Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I have to rant here, because even just trying to bring about new info to the GamerGate subreddit was incredibly frustrating. Before I continue on I wanna make it clear that I would expect idiots both amidst GamerGate and opposed to it, so what I've encountered now and what I'm about to say shouldn't be interpreted as a diss to GamerGate as a collective, only to a fringe group of members that are far too overzealous:

 

 

 

Those of you that are still complaining about removal are freaking children.

 

 

 

Firedorn himself said he had the option to keep the line. Case Closed. That's exactly how Obsidian should've handled it. You do not get to sit here and baselessly accuse Firedorn of lying, this is the most reliable source we've got and he's got no pony in this race. Your conspiracy that the Obsidian devs convinced him to say that will remain just that: a conspiracy. You lack proof, you can go no further until you get some.

 

 

 

"But what about how feargus' comment doesn't align with what Firedorn said?!?"

 

Have you considered that CEOs and marketing departments are basically required to save face for the company as much as possible. Yes, Feargus was probably a tad dishonest with you, but:

 

1) You are unbelievably naive and ignorant if you do not expect the very same from ANY CEO or marketing department

 

2) Have you considered that if Feargus had said "FIREDORN CAVED, BLAME HIM," then you would all be screaming at Obsidian for throwing him under the bus? For Obsidian to disclose the information Firedorn provided us with would be unfair to Firedorn. Why? Because perhaps Firedorn wouldn't want people knowing how things went down or that he was the one that "caved?" You never know what people might say, so the best way to respect Firedorn is to not say anything in regards to him unless he himself decides to say how it went down. Obsidian could ultimately only hope Firedorn would wish for his motivations to be known public, because it's just as likely he would've wanted no details given as to what went down, since wtf, half of you are acting like you have pitchforks and are ready to march on Obsidian headquarters.

 

 

 

 

   If you are still complaining and rioting at Obsidian, it's painfully obvious you just want something to b**** about and someone to be mad at, in which case, please explain to me how you are ANY better than the person on twitter who got this whole ball rolling?

 

 

 

Please, kindly sit down and shut up until you have any proof for any conspiracies you may still harbor. You'll get no support from me, and I don't think you'll get any support from a lot of others who would share your concerns about censorship and overly sensitive SJWs.

A bit more inflammatory than I'd like, and I still have some swirling periphery concerns, but I'm going to reiterate largely this.  And c'mon, if the word of backers is supposed to mean something, remember, Firedorn's a gold, I'm gold, this guy's bronze, let's put this one to bed.  I know it's hard to see through the ambiguity, but this is actually a hell of a victory against outrage culture, what with Obsidian OFFICIALLY VETTING a straight jab at the people raising the original fraccus.

 

Rub it in their faces, I say.  We need to blunt such outrages going forward, it's better for literally everyone involved, devs, publishers, backers, gamers, etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

(quote is at bottom because quoting is broken)

No. No "but"s. He was dishonest with paying customers, potential customers and funders. Period.

 

I never accused Firedorn of lying, only Obsidian.

 

Obsidian's response in that letter was nothing but a **** you to the above and emboldenment to the kill all men crowd (as can be seen with how Eric bragged about it on Twitter and immediantly started thinking about how if everyone were so gullable he'd be throwing men in concetration camps already) and a waste of time that could have been spent doing literally anything else on the game (even manually opening a random part of the script and looking for typos would have been a better use)

 

Yes, Feargus was probably a tad dishonest with you, but:
Edited by deuxhero
Never negotiate. You will only encourage more acts of terror.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Backer Content
It's come to our attention that a piece of backer-created content has made it into Pillars of Eternity that was not vetted. Once it was brought to our attention, it followed the same vetting process as all of our other content. Prior to release, we worked with many of our backers to iterate on content they asked to be put into the game that didn't strike the right tone.
In the case of this specific content, we checked with the backer who wrote it and asked them about changing it. We respect our backers greatly, and felt it was our duty to include them in the process. They gave us new content which we have used to replace what is in the game. To be clear, we followed the process we would have followed had this content been vetted prior to the release of the product.
We appreciate the faith you have all given us into making Pillars of Eternity the great game that it has become, and we appreciate the strength of conviction all of you bring to every conversation we have together.
Sincerely,
Feargus Urquhart, CEO 
Obsidian Entertainment, Inc.

 

 

From Firedorn: I had the choice not to change it. They simply emailed me and asked if I was OK with changing it, but I could choose not to.

 

From CEO: It failed out vetting process. We have already worked to change ("iterate") other content that didn't strike the right tone. We include backers in this process.

 

 

I guess what seems surprising is Firedorn's assertion that it was his choice. 

 

They probably emailed Firedorn asking "In light of the controversy, would you like to change your memorial?" Which might have given Firedorn the impression that it was his choice, but it doesn't suggest it either way if we don't know what would have happened if he would have replied, "No, I'd rather not". That it "failed our vetting process" leans towards them removing it entirely if the backer refuses to change it themselves. Which I'm fine with, the devs should decide, but if they are influenced by one **** gamer on twitter crying about bull****, then that's not OK. Have your opinions and stick by them, don't give into political correctness or fringe nonsense bullying. If Obsidian found it truly offensive, transphobic, then I can live with it, but I just can't see it. Also this is the same studio that loves South Park and made the Stick of Truth, amongst other things. No one should be giving those ****ers an easy win like this.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm honestly fine with how it was handled after hearing from Firedorn. My worries were under the assumption that Obsidian hastily removed it in fear of the SJW backlash, succumbing to demands and tossing aside artistic integrity.

 

They left it up to Firedorn since it was his piece. I respect Firedorn for having the class to not put Obsidian in the crossfire of further controversy, opting to change his poem instead. He acknowledged that it wasn't Obsidian's battle to fight considering he wrote it and not Obsidian. I'm okay with that. I'm still not okay with censorship like that but it's not like Obsidian abandoned any of the ideals they had before.

 

Obsidian doesn't have to worry about what somebody else wrote and can focus on videogames again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I visited KiA for the first time and... I'm never going there ever again. Jebus!

 


Have you read his posts? He *knew* it was offensive!

Why do you keep defending him?

 

Doesn't look to me like an attempt at defending Firedorn, but maybe I'm missing something.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

No. No "but"s. He was dishonest with paying customers, potential customers and funders. Period.

 

I never accused Firedorn of lying, only Obsidian.

 

Obsidian's response in that letter was nothing but a **** you to the above and emboldenment to the kill all men crowd (as can be seen with how Eric bragged about it on Twitter and immediantly started thinking about how if everyone were so gullable he'd be throwing men in concnertation camps already)

 

Yes, Feargus was probably a tad dishonest with you, but:

 

 

We don't actually know what "vetting" entails. For all we know the process could just be skimming it, making sure no one posted a Michael Jordan fanfic, and then putting it in the game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Regardless of why it is changed now.  Obsidian now has a huge target on their back for the professionally offended (or whatever you want to call them) after they smell the blood from this.  I expect they are going to get a lot more "problematic" complaints coming up in the future because someone is offended by something.  Josh should have never answered that tweet (then we wouldn't be in this mess now) and as soon as this happened Obsidian should have told them that the game is a harsh world were stuff like this exist and it no way reflects people who created the game beliefs.  Oh, and then flip them off for good measure.  

You've got it so backwards it's not even funny.  The very best way to paint the target is to engage in childish one-uppery.  Obsidian and Firedom responded rather perfectly.  The showed responsiveness to the issue but Firedom also got to express his feeling that this was an overreaction to what was intended as a harmless jest, but which unintentionally offended people.  The overall effect is an honest effort to keep the peace and nobody can fault Obsidian or Firedom for that.  Had they done what you suggest, it would only be throwing gas on the fire.

 

Firedorn knew it was offensive. He expected it to be rejected. He obviously did not intend it as just a harmless jest.

Why the hell are you so invested in making it seem like he is without fault?

 

I beg to differ.  You ascribe a lot of malevolent intent to someone you just don't know.  Fact is, HE chose to change it when confronted with the criticism...as he has told us.  HE changed it to keep the peace, which is behavior you'd expect from someone who acts maturely in the first place and didn't intend the offense.  People are at different levels of understanding and comfort with these issues.  If he says he meant no offense...which is what the first line of the changes indicate...then I have no reason to believe him.  BY continuing to lash out and pillory him, or anyone else who might be trying to catch up to you in your understanding of the issue, you discourage him and everyone else who might unintentionally offend people from having the dialogue that might help them learn not to.  When people make honest efforts to keep the peace on these things, the most productive response is "thank you, I appreciate that."  They're more likely to accept, or at least respect, your point of view and try not to tread on it next time.

Edited by Cyphon
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

No. No "but"s. He was dishonest with paying customers, potential customers and funders. Period.

 

I never accused Firedorn of lying, only Obsidian.

 

Obsidian's response in that letter was nothing but a **** you to the above and emboldenment to the kill all men crowd (as can be seen with how Eric bragged about it on Twitter and immediantly started thinking about how if everyone were so gullable he'd be throwing men in concnertation camps already)

 

Yes, Feargus was probably a tad dishonest with you, but:

 

 

Seconded. 

 

Longknife, unless you edit or apologise for the post above, I'm going to respond in kind. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Have you read his posts? He *knew* it was offensive!

 

Why do you keep defending him?

 

 

Why are you attacking him?

 

How am I attacking him?

I'm just annoyed by the way Cyphon misrepresents the situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you really think the insane backer texts were not choosed before the game shipped? Obsidian shouldn't said a word about this and no one else with more than two neurons in its head would care.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

No. No "but"s. He was dishonest with paying customers, potential customers and funders. Period.

 

I never accused Firedorn of lying, only Obsidian.

 

Obsidian's response in that letter was nothing but a **** you to the above and emboldenment to the kill all men crowd (as can be seen with how Eric bragged about it on Twitter and immediantly started thinking about how if everyone were so gullable he'd be throwing men in concnertation camps already)

 

Yes, Feargus was probably a tad dishonest with you, but:

 

 

We don't actually know what "vetting" entails. For all we know the process could just be skimming it, making sure no one posted a Michael Jordan fanfic, and then putting it in the game.

 

 

"Prior to release, we worked with many of our backers to iterate on content they asked to be put into the game that didn't strike the right tone." = we just glance at it to see whether there's a Michael Jordan fanfic and then we put it in the game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A bit more inflammatory than I'd like

 

 

I'm sure it is. You have no idea how many arguments I just had with people while trying to get the news of Firedorn's post spread.

 

Quite frankly, I'm pretty frustrated and disappointed in humanity right now, as I should be I think, when I encounter a handful of people that would rather cling onto resentment and anger and other baser emotions instead of acknowledge reality and confess that further pressure on Obsidian would be wrong.

  • Like 1

"The Courier was the worst of all of them. The worst by far. When he died the first time, he must have met the devil, and then killed him."

 

 

Is your mom hot? It may explain why guys were following her ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Firedorn knew it was offensive. He expected it to be rejected. He obviously did not intend it as just a harmless jest.

Why the hell are you so invested in making it seem like he is without fault?

 

I knew it was offensive.  It was meant as a joke, you know...an offensive one.  What fault is there in expressing myself with something controversial?

  • Like 6

Screw you Firedorn!

Never rub another man's rhubarb

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite frankly, I'm pretty frustrated and disappointed in humanity right now, as I should be I think, when I encounter a handful of people that would rather cling onto resentment and anger and other baser emotions instead of acknowledge reality and confess that further pressure on Obsidian would be wrong.

 

Don't be disappointed, friend.  There's nothing to be disappointing about.  A lot of people see it as defeat, when it, in reality isn't.  Don't hold on to the same negativity.

  • Like 1

Screw you Firedorn!

Never rub another man's rhubarb

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

No. No "but"s. He was dishonest with paying customers, potential customers and funders. Period.

 

I never accused Firedorn of lying, only Obsidian.

 

Obsidian's response in that letter was nothing but a **** you to the above and emboldenment to the kill all men crowd (as can be seen with how Eric bragged about it on Twitter and immediantly started thinking about how if everyone were so gullable he'd be throwing men in concnertation camps already)

 

Yes, Feargus was probably a tad dishonest with you, but:

 

 

We don't actually know what "vetting" entails. For all we know the process could just be skimming it, making sure no one posted a Michael Jordan fanfic, and then putting it in the game.

 

 

"Prior to release, we worked with many of our backers to iterate on content they asked to be put into the game that didn't strike the right tone." = we just glance at it to see whether there's a Michael Jordan fanfic and then we put it in the game.

 

 

Yep, sounds plausible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Well, if Firedorn asserts that he had a choice, contrary to what the "worked wth many of our backers to iterate on content that didn't strike the right tone" statement implies, then I'm not going to call that a lie.

 

I still find Obsidian's post on it bizarre and heavily implying that they would have forced a change.

You know how PR works... it generally make things worse when the truth isn't as bad as it seems. Sometimes not bothering about "What will people think if I say this? ... and what if I say that instead?" can make everything go smoother. Obsidian isn't perfect, but that doesn't make them terrible people either.

 

 

The thing is, if they are willing to bend over for this, it also reflects on their integrity in other areas... like development.

 

There are already big threads pointing out some fundamental flaws in the rule set, as well as some funky decisions with their art style. So this is just another highlight with something internally wrong imo.

 

Game is still impressive though :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Firedorn knew it was offensive. He expected it to be rejected. He obviously did not intend it as just a harmless jest.

Why the hell are you so invested in making it seem like he is without fault?

 

I knew it was offensive.  It was meant as a joke, you know...an offensive one.  What fault is there in expressing myself with something controversial?

 

Nothing at all. Especially not in this context. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Have you read his posts? He *knew* it was offensive!

 

Why do you keep defending him?

 

 

Why are you attacking him?

 

How am I attacking him?

I'm just annoyed by the way Cyphon misrepresents the situation.

 

 

"He obviously did not intend it as just a harmless jest"

 

How do you know that? Seemed more like smearing to me. And if you're annoyed then perhaps it's time to take a break from this thread?

Edited by ChipMHazard
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Regardless of why it is changed now.  Obsidian now has a huge target on their back for the professionally offended (or whatever you want to call them) after they smell the blood from this.  I expect they are going to get a lot more "problematic" complaints coming up in the future because someone is offended by something.  Josh should have never answered that tweet (then we wouldn't be in this mess now) and as soon as this happened Obsidian should have told them that the game is a harsh world were stuff like this exist and it no way reflects people who created the game beliefs.  Oh, and then flip them off for good measure.  

You've got it so backwards it's not even funny.  The very best way to paint the target is to engage in childish one-uppery.  Obsidian and Firedom responded rather perfectly.  The showed responsiveness to the issue but Firedom also got to express his feeling that this was an overreaction to what was intended as a harmless jest, but which unintentionally offended people.  The overall effect is an honest effort to keep the peace and nobody can fault Obsidian or Firedom for that.  Had they done what you suggest, it would only be throwing gas on the fire.

 

Firedorn knew it was offensive. He expected it to be rejected. He obviously did not intend it as just a harmless jest.

Why the hell are you so invested in making it seem like he is without fault?

 

I beg to differ.  You ascribe a lot of malevolent intent to someone you just don't know.  Fact is, HE chose to change it when confronted with the criticism...as he has told us.  HE changed it to keep the peace, which is behavior you'd expect from someone who acts maturely in the first place and didn't intend the offense.  People are at different levels of understanding and comfort with these issues.  If he says he meant no offense...which is what the first line of the changes indicate...then I have no reason to believe him.  BY continuing to lash out and pillory him, or anyone else who might be trying to catch up to you in your understanding of the issue, you discourage him and everyone else who might unintentionally offend people from having the dialogue that might help them learn not to.  When people make honest efforts to keep the peace on these things, the most productive response is "thank you, I appreciate that."  They're more likely to accept, or at least respect, your point of view and try not to tread on it next time.

 

"The way I see it, I got to write something controversial and then got to publicly insult some people who didn't like it."

 

"Who knows, probably slipped through the cracks.  I thought for sure they would have asked it to be changed prior to release."

 

So mature. ¬_¬

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Firedorn knew it was offensive. He expected it to be rejected. He obviously did not intend it as just a harmless jest.

Why the hell are you so invested in making it seem like he is without fault?

 

I knew it was offensive.  It was meant as a joke, you know...an offensive one.  What fault is there in expressing myself with something controversial?

 

 

Art that isn't offensive is very low grade art. If you aren't saying something controversial, you're not saying something interesting. Preventing offense means nothing but stagnation because nobody discusses anything.

Edited by deuxhero
Never negotiate. You will only encourage more acts of terror.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it would be wise to simply drop it at this point. While I do loathe the censorious social justice crowd and their methods this controversy is starting to overshadow what an absolutely amazing game this is and that is simply sad. Go enjoy the game and Firedorn's revised work which in my humble opinion is far more poignant.

"When the foul sore of envy corrupts the vanquished heart, the very exterior itself shows how forcibly the mind is urged by madness. For paleness seizes the complexion, the eyes are weighed down, the spirit is inflamed, while the limbs are chilled, there is frenzy in the heart, there is gnashing with the teeth."

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...