You know every dialogue yet you think Dynaheir and Minsc are involved romantically and should show affection to each other?
The party you start with depends on your alignement and you can go through the tomb with your party from BG1 if you go through bg1 first. ( A party with safana in it is only assigned to you if you import)
Can we really move on to the part where we go on without you ?
You are twisting my words. Safana IS in the party immediately at the start of the game, she doesn't even approach the protagonist - she just is in the party. And don't you dare kick her, you'll get a shower of emotions as if she somehow already was your best friend. Imoen's a sister, that I get, I can understand her feelings in Irenicus's dungeon, but Safana? Come on, it's blatant agenda. Unless writers change it to a normal encounter/introduction, she'll stay "agenda"-ish.
I'm not twisting your words, I'm quoting you and sincerely trying to understand you.
If Safana wasn't a vamp, it might agree with you. But she's horrid (for me) in her femme fatale style. She's the opposite of a feminist.
Are you saying that Beamdog's agenda is towards femme fatales/vamps? That's a new accusation to Beamdog, compared to the others..
I'm here because I care about the games. I'd prefer if you address my posts on their merits, or lack thereof, on their own basis rather than lumping me in with some group.
Sorry, but your "merits" implied that OP had a valuable critic view of the game, which was not the case and right before your post there were several explaining the reasons for that. Hence - the scepticism about your care for the game.
Funny though, how many freshly registered people came here starting their very first posts with declarations "I am not a GGer, but they have a lot of good points!" ... Just a coincidence, I guess.
The tendency here to attack individuals who are critical of the game is disheartening.
Oh, you mean people who did not play even BG1&2 but come here after they read some "alarming article" about how SoD is supporting SJW and LGBT, register on forums and flooding game discussions with their "honest reviews"?
The OP demonstrated total lack of elementary knowledge about BG, played for 15 minutes (worried about your refund? Still brave - to "risk" your own money just to bush a game company!) but claiming he knows it all! Yes, community here is a bit tired of it. Why don't you GGers and supporters crawl back to whatever corner of internet you came from and enjoy petting each others ego there? Or at least stick to one topic on these forums and let others discuss the game? Will be much more productive for both sides.
Elementary knowledge? Where did you get that? Quite the contrary, I've made those statements only because I know the game for so long, and managed to beat it with good-evil-neutral parties, on a SCS/Tactics 200% difficulty as well. I know every dialogue, sound and every item stat almost by memory! God damn it, now I do see where all the hate is coming from... show some respect and read what us "lowly males" are saying.
Really?! Many-many PTs? And after that you were talking about "game never take your money", "you can not loose your companions" and "Minsk and Dynaheir" had a romance?!
Try this: http://www.shsforums.net/topic/7858-romance-for-minsc/ and this: http://www.realmshelps.net/faerun/rashemen/people.shtml The interpretation here is that Dynaheir _could_ have a romance with Minsc or vice versa (in the game, not in the mod!!!), but it is very subtle and not forced at all. In SoD, it's immediately sealed and almost boo'ed, oh no-no-no, no romance! Dynaheir be a strong rashemen woman, no need for the subtleties!
I'm here because I care about the games. I'd prefer if you address my posts on their merits, or lack thereof, on their own basis rather than lumping me in with some group.
Sorry, but your "merits" implied that OP had a valuable critic view of the game, which was not the case and right before your post there were several explaining the reasons for that. Hence - the scepticism about your care for the game.
Funny though, how many freshly registered people came here starting their very first posts with declarations "I am not a GGer, but they have a lot of good points!" ... Just a coincidence, I guess.
I think the OP had some things that legitimately are issues for HIM, but he hasn't done the best job of communicating them. Maybe there's a bit of a language barrier.
I don't know. I came here to see how things were going with the SoD expansion and to get some idea about where the 2.0 upgrade is going, changes that might be happening etc.. I found myself in the middle of the controversy, which I've decided I'd really like to avoid at this point since it's all been said.
I think I've been reasonable in my posts, without attacking anyone, and been called a GGer, a troll, a sock puppet, and maybe a few other things that are neither accurate or particularly nice. That, in too many cases, seems to be the default attitude towards anyone who hasn't been here long or who has a criticism of the game or Beamdog. Sometimes it may be justified to call people those things, but when it's not, it's going to alienate people who would otherwise support the Baldurs Gate franchise and may have something to contribute.
Try this: http://www.shsforums.net/topic/7858-romance-for-minsc/ and this: http://www.realmshelps.net/faerun/rashemen/people.shtml The interpretation here is that Dynaheir _could_ have a romance with Minsc or vice versa (in the game, not in the mod!!!), but it is very subtle and not forced at all. In SoD, it's immediately sealed and almost boo'ed, oh no-no-no, no romance! Dynaheir be a strong rashemen woman, no need for the subtleties!
Hathran (Rashemi witches) and their defenders do NOT romance each other. Yes, I'm sure it has happened at some time during the history of Rashemen, but it's very much taboo. Never mind that Minsc is basically the intellectual equivalent of a 12 year old child, which bodes terribly for romance with a woman like Dynaheir. So, stop this baseless conjecture.
I like how you completely ignored my point by going, "Where does it say it's taboo in this reference to creating a Hathran prestige class?". Such bad logic, man. Ugh.
Which point was that again? "Hathran (Rashemi witches) and their defenders do NOT romance each other." - that's the one, right? It doesn't specifically say anywhere that its forbidden. Therefore, you lied. And about that Minsc being a 12-year old equivalent - not true, again. He might be slow, but shows remarkable feats of wit while "charging blindly on" or dealing with Sarevok in Suldanessellar.
I'm here because I care about the games. I'd prefer if you address my posts on their merits, or lack thereof, on their own basis rather than lumping me in with some group.
Sorry, but your "merits" implied that OP had a valuable critic view of the game, which was not the case and right before your post there were several explaining the reasons for that. Hence - the scepticism about your care for the game.
Funny though, how many freshly registered people came here starting their very first posts with declarations "I am not a GGer, but they have a lot of good points!" ... Just a coincidence, I guess.
I think the OP had some things that legitimately are issues for HIM, but he hasn't done the best job of communicating them. Maybe there's a bit of a language barrier.
And he was answered rather politely with pointing out obvious mistakes on his part. Nobody attacked him (besides me and later in the thread) but patiently explained things he did not get.
I don't know. I came here to see how things were going with the SoD expansion and to get some idea about where the 2.0 upgrade is going, changes that might be happening etc.. I found myself in the middle of the controversy, which I've decided I'd really like to avoid at this point since it's all been said.
A very very good sentiment, one I wholeheartedly support! And the reason I was so mad in my posts here in this thread - we all came here to talk about game, yet, found ourselves on the battle ground where you have to search for any topic related to the game-play, not some imaginary controversy. I try to read a review - totally honest and unbiased! the author promised it! you have to believe! - and instead I get yet another "Beamdog have an agenda and ruining the game" crap (I can not say otherwise). It's getting very tiresome.
I think I've been reasonable in my posts, without attacking anyone, and been called a GGer, a troll, a sock puppet, and maybe a few other things that are neither accurate or particularly nice.
Do not recall saying anything other then "GGers and supporters". Guess, it's a collateral damage of game-conversations these days, when anyone mentioning someone's rights is labeled SJW with the opposite side being labeled GGer. I do not know you and should not have lose my temper and call you names. My apology.
That, in too many cases, seems to be the default attitude towards anyone who hasn't been here long or who has a criticism of the game or Beamdog. Sometimes it may be justified to call people those things, but when it's not, it's going to alienate people who would otherwise support the Baldurs Gate franchise and may have something to contribute.
Completely disagree! You can not find more friendly and newbie supporting community. IF (and it's a very reasonable "if" I'd say) those newbies are not coming here and register for one purpose only - to badmouth the game and developers. (I am not talking about you right now, but about newcomers in general).
And if you simply look at forum right now you will see exactly that - freshly registered people starting their very first topics with "SoD is garbage and Beamdog must dye because of AGENDA!!!". Sorry, it's not criticism, it's not even "I kill you because I love you". It is bashing and trolling at it's worse.
Personal attacks are strictly against the forum rules. If you disagree with an idea do not attack the person presenting it. Bring your arguments to the table and let's have a healthy debate.
I'm here because I care about the games. I'd prefer if you address my posts on their merits, or lack thereof, on their own basis rather than lumping me in with some group.
Sorry, but your "merits" implied that OP had a valuable critic view of the game, which was not the case and right before your post there were several explaining the reasons for that. Hence - the scepticism about your care for the game.
Funny though, how many freshly registered people came here starting their very first posts with declarations "I am not a GGer, but they have a lot of good points!" ... Just a coincidence, I guess.
I think the OP had some things that legitimately are issues for HIM, but he hasn't done the best job of communicating them. Maybe there's a bit of a language barrier.
And he was answered rather politely with pointing out obvious mistakes on his part. Nobody attacked him (besides me and later in the thread) but patiently explained things he did not get.
I don't know. I came here to see how things were going with the SoD expansion and to get some idea about where the 2.0 upgrade is going, changes that might be happening etc.. I found myself in the middle of the controversy, which I've decided I'd really like to avoid at this point since it's all been said.
A very very good sentiment, one I wholeheartedly support! And the reason I was so mad in my posts here in this thread - we all came here to talk about game, yet, found ourselves on the battle ground where you have to search for any topic related to the game-play, not some imaginary controversy. I try to read a review - totally honest and unbiased! the author promised it! you have to believe! - and instead I get yet another "Beamdog have an agenda and ruining the game" crap (I can not say otherwise). It's getting very tiresome.
I think I've been reasonable in my posts, without attacking anyone, and been called a GGer, a troll, a sock puppet, and maybe a few other things that are neither accurate or particularly nice.
Do not recall saying anything other then "GGers and supporters". Guess, it's a collateral damage of game-conversations these days, when anyone mentioning someone's rights is labeled SJW with the opposite side being labeled GGer. I do not know you and should not have lose my temper and call you names. My apology.
That, in too many cases, seems to be the default attitude towards anyone who hasn't been here long or who has a criticism of the game or Beamdog. Sometimes it may be justified to call people those things, but when it's not, it's going to alienate people who would otherwise support the Baldurs Gate franchise and may have something to contribute.
Completely disagree! You can not find more friendly and newbie supporting community. IF (and it's a very reasonable "if" I'd say) those newbies are not coming here and register for one purpose only - to badmouth the game and developers. (I am not talking about you right now, but about newcomers in general).
And if you simply look at forum right now you will see exactly that - freshly registered people starting their very first topics with "SoD is garbage and Beamdog must dye because of AGENDA!!!". Sorry, it's not criticism, it's not even "I kill you because I love you". It is bashing and trolling at it's worse.
There is a lot of bad stuff going on here as far as atmosphere and tone (speaking in general about the forum). I've said before that the game shouldn't be in the middle of all this, and I guess my bigger point is that fighting negativity with negativity will just continue to damage Baldurs Gate and Beamdog. I think it would be better to ignore the trolls. A lot of people just want attention and they rarely even care about the topic.
Which point was that again? "Hathran (Rashemi witches) and their defenders do NOT romance each other." - that's the one, right? It doesn't specifically say anywhere that its forbidden. Therefore, you lied.
Dynaheir STRONGLY suggests it is forbidden, and that she tolerates Minsc. It also is strongly suggested by Rashemi culture. But whatever.
And about that Minsc being a 12-year old equivalent - not true, again. He might be slow, but shows remarkable feats of wit while "charging blindly on" or dealing with Sarevok in Suldanessellar.
I don't think yelling out nonsense counts as "wit". He also talks to a hamster, which begs the question of his mental stability. Granted, it makes him a great character, but he's there for comic relief...as the funny dumb guy. He's the warrior version of Homer Simpson.
Now, since we're sitting here illogically throwing out "it doesn't say that it IS forbidden", then let's try this the other way. Beyond some vague lack of supporting material in your URLs and some bad conjecture on the part of some group of players...where's your ACTUAL proof that Hathrans and their defenders are allowed to romantically link? Please do also avoid logical fallacies while you do so, particularly the inductive fallacy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
abentwookie, same goes to you. I am here. In the topic. Address me directly, why all the condensating?..
Well, like the saying goes, "ask a stupid question........" Do you seriously not realize how absurd your post is to most people who aren't raging reactionary GGer types?
abentwookie, same goes to you. I am here. In the topic. Address me directly, why all the condensating?..
Well, like the saying goes, "ask a stupid question........" Do you seriously not realize how absurd your post is to most people who aren't raging reactionary GGer types?
Labeling me a "GGer" and attacking me like that is contributing to the toxic atmosphere. I'm here because I care about the games. I'd prefer if you address my posts on their merits, or lack thereof, rather than lumping me in with some group.
You claim to be a big fan of the games and yet you just joined the forum after the controversy started.... Interesting.
abentwookie, same goes to you. I am here. In the topic. Address me directly, why all the condensating?..
Well, like the saying goes, "ask a stupid question........" Do you seriously not realize how absurd your post is to most people who aren't raging reactionary GGer types?
I seriously don't, and would like some explanation, please. Strictly topic-wise, as well.
rapsam2003, so you won't even admit you flat out lied. Great.
He is not allowed to have an opinion simply because he joined when the new expansion came out?
Yes but its a bit suspicious when he comes here supporting GG while claiming to be "just a fan of the game" right after all of this starts. At least I was honest when I came here and admitted that I had never even played the games until now. I don't believe he is being honest. For someone who is such a big fan of the game, its amazing that the majority of his posts so far are about the controversy rather than gameplay.
Again, for those not familiar with GamerGate, they have a habit of creating accounts (sockpuppets) in communities to pretend to be either impartial or actual members of the opposing side and yet they will be using all of the standard GG arguments. They have been busted several times for doing this, especially on twitter and forums.
Labeling me a "GGer" and attacking me like that is contributing to the toxic atmosphere. I'm here because I care about the games. I'd prefer if you address my posts on their merits, or lack thereof, rather than lumping me in with some group.
You claim to be a big fan of the games and yet you just joined the forum after the controversy started.... Interesting.
And again....
I am a fan of the game. BG1 was the first PC game I ever bought. I still have the 4 CDs and book/sleeve the discs came in. I played pencil and paper D&D starting in the mid 80s and then got more into 2nd Edition AD&D, which is why I love BG, because it's the best video game interpretation of 2nd Edition rules ever. I didn't care for the later rules editions and just in general preferred when it was all TSR instead of Wizards of the Coast. That's all neither here nor there. I've tried to talk about the game. I didnt care for the 2.0 upgrade when it rolled out, so I came here to see what was up with it. I had no reason to come here before, I was enjoying the EE just fine prior.
I felt Beamdog made a series of bad decisions to put the game in the middle of this GG vs SJW war, none of which have to do with the game. And I don't like the 2.0 UI. I guess that's "trolling" and supporting GG.
You on the other hand have stated you never played BG before and seem to only be here to talk about GG.
He is not allowed to have an opinion simply because he joined when the new expansion came out?
Yes but its a bit suspicious when he comes here supporting GG while claiming to be "just a fan of the game" right after all of this starts. At least I was honest when I came here and admitted that I had never even played the games until now. I don't believe he is being honest. For someone who is such a big fan of the game, its amazing that the majority of his posts so far are about the controversy rather than gameplay.
Again, for those not familiar with GamerGate, they have a habit of creating accounts (sockpuppets) in communities to pretend to be either impartial or actual members of the opposing side and yet they will be using all of the standard GG arguments. They have been busted several times for doing this, especially on twitter and forums.
So arguably you popped over here too then, when the controversy started?
People you really need to stop feeding this troll. Let him play or not. If he has deeply personal problems or delusions that prevent him from enjoying SoD let him refund it or whatever, not everyone can be pleased. But stop feeding him.
Labeling me a "GGer" and attacking me like that is contributing to the toxic atmosphere. I'm here because I care about the games. I'd prefer if you address my posts on their merits, or lack thereof, rather than lumping me in with some group.
You claim to be a big fan of the games and yet you just joined the forum after the controversy started.... Interesting.
Comments
The party you start with depends on your alignement and you can go through the tomb with your party from BG1 if you go through bg1 first. ( A party with safana in it is only assigned to you if you import)
Can we really move on to the part where we go on without you ?
If Safana wasn't a vamp, it might agree with you. But she's horrid (for me) in her femme fatale style. She's the opposite of a feminist.
Are you saying that Beamdog's agenda is towards femme fatales/vamps? That's a new accusation to Beamdog, compared to the others..
sorry, somehow it got posted twice.Funny though, how many freshly registered people came here starting their very first posts with declarations "I am not a GGer, but they have a lot of good points!" ... Just a coincidence, I guess.
I think the OP had some things that legitimately are issues for HIM, but he hasn't done the best job of communicating them. Maybe there's a bit of a language barrier.
I don't know. I came here to see how things were going with the SoD expansion and to get some idea about where the 2.0 upgrade is going, changes that might be happening etc.. I found myself in the middle of the controversy, which I've decided I'd really like to avoid at this point since it's all been said.
I think I've been reasonable in my posts, without attacking anyone, and been called a GGer, a troll, a sock puppet, and maybe a few other things that are neither accurate or particularly nice. That, in too many cases, seems to be the default attitude towards anyone who hasn't been here long or who has a criticism of the game or Beamdog. Sometimes it may be justified to call people those things, but when it's not, it's going to alienate people who would otherwise support the Baldurs Gate franchise and may have something to contribute.
I do not know you and should not have lose my temper and call you names. My apology. Completely disagree! You can not find more friendly and newbie supporting community. IF (and it's a very reasonable "if" I'd say) those newbies are not coming here and register for one purpose only - to badmouth the game and developers. (I am not talking about you right now, but about newcomers in general).
And if you simply look at forum right now you will see exactly that - freshly registered people starting their very first topics with "SoD is garbage and Beamdog must dye because of AGENDA!!!". Sorry, it's not criticism, it's not even "I kill you because I love you". It is bashing and trolling at it's worse.
BG1 > TOSC = the same team.
BG1 > SOD = ........
This is just a friendly reminder for everyone to read the site rules.
Now, since we're sitting here illogically throwing out "it doesn't say that it IS forbidden", then let's try this the other way. Beyond some vague lack of supporting material in your URLs and some bad conjecture on the part of some group of players...where's your ACTUAL proof that Hathrans and their defenders are allowed to romantically link? Please do also avoid logical fallacies while you do so, particularly the inductive fallacy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
I don't think you're helping the situation.
rapsam2003, so you won't even admit you flat out lied. Great.
Again, for those not familiar with GamerGate, they have a habit of creating accounts (sockpuppets) in communities to pretend to be either impartial or actual members of the opposing side and yet they will be using all of the standard GG arguments. They have been busted several times for doing this, especially on twitter and forums.
I am a fan of the game. BG1 was the first PC game I ever bought. I still have the 4 CDs and book/sleeve the discs came in. I played pencil and paper D&D starting in the mid 80s and then got more into 2nd Edition AD&D, which is why I love BG, because it's the best video game interpretation of 2nd Edition rules ever. I didn't care for the later rules editions and just in general preferred when it was all TSR instead of Wizards of the Coast. That's all neither here nor there. I've tried to talk about the game. I didnt care for the 2.0 upgrade when it rolled out, so I came here to see what was up with it. I had no reason to come here before, I was enjoying the EE just fine prior.
I felt Beamdog made a series of bad decisions to put the game in the middle of this GG vs SJW war, none of which have to do with the game. And I don't like the 2.0 UI. I guess that's "trolling" and supporting GG.
You on the other hand have stated you never played BG before and seem to only be here to talk about GG.
Yet I'm the one attacked. Go figure.
Let him play or not. If he has deeply personal problems or delusions that prevent him from enjoying SoD let him refund it or whatever, not everyone can be pleased.
But stop feeding him.
classic
I even have three playlists dedicated to BG, the oldest one being dated 2012:
1
2
3
I was completely open and honest with the topic's first four comments.