Baldur's Gate #BaldurGate: Siege of Dragonspear

[Delterius]

Wonder if the codex review will go into detail about the clearly obvious SJW agenda detailed by Gaulder.

One can never know.

 

[MRY]

This may be a risky question to ask, but aren't left-leaning politics (somewhat awkwardly coupled with the more traditionally right-leaning "great man" theory of causation) pretty endemic in even older RPGs? I mean, Dark Sun: Shattered Lands is pretty clearly a mix of environmentalism and poor vs. rich, for example. And Fallout (particularly Fallout 2) makes a point of satirizing right-wing militarism and suburbanism. Almost every fantasy RPG I can think of has had, at some point, some messaging about discrimination and tolerance (Ultima 6 is probably the paradigmatic example of this). Same with bizarre insertions of real-world stuff, like having Bill Gates be a major figure in Arcanum (if only Troika had known what Appleby would become!) or Dan Quayle jokes in FO2.

Is the issue here (1) that the politics are too far left, (2) that the writing is worse, (3) that the gameplay is worse, or (4) that the issue has simply moved from background static to signal due to the years-long GamerGate brouhaha? Or some combination of these things? I'm not particularly interested in Siege of Dragonspear itself, but I am interested in whether there is a shift going on in terms of players' tolerance of messaging in games.

 

[Sothpaw]

Because feminism is a supremacist movement and, unlike the games you mentioned, it permeates every single moment of SOD.

 

[Reinhardt]

Is the issue here

that they used classic game, made by others and beloved by many, to push their agenda.

 

[Lacrymas]

This may be a risky question to ask, but aren't left-leaning politics (somewhat awkwardly coupled with the more traditionally right-leaning "great man" theory of causation) pretty endemic in even older RPGs? I mean, Dark Sun: Shattered Lands is pretty clearly a mix of environmentalism and poor vs. rich, for example. And Fallout (particularly Fallout 2) makes a point of satirizing right-wing militarism and suburbanism. Almost every fantasy RPG I can think of has had, at some point, some messaging about discrimination and tolerance (Ultima 6 is probably the paradigmatic example of this). Same with bizarre insertions of real-world stuff, like having Bill Gates be a major figure in Arcanum (if only Troika had known what Appleby would become!) or Dan Quayle jokes in FO2.

Is the issue here (1) that the politics are too far left, (2) that the writing is worse, (3) that the gameplay is worse, or (4) that the issue has simply moved from background static to signal due to the years-long GamerGate brouhaha? Or some combination of these things? I'm not particularly interested in Siege of Dragonspear itself, but I am interested in whether there is a shift going on in terms of players' tolerance of messaging in games.

It's because it's too obvious, ham-fisted and the style of writing is out-of-place (in addition to just being awful in general). Even some classical literature has some sort of "message", although art doesn't need crutches like that. Like Shakespeare wrote in Hamlet "the role of drama is to put a mirror up to nature", although I have a feeling he was talking from the perspective of the mimesis rather than the Hegelian/Heideggerian concept of art-as-revealed-truth. Art is the mirror put in front of humanity in which we see ourselves are we truly are (it's not only that), but it should be done with grace, technique, subtlety and artistic insight, not by simply stating your desired outcome. This is gigantically complicated and can't be explained in a thread post, but that is the gist of it. SoD isn't a carefully constructed whole that arguments its position and shows injustices like in (for example) The Hunchback of Notre Dame. It has nothing to do with whether it's a "beloved classic" or some idealized crap like that, it's way more fundamental. Everything else has been explained to death and in-depth so you can check out the details in the thread.

 

[pippin]

Is the issue here (1) that the politics are too far left, (2) that the writing is worse, (3) that the gameplay is worse, or (4) that the issue has simply moved from background static to signal due to the years-long GamerGate brouhaha?

All of the above imo. Good science fiction and fantasy has always been a way to make comments about the reality of the author, in fact, the thing that separates good from bad in this sense is the portrayal of said conflicts instead of being glorified toy catalogues. Politics being too far left, I don't know if that's the proper way to word it. For me a "too far left" approach to leftist politics would be something like openly defending left wing anarchism and class warfare, bth theoretical and practical. The writing is really bad, fanfiction.net bad. Even in recent Bioware production you had snippets of interesting writing to drive your mind away from the author's intentions when it comes to gender and similar stuff. Just watch how meme-like the writing is, which is actually one of the biggest complaints about FO2's writing too. The gameplay is pretty much the same, with the exception that SoD apparently inherited Beamdog's trademark "story mode" where combat is almost non existant. About the fourth point, it seems this is going to be the norm from now own, every game will be scrutinized by every side of the conflict and their authors will be demonized for this or those reasons. However, it's also true that they had no business in changing stuff from a game they didn't made to fit their thinking because it was "wrong". I mean, even Bethesda didn't really changed the nature of institutions like the Enclave, although their parody of republicans seems really stupid, and then establishing the lore for DC's BoS, they stated it was a separatist chapter, and not the "real" one.

 

[mastroego]

This may be a risky question to ask, but aren't left-leaning politics (somewhat awkwardly coupled with the more traditionally right-leaning "great man" theory of causation) pretty endemic in even older RPGs? I mean, Dark Sun: Shattered Lands is pretty clearly a mix of environmentalism and poor vs. rich, for example. And Fallout (particularly Fallout 2) makes a point of satirizing right-wing militarism and suburbanism. Almost every fantasy RPG I can think of has had, at some point, some messaging about discrimination and tolerance (Ultima 6 is probably the paradigmatic example of this). Same with bizarre insertions of real-world stuff, like having Bill Gates be a major figure in Arcanum (if only Troika had known what Appleby would become!) or Dan Quayle jokes in FO2.

Is the issue here (1) that the politics are too far left, (2) that the writing is worse, (3) that the gameplay is worse, or (4) that the issue has simply moved from background static to signal due to the years-long GamerGate brouhaha? Or some combination of these things? I'm not particularly interested in Siege of Dragonspear itself, but I am interested in whether there is a shift going on in terms of players' tolerance of messaging in games.

1, 2 mostly, but you're not really seeing the whole picture imho.
One thing is to let your opinions vaguely known through your writing (or better yet, to incite pondering about concepts, even political ones), another thing is meme-level political propaganda inserted by people who are only able to parrot the "correct things to say", as heard from someone else.

Political themes such as these nowadays are brought forth by people who are incapable of autonomous thinking, and merely want to look "progressive" on the social networks.
This "expansion" seems a perfect example of this phenomenon and almost a cautionary tale about its extreme effects.

 

[Infinitron]

Of course it's mainly 4. For the hyper-aware, even The Witcher is left-wing propaganda. (Hi, Lyric Suite!)

 

[Anac'raxus]

Yeah, not being able to tease Voghlin or just ignore the "microaggression" is pretty limiting to both role playing and diversity (of thought). Very shrill axe-grinding going on there.

I don't really think people should condemn the war allegory, though. At least it was relatively subtle. Don't become the monster you are fighting by demanding rightthink. Boycotting stuff that speaks of the human condition in ways you disagree with, with SJWs doing the same, will make games hideously sterile.

 

[Excidium II]

I don't really think people should condemn the war allegory, though. At least it was relatively subtle. Don't become the monster you are fighting by demanding rightthink. Boycotting stuff that speaks of the human condition in ways you disagree with, with SJWs doing the same, will make games hideously sterile.

I think what people are saying is that it doesn't belong in a high fantasy adventure tale.

 

[Theldaran]

This may be a risky question to ask, but aren't left-leaning politics (somewhat awkwardly coupled with the more traditionally right-leaning "great man" theory of causation) pretty endemic in even older RPGs? I mean, Dark Sun: Shattered Lands is pretty clearly a mix of environmentalism and poor vs. rich, for example. And Fallout (particularly Fallout 2) makes a point of satirizing right-wing militarism and suburbanism. Almost every fantasy RPG I can think of has had, at some point, some messaging about discrimination and tolerance (Ultima 6 is probably the paradigmatic example of this). Same with bizarre insertions of real-world stuff, like having Bill Gates be a major figure in Arcanum (if only Troika had known what Appleby would become!) or Dan Quayle jokes in FO2.

Is the issue here (1) that the politics are too far left, (2) that the writing is worse, (3) that the gameplay is worse, or (4) that the issue has simply moved from background static to signal due to the years-long GamerGate brouhaha? Or some combination of these things? I'm not particularly interested in Siege of Dragonspear itself, but I am interested in whether there is a shift going on in terms of players' tolerance of messaging in games.

There's a difference in being critical of status quo/current system/things like they are now, and doing it well, like most of those old games did, and doing it extremely poorly *while* being radical shit.

The writers Beamdog used are extremely biased with their themes of choice (feminism, SJW, alternate sexualities, integration of everyone without regards to who they are) and believe we should get at those issues at every chance. Foooorced. They are louder about their ideology than was common in videogames up to this point. And it permeates every part of the dialogues down to the last comma. I don't know why exactly Beamdog employed these writers; maybe because they were cheap, maybe they wanted to spread this kind of message, maybe they thought the massive flame wars would end up in their favor, I don't have a clue.

But anyway, it seems like the logical development of things. Just take a look around.

 

[Kem0sabe]

Because feminism is a supremacist movement and, unlike the games you mentioned, it permeates every single moment of SOD.

This.

I wouldn't care if they were defending the environment, but defending a political agenda that clearly strives for the downfall of one gender and the dominance of another, is just pushing it too far.

 

[Lacrymas]

I think what people are saying is that it doesn't belong in a high fantasy adventure tale.

No, this is not what we are saying at all (well, at least what I am saying). There is no mold for a high fantasy adventure tale in which every writer should fit. The war connection would be fine if it was done well (War and Peace, duh), but SoD is not War and Peace. Literally every topic can fit if it's done well, but that's extremely hard to do. Whether it is something people would believe in or do believe in is not an issue and it never has been. You might want to check out Heidegger's The Origin of the Work of Art, if you are interested in more details.

 

[MRY]

Lacrymas: "Art is the mirror put in front of humanity in which we see ourselves are we truly are, but it should be done with grace, technique, subtlety and artistic insight, not by simply stating your desired outcome." Beautifully stated, and I agree almost entirely.* Alas, I feel that is a standard to which very little writing, and especially little game writing, rises. (* The "almost" is that I also think that sometimes art can and should be a funhouse mirror that distorts our features because sometimes exaggeration is revealing in its own way.) And, often, people tolerate and even applaud writing that clearly violates the standard (such as, say, Heinlein's writing).

The meme point may be the heart of it because it does seem like these are more "topic-of-the-day" political views than were pushed in past games. For example, I think that Ultima IV is an extraordinarily preachy game (and generally pretty left-leaning) but its politics are a bit more general and timeless, though I don't know -- they seem quite responsive to the '80s political conflicts.

 

[Bubbles]

All art is political

 

[AetherVagrant]

1) Characters now look like they came from Ultima 7 with the black outlines 9/10
2) Trans character is like one line, not a party member, and not even conclusively trans. Yes, the "revelation" is a little forced, but she could be a) a hermaphrodite, it was common for them to be assigned whatever gender the parents were comfortable with, unless puberty made their efforts null and void. b) simply born to parents who preferred a boy...I had an ex whose family gave her a boy name and treated her as such up until she was 7...it's also not that uncommon. c) fucking get over it. the Forgotten Realms is not an alt-medieval setting, sex and gender identity has always been more permissive in dnd than in life, and if the "forced and ham-handed writing" was really that big of a deal than you wouldnt be a fan of the original baldurs gate game at all. chosen one-orphan-dad-slain-sexy childhood friend...fucking edwin and minsc...it's all pretty daytime tv, and picking on this one point just shows peoples biases and insexurities when they dont treat everything else in the game with the same microscope.
3) Story is kinda shit so far, like NWN2...but individual quest writing ranges from retarded to brilliant. It's a game in which the writing team doesnt blend into one cohesive author, but are very distinct. Like a book where different characters are written by different people. It works, it's on par with the original, but the seams between the teams show.
4) Politics still isnt left enough for my tastes...but then nothing is likely to be. gotta let the grognards swallow the pill and it can only be so bitter.
5) Nobody cares about this controversy when it doesn't offend their own sensibilities -- codex is like brofags who complain that gay dudes kissing in public or being on TV outside of a comedic role is "forcing the liberal agenda" --it's not, it's just what a good chunk of the world think of as unremarkable and not an "issue". If it inflames you so much then maybe it's an issue of your own, and not the game's. closet fags like to demonize.

end result -- if you liked baldur's gate 1 and 2 then this game is good. not perfect, but good. if you only liked 1 for the freedom or only liked 2 for the story then it might fail...but for fans of both games who aren't going to let minuscule ideological differences set them on a flame war, it's good content.

 

[Excidium II]

^ great post

 

[Lacrymas]

Beautifully stated, and I agree almost entirely.* Alas, I feel that is a standard to which very little writing, and especially little game writing, rises. (* The "almost" is that I also think that sometimes art can and should be a funhouse mirror that distorts our features because sometimes exaggeration is revealing in its own way.) And, often, people tolerate and even applaud writing that clearly violates the standard (such as, say, Heinlein's writing).

Thanks :p Exaggeration is one of the principles of Expressionism (though expressionists don't think of it as exaggeration), so you are right. There is no "standard" in art, there is only the context in which it is done and its relation to other art, that's why being extremely different is good (if it has serious considerations and is not for its own sake). Of course not all art is like that, that's why I mentioned that it's not only that, art can exist solely for itself and most of the time it does, but when it does it ...changes people (complicated). You might want to check out Heidegger's The Origin of the Work of Art if you are interested in more details about art-as-truth.

 

[Shammy]

Played it for 2 hours and already bracing for mediocre. The amount of sarcastic/snarky responses that CHARNAME can give is concerning, I mean seriously I'm seeing one in every 2 conversations I'm having it's ridiculous.

Also whoever said that Minsc references Boo more than usual, you were so on point that I'm actually sad it's true. And I've only met 2 of the 4 companions and am already disappointed.

I'm holding out until I actually finish it to see how it all comes together and transitions into BG2, but so far it plays like a high budget, average mod, which is exactly what I expected.

Thanks. Amber Scott apparently has a thing for hamster characterization, explores the depths of hamster mentality.

I'm glad to see that there are so many people who notice just how bad the writing is. Obviously it's not just me trying too hard.

On this note, you really can tell where Amber Scott wanted to make a point about race equality in a universe that, by all accounts, is built around every race being different in some capacity. One glaring offender is at the start of Chapter 9, where you find a small group of Half-Orcs that wanna buddy buddy with your siege crew, but one of your lieutenants isn't a fan of em. And of course one of the responses you can give is "anyone can join us, regardless of their race".

Bitch half orcs are short-tempered by nature, no shit someone would be worried about them so why the fuck is CHARNAME a SJW now? The game has some good moments here and there but good god have they butchered some companions and ham fisted in SJW shit where it doesn't need to be. This whole thing better end well or I'm gonna cry myself to sleep over this trainwreck.

 

[Telengard]

I'm not particularly interested in Siege of Dragonspear itself, but I am interested in whether there is a shift going on in terms of players' tolerance of messaging in games.

Eh, the commons has always been an unruly beast. Treat them the right way, bring them their doggie treats, and they'll let you scratch their head and even rub their belly, and if you do it right, they'll give you everything they have. Doesn't matter what you say or believe. Approach them wrong, though, and they'll bite your hand off. Keep doing it and they'll fucking rip out your throat. (We don't physically tar and feather people anymore, we just do it verbally instead. So, that part's different.)

Beamdog touched BG in its secret places. Somebody was always going to pipe up about something. If this issue didn't exist, it would have been something else. That was a given and should have been expected. In this position, professional companies act, you know, professional and work to defuse the situation. They give the non-apology apology and work to maximize their sales with other people. Its crude and crass and entirely materialistic, and the commons don't care. Howsoever, the commons refuses to be lectured or insulted, and they will start growling if you do it. And then if you start committing internet taboos, like erasing peoples views, you're dead.

In fact, this is why PR companies exist in the first place - to prevent artists and business owners from saying stupid shit to the commons that gets them savaged.

 

[Bubbles]

one of the responses you can give is "anyone can join us, regardless of their race".

why the fuck is CHARNAME a SJW now?

It's fascinating to see all these different definitions of "SJW" clashing together in this thread.

We should try to define what "political correctness" means next.

 

[Infinitron]

MRY It's kind of interesting to compare this game with Icewind Dale 2, a game that had a somewhat similar premise but didn't provoke this kind of reaction. Part of that is, as I said, 4. This stuff wasn't on people's radars back in 2002.

But there is another thing. By virtue of being a rather simple game, Icewind Dale 2 made whatever anti-racist "SJW" message it had seem tragically doomed, making the game almost subversively anti-SJW in a way. Yes, the Legion of the Chimera catered to the needs of Faerun's discriminated outcasts and that's kind of sad, but they had to die anyway. Keep on hacking and slashing your way through the linear corridor, white man!

 

[PhantasmaNL]

This may be a risky question to ask, but aren't left-leaning politics (somewhat awkwardly coupled with the more traditionally right-leaning "great man" theory of causation) pretty endemic in even older RPGs? I mean, Dark Sun: Shattered Lands is pretty clearly a mix of environmentalism and poor vs. rich, for example. And Fallout (particularly Fallout 2) makes a point of satirizing right-wing militarism and suburbanism. Almost every fantasy RPG I can think of has had, at some point, some messaging about discrimination and tolerance (Ultima 6 is probably the paradigmatic example of this). Same with bizarre insertions of real-world stuff, like having Bill Gates be a major figure in Arcanum (if only Troika had known what Appleby would become!) or Dan Quayle jokes in FO2.

Is the issue here (1) that the politics are too far left, (2) that the writing is worse, (3) that the gameplay is worse, or (4) that the issue has simply moved from background static to signal due to the years-long GamerGate brouhaha? Or some combination of these things? I'm not particularly interested in Siege of Dragonspear itself, but I am interested in whether there is a shift going on in terms of players' tolerance of messaging in games.

I would even go and say that the majority of the entertainment *with a message* appears left-leaning, but that may be my perception. Perhaps those on the left just cannot pass up on an opportunity to "educate the masses" and show the world the wonders of their enlightenment while those oriented to the right just look at the sales figures. I guess this becomes problematic when the message IS the product, instead of a subtle undercurrent that does not interfere (or even stimulates thought). Also, good satire is difficult and requires a lot of skill.

From the examples posted, the message in this game is constant, hostile, viciously pummeled in by sledgehammer and amateurishly worded. Incidentally not the best way to get your message across.

I like my entertainment preferably without message, but wont skip good stuff because of it btw.

 

[MRY]

We should try to define what "political correctness" means next.

What is a politically correct RPG? :D

 

[ZagorTeNej]

This may be a risky question to ask, but aren't left-leaning politics (somewhat awkwardly coupled with the more traditionally right-leaning "great man" theory of causation) pretty endemic in even older RPGs? I mean, Dark Sun: Shattered Lands is pretty clearly a mix of environmentalism and poor vs. rich, for example. And Fallout (particularly Fallout 2) makes a point of satirizing right-wing militarism and suburbanism. Almost every fantasy RPG I can think of has had, at some point, some messaging about discrimination and tolerance (Ultima 6 is probably the paradigmatic example of this). Same with bizarre insertions of real-world stuff, like having Bill Gates be a major figure in Arcanum (if only Troika had known what Appleby would become!) or Dan Quayle jokes in FO2.

Is the issue here (1) that the politics are too far left, (2) that the writing is worse, (3) that the gameplay is worse, or (4) that the issue has simply moved from background static to signal due to the years-long GamerGate brouhaha? Or some combination of these things? I'm not particularly interested in Siege of Dragonspear itself, but I am interested in whether there is a shift going on in terms of players' tolerance of messaging in games.

Don't know if you're aware but Fallout 2 has been extensively criticized throughout the years (on Codex) for the tonal shift compared to the first with its excessive amount of references and silly stuff like ghosts, talking deathclaws, fedora wearing gangsters etc. many felt those things didn't fit the setting/gameworld established in the first game. Yet that doesn't mean the first game didn't contain pop-culture references (Doctor Who, Southpark etc.) but it didn't go overboard with them.

It's a similar situation here IMO, it isn't necessarily about whether the message is left-wing, right-wing or whatever but that in this case it's as subtle as a sledgehammer and could definitely be better written/integrated into the setting, in addition to giving the player (who may or may not agree with the politics of the creator, not to mention that he could be role-playing a character vastly different to himself/herself in real life) more choices to interact with it.