Azradun

They are evil. I bought a mod yesterday, Firelink Implements, for 0,92 Euros (scaled down the price to minimum). Tried it. It was an armor in a chest and a sword. The location of the item wasn't in description. The description didn't say that the armor hadn't the female version (he says he has now - but no screenshots whatsoever). The armor cannot be tempered and upgraded in-game (as all other armors can). Sure, he adds things... but this comes with *no warranty*. And after refunding, I have to wait "a few days" for my cash (still don't have it), and when it does, it is in Valve's Steam Vallet. So essentially *Valve doesn't lose it* like EVER I'm still forced to spend it on Steam so they practically keep it. Nice huh? With no additional investment from their side! No quality control! No responsibility! And mods will conflict with one another... oooh they will!

Already is. Petition is 97.000+ strong and rising. Last time I've seen so powerful a movement was a few years ago when they tried to pass ACTA in Poland. I actually worked back then in an open source foundation and spoke on the national radio against ACTA... ah, good times. Hundreds of thousands went to the streets and forced the Prime Minister to abandon the idea. I'm not naive to think my speech was the main or even significant reason, but I certainly did my part. But ValvEA is no Prime Minister who relies on popular votes... they are a corporate monopoly. We shall see what happens.

Or the Steam client will report those users to ValvEA to get their accounts banned.

Monopolies are *always* bad. Even the best people faced with absolute power become corrupt. Steam is too big now, and thought it could get away with anything. And money... money changes everything. I once lost a lifelong friend due to money.

This. It's not free market with 75% corporate tax. It's a blatant attempt to monetize something that was previously free. The discussion about "are mod makers free to get money for their work?" is deceptive since ValvEA and BethEAsda are taking 75% of the profts while leaving 100% of work, policing, quality control to users. Also paid modders aren't modders anymore, they become developers with all the responsibilities for their products, contrary to what ValvEA or BethEAsda says. This is all really laughable - for your cash, you get something that maybe works, maybe not. The refund process is also lengthy. I bought one item, which had a description of 2 lines of text and a few screenshots. Tried (the armor didn't even have a female version which is a standard for vanilla Skyrim!) and refunded - it told me to wait a few days until the cash gets back into my ValvEA Vallet. There is officially no support for conflicting mods whatsoever if not voluntarily provided by the modder (and there WILL be conflicts, as all who extensively use modded Skyrim know). The actual way of doing this paid mod system was very vile - taking an already established community and changing the rules overnight with a few people in the know behind non-disclosure agreements. Already paid mods are vanishing from free site Nexus entirely. A petition to remove this system has 74,093 supporters at this moment and is rapidly rising (began two days ago). This could have been done better. Way better.

Well, seems that assigning companions to Stronghold now doesn't strip away their voice... Good. But companions I had before that were voice-stripped are voice-stripped still. Bad. What I am to do with those I travelled with so far? Kill them off and make new ones? Lame.

Thank you for a good game, and thank you for being able to circumvent censorship via modding!

It also seems to influence new custom made recruits, as I have made three of them just a moment ago for testing, and none had a voice. It's irritating, since I have two of them in my group. Edit: It seems the thing that did it was that I had no empty slot in the group at the time - simple being in the rooster causes them to become silent. Edit2: I have the last patched game on Steam

Brad Wardell is maligned to this day, including by the (in)famous Brianna Wu, who openly called for boycotting him and his work (despite being a fellow games developer!). His wife and child got death threats from the "progressives" - I guess being related to an "offensive person" makes you a perfectly valid target of harassment. Matt Taylor should be able to live out his life without talentless hacks who didn't contribute anything of value to humanity watching and criticizing every one of his moves. Scientists put probes on comets, feminists put offense onto shirts. Reducing him to tears on television shows the true face of the progressive movement - the new Inquisition. Bullying great men won't get more girls into STEM, I assure you. I don't know much of Vox Day, but you using the term "an unrepentant piece of human garbage" automatically earns him my sympathy. It is very curious that if I'd use the same language about Anita Sarkeesian or Brianna Wu, that would easily earn a segment on a national television, yet you smearing a man with broad brush of insults is ok. Erika Victorious doesn't earn the same language yet she advocates for mass murder and concentration camps for men?

I don't see anyone from the other side condemning Erika for her views for "kill all men". But the MRAs and Gamergate are villified widely in press for any extremists they harbor. This is the problem. The extremists *are* the ones driving the "progressive movement", because no one inside denounces them, but are shielded from criticism by other feminists and progressives. Criticize one of them, and suddenly, you're facing a large and loud crowd of "moderates", plus their allies in press. When they get death threats, every outlet mobilizes instantly. When their opponents get death threats, it's all hush-hush in media. Very convenient, no? While still clinging to the dictionary definition that "feminism is for equality". Same for other progressives. Oh, and ask Polygon.com for JournoPros, that secret mailing list which existence was proven.

So if a black man loses a race, they award the prize to him? I'd refuse to go against a black man then to avoid being accused of racism - would that be offensive too? We have to go deeper than that... But I don't care about Apple's overpriced and inferior hipster products made in China and I'm not their customer and I'll never be.

Plainly because Intel, Microsoft's and HP's products aren't art. Processors and operating systems are utilities and I don't care about them. Those products are inherently neutral. How can you pack progressive ideology into a processor? Games I do care about, games are art. Therefore I will defend them from triggerhappy censors. I don't hate Obsidian, I just regret their choice. Okay, except that there's no reasonable argument that will define an ad created by Intel (a photograph which was planned out and edited to achieve the desired end product, with a bit or writing involved as well) as not being art, but will define a little poem made by a backer as art. Again, you're just singling this out and labeling it as art because it supports your agenda to do so. If Intel is "censoring" their ads so as not to offend people, then how is that better than Obsidian asking a backer if he wants to change his poem so as not to deal with people getting offended? Do you see how inconsistent that is? There is a clear distinction between an ad for a product and the product itself. I don't care about ads, I'm not a consumer of ads. I am a consumer of games and additional content for them. If that's not an enough explanation for you, then I'm sorry. But I don't see it as a problem. Edit: added "not"

My thoughts exactly when I think of the SJWs!

Plainly because Intel, Microsoft's and HP's products aren't art. Processors and operating systems are utilities and I don't care about them. Those products are inherently neutral. How can you pack progressive ideology into a processor? Games I do care about, games are art. Therefore I will defend them from triggerhappy censors. I don't hate Obsidian, I just regret their choice.

Good example. Injecting ideology into your business results in an inferior product. DA 2 (user score 4.4 on Metacritic) was worse than DA: Legends on Facebook released at the same time and I won't even buy Inquisition after Mass Effect 3 fiasco and DA 2. Bioware was a good company once. Now it is owned by Electronic Arts (Worst Company in America award of 2012 and 2013). It is your right to support the company you like of course.