People's performance often involves and has a reflection on budget. If an amazing product had been released sales would of been higher which normally triggers bonus and contract extensions. Sub par performance often ends in disciplinary action of some sort. It's how business works. I have to manage people on a daily basis if they don't perform they don't pass the 12 week review. If they pass they still get daily targets and have to be reviewed daily. It's how business works and at the end of the day I'm not at work to make friends. Sounds harsh but I have my own bills to pay and I want my bonus at the end of the year.
I don't think it's fair to talk about product performance without addressing the fact that the single NPC had a huge negative backlash, and that this may have had something to do with that performance.
I also don't think it's fair to talk about these people under assumptions such as "sub par performance often ends in disciplinary action of some sort." There's literally no indication that anyone at Beamdog was disciplined. Only that the people who were laid off were only laid off for budgetary reasons.
I get that you don't like SoD, but that doesn't mean that the negative response SoD received was actually earned, nor does it mean that people didn't blow something minor way out of proportion to get the outrage train moving. Those of us who were on the forum when everyone was complaining about Mizhena saw pretty much every negative thread about SoD either focus on Mizhena specifically, or talked about Mizhena in dog whistles (complaining about PC culture, complaining about having social agendas rammed down people's throats...okay, those are way more obvious than dog whistles). What this means is because a lot of internet rage machines latched onto something they hated about SoD (the trans character) people lost their jobs because of what was largely unearned negative press.
No one has a problem with you not liking the DLC, but you're trying to paint the situation as if things happened differently than they actually did, and that's not helpful.
The writing was all of a sudden tacked-on as a problem the negative posters had at the time when they got more pushback than they were expecting about the trans NPC and the Gamergate joke. They were getting creamed on that front, so had to move the goalposts to a completely different stadium. And my response was to ask what writing in the original Baldur's Gate was so good?? The main problem seemed to be this adolesecent fantasy of Safana people had in their heads. And anything you take from ANY NPC in the first Baldur's Gate is subjective, because they are presented as nothing but one-dimensional fantasy tropes on purpose. Especially minor ones like Safana.
And anything you take from ANY NPC in the first Baldur's Gate is subjective, because they are presented as nothing but one-dimensional fantasy tropes on purpose. Especially minor ones like Safana.
If you put all of Safana's dialogue together in BG1 I'm not sure it makes 20 full sentences. And that's counting her selection sounds. That's why the whole "waaaah our beloved characters have been butchered waaaah waaaah" line of complaints was ridiculous. There's basically nothing to butcher. Also Safana wasn't a terribly popular character to begin with (there's a reason she's a straight villain in her BG2 cameo...)
Well considering a majority of the positive reviews on Steam are even critical on the writing but I guess that was over looked. I wouldn't call a game with 73% rating amazing....
I own SoD and it sits uninstalled collecting digital dust...Money well spent...
Well considering a majority of the positive reviews on Steam are even critical on the writing but I guess that was over looked. I wouldn't call a game with 73% rating amazing....
I own SoD and it sits uninstalled collecting digital dust...Money well spent...
The argument was that the reviews were "more positive". 73% is certainly positive.
Well considering a majority of the positive reviews on Steam are even critical on the writing but I guess that was over looked. I wouldn't call a game with 73% rating amazing....
I own SoD and it sits uninstalled collecting digital dust...Money well spent...
The argument was that the reviews were "more positive". 73% is certainly positive.
Those 300 positive posts still contained people complaining about the writing which is one of the main things I disliked.....we can't all be wrong.
I haven't criticized you or anyone else for disliking the writing. I am pointing out that the majority of negative reviews came from people who very likely did not own a copy of the game in the first place. I also pointed out the one place where you are required to own SOD to review it, the reviews are described as "Mostly positive." I don't think Steam has a percentage rating.
You have no reason to be defensive of your dislike of the writing, because the sheer negativity that hit the game because of Mizhena (and Safana, for that matter) isn't about you (I hope).
However, I wouldn't expect anyone to change their opinions of the writing just because you keep expounding that it was bad. We know you think it was bad. No one is disputing that, nor trying to change your mind. However, others have come to different conclusions.
I am not sure where you're getting the 73% rating as Steam has either positive or negative and no stars or percentages or rating/10 options, so the best you can say is that 27% of the reviewers expressed that they didn't like the game, but not how much. And that 73% of the reviewers expressed that they like the game, but not how much.
Steam describes this as "mostly positive" reviews, which is a sharp contrast to other review venues that don't share Steam's requirements, which I think we can agree were "mostly negative."
Metacritic says the PC version has a 77% score overall from professional reviewers, which is good but not great. One would hope that professional reviewers actually played the game before reviewing it (tbh I'd be surprised if any of them didn't play before reviewing, unlike the user reviews).
I mean, there is no writing of characters to speak of to COMPARE IT TO in Baldur's Gate. The only characters who even have a remotely filled-in story are the ones who end up with you in Irenicus' dungeon at the start of 2 (dead or alive). Jaheira, Minsc, Imoen and Khalid. And then you can throw in Edwin. Everyone else was a one or two note idea at best. Xzar is insane. Safana has a sultry voice. Montaron would as soon slit your throat as look at you. Ajantis is a goody-two shoes. There is no way to compare character writing to the first BG because no actual character development exists until the second game, where they drastically reduced the number of NPCs for a more fleshed out story for each.
The one thing what I don't like about professional reviewers they are biased to a degree. I remember when frozen came out and it got panned by critics. It's not even aimed at critics it's aimed at kids and it got attacked for its so called homosexual agenda.
The best way to get a feel of a product is either via demos or paying out money for it. Unfortunately getting refunds for digital content is pretty much unattainable.
I broke down proffesional game reviews during the crap storm.
The only thing you can trust the average rating for, is the type of game that is being reviewed.
When it comes to reviews it is best to find a reviewer who shares your likes and stick with their personal input on a game.
If they didn't review it, hit any non professional review that averages 6.5-8.5. They always highlight positives and negatives in a game and you can npst likely judge if you will personally like it or not.
The one thing what I don't like about professional reviewers they are biased to a degree. I remember when frozen came out and it got panned by critics. It's not even aimed at critics it's aimed at kids and it got attacked for its so called homosexual agenda.
The best way to get a feel of a product is either via demos or paying out money for it. Unfortunately getting refunds for digital content is pretty much unattainable.
Well, the best movie critics have good things to say about MANY children's films, they just tend to like ones that don't treat kids like idiots and also have alot to offer for adults, since they are both going to be involved in watching them. "Frozen" was a perfectly decent film, I wouldn't have given it glowing reviews. There was a controversy about "Frozen" having a homosexual agenda?? If that's the case, it's further proof that if someone has hang-ups about gay people, they can find a homosexual agenda in pretty much anything. I remember when the Purple Teletubbie was supposedly trying to turn children gay.
Well considering a majority of the positive reviews on Steam are even critical on the writing but I guess that was over looked. I wouldn't call a game with 73% rating amazing....
I own SoD and it sits uninstalled collecting digital dust...Money well spent...
The argument was that the reviews were "more positive". 73% is certainly positive.
Those 300 positive posts still contained people complaining about the writing which is one of the main things I disliked.....we can't all be wrong.
Well, yes we can. No one person is completely right. Every single argument on this forum (and anywhere for that matter) has flaws.
As far as being right or wrong about the writing, I really hesitate to label anyone's assessment as "truth" simply because this is a subjective judgment. I mean some people like it some people don't.
As far as being right or wrong about the writing, I really hesitate to label anyone's assessment as "truth" simply because this is a subjective judgment. I mean some people like it some people don't.
At least you make sensible arguments and willing to accept that others think the game is sub par while not going down the trolling path.
There is some parts of the game I liked like the art and music which I've stated before but some people focus on the easier negative areas to pick apart posts.
I'm amazed and dumbstruck over the relentless need so many people seem to have to always, under any circumstances, express their opinions. it's like they actually believe that they are entitled to do this at all times, anywhere and everywhere. And also their view that those opinions, no matter how hatefully written, should be considered valid and be respected because "freedom of speech", and "it's only the internet, nothing written there mean anything for real". (The latter one I have actually seen after a flametard was confronted after he had written that a certain young girl should die because she was an ugly [courtesan].)
Really, you see it everywhere in "social media 2.0"; on facebook, twitter, any forums witout proper moderation, comment sections on internet newspapers etc etc.. I mean, IMDB recently took the drastic decision to close down their forums boards I think mainly due to all the hate-mongering BS posted there. What is wrong with people today and when did we lose the ability to realize that my freedom to express my views only extends to the point where it doesn't deliberately hurt others?
When I grew up my parents taught me, directly translated from swedish: "If you don't have anything nice to say; say nothing at all".
Here's to hoping social media 3.0 includes this mentality, and to the death of social media 2.0. Cheers.
Edit: and since this is internet and ppl like to misinterpret things I will make it perfectly clear to everyone that this is NOT about constructive criticism. My point is about posts that, for example, deliberately singles out one person out from a company and bashes them personally thinking that's an ok behavior.
I'm amazed and dumbstruck over the relentless need so many people seem to have to always, under any circumstances, express their opinions. it's like they actually believe that they are entitled to do this at all times, anywhere and everywhere. And also their view that those opinions, no matter how hatefully written, should be considered valid and be respected because "freedom of speech", and "it's only the internet, nothing written there mean anything for real".
On the one hand, they [b]are[/b] entitled to voice their opinions at any time on a public forum, even if those opinions are distasteful or demonstrably false. On the other hand, just because someone says something doesn't mean that everyone else has to agree upon the validity of what is being said. I can say things like "I like sardines in mustard sauce for lunch" and, although true, doesn't mean that a lot of people are going to agree with me or even like what I said ("how can you eat that? it's gross").
Your parents taught you "if you have nothing nice to say then say nothing at all" and that is really sound advice to which more people should adhere. A saying I use often is "say what you mean and mean what you say". If you say it on the Internet then anyone who reads it may interpret incorrectly because of slang filters, regional word choice filters, language barriers, etc. "Freedom of speech" does not extend to me telling someone that they are stupid for saying something with which I disagree.
Was the writing in the original Baldur's Gate award-winning dialogue which swept us away with its rich complexities? No. Does that make the game unplayable? Of course not. Will I start over and play it again? Sure, at some point I have no doubt that I will. (I will probably still get Safana, as well--I like her better than Imoen in BG).
Anyway...I digress...as you note--people who single out others (or, in this case, a company, namely Beamdog) and try to rake them over the coals have nothing better to do with their time than to waste everyone's time. If you don't like a game then don't buy it. If you bought it and you don't like it, then uninstall it, contact customer service, and ask for a refund. Seems pretty simple to me.
I'm amazed and dumbstruck over the relentless need so many people seem to have to always, under any circumstances, express their opinions. it's like they actually believe that they are entitled to do this at all times, anywhere and everywhere. And also their view that those opinions, no matter how hatefully written, should be considered valid and be respected because "freedom of speech", and "it's only the internet, nothing written there mean anything for real".
On the one hand, they [b]are[/b] entitled to voice their opinions at any time on a public forum, even if those opinions are distasteful or demonstrably false. On the other hand, just because someone says something doesn't mean that everyone else has to agree upon the validity of what is being said. I can say things like "I like sardines in mustard sauce for lunch" and, although true, doesn't mean that a lot of people are going to agree with me or even like what I said ("how can you eat that? it's gross").
I also said "What is wrong with people today and when did we lose the ability to realize that my freedom to express my views only extends to the point where it doesn't deliberately hurt others?", but I am not going to debate you @Mathsorcerer since I think we actually think very similar. Just wanted to point out that I am very much in favour of free speech itself, but I object to when people use that as an argument to be genuinely mean and disrespectful to others and still expect to be respected themselves afterwards. It's just classic bullying where you think you can get away with something as long as you are in the "crowd".
I believe humans as individuals can be one thing but something very different in groups. This we can see in riots or other type of gang behaviour where people who would not otherwise break the law alone do it when they think they can get away with as just one in a huge crowd of people. It's basic human psyche and we see it on ie soldiers committing horrendous crimes and when asked afterwards just say the got orders, or when hooligans in a crowd who are otherwise civilized humans goes bananas and brutally bash other people in fights because they wear the wrong colors and cheer for the wrong team. To me, the internet gives this same breeding ground; meaning that if too many people are talking trash and acting like douchebags, then new people joining will do the same. A culture of being a dick takes hold and to not be eaten, you start to eat others. Classic human group behaviour.
But we CAN rise above this. Humans have a gift, we can reason, we can move beyond our most basic whims and apply discipline to our actions that defy our most basic impulses. Among this is realizing that our freedom of speech ends where other people might get offended or hurt. And that's my point.
Sorry for this rambling that may be quite off-topic. Just needed to get this of my chest.
One thing that has always amazed me about this is the way folks make it seem like they spent $1000 on these games. Good Lord people! I bought both BGEE's, SOD, and IWDEE for less money than it costs to take my family out for dinner and a movie. It's like going on a rant and flaming a restaurant for years because they cooked your steak wrong once. I don't get it...
One thing that has always amazed me about this is the way folks make it seem like they spent $1000 on these games. Good Lord people! I bought both BGEE's, SOD, and IWDEE for less money than it costs to take my family out for dinner and a movie. It's like going on a rant and flaming a restaurant for years because they cooked your steak wrong once. I don't get it...
I always use Perkins as an example. Sometimes it tastes really good, sometimes it's crap. Then again, I'm the kind of person who has never sent food back, even when I got the entirely wrong order. There is a very serious sense of entitlement in the gaming community that borders on a mass psychosis. For instance, constantly arguing about whether a DLC is worth $15. Let me answer that.....if it's over the length of your average movie, it's worth $15. You own it forever. Once you own a computer or console, a $60 game that provides 50-100 hrs of entertainment is about the cheapest form of entertainment imaginable. Furthermore, if you simply wait 3 or 4 months to buy new games, you can literally double or even triple your gaming budget.
One thing that has always amazed me about this is the way folks make it seem like they spent $1000 on these games. Good Lord people! I bought both BGEE's, SOD, and IWDEE for less money than it costs to take my family out for dinner and a movie. It's like going on a rant and flaming a restaurant for years because they cooked your steak wrong once. I don't get it...
Money spent is money spent regardless of costs. I expect something to work if I pay for it. Don't mind waiting a month or two for a patch but anything longer is a bit of a piss take.
One thing that has always amazed me about this is the way folks make it seem like they spent $1000 on these games. Good Lord people! I bought both BGEE's, SOD, and IWDEE for less money than it costs to take my family out for dinner and a movie. It's like going on a rant and flaming a restaurant for years because they cooked your steak wrong once. I don't get it...
Money spent is money spent regardless of costs. I expect something to work if I pay for it. Don't mind waiting a month or two for a patch but anything longer is a bit of a piss take.
Still don't get it. If you're that pissed about it get a refund and don't buy their product anymore. Ubisoft has pissed me off with what they did to the Heroes of Might and Magic franchise and guess what, I'm done with them. I don't go to their web-site and rant and rave about it though. I have better things to do with my time.
One thing that has always amazed me about this is the way folks make it seem like they spent $1000 on these games. Good Lord people! I bought both BGEE's, SOD, and IWDEE for less money than it costs to take my family out for dinner and a movie. It's like going on a rant and flaming a restaurant for years because they cooked your steak wrong once. I don't get it...
Money spent is money spent regardless of costs. I expect something to work if I pay for it. Don't mind waiting a month or two for a patch but anything longer is a bit of a piss take.
Still don't get it. If you're that pissed about it get a refund and don't buy their product anymore. Ubisoft has pissed me off with what they did to the Heroes of Might and Magic franchise and guess what, I'm done with them. I don't go to their web-site and rant and rave about it though. I have better things to do with my time.
Haven't asked them. I assume so. If not, that's a reason to get angry. I know back in the day of buying games at stores, the policy was no refunds if the box was opened. That made me really cautious about what games to actually purchase (after being burned a few times of course!). I don't know how it works now in the digital age. I'm cautious to the point of hardly buying any games now except ones I know are good. I haven't even bought Pillars of Eternity yet even though I'm fairly sure I'd enjoy it...
"If you do encounter an issue with one of our games, we invite you to contact support@beamdog.com; our team of experts will do their best to help you resolve the issue and get back to playing.
We are committed to fixing any issues you encounter with future patches. If you don't wish to wait for a patch and it has been less than 14 days since you purchased the game, you may ask our support team for an immediate refund. After 14 days, all sales are final."
BTW, we have discussed the return policy in the CE thread at the start of 2017. According to the legislation, Beamdog are entitled to use this return policy, so "there's no reason to get angry."
In all fairness, knowing the policy doesn't mean I won't get angry. I've brought home quite a few games that sucked and couldn't return them. I knew the risk but I still got mad about wasting the money. However, the whole point of my posts have been about what I feel is the over the top reactions of gamers in proportion to the amount of money spent. I got angry but I didn't picket the store or accost people at the entrance and tell them how if they buy anything from that store they're stupid!
I have no beef with Beamdog whatsoever so it's all good...
In all fairness, knowing the policy doesn't mean I won't get angry. I've brought home quite a few games that sucked and couldn't return them. I knew the risk but I still got mad about wasting the money. However, the whole point of my posts have been about what I feel is the over the top reactions of gamers in proportion to the amount of money spent. I got angry but I didn't picket the store or accost people at the entrance and tell them how if they buy anything from that store they're stupid!
I have no beef with Beamdog whatsoever so it's all good...
I get some of the reaction. You do want to voice your displeasure in hopes that the company will at least listen and take it into consideration for the future. A company should learn more from their mistakes than from their successes.
But it is that communication that seems to be lacking on the part of the majority of users. They can just express their anger, and not explain why they are genuinely angry. People can guess, but more often than not, they guess wrong, mislabel the complainer as something they are not and that person storms off with the perception that their issues get brushed aside.
The other coin is the troll argument. It takes a handful to rile up the gullible masses and point their finger and say "it's them!" They'll find the most damning evidence, twist it to their message knowing that people won't fact check it or look deeper than what is presented to them and watch the action unfold. They'll attempt to discredit or accuse any information stating the otherwise. It's a form of power, both over the masses and companies. It's impossible to take this power away, or to delude it as people will believe whatever they want to believe. The finger right now is being pointed at Bioware and Andromeda so the rage against Beamdog isn't as bad now as if they didn't release this soon after ME:A.
Comments
I also don't think it's fair to talk about these people under assumptions such as "sub par performance often ends in disciplinary action of some sort." There's literally no indication that anyone at Beamdog was disciplined. Only that the people who were laid off were only laid off for budgetary reasons.
I get that you don't like SoD, but that doesn't mean that the negative response SoD received was actually earned, nor does it mean that people didn't blow something minor way out of proportion to get the outrage train moving. Those of us who were on the forum when everyone was complaining about Mizhena saw pretty much every negative thread about SoD either focus on Mizhena specifically, or talked about Mizhena in dog whistles (complaining about PC culture, complaining about having social agendas rammed down people's throats...okay, those are way more obvious than dog whistles). What this means is because a lot of internet rage machines latched onto something they hated about SoD (the trans character) people lost their jobs because of what was largely unearned negative press.
No one has a problem with you not liking the DLC, but you're trying to paint the situation as if things happened differently than they actually did, and that's not helpful.
I own SoD and it sits uninstalled collecting digital dust...Money well spent...
You have no reason to be defensive of your dislike of the writing, because the sheer negativity that hit the game because of Mizhena (and Safana, for that matter) isn't about you (I hope).
However, I wouldn't expect anyone to change their opinions of the writing just because you keep expounding that it was bad. We know you think it was bad. No one is disputing that, nor trying to change your mind. However, others have come to different conclusions.
I am not sure where you're getting the 73% rating as Steam has either positive or negative and no stars or percentages or rating/10 options, so the best you can say is that 27% of the reviewers expressed that they didn't like the game, but not how much. And that 73% of the reviewers expressed that they like the game, but not how much.
Steam describes this as "mostly positive" reviews, which is a sharp contrast to other review venues that don't share Steam's requirements, which I think we can agree were "mostly negative."
Metacritic says the PC version has a 77% score overall from professional reviewers, which is good but not great. One would hope that professional reviewers actually played the game before reviewing it (tbh I'd be surprised if any of them didn't play before reviewing, unlike the user reviews).
The best way to get a feel of a product is either via demos or paying out money for it. Unfortunately getting refunds for digital content is pretty much unattainable.
The only thing you can trust the average rating for, is the type of game that is being reviewed.
When it comes to reviews it is best to find a reviewer who shares your likes and stick with their personal input on a game.
If they didn't review it, hit any non professional review that averages 6.5-8.5. They always highlight positives and negatives in a game and you can npst likely judge if you will personally like it or not.
There is some parts of the game I liked like the art and music which I've stated before but some people focus on the easier negative areas to pick apart posts.
Really, you see it everywhere in "social media 2.0"; on facebook, twitter, any forums witout proper moderation, comment sections on internet newspapers etc etc.. I mean, IMDB recently took the drastic decision to close down their forums boards I think mainly due to all the hate-mongering BS posted there. What is wrong with people today and when did we lose the ability to realize that my freedom to express my views only extends to the point where it doesn't deliberately hurt others?
When I grew up my parents taught me, directly translated from swedish: "If you don't have anything nice to say; say nothing at all".
Here's to hoping social media 3.0 includes this mentality, and to the death of social media 2.0. Cheers.
Edit: and since this is internet and ppl like to misinterpret things I will make it perfectly clear to everyone that this is NOT about constructive criticism. My point is about posts that, for example, deliberately singles out one person out from a company and bashes them personally thinking that's an ok behavior.
Your parents taught you "if you have nothing nice to say then say nothing at all" and that is really sound advice to which more people should adhere. A saying I use often is "say what you mean and mean what you say". If you say it on the Internet then anyone who reads it may interpret incorrectly because of slang filters, regional word choice filters, language barriers, etc. "Freedom of speech" does not extend to me telling someone that they are stupid for saying something with which I disagree.
Was the writing in the original Baldur's Gate award-winning dialogue which swept us away with its rich complexities? No. Does that make the game unplayable? Of course not. Will I start over and play it again? Sure, at some point I have no doubt that I will. (I will probably still get Safana, as well--I like her better than Imoen in BG).
Anyway...I digress...as you note--people who single out others (or, in this case, a company, namely Beamdog) and try to rake them over the coals have nothing better to do with their time than to waste everyone's time. If you don't like a game then don't buy it. If you bought it and you don't like it, then uninstall it, contact customer service, and ask for a refund. Seems pretty simple to me.
I believe humans as individuals can be one thing but something very different in groups. This we can see in riots or other type of gang behaviour where people who would not otherwise break the law alone do it when they think they can get away with as just one in a huge crowd of people. It's basic human psyche and we see it on ie soldiers committing horrendous crimes and when asked afterwards just say the got orders, or when hooligans in a crowd who are otherwise civilized humans goes bananas and brutally bash other people in fights because they wear the wrong colors and cheer for the wrong team. To me, the internet gives this same breeding ground; meaning that if too many people are talking trash and acting like douchebags, then new people joining will do the same. A culture of being a dick takes hold and to not be eaten, you start to eat others. Classic human group behaviour.
But we CAN rise above this. Humans have a gift, we can reason, we can move beyond our most basic whims and apply discipline to our actions that defy our most basic impulses. Among this is realizing that our freedom of speech ends where other people might get offended or hurt. And that's my point.
Sorry for this rambling that may be quite off-topic. Just needed to get this of my chest.
Cheers all, remain ever excellent.
I know back in the day of buying games at stores, the policy was no refunds if the box was opened. That made me really cautious about what games to actually purchase (after being burned a few times of course!). I don't know how it works now in the digital age. I'm cautious to the point of hardly buying any games now except ones I know are good. I haven't even bought Pillars of Eternity yet even though I'm fairly sure I'd enjoy it...
"If you do encounter an issue with one of our games, we invite you to contact support@beamdog.com; our team of experts will do their best to help you resolve the issue and get back to playing.
We are committed to fixing any issues you encounter with future patches. If you don't wish to wait for a patch and it has been less than 14 days since you purchased the game, you may ask our support team for an immediate refund. After 14 days, all sales are final."
BTW, we have discussed the return policy in the CE thread at the start of 2017. According to the legislation, Beamdog are entitled to use this return policy, so "there's no reason to get angry."
I have no beef with Beamdog whatsoever so it's all good...
But it is that communication that seems to be lacking on the part of the majority of users. They can just express their anger, and not explain why they are genuinely angry. People can guess, but more often than not, they guess wrong, mislabel the complainer as something they are not and that person storms off with the perception that their issues get brushed aside.
The other coin is the troll argument. It takes a handful to rile up the gullible masses and point their finger and say "it's them!" They'll find the most damning evidence, twist it to their message knowing that people won't fact check it or look deeper than what is presented to them and watch the action unfold. They'll attempt to discredit or accuse any information stating the otherwise. It's a form of power, both over the masses and companies. It's impossible to take this power away, or to delude it as people will believe whatever they want to believe. The finger right now is being pointed at Bioware and Andromeda so the rage against Beamdog isn't as bad now as if they didn't release this soon after ME:A.