@Kitteh_On_A_Cloud and this is part of the whole problem with this mess. Misinformation. Things have been taken out of context, information skewed to meet certain peoples wants, and then when this misinformed (in some cases outright false) information meets the ears of potential buyers it puts them off. I'd implore you to check some of the critical reviews... Rockpapershotgun, gamespot, destructoid.. Even the mixed score reviews are still largely positive about the game as a whole.
Hey guys. Given money and time issues that cropped up recently, I have sadly not been able to buy or play Siege of Dragonspear. Just because I'm a giant murderlizard, doesn't mean I don't need entertainment too!
All joking aside, I was planning on doing so soon, but it appears there is some sort of odd controversy surrounding a particular transgender character and a line from Minsc? Now, I love Minsc, as I do most of the characters in this series. It would be a shame to see them misrepresented. Nonetheless, I'll still have enough money to purchase the expansion rather soon.
The controversy is overblown. On my first play I missed the trans character and didn't hear that line from Minsc. While I agree that the line was out of place it had zero impact on my expierience. SOD is solid, the new characters are fun. Go for it.
I bought it 5 mins after it was announced but I haven't finished my Baldurs Gate 1 playthrough yet. I'll wait until the main bugs are fixed and then download it. By then hopefully all the "controversy" will have died down.
I never even noticed the Minsc line - and I do not care at all about that- it is just two sides of nerds battling each other worse than officers in the command track in the rear ordering to be consulting on calls for fire. The silly Mizzenawaaaazenaaa character is a non-issue too. It is just a lame throw in for beamdog to salute Canada and their way of life.
On the other hand Safina is rather a sullen brat in the new game and not a trollop tart that pleased all the fat 40 someting now white guys who recall with fondness her shameless man pandering flirting.
I found the last 10-20 minutes a great bore overall with very unsatisfying chat choices that enraged my already angry fighter.
It was looking really cool towards the middle with some open areas to go through ala BG1 but they the scope is small in truth even if there are some fun old style discovery delves and cellars.
Anyway overall it is pretty good and worth the cash but the some of the writing is rather bland or too modern and does not cater to the ole fat guy of 1998 who played it with pride killing whole cities - you cant town kill in the game or you will get auto killed ala the Candle keep stater area. It might be funner if you just did a multiplayer game and avoided the 2 new abrasive female characters.
@Beowulf "It is just a lame throw in for beamdog to salute Canada and their way of life."
Uh, what? First off, Beamdog is a Canadian company--I can literally drive there from my house. Second, what does that even mean? So a company acknowledges a marginalized group actually exists, and it's just a "throw in?" This is nonsensical at best, inflammatory at worst.
Finally, I agree that the last 10-20 minutes were a bit of a slog. But then so were the Hell Trials, and literally most of Baldur's Gate 1's main storyline. I have to say the pacing of Dragonspear is much better than Baldur's Gate 1 and 2. Exploration is all fine and dandy, but I can't stand games where you have to march back through a dungeon just to get to the exit. That's why I hate dungeons without back doors--it's just padding, because back in the day having a game with "90 hours of playtime!" was a big selling point. They would just neglect to tell you that you spent 60 hours of that play time backtracking through wilderness. Baldur's Gate was particularly heinous in this regard.
Anyways, OP, to answer your question... yes, it's absolutely worth it. Hell, people paid upwards of $60 for skyrim when it first game out, and it had bugs like mad. Apparently the new Fallout isn't much better. This'll only burn a hole in your pocket to the size of $22.00, and that's money well spent in my opinion.
Mr Whitefire, Canada has actual laws that protect those who identify differently from discrimination from those persons who would bar them from adopting / couple forming and so on. I choose to not be part of Canada although with my special skillzset having worked for nations all over the globe I have no doubt Canada would be glad to have me as their helpful citizen. Beamdog likewise follows these very post modern very post Thomist ideals so thus my Canada comment. Now if a UAE game company made a game where you could not get a quest from a women unless she was your wife or sister or daughter I would as well comment on this aspect of the game due to the UAE culture the UAE company has and say =
"oh this UAE game company is mixing in thier UAE culture in the game it is not just about riding camels and getting loot - you can only get quests from women if you play a female character."
In similar spirit Beamdog choose to not let me romance gruff wymyn Corwin archer because they wanted my male to see how diverse their ideals of love and romance are. Instead of two lasses pandering to my male I had 1 thief character and the other was left for a female plythrough should you want to indulge that alternate female female romance ideal. I am very egotistical and can never play a female character so in my self limiting way this aspect is a turn off to me. For others it is well and good if you want a modern style errr post modern style fantasy world.
I am not going to condemn Beamdog for trying to be relative progressive open and inclusive and displaying the sorts of ideals they love in Canada. But, the buyer should know exactly wut he is getting. Thus my comment SoD is a product of Canada. This is not an accusation it is just a factual observation telling the buyer - if you do not like Canada values and blame Canada for something you do not like like well you can just go watch loops of Eric Cartmen and not play the game or play a UAE game instead. Although I think UAE games are all just lame ripoffs of US made shooters but you all shoot non-Islam persons instead.
Yes, I would because I am a grown man Illithid that does not judge a whole game by a few minor lines that have almost nothing to do with the actual gameplay.
$20 for taking some of your favorite Infinity Engine characters through a new and beautifully done adventure?
Sign me up!
But what if it's too controversial?
Heck if you are trying to enjoy yourself in life and avoiding controversy what's the point in being alive.
If it's not challenging or offending someone somewhere then it's probably not worth doing in the first place. (Don't worry, it's not really controversial)
* In actuality the controversy is entirely blown out of proportion and revolves around a member of the Beamdog team deciding that she'd be proud to called a Social Justice Warrior. This offended a small minority of reactionary gamers who seem to have real hangup with feminism and anything remotely connected to feminism. The specific details that the brigade of deeply offended have concentrated their ire upon are so minuscule and petty that most sane and adjusted people would never notice that these things, much less describe them as controversial.
I bought it directly from Beamdog and noticed bugs 3 times in a 75+hour playthrough(BGee +Sod), So bugs weren't really an issue for me or a vast majority of people that I know who have also played this game(Actually every last one them has mentioned minimal bugginess.)
Buy it, if you liked Baldur's Gate you'll like Siege of Dragonspear.
Seems like a lot of people here are minimizing the issue or condoning the fact that Beamdog tried to hamfist a political agenda into a game where it absolutely does not belong. Or can anyone explain me why Mizhena absolutely HAD to be trans? What does it add to her character other than a checkmark on the list of adding diverse sexual orientations? Sorry, but I absolutely do not agree that the original Baldur's Gate games were 'sexist'. I never thought of Jaheira as a 'nagging wife', for example. That is such a simplistic view on her character. And yes, I am basing myself here on quotes from news sources because I do not want to personally finance social justice bullcrap in a game I was anxious to see new content being created for. Besides, doesn't take away the fact that Scott still posted these words and thus acknowledged them. Why was the GamerGate joke added to Minsc's dialogue of all characters? Just because he's popular? I'm just trying to understand this mess, guys. And yes, living in a country which is going to shit because of political correctness and social justice bullshit has made me quite sensitive to things like these. Transgenders shouldn't be treated as a 'novelty' to modernise games, but as actual people and actual game characters with more to them than just their sexual orientation, doesn't matter whether they are minor characters or not, don't you think?
Its not about minimising the issue or "condoning" anything.. Just to me, it isn't an issue at all, and I don't see a political agenda.. I see a character in a game with a few lines of dialogue explaining why she has the name she does, and that's just the way I choose to see it. Many people didn't even realise there was an issue until they finished playing the game and them came and saw the internet s**t storm. I agree about the characters such as Jaheira, but then everyone who has actually played the game have told me that she hasn't been changed at all, and is true to her BG character.
As for whether mizhena could've had more to her, sure... But Trent has said they want to rectify this, as well as remove minsc's line referring to GG (which just for reference is an easter egg line that you only hear if you click on the character so many times.
Seems like a lot of people here are minimizing the issue or condoning the fact that Beamdog tried to hamfist a political agenda into a game....
Kitteh, I wouldn't dream of minimizing or condoning the fact that Beamdog tried to hamfist a political agenda into a game.
Because from my perspective they havn't.
If your worries about this supposed 'controversy' stops you buying the game and playing it and enjoying it, I am very sorry. As someone else who loves the BG series as much as you, I know how much you must have been looking forward to new content and recapturing the magic of playing a BG game for the very first time.
So you can either listen to all the people telling you the whole controversy has been overblown, exaggerated, misrepresented and generally a storm in a tea cup, and buy the game and play it. Or you can decide to believe the alternative and miss out.
As a fellow BG lover, I hope you choose the former.
Seems like a lot of people here are minimizing the issue or condoning the fact that Beamdog tried to hamfist a political agenda into a game where it absolutely does not belong. Or can anyone explain me why Mizhena absolutely HAD to be trans? What does it add to her character other than a checkmark on the list of adding diverse sexual orientations? Sorry, but I absolutely do not agree that the original Baldur's Gate games were 'sexist'. I never thought of Jaheira as a 'nagging wife', for example. That is such a simplistic view on her character. And yes, I am basing myself here on quotes from news sources because I do not want to personally finance social justice bullcrap in a game I was anxious to see new content being created for. Besides, doesn't take away the fact that Scott still posted these words and thus acknowledged them. Why was the GamerGate joke added to Minsc's dialogue of all characters? Just because he's popular? I'm just trying to understand this mess, guys. And yes, living in a country which is going to shit because of political correctness and social justice bullshit has made me quite sensitive to things like these. Transgenders shouldn't be treated as a 'novelty' to modernise games, but as actual people and actual game characters with more to them than just their sexual orientation, doesn't matter whether they are minor characters or not, don't you think?
Hopefully @bengoshi 's link can provide some perspective. Baldur's Gate is not and has never been a game that offers a swath of deep characters outside of the joinable NPCs and antagonists. Mizhena has 3 sidequests attached to her, which is more than any other stand-around NPC IIRC. She does not simply blurt out her transness with nothing else to her, that's a total myth: she's also a Priest of Tempus with an aggressive personality and a major penchant for *honesty* – which probably factors in to why she tells CHARNAME the truth about her gender when asked about her unique name.
As for Amber Scott, I'm a 30 year old white dude and I agree with her – that is, I agree with what she *actually said*, not with what gamergate tried to put in her mouth. Any game made in 1998 is going to have a few dated or sexist tropes; Amber identified two of these and said that it wouldn't be informing her writing for these characters in SoD. She did not say that BG was a sexist game or tell anyone that they were sexist for liking it (as has been said before, she is a BG fan and works for people who MADE it). People can disagree with her relatively innocuous observation, but they should at least represent what she said accurately.
This was about an inclusive nod to trans players that got distorted by people who either want to hold trans NPCs to a different standard than *all other* NPCs or don't want them represented in games at all. You can find common cause with those folks, but you'll be missing out on a great game over essentially nothing.
Frankly, the "controversy" has been about two groups fighting each other for reasons only remotely related to the game. Because the game is not controversial. But some people are very thin skinned.
Seems like a lot of people here are minimizing the issue or condoning the fact that Beamdog tried to hamfist a political agenda into a game where it absolutely does not belong.
It's not an issue. Or rather, if it is an issue, it's so minor as to not matter.
Seems like a lot of people here are minimizing the issue or condoning the fact that Beamdog tried to hamfist a political agenda into a game where it absolutely does not belong.
As Galadriel so nearly said, "there is no agenda here, unless you bring it here yourself".
Or can anyone explain me why Mizhena absolutely HAD to be trans?
*Start thinking how stupid it will look if Beamdog have made all NPC transgender, except one who talk about the fact they didn't change their name, and a lot of angry people will come on the forum saying Beamdog try to "force agenda" by having put a cisgender character in the game and making them talking about it, and then try to blame the writer of the character for the harasment made by the other people*
The game isn't 100% perfect, I would have done a few things differently, and it shipped with bugs. Just like... well, every other game, ever. People put BG1 and 2 on a pedestal, and frankly, it's impossible to perfectly recapture the original magic because it is 18 years later and every part of the originals is brimming with comfortable nostalgia. However it is still a great edition to the saga, and finally scratches the annoying itch that the gap between BG1 and BG2 created. That alone made it worth it for me.
So you would all say that the controversy is blown out of proportion? I'm really sorry if I sound confused or something. I have no problem with transgenders at all, as long as they aren't just included for some or the other SJW agenda, the impression of which I got from the reviews and articles I have been reading. Also, just like for many of you, the BG games mean a lot to me and are part of my fondest childhood memories, so I'm a bit sensitive when it comes to them being tampered with. That's all. I'm sorry if I worded myself poorly in my earlier comment. I just got the impression that Beamdog included a trans character just for the sake of novelty and 'modernising' the game. As some kind of checkmark on a list, you see. But if you guys who have played the game truly think it's someting minor, well then, maybe I should just see it for myself and play the game myself.
The problem is not a transgender character. The problem is everything. Bad design decisions, bad UI, bad dialogs, bad inmersion, bad progression.
As far as I am reading, people is focusing too much in that character while you could pass through the game without talking to it. There are plenty of problems but the discusion is being moved to that npc, which is the least of the problems, if there is any.
I sorry if I am committing treason or anything, but in my opinion, even the original games were flawed in many ways, had some design decisions I greatly disliked, had some areas that were very weak and lazy, had some clunky and tedious UI failings and yes, there might even have been some room for improvement with the dialogue, if you want to stack it side by side with its sister project, Planescape:Torment, which was essentially a novel with a video game outer coating. Every Infinity engine game has had its pluses and minuses, it's only the fact that people imagine that they were somehow infallible and perfect that is shattering peoples illusions right now.
They were very good, no doubt, and to be fair, they do offer more overall than SoD does on its own. But that doesn't mean SoD is the piece of shit that some people are making it out to be. I've played plenty of terrible, irredeemable games just for the curiosity, I'm not shy of saying "what is this crap" and putting it down, but SoD is not one of those games. It is actually more or less exactly what I expected it to be - a short, straightforward tie in that evokes the same sense of adventure as the original games. Whatever flaws it has, and it does have them, on balance it is still a very good effort, and a few months from now when emotions have died down and all the whiners have found something else to whine about, we might be able to talk about it objectively. We might even be able to see it modded to everyones liking. You know, like the way that mods became pretty much indispensable for being able to play BG1 after a while, because it had so much room for improvement...
Comments
On the other hand Safina is rather a sullen brat in the new game and not a trollop tart that pleased all the fat 40 someting now white guys who recall with fondness her shameless man pandering flirting.
I found the last 10-20 minutes a great bore overall with very unsatisfying chat choices that enraged my already angry fighter.
It was looking really cool towards the middle with some open areas to go through ala BG1 but they the scope is small in truth even if there are some fun old style discovery delves and cellars.
Anyway overall it is pretty good and worth the cash but the some of the writing is rather bland or too modern and does not cater to the ole fat guy of 1998 who played it with pride killing whole cities - you cant town kill in the game or you will get auto killed ala the Candle keep stater area. It might be funner if you just did a multiplayer game and avoided the 2 new abrasive female characters.
Uh, what? First off, Beamdog is a Canadian company--I can literally drive there from my house. Second, what does that even mean? So a company acknowledges a marginalized group actually exists, and it's just a "throw in?" This is nonsensical at best, inflammatory at worst.
Finally, I agree that the last 10-20 minutes were a bit of a slog. But then so were the Hell Trials, and literally most of Baldur's Gate 1's main storyline. I have to say the pacing of Dragonspear is much better than Baldur's Gate 1 and 2. Exploration is all fine and dandy, but I can't stand games where you have to march back through a dungeon just to get to the exit. That's why I hate dungeons without back doors--it's just padding, because back in the day having a game with "90 hours of playtime!" was a big selling point. They would just neglect to tell you that you spent 60 hours of that play time backtracking through wilderness. Baldur's Gate was particularly heinous in this regard.
Anyways, OP, to answer your question... yes, it's absolutely worth it. Hell, people paid upwards of $60 for skyrim when it first game out, and it had bugs like mad. Apparently the new Fallout isn't much better. This'll only burn a hole in your pocket to the size of $22.00, and that's money well spent in my opinion.
"oh this UAE game company is mixing in thier UAE culture in the game it is not just about riding camels and getting loot - you can only get quests from women if you play a female character."
In similar spirit Beamdog choose to not let me romance gruff wymyn Corwin archer because they wanted my male to see how diverse their ideals of love and romance are. Instead of two lasses pandering to my male I had 1 thief character and the other was left for a female plythrough should you want to indulge that alternate female female romance ideal. I am very egotistical and can never play a female character so in my self limiting way this aspect is a turn off to me. For others it is well and good if you want a modern style errr post modern style fantasy world.
I am not going to condemn Beamdog for trying to be relative progressive open and inclusive and displaying the sorts of ideals they love in Canada. But, the buyer should know exactly wut he is getting. Thus my comment SoD is a product of Canada. This is not an accusation it is just a factual observation telling the buyer - if you do not like Canada values and blame Canada for something you do not like like well you can just go watch loops of Eric Cartmen and not play the game or play a UAE game instead. Although I think UAE games are all just lame ripoffs of US made shooters but you all shoot non-Islam persons instead.
You can have a one-handed sword equipped to your weapon slots.
And a bow.
AND a shield.
ALL AT THE SAME TIME.
Screw the controversy--that alone is reason enough to buy it!
I don't see your point.
Sign me up!
But what if it's too controversial?
Heck if you are trying to enjoy yourself in life and avoiding controversy what's the point in being alive.
If it's not challenging or offending someone somewhere then it's probably not worth doing in the first place. (Don't worry, it's not really controversial)
* In actuality the controversy is entirely blown out of proportion and revolves around a member of the Beamdog team deciding that she'd be proud to called a Social Justice Warrior. This offended a small minority of reactionary gamers who seem to have real hangup with feminism and anything remotely connected to feminism. The specific details that the brigade of deeply offended have concentrated their ire upon are so minuscule and petty that most sane and adjusted people would never notice that these things, much less describe them as controversial.
I bought it directly from Beamdog and noticed bugs 3 times in a 75+hour playthrough(BGee +Sod), So bugs weren't really an issue for me or a vast majority of people that I know who have also played this game(Actually every last one them has mentioned minimal bugginess.)
Buy it, if you liked Baldur's Gate you'll like Siege of Dragonspear.
As for whether mizhena could've had more to her, sure... But Trent has said they want to rectify this, as well as remove minsc's line referring to GG (which just for reference is an easter egg line that you only hear if you click on the character so many times.
Because from my perspective they havn't.
If your worries about this supposed 'controversy' stops you buying the game and playing it and enjoying it, I am very sorry. As someone else who loves the BG series as much as you, I know how much you must have been looking forward to new content and recapturing the magic of playing a BG game for the very first time.
So you can either listen to all the people telling you the whole controversy has been overblown, exaggerated, misrepresented and generally a storm in a tea cup, and buy the game and play it. Or you can decide to believe the alternative and miss out.
As a fellow BG lover, I hope you choose the former.
It should explain things a bit.
Hopefully @bengoshi 's link can provide some perspective. Baldur's Gate is not and has never been a game that offers a swath of deep characters outside of the joinable NPCs and antagonists. Mizhena has 3 sidequests attached to her, which is more than any other stand-around NPC IIRC. She does not simply blurt out her transness with nothing else to her, that's a total myth: she's also a Priest of Tempus with an aggressive personality and a major penchant for *honesty* – which probably factors in to why she tells CHARNAME the truth about her gender when asked about her unique name.
As for Amber Scott, I'm a 30 year old white dude and I agree with her – that is, I agree with what she *actually said*, not with what gamergate tried to put in her mouth. Any game made in 1998 is going to have a few dated or sexist tropes; Amber identified two of these and said that it wouldn't be informing her writing for these characters in SoD. She did not say that BG was a sexist game or tell anyone that they were sexist for liking it (as has been said before, she is a BG fan and works for people who MADE it). People can disagree with her relatively innocuous observation, but they should at least represent what she said accurately.
This was about an inclusive nod to trans players that got distorted by people who either want to hold trans NPCs to a different standard than *all other* NPCs or don't want them represented in games at all. You can find common cause with those folks, but you'll be missing out on a great game over essentially nothing.
Since when does anyone need more reason than that?
The game isn't 100% perfect, I would have done a few things differently, and it shipped with bugs. Just like... well, every other game, ever. People put BG1 and 2 on a pedestal, and frankly, it's impossible to perfectly recapture the original magic because it is 18 years later and every part of the originals is brimming with comfortable nostalgia. However it is still a great edition to the saga, and finally scratches the annoying itch that the gap between BG1 and BG2 created. That alone made it worth it for me.
As far as I am reading, people is focusing too much in that character while you could pass through the game without talking to it. There are plenty of problems but the discusion is being moved to that npc, which is the least of the problems, if there is any.
They were very good, no doubt, and to be fair, they do offer more overall than SoD does on its own. But that doesn't mean SoD is the piece of shit that some people are making it out to be. I've played plenty of terrible, irredeemable games just for the curiosity, I'm not shy of saying "what is this crap" and putting it down, but SoD is not one of those games. It is actually more or less exactly what I expected it to be - a short, straightforward tie in that evokes the same sense of adventure as the original games. Whatever flaws it has, and it does have them, on balance it is still a very good effort, and a few months from now when emotions have died down and all the whiners have found something else to whine about, we might be able to talk about it objectively. We might even be able to see it modded to everyones liking. You know, like the way that mods became pretty much indispensable for being able to play BG1 after a while, because it had so much room for improvement...