achaye

That's a horrible analogy that you have there. If I see a construction worker there, literally it means that something is getting done, and that I can reasonably expect the sidewalk to get fixed. Real-life experiences have confirmed as much. Additionally, I can ASK the construction worker what's going on, and what the ETA is on the sidewalk's completion. Your analogy would be sufficiently less horrible as follows: You wanted to walk on the left side of the road, but the sidewalk is dug up. There's no construction worker around, nor any signs of work progress. Peeved, you go to the other side of the street. Two weeks later, the sidewalk is still dug up, and no construction worker is around, nor are any signs posted. None of the neighbors have been given any notifications or updates either. With a defeated sigh, you acknowledge the uncertain fate of this left sidewalk, and proceed to cross the street. Fin.

Are the new pieces recorded with a live orchestra as well? I vaguely remember the Kickstarter meeting the orchestration goal, but that was for the main game. Disclaimer: I have yet to play the game yet, so I haven't a clue what the music sounds like, and it would be nice if some of the important themes are orchestrated with live players.

I agree with your sentiments 1000%. It really makes me second-guess going for a physical rewards tier for any future kickstarter they plan on having; what's the point of having a physical disc if it's so badly supported? It's barely better than having a physical disc that simply has a Steam installation file. The radio silence on both this issue and the Avellone novella is pretty disconcerting.

That's good to hear; I definitely would have been disappointed if they just completely dropped support of the physical DVD rewards, leaving me unable to play the White March with the DVD install.

So I have the physical DVD installation of POE that I received through Kickstarter. Is this compatible with the GOG expansion pass? If not, how would I play the expansion with the DVD install that I have on the computer?

PRAISE BE TO ODIN, I got an automated e-mail from Paradox saying my regular physical box has shipped (I live in California, USA) and is expected to arrive before the 12th! I'm guessing it has ver 1.04, or if they're really pushing it, possibly 1.05 on the disc.

I don't think anyone, anywhere, has received the regular physical goods (a few have received the Collector's Edition version from what I see in these forums). The lack of communication from Obsidian/Paradox is unacceptable.

I don't mind the wait at all, but Jeebus, the radio-silence regarding shipping of the physical goods is downright unprofessional. If either Obsidian or Paradox just gave us even a tiny update every 2 weeks or it would have been fine. At first they said they'd release it, then they said after 1.04, and now with 1.06 beta out on Steam already and ready to release, we STILL hear nothing about it. If possible, I would even prefer my physical disc to have the "final" patch integrated into the installer for archival purposes, but seriously, Obsidian/Paradox needs to have better communication with physical rewards backers.

By HAND too, no doubt. I have yet to hear anything about my non-collector's edition boxed copy.

Hmm, well since I personally have never seen any such Quark, much less in that flavor (zing!) in my local supermarket, which I believe to be extremely well-equipped, I find your "evidence" underwhelming at best. And even if I did fine it, it can't REALLY be a quark now could it? Real quarks can't possibly be made in Vermont. So HAH *pfffttt!*

Wow, I go away for a few hours and now we have hardcore human-caused climate-change denialists, to go with denialists for systemic racism and sexism. What next, I don't suppose any amount of scientific and clinical research will make you believe in the safety and efficacy of vaccines either? Or perhaps the moon landing was faked? Or perhaps evolution by natural selection and genetic drift is an evil progressive ploy meant to poison the minds of the vulnerable young? What I really don't understand is how people can claim that the evidence doesn't add up, or that the experiment is poor, when they've very likely never done a single day's worth of scientific research on said phenomenon that they deny, yet think themselves as capable enough to invalidate hundreds or even thousands of peer-reviewed literature. That is truly jaw-dropping. Do you believe in the existence of quarks? What's that, you do? Well okay, prove that they exist. What's that, you need a particle accelerator but don't have one to prove it to me? Fine, explain how it works, and what you would analyze to detect them in a hypothetical collision, and how you know that they're quarks and not some other non-fundamental particle. What, you don't know how that works either at the most intricate level? THEN WHY THE HELL DO YOU BELIEVE IN THE EXISTENCE OF QUARKS??

Oh that's rich, so you're basically saying that peer-reviewed research, cited by hundreds of other researchers in the field, is BS because of words and terms you can't understand? I'll admit that I don't either, and that's fine, because it's not in a field that I am technically versed in. That you can simply toss aside peer-reviewed literature without actually knowing the terms, terms which are likely very relevant in the field, as shown with the top article from 1986 being cited 1863 times, shows your complete bias in the topic. I'm curious, are you equally skeptical about human-caused global warming as well?

Yep, the same Ferguson that the Justice Department, in its report, refers to as possessing institutional racism against primarily black people: "...Ferguson’s police and municipal court practices both reflect and exacerbate existing racial bias, including racial stereotypes. Ferguson’s own data establish clear racial disparities that adversely impact African Americans. The evidence shows that discriminatory intent is part of the reason for these disparities. Over time, Ferguson’s police and municipal court practices have sown deep mistrust between parts of the community and the police department, undermining law enforcement legitimacy among African Americans in particular." But go on.

Well, I guess if you really just stick your head in the sand and not pay attention to what's going on in Ferguson and South Carolina, I suppose this can get you started, assuming that you're acting in good faith and want to learn something and not asking for scholarly articles for the sake of asking for scholarly articles, and that you will actually read at least the abstract, and respond accordingly about whether actual, peer-reviewed literature is a high-enough bar to meet your standards of "evidence." Institutional racism against black people in the process of hiring, cited 317 times (unfortunately it's not free to view the whole paper). Systemic racism (a book, not a paper), cited 489 times. Institutional racism against black children through labeling language sets as "pathological," cited 549 times. I will be very curious to see how you will respond.

Hilarious. You point out an INDIVIDUAL as an example, and a questionable one at that, for SYSTEM-WIDE racism. I almost could not tell whether your post was intended as satire or not, until I browsed through some of your earlier comments in the thread.

This thread moves really fast, so I'll try to put in what I can. You can be an apologist for what is a transphobic poem, transphobic enough to cause a trans individual to contact Obsidian about it, but there's no "over-interpreting" it. It's offensive because the language makes it explicitly clear that a woman who used to be a man, or a man who used to be a woman, is yucky enough to warrant suicide, regardless of whether the "Hero" was tricked into it. It doesn't matter what you think about the issue of informed consent or not, because the intent of the limerick was to get people to laugh at the idea of bedding a trans individual, an act apparently shameful enough to lead to suicide. Of course I would think such of you, based on your posts denying systemic sexism and generally downplaying the sexist shirt worn by the Nasa scientist, while repeatedly claiming that SJWs have "demolished" him and "bullied him into crying," without a shred of irony when you constantly tell SJWs to stop being such insensitive babies. This is while you're simultaneously hurl invectives towards SJWs as being "ignorant, pathethic, soulless, vindictive, delusional and violent little ****lords by choice." Your bias clearly shows. So yes, I would be EXTREMELY surprised if you were not a heterosexual male, but that's not what disqualifies your points as moot to me -- it's your complete lack of awareness of your privilege. I'm sorry that you are somewhat offended by whatever I may think of your views, but know that I don't actually think you're a bad person. On the contrary, I believe you are a better person than most in the gaming community, as I genuinely believe you mean well towards oppressed groups. It's just that I believe you to be an apologist for a discriminatory culture, and that you maintain the status quo as a result.

I find it extremely hard to believe that someone can make this statement without being ironical. SJWs get to define "systemic oppression", find the group they consider the most oppressed and let only them talk. All the while they advise others to **** off and don't mess in their racism discussion, because they do not belong to the proper race. Truly that's comedy gold, mate. What you may find extremely hard to believe does not refute what minorities of color, and sociologists, have found to be true; that there is systemic oppression. People in positions of privilege, aka, in this case, white people, oftentimes don't see it because they are not systematically oppressed. The reason why Serdan's hypothetical white guy was rightfully told off is not because he is white, but because aforementioned hypothetical white guy is comparing the plight of an entire, systematically-oppressed minority to this one time that a black guy was being mean to him. You could start by seeing what systemic racism does, and what white privilege is in general (then there's male privilege, but that's another topic).

That doesn't actually, y'know, change it or suddenly make it offensive. It just means that the author has bought into the idiocy. And for reference, it is hilarious that you don't know what a windmill is in context. Sweet, even. I almost forgot to mention this gem. The author admits to his own work as being offensive, yet you brush it off completely; what sort of mental gymnastics is required for such a feat? Do you do this with others like Einstein, where, when he mentions "God does not play dice," you construe that as Einstein buying into the "idiocy" of quantum mechanics?

Sorry to disappoint you, I know full well what a windmill is, and perhaps if you used it properly, it would actually make sense, rather than "what you're doing is called an imaginary obstacle," but I'm glad I got to give you a few moments of feeling smugly superior. Hyperbole aside, it's funny that you would claim to accept "science and reality" over "every individual crazy person" only a page after I talked about androgen insensitivity syndrome, and how it's an actual living, breathing trans individual that made the complaint to Obsidian in the first place. The poem is transphobic (and misogynistic) because it clearly disparages transsexuals as a whole, again, poking at the idea that a woman being a man is something to be ashamed of, and regardless of how you (undoubtedly a straight male) may think it in-offensive at all, that a trans individual found it offensive clearly refutes your point.

Except, to just repeat what has been repeated probably a million times by now, it does nothing even close to that. It doesn't malign anyone, whether "historically-oppressed" or not, nor does it have a context to offend, or suggest that a real woman turned into a man is shameful. What you are doing is called a windmill. Except, to just repeat what has been repeated probably a billion times by now, the author himself stated it was offensive. I'm only forced do to a "windmill" because apparently there is a need for constant reminders.

So, you're saying a fictional character in a fictional game isn't even fictionally free to prefer fictional women to fictional men. ... said absolutely no-one in the history of ever. Nice straw-man though. I'll just repeat what has been repeated probably a million times by now, it's trans-misogynistic because it unfairly maligns an already historically-oppressed group, because it has absolutely no context other than to offend, that somehow, a "genetic" woman turned into a man is somehow shameful.

They're not being intolerant. The notion that black people (or any people really) are property has severe legal consequences. The notion that homosexuality is "unnatural" does not have legal consequences. Said person is not intolerant to the idea. They just don't accept it. Big difference. Said person not even acknowledging the trans individual's identified female gender is.... not intolerance? That's news to me. How can you be tolerant of something that you do not even believe can exist? Not tolerating the fact that a XY trans individual can be considered female is the textbook definition of intolerance. And something cannot be considered bigoted if there's no legal frameworks around it? You should tell that to the police officer during the Ferguson protests who called the protestors "f***cking animals."

Wow Psychevore, that guy nailed it on so many levels it's unbelievable. I wonder what the transformative experience was for him to change his mind... I can empathize with you completely, it definitely takes a certain mindset to wade in the mud against numerous, extremely vocal "social injustice warriors", as PrimeJunta would call them, and stick around despite all the childish insults like "lunatic" or "loon" being tossed around, so it feels really nice to see others who care about the same cause. Like the guy in the video, I won't back down to intolerance if I see it, no matter how uncomfortable it may be. That the SIJWs would label people like us "babies" and "whiners" with no backbone, whilst hanging around in the relative safety of a game forum (which surely has far more like-minded SIJWs than other subgroups), is pure irony. I wonder how long they would last making comments at Jezebel or something like that, before they're viciously tore apart by the denizens that reside there. EDIT: Regarding the insults, I find that if I simply engage them without lashing back with insults, they eventually back down and become more civil, and we can perhaps even get a conversation going. I mean, the start of this thread had a WHOLE lot of "feminazi," "idiot," "lunatic," and "crazy f***" thrown at anyone making any comment about social justice. Now, it's essentially gone, and I think part of it, besides perhaps threats by moderators to keep it civil, is that they know how ridiculous it looks when one side is making arguments that are mostly personal-insult-free, while the other side regurgitates tons of vitriol.

It can't be bigoted without there being a dislike of the given characteristic. Shallow minded perhaps, but not bigoted. Definition of bigotry: A state of mind where a person obstinately, irrationally, unfairly, or intolerantly DISLIKES other people, ideas, etc. Bigotry carries a powerful stigma for a reason. Don't make the term weaker by applying it to people whom are simply ignorant. It won't help anyone, and just elevates the genuine bigots up to the same level as ignorant but well-meaning people. It's a joke in the same vein as, "pc master race". It's not that SJW's are seen as actual warriors, but rather they're being mocked for the way they (supposedly) view themselves as warriors that are accomplishing great things. The fact that some SJW's would embrace the term is just confirming the joke for the people who use the term as an insult. I maintain my assertion that the author's view on trans females is bigoted, regardless of a lack of ill-intent. Not all bigotry is defined by dislike. Bigotry can simply be irrational, narrow-minded intolerance of creed, belief, opinion, etc, different from one's own. Meriam-Webster's full definition is along the same vein: "..intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices." The author to which I refer does not even acknowledge the identified gender of trans individuals. How is this different than a person from the 1700s saying that black people weren't people, they're property? Even if that person harbored zero ill-will towards black people, it would still amount to 100% bigotry, because said person is completely intolerant to the idea that a black person can actually be a person, and not property. Back to the author, he is completely intolerant to the fact that a person born "genetically" as a male can still identify as a female, and vice versa. That's bigotry. Also, I completely agree with you PrimeJunta to just own the term SJW. It loses its effectiveness as an insult to anyone save the hardcore misogynistic crowd and the like. Like seriously Namutree, when was the last time an actual PC user was insulted by the term "PC master race?" Maybe the person who made the crack in the first place may get a giggle or two in and virtual high-five a like-minded buddy, but I can't imagine anyone else would even find that as anywhere close to being as insulting as you say it is.

Good to know, Hiro. I too live in CA, and though I'm in no rush to play the game just yet, I do find it unsettling that Paradox does not send any emails in regards to when they will ship the regular box edition. I do find a certain amount of solace in my physical disc coming in a default, installable state that's far more bug-free than the game's initial release.