Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

Dark Dreams of Furiae - a new module for NWN:EE! Buy now
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

The creator of Forgotten Realms chimes in

1356789

Comments

  • skeptik_59skeptik_59 Member Posts: 38

    Here are my thoughts as a Baldur's Gate fan friends: Be cool and excellent to one another. This includes NPCs and writers of videogames that we all love. If you all truly believe that the only problem with the character is "bad writing" then simply move on and acknowledge that the writer was maybe having an off day when they wrote that dialogue and then enjoy the rest of the good times the game offers. Thank you all for being such strong advocates of Baldur's Gate.

    I agree with what you're saying but that one OFF day might cost us any and/or all Baldur's Gate material in the future.
    That will be the choice of the people who do, or don't support the company, right? If BD makes money, more content can be expected - if they don't make money, then no new content, from them, at least.

    Totally in the hands of the buying public. One way to make it more likely that no new content will appear, however, would be for people, whoever they might be, to sabotage the rankings of the game, on external sites, to make some sort of political point.

    I'm all for people who don't want the game, not buying the game, but I do have issues with those who would go out of their way to try to insure that the game fails. I don't know if anyone here would do such a thing, but it is pretty obvious that such things are going on where it counts, on game ratings sites.

    I just don't like that sort of censorship, myself.

    sparkleav
  • skeptik_59skeptik_59 Member Posts: 38
    bengoshi said:

    Ed Greenwood later added to that first comment:

    "And another thing: I have always felt HONOURED to have met, worked with, and enjoyed the work of so many talented women in all of my professional fields (library work has traditionally been dominated by females, gaming hasn't, and fiction-writing was male-dominated when I was young, but has steadily shifted throughout my lifetime). Does Paul Jaquays becoming Jennell Jaquays rob his, now her, artwork or game design or prose of one iota of its richness and the enjoyment it gives me? NO! And how by the Nine flaming Hells does one human being made happier by being the gender they prefer to be lessen my own security, or happiness, or make my life the less?
    Sheesh.
    The world has REAL problems, people. Telling someone else how to behave in bed (or dress, or what jobs they can hold down) isn't one of them. Or shouldn't be."

    Thanks for posting this - again especially for those of us who don't "do" FB. Much appreciated.

    KamigoroshiJuliusBorisovkillerrabbit
  • BGLoverBGLover Member Posts: 549
    Ah, Ed Greenwood...

    So many great modules, and so many great memories of sittting around with friends rolling dice and having fun. And a few not-so great memories, like that one time I died which still rankles because it was so unfair! But I can hardly blame you for that Ed. I blame the DM. You know who you are!

  • jankmasterjankmaster Member Posts: 38
    I sometimes just feel like a hand grenade was tossed into a minefield that didn't have to be thrown, but the deed is done. Overall, I'm more concerned with wether or not the game will come to a good and playable level when it does release for iOS. I can't make informed judgements without the product itself, but from what I've seen and read something has spiraled out of control...

    prem0nition
  • DillicDillic Member Posts: 16
    From the other thread:

    Misses the point IMO.

    The trans character is just poorly done and reeks of agenda due to how poorly she's written. Plenty of people dislike it for this reason, trans included.

    Some people might just dislike her for being trans, yes, but from what I've seen, a good portion that don't like it and other writing is how it's actually written rather than the actual identities of the characters.

    Breaking it down into simple bigotry is wrong, as for many, it's not that.

  • prem0nitionprem0nition Member Posts: 65
    edited April 2016
    helmo1977 said:

    Well, certainly Ed has a point when he says that the FR is a place were transexual people (or gay) fits perfectly. FR is relatively full of halfs-whatever and some people (not many, but I have read some) rant about a transexual minor npc?

    Altough, truth to be said, the controversy is not just about that, but about several other things:

    First of all, some people think the writing of the character could have been better. On that I agree. In fact I think even Amber Scott agrees, but no writer can always give a character all the depth he/she would have liked, and no writer is always at his/her best everytime.

    Second of all, the joke about GG wasnt a good idea, but dont overblow things. It was just a joke.

    Third, and here is the real problem. In this controversy there seems to be two sides that have been quarreling for long, and not just in this game, but several others (Pillars of Eternity and Divinity, for example). One side seems to think, to a bigger or lesser extent, that "social justice" (although I am not really sure what that term means) must be felt through videogames, and that means, among other things, that characters and games as a whole must be made up to certain "standards" of that social justice (examples, no jokes about women, not using or depicting women in certain ways, putting LGBT characters in game...). The other side seems to think that these kind of things should be left out of videogames or, at least, should be introduced in ways that made sense with the story at hand.

    Both sides, as far as I have seen, are very soft skinned. That struck me from the begining, and only when I started to see that this was about a years long quarrel did I began to understand many things that were being said and many weird (for me) reactions.

    One side has been using reviews as a way to boycott the game. I am not saying all bad reviews are fake (because they make several good points, bugs, multiplayer problems and UI mess are there for everybody to see, apart from the fact that some chracters have been changed) but, after having read a lot of them, I feel a certain kind of attempt at boycott (truth to be said, erasing several reviews and asking for positive votes didnt help) due to reasons that are just partially related to the game. This side seems to autojustify its actions in the fact that, the other side, has also boycotted (or harrased) games that made things they didnt like (examples: in Pillars of Eternity one of the backers put a sentence in a minor place of the game which some people felt it denigrated women, and, after makign quite of a fuss about it, the sentence was finally taken out. In Divinity, one of the women at the games cover was showing too much breast for this sides liking, so that women was covered).

    As you see, we are in the middle of a crossfire between to groups that have been quarreling for long. Baldurs Gate is just their last field of battle. And the game is "suffering" these things due to reasons that are only partially related to it.

    Well, that is my opinion.


    Regards


    You have hit the nail exactly on the head friend. Your post has an exceptionally good understanding of the situation. Thank you for your objectivity. Something that has been sorely lost by a lot of people involved in both this controversy and the ones preceding it.

    Thank you :)

    sparkleav
  • UltraB00nUltraB00n Member Posts: 37
    edited April 2016

    Altough, truth to be said, the controversy is not just about that, but about several other things:

    Yeah, so the SJWs misled Ed Greenwood into berating a strawman and now they're celebrating like it was some sort of major victory.

  • BGLoverBGLover Member Posts: 549
    I have read countless posts in recent days claiming we are part of a cultural war, that there is an 'SJW' agenda, that 'SJW's are writing propaganda that seeks to promote their agenda, and are then shoving it down our throats. And plenty of posts that cite examples of this 'fact', examples that have included the inclusion of a transgender person in the game.

    Ed Greenwood then makes the point that crossdressing, gender changing, actively bisexual, and openly gay characters have always been part of the fantasy setting that he co-created.

    So now what?

    Perhaps Ed Greenwood is an 'SJW'. Perhaps he is part of that 'SJW' campaign to promote their own political agenda and shove it down our throats.

    And if that sounds faintly ridiculous, perhaps it was never about shoving a particular agenda down our throats. Now Ed has said what he said, we don't/can't object to crossdressing, gender changing, actively bi-sexual and openly gay characters. So lets concentrate on the quality of the writing instead, and say that was the problem all along.

    And if that is all it's about, hurray!

    What do we want... more transgender characters... when do we want them... NOW*

    (*providing they are well written of course)

    Roseweave
  • jankmasterjankmaster Member Posts: 38

    It's not a straw man. It's to the point. I have seen a lot of people on this forum alone complain about the presence of a transgender person in the Forgotten Realms. It's pretty obvious that people who disagree with this inclusion are savvy enough to frame their criticisms as "bad writing", "bugs," etc. so as to make it look like they don't have a problem with a transgender woman in the game, just with the way she was written, but anyone looking in on this "debate" can see the truth of the matter.

    And of course people have directly said several times that transgender people have no place in the Forgotten Realms.

    Ed Greenwood directly addressed the problem, not a straw man. What you are doing in response is called "shifting the goalpost."

    Of course certainly some (if not most) veil their hate through such complaints, is it not strawmaning/generalizing to say that people who level legitimate criticism about bugs and quality of writing are merely masking irrational hatred? I think there are legitimate things for people to complain about, however the magnitude and the response that both sides of the "debate" have unleashed seems to cloud genuine discussion and constructive advice.

  • BelfaldurnikBelfaldurnik Member Posts: 208
    marceror said:

    Internet mobs are super mobby.

    They ought to be ashamed of themselves for what they are doing. Voting down well-written informative positive reviews just because they want to bash the game and punish the publisher. Disgusting.

    MonkeyLungsNomphosumus
  • BGLoverBGLover Member Posts: 549

    It's not a straw man. It's to the point. I have seen a lot of people on this forum alone complain about the presence of a transgender person in the Forgotten Realms. It's pretty obvious that people who disagree with this inclusion are savvy enough to frame their criticisms as "bad writing", "bugs," etc. so as to make it look like they don't have a problem with a transgender woman in the game, just with the way she was written, but anyone looking in on this "debate" can see the truth of the matter.

    And of course people have directly said several times that transgender people have no place in the Forgotten Realms.

    Ed Greenwood directly addressed the problem, not a straw man. What you are doing in response is called "shifting the goalpost."

    Of course certainly some (if not most) veil their hate through such complaints, is it not strawmaning/generalizing to say that people who level legitimate criticism about bugs and quality of writing are merely masking irrational hatred? I think there are legitimate things for people to complain about, however the magnitude and the response that both sides of the "debate" have unleashed seems to cloud genuine discussion and constructive advice.
    Jankmaster, I agree that people have a legitimate right to complain about bugs and the quality of the writing.

    What I have witnessed these days past has not been post after post after post concerned with bugs and the quality (or otherwise) of the writing.

    What I have witnessed is a storm of hyperbole, sweeping generalisations, bile, vitriol and other unpleasantries (that have even stooped as low as naming, insulting and abusing Beamdog staff), all of which has had very little, if anything, to do with Siege of Dragonspear.

    craymond727Nomphosumus
  • jankmasterjankmaster Member Posts: 38
    Then that is for others to stoop to that level, as for me and my computer I will type with civility. I wonder if at a time even things like Gamergate had legitimate points couched in-between the dogma and the hate, doubtful I'd think but something to wonder.... Anyway, aside from all the drama I hope we can continue to move forward with the BG series with better characters and writing, and also better mechanics in the gameplay, stability, and as a PC perk, modding capability... Here's to the future!

  • jankmasterjankmaster Member Posts: 38
    Funny thing about the frog experiment, I heard that the frog only failed to jump out after it's brain was surgically removed, but I only have CGPGrey's word on that, doesn't diminish your point though.

    prem0nition
  • BGLoverBGLover Member Posts: 549

    aside from all the drama I hope we can continue to move forward with the BG series with better characters and writing, and also better mechanics in the gameplay, stability, and as a PC perk, modding capability... Here's to the future!

    Hear hear! I agree with this sentiment completely.

  • BelleSorciereBelleSorciere Member Posts: 2,095
    edited April 2016


    Of course certainly some (if not most) veil their hate through such complaints, is it not strawmaning/generalizing to say that people who level legitimate criticism about bugs and quality of writing are merely masking irrational hatred? I think there are legitimate things for people to complain about, however the magnitude and the response that both sides of the "debate" have unleashed seems to cloud genuine discussion and constructive advice.

    The vast majority of complaints I've seen about the quality of writing are concerned with four entire lines of dialogue out of the entire expansion. Three of those lines have to do with Mizhena and how allegedly "forced" she is, and the fourth is Minsc's line about ethics in heroic adventuring.

    This leads me to conclude that people making those complaints are trying to veil their hatred in what they hope will appear as legitimate criticisms of writing quality. The sheer number of negative reviews as compared to other games as well as the sheer focus of those reviews when mentioned makes the whole thing rather suspicious.

    I also do not think the "both sides are equally bad" stance is accurate. This is where I have seen straw men, talking about people who are okay with Mizhena's inclusion as being extremists just as bad as those trying to drown SoD in negative reviews. I should say I believe you're arguing in good faith, but I just haven't seen both sides being "equally bad" in the various places I've followed this controversy.

    MonkeyLungsValamirCleaverNomphosumus
  • jankmasterjankmaster Member Posts: 38
    I'm oddly cynical in some matters, and oddly optimistic in others... The cynicism comes in where experience has taught me that even the people who should have the moral high ground are all too willing to sacrifice it for the sake of pettiness and getting a "victory" over their foes. The optimism comes in where I still believe there are those that most of us aren't trying to tear each other apart and most of us still want to try and make the game better.

    prem0nition
  • Greenman019Greenman019 Member Posts: 206
    This is getting really old really fast

    It's such a minor part of the game. Such a tiny little thing. Call it what it is. Some of SoD is poorly written such as this "Character". Totally blown out of proportion.

    Pretending the issue is the inclusion of a trans character helps no-one. This false narrative is pointless.

  • TorinTorin Member Posts: 229
    edited April 2016
    Dillic said:

    From the other thread:

    Misses the point IMO.

    The trans character is just poorly done and reeks of agenda due to how poorly she's written. Plenty of people dislike it for this reason, trans included.

    Some people might just dislike her for being trans, yes, but from what I've seen, a good portion that don't like it and other writing is how it's actually written rather than the actual identities of the characters.

    Breaking it down into simple bigotry is wrong, as for many, it's not that.

    Except it is pure bigotry. Would the internet make such a shitfest if his answer to question about his name was: "I was born together with my twin sister. We did everything together. One day when we were 12 she drowned in a lake and I could not save her. My life became living hell after that and I wanted to kill myself more than once. But one day my parents made me see that life goes on and that we must continue living and fighting and that my sister would want that. We agreed I should honor her and the connection we had by changing my name. I made this name as combination of different languages so I can always remember her and feel that she is part of me."

    Tell me truthfully, would there be such a shitfest? I bet people would even quote that and say what a touching story (well not this exactly because I am a shit writer :D)

    Grond0ValamirCleaverTheSnarkyShamanamyae
  • Diogenes42Diogenes42 Member Posts: 597
    Is Ed Greenwood a wizard in real life? Signs point to yes friends.

  • HalfwiseHalfwise Member Posts: 78
    helmo1977 said:

    Well, certainly Ed has a point when he says that the FR is a place were transexual people (or gay) fits perfectly. FR is relatively full of halfs-whatever and some people (not many, but I have read some) rant about a transexual minor npc?

    Altough, truth to be said, the controversy is not just about that, but about several other things:

    First of all, some people think the writing of the character could have been better. On that I agree. In fact I think even Amber Scott agrees, but no writer can always give a character all the depth he/she would have liked, and no writer is always at his/her best everytime.

    Second of all, the joke about GG wasnt a good idea, but dont overblow things. It was just a joke.

    Third, and here is the real problem. In this controversy there seems to be two sides that have been quarreling for long, and not just in this game, but several others (Pillars of Eternity and Divinity, for example). One side seems to think, to a bigger or lesser extent, that "social justice" (although I am not really sure what that term means) must be felt through videogames, and that means, among other things, that characters and games as a whole must be made up to certain "standards" of that social justice (examples, no jokes about women, not using or depicting women in certain ways, putting LGBT characters in game...). The other side seems to think that these kind of things should be left out of videogames or, at least, should be introduced in ways that made sense with the story at hand.

    Both sides, as far as I have seen, are very soft skinned. That struck me from the begining, and only when I started to see that this was about a years long quarrel did I began to understand many things that were being said and many weird (for me) reactions.

    One side has been using reviews as a way to boycott the game. I am not saying all bad reviews are fake (because they make several good points, bugs, multiplayer problems and UI mess are there for everybody to see, apart from the fact that some chracters have been changed) but, after having read a lot of them, I feel a certain kind of attempt at boycott (truth to be said, erasing several reviews and asking for positive votes didnt help) due to reasons that are just partially related to the game. This side seems to autojustify its actions in the fact that, the other side, has also boycotted (or harrased) games that made things they didnt like (examples: in Pillars of Eternity one of the backers put a sentence in a minor place of the game which some people felt it denigrated women, and, after makign quite of a fuss about it, the sentence was finally taken out. In Divinity, one of the women at the games cover was showing too much breast for this sides liking, so that women was covered).

    As you see, we are in the middle of a crossfire between to groups that have been quarreling for long. Baldurs Gate is just their last field of battle. And the game is "suffering" these things due to reasons that are only partially related to it.

    Well, that is my opinion.


    Regards

    Excellent unbiased analysis of the situations.

    prem0nition
  • HalfwiseHalfwise Member Posts: 78
    bengoshi said:

    Ed Greenwood later added to that first comment:

    "And another thing: I have always felt HONOURED to have met, worked with, and enjoyed the work of so many talented women in all of my professional fields (library work has traditionally been dominated by females, gaming hasn't, and fiction-writing was male-dominated when I was young, but has steadily shifted throughout my lifetime). Does Paul Jaquays becoming Jennell Jaquays rob his, now her, artwork or game design or prose of one iota of its richness and the enjoyment it gives me? NO! And how by the Nine flaming Hells does one human being made happier by being the gender they prefer to be lessen my own security, or happiness, or make my life the less?
    Sheesh.
    The world has REAL problems, people. Telling someone else how to behave in bed (or dress, or what jobs they can hold down) isn't one of them. Or shouldn't be."

    He is right of course.
    But I'm afraid he is going to lose a lot of impact, because he is arguing under a false pretense of what the argument is.

  • StradlinStradlin Member Posts: 142
    edited April 2016
    marceror said:

    Nice to see the post from Ed. But really, this situation is not nearly as important as people are making it out to be.

    Internet mobs are super mobby.

    Character is one single minor NPC in game that has hundreds, if not thousands of others. Whether there are transgender NPCs among few thousand other NPCs is an absolute non-issue. Frankly, there being some feels more like a given, really. I'm pretty sure most all agree on this.

    Among the hundreds, if not thousands of posts about all this, I've seen precious few who'd in any way be against trans NPCs as such. This is not where the storm-in-water-glass is here. What counts is..well, when larger portion of community gets an impression that writers use minorities or odd professional victim outrage culture as dirt to pile up as a hill underneath them for purposes of feeling like they've managed to climb some greater enlightened moral high ground..that's when people get ticked off. That's where some people start feeling used. Then when you see few hundred stupid metacritic user reviews immediately translate into some terrible "Help us Anita Kenobi, u our only hope" - type of drumming up to make it worse, it begins feeling almost like pragmatic and calculated PR move all along. Dragonspear is much more spoken about now than it otherwise would have. My wild guess is that no minority ever wants to feel like the high horse for somebody else to ride. Far less important matter, but one that prolly irritates people far more, is how we don't want to see a timeless classic of a PC game (ab)used as mouth piece in some ridiculous outrage culture of GG vs SJW sillyness at all.

    It's great that creator of Forgotten Realms chimes in to some storm-in-water-glass that he prolly has very limited understanding of. Just that I'm sorry, but vantage point of the actual Trans people within and among this very community is infinitely more relevant and important and valuable than this guy descending among mortals with Elminister anecdotes and loads of insult-on-behalf-of-others.

    It is a riot how people behave as if HIS pov somehow should have more value than, say, OP of this thread: https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/50420/my-thoughts-on-mizhena-as-a-transgender-person-myself/p1

    GodKaiserHellCoffeethrallatakdog
  • BelleSorciereBelleSorciere Member Posts: 2,095
    Halfwise said:


    He is right of course.
    But I'm afraid he is going to lose a lot of impact, because he is arguing under a false pretense of what the argument is.

    No, he's not. You're shifting the goalpost, as I pointed out above. People started saying this after things really escalated but the majority of complaints I've seen have been about the inclusion of a transgender character in the game.

    If the character was poorly written but cisgender, there wouldn't be nearly this kind of response, because it's not the writing quality that prompted it.

    SamyDurenas
  • BelleSorciereBelleSorciere Member Posts: 2,095
    Stradlin said:


    It is a riot how people behave as if HIS pov somehow should have more value than, say, OP of this thread: https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/50420/my-thoughts-on-mizhena-as-a-transgender-person-myself/p1

    And I can find a transgender person who is all for the inclusion. You're using that particular individual as a shield to justify your complaints.

  • AmmarAmmar Member Posts: 1,073

    Stradlin said:


    It is a riot how people behave as if HIS pov somehow should have more value than, say, OP of this thread: https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/50420/my-thoughts-on-mizhena-as-a-transgender-person-myself/p1

    And I can find a transgender person who is all for the inclusion. You're using that particular individual as a shield to justify your complaints.
    Here is an example

    http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/269735/Opinion_The_Siege_of_Dragonspear_drama_and_the_video_game_community.php

    JuliusBorisov
  • HalfwiseHalfwise Member Posts: 78
    edited April 2016

    Halfwise said:


    He is right of course.
    But I'm afraid he is going to lose a lot of impact, because he is arguing under a false pretense of what the argument is.

    No, he's not. You're shifting the goalpost, as I pointed out above. People started saying this after things really escalated but the majority of complaints I've seen have been about the inclusion of a transgender character in the game.

    If the character was poorly written but cisgender, there wouldn't be nearly this kind of response, because it's not the writing quality that prompted it.
    And if the character was properly included and was transgender, there wouldn't need to be this kind of response either. Thus the issue has always been "There is a transgender character that is poorly written." Not "There is a transgender." OR "There is a character that is poorly written."

    And you are misusing "shifting the goal posts", it implies that when confronted on your initial argument, and find it wanting, you lessen the requirements on it to try and make it still valid, without changing the meaning of it.

    But, I jumped onto the forums just before the first posts went up about this character. There was never once a comment of "Transgender people shouldn't be in the game." It was, from the start, the use of the character as being "cringe-worthy" (their words, not mine), and poorly handled. The second complaint that came up was the lack the options for handling it, where they wanted to know "If this person wants to be female, why can't we just go and get them the Sex-Change Girdle".

    The argument has expanded since to cover Minsc, Jaheira, the Archer, Safana, etc. But the points on the transgender cleric have always remained the same.

Sign In or Register to comment.