviously sick and tried of getting extremist propaganda forced down their throats and taken their choices away.
and people like you seems to still want to live in their dreamworld where gamergate is some anti-minority movement, or even where gamergate is anti-sjw. maybe you should inform yourself about gamergates accomplishments and see for yourself how much gamergate helped ethical standards to be established in the gaming press. you may thank them later. when you read "disclosure warnings" you would never have read without gamergate on your favortie gaming press website.
That so called gamer gaters always hide their misogynic opinions behinds ridiculous statements of "ethics" and and "censorship"? Now THAT is funny!
@skatan way to misrepresent what i said and to ignore the argument. you are not hiding the shameful behaviour of "the" writer who identified as an sjw and told the world that she doesn't care if her writing is fake or forced, by trying to generalise about gamergaters and misrepresenting the movement.
if you find the fight for objetivity and transparncy in the media so ridiculus and make accusations of some hidden intent, it's strange that you cannot show a single line of proof that gamergate doesn't have a genuine intrest in ethics. show me the gamergate spokespeople who ever said anything remotely in that direction? you are nothing but a usefull idiot to our corperate media, who uses people like you with buzzwords to defend them from critisism. Now THAT is funny.
not providing any proof to your statements this lends very little credence to your entire post.
Sorry to interrupt the debate on racial biology and politics, I just wanted to share something you may or may not have heard of: An expansion to the 1998 game Baldur's Gate has been released. It's pretty cool. There's still some bugs left, and there's a couple of minor details that bothered some people, but the developer seem fully committed to improve that. While there's no excuse for shipping something with bugs, I'm just happy someone has risked money and time to make an expansion to an old 2D game that I really like, I never thought that would happen. Thank you Beamdog!
Sure, there are some things that need to be fixed, but hey, look at it on the bright side, things could be worse, like, just image if the forums would be swarmed with trolls and racists..
the writing in this game is abysmal and full of shoehorned propaganda... this dismemberment of the good name of baldurs gate that beamdog delivered here... the fact that the wave is going in favor for anti-sjws should show you that this is actually what the audiance likes. the audiance is obviously sick and tried of getting extremist propaganda forced down their throats
Well I don't think Siege of Dragonspear is shoehorned propaganda. I don't think Beamdog has dismembered the good name of Baldurs Gate. I'm a member of the audience, and I don't think Siege of Dragonspear is extremist propaganda and I don't think its being shoved down my throat.
Perhaps once we have got passed all the stuff about cultural wars and propaganda we can sit down and play a little Siege of Dragonspear, and then have a chat about whether its a good game, and what we like about it and what we don't like about it, and how Beamdog can continue to support and improve the series going forwards.
OK let me ask you this, is racism not even thirty years old?
Let me remind you of what you said:
"As for the rest, I'll make this simple, do you think that the original Bladur's Gate made references to real life political problems in the 90s or not?"
So, let's keep this simple: Yes, the original Baldur's Gate made references to real life political problems in the 90s - specifically, racism.
You cannot just change the question because you don't like that somebody gave you an answer.
Racism was a real life political problem (in the US) in the 90s. And not a small one. Rodney King was beaten by police in 1991, and the acquittal of his attackers caused riots that ended in 53 dead and over a billion dollars in property damage. The OJ Trial was in 1995, and the subsequent civil case in 1997. Those are just two of the most notable incidents of that decade, incidents that almost literally everybody knew about, whether they were young or old, whether they followed the news or not.
And then there's Viconia, being attacked by law enforcement just because of her race, having not even done anything wrong besides being a drow. And saving her from this unjust fate actually LOWERS your reputation... because she's a drow.
That is something way more political and topical for the 90s than a throwaway reference to the "ethics in X" meme is in 2016.
Viconia got attacked because she is a drow. Not because her skin is black. Read up on what the drow actually do, and you will see the dude who attacks her is actually doing a good job. The drow sacrifice children. They do raid on the surfacers just for sports. Killing for the joy of it. The drow even started off as a monster in d&d. Viconia being attacked is perfectly in tone with the setting and the lore. Extremely so.
< @skatan way to misrepresent what i said and to ignore the argument. you are not hiding the shameful behaviour of "the" writer who identified as an sjw and told the world that she doesn't care if her writing is fake or forced, by trying to generalise about gamergaters and misrepresenting the movement.
if you find the fight for objetivity and transparncy in the media so ridiculus and make accusations of some hidden intent, it's strange that you cannot show a single line of proof that gamergate doesn't have a genuine intrest in ethics. show me the gamergate spokespeople who ever said anything remotely in that direction? you are nothing but a usefull idiot to our corperate media, who uses people like you with buzzwords to defend them from critisism. Now THAT is funny.
not providing any proof to your statements this lends very little credence to your entire post.
I never said I find "the fight for objetivity and transparncy in the media so ridiculus and make accusations of some hidden intent", therefore I don't have to defend my statement with "proof". You come in here, you slander the game, you talk about the writers "SJW" agenda, etc etc, so YOU should do the proving. I've just called you out on your bullshit.
I'm an evil SJW in the eyes of the, ahem "enthusiastic ethics-in-gaming advocates" who have swarmed over from reddit and joined this forum just for the controversy.
And I'm an evil GG supporter in the eyes of the, ahem, "enthusiastic social justice advocates" who have swarmed over from tumblr to join this forum just for the controversy.
I know the truth is not always in the middle of two extremes, but still, it feels like I'm doing something right...
Having a transgender character in BG1 was always a possibility in this game, it wasn't just from the expansion. All of you old school gamers know this. Check on item: Girdle of Masculinity/Femininity.
Having a transgender character in BG1 was always a possibility in this game, it wasn't just from the expansion. All of you old school gamers know this. Check on item: Girdle of Masculinity/Femininity.
It was in the lore from day 1 when the Forgotten Realms became an official setting too. So...since the early 80s, or something. Plenty of spells that does the same too. People who have issues with transgendered characters should find a different setting to play in.
saying that you bad reviews are part of a snowball effect is not helping you whitewash this dismemberment of the good name of baldurs gate that beamdog delivered here. the fact that the wave is going in favor for anti-sjws (which are not even gamergaters btw.) should show you that this is actually what the audiance likes. the audiance is obviously sick and tried of getting extremist propaganda forced down their throats and taken their choices away.
Doubtfull, we have some loud people acting as a mob, review bombing the shit out of it at metacritic, gog and downvoting postive reviews on steam, while upvoting negative reviews (interesting enough overall most of the reviews themselves remain positive, probably because you have to actually own the game to review it), furthermore the content of SoD is hardly 'extremist' nor propaganda and second of all, just because a group is loud, doesn't mean they are significant.
< @skatan way to misrepresent what i said and to ignore the argument. you are not hiding the shameful behaviour of "the" writer who identified as an sjw and told the world that she doesn't care if her writing is fake or forced, by trying to generalise about gamergaters and misrepresenting the movement.
if you find the fight for objetivity and transparncy in the media so ridiculus and make accusations of some hidden intent, it's strange that you cannot show a single line of proof that gamergate doesn't have a genuine intrest in ethics. show me the gamergate spokespeople who ever said anything remotely in that direction? you are nothing but a usefull idiot to our corperate media, who uses people like you with buzzwords to defend them from critisism. Now THAT is funny.
not providing any proof to your statements this lends very little credence to your entire post.
I never said I find "the fight for objetivity and transparncy in the media so ridiculus and make accusations of some hidden intent", therefore I don't have to defend my statement with "proof". You come in here, you slander the game, you talk about the writers "SJW" agenda, etc etc, so YOU should do the proving. I've just called you out on your bullshit.
Edit: Deleted a bit of borderline flaming.
Do the proofing of what? That the writer admitted she is an SJW, and that she admitted giving a shit about the dialoges being forced and fake? Did you not read her own statements? You come here and try to slander a movement that stood up for ethics and have no proof for you accusations. You claim that the movement gamergate is responsible for the bad reviews, yet no gamergate spokesman ever called for any of such things. You have the burden of proof. But of course you chicken out now, that i called you out for your bullshit. You have no proof for your accusations. SJWs like you rarely do. You just love to bash some people and misrepresent their statements to hide your own divisive agenda. The obvious truth is, this game is full of dialogue that leaves you with zero choice. And full of hatefilled propaganda. Minsc making fun of gamergate is only one of the many things and token characters that have lterally no character depths other than being transgender or gay.
my proof for my statements can be read by anyone who reads her interview about her propaganda writing.
you came here and pretended to have information about gamergates agenda. you have zero proof for your statements. if you have no proof, maybe next time don't make such a fool of yourself.
People like me didn't start this, Beamdog did. You can tell yourself all day long, that the CEO of beamdog didn't know what kind of a crazy person they hired. You can tell yourself all day long, that it was all just a mistake. Every SJW dialogue line in this game is written intentionally with an agenda in mind as is blantantly evident by the statements of the writer.
I guess since the thread has run its course, and all the on-topic arguments that are going to be made have been made, the temptation to descend into off-topic or personal comments is too great. With that in mind, I think I'll do myself a favor by returning to the useful (i.e. drama-free) threads of the forum now...
(Wasn't there a certain portrait thread I'd been meaning to update? )
@ineth nice of you to ingore the fact that i called you out that your very immature statement that basically everytime gamers have a complaint about writing, it was gamergate.
just poking some fun about it now, doesn't make you seems smarter or your argument not any worse.
@mzachary so you are complaining about getting bad reviews from the audiance. fanboy much? the up and downvoting system is exactly for that. its about the audiance deceiding what they like and dislike. that most people dislike the game, should give you an insight at the fact that something is blantantly wrong.
calling people a mob every time a game gets bad reviews shows how immature you are.
and your statement that many people give it positive reviews is wrong to begin with. many people complain about bugs, crashes, bad writing and propaganda. there is a multitude of errors in this game.
That the so called "GG movement's" agenda is not about the LGBT character, and that your hatred is actually based on "ethics" and the other so called GG incentives for acting out. I've yet to see any proof of this other than quite ridiculous statements about being force-fed propaganda etc which obviously is fake. Climb down from the cross, you're not the martyr in this discussion so stop acting like it.
That the writer admitted she is an SJW, and that she admitted giving a shit about the dialoges being forced and fake? Did you not read her own statements?
"Writer" - singular! You're learning to stay true to facts finally. Congratz!
You come here and try to slander a movement that stood up for ethics and have no proof for you accusations. You claim that the movement gamergate is responsible for the bad reviews, yet no gamergate spokesman ever called for any of such things. You have the burden of proof. But of course you chicken out now, that i called you out for your bullshit. You have no proof for your accusations. SJWs like you rarely do. You just love to bash some people and misrepresent their statements to hide your own divisive agenda.
Please quote me on that, 'cause I don't remember saying much of anything of what you accusing me of.
The obvious truth is, this game is full of dialogue that leaves you with zero choice. And full of hatefilled propaganda. Minsc making fun of gamergate is only one of the many things and token characters that have lterally no character depths other than being transgender or gay.
"Full of hatefilled propaganda", hahaha.. come on, is that the best argument you can come up with? That's so obviously false I won't even respond to it with anything but laughter.
you came here and pretended to have information about gamergates agenda. you have zero proof for your statements. if you have no proof, maybe next time don't make such a fool of yourself.
You come here and and pretend to have information about Beamdog's agenda. You have zero proof for your statements. If you have no proof, maybe next time don't make such a fool of yourself.
Lol @Skatan if you haven't even read her interview how about you stop trying to defend her writing. you make quite the fool out of yourself here.
again you try to deny that you slandered gamergate on the very same page of the dicussion, how about you scroll up and read your own comment? everybody can read it here.
and her interview is open acces for everybody to read as well. if you are this lazy as to not want to read it yourself what beamsdogs agenda was, maybe you should not engange in a discussion about propaganda being shoehorned in.
at least you finally admit that she said she is an SJW.
all you need to do now is read the interview and see that she admitted that she doesnt care about her writing being fake or forced.
Its allways funny seeing sjws argue for something, yet they haven#t even read what the controversy is all about.
a little bit biased arent we Skatan?
PS: you just did it again "so called incentives"? so obejctivity in the media is a "so called" incentive for you and not a legitimate concern? you may thank gamergate later, every time you read an article from you most favorite gaming press website, where finally we see disclosure happing. disclosure that wouldn#t be there if it weren't for the tireless actions of gamergate.
There is definitely some sort of SWJ agenda here or similar. In baldur's gate, you can kill kid NPC's, and nobody talks about that. Even if like, all RPG starting the 2000 era all restricted us from killing kids in a game. But then one random guy kills one transgender NPC, posts a video on u tube and everybody loses their minds.
< @skatan way to misrepresent what i said and to ignore the argument. you are not hiding the shameful behaviour of "the" writer who identified as an sjw and told the world that she doesn't care if her writing is fake or forced, by trying to generalise about gamergaters and misrepresenting the movement.
if you find the fight for objetivity and transparncy in the media so ridiculus and make accusations of some hidden intent, it's strange that you cannot show a single line of proof that gamergate doesn't have a genuine intrest in ethics. show me the gamergate spokespeople who ever said anything remotely in that direction? you are nothing but a usefull idiot to our corperate media, who uses people like you with buzzwords to defend them from critisism. Now THAT is funny.
not providing any proof to your statements this lends very little credence to your entire post.
I never said I find "the fight for objetivity and transparncy in the media so ridiculus and make accusations of some hidden intent", therefore I don't have to defend my statement with "proof". You come in here, you slander the game, you talk about the writers "SJW" agenda, etc etc, so YOU should do the proving. I've just called you out on your bullshit.
Edit: Deleted a bit of borderline flaming.
Do the proofing of what? That the writer admitted she is an SJW, and that she admitted giving a shit about the dialoges being forced and fake? Did you not read her own statements?
Well I certainly did read them and the statments are not what you make them out to be, for example she stated this: "In Siege of Dragonspear, Safana gets her own little storyline, she got a way better personality upgrade. If people don’t like that, then too bad.”
That is quite different than your seemingly unfounded accusation of her stating 'not giving a shit about dialogues being forced and fake'. Would it be ethical to misrepresent her words?
You come here and try to slander a movement that stood up for ethics and have no proof for you accusations.
Then again, gamergate has only been interested in 'ethics' to dig up mudd on targets. That is not really being interested in ethics for ethics sake, and more of a smear campaign under the guise of ethics.
You claim that the movement gamergate is responsible for the bad reviews, yet no gamergate spokesman ever called for any of such things.
That is rather intentionally misleading of you, as ineth stated before that is not necessarily how a mob works. As gamergate does not have official spokespeople, there is no such thing as an official call for it.
The obvious truth is, this game is full of dialogue that leaves you with zero choice. And full of hatefilled propaganda. Minsc making fun of gamergate is only one of the many things
Then why can you only give 1 example which does not even seem hateful propaganda?
and token characters that have lterally no character depths other than being transgender or gay.
In that case your argument against Amber Scott her having given safana more depth seems weird, as safana in the original was only a token sultry character only defined by her flirting all the time.
Besides what is wrong with a character being gay or trans?
People like me didn't start this, Beamdog did. You can tell yourself all day long, that the CEO of beamdog didn't know what kind of a crazy person they hired. You can tell yourself all day long, that it was all just a mistake. Every SJW dialogue line in this game is written intentionally with an agenda in mind as is blantantly evident by the statements of the writer.
Comments
Strange how none-gamers use the term just as well to describe these extremists. And seing how the writers of this game describe themselves as SJW, i don't even know what you complain about.
Extremist leftwingers who take choices away from people and start their hate campaigns are SJWs, whever or not you like it.
And the first thread on the gamergate reddit says gamergaters didnt want the line removed because they are against censorship. seems very consistent with their ideology of no censorship.
apparently everybody who doenst like extremist propaganda put into our video-games must be a gamergater. nobody else would do that.
it's strange how SJWS on one hand say gamergate is a small minority, but on the other hand everybody who dislikes the game, which are thousands of people, are gamergaters.
it's nice to see sjws being hypocritical like crazy and never changing.
(I notice at a glance that "Gaming", "Ethics", and "Journalism" are the first three out of four words on their title bar, so it's not like the meme is so insulting to them as people have argued it is here.)
And pretending that gamergate is not about ethics, like beamdog tried might just not sit well with people who fought for years now for opjectivity and transparency in the media.
you may thank them later, since because of gamergate you have better media now.
today in gaming media, you actually once in a while see journalists disclosing their relations to their sources. when collusion might be a factor.
Regarding your argument: That doesn't mean that they weren't instrumental in causing it to be removed.
When lots of people vocally complain about something on the Internet and cause a snowball effect of angry shares/retweets/reblogs, then it always also draws the kind of people into it who are willing to hurt others (in this case using review bombing) in the name of the "cause".
It seems to me that GG doesn't quite understand their own Internet-mob dynamics. They enjoy it when the avalanche is going their way, but then when it turns ugly they say "What, we? We didn't explicitly plan this outcome, our hands are clean!"
(And again, the same goes for the "tumblr/twitter feminist" scnene which is governed by similar angry-Internet-mob dynamics and similarly lacks self-awareness about it.)
Frankly, had the line come from one of the Beamdog created characters, well, there would still have been a backlash against it, but it wouldn't have been as bad. Instead, it was put in the mouth of Minsc, an established character who is pretty universally loved no matter what side of the political divide/culture war you are on.
Add in the fact that using that line is completely against Minsc's personality (If Minsc thinks you're evil or doing something wrong, he wouldn't make snide, mocking remarks, instead, he'd be in your face ready to commit some "Butt kicking for Goodness!") I absolutely think Beamdog were in the right for taking another look at it and deciding to remove the line due to the complaints they received.
Pot.
Kettle.
Black. .. isn't this exactly what that line is mocking? That so called gamer gaters always hide their misogynic opinions behinds ridiculous statements of "ethics" and and "censorship"? Now THAT is funny!
aha so basically everytime gamers have a complaint about writing, it was gamergate..thaks for your wonderful insights. only sjws like you can think so one dimensionally stupid.
gamergaters were not "instrumental" in removing anything. otherwise you would have found their spokespeople calling for a rallying cry to remove it.
you would have found plenty of statements on gamergate websites and from noteable gamergates to force the devs to remove it.
individual people who played the game hate it for what it delivered. deal with it.
just calling every critic gamergate is only trying to swep the fact under the rug that the writing in this game is abysmal and full of shoehorned propaganda.
saying that you bad reviews are part of a snowball effect is not helping you whitewash this dismemberment of the good name of baldurs gate that beamdog delivered here.
the fact that the wave is going in favor for anti-sjws (which are not even gamergaters btw.) should show you that this is actually what the audiance likes.
the audiance is obviously sick and tried of getting extremist propaganda forced down their throats and taken their choices away.
and people like you seems to still want to live in their dreamworld where gamergate is some anti-minority movement, or even where gamergate is anti-sjw. maybe you should inform yourself about gamergates accomplishments and see for yourself how much gamergate helped ethical standards to be established in the gaming press.
you may thank them later. when you read "disclosure warnings" you would never have read without gamergate on your favortie gaming press website. @skatan
way to misrepresent what i said and to ignore the argument. you are not hiding the shameful behaviour of "the" writer who identified as an sjw and told the world that she doesn't care if her writing is fake or forced, by trying to generalise about gamergaters and misrepresenting the movement.
if you find the fight for objetivity and transparncy in the media so ridiculus and make accusations of some hidden intent, it's strange that you cannot show a single line of proof that gamergate doesn't have a genuine intrest in ethics.
show me the gamergate spokespeople who ever said anything remotely in that direction?
you are nothing but a usefull idiot to our corperate media, who uses people like you with buzzwords to defend them from critisism. Now THAT is funny.
not providing any proof to your statements
this lends very little credence to your entire post.
Sure, there are some things that need to be fixed, but hey, look at it on the bright side, things could be worse, like, just image if the forums would be swarmed with trolls and racists..
..oh wait..
Perhaps once we have got passed all the stuff about cultural wars and propaganda we can sit down and play a little Siege of Dragonspear, and then have a chat about whether its a good game, and what we like about it and what we don't like about it, and how Beamdog can continue to support and improve the series going forwards.
You come in here, you slander the game, you talk about the writers "SJW" agenda, etc etc, so YOU should do the proving. I've just called you out on your bullshit.
Edit: Deleted a bit of borderline flaming.
It's official:
I'm an evil SJW in the eyes of the, ahem "enthusiastic ethics-in-gaming advocates" who have swarmed over from reddit and joined this forum just for the controversy.
And I'm an evil GG supporter in the eyes of the, ahem, "enthusiastic social justice advocates" who have swarmed over from tumblr to join this forum just for the controversy.
I know the truth is not always in the middle of two extremes, but still, it feels like I'm doing something right...
Flaming other users, whether provoked or not, is not allowed. If you are confused about what flaming is, check https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/10852/site-rules-mind-the-gap
Did you not read her own statements?
You come here and try to slander a movement that stood up for ethics and have no proof for you accusations. You claim that the movement gamergate is responsible for the bad reviews, yet no gamergate spokesman ever called for any of such things.
You have the burden of proof. But of course you chicken out now, that i called you out for your bullshit.
You have no proof for your accusations.
SJWs like you rarely do. You just love to bash some people and misrepresent their statements to hide your own divisive agenda.
The obvious truth is, this game is full of dialogue that leaves you with zero choice. And full of hatefilled propaganda. Minsc making fun of gamergate is only one of the many things and token characters that have lterally no character depths other than being transgender or gay.
my proof for my statements can be read by anyone who reads her interview about her propaganda writing.
you came here and pretended to have information about gamergates agenda.
you have zero proof for your statements.
if you have no proof, maybe next time don't make such a fool of yourself.
People like me didn't start this, Beamdog did. You can tell yourself all day long, that the CEO of beamdog didn't know what kind of a crazy person they hired.
You can tell yourself all day long, that it was all just a mistake. Every SJW dialogue line in this game is written intentionally with an agenda in mind as is blantantly evident by the statements of the writer.
I guess since the thread has run its course, and all the on-topic arguments that are going to be made have been made, the temptation to descend into off-topic or personal comments is too great. With that in mind, I think I'll do myself a favor by returning to the useful (i.e. drama-free) threads of the forum now...
(Wasn't there a certain portrait thread I'd been meaning to update?
nice of you to ingore the fact that i called you out that your very immature statement that basically everytime gamers have a complaint about writing, it was gamergate.
just poking some fun about it now, doesn't make you seems smarter or your argument not any worse.
@mzachary
so you are complaining about getting bad reviews from the audiance. fanboy much?
the up and downvoting system is exactly for that. its about the audiance deceiding what they like and dislike.
that most people dislike the game, should give you an insight at the fact that something is blantantly wrong.
calling people a mob every time a game gets bad reviews shows how immature you are.
and your statement that many people give it positive reviews is wrong to begin with. many people complain about bugs, crashes, bad writing and propaganda. there is a multitude of errors in this game.
"Writer" - singular! You're learning to stay true to facts finally. Congratz! Please quote me on that, 'cause I don't remember saying much of anything of what you accusing me of. "Full of hatefilled propaganda", hahaha.. come on, is that the best argument you can come up with? That's so obviously false I won't even respond to it with anything but laughter. Then quote her instead of falsifying things she said. You come here and and pretend to have information about Beamdog's agenda.
You have zero proof for your statements.
If you have no proof, maybe next time don't make such a fool of yourself.
Dear Pot, you are black.
-Love, the Kettle.
Cheers mate.
if you haven't even read her interview how about you stop trying to defend her writing.
you make quite the fool out of yourself here.
again you try to deny that you slandered gamergate on the very same page of the dicussion, how about you scroll up and read your own comment? everybody can read it here.
and her interview is open acces for everybody to read as well. if you are this lazy as to not want to read it yourself what beamsdogs agenda was, maybe you should not engange in a discussion about propaganda being shoehorned in.
at least you finally admit that she said she is an SJW.
all you need to do now is read the interview and see
that she admitted that she doesnt care about her writing being fake or forced.
Its allways funny seeing sjws argue for something, yet they haven#t even read what the controversy is all about.
a little bit biased arent we Skatan?
PS: you just did it again "so called incentives"? so obejctivity in the media is a "so called" incentive for you and not a legitimate concern?
you may thank gamergate later, every time you read an article from you most favorite gaming press website, where finally we see disclosure happing. disclosure that wouldn#t be there if it weren't for the tireless actions of gamergate.
That is quite different than your seemingly unfounded accusation of her stating 'not giving a shit about dialogues being forced and fake'. Would it be ethical to misrepresent her words? Then again, gamergate has only been interested in 'ethics' to dig up mudd on targets. That is not really being interested in ethics for ethics sake, and more of a smear campaign under the guise of ethics.
That is rather intentionally misleading of you, as ineth stated before that is not necessarily how a mob works. As gamergate does not have official spokespeople, there is no such thing as an official call for it. Then why can you only give 1 example which does not even seem hateful propaganda? In that case your argument against Amber Scott her having given safana more depth seems weird, as safana in the original was only a token sultry character only defined by her flirting all the time.
Besides what is wrong with a character being gay or trans? And what would that agenda be?