Obsidian Entertainment Caves to a Vocal Minority: Controversial Backer Tombstone Changed in Pillars - Polidicks

As much as this does suck, does it really detract from the game that is Pillars of Eternity? Does replacing this message take away from the story or gameplay? No? Then I'm off to play more Pillars of Eternity. Honestly, the worst thing GG has done has instantiated this overarching fear of the "SJW boogeyman" and how they're out to "ruin our games." It's fucking video games. As much as I love them, everyone should have an equal voice concerning them and their content. SJW or no. If you don't agree with the opinions of some people, then disregard their opinions and move on with your life. And again, it's not like this change is massive and undermines the theme of the game. It sucks, yes, but again it doesn't take away from the game that much. [sp]I'm expecting a barrage of angry GG supporter posts in response to this calling me an SJW, even though I'm mostly neutral to this whole shitty episode of internet drama[/sp]

[QUOTE=Eonart;47453424]I just want to point out that the first person that complained about it and triggered the shitstorm was someone that "unironically wanted to #KillAllMen" almost word for word. People who backed her up were either just as loony or didn't actually play the game to end up seeing it themselves. I find it's more important to listen to the majority of your sane customers and not a minority that probably don't even play the game.[/QUOTE] [img]http://i.imgur.com/2WXPa5T.png[/img]

[QUOTE=.Lain;47453173]calm down and ignore this tiny little issue rather than making a bigger issue out of it than it deserves[/QUOTE] How small/big is this issue compared to the original issue about the joke? Just wondering.

[QUOTE=Rahu X;47453472]As much as this does suck, does it really detract from the game that is Pillars of Eternity? Does replacing this message take away from the story or gameplay? No? Then I'm off to play more Pillars of Eternity. Honestly, the worst thing GG has done has instantiated this overarching fear of the "SJW boogeyman" and how they're out to "ruin our games." It's fucking video games. As much as I love them, everyone should have an equal voice concerning them and their content. SJW or no. If you don't agree with the opinions of some people, then disregard their opinions and move on with your life. And again, it's not like this change is massive and undermines the theme of the game. It sucks, yes, but again it doesn't take away from the game that much. [sp]I'm expecting a barrage of angry GG supporter posts in response to this calling me an SJW, even though I'm mostly neutral to this whole shitty episode of internet drama[/sp][/QUOTE] I think a big part of the fear of the "SJW boogeymen" comes from alot of those kinds of people being in positions where they have more "reach" than others, or more of a voice. It's this thing where you see people listening to somebody talking about how video games cause sexism and ignoring the large population of people who disagree with them. As for expecting "angry GG supporters" calling you an SJW for taking this stance, maybe on *chan, but I'd be surprised to see something like that here.

[QUOTE=Rahu X;47453472]As much as I love them, everyone should have an equal voice concerning them and their content. SJW or no. If you don't agree with the opinions of some people, then disregard their opinions and move on with your life. [/QUOTE] The problem here is that the ratio of game players is like 98% normal, mentally healthy folks to 2% SJWs. If everyone had an equal voice, SJW bullshit would never touch any game. The reason it's different is precisely because people don't have equal voices. That 98% is off playing video games and enjoying themselves while this angry, self-satisfied 2% flings all of its energy into making itself heard.

[QUOTE=Glent;47453483]I think a big part of the fear of the "SJW boogeymen" comes from alot of those kinds of people being in positions where they have more "reach" than others, or more of a voice. It's this thing where you see people listening to somebody talking about how video games cause sexism and ignoring the large population of people who disagree with them. As for expecting "angry GG supporters" calling you an SJW for taking this stance, maybe on *chan, but I'd be surprised to see something like that here.[/QUOTE] While I agree it's a bit concerning that SJWs can have a loud and somewhat incorrect voice regarding nearly all forms of media, we should not deny them their right to speak with said voice. If you don't like the voice, stop listening to it, or speak with a louder voice with evidence to disregard their voice. Just make sure you don't end up the same as them, only with the difference of an opposing opinion. Stay level headed and don't be incorrect.

[QUOTE=Rahu X;47453502]While I agree it's a bit concerning that SJWs can have a loud and somewhat incorrect voice regarding nearly all forms of media, we should not deny them their right to speak with said voice. [/QUOTE] No one has suggested this at any point so ???

Most likely the people that originally complained about the joke probably don't play video games, most socjus people don't. Just like those that complained about The Killing Joke cover. At this point I can't tell the difference between authoritarian leftists (socjus) and righty's (jack thompson types).

[QUOTE=hrak;47453514]No one has suggested this at any point so ???[/QUOTE] Apologies. I'm used to having to speak with the more crazy side of GG supporters. The ones that are basically just SJWs, but with the opposite viewpoint of the SJWs they are against.:tinfoil: [sp]How many times am I going to type "SJW" today...[/sp]

[QUOTE=hrak;47453493]The problem here is that the ratio of game players is like 98% normal, mentally healthy folks to 2% SJWs. If everyone had an equal voice, SJW bullshit would never touch any game. The reason it's different is precisely because people don't have equal voices. That 98% is off playing video games and enjoying themselves while this angry, self-satisfied 2% flings all of its energy into making itself heard.[/QUOTE] Then nobody has the right to complain when the 98% flips the table and walks away with their money for devaluing their opinion.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;47453347]Very recently veterans and bystanders shamed a family for letting their children climb on a statue. What the children were doing was completely legal but someone took offense to it and complained. The family has very likely been pressured into making sure their children don't do it again. In that case, this forum overwhelmingly sided with the people complaining even though the "ruckus" they caused resulted in the suppression of legal activity through societal pressure. Why is this suddenly a huge deal when it happens in a video game? Second example: businesses boycotting Indiana over their recent religious freedom law[/QUOTE] it's simple. people think children shouldnt have climbed on a statue. people dont think the original joke was in any way offensive, and also think that pandering to the hyper offended babies will result in an overall degradation of the medium. It's not about social pressure not existing, it's about how it's applied.

Here lies Firedorn, a hero for sure Until SJWs appeared with bottoms so sore They ranted and raved, it was a great shame Cause it was only a joke in a video game

They're now upset over the new limerick pocking fun at them.

How are those people actually living with the day to day struggles if something as ridiculous as this offends them and makes them go on a crusade?

[QUOTE=Glent;47453483]I think a big part of the fear of the "SJW boogeymen" comes from alot of those kinds of people being in positions where they have more "reach" than others, or more of a voice. It's this thing where you see people listening to somebody talking about how video games cause sexism and ignoring the large population of people who disagree with them. As for expecting "angry GG supporters" calling you an SJW for taking this stance, maybe on *chan, but I'd be surprised to see something like that here.[/QUOTE] Pretty much this. What really boils my piss that the people who hear their voice just hear some media intern's horrible tales of those dastardly gamers on the internet and and never really see the trainwreck of fanaticism, hypocrisy, and BPD that's just under the surface.

[QUOTE=bunguer;47453607]How are those people actually living with the day to day struggles if something as ridiculous as this offends them and makes them go on a crusade?[/QUOTE] Here's an explanation I posted in the Corruption thread for how people like this function: Students of Gender Studies and other newer-er social sciences use the post-structural and postmodern methodology of examining context and "core messages" AKA "keep digging until I find whatever I'm looking for". This is where you get things like "the color blue means rape". It's not about the creator's intention, in fact the creator's intention is completely pointless because the creator is most likely unaware of the postmodern messages they are delivering and the individual reader's opinion, interpretation and "headcanon" is more important (see "[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_the_Author]Death of the author[/url]"). This is actually a huge issue with the late postmodernism of the 80s-90s that came into effect due to the rise of technology (suddenly everybody could be an artist and not just people with decades of study), the fact that the rest of the world moved on from postmodern thought after 9/11 further segregated these ideological groups from the rest of society and created the circle-jerking thought-boxes we see today in academia. Putting it very simply, Postmodern thinking was originally seen as a way of fighting against the Modernists who believed that there was a single, perfect way of designing things. Postmodernism is all about deconstructing and analyzing art, design, culture and society by isolating, creating copies and objectively studying a piece of work or a element of culture in order to create remixed interpretations and new insights. Postmodernism is said to be post-structural because it doesn't rely on a specific set of rules or instructions to be applied and this was a pretty big deal before computers came out and it was easy to remix, edit and create new things from already existing works without any design skill whatsoever. Postmodernism was ultimately designed as a way of criticizing egotists who claimed to come up with a perfect means of communication. As technology advanced it became filled with the same egotists who claimed their postmodernist theory was the be all and end all of literally analysis and cultural criticism. They claimed that because their works were an objective analysis and their own personal opinion that they were immune to criticism. They derided or outright ignored the claim of original artists upon their own work while ravenously defending their own copies. They claimed their work was objective rather than other works which were subjective and flawed. They relied and still rely on a single method of thinking in everything they do. So here's the fantastic irony of the whole thing, Postmodernists criticize Modernists for being too structural and applying things such as the scientific process but in the end they rely on a single methodology to do their critique, which cannot be deviated from under any circumstances and gives the same result each time. The whole idea of internet culture and internet memes infuriates cultural theorists like Jonathan McIntosh and many, many Gender Studies university lecturers because it deviates from the Pluralism and core ideas and patterns that they've established as existing within society, it simply doesn't make sense to them. The underlying problem is that they need something to attack and criticize in order to exist and for their grungy, moody rhetoric to gain any traction. The stuff we're seeing now in modern media has effectively been repeated multiple times throughout the last twenty years or so, the biggest example of which I can think of being the [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_wars]Science Wars[/url] of the mid to late 90s, which was a huge conflict between actual Scientists and Gender Studies professors in which [b]Postmodernist Cultural Theorists argued that the study of Science and intellectual study itself was not inclusive enough and that we needed to increase diversity by abolishing the entire scientific method and the way we do science altogether and replace it with postmodernist rhetoric[/b] ("Guys, don't you know that science is just a social construct?"). That argument has basically just continued into Atheism+ and eventually video games, comics, the internet and new media. They ultimately want to abolish all empirical, rational and scientific reasoning and replace it with their own late postmodernist cultural theory where no piece of work means what it says it means and in reality everything is just sexist and racist and offensive, etcetera. It's what they believe.

[QUOTE=Rahu X;47453472]It's fucking video games. As much as I love them, everyone should have an equal voice concerning them and their content.[/QUOTE] Except they don't even play video games. They get mad at things that they don't use. [QUOTE=Gray Altoid;47453477][t]http://i.imgur.com/2WXPa5T.png[/t][/QUOTE] If there's one thing GG has made me really hate, it's Twitter conversations. "Person says something stupid. Internet outraged!" After the hundredth time, it gets really tiring and annoying.

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;47453649]Except they don't even play video games. They get mad at things that they don't use. If there's one thing GG has made me really hate, it's Twitter conversations. "Person says something stupid. Internet outraged!" After the hundredth time, it gets really tiring and annoying.[/QUOTE] it does get pretty tiring. Usually people only care if it's someone with some kind of importance or power, or in this case, someone being given power and trust to declare things offensive while being a sexist sack of shit themselves.

[QUOTE=Mattk50;47453685]it does get pretty tiring. Usually people only care if it's someone with some kind of importance or power, or in this case, someone being given power and trust to declare things offensive while being a sexist sack of shit themselves.[/QUOTE] it's so fucking obvious that 90% of these people are xenophobic shits who can't stand anyone who isn't identical to themselves. The insults may change, but the hatred and the intolerance for anything that offends their fragile sensibilities is exactly the same.

Calling them xenophobic is a bit of a stretch, don't you think?

[QUOTE=.Lain;47453077]the only way you could interpret that as having nothing offensive in it in 2015 is if you had no eyeballs[/QUOTE] To be honest I consider it a cliche joke and that's it. And let's be honest, it's often hard to make a joke that would not offend someone these days.

I wouldn't say xenophobic. Ignorant is a better word for it.

[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;47453730]Calling them xenophobic is a bit of a stretch, don't you think?[/QUOTE] if you need everyone around you to think the same way you do and act the same way you do then you are a xenophobe All these people are is another group of white upper middle class yuppies who are terrified of anything unfamiliar, strange, or potentially threatening. Just like the ones who were terrified of rock music, just like the ones who were terrified of D&D, and just like the ones who were terrified of video game violence. They may dress differently and they may justify their fears in different ways, but their fears stem from the same mentality and are just as irrational as the fears of the past.

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;47453649]Except they don't even play video games. They get mad at things that they don't use. If there's one thing GG has made me really hate, it's Twitter conversations. "Person says something stupid. Internet outraged!" After the hundredth time, it gets really tiring and annoying.[/QUOTE] twitter has proven that brevity really isn't the soul of wit

[QUOTE=hrak;47453380]Obsidian adds limerick > SJWs complain about limerick addition > zeke: this is ok and it's their right to complain Obsidian removes limerick > everyone else complains about limerick removal > zeke: DON'T removal-shame obsidian you shitlords they can do what they want ???[/QUOTE] Remember how I said I'm fine with both sides complaining all they want? What I'm not fine with is the blatant hypocrisy exhibited by people complaining about the removal. [editline]3rd April 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Zyler;47453643] They ultimately want to abolish all empirical, rational and scientific reasoning and replace it with their own late postmodernist cultural theory where no piece of work means what it says it means and in reality everything is just sexist and racist and offensive, etcetera. It's what they believe.[/QUOTE] This is the conclusion people in gamergate are reaching based on liberals criticizing videogames. Let that sink in for a minute. There is an entire movement of people on the internet who believe that the criticism of videogames is the "abolishment of all empirical, rational, and scientific reasoning". And they want to convince you that this is an example of rational reasoning.

I love reading through threads like this and seeing the same ~5 SJW leaning posters consistently get dumbed for their opinions by the majority of people who recognize their zealotry. Edit: Zeke SJW outcries concerning videogames aren't based on rationality at all; 'muh feelings and yuh privilege' are pretty much exclusively used to disarm any rational argument presented against them. We've seen this time and again by AGGro figureheads and the people who follow them. For this reason I think it perfectly reasonable for GGers to assume that the sudden SJW videogame flashpoint is totally against reasonable thought.

[QUOTE=Ruski v2.0;47453848]I love reading through threads like this and seeing the same ~5 SJW leaning posters consistently get dumbed for their opinions by the majority of people who recognize their zealotry.[/QUOTE] It's almost as though people are "pressuring" "social justice warriors" to "cave to pressure" and change their minds. But don't worry, I will not allow myself to be "censored".

Nice quotation marks dude. I wouldn't say that they are being pressured to change their minds at all. Rating someone's post is simply an easy way of saying you agree or disagree with them without getting into a debate you either don't have the energy or time to have with them. Try harder.

[QUOTE=Ruski v2.0;47453883]Nice quotation marks dude. I wouldn't say that they are being pressured to change their minds at all. Rating someone's post is simply an easy way of saying you agree or disagree with them without getting into a debate you either don't have the energy or time to have with them. Try harder.[/QUOTE] Debates aren't popularity contests so using ratings in debates is basically meaningless anyway. [editline]3rd April 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Ruski v2.0;47453848] Zeke SJW outcries concerning videogames aren't based on rationality at all; 'muh feelings and yuh privilege' are pretty much exclusively used to disarm any rational argument presented against them. We've seen this time and again by AGGro figureheads and the people who follow them. For this reason I think it perfectly reasonable for GGers to assume that the sudden SJW videogame flashpoint is totally against reasonable thought.[/QUOTE] "I'm upset by this" is a completely rational opinion to have on things, and something that has existed long before gamergate appeared and will continue existing long after. It's only recently that people have begun believing (widespread) that the mere existence of these viewpoints is an attempt to suppress them.

I'm not saying debates are popularity contests in the slightest. I for one simply enjoy rating a person's post based upon what I think they have said. But sure dude. Lets just all stop rating posts and all get into hour long internet debates when we either agree, disagree, think something is useful, think something is dumb, think someone won at something... etc etc.