^^Yes! Taking things on emotions and faith is best way to go. People do so well with that model, it never gets out of hand, (e.g. two world wars) or anything... lol
This situation is more like having a plate of crumbs formely occupied with cookies and a dog taking way too much effort to look innocent with some crumbs lying in her basket and you asking me to provide formal evidence that the dog ate the cookies... Hence the question who you think to fool?
Thanks for proving my point, your comment is nothing but an ad hominem smashed together with a straw man. That's what happens when you sacrifice the dialectic, and instead take on the false consolation of faith over reason, and emotion over logic.
Actually it is called a metaphor or analogy and so far there is rather enough circumstancial evidence to state with both reason and logic that SoD has been reviewbombed by GG-aligned or sympathized people, hence the -> who do you think you are fooling? question
Calling someone a deceitful dog is in fact an ad hominem,
Oh poor dear, I did not call you a deceitful dog, I used a metaphor to illustrate why in this situation it is rather silly to ask so formally for evidence when the circumstances already paint a rather clear picture.
I can tell, as you have lumped my comments in with Abdel, someone whose comments I like but don't always agree with. And, without much doubt, I can say that you have sacrificed the dialectic for overly emotional, irrational discourse, thus forfeiting any chance of a decent philosophical discussion.
Not at all, I am simply denying the premise of your call for evidence. There is not really anything emotional or irrational about it.
You are like talking to a religious fundamentalist. Moreover you are being very patronizing and credulous, which just proves what I've said already,
And, without much doubt, I can say that you have sacrificed the dialectic for overly emotional, irrational discourse, thus forfeiting any chance of a decent philosophical discussion.
Lol I would be a religious fundamentalist if I would deny facts in favour of my own belief. I am doing no such thing. Because you do not have an alternative for my postulation. You see that is why you and Abdel come across as rather disingenuous, you know very well that all the circumstancial evidence points to GG and given the nature of anonymous mobs makes it very likely to be GG especially in combination by language used and so forth.
You and abdel also know very well that you do not have any credible alternative that would explain what has happened, but please feel free to state that it was actually all a false flag to make GG look bad, because that would make me laugh ;-)
Hence I am not denying facts in favour of any belief and hence why I keep asking, who do you think you are fooling?
Yes, you are stubbornly denying the truth of what I actually wrote and lumping it in with what Abdel and Booinyourface were arguing over, i.e. that both were arguing with objective facts. This is what I wrote in critique:
As Christopher Hitchens once said, "That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." Unless some statistician goes through every comment on Steam etc. and makes some kind of regression for the negative and positive reviews, then all you guys are doing is fighting over face value. Each side is asserting the opposite position as being true, with no statistical model or methodology that I can see other than, "I looked at the reviews and they are like this, and other people say the same thing."
They were stating opinions, not facts. Furthermore, get over yourself.
Hello friends. Let's try and remember that we are here because of Baldur's Gate and not because we have to prove that we are the best at arguing our points and winning debates.
Hello friends. Let's try and remember that we are here because of Baldur's Gate and not because we have to prove that we are the best at arguing our points and winning debates.
Besides its me, I'm the best.
If you call this a debate, then you are definitely not the best. lol
Hello friends. Let's try and remember that we are here because of Baldur's Gate and not because we have to prove that we are the best at arguing our points and winning debates.
Besides its me, I'm the best.
Diogenes has been the best since he told an imperialist tyrant conqueror seeking his wisdom to get the #^(% out of his sun.
Hello friends. Let's try and remember that we are here because of Baldur's Gate and not because we have to prove that we are the best at arguing our points and winning debates.
Besides its me, I'm the best.
Diogenes has been the best since he told an imperialist tyrant conqueror seeking his wisdom to get the #^(% out of his sun.
That is one of my favourite historical moments friend, glad to see another fan.
This thread is so opposed dead to the dialectic, that it should have this as an epigraph:
“Nam Sibyllam quidem Cumis ego ipse oculis meis vidi in ampulla pendere, et cum illi pueri dicerent:Σιβυλλα τι θελεις; respondebat illa:αποθανειν θελω.”
Main prob with Minsc line was that it was out of character. They should replace it with that classic line "Ahh we are all heroes, you and boo and I. Hamsters and rangers everywhere rejoice". Brings everyone together.
I don't know why that one line was so detested. It didn't have anything insulting or judgmental in it. If you look at more of the rare lines, you'll see, more of the fourth wall ones.
Jaheira: "By your command" said in a robot voice Khalid: " Th-th-th-that's all, f-folks!" Khalid: "Click on someone your own size!"
No one got hung up on those. These lines are kind of easter eggs, you shouldn't see them in normal gameplay. You have to click on the character 10 times without giving a command.
Ok, now i looked up the meme and understand the problem a bit more.
Main prob with Minsc line was that it was out of character. They should replace it with that classic line "Ahh we are all heroes, you and boo and I. Hamsters and rangers everywhere rejoice". Brings everyone together.
I don't know why that one line was so detested. It didn't have anything insulting or judgmental in it. If you look at more of the rare lines, you'll see, more of the fourth wall ones.
Jaheira: "By your command" said in a robot voice Khalid: " Th-th-th-that's all, f-folks!" Khalid: "Click on someone your own size!"
No one got hung up on those. These lines are kind of easter eggs, you shouldn't see them in normal gameplay. You have to click on the character 10 times without giving a command.
Which line exactly? If it's the gamer gate one, I think there has been ample amount of explanation as to why people did not like it.
This picture is wrong. 3 % of colored villains? I call bullshit on that. Not to mention, why would we count people "of color" ? As opposed to white people? Why are white people the base to compare to? Seems extremely racist toward white people to me. Or are white people not even allowed to be counted as a race?
It's really hard to take you seriously you know? Like... you just don't get it, on any level. And I don't think you particularly care about people that aren't like you at all.
You can't just say "That picture is wrong." Do you have better statistics? And thanks for ignoring the central point which is that LGBT rep in Hollywood blockbusters is essentially non-existent.
Racist against white people FFS.
When it's time to cry for racism, Social Justice Warriors point out how Hollywood villains are so often Muslims and other color race religion. But when it's time to say that non-white-straight people are underrepresented, suddenly, only 3 % of villains are non white.
This picture is wrong. 3 % of colored villains? I call bullshit on that. Not to mention, why would we count people "of color" ? As opposed to white people? Why are white people the base to compare to? Seems extremely racist toward white people to me. Or are white people not even allowed to be counted as a race?
It's really hard to take you seriously you know? Like... you just don't get it, on any level. And I don't think you particularly care about people that aren't like you at all.
You can't just say "That picture is wrong." Do you have better statistics? And thanks for ignoring the central point which is that LGBT rep in Hollywood blockbusters is essentially non-existent.
Racist against white people FFS.
When it's time to cry for racism, Social Justice Warriors point out how Hollywood villains are so often Muslims and other color race religion. But when it's time to say that non-white-straight people are underrepresented, suddenly, only 3 % of villains are non white.
Manipulation of information at it's finest.
Like that graph demonstrates an ACTUAL PROBLEM and you still manage to paint yourself and white people(somehow) as the victim here. This isn't a point we've reached where we're still having a real argument. It's you going out of your way to be as obtuse as possible. Like you latched onto the villain statistic - why? Do you think it's somehow not a bad thing that Hollywood keeps throwing out the same middle eastern terrorists again and again?
Also, you know what, I'm going to recommend everyone else do this too - I'm not engaging a post that contains the word "Social Justice Warrior" because it's effectively used as a slur. If your first instinct is to compare it to "cis", "white" or "male" then it just proves you're coming from a disingenous place, because those describe a demographic and aren't inherently weighted. I'm also not interested in dealing with people who nasty enough to turn around to an actual factually marginalised person and claim they're being somehow oppressed for having their own crappy attitudes called out. Just no.
There is a problem with racism and erasure of LGBT people in Hollywood. Full stop. And it's largely the same for video games. If you can't accept this basic point then your grip on reality is too tenuous to get into a real debate.
There is no "racism against white people". Do you know where the term "white people" comes from? There is no "white race" or "black race" or "yellow race". These were distinctions that were created in the US hundreds of years ago to justify slavery and give poor whites a sense of superiority. What exactly constitutes "white" isn't constant in of itself throughout history. Genetically, a British person is still quite different to someone from the Balkans, or Scandinavia. There are lots of grey areas - people from the Balkans and southern Italy who don't have typically "white" features(probably due to admixture from North African, Middle Eastern or Romani populations over the centuries).
The idea that you can't be racist against white people is when a lot of anti-SJWs just act like everything's a big joke. But again - the creation of the white race was ENTIRELY a system of subjugation. "White" people have never been an oppressed group, as an ethnic distinction. Anywhere. Ever. Because "White" SPECIFICALLY refers to an American construct used to justify slavery and exported back to Europe and other Europe colonised countries. There is no such thing - for that reason - as racism against "White" people as a group.
There is no "racism against white people". There is no "white race"
Exactly what I said. Anyone that isn't a straight white person considers white people to not even be a race. Social Justice Warriors think that way because it's easier to call them names and what's not. If we were considered a race, we would have rights under the Social Justice Warrior movement.
There is no "racism against white people". There is no "white race"
Exactly what I said. Anyone that isn't a straight white person considers white people to not even be a race. Social Justice Warriors think that way because it's easier to call them names and what's not. If we were considered a race, we would have rights under the Social Justice Warrior movement.
This picture is wrong. 3 % of colored villains? I call bullshit on that. Not to mention, why would we count people "of color" ? As opposed to white people? Why are white people the base to compare to? Seems extremely racist toward white people to me. Or are white people not even allowed to be counted as a race?
It's really hard to take you seriously you know? Like... you just don't get it, on any level. And I don't think you particularly care about people that aren't like you at all.
You can't just say "That picture is wrong." Do you have better statistics? And thanks for ignoring the central point which is that LGBT rep in Hollywood blockbusters is essentially non-existent.
Racist against white people FFS.
When it's time to cry for racism, Social Justice Warriors point out how Hollywood villains are so often Muslims and other color race religion. But when it's time to say that non-white-straight people are underrepresented, suddenly, only 3 % of villains are non white.
Manipulation of information at it's finest.
Like that graph demonstrates an ACTUAL PROBLEM and you still manage to paint yourself and white people(somehow) as the victim here. This isn't a point we've reached where we're still having a real argument. It's you going out of your way to be as obtuse as possible. Like you latched onto the villain statistic - why? Do you think it's somehow not a bad thing that Hollywood keeps throwing out the same middle eastern terrorists again and again?
Also, you know what, I'm going to recommend everyone else do this too - I'm not engaging a post that contains the word "Social Justice Warrior" because it's effectively used as a slur. If your first instinct is to compare it to "cis", "white" or "male" then it just proves you're coming from a disingenous place, because those describe a demographic and aren't inherently weighted. I'm also not interested in dealing with people who nasty enough to turn around to an actual factually marginalised person and claim they're being somehow oppressed for having their own crappy attitudes called out. Just no.
There is a problem with racism and erasure of LGBT people in Hollywood. Full stop. And it's largely the same for video games. If you can't accept this basic point then your grip on reality is too tenuous to get into a real debate.
There is no "racism against white people". Do you know where the term "white people" comes from? There is no "white race" or "black race" or "yellow race". These were distinctions that were created in the US hundreds of years ago to justify slavery and give poor whites a sense of superiority. What exactly constitutes "white" isn't constant in of itself throughout history. Genetically, a British person is still quite different to someone from the Balkans, or Scandinavia. There are lots of grey areas - people from the Balkans and southern Italy who don't have typically "white" features(probably due to admixture from North African, Middle Eastern or Romani populations over the centuries).
The idea that you can't be racist against white people is when a lot of anti-SJWs just act like everything's a big joke. But again - the creation of the white race was ENTIRELY a system of subjugation. "White" people have never been an oppressed group, as an ethnic distinction. Anywhere. Ever. Because "White" SPECIFICALLY refers to an American construct used to justify slavery and exported back to Europe and other Europe colonised countries. There is no such thing - for that reason - as racism against "White" people as a group.
Okay, not to support the bigots, but race (skin color) as a concept to excuse slavery was invented in Ancient Egypt, not the USA. "White" to describe people of a caucasian descent has existed for way longer than you seem to think, though what a white person is has changed wildely since it's entrance into language in the 16th century (the chinese were once considered white)so yes it is entirely possible to racist against white people, though it is rare for institutional racism to exist against white people due to the privilege of the plurality. Also, race in this post is vastly off topic, either create a new discussion in the off-topic board, or go elsewhere. Beamdogs decision has nothing to do with race/ethnicity.
There is no "racism against white people". Do you know where the term "white people" comes from? There is no "white race" or "black race" or "yellow race". These were distinctions that were created in the US hundreds of years ago to justify slavery and give poor whites a sense of superiority. What exactly constitutes "white" isn't constant in of itself throughout history. Genetically, a British person is still quite different to someone from the Balkans, or Scandinavia. There are lots of grey areas - people from the Balkans and southern Italy who don't have typically "white" features(probably due to admixture from North African, Middle Eastern or Romani populations over the centuries).
The idea that you can't be racist against white people is when a lot of anti-SJWs just act like everything's a big joke. But again - the creation of the white race was ENTIRELY a system of subjugation. "White" people have never been an oppressed group, as an ethnic distinction. Anywhere. Ever. Because "White" SPECIFICALLY refers to an American construct used to justify slavery and exported back to Europe and other Europe colonised countries. There is no such thing - for that reason - as racism against "White" people as a group.
Pshaw, typical American. Claiming to have invented everything. We of the Old World were using the term 'white people' before George Washington's grandfather was in diapers.
I never felt censored from dipping my head unto vat of boiling acid, just because the jews might see it, like those traditionalists...
Political correctness gone mad, I just dip it in, whomever might see it!
And if someone wants to paint bigoted slogans and religion hate with excrement on a car of someone else, political correctness gone mad, I disprove of it! Even if a Seventh Day Adventist or a Muslim might point out it is softer to just look away... Or hate them for a token sake of popularity...
Political correctness gone mad, I simply disapprove of throwing shit at anyone's car!
And because there is this horrendously "political correctness gone mad" character with Dragonspear, really, rather than just play it and enjoy it... where is that vat of boiling acid? You call it "swoosh" and it is bugged???
If political correctness had not gone mad, I might have not had to enjoy this game! Trans, or advenists, or jews etc notwithstanding, I could always boldly and modernly dip my head unto vat of boiling acid. You just watch!
Edit: Yer raise. I love Stewart Lee. And to be clear he did not say the above literally. My take on his sketch... If only we had so many boiling vats of acid around before...
I just wanted to say that while I have never played a game in this series, I will be buying this one over the weekend to give it a try. As far as the controversy is concerned, don't pay attention to the perpetually enraged Gamer Gate types. They will always be angry about something anyway. Whether its Mad Max's Furiosa character, another strong female and a black male protagonist in The Force Awakens, a white character being changed to a black one in Battlefield 3, an option for a gay relationship in Mass Effect and other games, etc... Anytime you try to add any diversity to a game or movie, they are going to scream and rage about it because that is what they are really all about... They want everything to revolve around heterosexual white guys because that was the status quo for so long. What they fail to realize is that as society progresses, its just going to get worse for them if they think that way. You can't stop the progress of humanity. It doesn't matter how many tantrums they throw. :P Anyway, keep up the good work Beamdog. I hope this controversy brings more attention to your game and you end up selling more of them.
""White" people have never been an oppressed group, as an ethnic distinction. Anywhere. Ever. "
Well, the Celts of Britain who were oppressed by the Romans or the Germans who were oppressed by the Romans or the Germans who oppressed the Romans or the Irish who were oppressed by the English (recall potato famine and Swift's "Modest Proposal") etc. will be ecstatic to hear it. EDIT: And I bet I know what the rejoinder will be, but I won;t argue it here, because this is really OT.
I just wanted to say that while I have never played a game in this series, I will be buying this one over the weekend to give it a try. As far as the controversy is concerned, don't pay attention to the perpetually enraged Gamer Gate types. They will always be angry about something anyway. Whether its Mad Max's Furiosa character, another strong female and a black male protagonist in The Force Awakens, a white character being changed to a black one in Battlefield 3, an option for a gay relationship in Mass Effect and other games, etc... Anytime you try to add any diversity to a game or movie, they are going to scream and rage about it because that is what they are really all about... They want everything to revolve around heterosexual white guys because that was the status quo for so long. What they fail to realize is that as society progresses, its just going to get worse for them if they think that way. You can't stop the progress of humanity. It doesn't matter how many tantrums they throw. :P Anyway, keep up the good work Beamdog. I hope this controversy brings more attention to your game and you end up selling more of them.
It's certainly going to get worse from an artistic point of view if SJW think it acceptable to bowdlerise a text in order to suit their political agenda.
""White" people have never been an oppressed group, as an ethnic distinction. Anywhere. Ever. "
Well, the Celts of Britain who were oppressed by the Romans or the Germans who were oppressed by the Romans or the Germans who oppressed the Romans or the Irish who were oppressed by the English (recall potato famine and Swift's "Modest Proposal") etc. will be ecstatic to hear it. EDIT: And I bet I know what the rejoinder will be, but I won;t argue it here, because this is really OT.
Those are all persecuted groups of white people, but the persecution didn't occur because they were white. So were their oppressors. It happened because they were Celts, Germans, and Irish.
""White" people have never been an oppressed group, as an ethnic distinction. Anywhere. Ever. "
Well, the Celts of Britain who were oppressed by the Romans or the Germans who were oppressed by the Romans or the Germans who oppressed the Romans or the Irish who were oppressed by the English (recall potato famine and Swift's "Modest Proposal") etc. will be ecstatic to hear it. EDIT: And I bet I know what the rejoinder will be, but I won;t argue it here, because this is really OT.
Those are all persecuted groups of white people, but the persecution didn't occur because they were white. So were their oppressors. It happened because they were Celts, Germans, and Irish.
That doesn't help your argument; all you are saying is that they were persecuted because they were of a certain white ethnicity.
White people have been oppressed along with tones of other people for thousands of years. Most people don't seem to understand that democracy is not very old, humanity has lived under abject class systems like empires, tribalism, kingdoms, castes and theocracy for a much longer period of time than the sort of Americanized version of democracy, with it's particular socio-historical tribulations (black slavery, etc). For example, the backbone of the Roman economy was not just 'black-slavery', it was 'everyone who is not an upper-class (patrician) Roman is a potential slave...'
White people have been oppressed along with tones of other people for thousands of years. Most people don't seem to understand that democracy is not very old, humanity has lived under abject class systems like empires, tribalism, kingdoms, castes and theocracy for a much longer period of time than the sort of Americanized version of democracy, with it's particular socio-historical tribulations (black slavery, etc). For example, the backbone of the Roman economy was not just 'black-slavery', it was 'everyone who is not an upper-class (patrician) Roman is a potential slave...'
Exactly there would not be anyone alive who does not have an ancestor that has been oppressed.
I have not read a lot of the posts here, so not gonna reply to anything in particular.
I just wanted to drop by and say:
I haven't bought the expansion yet because of the numerous reports on bugs and broken mods. So holding off for that particular reason. That being said, I see a lot of people commenting on the linear and/or unrealistic writing.
Considering that Beamdog appears to be willing to adjust stuff from the writing (TrentOster' post on the cleric), but also concerned with what was said in the interview on how Beamdog is doing the writing, I only ask one thing:
Please, do not take an one-dimensional view in the writing.
Make the game open and with many options and diversity. Present it in the most realistic manner you can and then give players the option to approach it and interact with it with a lot of variety.
All I want from Baldur's Gate is a game that has variety, that has a bit of every spice.
Put sexism, conservationism, progressiveness, and all other "ism" and "ness" that are out there - and even more, please add them with a touch of gray to show virtues and flaws in all sides of all these "ism" and "nesses".
Give us the chance to approach that diversity using the all the "ism" and "ness" so we can role play!
Make the game open - both by abandoning excessive linearity and also giving the option to interact with the world in various ways. Give us a multi-dimensional experience that doesn't force us into a single belief / vision of the world.
I loved that on BG 2 - and could it have been done better? Yes! And that is exactly what DLCs and a BG 3 have a shot of doing.
I know its hard, I know it is asking for a lot, but give us a rich and broad experience.
Maybe having such a grand scope is not possible with only patches to the DLC, but if you can adjust this at least to a good/reasonable level, we can hope for a very good BG 3 in the future that does this variety even better than BG 2 did.
""White" people have never been an oppressed group, as an ethnic distinction. Anywhere. Ever. "
Well, the Celts of Britain who were oppressed by the Romans or the Germans who were oppressed by the Romans or the Germans who oppressed the Romans or the Irish who were oppressed by the English (recall potato famine and Swift's "Modest Proposal") etc. will be ecstatic to hear it. EDIT: And I bet I know what the rejoinder will be, but I won;t argue it here, because this is really OT.
Those are all persecuted groups of white people, but the persecution didn't occur because they were white. So were their oppressors. It happened because they were Celts, Germans, and Irish.
Since we have been speaking of the United States, I will give you a fun fact: what people consider as 'white' in the United States has actually been a shifting spectrum. In the late 19th Century, the Irish were considered Celts, subhuman and inferior to Anglo-Saxons and other Germanic peoples. After them, the Italians, particularly those from the southern parts of Italy, were considered non-white, in part due to darker skin tones.
EDIT: Because I feel guilty over contributing to us going off-topic, I do want to say that I appreciate the fact that Trent and the Beamdog team sent out information like this in a timely manner. Whether you agree with the steps that they have taken or not, I appreciate the timely efforts.
I just wanted to say that while I have never played a game in this series, I will be buying this one over the weekend to give it a try. As far as the controversy is concerned, don't pay attention to the perpetually enraged Gamer Gate types. They will always be angry about something anyway. Whether its Mad Max's Furiosa character, another strong female and a black male protagonist in The Force Awakens, a white character being changed to a black one in Battlefield 3, an option for a gay relationship in Mass Effect and other games, etc... Anytime you try to add any diversity to a game or movie, they are going to scream and rage about it because that is what they are really all about... They want everything to revolve around heterosexual white guys because that was the status quo for so long. What they fail to realize is that as society progresses, its just going to get worse for them if they think that way. You can't stop the progress of humanity. It doesn't matter how many tantrums they throw. :P Anyway, keep up the good work Beamdog. I hope this controversy brings more attention to your game and you end up selling more of them.
It's certainly going to get worse from an artistic point of view if SJW think it acceptable to bowdlerise a text in order to suit their political agenda.
We seem to be discussing different issues. I'm referring to the fact that some people are enraged about the idea of a transgendered character in the game. The people who are screaming about it being PC and other nonsense. As far as changing text that may be insulting to a group of people, if that is what you are talking about, that has nothing to do with art, its choosing not to be an ass to people. And this is particularly important if you are trying to sell a product. One thing that i find amusing about the people who scream about "PC" and "Free Speech", other than the fact that they usually don't have a basic understanding of what free speech actually entails, is that they never really seem to have a logical reason to say the things they want to say. For example, when I see someone saying people should get upset about jokes with the N word in them, I will usually ask them WHY they feel the need to make jokes using that wrd in the first place and what exactly is so humorous about the word itself. And why is it necessary to use that word in the joke in the first place. They invariably don't have an answer for my questions, which tells me that the purpose is to be an ass to people. The purpose is to insult the groups they are targeting without dealing with any consequences.
""White" people have never been an oppressed group, as an ethnic distinction. Anywhere. Ever. "
Well, the Celts of Britain who were oppressed by the Romans or the Germans who were oppressed by the Romans or the Germans who oppressed the Romans or the Irish who were oppressed by the English (recall potato famine and Swift's "Modest Proposal") etc. will be ecstatic to hear it. EDIT: And I bet I know what the rejoinder will be, but I won;t argue it here, because this is really OT.
Those are all persecuted groups of white people, but the persecution didn't occur because they were white. So were their oppressors. It happened because they were Celts, Germans, and Irish.
Yep. A perfect example would be the Irish immigrants in the United States. They were essentially treated like hispanic immigrants today and it wasn't because they were white. In fact, they were persecuted by other white people. It was due to them being Irish... Well, a foreign group of people to be specific. Our country has always had issues with xenophobia, which is the ultimate irony when you consider the fact that the Statue of Liberty is such an important historical landmark.
Comments
Besides its me, I'm the best.
opposeddead to the dialectic, that it should have this as an epigraph:“Nam Sibyllam quidem Cumis ego ipse oculis meis vidi
in ampulla pendere, et cum illi pueri dicerent:Σιβυλλα
τι θελεις; respondebat illa:αποθανειν θελω.”
lol
don't know why that one line was so detested. It didn't have anything insulting or judgmental in it.
If you look at more of the rare lines, you'll see, more of the fourth wall ones.
Jaheira: "By your command" said in a robot voice
Khalid: " Th-th-th-that's all, f-folks!"
Khalid: "Click on someone your own size!"
No one got hung up on those. These lines are kind of easter eggs, you shouldn't see them in normal gameplay. You have to click on the character 10 times without giving a command.
Ok, now i looked up the meme and understand the problem a bit more.
Manipulation of information at it's finest.
Also, you know what, I'm going to recommend everyone else do this too - I'm not engaging a post that contains the word "Social Justice Warrior" because it's effectively used as a slur. If your first instinct is to compare it to "cis", "white" or "male" then it just proves you're coming from a disingenous place, because those describe a demographic and aren't inherently weighted. I'm also not interested in dealing with people who nasty enough to turn around to an actual factually marginalised person and claim they're being somehow oppressed for having their own crappy attitudes called out. Just no.
There is a problem with racism and erasure of LGBT people in Hollywood. Full stop. And it's largely the same for video games. If you can't accept this basic point then your grip on reality is too tenuous to get into a real debate.
There is no "racism against white people". Do you know where the term "white people" comes from? There is no "white race" or "black race" or "yellow race". These were distinctions that were created in the US hundreds of years ago to justify slavery and give poor whites a sense of superiority. What exactly constitutes "white" isn't constant in of itself throughout history. Genetically, a British person is still quite different to someone from the Balkans, or Scandinavia. There are lots of grey areas - people from the Balkans and southern Italy who don't have typically "white" features(probably due to admixture from North African, Middle Eastern or Romani populations over the centuries).
The idea that you can't be racist against white people is when a lot of anti-SJWs just act like everything's a big joke. But again - the creation of the white race was ENTIRELY a system of subjugation. "White" people have never been an oppressed group, as an ethnic distinction. Anywhere. Ever. Because "White" SPECIFICALLY refers to an American construct used to justify slavery and exported back to Europe and other Europe colonised countries. There is no such thing - for that reason - as racism against "White" people as a group.
Political correctness gone mad, I just dip it in, whomever might see it!
And if someone wants to paint bigoted slogans and religion hate with excrement on a car of someone else, political correctness gone mad, I disprove of it! Even if a Seventh Day Adventist or a Muslim might point out it is softer to just look away... Or hate them for a token sake of popularity...
Political correctness gone mad, I simply disapprove of throwing shit at anyone's car!
And because there is this horrendously "political correctness gone mad" character with Dragonspear, really, rather than just play it and enjoy it... where is that vat of boiling acid? You call it "swoosh" and it is bugged???
If political correctness had not gone mad, I might have not had to enjoy this game! Trans, or advenists, or jews etc notwithstanding, I could always boldly and modernly dip my head unto vat of boiling acid. You just watch!
Edit:
Well, the Celts of Britain who were oppressed by the Romans or the Germans who were oppressed by the Romans or the Germans who oppressed the Romans or the Irish who were oppressed by the English (recall potato famine and Swift's "Modest Proposal") etc. will be ecstatic to hear it.
EDIT: And I bet I know what the rejoinder will be, but I won;t argue it here, because this is really OT.
I just wanted to drop by and say:
I haven't bought the expansion yet because of the numerous reports on bugs and broken mods. So holding off for that particular reason. That being said, I see a lot of people commenting on the linear and/or unrealistic writing.
Considering that Beamdog appears to be willing to adjust stuff from the writing (TrentOster' post on the cleric), but also concerned with what was said in the interview on how Beamdog is doing the writing, I only ask one thing:
Please, do not take an one-dimensional view in the writing.
Make the game open and with many options and diversity. Present it in the most realistic manner you can and then give players the option to approach it and interact with it with a lot of variety.
All I want from Baldur's Gate is a game that has variety, that has a bit of every spice.
Put sexism, conservationism, progressiveness, and all other "ism" and "ness" that are out there - and even more, please add them with a touch of gray to show virtues and flaws in all sides of all these "ism" and "nesses".
Give us the chance to approach that diversity using the all the "ism" and "ness" so we can role play!
Make the game open - both by abandoning excessive linearity and also giving the option to interact with the world in various ways. Give us a multi-dimensional experience that doesn't force us into a single belief / vision of the world.
I loved that on BG 2 - and could it have been done better? Yes! And that is exactly what DLCs and a BG 3 have a shot of doing.
I know its hard, I know it is asking for a lot, but give us a rich and broad experience.
Maybe having such a grand scope is not possible with only patches to the DLC, but if you can adjust this at least to a good/reasonable level, we can hope for a very good BG 3 in the future that does this variety even better than BG 2 did.
Th-th-th-that's all, f-folks!
EDIT: Because I feel guilty over contributing to us going off-topic, I do want to say that I appreciate the fact that Trent and the Beamdog team sent out information like this in a timely manner. Whether you agree with the steps that they have taken or not, I appreciate the timely efforts.