Update 93: Patch 1.03 - Important Community Fixes

[LordCrash]

 

 

Not sure if you're serious or not. Regardless. Let's take that deep breath together. Inhale. One... Two... Three... Exhale. And again... Okay? I truly don't mean that to patronize you. I am actually concerned you are letting internet cats dancing across a keyboard affect your mood. Oh you weren't aware? That's all we are. Absolutely true. Cats somehow mashing out complete thoughts. Even this. So take this next bit with a grain of salt.

 

 

 

You can not deny this is a triviality if it affects you so. It is a triviality relatively speaking. Claims of alleged insensitivity or obsequiousness have a way of building malign towers to better cast stones. But that is fine. Because you know triviality when you see it, but more importantly... the cats. Hope you feel better LordCrash.

 

Sincerely,

Detruncate

 

 

You're right, I'm sorry. I know I should let this internet stuff get to me but sometimes the pure stupidity, egocentrism and self-righteousness of some people on the internet is really hard to bear.

 

Anyway, I think Obsidian can gladly go without every single customer who feels personally offended by such a triviality (no matter on which "side" you are). The community here and the long-term sanity of its members (devs included) will be better without them. Looking at the ridiculously low post count of many people on this "discussion" proves that most of them aren't really interested in the game itself in the first place...

 

Much Ado About Nothing.

 

 

Couple of things. 

 

How does someones post have any bearing on the issue?

 

And using false equilevance fallacy to make both sides seem equal is quite absurd. Some of us are rightly disturbed by the fact that a company we have supported and followed for years has decided to remove content from it's game because someone decided to take issue about a joke. A joke they decided was about an issue it had nothing to do with. Also freedom of speech and expression aren't trivial matters. People actually die defending free speech and expression. IF Obsidian had made an editorial decision about the limerick on their own and before the release of the game it would have been fine. But lacking the courage and spine to defend a piece of art after it has been included in the game shows that they are propably willing to censor themselves in future.

 

Would you prefer if Obsidian in future doesn't include any situations that might be a source of controversy, there is implied rape, abortion, dead gods and murders. IF we start to remove content because it triggers some of the consumers we will soon have nothing left.

 

Those who decided to take one the mantle of limerick police have the right to express their opinion on the matter, but that doesn't mean that their wishes has to be granted and something has to be taken away from the community through the act of censorship.

 

“Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties.” - John Milton 

 

“Because if you don't stand up for the stuff you don't like, when they come for the stuff you do like, you've already lost.” - Neil Gaiman 

 

“Most people do not really want others to have freedom of speech, they just want others to be given the freedom to say want they want to hear.” - Mokokoma Mokhonoama

 

 

Short answer: I think people at Obsidian are professionals AND normal people at the same time who just want the best for their game. It seems that THEY weren't happy with the content they've changed and they have EVERY right to do so because they told us backers already in the first place that the content we can create is only ok if Obsidian approves it and if they think it fit to the game they make.

 

And people taking about this "issue" as if it was about something that actually counts are equal to me: equally ridiculous and self-righteous drama queens, sorry.

 

Honestly, I don't care if anybody is offended by a video game. If you are, just don't play the game. Done. At the same time I don't care if a game developer thinks that some content doesn't fit their game. That's not censorship, that's expression of their free will to make the game they want. It's their property and they can do with it whatever they want. After all, censorship can only be applied to someone, self-cencorship is just a constructed term coming from people who disagree with the (artistic) direction of somebody else.

 

If Obsidian wants certain things out of the their game, it's their frigging right to do exactly that, even in the "holy backer content" (which never got a free pass in the first place). You can be sorry about that, or even sad, but that's just your personal opinion. You're actually in the same place as the one who is offended by certain stuff: if you don't like it, just don't play it. But stop with these ridiculous censorship arguments as if you fought for some kind of "bigger good" for everyone. You're not. You're just fighting against illusions of windmills on the internet, against a foe where there isn't one.

 

Over and out (again).

[BlackAdder]

While the knobhead SJWs are beyond silly, I think Obsidian handled it agreeably.

 

What I would like to know, is what they would have done, had the original tombstone creator not agreed to a new piece of text.

 

I wonder the same, but given how eagerly Josh "Balance" Sawyer jumped on the case I doubt that the, implied by many, choice was actually real.

 

What's even sadder in the whole incident is that the specific memorial was one of the few that fit the game's setting in mood and wasn't just a backer's opportunity to express their hilarity and wit. Still, the new one is not bad either, so at least there's that.

[draek]

 

*sigh* it really doesn't matter who started the movement - it really is about the movement it self. 

The person who started it might have been a pure hypocrite, but it still holds meaning regardless.

 

The whole issue is a grey area.

Everyone has the right to their own opinion and should be free to say it, but as a commercial product obsidian does needs to cover its bases. After all, the media is a dangerous beast who can easily be swayed one way or the other. The media can make or break a company and its best to be on its side. During development of PoE ,Obsidian nearly went bankrupt now isn't a time for them to do risky behavior. If you love Obsidian you will accept their decision so they can continue to make games you enjoy. Sometimes you should know when to fight and when not too. After all it is not your jobs and livelihood on the line when you say "They should have Stood up to the SJW's".

 

If you want to take a stand against them - do it directly to them ( SJW ), but don't blame Obsidian for it. After all, they are simply trying to survive in these dangerous times where many studios are shuttering its doors.

 

So you are ok that people start to influence Obsidian when they decide to view some part of content as offensive to them even if they have misunderstood the said content? 

Obsidian was able to create Pillars of Eternity through the help of 77000 backers, do you really think that vast majority of them find that limerick be so damaging they wouldn't buy the next Obsidian game? Then again if Obsidian starts to cater to SJW's and cut and remove content from the game everytime someone makes a fuss about something that will definately affect peoples willingness to buy it's products. 

 

Only party in this case that had the ability to stand for it's content and editorial decicions was Obsidian, but they decided to remove content from the game because someone was offended by it. People will allways take offence on what you do, but if you seek to please everyone by losing your integrity you will end up pleasing nobody.

 

In the end we who have bought the game end up losing content, Obsidian has lost it's spine and Firedorn was forced to remove his art.

 

 

I rather not be petty and make a fuss on a subject which doesn't alter the game one bit. 

[ChipMHazard]

 

"Here lies Firedorn, a hero in bed. 

He once was alive, but now he's dead. 

The last women he bedded, turned out a man

And crying in shame, off a cliff he ran."

 

And worst of all, his verse doesn't scan.

 

 

Excuse me? Doesn't scan?

[PrimeJunta]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scansion

[ChipMHazard]

Oh, eh no you're right. Heh. 

[LelBell]

  "For it is a mad world and it will get madder if we allow the minorities, be they dwarf or giant, orangutan or dolphin, nuclear-head or water-conversationalist, pro-computerologist or Neo-Luddite, simpleton or sage, to interfere with aesthetics. The real world is the playing ground for each and every group, to make or unmake laws. But the tip of the nose of my book or stories or poems is where their rights and my territorial imperatives begin, run and rule. If Mormons do not like my plays, let them write their own. If the Irish hate my Dublin stories, let them rent typewriters. If teachers and grammar school editors find my jawbreaker sentences shatter their mushmild teeth, let them eat stale cake dunked in weak tea of their own ungodly manufacture. If the Chicano intellectuals wish to re-cut my "Wonderful Ice Cream Suit" so it shapes "Zoot," may the belt unravel and the pants fall."

[Eloy]

Hi,

 

I just installed the patch, but this point doesn't seems to be ingame:

• Modified attributes of companions and Itumaak.

My companions' atributes looks the same before the patch, at least Edér, Durance, Aloth and Kana Rua attributes.

 

I'm using GOG version, but in Steam are happening as well.

 

o/

[ChipMHazard]

Hi,

 

I just installed the patch, but this point doesn't seems to be ingame:

• Modified attributes of companions and Itumaak.

My companions' atributes looks the same before the patch, at least Edér, Durance, Aloth and Kana Rua attributes.

 

I'm using GOG version, but in Steam are happening as well.

 

o/

 

Did you start a new game? Because sadly the changes to the attributes only work if you start a new game. 

[Xeo]

Hey there!

Can someone update me what was the piece of content that was replaced?

I've been playing the game for a while now and didn't notice anything extremely inappropriate...

 

~Xeo

[pezequiel]

Hello! How can i get the patch?

[Jojobobo]

 

I hate this idea people have that jokes perpetuate a culture of a certain kind of behaviour or attitude - jokes don't perpetuate anything. I've had a look into whether there's any academic literature and journal articles to substantiate things like sexist jokes or rape jokes or anything like that promote those behaviours because I've had this argument many times before - and you know what, there's zero evidence they do. Prejudices and illegal behaviours arise from the cultures people grow up in and and their own personality, not because they heard a joke and it made them do it.

 

Saying that a risqué limerick perpetuates transgender hate is beyond stupid. Vocal morons preaching that certain jokes are going to make the world turn into a sea of prejudice and inhumanity are complete idiots - they have no backing to their argument on any kind of level (go onto any kind of academic literature database like Web of Knowledge and have a search, I dare you) and the more people pander to them the more people believe these stupid notions have any kind of basis.

 

That is why Obsidian shouldn't have altered the verse - they shouldn't have even approached the guy in the first place suggesting he should change it.

 

Jokes do, but only if they are uttered with malevolence. The one in-game was more of a dirty limerick, hilarious but not malevolent in scope.

The author is OK with it, and in this particular case we should be too. The principle is still wrong, however.

 

No, as I mentioned, there's literally no evidence that jokes cause any kind of behaviour to start/continue. The issue should have not been taken seriously from the off.

[otterontheflightdeck]

 

 

I hate this idea people have that jokes perpetuate a culture of a certain kind of behaviour or attitude - jokes don't perpetuate anything. I've had a look into whether there's any academic literature and journal articles to substantiate things like sexist jokes or rape jokes or anything like that promote those behaviours because I've had this argument many times before - and you know what, there's zero evidence they do. Prejudices and illegal behaviours arise from the cultures people grow up in and and their own personality, not because they heard a joke and it made them do it.

 

Saying that a risqué limerick perpetuates transgender hate is beyond stupid. Vocal morons preaching that certain jokes are going to make the world turn into a sea of prejudice and inhumanity are complete idiots - they have no backing to their argument on any kind of level (go onto any kind of academic literature database like Web of Knowledge and have a search, I dare you) and the more people pander to them the more people believe these stupid notions have any kind of basis.

 

That is why Obsidian shouldn't have altered the verse - they shouldn't have even approached the guy in the first place suggesting he should change it.

 

Jokes do, but only if they are uttered with malevolence. The one in-game was more of a dirty limerick, hilarious but not malevolent in scope.

The author is OK with it, and in this particular case we should be too. The principle is still wrong, however.

 

No, as I mentioned, there's literally no evidence that jokes cause any kind of behaviour to start/continue. The issue should have not been taken seriously from the off.

 

 

I'm not sure you can hold up a lack of research as proof that something isn't happening. Are there papers disproving that this happens? Or has the subject not been explored yet?

 

Not trying to slam you, just genuinely interested in the topic. This feels a bit like insisting that violent video games cause violent behavior, and as we know that's been disproved pretty thoroughly. People have used the "sleeping with a man disguised as a woman" jokes when telling me face-to-face why transgender people are disgusting and why it's okay to be violent against them, though, so I guess it's a little difficult for me to disregard that (admittedly anecdotal) evidence.

[Karnashuk]

WHEN CAN WE EXPECT THE PATCH FOR MAC OSX (GOG)? I CAN SEE THAT IT'S AVAILABLE FOR WINDOWS. Not everybody uses this platform. Can anyone please answer?

[Xiyng]

Yeah right. If it's inappropriate or even offensive, or even personal to some people, it seems to be generally OK. But if it's even slightly related to sexual minorities or women, or gender roles or anything like that, it's a reason for a huge outrage. Something's seriously wrong with people. Considering all the facts, I can't blame Obsidian but I am somewhat disappointed nonetheless.

 

Hey there!

Can someone update me what was the piece of content that was replaced?

I've been playing the game for a while now and didn't notice anything extremely inappropriate...

 

~Xeo

PC Gamer has a pretty good article on the case. To put it short, it wasn't a big thing and in my opinion, not terribly inappropriate either. You're quite unlikely to find it even with several playthroughs, I think. I think it was pretty tasteless and out of place, but nothing to rage about.

[GrinningReaper659]

WHEN CAN WE EXPECT THE PATCH FOR MAC OSX (GOG)? I CAN SEE THAT IT'S AVAILABLE FOR WINDOWS. Not everybody uses this platform. Can anyone please answer?

 

NOBODY KNOWS. Seriously, nobody knows. Everyone seemed to think that the Windows patch wouldn't even be out until around Monday until it showed up, so nobody here has any idea I'm sure. As this is a GOG issue, the only (still unlikely) chance of finding an answer to that question will be on the GOG support forums I imagine. Good luck.

[Vok]

 

 

Making a semantic argument about how being offended is whining is to ignore that maybe it's not offence it's emotional hurt,  before you come up with a smart retort to that consider the number of people with OCD who find release in physical pain.

that maybe it's not offence it's emotional hurt

Whoa, whoa, whoa, WHOA, Hold on for a minute. My brain needs to process this level of mental.

You are saying that a joke is so bad that it can cause EMOTIONAL HURT to you? And you find a reaction like this to a joke to be a healthy and proper response? Are you for real?

 

 

 that discounting emotional pain is silly

 

No, saying that you got emotional pain because someone joked about your bodyhair or called you a mean poopy-head is silly. It is not only silly, it is in fact as insulting as people who claim they got PTSD because someone made fun of them on Twitter.

[Jojobobo]

 

 

 

I hate this idea people have that jokes perpetuate a culture of a certain kind of behaviour or attitude - jokes don't perpetuate anything. I've had a look into whether there's any academic literature and journal articles to substantiate things like sexist jokes or rape jokes or anything like that promote those behaviours because I've had this argument many times before - and you know what, there's zero evidence they do. Prejudices and illegal behaviours arise from the cultures people grow up in and and their own personality, not because they heard a joke and it made them do it.

 

Saying that a risqué limerick perpetuates transgender hate is beyond stupid. Vocal morons preaching that certain jokes are going to make the world turn into a sea of prejudice and inhumanity are complete idiots - they have no backing to their argument on any kind of level (go onto any kind of academic literature database like Web of Knowledge and have a search, I dare you) and the more people pander to them the more people believe these stupid notions have any kind of basis.

 

That is why Obsidian shouldn't have altered the verse - they shouldn't have even approached the guy in the first place suggesting he should change it.

 

Jokes do, but only if they are uttered with malevolence. The one in-game was more of a dirty limerick, hilarious but not malevolent in scope.

The author is OK with it, and in this particular case we should be too. The principle is still wrong, however.

 

No, as I mentioned, there's literally no evidence that jokes cause any kind of behaviour to start/continue. The issue should have not been taken seriously from the off.

 

 

I'm not sure you can hold up a lack of research as proof that something isn't happening. Are there papers disproving that this happens? Or has the subject not been explored yet?

 

Not trying to slam you, just genuinely interested in the topic. This feels a bit like insisting that violent video games cause violent behavior, and as we know that's been disproved pretty thoroughly. People have used the "sleeping with a man disguised as a woman" jokes when telling me face-to-face why transgender people are disgusting and why it's okay to be violent against them, though, so I guess it's a little difficult for me to disregard that (admittedly anecdotal) evidence.

 

I think it is a lack of evidence kind of factor, which still means that people vehemently insisting that "x causes y" when in terms or prejudice when there's no documented research that that's the case is still potentially a load of crap - they should not be reporting their opinions as fact. The evidence is just not there that this is the case, and many many people - myself included - enjoy risqué jokes and yet lack any prejudices themselves.  Obviously direct and personal (and ultimately humourless) persecution of yourself with "jokes" is not acceptable, and I'd be the first to damn that - but this was not a case of that.

[cake-teleporter]

 

 

 

Making a semantic argument about how being offended is whining is to ignore that maybe it's not offence it's emotional hurt,  before you come up with a smart retort to that consider the number of people with OCD who find release in physical pain.

that maybe it's not offence it's emotional hurt

Whoa, whoa, whoa, WHOA, Hold on for a minute. My brain needs to process this level of mental.

You are saying that a joke is so bad that it can cause EMOTIONAL HURT to you? And you find a reaction like this to a joke to be a healthy and proper response? Are you for real?

 

 

 that discounting emotional pain is silly

 

No, saying that you got emotional pain because someone joked about your bodyhair or called you a mean poopy-head is silly. It is not only silly, it is in fact as insulting as people who claim they got PTSD because someone made fun of them on Twitter.

 

 

You know snipping my posts for out of context effect isn't very good trolling.

 

No I'm merely saying that a potential exists for some emotional pain, for some people.

 

The second part was an extreme illustrative example of how certain conditions of the mind can be as injurious as other sources of corporeal pain and that discounting emotional pain is silly, not that they were equivalent in any way, or that it was about me.

 

 

I should have put (potential, if small,) in front of emotional pain in that last sentence to soften it. You also seem to have missed where I said It wasnt about me.

Edited April 4, 2015 by cake-teleporter

[Vok]

 

 

 

I hate this idea people have that jokes perpetuate a culture of a certain kind of behaviour or attitude - jokes don't perpetuate anything. I've had a look into whether there's any academic literature and journal articles to substantiate things like sexist jokes or rape jokes or anything like that promote those behaviours because I've had this argument many times before - and you know what, there's zero evidence they do. Prejudices and illegal behaviours arise from the cultures people grow up in and and their own personality, not because they heard a joke and it made them do it.

 

Saying that a risqué limerick perpetuates transgender hate is beyond stupid. Vocal morons preaching that certain jokes are going to make the world turn into a sea of prejudice and inhumanity are complete idiots - they have no backing to their argument on any kind of level (go onto any kind of academic literature database like Web of Knowledge and have a search, I dare you) and the more people pander to them the more people believe these stupid notions have any kind of basis.

 

That is why Obsidian shouldn't have altered the verse - they shouldn't have even approached the guy in the first place suggesting he should change it.

 

Jokes do, but only if they are uttered with malevolence. The one in-game was more of a dirty limerick, hilarious but not malevolent in scope.

The author is OK with it, and in this particular case we should be too. The principle is still wrong, however.

 

No, as I mentioned, there's literally no evidence that jokes cause any kind of behaviour to start/continue. The issue should have not been taken seriously from the off.

 

 

I'm not sure you can hold up a lack of research as proof that something isn't happening.

Yet you apparently can go the way of "My Feelings are proof" and somehow that is more valid?

 

People have used the "sleeping with a man disguised as a woman" jokes when telling me face-to-face why transgender people are disgusting and why it's okay to be violent against them, though, so I guess it's a little difficult for me to disregard that (admittedly anecdotal) evidence.

 

Im sorry but it takes outragous naïveté if not outright ignorance to make out with someone who is not aware or is too drunk to realize that his partner may be transgender, start getting romantic and then drop "by the way I have a ****" on him. "I am surprised that I got socked in the face" shows a baffling lack of social awareness. Not saying that violence is justified, dont get me wrong, just that I have enough empathy to understand WHY someone would react like that.

 

Wasnt there even a court case some years back like that? Drunk guy gets picked up by a trans, they have sex, next morning guy wakes up and claims he was raped because he was never told by her that she was trans?

[Vok]

 

 

 

 

Making a semantic argument about how being offended is whining is to ignore that maybe it's not offence it's emotional hurt,  before you come up with a smart retort to that consider the number of people with OCD who find release in physical pain.

that maybe it's not offence it's emotional hurt

Whoa, whoa, whoa, WHOA, Hold on for a minute. My brain needs to process this level of mental.

You are saying that a joke is so bad that it can cause EMOTIONAL HURT to you? And you find a reaction like this to a joke to be a healthy and proper response? Are you for real?

 

 

 that discounting emotional pain is silly

 

No, saying that you got emotional pain because someone joked about your bodyhair or called you a mean poopy-head is silly. It is not only silly, it is in fact as insulting as people who claim they got PTSD because someone made fun of them on Twitter.

 

 

You know snipping my posts for out of context effect isn't very good trolling.

 

No I'm merely saying that a potential exists for some emotional pain, for some people.

 

The second part was an extreme illustrative example of how certain conditions of the mind can be as injurious as other sources of corporeal pain and that discounting emotional pain is silly, not that they were equivalent in any way, or that it was about me.

 

 

You know snipping my posts for out of context effect isn't very good trolling.

Your post can be essentially reduced to that sentences.  You should also probably look up what trolling actually means before you throw it at someone.

 

 

I should have put (potential, if small,) in front of emotional pain in that last sentence to soften it.

it makes no difference it wont make it any less mind-boggling. You are implying that sane normal behaviour is being emotionally hurt by bad jokes or strangers making fun of you.

 

Its not.

 

You also seem to have missed where I said It wasnt about me.

Where did I say it was about you? Why are you trying to make it about you?

[Goatmeat]

Since this thread pretty much instantly turned into complaints about a single change to the game, I just wanted to throw in that I'm glad to see how Obsidian handled the backer-created content once it was brought to their attention.  I'd have been disappointed if their reaction was to either say "They paid $500 so can say what they want," or just ignored it.

 

As an aside, there has been research that indicates that sexist humour can make people more tolerant of sexist views.  It's fairly easy to find if you look for it.  Just as an example: http://www.academia.edu/266974/The_effect_of_sexist_humor_and_type_of_rape_on_mens_self-reported_rape_proclivity_and_victim_blame

[Althernai]

PC Gamer has a pretty good article on the case.

It does a good job of presenting the facts, but it is extremely biased starting from the very title. There is one thing in this situation that I find to be really heartening: when given all of the facts, an overwhelming majority stands against the bullies of Twitter. This is true both in the relatively open comments section of PC gamer and in the restricted Kickstarter comments area (where you can only post if you backed the game years ago). I tried counting the unique perspectives in the latter and while there are some people who support the decision to change the poem, they are significantly outnumbered (something like 2:1 or maybe even 3:1) by those who are disappointed. The reaction to PC gamer's biased article is likewise mostly negative (though here it is harder to say how many of those names are unique).

 

Let the bullies of Twitter have their Pyrrhic victory -- the main thing they have accomplished is expose just how vile and petty they are and demonstrate how few people actually support them. Also, now that everybody knows the context, the new poem is funnier than the old one. As a completely unrelated bonus, it also has better scansion.

[McWafflez]

Caving to SJW is sad. I had Pillars on my steam wishlist but now it isn't until this is reversed which will probably be never. Is it petty for me not to buy your game because of this? Sure. There are many other game companies who won't cave to the people looking to be offended.

[lightblade75]

"Here lies Firedorn, a hero in bed. 

He once was alive, but now he's dead. 

The last women he bedded, turned out a man

And crying in shame, off a cliff he ran."

 

Thanks for posting. For me I do not feel offended by this poem. I think it is a funny poem and can not see how it should offend anyone? But this is only MHO. Of course I respect any other opinion on this.