How can you rate this game with a 10/10 with a clear face? Advertised as having multiplayer - not working. New hardcore mode - bugged. Crashes to desktop - yes. Mod compatibility lost - yes. Bunch of changes nobody asked for and most seem to hate - yes.
Regardless of how your feelings for SoD/Beamdog/devs are the game isn't remotely near to perfect score. Those 10/10 reviews are just as bad as 0/10, since they appear as nothing more than really bad advertising. If somebody gave it a 4-5, I'd consider the review to be fairly legit. Anything over a 6 is pushing it, anything lower than 2 is just as wrong. The way PR was/is handled surely isn't helping either.
Well, how would you feel if one day Beamdog decided to change Minsc into a woman for absolutely no other reason than to push forward their political agenda?
Let's assume they did... what kind of political agenda would that be?
More female representation in the games we play. That was the excuse they used for changing Thor into a woman.
That sounds like a good thing to me friend.
Yes, I absolutely agree. I also want more female representations in the games we are playing. The goal is not an issue. The problem is how do you get to that goal? Do you get there by changing existing characters into females, which is bound to rub some people off the wrong way, or do you do it by creating new content. GGers like me want new content! SJWs want to change existing characters into women. Dont you see how this might be a problem???
I think you might be misrepresenting the issue a bit my friend. I'm sure the "SJWs" would be happy with more female characters and probably prefer that to changing male characters into women. If we all have the same goal then I think we can work positively towards that goal, as pals.
As for your Thor example the legends feature Thor and Loki turning into women or dressing as women on several occasions so I don't see him becoming a woman in a comic book to be that out of place. Perhaps it would be a good opportunity to explore a new side of the character?
Well, how would you feel if one day Beamdog decided to change Minsc into a woman for absolutely no other reason than to push forward their political agenda?
Let's assume they did... what kind of political agenda would that be?
More female representation in the games we play. That was the excuse they used for changing Thor into a woman. Now they are pushing to change Link into a girl. There was also a push to change Samus from Metroid prime into a transgender person.
Link isn't being made a girl. There is a girl VERSION of Link now. In a mythology that consists of multiple Links, on multiple timelines, in multiple realities, it is in no way out of place. Again, if Link was made into a Goron for one game, no one would care. But because it is a chick, sexist people complain. It's that simple.
That is the argument SJWs use, but its completely false. While its true that there have been multiple Links, it is also true he has always been a male. Fine me one game in which Link is female.
*Sigh*... I give up. If you dont see how changing Batman into a female might rub off some people the wrong way, I dont know what to tell you. And to call that sexist, even when the person says he supports representations of women in gaming... wow.. .just wow... I guess next thing will be calling people sexists for eating a pan cake with strawberry sauce.
Yes, I absolutely agree. I also want more female representations in the games we are playing. The goal is not an issue. The problem is how do you get to that goal? Do you get there by changing existing characters into females, which is bound to rub some people off the wrong way, or do you do it by creating new content. GGers like me want new content! SJWs want to change existing characters into women. Dont you see how this might be a problem???
Oh I think pretty much everyone here gets your concern. We're just wondering what you are doing HERE since nothing has really changed in BG...
Yes, exactly. No one is getting changed.
AND, I just proved your previous hypothesis wrong, Redknight - Thor and Link aren't being changed - with no response for you. One is an alternate reality Link, another is a temporary Thor.
What did they do that is illegal? Oh my god! They said they didnt like the game. Here it is again! Censor the internet! Dont allow people to post their opinions! Wow... its like I am living in Orwell's 1984 or something.
Don't lye, please. They started a crusade to destroy scores in user-review section on several major critic-sites. And should you read my post you would notice the words "borderline" and "internet mobbing". Your GGers did not "didnt like the game" - they did not like the interview and one character in the game, which they heard is transsexual (most people who played did not noticed that character). They did not even play the game, yet, they pretended they found game bad.
Cowardness, mobbing (which includes cowardness, of course), bulling. You would not do that IRL, but you do allow yourself to do it in internet.
Some mentioned PoE and that joke about trans that was removed. Good example - when trans (SJW, LGBT supporters) felt offended they came to media (Twitter, FB and so on) and TALKED openly what did not they like and why. They did not try to ruin the scores of PoE pretending the game is bad, they did not bash the joker or developers. And this is how you handle things.
I'm sure many of the games I enjoy are developed by people who have views that I would strongly disagree with - but they don't push their agenda in the game, and they don't brag about it in interviews and on forums.
See... this is where I have trouble following people. I see offensive things in videogames, books, movies, etc. all the time. Just recently I played a mediocre game called "Remember Me" and thought the first chapter's depiction of the female protagonist was an objectifying one.
And you know what I did? Nothing. I rolled my eyes at the content I found disagreeable and I evaluated the rest of the game on its merits. It would never have occurred to me to leave a 0 review or wage war on the developers, because they're just *people* who made some content that wasn't to my taste. Could you imagine if everyone responded to content they didn't like by trying to run its creator of of business?
If you think the backlash to this has been overblown, I would encourage you to do the right thing and stand up against these people even if you happen to agree with them: write an honest review that evaluates the game on the other 99.99% of its content, even if it's negative. There's right and there's wrong no matter which side of the fence you're on.
You know the GGer's would say that the SJW's ruin stuff they like all the time? Both sides make good points, and both sides really suck.
Beamdog, to their shame, should have never needled the beast. Baldur's Gate is the thing that's going to suffer.
If you have experienced having your game ruined because an angry group of people who have never played the game didn't like some small thing that was in it.........then you shouldn't be condoning that behavior now either. It's fundamentally wrong to try and destroy someone else's experience because you don't like a tiny part of what's in it. It's wrong when other people do it and it's wrong now.
I don't condone it. But it goes both ways. Beamdog started this. A lot of GG'er had their experienced ruined. And saying it's a small thing is subjective. Clearly it's not small to a lot of people.
Beamdog should have never gotten involved. I blame them. GG'ers and SJW's just gonna do what they do.
No, it doesn't go both ways. If I tell you a joke that offends you, it's ON YOU if you overreact and try to kill me over it.
Nobody is killing anyone. That is a terrible analogy. Beamdog hit the GG community in such a way that they felt the sting. The only way GG can return the favor so that Beamdog can feel the sting is by what they are doing right now. I dont like it, since I want BG to sell well, but I understand GG reaction. And believe me it is mild in comparison to what SJWs have been pulling.
Why do you have to react at all? Why not simply move on? Not everything needs to be approached as a great battle my friend, no matter how much Tempus wills it.
Because I have seen SJWs ruin things over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. Now they are infiltrating BG... my favorite game of all time and if they win this war, Baldur's Gate will be dead. It will become a shell of what it once was.
I'm not trying to be dense here friend but could you explain to me in what way things have been "ruined" by "SJWs" or what you fear will happen to Baldur's Gate? I've only come across some fairly inoffensive things in the expansion so far but perhaps I didn't see the right things?
Well, how would you feel if one day Beamdog decided to change Minsc into a woman for absolutely no other reason than to push forward their political agenda? They have done that to Thor in the comic industry. Fans of original lost their mind. They said: "Build a new character if you want more female representation in the comic industry, but dont change the existing content." SJWs response was: "People are hating on our new comics because they hate women." People who were misrepresented got pissed and arguing started and now the comic book community is divided.
Now, you might say: "Beamdog would never do that!" But, here is the thing with SJWs. They are never happy! You give them a finger and they will take the hand. Its happened in comics, it happened in every media they touched, its happening in gaming as we speak and they wont rest until they get what they want - which just happens to be completely opposite of what most people want.
That is just one example. I gave more examples in my long post earlier and I dont feel like repeating myself. Go read it.
Your example sucks, because Thor isn't a woman in the comics. They didn't magically gender-bend Thor. He was unworthy of the hammer, so it abandoned him for a beloved female character fully entrenched in the mythos of Thor. This is in no way PERMANENT. A few years back Batman died and Dick became Batman, and no one made this kind of hullaballoo, but they do when they're female. THIS is why people see this criticism as SEXIST. When Spidey was replaced by Doc Ock, people rightly lost their shit because it was a bad guy taking over a beloved character. People lost their shit because the hammer of Thor went to a woman FOR A TEMPORARY STORYLINE. That's sexist, end of story.
If the made Minsc a trans person or a woman or something, hey, I'd probably be right here with you saying how stupid Beamdog are. But they didn't do anything of the sort. They haven't ruined a thing.
People oppose it because its driven by political agenda. That is the problem. I have said that multiple times, yet here you are arguing with your own strawmen. Yes, you can rationalize the change however you want. Hell, I bet you could make a story about Minsc becoming a woman, considering Fearun has items that would allow for such a change. Thats not the problem. Problem is that we are living in an age where you have political activists doing these sorts of changes for no other reason than to "bring diversity" and then they pretend its sexism when people dont like the changes.
Yes, I absolutely agree. I also want more female representations in the games we are playing. The goal is not an issue. The problem is how do you get to that goal? Do you get there by changing existing characters into females, which is bound to rub some people off the wrong way, or do you do it by creating new content. GGers like me want new content! SJWs want to change existing characters into women. Dont you see how this might be a problem???
Oh I think pretty much everyone here gets your concern. We're just wondering what you are doing HERE since nothing has really changed in BG...
I am not saying Beamdog is guilty of these things, but the way that Kotaku interview came off it sounded like Amber Scott wanted to change Jaheira and Safana to make them more politically correct. That is what people are reacting to. And of course people who disagree with this SJW narrative flipped their shit after reading that interview. I dont understand what is so difficult to understand here.
See... this is where I have trouble following people. I see offensive things in videogames, books, movies, etc. all the time. Just recently I played a mediocre game called "Remember Me" and thought the first chapter's depiction of the female protagonist was an objectifying one.
And you know what I did? Nothing. I rolled my eyes at the content I found disagreeable and I evaluated the rest of the game on its merits. It would never have occurred to me to leave a 0 review or wage war on the developers, because they're just *people* who made some content that wasn't to my taste. Could you imagine if everyone responded to content they didn't like by trying to run its creator of of business?
If you think the backlash to this has been overblown, I would encourage you to do the right thing and stand up against these people even if you happen to agree with them: write an honest review that evaluates the game on the other 99.99% of its content, even if it's negative. There's right and there's wrong no matter which side of the fence you're on.
You know the GGer's would say that the SJW's ruin stuff they like all the time? Both sides make good points, and both sides really suck.
Beamdog, to their shame, should have never needled the beast. Baldur's Gate is the thing that's going to suffer.
If you have experienced having your game ruined because an angry group of people who have never played the game didn't like some small thing that was in it.........then you shouldn't be condoning that behavior now either. It's fundamentally wrong to try and destroy someone else's experience because you don't like a tiny part of what's in it. It's wrong when other people do it and it's wrong now.
I don't condone it. But it goes both ways. Beamdog started this. A lot of GG'er had their experienced ruined. And saying it's a small thing is subjective. Clearly it's not small to a lot of people.
Beamdog should have never gotten involved. I blame them. GG'ers and SJW's just gonna do what they do.
No, it doesn't go both ways. If I tell you a joke that offends you, it's ON YOU if you overreact and try to kill me over it.
Nobody is killing anyone. That is a terrible analogy. Beamdog hit the GG community in such a way that they felt the sting. The only way GG can return the favor so that Beamdog can feel the sting is by what they are doing right now. I dont like it, since I want BG to sell well, but I understand GG reaction. And believe me it is mild in comparison to what SJWs have been pulling.
Why do you have to react at all? Why not simply move on? Not everything needs to be approached as a great battle my friend, no matter how much Tempus wills it.
Because I have seen SJWs ruin things over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. Now they are infiltrating BG... my favorite game of all time and if they win this war, Baldur's Gate will be dead. It will become a shell of what it once was.
I'm not trying to be dense here friend but could you explain to me in what way things have been "ruined" by "SJWs" or what you fear will happen to Baldur's Gate? I've only come across some fairly inoffensive things in the expansion so far but perhaps I didn't see the right things?
Well, how would you feel if one day Beamdog decided to change Minsc into a woman for absolutely no other reason than to push forward their political agenda? They have done that to Thor in the comic industry. Fans of original lost their mind. They said: "Build a new character if you want more female representation in the comic industry, but dont change the existing content." SJWs response was: "People are hating on our new comics because they hate women." People who were misrepresented got pissed and arguing started and now the comic book community is divided.
Now, you might say: "Beamdog would never do that!" But, here is the thing with SJWs. They are never happy! You give them a finger and they will take the hand. Its happened in comics, it happened in every media they touched, its happening in gaming as we speak and they wont rest until they get what they want - which just happens to be completely opposite of what most people want.
That is just one example. I gave more examples in my long post earlier and I dont feel like repeating myself. Go read it.
Your example sucks, because Thor isn't a woman in the comics. They didn't magically gender-bend Thor. He was unworthy of the hammer, so it abandoned him for a beloved female character fully entrenched in the mythos of Thor. This is in no way PERMANENT. A few years back Batman died and Dick became Batman, and no one made this kind of hullaballoo, but they do when they're female. THIS is why people see this criticism as SEXIST. When Spidey was replaced by Doc Ock, people rightly lost their shit because it was a bad guy taking over a beloved character. People lost their shit because the hammer of Thor went to a woman FOR A TEMPORARY STORYLINE. That's sexist, end of story.
If the made Minsc a trans person or a woman or something, hey, I'd probably be right here with you saying how stupid Beamdog are. But they didn't do anything of the sort. They haven't ruined a thing.
People oppose it because its driven by political agenda. That is the problem. I have said that multiple times, yet here you are arguing with your own strawmen. Yes, you can rationalize the change however you want. Hell, I bet you could make a story about Minsc becoming a woman, considering Fearun has items that would allow for such a change. Thats not the problem. Problem is that we are living in an age where you have political activists doing these sorts of changes for no other reason than to "bring diversity" and then they pretend its sexism when people dont like the changes.
Oh, but then its racism, no matter that these same people would be equally pissed if they changed Black Panther into a white dude.
Um, well, yeah... it is racist. Spidey has been changed BEFORE. SEVERAL TIMES. And no one made a media circus of it until he was black. That is the point. Stop living in a fantasy world where the people who bitch about this stuff have the best intentions.
And if you're still spouting this crap about comic books characters not being used for a political agenda, you clearly have 0 concept of the medium's history. CAPTAIN AMERICA'S FIRST APPEARANCE HAD HIM SOCKING HITLER IN THE JAW.
IRON MAN FOUGHT COMMUNISTS
X-MEN WERE CIVIL RIGHTS ACTIVISTS
BLACK PANTHER IS NAMED AFTER A BLACK RIGHTS GROUP
THE SUPERHUMAN REGISTRATION ACT IS A COMMENT ON THE PATRIOT ACT
AND THOR IS A WOMAN FOR A SHORT TIME FOR THE CAUSE OF FEMINISM
WELCOME TO COMICS
These stories do not exist in a vacuum. They are influenced and changed by the world around them. Green Lantern used to get his power from magic; when magic when out of vogue and science fiction became big in the 50s, he was completely changed to a fighter pilot with sci-fi technology. Same for Flash.
These changes are celebrated. Changes involving women and minorities aren't (by certain people). That's bigotry.
What did they do that is illegal? Oh my god! They said they didnt like the game. Here it is again! Censor the internet! Dont allow people to post their opinions! Wow... its like I am living in Orwell's 1984 or something.
Don't lye, please. They started a crusade to destroy scores in user-review section on several major critic-sites. And should you read my post you would notice the words "borderline" and "internet mobbing". Your GGers did not "didnt like the game" - they did not like the interview and one character in the game, which they heard is transsexual (most people who played did not noticed that character). They did not even play the game, yet, they pretended they found game bad.
Cowardness, mobbing (which includes cowardness, of course), bulling. You would not do that IRL, but you do allow yourself to do it in internet.
Some mentioned PoE and that joke about trans that was removed. Good example - when trans (SJW, LGBT supporters) felt offended they came to media (Twitter, FB and so on) and TALKED openly what did not they like and why. They did not try to ruin the scores of PoE pretending the game is bad, they did not bash the joker or developers. And this is how you handle things.
I would agree with you if you said that downvoting a game you have not played is a dick move. But you want the govrenment to make it illegal. Thats just sick! This is something Metacritic should fix - not get the government involved by censoring the whole internet. Trust me,... you dont want the government to control the internet. That would be bad for everyone.
I dont approve of what GGers are doing to Beamdog for what seem to be trivial and non-existent reasons, but Beamdog made it worse by choosing to be as divisive as possible in their comments on this whole affair, which only made things worse after the interview. i also understand GGers. Unlike the feminist SJW mob, they dont have the support of the mainstream media, so they use guerilla tactics in order to achieve their goals and send the message.
People oppose it because its driven by political agenda. That is the problem. I have said that multiple times, yet here you are arguing with your own strawmen. Yes, you can rationalize the change however you want. Hell, I bet you could make a story about Minsc becoming a woman, considering Fearun has items that would allow for such a change. Thats not the problem. Problem is that we are living in an age where you have political activists doing these sorts of changes for no other reason than to "bring diversity" and then they pretend its sexism when people dont like the changes.
Well I was there when they changed Starbuck in the Battlestar Galactica reboot and the outrage over that was blatandly sexism of the 'Starbuck can't be a girl' kind. It is really simple, is there a profound reason why a character can't be a woman? If no then the criticism about changing the character is most likely not about the character itself, but about it being a woman and that is indeed rather sexist
See... this is where I have trouble following people. I see offensive things in videogames, books, movies, etc. all the time. Just recently I played a mediocre game called "Remember Me" and thought the first chapter's depiction of the female protagonist was an objectifying one.
And you know what I did? Nothing. I rolled my eyes at the content I found disagreeable and I evaluated the rest of the game on its merits. It would never have occurred to me to leave a 0 review or wage war on the developers, because they're just *people* who made some content that wasn't to my taste. Could you imagine if everyone responded to content they didn't like by trying to run its creator of of business?
If you think the backlash to this has been overblown, I would encourage you to do the right thing and stand up against these people even if you happen to agree with them: write an honest review that evaluates the game on the other 99.99% of its content, even if it's negative. There's right and there's wrong no matter which side of the fence you're on.
You know the GGer's would say that the SJW's ruin stuff they like all the time? Both sides make good points, and both sides really suck.
Beamdog, to their shame, should have never needled the beast. Baldur's Gate is the thing that's going to suffer.
If you have experienced having your game ruined because an angry group of people who have never played the game didn't like some small thing that was in it.........then you shouldn't be condoning that behavior now either. It's fundamentally wrong to try and destroy someone else's experience because you don't like a tiny part of what's in it. It's wrong when other people do it and it's wrong now.
I don't condone it. But it goes both ways. Beamdog started this. A lot of GG'er had their experienced ruined. And saying it's a small thing is subjective. Clearly it's not small to a lot of people.
Beamdog should have never gotten involved. I blame them. GG'ers and SJW's just gonna do what they do.
No, it doesn't go both ways. If I tell you a joke that offends you, it's ON YOU if you overreact and try to kill me over it.
Nobody is killing anyone. That is a terrible analogy. Beamdog hit the GG community in such a way that they felt the sting. The only way GG can return the favor so that Beamdog can feel the sting is by what they are doing right now. I dont like it, since I want BG to sell well, but I understand GG reaction. And believe me it is mild in comparison to what SJWs have been pulling.
Why do you have to react at all? Why not simply move on? Not everything needs to be approached as a great battle my friend, no matter how much Tempus wills it.
Because I have seen SJWs ruin things over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. Now they are infiltrating BG... my favorite game of all time and if they win this war, Baldur's Gate will be dead. It will become a shell of what it once was.
I'm not trying to be dense here friend but could you explain to me in what way things have been "ruined" by "SJWs" or what you fear will happen to Baldur's Gate? I've only come across some fairly inoffensive things in the expansion so far but perhaps I didn't see the right things?
Well, how would you feel if one day Beamdog decided to change Minsc into a woman for absolutely no other reason than to push forward their political agenda? They have done that to Thor in the comic industry. Fans of original lost their mind. They said: "Build a new character if you want more female representation in the comic industry, but dont change the existing content." SJWs response was: "People are hating on our new comics because they hate women." People who were misrepresented got pissed and arguing started and now the comic book community is divided.
Now, you might say: "Beamdog would never do that!" But, here is the thing with SJWs. They are never happy! You give them a finger and they will take the hand. Its happened in comics, it happened in every media they touched, its happening in gaming as we speak and they wont rest until they get what they want - which just happens to be completely opposite of what most people want.
That is just one example. I gave more examples in my long post earlier and I dont feel like repeating myself. Go read it.
Your example sucks, because Thor isn't a woman in the comics. They didn't magically gender-bend Thor. He was unworthy of the hammer, so it abandoned him for a beloved female character fully entrenched in the mythos of Thor. This is in no way PERMANENT. A few years back Batman died and Dick became Batman, and no one made this kind of hullaballoo, but they do when they're female. THIS is why people see this criticism as SEXIST. When Spidey was replaced by Doc Ock, people rightly lost their shit because it was a bad guy taking over a beloved character. People lost their shit because the hammer of Thor went to a woman FOR A TEMPORARY STORYLINE. That's sexist, end of story.
If the made Minsc a trans person or a woman or something, hey, I'd probably be right here with you saying how stupid Beamdog are. But they didn't do anything of the sort. They haven't ruined a thing.
People oppose it because its driven by political agenda. That is the problem. I have said that multiple times, yet here you are arguing with your own strawmen. Yes, you can rationalize the change however you want. Hell, I bet you could make a story about Minsc becoming a woman, considering Fearun has items that would allow for such a change. Thats not the problem. Problem is that we are living in an age where you have political activists doing these sorts of changes for no other reason than to "bring diversity" and then they pretend its sexism when people dont like the changes.
Oh, but then its racism, no matter that these same people would be equally pissed if they changed Black Panther into a white dude.
Um, well, yeah... it is racist. Spidey has been changed BEFORE. SEVERAL TIMES. And no one made a media circus of it until he was black. That is the point. Stop living in a fantasy world where the people who bitch about this stuff have the best intentions.
And if you're still spouting this crap about comic books characters not being used for a political agenda, you clearly have 0 concept of the medium's history. CAPTAIN AMERICA'S FIRST APPEARANCE HAD HIM SOCKING HITLER IN THE JAW.
IRON MAN FOUGHT COMMUNISTS
X-MEN WERE CIVIL RIGHTS ACTIVISTS
BLACK PANTHER IS NAMED AFTER A BLACK RIGHTS GROUP
THE SUPERHUMAN REGISTRATION ACT IS A COMMENT ON THE PATRIOT ACT
AND THOR IS A WOMAN FOR A SHORT TIME FOR THE CAUSE OF FEMINISM
WELCOME TO COMICS
These stories do not exist in a vacuum. They are influenced and changed by the world around them. Green Lantern used to get his power from magic; when magic when out of vogue and science fiction became big in the 50s, he was completely changed to a fighter pilot with sci-fi technology. Same for Flash.
These changes are celebrated. Changes involving women and minorities aren't (by certain people). That's bigotry.
Of course they dont exist in the vacuum, and yes spidey was changed before and people didnt like that change either. Even Stan Lee - the greatest comic book artist of the last century - the guy who created Spiderman and many other superheroes - both female and black - said he wants to remember the characters as they were! Is he also racist for disagreeing with your feminist SJW opinion?
On the subject of Thor, I actually loved the idea of Thor being female. It would have been perfectly fine by me. But because it *was* politically driven, the inherent personality of this Thor feels politically driven and even sometimes misandrist. That is the part that not okay.
Things like this...:
...Are not okay. Or this...
This is what people keep referring to as a "straw man" a dramatized example of an enemy that is obviously wrong, and can easily be proven wrong. ('knocking down the straw man') but then using that same straw man as the allegory for people who criticize your writing. (Like in a political comic, they draw everyone who disagrees as fat/stupid/ugly, etc.)
The character is sexist, yet uses similar, kinda/almost/maybe/but not quite, the same arguments that people that disagree with me do, ergo the people who disagree with me are the same, aka 'sexist'.
People oppose it because its driven by political agenda. That is the problem. I have said that multiple times, yet here you are arguing with your own strawmen. Yes, you can rationalize the change however you want. Hell, I bet you could make a story about Minsc becoming a woman, considering Fearun has items that would allow for such a change. Thats not the problem. Problem is that we are living in an age where you have political activists doing these sorts of changes for no other reason than to "bring diversity" and then they pretend its sexism when people dont like the changes.
Well I was there when they changed Starbuck in the Battlestar Galactica reboot and the outrage over that was blatandly sexism of the 'Starbuck can't be a girl' kind. It is really simple, is there a profound reason why a character can't be a woman? If no then the criticism about changing the character is most likely not about the character itself, but about it being a woman and that is indeed rather sexist
Again... the problem is changing characters for political reasons. Maybe it doesnt bother you, but it does bother some people. Ok, we have a difference of opinion, but WHY do you SJW types have this need to then call people who disagree with your view as sexist?
How is it sexist to dislike the change, because its not true to the original? Where is sexism in this argument? I like the content to be true to the original interpretation of the character. SJWs: OMFG! THATS SO SEXIST!
ts this preachy moral highground attitude that pisses people off about you people.
ts this preachy moral highground attitude that pisses people off about you people.
Then why the hell are you still here.
You've said your piece. Clearly, you're not finding a lot of sympathy for your position. So you keep saying your piece. No one's going to switch sides here. Considering you joined this forum yesterday, maybe this isn't where you need to be. If this is SJW Central, then you don't belong here, right? Get gone.
On the subject of Thor, I actually loved the idea of Thor being female. It would have been perfectly fine by me. But because it *was* politically driven, the inherent personality of this Thor feels politically driven and even sometimes misandrist. That's the part that not okay.
Things like this...:
...Are not okay. Or this...
This is what people keep referring to as a "straw man" a dramatized example of an enemy that is obviously wrong, and can easily be proven wrong. ('knocking down the straw man') but then using that same straw man as the allegory for people who criticize your writing. (Like in a political comic, they draw everyone who disagrees as fat/stupid/ugly, etc.)
These changes are celebrated. Changes involving women and minorities aren't (by certain people). That's bigotry.
This is just Bullshit...everytime especialy with established Characters there is a HUGE amount of skepsis involved when Characters change just the Person portraing the Character...just think of the Discussions that popt up when Affleck was casted as the new Batman, or when it was known who would be the next Spiderman, or James Bond...Actors like Pierce Brosnan left such a great mark on Characters, that when Daniel Craig was cast they had to point out how much closer he is to the Book-Character James Bond than Brosnan so Fans would shut up. And those are just minor changes. New Interpretations have to stand the test before Fans every Singel Time. If you want examples from Video Games see what Fans thought about the change from Snake to Raiden in Metal Gear back in Metal Gear 2. Changing of Characters is ALWAYs very risky even with minor changes.
ts this preachy moral highground attitude that pisses people off about you people.
Then why the hell are you still here.
You've said your piece. Clearly, you're not finding a lot of sympathy for your position. So you keep saying your piece. No one's going to switch sides here. Considering you joined this forum yesterday, maybe this isn't where you need to be. If this is SJW Central, then you don't belong here, right? Get gone.
I dunno, I agree with @RedKnight, and I've been here a while. Guess I don't belong here either?
I am not saying Beamdog is guilty of these things, but the way that Kotaku interview came off it sounded like Amber Scott wanted to change Jaheira and Safana to make them more politically correct. That is what people are reacting to. And of course people who disagree with this SJW narrative flipped their shit after reading that interview. I dont understand what is so difficult to understand here.
I guess that what is so difficult to understand is why people are writing extremely controversial ratings all across the internet based on how that interview "came off"... tell me, what is your impression of Jaheira and Safana after playing the game? have their personalities changed? … and if yes, how?
If you agree that Beamdog is SJWing - and you're aware of the fact that they have WotC's backing on this - then the same question applies: what are you doing here? Why be part of a board if you believe the people running it are disrespecting or vilifying your beliefs?
If you agree that Beamdog is SJWing - and you're aware of the fact that they have WotC's backing on this - then the same question applies: what are you doing here? Why be part of a board if you believe the people running it are disrespecting or vilifying your beliefs?
Friends perhaps you can tell me why "political correctness" is considered a bad thing.
It creates an atmosphere where people are afraid to express their opinions and have to self-censor in order to not be attacked.
Those who uphold the tenants of free speech must do so for even those they disagree with, because tomorrow, it may be your own beliefs that are not deemed politically correct.
(I should point out now: I agree with open discourse. I disagree with the changes they made to the characters in BG. I disagree with the review bombing going on as well, because it is way too heavy handed and will cause more damage than good.)
People oppose it because its driven by political agenda. That is the problem. I have said that multiple times, yet here you are arguing with your own strawmen. Yes, you can rationalize the change however you want. Hell, I bet you could make a story about Minsc becoming a woman, considering Fearun has items that would allow for such a change. Thats not the problem. Problem is that we are living in an age where you have political activists doing these sorts of changes for no other reason than to "bring diversity" and then they pretend its sexism when people dont like the changes.
Well I was there when they changed Starbuck in the Battlestar Galactica reboot and the outrage over that was blatandly sexism of the 'Starbuck can't be a girl' kind. It is really simple, is there a profound reason why a character can't be a woman? If no then the criticism about changing the character is most likely not about the character itself, but about it being a woman and that is indeed rather sexist
Again... the problem is changing characters.
Oh please, using again the BSG example, the fact that it is a reboot and another actor is cast and other writers are brought on a project already changes a character. If the new Starbuck had been male, the character would also have been changed from the original. Changing a character in a story that is being retold is inevitable, simply because we as humans and as a society change and our culture reflects that.
So indeed if the complaint about a character being changed into a woman is just because the character is being changed into a woman, that is indeed rather sexist.
Maybe it doesnt bother you, but it does bother some people. Ok, we have a difference of opinion, but WHY do you SJW types have this need to then call people who disagree with your view as sexist?
How is it sexist to dislike the change, because its not true to the original? Where is sexism in this argument? I like the content to be true to the original interpretation of the character. SJWs: OMFG! THATS SO SEXIST!
ts this preachy moral highground attitude that pisses people off about you people.
It seems more that you are unable to handle criticism about your position, if you want to argue that a new iteration of a fictional character can't be female, that is unfortunately rather sexist. Don't like it? Though, either don't be so sexist or just live with the fact that you are in this circumstance.
Friends perhaps you can tell me why "political correctness" is considered a bad thing.
Because it's a form of though control where people are constantly worried about offending people around them, so they never speak their minds, leading to frustration and control of the masses who believe it's fine to repress your thoughts. Self-imposed tyranny is the worst thing that can happen to a human being. However, the freedom of speech doesn’t say that you have free speech without repercussions or without someone else exercising their own freedom to disagree with you. So when someone calls you out on saying something that may offend them, they’re not limiting your free speech, just exercising theirs.
I am not saying Beamdog is guilty of these things, but the way that Kotaku interview came off it sounded like Amber Scott wanted to change Jaheira and Safana to make them more politically correct. That is what people are reacting to. And of course people who disagree with this SJW narrative flipped their shit after reading that interview. I dont understand what is so difficult to understand here.
I guess that what is so difficult to understand is why people are writing extremely controversial ratings all across the internet based on how that interview "came off"... tell me, what is your impression of Jaheira and Safana after playing the game? have their personalities changed? … and if yes, how?
Its the interview and comments from Beamdog that people complain about. Its not the game. They are just using the Metacritic to hurt Beamdog for their political views and are using the game as an excuse. I dont agree with it. Its a dick move by GG, and this comes from a GGer. I think even SJWs should have the right to have their own opinions.
ts this preachy moral highground attitude that pisses people off about you people.
Then why the hell are you still here.
You've said your piece. Clearly, you're not finding a lot of sympathy for your position. So you keep saying your piece. No one's going to switch sides here. Considering you joined this forum yesterday, maybe this isn't where you need to be. If this is SJW Central, then you don't belong here, right? Get gone.
You should open yourself to disagreement and criticism. At worst, you change your position or stress out. On average, you strengthen and refine your argument against those around you. At best, you accept the different opinions of those around you, and learn to respect their beliefs and their right to exist. Shutting yourself out to other points of view just festers intolerance.
If you need a break, leaving the thread is fine, or shutting off the computer. I can 99% guarantee that no one will chase you.
Friends perhaps you can tell me why "political correctness" is considered a bad thing.
Because it's a form of though control where people are constantly worried about offending people around them, so they never speak their minds, leading to frustration and control of the masses who believe it's fine to repress your thoughts. Self-imposed tyranny is the worst thing that can happen to a human being. However, the freedom of speech doesn’t say that you have free speech without repercussions or without someone else exercising their own freedom to disagree with you. So when someone calls you out on saying something that may offend them, they’re not limiting your free speech, just exercising theirs.
I don't know what you mean by thought control but I think what you are saying is that political correctness is fine as long as it is used reasonably? And people who are rude should be called out, within reason? I think that's something we can all agree on. Thank you for your contribution to the discussion friend.
Friends perhaps you can tell me why "political correctness" is considered a bad thing.
Because it's a form of though control where people are constantly worried about offending people around them, so they never speak their minds, leading to frustration and control of the masses who believe it's fine to repress your thoughts. Self-imposed tyranny is the worst thing that can happen to a human being. However, the freedom of speech doesn’t say that you have free speech without repercussions or without someone else exercising their own freedom to disagree with you. So when someone calls you out on saying something that may offend them, they’re not limiting your free speech, just exercising theirs.
First you say this: "Because it's a form of though control where people are constantly worried about offending people around them,"
But then you say this: "So when someone calls you out on saying something that may offend them, they’re not limiting your free speech, just exercising theirs."
So basically you are saying there is nothing wrong with being PC...
Friends perhaps you can tell me why "political correctness" is considered a bad thing.
Because it's a form of though control where people are constantly worried about offending people around them, so they never speak their minds, leading to frustration and control of the masses who believe it's fine to repress your thoughts. Self-imposed tyranny is the worst thing that can happen to a human being. However, the freedom of speech doesn’t say that you have free speech without repercussions or without someone else exercising their own freedom to disagree with you. So when someone calls you out on saying something that may offend them, they’re not limiting your free speech, just exercising theirs.
I don't know what you mean by thought control but I think what you are saying is that political correctness is fine as long as it is used reasonably? And people who are rude should be called out, within reason? I think that's something we can all agree on. Thank you for your contribution to the discussion friend.
The thing is, who decides what is reasonable usage of political correctness? You ask someone like @mzachary there... he seems to think that its sexist and racist just to dislike the character change, even if the person is disliking it for non-sexist and non-racist reasons.
Comments
Advertised as having multiplayer - not working.
New hardcore mode - bugged.
Crashes to desktop - yes.
Mod compatibility lost - yes.
Bunch of changes nobody asked for and most seem to hate - yes.
Regardless of how your feelings for SoD/Beamdog/devs are the game isn't remotely near to perfect score.
Those 10/10 reviews are just as bad as 0/10, since they appear as nothing more than really bad advertising.
If somebody gave it a 4-5, I'd consider the review to be fairly legit. Anything over a 6 is pushing it, anything lower than 2 is just as wrong.
The way PR was/is handled surely isn't helping either.
As for your Thor example the legends feature Thor and Loki turning into women or dressing as women on several occasions so I don't see him becoming a woman in a comic book to be that out of place. Perhaps it would be a good opportunity to explore a new side of the character?
*Sigh*... I give up. If you dont see how changing Batman into a female might rub off some people the wrong way, I dont know what to tell you. And to call that sexist, even when the person says he supports representations of women in gaming... wow.. .just wow... I guess next thing will be calling people sexists for eating a pan cake with strawberry sauce.
AND, I just proved your previous hypothesis wrong, Redknight - Thor and Link aren't being changed - with no response for you. One is an alternate reality Link, another is a temporary Thor.
Your GGers did not "didnt like the game" - they did not like the interview and one character in the game, which they heard is transsexual (most people who played did not noticed that character). They did not even play the game, yet, they pretended they found game bad.
Cowardness, mobbing (which includes cowardness, of course), bulling. You would not do that IRL, but you do allow yourself to do it in internet.
Some mentioned PoE and that joke about trans that was removed. Good example - when trans (SJW, LGBT supporters) felt offended they came to media (Twitter, FB and so on) and TALKED openly what did not they like and why. They did not try to ruin the scores of PoE pretending the game is bad, they did not bash the joker or developers. And this is how you handle things.
And yes, there was an outcry by the fans when they changed certain characters, even when they were male. But you dont want to see that, because it would destroy your SJW lense.
http://whateveraspidercan.com/2015/02/23/spider-man-finds-middle-racism-row/
Oh, but then its racism, no matter that these same people would be equally pissed if they changed Black Panther into a white dude.
And if you're still spouting this crap about comic books characters not being used for a political agenda, you clearly have 0 concept of the medium's history. CAPTAIN AMERICA'S FIRST APPEARANCE HAD HIM SOCKING HITLER IN THE JAW.
IRON MAN FOUGHT COMMUNISTS
X-MEN WERE CIVIL RIGHTS ACTIVISTS
BLACK PANTHER IS NAMED AFTER A BLACK RIGHTS GROUP
THE SUPERHUMAN REGISTRATION ACT IS A COMMENT ON THE PATRIOT ACT
AND THOR IS A WOMAN FOR A SHORT TIME FOR THE CAUSE OF FEMINISM
WELCOME TO COMICS
These stories do not exist in a vacuum. They are influenced and changed by the world around them. Green Lantern used to get his power from magic; when magic when out of vogue and science fiction became big in the 50s, he was completely changed to a fighter pilot with sci-fi technology. Same for Flash.
These changes are celebrated. Changes involving women and minorities aren't (by certain people). That's bigotry.
I dont approve of what GGers are doing to Beamdog for what seem to be trivial and non-existent reasons, but Beamdog made it worse by choosing to be as divisive as possible in their comments on this whole affair, which only made things worse after the interview. i also understand GGers. Unlike the feminist SJW mob, they dont have the support of the mainstream media, so they use guerilla tactics in order to achieve their goals and send the message.
http://hollywoodlife.com/2015/06/30/stan-lee-spider-man-creator-explains-why-sony-agreement-white-straight/
Wow... just wow... i am flabbergasted!
People claiming that they agree that we should make new characters instead of changing old ones. Hooray!
Same people arguing why its perfectly legit that all the old ones were changed.
In short, we have people who want all new female characters, and then to change all the old ones as well. Balance!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On the subject of Thor, I actually loved the idea of Thor being female. It would have been perfectly fine by me. But because it *was* politically driven, the inherent personality of this Thor feels politically driven and even sometimes misandrist. That is the part that not okay.
Things like this...:
...Are not okay. Or this...
This is what people keep referring to as a "straw man" a dramatized example of an enemy that is obviously wrong, and can easily be proven wrong. ('knocking down the straw man') but then using that same straw man as the allegory for people who criticize your writing. (Like in a political comic, they draw everyone who disagrees as fat/stupid/ugly, etc.)
The character is sexist, yet uses similar, kinda/almost/maybe/but not quite, the same arguments that people that disagree with me do, ergo the people who disagree with me are the same, aka 'sexist'.
How is it sexist to dislike the change, because its not true to the original? Where is sexism in this argument? I like the content to be true to the original interpretation of the character. SJWs: OMFG! THATS SO SEXIST!
ts this preachy moral highground attitude that pisses people off about you people.
You've said your piece. Clearly, you're not finding a lot of sympathy for your position. So you keep saying your piece. No one's going to switch sides here. Considering you joined this forum yesterday, maybe this isn't where you need to be. If this is SJW Central, then you don't belong here, right? Get gone.
Those who uphold the tenants of free speech must do so for even those they disagree with, because tomorrow, it may be your own beliefs that are not deemed politically correct.
(I should point out now: I agree with open discourse. I disagree with the changes they made to the characters in BG. I disagree with the review bombing going on as well, because it is way too heavy handed and will cause more damage than good.)
So indeed if the complaint about a character being changed into a woman is just because the character is being changed into a woman, that is indeed rather sexist. It seems more that you are unable to handle criticism about your position, if you want to argue that a new iteration of a fictional character can't be female, that is unfortunately rather sexist. Don't like it? Though, either don't be so sexist or just live with the fact that you are in this circumstance.
If you need a break, leaving the thread is fine, or shutting off the computer. I can 99% guarantee that no one will chase you.
"Because it's a form of though control where people are constantly worried about offending people around them,"
But then you say this:
"So when someone calls you out on saying something that may offend them, they’re not limiting your free speech, just exercising theirs."
So basically you are saying there is nothing wrong with being PC...