Baldur's Gate: Siege of Dragonspear RELEASED

[213374U]

That really is odd. If Beamdog planned to have Imoen leave your party, then she should have left after the starting dungeon like everyone else and not be recruitable later.

 

Technically, that's what happens. She's simply not a playable NPC in the starting dungeon -- she acts as a guide and gives you her line about her now being an apprentice and therefore useless. I guess it was a way to cut corners. Changing her dual-into-mage subplot timing to account for the (very likely) possibility that you had had her in your party confronting Sarevok and keeping her during the initial dungeon would be too much effort for a fairly minor story pacing detail.

 

More than anything it bothered me that Safana, whom I might not have even met previously is now a trusted party member, no questions asked. I would have preferred that they code in a throwaway generic Flaming Fist "spec ops" or whatever to offer support with traps, if they couldn't be bothered to come up with a Safana continuity solution.

 

And yeah, I'm not impressed by the dearth of alternatives regarding NPCs. I'll probably have to create one or two custom NPCs when (if) I get around to that evil party run.

[BruceVC]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Volo many people get frustrated when you respond like this but just to let you know it doesnt bother me in the slightest 

 

I have no expectation when you and I debate so if you want to avoid engaging on a topic thats fine, we can debate later

 

What really annoys me is when people call me a troll and criticize me but refuse to debate me or ignore me ...and I have always been annoyed by that  and I am quite open about that  but our debates arent like that as far as I am aware ?

[redneckdevil]

Ok I'm bored so I'll muck thru.

 

Welp ok, just one thing right since I'm on break.

 

My problem so far is how "special" bio/beam dog treat their non white straight characters. You can put whatever sexual/race/etc preference into a rpg (been done for years) BUT imho they need to advance the story, not that they are special snowflakes for being normal.

2 examples done wrong.

Da2. Anders. Ok he's gay, ok whatever. The problem with Anders in ur party is that u either have to accept his advances OR politely refuse him while still sounding like there's a chance. If u are blunt or rude in denying his advances, u lose him from the party.

You basically have to swallow his advances and still be civil while hinting that u maybe interested later on. It was what 3 or 4 times this pops up and u can't just deny him while being urself. U have to baby him in denying him or go thru a romance option with him to keep him. Yes u can be an **** to him but u lose the only healer if u aren't a healer urself.

2. This in between BG. U get a trans who u cannot be an **** to. There's no option.

 

Both characters scream their sexuality and are denied to being blunt or even evil towards. Granted u can be evil and an **** to everybody else and still keep them in ur party, but it feels like u have to treat these people "special" simply because of their sexuality.

 

Now here's an example done right and surpriselingly (well not really seeing how it was the last game MK worked on) but bethesdas Vivec from Morrowind.

Here is someone who is straight up bi and transexual in changing his/her sexuality on a fly or a whim, but no ones ever been up in arms about him. Why? Because even though if I read the lore and the ingame books, the game screams this guy is bi and trans, he still an awesome character because of 2 key points. One is that he's very well written and two, his sexuality is never defining his character. Meaning it does play a role in his point of view of some things, but it never the key thing that defined him. You wanna be an **** to him, go ahead he's problemly a bigger **** than u by forcing his people to love him or face the moon crashing and destroying everything. The very same moon that hangs above Vivec that people must stare at everyday.

 

The reason why I have a problem with checklist mentality when it comes to making sure different sexualitys are in the game is because they mainly defining that character by their sexuality. When tbh imho ur sexuality in real life isn't that important at all and it shouldn't be something "special" or a check to check on a list to make sure everyone's being represented.

 

another great example is fallout series. U can be gay/trans/bi/etc and u can roleplay that and u can even get a few new things to happen because of it, but it's not the over defining thing that makes ur character. The main story doesn't change because ur "different" because as it should in real life not matter.

Ur not better or worse because of it and my problem is that with sjw that I'm seeing in games is not that they are added (they've been in video games for years and one of my fav characters is a bisexual trans) but that Because of their sexuality they are somehow "special" because of it.

 

And also the woman's attitude and checklist mentality when she thinks she's doing the community a GREaT service because she adds something in and creates them as special snowflakes and thinks she's doing something ground breaking when in actuality imho she's doing worse BECAUSE she views them as special snowflakes that u can't treat normal like other people.

 

Rants over, let the flames begin. Hopefully it was understandable.

[BruceVC]

Ok I'm bored so I'll muck thru.

 

Welp ok, just one thing right since I'm on break.

 

My problem so far is how "special" bio/beam dog treat their non white straight characters. You can put whatever sexual/race/etc preference into a rpg (been done for years) BUT imho they need to advance the story, not that they are special snowflakes for being normal.

2 examples done wrong.

Da2. Anders. Ok he's gay, ok whatever. The problem with Anders in ur party is that u either have to accept his advances OR politely refuse him while still sounding like there's a chance. If u are blunt or rude in denying his advances, u lose him from the party.

You basically have to swallow his advances and still be civil while hinting that u maybe interested later on. It was what 3 or 4 times this pops up and u can't just deny him while being urself. U have to baby him in denying him or go thru a romance option with him to keep him. Yes u can be an **** to him but u lose the only healer if u aren't a healer urself.

2. This in between BG. U get a trans who u cannot be an **** to. There's no option.

 

Both characters scream their sexuality and are denied to being blunt or even evil towards. Granted u can be evil and an **** to everybody else and still keep them in ur party, but it feels like u have to treat these people "special" simply because of their sexuality.

 

Now here's an example done right and surpriselingly (well not really seeing how it was the last game MK worked on) but bethesdas Vivec from Morrowind.

Here is someone who is straight up bi and transexual in changing his/her sexuality on a fly or a whim, but no ones ever been up in arms about him. Why? Because even though if I read the lore and the ingame books, the game screams this guy is bi and trans, he still an awesome character because of 2 key points. One is that he's very well written and two, his sexuality is never defining his character. Meaning it does play a role in his point of view of some things, but it never the key thing that defined him. You wanna be an **** to him, go ahead he's problemly a bigger **** than u by forcing his people to love him or face the moon crashing and destroying everything. The very same moon that hangs above Vivec that people must stare at everyday.

 

The reason why I have a problem with checklist mentality when it comes to making sure different sexualitys are in the game is because they mainly defining that character by their sexuality. When tbh imho ur sexuality in real life isn't that important at all and it shouldn't be something "special" or a check to check on a list to make sure everyone's being represented.

 

another great example is fallout series. U can be gay/trans/bi/etc and u can roleplay that and u can even get a few new things to happen because of it, but it's not the over defining thing that makes ur character. The main story doesn't change because ur "different" because as it should in real life not matter.

Ur not better or worse because of it and my problem is that with sjw that I'm seeing in games is not that they are added (they've been in video games for years and one of my fav characters is a bisexual trans) but that Because of their sexuality they are somehow "special" because of it.

 

And also the woman's attitude and checklist mentality when she thinks she's doing the community a GREaT service because she adds something in and creates them as special snowflakes and thinks she's doing something ground breaking when in actuality imho she's doing worse BECAUSE she views them as special snowflakes that u can't treat normal like other people.

 

Rants over, let the flames begin. Hopefully it was understandable.

Thanks for sharing and taking the time to explain 

 

I dont agree with all of what you say but I respect your opinion 

[aluminiumtrioxid]

Da2. Anders. Ok he's gay, ok whatever. The problem with Anders in ur party is that u either have to accept his advances OR politely refuse him while still sounding like there's a chance. If u are blunt or rude in denying his advances, u lose him from the party.

You basically have to swallow his advances and still be civil while hinting that u maybe interested later on. It was what 3 or 4 times this pops up and u can't just deny him while being urself. U have to baby him in denying him or go thru a romance option with him to keep him. Yes u can be an **** to him but u lose the only healer if u aren't a healer urself.

 

> NPC doesn't want to associate with people who treat him like ****

> bad writing

 

okay

[Hiro Protagonist II]

> NPC doesn't want to associate with people who treat him like ****

> bad writing

 

That's not what I got from redneckdevil's post. More like you can't say, 'No thanks' which isn't impolite but the game can take it as being impolite. You have to tippy toe on eggshells and say it in the most polite manner possible while still sounding slightly interested which is giving a false impression to the NPC that there might still be hope for them. It's similar to the NPCs in SoD. I tried to say no thanks, to some of the Beamdog NPCs including if they wanted to join my party and instead of the dialogue finishing, the dialogue keeps continuing as if there's still a chance. Even when you refuse that NPC joining your party, they get all in a huff about it.

[Volourn]

." The problem with Anders in ur party is that u either have to accept his advances OR politely refuse him while still sounding like there's a chance. If u are blunt or rude in denying his advances, u lose him from the party."

 

This is a lie. I flat out refused his advances and hooked up with a woman and he never  ran away.  I only lost him as a companion when I couldn't support his terrorism. Not ebcause I refused to have sex with him. Don't bull****z. That SJW Nazis turf.

[BruceVC]

." The problem with Anders in ur party is that u either have to accept his advances OR politely refuse him while still sounding like there's a chance. If u are blunt or rude in denying his advances, u lose him from the party."

 

This is a lie. I flat out refused his advances and hooked up with a woman and he never  ran away.  I only lost him as a companion when I couldn't support his terrorism. Not ebcause I refused to have sex with him. Don't bull****z. That SJW Nazis turf.

Yes this was my experience, he only hit on me once and I said " no but don't take it personally ...I still need your magic " 

 

It really wasn't  a big deal 

 

Volo have you ever used the adult Romance mod and Romanced Iron Bull?

[Hurlshort]

I find it was best to not look too closely at any of the plot stuff in DA2.  I mean, your first act when you reach Kirkwall is to massacre a bunch of scared refugees.  Like, there isn't a choice, they just decide to attack you and the entire city watch because they want inside.  These are people that fled the Darkspawn, but they felt like their odds against the entire city watch were better.  

[BruceVC]

I find it was best to not look too closely at any of the plot stuff in DA2.  I mean, your first act when you reach Kirkwall is to massacre a bunch of scared refugees.  Like, there isn't a choice, they just decide to attack you and the entire city watch because they want inside.  These are people that fled the Darkspawn, but they felt like their odds against the entire city watch were better.  

Yes, thats probably best in this type of game

 

 

I started playing DA:I but stopped after 1 hour, I'll play it again but compared to W3 it just didnt grab me

[Volourn]

 " I mean, your first act when you reach Kirkwall is to massacre a bunch of scared refugees."

 

Huh? Those weren't 'scared' refugees. Those were thugs.

 

 

"Volo have you ever used the adult Romance mod and Romanced Iron Bull?"

 

Nope. Couldn't even finish the game once because it simply got boring.

[Hurlshort]

 " I mean, your first act when you reach Kirkwall is to massacre a bunch of scared refugees."

 

Huh? Those weren't 'scared' refugees. Those were thugs.

 

 

They were actually labelled Ferelden Deserters.  Which, again, makes little sense.  They deserted their homeland to make a suicidal attack on the city guard?  Random thugs would have been dumb enough, but that makes even less sense.

[Volourn]

Made perfect sense. They were evil pieces of crap who got violent b/c they didn't get what they want. What doesn't make sense is believing they should act like you would in that situation. LMAO

 

They certainly weren't 'terrified refugees' like you claimed they were.

Edited May 8, 2016 by Volourn

[Hurlshort]

Ferelden Lives Matter, stop making excuses for the murderous City Guard.

 

 

 

Edited May 8, 2016 by Hurlshot

[redneckdevil]

You know what, I think I may have been mistaken about Anders. Been a long time since I played it, and I think it was more along the lines of walking on egg shells of dialogue with mages and not relationship wise. My bad I believe I was wrong about Anders.

I remember being excited for him being in the second one because I liked his character in dao, but the second one I was put off with what he become as a character difference. A charming **** into an emo whiner.

Edited May 8, 2016 by redneckdevil

[Tale]

 

 " I mean, your first act when you reach Kirkwall is to massacre a bunch of scared refugees."

 

Huh? Those weren't 'scared' refugees. Those were thugs.

 

 

They were actually labelled Ferelden Deserters.  Which, again, makes little sense.  They deserted their homeland to make a suicidal attack on the city guard?  Random thugs would have been dumb enough, but that makes even less sense.

 

If ASOIAF taught me anything, it's that you can't trust deserters.

 

They'll do anything.

[DreamWayfarer]

 

They were actually labelled Ferelden Deserters. Which, again, makes little sense. They deserted their homeland to make a suicidal attack on the city guard? Random thugs would have been dumb enough, but that makes even less sense.

 

If ASOIAF taught me anything, it's that you can't trust deserters anything living or dead.

Edited May 9, 2016 by DreamWayfarer

[HoonDing]

"I find it was best to not look too closely at any of the plot stuff in DA2.  I mean, your first act when you reach Kirkwall is to massacre a bunch of scared refugees.  Like, there isn't a choice, they just decide to attack you and the entire city watch because they want inside.  These are people that fled the Darkspawn, but they felt like their odds against the entire city watch were better. "

they had nothing to lose

 

look at what some of the "Syrian "refugees" pulled to get to Mama Merkel

[Mamoulian War]

So in other words, in Bio games, it is completely OK, to massacre refugees, but you can't say anything negative to the special, as redneckdevil said, "snowflake" characters...

 

Is that the strong message, which should we sheeples take to our hearts from their inclusivity crusade?

[aluminiumtrioxid]

So in other words, in Bio games, it is completely OK, to massacre refugees, but you can't say anything negative to the special, as redneckdevil said, "snowflake" characters...

 

Is that the strong message, which should we sheeples take to our hearts from their inclusivity crusade?

 

Personally I'd go with "Bioware doesn't have very good writers", but whatever floats your goat.

[Volourn]

"So in other words, in Bio games, it is completely OK, to massacre refugees"

 

Are you guys high or just insnae? Those 'refugees' are violent sucmbags who try to commit murder. They aren't just random harmless refugees.

 

 

 

"you can't say anything negative to the special, as redneckdevil said, "snowflake" characters..."

 

Why are you lying? I turned the bozo down flat and he didn't leave. He shrugeed his shoulders and  still remained  my ally  until I told his terrorist self to get bent.

 

WHY DO PEOPLE MAKE BULLCRAP UP!?!

[Mamoulian War]

Well, that's YOUR oppinion ;-)

[Chippy]

Have put my playthough of this on hold until I can forget all the criticism of it at launch.  Considering how long it takes Beamdog to patch their games and get mandatory stuff working (I've given up on working soundsets after almost 6 years) it'll probably be next year or so.