sparklecat

I agree that the communication surrounding this has been awful. I understand that shipping takes a fair bit of time, but an email to all of us to give some approximate dates, a status update, etc., does not. As it is, I've heard absolutely nothing about what's going on with the physical items since the update with the poll results.

That's between you and your retailer. Unless you've made some effort to figure out what's gone wrong with technical support and fix it, probably not.

The strange chest is a separate quest that begins in the Catacombs.

There's pretty much no way we would've caught it, given that the trigger seems to be related to both areas saved and loaded in, and time spent playing for the changes to mount up enough to be noticeable - like Tanred said, we had a three map section slice of the game to play around with. Given that it took me over 30 hours to notice anything was up with my PC in the actual game... Which is probably the same reason Obsidian didn't catch it in their QA; I gather playing the game through "normally" for a week or so isn't as much a part of the testing process as playing certain content to check for specific problems, going by what others have said about this.

Well, if Steam's started downloading, I'd say you probably need it for some of the game, yeah; besides that, you'd need to be able to download patches as well. Got a friend's internet connection you could borrow?

Saw an update today somewhere in the depths of the technical support forum that they're still on track for the first patch this week.

Lephys: Actually I brought up EA to redirect the hate towards Bioware, where I don't think it rightfully belongs. I like Bioware. Well, Bioware Edmonton. Not overly fond of Bioware Austin.

It was still quite unexpected :D

Which bug is this? I was playing a generally nice person, but... In terms of completing the quest, yup! If you try to, it just doesn't update itself and Pallegina disappears.

It's a little lizardy thing, it doesn't get to be a paladin!

I was very indignant when I saw a combat message about a xaurip using lay on hands.

I believe they said it will be, yes.

Did you get the right answers to the questions the person asks before going in?

I believe if your main has the mask in his/her inventory, you can put it on via the door dialogue.

I'm sorry, but you're simply wrong; hate speech has a very particular definition. If you want to talk about speech that targets someone based on simple group identity, okay, but it's something different.

So just to check, you'd be cool with backer messages that included racial slurs as well? I think that skews his point. It is not whether he is "cool" with it or not, but rather whether any message needs censorship over a simple mod. Not really; if you're arguing that absolutely nothing be removed from the game by Obsidian for offensive content, that's a pretty broad category. That said, it occurs to me that he/she might well be talking about the original subject of... one of the threads here, the backer NPCs, which is a different matter entirely.

So just to check, you'd be cool with backer messages that included racial slurs as well? eta: wait, you probably meant the backer NPCs, not the memorial message, didn't you?

I am not sure that I understand the distinction between commercial and artistic vision, since both are in view of the player. In fact, one needs to go out of his or her way to find the message. Mostly I'm just saying that acting like we're mangling some precious work of art by taking out a backer message and comparing it to the Charlie Hebdo situation is really pushing it. I would argue the debate does not depend on whether the work is precious or not, but rather the act of removing/censoring a message. The act of censorship is not good in any instance. Ehhh...I would disagree I would say that removing a message because it offends someone is, by definition, censorship. However, I would also say that not all censorship is bad. For example, I doubt most major news organizations would give a segment to the KKK. This is definitely censorship, but I am for the censoring of hate speech, so I regard it as good censorship. That said, I think that any policy of censorship really needs to be thought out carefully, and it needs to be applied fairly throughout society. You want to censor hate speech? Fine, but you need to clearly define what hate speech is, and you need to censor it REGARDLESS of the origin or the target. So when I look at the requests to censor this limerick, I basically see a request to censor a joke that offended someone. It is by no stretch of the imagination "hate speech." And if this joke were censored, then I would think it's only fair to censor any other jokes that offend someone. So if a blonde gets mad at a blonde joke, if a religious person gets mad at an offensive drawing of one of their figures, if a lawyer gets upset at a lawyer joke, then all those should be censored as well. Personally, I think that is going WAY too far, which is why I'm firmly AGAINST censoring this limerick. Except that the entire point of hate speech as a category is the target. Simply targeting someone because of the fact that they belong to some group isn't hate speech. It has to be a protected group that's historically been the victims of oppression. If the speech in question isn't contributing to systemic discrimination, it's toothless.

According to one random person on the internet, the backer in question is fine with doing so!

More about removing a joke that targets an oppressed group and was painful to some of its members to encounter.

Incidentally, since we're talking about respect and tolerance, this rather illustrates a key point - I'm not required to respect anyone else's opinions. I'm not even required to respect them; respect is earned, both for people and what they say, through merit. So while I still utterly do not respect PermTrouble's opinions on this topic and think they are wrong, I came to respect him/her because of the classy handling of the debate. Likewise, I tolerate people's right to hold dumb opinions when I don't call for their imprisonment for expressing them. Tolerance doesn't mean you get to be free of all consequences for expressing an opinion. I am not trying to be nitpicky or disingenuous, but who decides what is dumb, and who decides what deserves consequences? When I call people's opinions dumb, that's my subjective opinion. Actually it's not the nicest way to express it; let's just go with wrong or sometimes uninformed instead. I'm not really big on consequences being deserved, but I think demanding that you get to say whatever you want without anyone telling you it's not acceptable is ridiculous.

Incidentally, since we're talking about respect and tolerance, this rather illustrates a key point - I'm not required to respect anyone else's opinions. I'm not even required to respect them; respect is earned, both for people and what they say, through merit. So while I still utterly do not respect PermTrouble's opinions on this topic and think they are wrong, I came to respect him/her because of the classy handling of the debate. Likewise, I tolerate people's right to hold dumb opinions when I don't call for their imprisonment for expressing them. Tolerance doesn't mean you get to be free of all consequences for expressing an opinion.

I knew I liked you.

I am not sure that I understand the distinction between commercial and artistic vision, since both are in view of the player. In fact, one needs to go out of his or her way to find the message. Mostly I'm just saying that acting like we're mangling some precious work of art by taking out a backer message and comparing it to the Charlie Hebdo situation is really pushing it.

You can stop trolling anytime. You're essentially saying that someone who orders a hamburger in a restaurant needs to tell the waiter ahead of time that they don't want deermeat in place of the beef, cow dung mixed in with it, or anything else other than what a hamburger is, and not the waiter's job to inform the customer that what's listed on the menu isn't exactly what one will get when one sinks their teeth into their order. If you're not trolling and you actually believe that, you're a bit messed in the head, as well as fundamentally dishonest. While I'm sure it's the dream of the some of the gender confused that everyone else be gender confused, that is not the case for most people, fortunately for the human race. Trying to imply the dishonest person is in the right over the duped person is evil. That said, the arguments presented for censoring the headstone are complete nonsense as there's nothing definitive in the limerick even says there was a transanything in that bed, or even that anyone lied, it's really quite ambiguous. It does not bode well for our society and culture that such nonsense is given an ear. And you can piss off.