There are hundreds of these, everywhere. I'm not quoting these to be negative, I just want to show that the people who are writing on this forum are a very small part of the gaming community. This isn't going to disappear in a few weeks, when people think of Beamdog, this will be the first thing that comes to many peoples mind. It makes me sad, because I don't want the BG:EE games to suffer, for this one DLC.
The people doing the things you mention are also a very small part of the gaming community. "Hundreds" of people is nothing. It'd be generous to call it a drop in the bucket.
Without any sort of scientifically conducted survey, the fact that a loud minority of people are complaining about this is... proof a loud minority of people are complaining about this. And that's it, and that's all.
Besides, the exact same sorts of people (in some cases, the exact same people) flipped out over Hexxat, too (which was before "that writer" was even there!). They were never going to like Beamdog, because Beamdog was never catering to them.
If those "fans" think Beamdog spits on them, well, I hope the door doesn't hit them on the way out. I'm a fan too, and BD hasn't spit on me yet. Who's to say there's more of people like them than there is of people like me?
There are hundreds of these, everywhere. I'm not quoting these to be negative, I just want to show that the people who are writing on this forum are a very small part of the gaming community. This isn't going to disappear in a few weeks, when people think of Beamdog, this will be the first thing that comes to many peoples mind. It makes me sad, because I don't want the BG:EE games to suffer, for this one DLC.
The people doing the things you mention are also a very small part of the gaming community. "Hundreds" of people is nothing. It'd be generous to call it a drop in the bucket.
Without any sort of scientifically conducted survey, the fact that a loud minority of people are complaining about this is... proof a loud minority of people are complaining about this. And that's it, and that's all.
Besides, the exact same sorts of people (in some cases, the exact same people) flipped out over Hexxat, too (which was before "that writer" was even there!). They were never going to like Beamdog, because Beamdog was never catering to them.
If those "fans" think Beamdog spits on them, well, I hope the door doesn't hit them on the way out. I'm a fan too, and BD hasn't spit on me yet. Who's to say there's more of people like them than there is of people like me?
This is very different from before. Just about every magazine, article and review are talking about this controversy, write 'Beamdog siege of dragonspear controversy' into google and you'll find page after page with articles that go into detail about it.
If you go onto youtube, you'll find a lot of videos as well. It's not just gamers anymore, there are several people out there that don't have any gaming on their channel, that is talking about it. Siege of Dragonspear has become the new Anita Sarkeesian, even if for a short duration only.
This is by no means a small thing, and this isn't a 'small drop in the bucket'. The reviews have been horrendous, and Siege of Dragonspear has been pushed back a few pages on steam (it's not on the front page anymore), which is not a good place to be when you've just put your game out on the market.
They made a mistake, it's not the end of the world, hopefully they learnt something from it.
The reason I've been writing this is to show that there have been consequences for the controversy that got created around Siege of Dragonspear, and it's not far fetched to believe that they will lose sales on this. It might also turn around and they will gain sales from the publicity, it could go both ways.
Siege of Dragonspear = Controversy, that won't change in any near future.
Still, no need to be offensive or insulting towards me just because I'm sharing my opinion.
None of this can be considered scientific, and a lot of it is anecdotal, but there can be little doubt that the way Beamdog has handled all of this has hurt the game and the franchise. Perhaps hurt it very badly. The people on this forum are certainly almost entirely hardcore fans of the franchise. The true believers, the choir. 22% of those people who voted in this poll indicated that they would skip the game, or at least consider it, as a result of everything that's happened. To have that many of your core customers feeling that way should be a huge concern for any business.
Your right, there is no need to be insulting or offensive towards you. My apologies for offense caused.
The only mistake beamdog made was angering the gamergate group, which has proven quite happy to try and ruin lives and careers. Internet hate mobs are scary things. GG has shown that it won't stop until it has destroyed its target and has no shame when it comes to their methods.
Beamdog' mistake was having a joke at their expense, when everyone knows that they are thin skinned, insecure babies who will ruthlessly attack, tear down and destroy whatever doesn't fit their world view.
Your right, there is no need to be insulting or offensive towards you. My apologies for offense caused.
The only mistake beamdog made was angering the gamergate group, which has proven quite happy to try and ruin lives and careers. Internet hate mobs are scary things. GG has shown that it won't stop until it has destroyed its target and has no shame when it comes to their methods.
Beamdog' mistake was having a joke at their expense, when everyone knows that they are thin skinned, insecure babies who will ruthlessly attack, tear down and destroy whatever doesn't fit their world view.
It's not just Minsc, or his one joke. Most of the Articles and Youtubers focus on the two quotes from Amber, and it doesn't matter how you turn them, they are bad, very bad. It doesn't help that Dee ended up writing that tweet either, or how Beamdog in general handled the situation.
I get the feeling that it isn't so much about the whole trans part, or the gamergate joke. It's about the way they have handled this situation as a company, that has made a lot of people lose faith and respect for them.
1.) They made a choice that COULD be controversial. 2.) Certain people ended up saying a few things that they shouldn't have. 3.) A few tweets ignited the fire even more. 4.) The situation was handled badly.
It wasn't just one thing that made it all explode.
Apology accepted, I'm not trying to cause any grief, just looking at the situation from a neutral viewpoint. I've spent 1 500 hours playing their game, I'll get no pleasure from them failing.
This is very different from before. Just about every magazine, article and review are talking about this controversy, write 'Beamdog siege of dragonspear controversy' into google and you'll find page after page with articles that go into detail about it.
The vast majority of articles (on professional gaming sites) are outright supportive of Beamdog on the issue or going "Gamergate is doing the same dumb crap again".
If you go onto youtube, you'll find a lot of videos as well. It's not just gamers anymore, there are several people out there that don't have any gaming on their channel, that is talking about it. Siege of Dragonspear has become the new Anita Sarkeesian, even if for a short duration only.
Well, since Anita Sarkeesian is very popular and well-known, far more so than her detractors, then that can only be a good thing, right?
This is by no means a small thing, and this isn't a 'small drop in the bucket'. The reviews have been horrendous, and Siege of Dragonspear has been pushed back a few pages on steam (it's not on the front page anymore), which is not a good place to be when you've just put your game out on the market.
The reviews by professionals and people who own the game aren't horrendous at all. Do you have access to Beamdog's data on projected versus actual sales, or are you just making assumptions that the sales were terrible because of a bunch of bad reviews that were overwhelmingly made and upvoted by people mad about "SJWs"?
Still, no need to be offensive or insulting to me just because I'm sharing my opinion.
I didn't say a single offensive or insulting thing to you. Like, not even slightly. I disagreed with you politely. If you found that insulting, that is unfortunate.
This is very different from before. Just about every magazine, article and review are talking about this controversy, write 'Beamdog siege of dragonspear controversy' into google and you'll find page after page with articles that go into detail about it.
The vast majority of articles (on professional gaming sites) are outright supportive of Beamdog on the issue or going "Gamergate is doing the same dumb crap again".
If you go onto youtube, you'll find a lot of videos as well. It's not just gamers anymore, there are several people out there that don't have any gaming on their channel, that is talking about it. Siege of Dragonspear has become the new Anita Sarkeesian, even if for a short duration only.
Well, since Anita Sarkeesian is very popular and well-known, far more so than her detractors, then that can only be a good thing, right?
This is by no means a small thing, and this isn't a 'small drop in the bucket'. The reviews have been horrendous, and Siege of Dragonspear has been pushed back a few pages on steam (it's not on the front page anymore), which is not a good place to be when you've just put your game out on the market.
The reviews by professionals and people who own the game aren't horrendous at all. Do you have access to Beamdog's data on projected versus actual sales, or are you just making assumptions that the sales were terrible because of a bunch of bad reviews that were overwhelmingly made and upvoted by people mad about "SJWs"?
Still, no need to be offensive or insulting to me just because I'm sharing my opinion.
I didn't say a single offensive or insulting thing to you. Like, not even slightly. I disagreed with you politely. If you found that insulting, that is unfortunate.
They are getting mostly 7-8 from 'professionals', and horrendous user reviews. Yes the reviews don't make sense because there are so many 1's, but they are also many 10's, so the user reviews are completely useless. I can only see this as hurting the sales though, as many people don't trust the professionals (look at fallout 4), and they won't buy a game if the user reviews seem shady.
Anita Sarkeesian is just as popular as Miley Cyrus with her Twerking, Paris Hilton or Michael Jackson (RIP). Now ask yourself how good that is going to be for your reputation.
This was an important moment for them, especially for their future and for Baldur's Gate 3. This was the moment for them to stand on their own legs, to show their own product, to live up to the name of the original games. There is no way that this won't hurt their reputation, or make people question them if they end up making Baldur's Gate 3.
It's sad but in a few months when you ask a gamer about Siege of Dragonspear, they will most likely say "Oh, isn't that the one with the trans woman and gamergate?" Yes, they will be remembered, but for all the wrong reasons. What do you think people will say when they hear that Baldur's Gate 3 is in the making? They will throw out some crude joke about the characters in the game and what they will be like.
And you're right, I don't have their data, and I doubt that they will share it (though it might be a boost to the morale of our community if the sales were good), we'll only know with time, how this will end.
It could help their reputation. Gamergate is a joke. Society is advancing. GG is giving free publicity to a small gaming company. You can't buy publicity like this.
Maybe we should be thanking GG for bringing this game such publicity.
It could help their reputation. Gamergate is a joke. Society is advancing. GG is giving free publicity to a small gaming company. You can't buy publicity like this.
Maybe we should be thanking GG for bringing this game such publicity.
It isn't very likely, but the possibility is there, it wouldn't be impossible.
The question is what we'll do with people who have lost faith in Beamdog for the way that they handled this situation, or about the them insulting the original games and saying that they will do this the way that they want and couldn't care less about what the community want.
I couldn't care less about the trans person or gamergate. I just didn't like the way that Beamdog took care of the situation, and I've lost all respect for Amber after the two things that she said. Dee's tweet sure as hell came as a shock, I did not seen that one coming.
I would also like to mention that this forum has gone down the dumps. There is so much focus on LGBT and racial issues right now, there aren't people talking about the game. I'm really curious to see how the moderators will clean up this forum. I really liked the BG:EE games, but I absolutely adored this forum and the people that are here, and now that has made a turn for the worse.
It's sad but in a few months when you ask a gamer about Siege of Dragonspear, they will most likely say "Oh, isn't that the one with the trans woman and gamergate?" Yes, they will be remembered, but for all the wrong reasons. What do you think people will say when they hear that Baldur's Gate 3 is in the making? They will throw out some crude joke about the characters in the game and what they will be like.
I just want to add a couple of lines to this discussion.
The biggest problem to me, and that has not been dealt with IMO in all of this controversy, is reading the tweets and interview they paint a bad imagine on what can be expect for writing in the future (particularly the part were "I don't care if people think its fake or forced").
I personally think that the more sensible critics on the forums regarding those tweets and interview have been aimed at the concern of the game having role playing options cut (which would be bad), rather than adding more and more diverse options (which would be great).
Add to that the controversy that this game had on release - with a lot of extremism on both sides (from pro and against fans and from the developers themselves) - and Beamdog ended in a very rough spot for any "fixes" to this DLC as well as for the launch of Baldur's Gate 3.
Sadly, Beamdog now has a "target" on its back and when they launch the indicated improvements to this DLC, all of these extremists will be on top of their keyboard to blindly praise or criticize any small nitpick detail - this is again very bad because it screws up on how the game is perceived.
[Just to give a small comment, I have seen several user reviews only giving a 0 and only bad mouthing the fact there is a trans character (ridiculous review) as well as user reviews giving a 10 but saying that they are disappointed with the UI, with bugs, with broken mods and/or saying story is not that great (an absolutely unreliable review that possible has valid concerns, but shows a crazy grade only to counter the 0s). How can we draw conclusions from either of these reviews?]
This is bad, and thus far the way this whole thing has been handled very badly.
I hope Beamdog takes a bit of a time off, let the dust settle a bit, and then come in with a good patch that shows that we should not interpret those tweets and interview as something that will cut role playing options, but rather has something that will preserve options we had in BG1 and BG2 and add even more (which, yes, includes diverse characters).
That is, in my view, what would help this controversy end and, hopefully, make the path for a BG 3 all the more smoother.
It could help their reputation. Gamergate is a joke. Society is advancing. GG is giving free publicity to a small gaming company. You can't buy publicity like this.
Maybe we should be thanking GG for bringing this game such publicity.
It isn't very likely, but the possibility is there, it wouldn't be impossible.
The question is what we'll do with people who have lost faith in Beamdog for the way that they handled this situation, or about the them insulting the original games and saying that they will do this the way that they want and couldn't care less about what the community want.
I couldn't care less about the trans person or gamergate. I just didn't like the way that Beamdog took care of the situation, and I've lost all respect for Amber after the two things that she said. Dee's tweet sure as hell came as a shock, I did not seen that one coming.
I would also like to mention that this forum has gone down the dumps. There is so much focus on LGBT and racial issues right now, there aren't people talking about the game. I'm really curious to see how the moderators will clean up this forum. I really liked the BG:EE games, but I absolutely adored this forum and the people on this forum, and now that has made a turn for the worse.
I think there were some over the top hysterical reactions of "I have lost my faith in BeamDog" but really there was not real evidence from the majority of these types of posters, having less than a dozen posts mostly, that they ever had faith in BeamDog to begin with. And weren't sockpuppets frankly. I think a lot of these people were stoking it, and when we (Me included ) stop feeding the trolls (not meaning you!! @SionIV ) they will go away to some other game/nontroversy and the forums will go back to normalcy.
If people are truly hardcore fans of the BG series then they will buy SOD and play it and love it. I won't look for them to come here and say it, but no one that is truly a fan will stay away. SOD is good. Really good. BeamDog will fix the bugs, they are listening to the community (and not just the ones who scream that *they* are speaking for the gaming community) and ultimately everything is moddable anyways. Really, don't sweat it.
Ok, I am going to keep playing SOD and stop the feeding here. Sorry everybody.
It's awfully presumptuous to say "If people are truly hardcore fans of the BG series then they will buy SOD and play it and love it." It's not for anyone else to decide who is or is not a hardcore fan, to say nothing of the accusation that people who aren't happy with the game and the situation are sockpuppets and/or trolls. People like what they like, and taste is subjective. No one gets to decide for anyone else what they will or will not like.
There are legitimate issues with the game, and now there are legitimate concerns with Beamdogs handling of the franchise.
Broad brushing and dismissing people who raise those concerns is insulting and will not be productive to improving the game and any future efforts.
It's awfully presumptuous to say "If people are truly hardcore fans of the BG series then they will buy SOD and play it and love it." It's not for anyone else to decide who is or is not a hardcore fan, to say nothing of the accusation that people who aren't happy with the game and the situation are sockpuppets and/or trolls. People like what they like, and taste is subjective. No one gets to decide for anyone else what they will or will not like.
There are legitimate issues with the game, and now there are legitimate concerns with Beamdogs handling of the franchise.
Broad brushing and dismissing people who raise those concerns is insulting and will not be productive to improving the game and any future efforts.
Yeah, it really shows the tribal nature of these people, doesn't it? The only thing required to be a fan of Baldur's Gate is to have bought one of the original games, loved it, and to think of yourself as a fan of it. I also find the whole "I bought it because people complained!!" angle completely hilarious. I mean, if you actually like the SJW stuff in the game then let yourself loose, buy 1000 copies of the game if that's your thing. But buying it because of what someone unrelated to the game thinks is quite honestly retarded. I mean, it's well within your rights, but that's not what's going to bring you quality games in the future (whatever your definition of quality is - as long as it's about what's IN the game). The only thing it's going to bring you is that people you like/agree with are making the games you buy, not necessarily that the games are good. For example: I don't really think the Dead or Alive series is that good, honestly, so I won't buy it. Even if it's been under loads of attack by SJW's and I applaud how Play-Asia handled the whole thing.
The thing is, these people are unable to divorce their ideology from their hobbies*. It's quite safe for me to come to the conclusion now that I don't really like Beamdog that much anymore, but if they release a good game in the future and my initial skepticism is put to rest, I'll buy it even if I don't like them. I care about good games and securing good games in the future, not who make them.
*Before you interject. Personally, for example, the reason I have an issue with the Minsc line isn't because it's against gamergate in itself, but because of how it is completely nonsensical from a setting perspective, and detracts from/uses the character. Granted, it does generate some additional ire because of the personal nature of it, but it's not the core issue itself. I've admitted in earlier posts that I would also find him saying equally immersion breaking lines targeting Anita Sarkeesian, for example, equally retarded.
Saying that you are not of a true Baldur's Gate fan if you don't buy SoD it's indeed silly. I have my own mind, I don't need someone to tell me what it's good and what is not. I have spent hundreds if not thousands of hours in original BG 1 & 2 since 2000 and if I don't like the direction in which some want to divert the franchise then I won't support them. It's like saying you are not a true Fallout fan because you didn't like or buy Fallout 3, which is a travesty.
Also a lot of original fans of BG are now over 30 years old and don't have the time or energy to post as often as those that became familiar with BG after the "enhanced" editions.
Saying that you are not of a true Baldur's Gate fan if you don't buy SoD it's indeed silly. I have my own mind, I don't need someone to tell me what it's good and what is not.
Except clearly you do, if you're content to rely on other people's opinions as to "the direction in which some want to divert the franchise" rather than base your judgment on direct experience.
Don't get me wrong, that's totally fine - "you do you" is really the end line of all this - but if you're just repeating the party line, your opinion's not going to carry as much weight as someone who actually played SoD (or Fallout 3, for that matter) and can speak with some degree of authority as to what the game factually does or does not do.
I've said it a few times, but that politics was ever brought into this to begin with is the issue, and there the fault lies with BD.
And as I've said a few times, if you have a problem with politics you're going to have to take it up with Wizards of the Coast and BioWare - unless you're conveniently overlooking that minor detail of Viconia's entire storyline being about racism and prejudice. I suppose that doesn't fit the narrative either, does it.
Hello friends. The story of Baldur's Gate is mostly about the sinister manipulation of politics and economics through shadowy manoeuvring by an evil figure hoping to become all powerful. Later in a megalomaniacal rant he reveals that he hopes to attain apotheosis and is willing to force the country into a pointless war and drown the land in blood in order to achieve it.
That's political. That's political as hell. A pretty harsh take on some of the "important" people in our society too. It sounds depressingly like real life right? So really the series has been about politics from day one.
While of course everyone is entitled to their opinion and part of the healthy enjoyment of any work includes criticism of it, I personally don't feel the political aspect of SoD is either a negative or something that Beamdog brought into the series themselves.
Furthermore, I am of the opinion that Carthage should be destroyed.
Saying that you are not of a true Baldur's Gate fan if you don't buy SoD it's indeed silly. I have my own mind, I don't need someone to tell me what it's good and what is not.
Except clearly you do, if you're content to rely on other people's opinions as to "the direction in which some want to divert the franchise" rather than base your judgment on direct experience.
I made my mind based on images and videos I have seen from the actual game, not exclusively on other peoples' reviews. Also I grew disappointed with the changes integrated in the EEs of BG1 and BG2, so I'm not turned off only by this social agenda everyone is talking about.
I've said it a few times, but that politics was ever brought into this to begin with is the issue, and there the fault lies with BD.
And as I've said a few times, if you have a problem with politics you're going to have to take it up with Wizards of the Coast and BioWare - unless you're conveniently overlooking that minor detail of Viconia's entire storyline being about racism and prejudice. I suppose that doesn't fit the narrative either, does it.
Yeah the thing is, folks don't want to "take it up" with anyone. Folks don't want to care about "the narrative". Folks want to play a game and read reviews free of controversial politics.
I've said it a few times, but that politics was ever brought into this to begin with is the issue, and there the fault lies with BD.
I don't even know if I'd call it politics, but for the developers to put in the Minsc line in the first place was childish and is a large part of why I question their judgment and ability to handle the game and the series.
There was no need for it. It didn't add anything, and it was meant as a poke in the eye to people who have a reputation for being involved with a lot of drama. Why do that to the game? Why bring those people and that debate into this? At the same time you've got people from Beamdog making public statements that are insulting to the previous games and telling us that they are going to "fix" them to fit with their vision and they don't care whether we like it or not. It's insanity. Who do they think makes up the market that is going to buy this and future games? It's largely existing fans. People that have been fans for years and years. Not many people who aren't longtime fans are going to get into these games. Using the game to score some point in a petty argument or as a vehicle to push any kind of agenda (outside of making a great game), while at the same time antagonizing long time fans, is nuts.
It's bad business, and it's bad game making. I can't support it.
"Politics in my game are the problem, the dev team doesn't have the right to add politic in games"
*facepalm*
*look at all her Realms-lore-based books and video games, and all the politicals views there already inside since from the very start*
*Remember all the politicals views in all the D&D campain she play*
Keep your false "apolitic" off of my games please.
That is a misrepresentation of what I said, but maybe you aren't aware that the politics I am referring to are primarily those found outside of the game. Yes, there's the GG line, but that by itself is a tiny thing in all of this. That line could have even been interpreted more easily to mean other things, had the writers in interviews or on the forum not brought politics into the matter.
You know, it is passing ridiculous that people are insisting that correctly pointing out that Baldur's Gate had sexist elements is somehow insulting or disrespectful. It had sexist elements - a lot of games do. This doesn't mean it is a terrible game beyond any redemption or just full of evil, it just means it has places where it could have done better.
It's pretty obvious that people objecting to "politics" as a general concept mean something very specific - they don't want a transgender character in the game. Talking about "politics" is just a smokescreen, and they won't complain about other political aspects of the games they play. Especially when those politics agree with their own. It's about "not ever being exposed to something they don't like/agree with." Which makes it sound like what they're asking for is for computer games to just be a giant hug box for their own views.
When it comes to pushing politics into games maybe we should just compare how many lines we're talking about.
How many lines are there in SoD? Ten? Twenty? What are we talking about here? One insignificant npc? Two?
Ok let's compare this with the politics all the "concerned" gamers have injected into the game, shall we? Hundreds of posts and reviews - is that close? Or is it even more? Nuff said!
You know, it is passing ridiculous that people are insisting that correctly pointing out that Baldur's Gate had sexist elements is somehow insulting or disrespectful. It had sexist elements - a lot of games do. This doesn't mean it is a terrible game beyond any redemption or just full of evil, it just means it has places where it could have done better.
It's pretty obvious that people objecting to "politics" as a general concept mean something very specific - they don't want a transgender character in the game. Talking about "politics" is just a smokescreen, and they won't complain about other political aspects of the games they play. Especially when those politics agree with their own. It's about "not ever being exposed to something they don't like/agree with." Which makes it sound like what they're asking for is for computer games to just be a giant hug box for their own views.
Sorry, but it isn't a smokescreen at all. As I just said to Kco, this wasn't brought to the spotlight and held there so long because of things found within the game but rather because the writers disclosed their personal politics in interviews and on the forum which led to being much more easily able to interpret (or misinterpret) politics in the game itself.
You know, it is passing ridiculous that people are insisting that correctly pointing out that Baldur's Gate had sexist elements is somehow insulting or disrespectful. It had sexist elements - a lot of games do. This doesn't mean it is a terrible game beyond any redemption or just full of evil, it just means it has places where it could have done better.
It's pretty obvious that people objecting to "politics" as a general concept mean something very specific - they don't want a transgender character in the game. Talking about "politics" is just a smokescreen, and they won't complain about other political aspects of the games they play. Especially when those politics agree with their own. It's about "not ever being exposed to something they don't like/agree with." Which makes it sound like what they're asking for is for computer games to just be a giant hug box for their own views.
Sorry, but it isn't a smokescreen at all. As I just said to Kco, this wasn't brought to the spotlight and held there so long because of things found within the game but rather because the writers disclosed their personal politics in interviews and on the forum which led to being much more easily able to interpret (or misinterpret) politics in the game itself.
So in other words it's not about the game or anything in the game - but this whole ruckus including the bad user reviews actually exist because someone on the dev team has views that you don't agree with... That's rich!
Edit: @bluntfeather not meaning to offend you! But from my impression from reviews/comments it certainly seems true for a bunch of people.
Comments
Without any sort of scientifically conducted survey, the fact that a loud minority of people are complaining about this is... proof a loud minority of people are complaining about this. And that's it, and that's all.
Besides, the exact same sorts of people (in some cases, the exact same people) flipped out over Hexxat, too (which was before "that writer" was even there!). They were never going to like Beamdog, because Beamdog was never catering to them.
If those "fans" think Beamdog spits on them, well, I hope the door doesn't hit them on the way out. I'm a fan too, and BD hasn't spit on me yet. Who's to say there's more of people like them than there is of people like me?
If you go onto youtube, you'll find a lot of videos as well. It's not just gamers anymore, there are several people out there that don't have any gaming on their channel, that is talking about it. Siege of Dragonspear has become the new Anita Sarkeesian, even if for a short duration only.
This is by no means a small thing, and this isn't a 'small drop in the bucket'. The reviews have been horrendous, and Siege of Dragonspear has been pushed back a few pages on steam (it's not on the front page anymore), which is not a good place to be when you've just put your game out on the market.
They made a mistake, it's not the end of the world, hopefully they learnt something from it.
The reason I've been writing this is to show that there have been consequences for the controversy that got created around Siege of Dragonspear, and it's not far fetched to believe that they will lose sales on this. It might also turn around and they will gain sales from the publicity, it could go both ways.
Siege of Dragonspear = Controversy, that won't change in any near future.
Still, no need to be offensive or insulting towards me just because I'm sharing my opinion.
The only mistake beamdog made was angering the gamergate group, which has proven quite happy to try and ruin lives and careers. Internet hate mobs are scary things. GG has shown that it won't stop until it has destroyed its target and has no shame when it comes to their methods.
Beamdog' mistake was having a joke at their expense, when everyone knows that they are thin skinned, insecure babies who will ruthlessly attack, tear down and destroy whatever doesn't fit their world view.
I get the feeling that it isn't so much about the whole trans part, or the gamergate joke. It's about the way they have handled this situation as a company, that has made a lot of people lose faith and respect for them.
1.) They made a choice that COULD be controversial.
2.) Certain people ended up saying a few things that they shouldn't have.
3.) A few tweets ignited the fire even more.
4.) The situation was handled badly.
It wasn't just one thing that made it all explode.
Apology accepted, I'm not trying to cause any grief, just looking at the situation from a neutral viewpoint. I've spent 1 500 hours playing their game, I'll get no pleasure from them failing.
Anita Sarkeesian is just as popular as Miley Cyrus with her Twerking, Paris Hilton or Michael Jackson (RIP). Now ask yourself how good that is going to be for your reputation.
This was an important moment for them, especially for their future and for Baldur's Gate 3. This was the moment for them to stand on their own legs, to show their own product, to live up to the name of the original games. There is no way that this won't hurt their reputation, or make people question them if they end up making Baldur's Gate 3.
It's sad but in a few months when you ask a gamer about Siege of Dragonspear, they will most likely say "Oh, isn't that the one with the trans woman and gamergate?" Yes, they will be remembered, but for all the wrong reasons. What do you think people will say when they hear that Baldur's Gate 3 is in the making? They will throw out some crude joke about the characters in the game and what they will be like.
And you're right, I don't have their data, and I doubt that they will share it (though it might be a boost to the morale of our community if the sales were good), we'll only know with time, how this will end.
Maybe we should be thanking GG for bringing this game such publicity.
The question is what we'll do with people who have lost faith in Beamdog for the way that they handled this situation, or about the them insulting the original games and saying that they will do this the way that they want and couldn't care less about what the community want.
I couldn't care less about the trans person or gamergate. I just didn't like the way that Beamdog took care of the situation, and I've lost all respect for Amber after the two things that she said. Dee's tweet sure as hell came as a shock, I did not seen that one coming.
I would also like to mention that this forum has gone down the dumps. There is so much focus on LGBT and racial issues right now, there aren't people talking about the game. I'm really curious to see how the moderators will clean up this forum. I really liked the BG:EE games, but I absolutely adored this forum and the people that are here, and now that has made a turn for the worse.
I 100% agree with @SionIV in the quote above.
The biggest problem to me, and that has not been dealt with IMO in all of this controversy, is reading the tweets and interview they paint a bad imagine on what can be expect for writing in the future (particularly the part were "I don't care if people think its fake or forced").
I personally think that the more sensible critics on the forums regarding those tweets and interview have been aimed at the concern of the game having role playing options cut (which would be bad), rather than adding more and more diverse options (which would be great).
Add to that the controversy that this game had on release - with a lot of extremism on both sides (from pro and against fans and from the developers themselves) - and Beamdog ended in a very rough spot for any "fixes" to this DLC as well as for the launch of Baldur's Gate 3.
Sadly, Beamdog now has a "target" on its back and when they launch the indicated improvements to this DLC, all of these extremists will be on top of their keyboard to blindly praise or criticize any small nitpick detail - this is again very bad because it screws up on how the game is perceived.
[Just to give a small comment, I have seen several user reviews only giving a 0 and only bad mouthing the fact there is a trans character (ridiculous review) as well as user reviews giving a 10 but saying that they are disappointed with the UI, with bugs, with broken mods and/or saying story is not that great (an absolutely unreliable review that possible has valid concerns, but shows a crazy grade only to counter the 0s). How can we draw conclusions from either of these reviews?]
This is bad, and thus far the way this whole thing has been handled very badly.
I hope Beamdog takes a bit of a time off, let the dust settle a bit, and then come in with a good patch that shows that we should not interpret those tweets and interview as something that will cut role playing options, but rather has something that will preserve options we had in BG1 and BG2 and add even more (which, yes, includes diverse characters).
That is, in my view, what would help this controversy end and, hopefully, make the path for a BG 3 all the more smoother.
My only pet peeve is honestly with the new bugs and problems added with 2.0. Can't wait for patches.
If people are truly hardcore fans of the BG series then they will buy SOD and play it and love it. I won't look for them to come here and say it, but no one that is truly a fan will stay away. SOD is good. Really good. BeamDog will fix the bugs, they are listening to the community (and not just the ones who scream that *they* are speaking for the gaming community) and ultimately everything is moddable anyways. Really, don't sweat it.
Ok, I am going to keep playing SOD and stop the feeding here. Sorry everybody.
Hear that Evil?! I'm playing SoD!! Woe is you!!!
There are legitimate issues with the game, and now there are legitimate concerns with Beamdogs handling of the franchise.
Broad brushing and dismissing people who raise those concerns is insulting and will not be productive to improving the game and any future efforts.
The thing is, these people are unable to divorce their ideology from their hobbies*. It's quite safe for me to come to the conclusion now that I don't really like Beamdog that much anymore, but if they release a good game in the future and my initial skepticism is put to rest, I'll buy it even if I don't like them. I care about good games and securing good games in the future, not who make them.
*Before you interject. Personally, for example, the reason I have an issue with the Minsc line isn't because it's against gamergate in itself, but because of how it is completely nonsensical from a setting perspective, and detracts from/uses the character. Granted, it does generate some additional ire because of the personal nature of it, but it's not the core issue itself. I've admitted in earlier posts that I would also find him saying equally immersion breaking lines targeting Anita Sarkeesian, for example, equally retarded.
Also a lot of original fans of BG are now over 30 years old and don't have the time or energy to post as often as those that became familiar with BG after the "enhanced" editions.
Don't get me wrong, that's totally fine - "you do you" is really the end line of all this - but if you're just repeating the party line, your opinion's not going to carry as much weight as someone who actually played SoD (or Fallout 3, for that matter) and can speak with some degree of authority as to what the game factually does or does not do.
That's political. That's political as hell. A pretty harsh take on some of the "important" people in our society too. It sounds depressingly like real life right? So really the series has been about politics from day one.
While of course everyone is entitled to their opinion and part of the healthy enjoyment of any work includes criticism of it, I personally don't feel the political aspect of SoD is either a negative or something that Beamdog brought into the series themselves.
Furthermore, I am of the opinion that Carthage should be destroyed.
There was no need for it. It didn't add anything, and it was meant as a poke in the eye to people who have a reputation for being involved with a lot of drama. Why do that to the game? Why bring those people and that debate into this? At the same time you've got people from Beamdog making public statements that are insulting to the previous games and telling us that they are going to "fix" them to fit with their vision and they don't care whether we like it or not. It's insanity. Who do they think makes up the market that is going to buy this and future games? It's largely existing fans. People that have been fans for years and years. Not many people who aren't longtime fans are going to get into these games. Using the game to score some point in a petty argument or as a vehicle to push any kind of agenda (outside of making a great game), while at the same time antagonizing long time fans, is nuts.
It's bad business, and it's bad game making. I can't support it.
*facepalm*
*look at all her Realms-lore-based books and video games, and all the politicals views there already inside since from the very start*
*Remember all the politicals views in all the D&D campain she play*
Keep your false "apolitic" off of my games please.
It's pretty obvious that people objecting to "politics" as a general concept mean something very specific - they don't want a transgender character in the game. Talking about "politics" is just a smokescreen, and they won't complain about other political aspects of the games they play. Especially when those politics agree with their own. It's about "not ever being exposed to something they don't like/agree with." Which makes it sound like what they're asking for is for computer games to just be a giant hug box for their own views.
How many lines are there in SoD? Ten? Twenty? What are we talking about here? One insignificant npc? Two?
Ok let's compare this with the politics all the "concerned" gamers have injected into the game, shall we? Hundreds of posts and reviews - is that close? Or is it even more? Nuff said!
Edit: @bluntfeather not meaning to offend you! But from my impression from reviews/comments it certainly seems true for a bunch of people.