Yes it's all about protected classes of humans.. Women should get special treatment and every insult is an outrage, gay need special protection, transgenders need to be touched with silk gloves. I wonder why SJWs who pretend to be concerend with equality, do not treat every group of people equally. If they want everyone to be treated equally why can an evil character not insult the transgender? why can i not say anything witty or positive to the dwarf that insults a female CHARNAME.
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.
She said she doesn't care if people think her writing is "forced". In quotes. The implication being that some people will see gay people in a story and complain that it's forced, when really they just don't like seeing gay characters, and these people are not worth listening to.
Whether you agree with that or not, it's not the same thing as saying "I don't care if my work sucks."
@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.
On the contrary dear @RacistGoblin could you explain why the majority of reviews on steam (where it is required to own the game) are positive? Yet on metacritic and gog are mostly negative (where you don't have to own the game).
I shall give you the answer: reviewbombing by people not owning the game at all. The ability to up- or downvote is also not dependent on owning the game and can therefor not be an objective measure when it is obvious that reviewbombing and votebrigading is taking place.
So to make a statement about 'most people disliking the game' you need to do independent market research, or failing that the most reliable indicater thereafter, which is reviews by confirmed gamesowners who are 72% positive.
calling people a mob every time a game gets bad reviews shows how immature you are.
Is it? It seems that describing it as a 'mob' is simply a rather accurate description for a large group of angry people reviewbombing a game because they got triggered by its content.
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.
*False: as of this post Siege of Dragonspear is rated 72% positive on steam this is also reflected by professional reviews who are also around that percentage positive.
@mzachary provide proof that gamergate speficially only digs up dirt to hurt specific targets. there is an entire gamergate website called deepfreeze that calls out every tiny bit of collusion and unethical behaviour. just because sometimes it'sa women who does it gives no indication that gamergate targets anyone specifically. you are again trying to generalize by only seeing what you want to see. all the man that have been critised by gamergate are apparently not noteworth. gamejournalpro a media group that was critised by gamergate. apparently you intentially ignore it.
and apparently you don#t understand the dynamic of groups like gamergate. if they had no spokespeople, they wouldn't even be a collective group. obviously gamergate has spokespeople. it's the most famous gamergaters that other gamergaters listen to. Just as feminism has spokespeople like anita sarkeesian. they influence the masses. and i have yet to see a single famous gamergater calling to war against baldurs gate. it seems you purposefully misrepresent the movement once against to slander it. you somehow think you can blame bad reviews on a group, that you claim has no spokespeople. ridiculus. how about searching fo the flaw at the source. the bad reviews come in, because the audiance obviously doens't like it.
and nice trying to connect my statement with an entirely diffent part of her itnerview.
the part where she talked about her writing being fored and fake, you left out. whom are you trying to manipulate here? it's not ethical to cherry pick parts of the interview that i didn't even adress.
Not that the quote you showed wasn't bad enough. she blatantly displays an attitude of "i don't give a shit if players don't like it" that she changed established chracter personalities.
that is dishonoring the name baldurs gate. and again that is one of the many examples you can find in this thread and more i have given.
PS: And again you put words in my mouth i didnÄt say. I never said it#s wrong for a chracter being trans, i said the character is a token without depth. your poor attempts to manipulate fall on deaf ears.
Yes it's all about protected classes of humans.. Women should get special treatment and every insult is an outrage, gay need special protection, transgenders need to be touched with silk gloves. I wonder why SJWs who pretend to be concerend with equality, do not treat every group of people equally. If they want everyone to be treated equally why can an evil character not insult the transgender? why can i not say anything witty or positive to the dwarf that insults a female CHARNAME.
they take choices away. their agenda is obvious.
So basically according to you the superdevious agenda is: 'being nice to women, gays and transgenders'.... yes regardless of that being true or not, I see why people would get upset about not being able to insult women, gays and transgenders...
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.
She said she doesn't care if people think her writing is "forced". In quotes. The implication being that some people will see gay people in a story and complain that it's forced, when really they just don't like seeing gay characters, and these people are not worth listening to.
Whether you agree with that or not, it's not the same thing as saying "I don't care if my work sucks."
The funny thing is that she didn't even say that, her statement solely related to the expansion of the Safana character. "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.”
"the part where she talked about her writing being fored and fake, you left out. whom are you trying to manipulate here? it's not ethical to cherry pick parts of the interview that i didn't even adress.
Not that the quote you showed wasn't bad enough. she blatantly displays an attitude of "i don't give a shit if players don't like it" that she changed established chracter personalities."
Could you provide quotes to back this up? You are making very damning assertions here. And obviously you believe that ethics in journalism are very important. So I'd like to see exactly what she said that supports your claims.
The SJW thing is just to fool ourselves into thinking we're the good guys. We point fingers and say this is bad, that is bad, and meanwhile, we got an army carpet bombing the crap out of Arabic regions and sucking oil at a ridiculously low price so we can live our lives of excess and fake moral superiority.
It's also a great way to control the population. Make them believe that everything can be solved with peaceful means, and they will only use peaceful means. Hire most that do not adhere to this philosophy in the law, the cop or army force, and bingo. A few powerful people got control of a whole country. What are these SJW do about it, whine over the net? Let them believe they can change things that way, and strengthen said illusion.
Let people spend their energy defending or attacking some transgender NPC in a game. They won't have enough left to deal with real problems.
Yes it's all about protected classes of humans.. Women should get special treatment and every insult is an outrage, gay need special protection, transgenders need to be touched with silk gloves. I wonder why SJWs who pretend to be concerend with equality, do not treat every group of people equally. If they want everyone to be treated equally why can an evil character not insult the transgender? why can i not say anything witty or positive to the dwarf that insults a female CHARNAME.
they take choices away. their agenda is obvious.
So basically according to you the superdevious agenda is: 'being nice to women, gays and transgenders'.... yes regardless of that being true or not, I see why people would get upset about not being able to insult women, gays and transgenders...
read my statement. you again try to misrepresent what i said. i said i want choices. not that i want to insult anyone. the point is that you are getting propaganda forced down your thorat by only having one choice when the dward insults you, your only choice is "i'm an offended" 5 times.
@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.
On the contrary dear @RacistGoblin could you explain why the majority of reviews on steam (where it is required to own the game) are positive? Yet on metacritic and gog are mostly negative (where you don't have to own the game).
I shall give you the answer: reviewbombing by people not owning the game at all. The ability to up- or downvote is also not dependent on owning the game and can therefor not be an objective measure when it is obvious that reviewbombing and votebrigading is taking place.
So to make a statement about 'most people disliking the game' you need to do independent market research, or failing that the most reliable indicater thereafter, which is reviews by confirmed gamesowners who are 72% positive.
calling people a mob every time a game gets bad reviews shows how immature you are.
Is it? It seems that describing it as a 'mob' is simply a rather accurate description for a large group of angry people reviewbombing a game because they got triggered by its content.
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.
*False: as of this post Siege of Dragonspear is rated 72% positive on steam this is also reflected by professional reviews who are also around that percentage positive.
professional reviews LOL, you mean the biased media? yeah not really representive of the mayority of the people.
user reviews are. and they are terribly bad. for all the reasons we disgussed here.
again you call gamers a mob, just bceause fanboys like you don't get their opinion repeated by the masses. if people don't like the game, that is not a mob, that is the audiance dislikig it.
stop whinig and crying for positive reviews. that's shameful.
Yes it's all about protected classes of humans.. Women should get special treatment and every insult is an outrage, gay need special protection, transgenders need to be touched with silk gloves. I wonder why SJWs who pretend to be concerend with equality, do not treat every group of people equally. If they want everyone to be treated equally why can an evil character not insult the transgender? why can i not say anything witty or positive to the dwarf that insults a female CHARNAME.
they take choices away. their agenda is obvious.
So basically according to you the superdevious agenda is: 'being nice to women, gays and transgenders'.... yes regardless of that being true or not, I see why people would get upset about not being able to insult women, gays and transgenders...
read my statement. you again try to misrepresent what i said. i said i want choices. not that i want to insult anyone. the point is that you are getting propaganda forced down your thorat by only having one choice when the dward insults you, your only choice is "i'm an offended" 5 times.
Please answer my post to you. I really do want to see the quotes you were talking about.
"the part where she talked about her writing being fored and fake, you left out. whom are you trying to manipulate here? it's not ethical to cherry pick parts of the interview that i didn't even adress."
Please show me the quote where she says that her writing is forced and fake.
@Grum: It wasn't in the interview (which I'm not convinced that @RacistGoblin has read), but last year Amber Scott said in a forum post that she doesn't care if people think the added diversity in her writing seems forced or fake. It seemed more in the spirit of "I ignore trolls" than "I don't care about the quality of my writing."
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.
She said she doesn't care if people think her writing is "forced". In quotes. The implication being that some people will see gay people in a story and complain that it's forced, when really they just don't like seeing gay characters, and these people are not worth listening to.
Whether you agree with that or not, it's not the same thing as saying "I don't care if my work sucks."
The funny thing is that she didn't even say that, her statement solely related to the expansion of the Safana character. "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.”
and again you quote her saying she doesn't give a shit if players like her disgracing an allready established character. i am amazed that you want to pretend that thereis nothing insane or wrong about that. too bad. i wonder who has the last laught...ohh wait, it's the people. leaving bad reviews. because too bad we don#t like the game.
and you still quote the part of the interview i didn't even adress, but thanks for pointing out another horrific part of it.
@Grum: It wasn't in the interview (which I'm not convinced that @RacistGoblin has read), but last year Amber Scott said in a forum post that she doesn't care if people think the added diversity in her writing seems forced or fake. It seemed more in the spirit of "I ignore trolls" than "I don't care about the quality of my writing."
that's excactly what it sounds like. if you write a story maybe you should care if your story comes across as forced or fake. it shows a krass disconnect between her and the audiance. she literally doesn't care if people like it or not. and the result is the game we got.
full of shoehorned propaganda, empty of choices in dialoges.
and the result of that is people hate the game, and people like mzachary and the CEO are now whining about getting bad reviews for a shitty written game. well TOO BAD! if she cared more about her writing being believeable, the reviews wouldnt be so terrible.
funny fact is: witcher 3 also displays a trans character and lesbians. yet you see nobody complaining about that. because its well written
You know when George Lucas tampered with the old Star Wars trilogy? Same thing here. Change something people have loved for a long time and you get stick for it.
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.
She said she doesn't care if people think her writing is "forced". In quotes. The implication being that some people will see gay people in a story and complain that it's forced, when really they just don't like seeing gay characters, and these people are not worth listening to.
Whether you agree with that or not, it's not the same thing as saying "I don't care if my work sucks."
The funny thing is that she didn't even say that, her statement solely related to the expansion of the Safana character. "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.”
and again you quote her saying she doesn't give a shit if players like her disgracing an allready established character. i am amazed that you want to pretend that thereis nothing insane or wrong about that. too bad. i wonder who has the last laught...ohh wait, it's the people. leaving bad reviews. because too bad we don#t like the game.
and you still quote the part of the interview i didn't even adress, but thanks for pointing out another horrific part of it.
I keep asking YOU to provide me the exact quotes to back your claims up. You keep ignoring that request while still calling for ethics in journalism. Why do you keep ignoring this simple request?
Here are the first 5 reviews on the steam page. I guess all of these people must be part of the "raging gamergate mob" lol: over 82% agree with the obvious problems
749 od 914 people (82 %) like this review. Not recommended 4. April Do not buy this game in its current state. The entire expansion is plagued with technical issues including (but not limited to) corruption of previous single-player save files, randomly changing game difficulty, inaccessible online multiplayer, and inescapable dialogue loops. While some of these problems might be the product of the v1.3 to v2.0 update, several game-breaking issues are already easily reproducible in the expansion's content alone. Had I known on launch day just how poorly programmed this expansion was, I would have waited for Beamdog to iron out all of the kinks (a process which they seem rather lackadaisical about) and not purchased this product.
1,418 von 1,736 people (82 %) like this review. Not recommended 4. April Doesn't feel like Baldur's Gate at all. Linear progression through the game with previous areas becoming unavailable once you pass to the next. Lazy writing that lends to little roleplaying options. Bugs, bugs and more bugs.
1,226 von 1,455 people (84 %) like this review. Not recommended 4. April the multiplayer is just a mess. a friend and i needed about 1.5h to get a multiplayer game running, just to encounter a bug after the intro dungeon where we lost our keys the moment they where added to the keyring.
here are some of the major bugs we encounterd in multiplayer: -gear from imported characters just disappeard -created characters (except the groupleader) all had a mage style starting gear (robe, quarterstaff, ...) -game constantly crashing while saving while friend of mine was host (host switching "fixed" this bug...) -unpausing didn't work for client player (workaround - talk to npc..., after restarting this one worked) -keys disappeard the moment they where added to the keyring so don't buy if you want to play with friends until patched singleplayer works well so far...
1,551 von 1,835 people (85 %) like this review. Not recommended 4. April The game in it's current state is really buggy and has broken a few things like mods, and multiplay. Maybe in the future when things get ironed out I'll be able to recommend this expansion.
2,105 von 2,436 people (86 %) like this review. Not recommended 4. April I'm a huge fan of the Baldur's Gate franchise and, over the years, have played through the campaigns more times than I can count. That said, I would urge fans of the series to hold off on purchasing this DLC for the moment. Here are a few of the issues I experienced in SoD.
-Attempting to import my protagonist via save file or character import results in him being stripped of all equipment. This gear is permanently lost. (If you have an endgame save from the main campaign this doesn't occur, but I don't have that luxury.) -Game difficulty settings are broken and can retroactively corrupt save files if you're attempting to play on the highest difficulty. -Multiplayer is in an unusable state. -Although I have some minor grievances with the UI updating, there is one particular change I find rather immersion breaking. If you scroll towards the edge of the map, nearly half the screen will be blanketed in darkness. This was not present in previous versions. Here, for example, is one of the earliest conversations in the game. http://imgur.com/hcwj0SC This is distracting at best and jarring at worst. -When purchased through Steam, the DLC is accessed in a manner that breaks all mod compatibility. (I normally wouldn't count this against a developer, but this issue is not present in copies sold directly through Beamdog.) There are other bugs of varying severity but I won't bother mentioning them all. I would advise anyone considering this DLC to wait for an official patch, as all of these issues have been reported and will hopefully be fixed in time. I just don't believe you should pay Beamdog to beta test their product in the interim.
The people have spoken. Fix your shitty game. And stop begging for positive reviews. Instead hire good writers and good coders.
@mzachary provide proof that gamergate speficially only digs up dirt to hurt specific targets. there is an entire gamergate website called deepfreeze that calls out every tiny bit of collusion and unethical behaviour.
Not a problem, could you explain why the escapist article on Star Citizen by gamergater Lizzy Finnegan isn't listed on that deepfreeze website, where she portrayed developer CIG as racist solely based on anonymous sources with no independent research or factual data to back or test any of its allegations? While at the same time such practices are condemmed by gamergate (on deepfreeze) when they happen at Kotaku?
I shall tell you why, kotaku is seen as an enemy by gamergate, but Lizzy is one of your own so we will never see an entry about her on deepfreeze like this one
Could you also explain why that website still lies about collusion on the gamers are dead articles, when such collusion was never proven? (and no journalists talking to each other does in itself not prove collusion)
You know when George Lucas tampered with the old Star Wars trilogy? Same thing here. Change something people have loved for a long time and you get stick for it.
Improvement or not, this is why things heated up.
that is exactly it. finally somebody understands a major complained people have. fanboys be damned.
You know when George Lucas tampered with the old Star Wars trilogy? Same thing here. Change something people have loved for a long time and you get stick for it.
Improvement or not, this is why things heated up.
that is exactly it. finally somebody understands a major complained people have. fanboys be damned.
Keep in mind that I am just saying I understand why people get upset over this particular thing. I am not saying that Amber Scott should get personal attacks aimed at her. Doing that is way out of line.
@mzachary provide proof that gamergate speficially only digs up dirt to hurt specific targets. there is an entire gamergate website called deepfreeze that calls out every tiny bit of collusion and unethical behaviour.
Not a problem, could you explain why the escapist article on Star Citizen by gamergater Lizzy Finnegan isn't listed on that deepfreeze website, where she portrayed developer CIG as racist solely based on anonymous sources with no independent research or factual data to back or test any of its allegations? While at the same time such practices are condemmed by gamergate (on deepfreeze) when they happen at Kotaku?
I shall tell you why, kotaku is seen as an enemy by gamergate, but Lizzy is one of your own so we will never see an entry about her on deepfreeze like this one
Could you also explain why that website still lies about collusion on the gamers are dead articles, when such collusion was never proven? (and no journalists talking to each other does in itself not prove collusion)
Lizzy left gamergate in the very very early stages of it. Because of constant harrassment from you SJWs and the doxxing of her family. She is not part of gamergate ever since. which strangely the media did not cover at all. But the harrasment of somebody that had not even a connection to gamergate brianna wu was covered like crazy. You sit in a glasshouse. You people are the ones targeting specific rtargets, but when something happens to your supposed enemies like lizzy, you don't give a shit about it.
why? well because it isn't gamergate who targets and harasses people into silence, it's SJWs. the entire argument just now reflects completelty what the gaming press did when people from gamergate who voiced their opinion on bias in the media got harassed.
You stil have not shown me any of the spokespeople of gamergate calling for a war on baldurs gate and beamdog. STRANGE. if gamergate did it all, how come the evidence is SOOO hard for you to find? LOL
and PS: maybe you should read the texts that were recovered from gamejournals pros "talkings". where some of them planned to threaten Totalbiscuit and make fun of him breaking easily to their pressure. Not to mention the "gamers are dead" coordianted attack, which could only been done if the organised it in unison.
@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.
On the contrary dear @RacistGoblin could you explain why the majority of reviews on steam (where it is required to own the game) are positive? Yet on metacritic and gog are mostly negative (where you don't have to own the game).
I shall give you the answer: reviewbombing by people not owning the game at all. The ability to up- or downvote is also not dependent on owning the game and can therefor not be an objective measure when it is obvious that reviewbombing and votebrigading is taking place.
So to make a statement about 'most people disliking the game' you need to do independent market research, or failing that the most reliable indicater thereafter, which is reviews by confirmed gamesowners who are 72% positive.
calling people a mob every time a game gets bad reviews shows how immature you are.
Is it? It seems that describing it as a 'mob' is simply a rather accurate description for a large group of angry people reviewbombing a game because they got triggered by its content.
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.
*False: as of this post Siege of Dragonspear is rated 72% positive on steam this is also reflected by professional reviews who are also around that percentage positive.
professional reviews LOL, you mean the biased media? yeah not really representive of the mayority of the people.
Can you provide evidence of the media being biased in their review of SoD and them not being 'representive of the mayority of the people'? while keeping in mind that the steam average is 72% positive on SoD which is similar as the professional reviews (average 7.5)
user reviews are. and they are terribly bad. for all the reasons we disgussed here.
again you call gamers a mob, just bceause fanboys like you don't get their opinion repeated by the masses. if people don't like the game, that is not a mob, that is the audiance dislikig it.
stop whinig and crying for positive reviews. that's shameful.
instead create a better game.
I am simply stating reality, the reality is that reviews by actual game owners are positive, while it is obvious that a mob is reviewbombing and vote brigading, why are you denying reality?
There IS a review bombing going on. You have to be blind not to see it. No point in denying it. Some have valid reasons for not being too favorable in their reviews. Most relate to bugs (which will be fixed anyway), and the writing. But the majority of the bad reviews are just review bombing.
Why are you not showing proof that a mob attacked and that like you claim gamergate was behind it. (lol i still can't believe the insanity of that statement)
For now the only thing that is 100% clear is that People made their choice what they like or dislike.
Unless you finally show me anyone of the even moderately famous gamergaters to call for an attack on baldurs gate reviews, you have no ammunition for your fingerpointing propaganda.
The reality is, that people look at reviews and they deceide what they like and dislike. that is entirely the point of up and downvotes. that such an enourmos amount of people dislike the game (over 82% as i have shown you) should make gamedevelopers realize that gamers in general don't like this shit.
@mzachary provide proof that gamergate speficially only digs up dirt to hurt specific targets. there is an entire gamergate website called deepfreeze that calls out every tiny bit of collusion and unethical behaviour.
Not a problem, could you explain why the escapist article on Star Citizen by gamergater Lizzy Finnegan isn't listed on that deepfreeze website, where she portrayed developer CIG as racist solely based on anonymous sources with no independent research or factual data to back or test any of its allegations? While at the same time such practices are condemmed by gamergate (on deepfreeze) when they happen at Kotaku?
I shall tell you why, kotaku is seen as an enemy by gamergate, but Lizzy is one of your own so we will never see an entry about her on deepfreeze like this one
Could you also explain why that website still lies about collusion on the gamers are dead articles, when such collusion was never proven? (and no journalists talking to each other does in itself not prove collusion)
Lizzy left gamergate in the very very early stages of it. Because of constant harrassment from you SJWs and the doxxing of her family. She is not part of gamergate ever since. which strangely the media did not cover at all. But the harrasment of somebody that had not even a connection to gamergate brianna wu was covered like crazy. You sit in a glasshouse. You people are the ones targeting specific rtargets, but when something happens to your supposed enemies like lizzy, you don't give a shit about it.
why? well because it isn't gamergate who targets and harasses people into silence, it's SJWs. the entire argument just now reflects completelty what the gaming press did when people from gamergate who voiced their opinion on bias in the media got harassed.
Amusing I crossed out all the irrelevant text because, you are ignoring the obvious why a gamergate sympathizer on a gamergate promoted website is not listed on deepfreeze while another writer for kotaku doing the same thing is. So i shall repeat: could you explain why the escapist article on Star Citizen by gamergater Lizzy Finnegan isn't listed on that deepfreeze website, where she portrayed developer CIG as racist solely based on anonymous sources with no independent research or factual data to back or test any of its allegations? While at the same time such practices are condemmed by gamergate (on deepfreeze) when they happen at Kotaku?
I shall tell you why, kotaku is seen as an enemy by gamergate, but Lizzy is one of your own so we will never see an entry about her on deepfreeze like this one
I just showed you the evidance, you SJW not wanting to acknowleage your own hateful and corrupt moves in the gaming press, is really not my problem. you apparently don't want to see the collusion of the gamers are dead articles and the texts that were revealed of the gamejournalpro network. the evidance is online for over 1 year now.
i wonder if you think you are convincing anyone with trying to deny things that have long past been proven and discussed. What statement are you trying to make?
You still have not shown any evidance for your inital statement that gamergate is behind the bad reviews. All your talk and still nothing. You try to evade the discussion with talking about ages old things that gamergate has unraveled. But you still have not a grain of evidance that gamergate was behind anything that happend here.
That is just sad. You have not shown a single gamergater spokesperson that called for a review mob to downvote. WHY? BECAUSE YOU HAVE NO EVIDANCE. You just use gamergate as some sort of a buzzword, to describe everybody who didn't like the game.
get over your own studpity.
PS: again lizzy is not part of gamergate. so what are you even talking about? discuss the details of her case with deepfreeze if you think there was some collusion. you have not shown evidance that deepfreeze is biased. you just made an accusation. the burden of proof is on you. you literally link to a website where kotaku and Salon writers are making accusation, the same people that were caught by gamergate for their corruption. their word is not worth anything. facts are worth everything.
There IS a review bombing going on. You have to be blind not to see it. No point in denying it. Some have valid reasons for not being too favorable in their reviews. Most relate to bugs (which will be fixed anyway), and the writing. But the majority of the bad reviews are just review bombing.
if there were "review bombing" then who is doing it? how was it caused? it's strange how some sjws just want to point a finger at gamergate, a movement thatis about ethics in the gaming press, yet nobody is showing the slightest bit of evidance that gamergate was behind it.
many bad reviews are not review bombing , it just shows the game is very bad and very disliked by gamers.
There IS a review bombing going on. You have to be blind not to see it. No point in denying it. Some have valid reasons for not being too favorable in their reviews. Most relate to bugs (which will be fixed anyway), and the writing. But the majority of the bad reviews are just review bombing.
if there were "review bombing" then who is doing it? how was it caused? it's strange how some sjws just want to point a finger at gamergate, a movement thatis about ethics in the gaming press, yet nobody is showing the slightest bit of evidance that gamergate was behind it.
many bad reviews are not review bombing , it just shows the game is very bad and very disliked by gamers.
I never said it was Gamergate doing it. I have seen plenty downright bigoted gamers giving the game a bad review because it is "SJW propaganda". Tons of them, actually. I see angry posts on forums and whatnot too. From people advicing others not to buy the game due to Mizhena.
I have also seen bad reviews, like the ones you pointed out, that have valid points.
Comments
Women should get special treatment and every insult is an outrage, gay need special protection, transgenders need to be touched with silk gloves.
I wonder why SJWs who pretend to be concerend with equality, do not treat every group of people equally.
If they want everyone to be treated equally why can an evil character not insult the transgender?
why can i not say anything witty or positive to the dwarf that insults a female CHARNAME.
they take choices away. their agenda is obvious.
Whether you agree with that or not, it's not the same thing as saying "I don't care if my work sucks."
I shall give you the answer: reviewbombing by people not owning the game at all. The ability to up- or downvote is also not dependent on owning the game and can therefor not be an objective measure when it is obvious that reviewbombing and votebrigading is taking place.
So to make a statement about 'most people disliking the game' you need to do independent market research, or failing that the most reliable indicater thereafter, which is reviews by confirmed gamesowners who are 72% positive. Is it? It seems that describing it as a 'mob' is simply a rather accurate description for a large group of angry people reviewbombing a game because they got triggered by its content. *False: as of this post Siege of Dragonspear is rated 72% positive on steam this is also reflected by professional reviews who are also around that percentage positive.
provide proof that gamergate speficially only digs up dirt to hurt specific targets.
there is an entire gamergate website called deepfreeze that calls out every tiny bit of collusion and unethical behaviour.
just because sometimes it'sa women who does it gives no indication that gamergate targets anyone specifically.
you are again trying to generalize by only seeing what you want to see.
all the man that have been critised by gamergate are apparently not noteworth. gamejournalpro a media group that was critised by gamergate. apparently you intentially ignore it.
and apparently you don#t understand the dynamic of groups like gamergate. if they had no spokespeople, they wouldn't even be a collective group. obviously gamergate has spokespeople. it's the most famous gamergaters that other gamergaters listen to. Just as feminism has spokespeople like anita sarkeesian. they influence the masses.
and i have yet to see a single famous gamergater calling to war against baldurs gate.
it seems you purposefully misrepresent the movement once against to slander it.
you somehow think you can blame bad reviews on a group, that you claim has no spokespeople. ridiculus.
how about searching fo the flaw at the source. the bad reviews come in, because the audiance obviously doens't like it.
and nice trying to connect my statement with an entirely diffent part of her itnerview.
the part where she talked about her writing being fored and fake, you left out. whom are you trying to manipulate here?
it's not ethical to cherry pick parts of the interview that i didn't even adress.
Not that the quote you showed wasn't bad enough. she blatantly displays an attitude of "i don't give a shit if players don't like it" that she changed established chracter personalities.
that is dishonoring the name baldurs gate.
and again that is one of the many examples you can find in this thread and more i have given.
PS:
And again you put words in my mouth i didnÄt say. I never said it#s wrong for a chracter being trans, i said the character is a token without depth.
your poor attempts to manipulate fall on deaf ears.
"the part where she talked about her writing being fored and fake, you left out. whom are you trying to manipulate here?
it's not ethical to cherry pick parts of the interview that i didn't even adress.
Not that the quote you showed wasn't bad enough. she blatantly displays an attitude of "i don't give a shit if players don't like it" that she changed established chracter personalities."
Could you provide quotes to back this up? You are making very damning assertions here. And obviously you believe that ethics in journalism are very important. So I'd like to see exactly what she said that supports your claims.
It's also a great way to control the population. Make them believe that everything can be solved with peaceful means, and they will only use peaceful means. Hire most that do not adhere to this philosophy in the law, the cop or army force, and bingo. A few powerful people got control of a whole country. What are these SJW do about it, whine over the net? Let them believe they can change things that way, and strengthen said illusion.
Let people spend their energy defending or attacking some transgender NPC in a game. They won't have enough left to deal with real problems.
read my statement. you again try to misrepresent what i said. i said i want choices. not that i want to insult anyone.
the point is that you are getting propaganda forced down your thorat by only having one choice when the dward insults you, your only choice is "i'm an offended" 5 times.
user reviews are. and they are terribly bad. for all the reasons we disgussed here.
again you call gamers a mob, just bceause fanboys like you don't get their opinion repeated by the masses.
if people don't like the game, that is not a mob, that is the audiance dislikig it.
stop whinig and crying for positive reviews. that's shameful.
instead create a better game.
Please answer my post to you. I really do want to see the quotes you were talking about.
"the part where she talked about her writing being fored and fake, you left out. whom are you trying to manipulate here?
it's not ethical to cherry pick parts of the interview that i didn't even adress."
Please show me the quote where she says that her writing is forced and fake.
too bad.
i wonder who has the last laught...ohh wait, it's the people. leaving bad reviews. because too bad we don#t like the game.
and you still quote the part of the interview i didn't even adress, but thanks for pointing out another horrific part of it.
it shows a krass disconnect between her and the audiance.
she literally doesn't care if people like it or not. and the result is the game we got.
full of shoehorned propaganda, empty of choices in dialoges.
and the result of that is people hate the game, and people like mzachary and the CEO are now whining about getting bad reviews for a shitty written game.
well TOO BAD!
if she cared more about her writing being believeable, the reviews wouldnt be so terrible.
funny fact is: witcher 3 also displays a trans character and lesbians. yet you see nobody complaining about that. because its well written
Improvement or not, this is why things heated up.
I guess all of these people must be part of the "raging gamergate mob" lol:
over 82% agree with the obvious problems
The people have spoken. Fix your shitty game. And stop begging for positive reviews. Instead hire good writers and good coders.
I shall tell you why, kotaku is seen as an enemy by gamergate, but Lizzy is one of your own so we will never see an entry about her on deepfreeze like this one
Could you also explain why that website still lies about collusion on the gamers are dead articles, when such collusion was never proven? (and no journalists talking to each other does in itself not prove collusion)
finally somebody understands a major complained people have.
fanboys be damned.
which strangely the media did not cover at all.
But the harrasment of somebody that had not even a connection to gamergate brianna wu was covered like crazy.
You sit in a glasshouse. You people are the ones targeting specific rtargets, but when something happens to your supposed enemies like lizzy, you don't give a shit about it.
why? well because it isn't gamergate who targets and harasses people into silence, it's SJWs.
the entire argument just now reflects completelty what the gaming press did when people from gamergate who voiced their opinion on bias in the media got harassed.
You stil have not shown me any of the spokespeople of gamergate calling for a war on baldurs gate and beamdog.
STRANGE. if gamergate did it all, how come the evidence is SOOO hard for you to find? LOL
and PS: maybe you should read the texts that were recovered from gamejournals pros "talkings". where some of them planned to threaten Totalbiscuit and make fun of him breaking easily to their pressure.
Not to mention the "gamers are dead" coordianted attack, which could only been done if the organised it in unison.
For now the only thing that is 100% clear is that People made their choice what they like or dislike.
Unless you finally show me anyone of the even moderately famous gamergaters to call for an attack on baldurs gate reviews, you have no ammunition for your fingerpointing propaganda.
The reality is, that people look at reviews and they deceide what they like and dislike. that is entirely the point of up and downvotes.
that such an enourmos amount of people dislike the game (over 82% as i have shown you)
should make gamedevelopers realize that gamers in general don't like this shit.
I shall tell you why, kotaku is seen as an enemy by gamergate, but Lizzy is one of your own so we will never see an entry about her on deepfreeze like this one So you admit you have no actual evidence of collusion on the gamers are dead articles
you apparently don't want to see the collusion of the gamers are dead articles and the texts that were revealed of the gamejournalpro network. the evidance is online for over 1 year now.
i wonder if you think you are convincing anyone with trying to deny things that have long past been proven and discussed.
What statement are you trying to make?
You still have not shown any evidance for your inital statement that gamergate is behind the bad reviews.
All your talk and still nothing.
You try to evade the discussion with talking about ages old things that gamergate has unraveled. But you still have not a grain of evidance that gamergate was behind anything that happend here.
That is just sad.
You have not shown a single gamergater spokesperson that called for a review mob to downvote.
WHY? BECAUSE YOU HAVE NO EVIDANCE. You just use gamergate as some sort of a buzzword, to describe everybody who didn't like the game.
get over your own studpity.
PS: again lizzy is not part of gamergate. so what are you even talking about? discuss the details of her case with deepfreeze if you think there was some collusion. you have not shown evidance that deepfreeze is biased. you just made an accusation. the burden of proof is on you.
you literally link to a website where kotaku and Salon writers are making accusation, the same people that were caught by gamergate for their corruption. their word is not worth anything. facts are worth everything.
it's strange how some sjws just want to point a finger at gamergate, a movement thatis about ethics in the gaming press, yet nobody is showing the slightest bit of evidance that gamergate was behind it.
many bad reviews are not review bombing , it just shows the game is very bad and very disliked by gamers.
I have also seen bad reviews, like the ones you pointed out, that have valid points.