Litany
-
Posts
66 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Litany
-
-
Met Mukumu and spoke to him, had the option for a Bleak Walker response even though I was a Beastmaster.
-
And a typo in the Stalker's Link skill
"gain and Accuracy bonus"
-
And another: when creating a Beastmaster with the Stalker subclass, the Separation Anxiety and Companion Bond skills appeared twice in the skill list.
-
In attached screens:
1.) a typo for a cipher power ("bonust")
2.) pop-up tooltips getting cut off in 1920x1080 res.
3.) when clicking between monk subclasses, Nalpazca is cut off with no way to scroll down. Scroll bar then appears on Shattered Pillar but disappears when attempting to scroll.
4.) when creating a wild orlan character, I clicked on the hair button and her hair disappeared with no way to restore it.
-
I wasn't offended by the limerick. But when someone else said they were, I thought to myself "Oh, they're offended. I personally am not, but I can't discount their personal views on the subject. So the poem in question should probably be changed." I'm a member of the majority who joins with the minority to make the change happen without having any personal stake. There are a lot of us, we just don't tend to be as loudmouthed as the regressives/reactionaries.
And actually minorities get rights all the time in democracies? Gay folks make up ten percent of the population but Indiana is facing nationwide boycotts over recent legislation. The US Supreme Court has made a number of rulings re: minority rights, even when a majority opposed what they did, which is how you got integrated schools and interracial marriage in the US thirty to forty years before it had popular approval.
And you know who has the right to censor what's in Obsidian's video game? Obsidian. And they did. You lose. Neener neener.
You're contradicting yourself again with reality. You made the boss analogy, I simply enlightened you as to how it was wrong.
If you change something said in jest because it's "offensive", where does it end? Who decides what is okay and what isn't? You? If so, why are you suddenly speaking for me and in effect taking away my liberties of reading the joke. Why do I, as an adult, need another adult to run in front of me waving their hands telling me that what I'm about to read or watch is so offensive that I'm not allowed to even judge it for myself? That's what you're doing and advocating right now.
The infantilization of the LGB and transgendered community in particular is disgusting to me. Why are you treating them like children who don't have the common sense to just, skip past reading something that offends them? Why do they need you to defend them when they aren't asking for it, and frankly, don't need it.
Obsidian decides because it's their game.
And yes, different types of content are held to different standards. This is not controversial.
Edit: And you don't have a "right" to read or watch anything. Obsidian can produce whatever content they desire and decided that this content was not appropriate for their game. They didn't take away your right to read it, and insisting they keep it tramples on THEIR rights to decide what is in their game,
Your rights end where they intrude on the rights of another.
This is your third contradiction, so technically, you're out. You can keep going if you want though.
Obsidian did decide. It was in the original game. It wasn't removed until the fake PC hate pandering victimized ragestorm on Twitter, that you self-admittedly are directly contributing to, made it something it wasn't. Obsidian did produce what they desired, and they forced to change it by people like you who feel that your being offended outweighs every other person's right to even BE offended if they so choose wish. You've taken that ability from people to decide for themselves. I know that you're having trouble comprehending this but how isn't that considered the definition of censorship?
Obsidian just said, in a post from their CEO today, that they were unhappy with the content and asked the backer to change it. So if you're accusing them of lying, more power to ya.
And let's say, for the sake of argument, that they liked it at first but changed their mind when they were criticized. That's still Obsidian making the decision.
And I have a hard time calling it censorship unless Obsidian's hand was forced, and I see no evidence of that. They seemed to take the criticism to heart immediately and took steps to correct the issue with their very first patch.
Edit: And none of you are in a position to say what her motivations were for complaining. And it hardly matters either way, since there appear to be plenty of people who agree with her regardless. And if she really was looking for attention and this bothers you, I'm sure she's really hurting now that a bunch of nerds decided to go to war over the issue.
-
2
-
-
Aww a mod said not to be mean. You shouldn't misgender people, though.
I do not, I call him what he is.
You're a sad, sad person, and I hope you can be a better one someday.
-
1
-
-
That depends, is the rape and abortion content part of a Backer-submitted joke poem that isn't explored or deconstructed by the game or its story?
I'm not saying that games shouldn't have negative things in them. If we did that we wouldn't have a lot of stories left to tell. For example, Pillars could explore racism (and does!) and even use racial slurs, but if a Backer submitted a poem full of racial slurs I would expect it to be rejected. There's a difference between storytelling and thematic elements, and some fluff included to reward a contributor.
TLDR: It's ok for Mark Twain to write the n-word, but it isn't ok for you to walk up to a black guy and call him that.
That's simply an absurd, subjective and arbitrary place to draw the line between what is allowed and what isn't. What counts explored or deconstructed to you? To me? To someone on twitter looking for more followers? Unless you buy their story about missing it during the vetting (Just as they missed the gamebanshee.com advertisement and the numerous other not-lore-friendly) then they clearly thought it fit the "tone" of their game until a twitter dust-up - the only reason it's out now is to avoid offending the sensibilities of some people and that's censorship anyway you cut it.
I dunno, but I think that a one-off limerick doesn't make the cut, and Obsidian agrees.
Yeah, we know this, the question is why, and the only answer you or Obsidian seem interesting in giving is "someone was offended" and that just doesn't seem like the response of someone who has thought much about the issue.
Why isn't that enough? What was lost by the change? What do you gain if it were changed back?
Why are you so insistent on hurting the feelings of others for no reason?
-
1
-
-
The only opinion I truly value is my own. And Obsidian's. Because I like their games.
Edit: In all seriousness, the calculus I use is simple. It cost the people complaining nothing when this content was changed. And it resulted in others feeling safer and included. Since the cost was minimal (practically non-existent), removing the content is a net gain for the players and Obsidian. I will always err on the side of inclusion in these matters. That's my two cents.-
4
-
-
It's also considered rude not to use the preferred pronoun. The name her parents gave her.
Shame I don't care in this particular case since he wants to kill people like me.
Aww a mod said not to be mean. You shouldn't misgender people, though.
-
That depends, is the rape and abortion content part of a Backer-submitted joke poem that isn't explored or deconstructed by the game or its story?
I'm not saying that games shouldn't have negative things in them. If we did that we wouldn't have a lot of stories left to tell. For example, Pillars could explore racism (and does!) and even use racial slurs, but if a Backer submitted a poem full of racial slurs I would expect it to be rejected. There's a difference between storytelling and thematic elements, and some fluff included to reward a contributor.
TLDR: It's ok for Mark Twain to write the n-word, but it isn't ok for you to walk up to a black guy and call him that.
That's simply an absurd, subjective and arbitrary place to draw the line between what is allowed and what isn't. What counts explored or deconstructed to you? To me? To someone on twitter looking for more followers? Unless you buy their story about missing it during the vetting (Just as they missed the gamebanshee.com advertisement and the numerous other not-lore-friendly) then they clearly thought it fit the "tone" of their game until a twitter dust-up - the only reason it's out now is to avoid offending the sensibilities of some people and that's censorship anyway you cut it.
I dunno, but I think that a one-off limerick doesn't make the cut, and Obsidian agrees.
-
I wasn't offended by the limerick. But when someone else said they were, I thought to myself "Oh, they're offended. I personally am not, but I can't discount their personal views on the subject. So the poem in question should probably be changed." I'm a member of the majority who joins with the minority to make the change happen without having any personal stake. There are a lot of us, we just don't tend to be as loudmouthed as the regressives/reactionaries.
And actually minorities get rights all the time in democracies? Gay folks make up ten percent of the population but Indiana is facing nationwide boycotts over recent legislation. The US Supreme Court has made a number of rulings re: minority rights, even when a majority opposed what they did, which is how you got integrated schools and interracial marriage in the US thirty to forty years before it had popular approval.
And you know who has the right to censor what's in Obsidian's video game? Obsidian. And they did. You lose. Neener neener.
You're contradicting yourself again with reality. You made the boss analogy, I simply enlightened you as to how it was wrong.
If you change something said in jest because it's "offensive", where does it end? Who decides what is okay and what isn't? You? If so, why are you suddenly speaking for me and in effect taking away my liberties of reading the joke. Why do I, as an adult, need another adult to run in front of me waving their hands telling me that what I'm about to read or watch is so offensive that I'm not allowed to even judge it for myself? That's what you're doing and advocating right now.
The infantilization of the LGB and transgendered community in particular is disgusting to me. Why are you treating them like children who don't have the common sense to just, skip past reading something that offends them? Why do they need you to defend them when they aren't asking for it, and frankly, don't need it.
Obsidian decides because it's their game.
And yes, different types of content are held to different standards. This is not controversial.
Edit: And you don't have a "right" to read or watch anything. Obsidian can produce whatever content they desire and decided that this content was not appropriate for their game. They didn't take away your right to read it, and insisting they keep it tramples on THEIR rights to decide what is in their game,
Your rights end where they intrude on the rights of another.
-
2
-
-
Name before she transitioned. Gets hurled at transfolk a lot.
deadname?BTW a few people tried to use Erika's deadname. It's not actually Eric. That's pretty lazy of you.
If you're going to be a bigot and blow your whole case to hell put some more effort into it,
Wouldn't it be Birthname? As in the one his parents gave him?
It's also considered rude not to use the preferred pronoun. The name her parents gave her.
-
Yeah and now people expressing their opinions about Obsidian carving in. I know its an endless circle and Developer will never win.
Prove that they caved in.
Put up or shut up.
It's really not such a difficult concept.
You will never ba able to prove this- This is ridiculous. However...
Obsidian makes games and even controlled backer content and helped them with writing as well.
Games gets released
Some crazy person saw some messages that did upset her even though the meaning is not even clear
She calls Obsidian out, she calls for a boycott.
a Week or so later Obsidian removed the content with some PR messages behind it.
Yeah the chances that they carved in is pretty high for me.
I'm not sure it counts as "caving" if you immediately agree with what is proposed and promise to change it. Generally to cave in there has to be a disagreement in the first place.
The only reason it took a week is because that's when they released their first major patch.
-
If the death of freedom looks like a bunch of nerds weeping over the loss of bad video game dialogue, then I welcome it with open arms.
Because it's hilarious.
(Also, kill all men)
Can we ammend this to "manchildren"?
No, there is only one way to be sure. All men must fall. As a man, I must slay my brothers to give rise to the glorious gynocracy!
-
If the death of freedom looks like a bunch of nerds weeping over the loss of bad video game dialogue, then I welcome it with open arms.
Because it's hilarious.
Cant EDIT: Even in jest, no kill all [insert group of people here].
-
4
-
-
I also bought Pillars of Eternity and support what Obsidian did.
You aren't special because you bought a video game.
What you said is in direct contrast to reality.
"So one thing that, um, I really appreciate about Kickstarter is that its sorta given the game development community, um, more options in terms of what content it can produce. What sort of game ideas you can bring to the table, and the fact that it doesn't really have the publisher model involved but we're actually being financed directly by they players, who, we answer to anyway and I'd rather have them as the bosses. Um, that's sorta been a very new way of doing games that's been very, very exciting." - Chris Avellone, Pillars of Eternity Kickstarter video
Well, here's the problem with the idea that the backers are bosses: we both bought the game (I'm assuming you did even though you lack a visible backer badge, else why are you here?) so we're BOTH his bosses, right? I think Obsidian made the right choice, you think they made the wrong choice. So we cancel out.
Now, unless you think Obsidian should make all future decisions by Backer Committee (and what a cluster THAT would be!) we'll probably just have to agree that Obsidian is a private company that will do what it thinks is best for itself and its consumer, regardless of our individual opinions.
WE AREN'T SPECIAL WE JUST BOUGHT A VIDEO GAME. Honestly no one should listen to us because we clearly waste our money on frivolous nonsense.
So I'll use your own example to discredit you so you can more easily process it. The hardest truths are often the most difficult to swallow:
With your example, all backers are bosses, I went back to the first post of this thread and read to the end. I wrote down who was strongly against, didn't care so they remained neutral, and who were the opposite by being strongly supportive of the change to the memorial stone.
25 bosses felt strongly enough about the change to express their disappointment in the change. 9 of the bosses remained neutral, not caring either way. And 8 bosses were strongly supportive of the change.
In any democracy, or any boardroom as your example indicates this change would've never happened in the first place. The offended are the minority, they aren't even eclipsing the neutral party who have no feeling either way on the subject. They're dwarfed by the majority, yet the majority is expected to acquiesce? They aren't entitled to their criticism without their criticism being criticized?
The joke was a joke and all jokes come from the same place. Good jokes and bad jokes are born from the same womb. Just because it was in your opinion a "bad" joke doesn't mean he didn't have the right to attempt to be funny, and that definitely doesn't mean that you have the right to censor him because what they said in the pursuit of being funny was personally offensive to you.
I wasn't offended by the limerick. But when someone else said they were, I thought to myself "Oh, they're offended. I personally am not, but I can't discount their personal views on the subject. So the poem in question should probably be changed." I'm a member of the majority who joins with the minority to make the change happen without having any personal stake. There are a lot of us, we just don't tend to be as loudmouthed as the regressives/reactionaries.
And actually minorities get rights all the time in democracies? Gay folks make up ten percent of the population but Indiana is facing nationwide boycotts over recent legislation. The US Supreme Court has made a number of rulings re: minority rights, even when a majority opposed what they did, which is how you got integrated schools and interracial marriage in the US thirty to forty years before it had popular approval.
And you know who has the right to censor what's in Obsidian's video game? Obsidian. And they did. You lose. Neener neener.
Just curious - if I were to find someone offended by the game's involving rapes and abortions, will you also not discount their personal views on the subject and agree that the content should be changed to something that will offend /less/ people?
That depends, is the rape and abortion content part of a Backer-submitted joke poem that isn't explored or deconstructed by the game or its story?
I'm not saying that games shouldn't have negative things in them. If we did that we wouldn't have a lot of stories left to tell. For example, Pillars could explore racism (and does!) and even use racial slurs, but if a Backer submitted a poem full of racial slurs I would expect it to be rejected. There's a difference between storytelling and thematic elements, and some fluff included to reward a contributor.
TLDR: It's ok for Mark Twain to write the n-word, but it isn't ok for you to walk up to a black guy and call him that.
-
1
-
-
I wasn't offended by the limerick. But when someone else said they were, I thought to myself "Oh, they're offended. I personally am not, but I can't discount their personal views on the subject. So the poem in question should probably be changed."
Well I guess since so many people are offended by the change then by your logic it should be changed back
If that's how Obsidian wants to respond, they are free to do so. I would oppose it because people have said they find the language hurtful and I have no rationale for denying that experience. And Obsidian agrees, so gone it will stay.
-
I have ****ing had it with these SJWs I'm just livid at this point as of late this has been happening more and more developers walking on eggshells to appease a bunch of oversensitive twitter nitwits. Every developer that censors themselves to appease these people are all cowards in my eyes and will never see my money these people do not give a single **** about your games they just want power and they scream "I'm offended" until they get their way.
This whole debacle had already blown over about a day after it started Obsidian could have said nothing but no Obsidian decided to cave to a hateful SJW and her followers instead of listening to their own fans.
I hope your happy with the SJWs Obsidian and thanks for saving me money.
Counterpoint: SJWs rule and you drool.
-
1
-
-
I also bought Pillars of Eternity and support what Obsidian did.
You aren't special because you bought a video game.
What you said is in direct contrast to reality.
"So one thing that, um, I really appreciate about Kickstarter is that its sorta given the game development community, um, more options in terms of what content it can produce. What sort of game ideas you can bring to the table, and the fact that it doesn't really have the publisher model involved but we're actually being financed directly by they players, who, we answer to anyway and I'd rather have them as the bosses. Um, that's sorta been a very new way of doing games that's been very, very exciting." - Chris Avellone, Pillars of Eternity Kickstarter video
Well, here's the problem with the idea that the backers are bosses: we both bought the game (I'm assuming you did even though you lack a visible backer badge, else why are you here?) so we're BOTH his bosses, right? I think Obsidian made the right choice, you think they made the wrong choice. So we cancel out.
Now, unless you think Obsidian should make all future decisions by Backer Committee (and what a cluster THAT would be!) we'll probably just have to agree that Obsidian is a private company that will do what it thinks is best for itself and its consumer, regardless of our individual opinions.
WE AREN'T SPECIAL WE JUST BOUGHT A VIDEO GAME. Honestly no one should listen to us because we clearly waste our money on frivolous nonsense.
So I'll use your own example to discredit you so you can more easily process it. The hardest truths are often the most difficult to swallow:
With your example, all backers are bosses, I went back to the first post of this thread and read to the end. I wrote down who was strongly against, didn't care so they remained neutral, and who were the opposite by being strongly supportive of the change to the memorial stone.
25 bosses felt strongly enough about the change to express their disappointment in the change. 9 of the bosses remained neutral, not caring either way. And 8 bosses were strongly supportive of the change.
In any democracy, or any boardroom as your example indicates this change would've never happened in the first place. The offended are the minority, they aren't even eclipsing the neutral party who have no feeling either way on the subject. They're dwarfed by the majority, yet the majority is expected to acquiesce? They aren't entitled to their criticism without their criticism being criticized?
The joke was a joke and all jokes come from the same place. Good jokes and bad jokes are born from the same womb. Just because it was in your opinion a "bad" joke doesn't mean he didn't have the right to attempt to be funny, and that definitely doesn't mean that you have the right to censor him because what they said in the pursuit of being funny was personally offensive to you.
I wasn't offended by the limerick. But when someone else said they were, I thought to myself "Oh, they're offended. I personally am not, but I can't discount their personal views on the subject. So the poem in question should probably be changed." I'm a member of the majority who joins with the minority to make the change happen without having any personal stake. There are a lot of us, we just don't tend to be as loudmouthed as the regressives/reactionaries.
And actually minorities get rights all the time in democracies? Gay folks make up ten percent of the population but Indiana is facing nationwide boycotts over recent legislation. The US Supreme Court has made a number of rulings re: minority rights, even when a majority opposed what they did, which is how you got integrated schools and interracial marriage in the US thirty to forty years before it had popular approval.
And you know who has the right to censor what's in Obsidian's video game? Obsidian. And they did. You lose. Neener neener.
-
2
-
-
Obsidian got away with this IMO. Look what Dota 2 fans did when Valve didn't release a Halloween patch last year - they destroyed the game Metacritic rating (from 9 to 2) , and spammed facebook accounts of Volvo and Obama (yeah)
This is exactly why I don't identify myself as a gamer. That's pathetic.
You have a responsibility as a developer
And if you got your game through KICKSTARTER (i.e. other people's money) they you have even MORE responsibility to NOT LISTEN to some random whiner who didn't even back the game
Makes no difference. The only difference between kickstarter and buying in a shop is you gave the money in advance. Who's money exactly do you think gets things made? Obviously not the consumer....
Kickstarter means you don't have to listen to that WHINING from that WHINER who WHINES about everything!
Except for my whining. My whining is important and should be addressed immediately or I'm gonna start making empty threats about never buying a game from you again!
OH like the person exactly did which thought this joke was transophobic and also did threat Obsidian with boycott.? Damm I thought you were on her side...
My opinion is that everyone should shut up and play the awesome game Obsidian made.
I probably should shut up as well but I never follow my own advice. It's my only flaw.
-
this whole ruse about the memorial is a good example how this rotten system we call democracy works
1) be a minority
2) ask
3) ask again
4) wait
5) receive
6) ktnxbye
7) brag about it on twitter
8 ) let Obsidian take all the heat from backers and grab some popcorn
....... while the majority (actual backers who's money made the game possible) can go suck a tail pipe.
No one has it as easy as minorities. Lucky Duckies!
-
Obsidian got away with this IMO. Look what Dota 2 fans did when Valve didn't release a Halloween patch last year - they destroyed the game Metacritic rating (from 9 to 2) , and spammed facebook accounts of Volvo and Obama (yeah)
This is exactly why I don't identify myself as a gamer. That's pathetic.
You have a responsibility as a developer
And if you got your game through KICKSTARTER (i.e. other people's money) they you have even MORE responsibility to NOT LISTEN to some random whiner who didn't even back the game
Makes no difference. The only difference between kickstarter and buying in a shop is you gave the money in advance. Who's money exactly do you think gets things made? Obviously not the consumer....
Kickstarter means you don't have to listen to that WHINING from that WHINER who WHINES about everything!
Except for my whining. My whining is important and should be addressed immediately or I'm gonna start making empty threats about never buying a game from you again!
-
I'm seriously hoping the rest of this thread will be about cats now. It's just far more constructive.
Cats are good. Should I post pictures of my cats? I have a pic of one of my cats sleeping in a sink. It's cute.
-
1
-
-
I think you should look up the definition of censorship.You're either dishonest or ignorant.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/censorship
a : the institution, system, or practice of censoring ...
: a person who examines books, movies, letters, etc., and removes things that are considered to be offensive, immoral, harmful to society, etc.
A person. Not a government, not a law, a PERSON.
Did a person examine this game? Yes.
Did they apply pressure, directly, to the developer of said game to remove something they felt was offensive, immoral, or harmful to society? Yes.
This person is a censor.
They performed censorship by pressuring the developer to remove it.
About to go offensive (trigger warning); if I "pressure" someone into having sex, I'm not a rapist or immoral, right? After all, they could have said no, they could have resisted, so it's alright, right?
So you can't tell the difference between advocacy and rape. Gotcha.
As someone who lives in a country where censorship is explicitly prohibited by the constitution I just have to point out that a "censor" is historically an official.
Censor: "an official who examines books, plays, news reports, motion pictures, radio and television programs, letters, cablegrams, etc., for the purpose of suppressing parts deemed objectionable on moral, political, military, or other grounds."
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/censor?s=t
You can expand the concept, sure, but you have to do it very carefully if you want to claim that censorship is a bad thing in any context.
oh yeah now we are going the not every censorship is bad...
YES EVERY FORM OF CENSORSHIPOT IS BAD....
Its like saying racism against white people is not as bad as racism against black people....
Seriously.. There is no different. There is no good or bad discrimination. there are no differences at all....
sadly in the mind of most (at least in the media) racism against whites is a myth or even an impossibility
It depends on if you think discrimination requires power structures reinforcing it to actually have a meaningful effect. But this line of conversation is a little beyond the scope of a thread about a bad poem which got changed to a slightly better poem.
Plucked Fruit Quest Popup Error
in Backer Beta Bugs and Support
Posted
After finding out where the fruit was hidden, I told Rongi I would consider his request to lie about the fruit. See screenshot for the error that occurred.