It's not a slur, it's simply a shorter word to type / say. That's like crying over someone typing "pic" instead of "picture".

OK, giving women a malus with no counter-balance is stupid, point taken. I still don't see the problem with pronouns, unless you are playing with some hyper-autists who go "it says 'he', so girls can't be fighters, reeee", but in that case you need to look for new friends.

As for the links you posted, that's what happens when people have too much time and too little problems in their lives. The supposed issues have unrelated origins and implications, you cannot just lump them together. For instance, the reason why women's sports are specially labelled is because that is their selling point, without the "women's" part it would be just boring sports. Anyone who compares a math of men's football and women's football will agree with that. Note that tennis for example is not divided like that, exactly because women's tennis is also interesting. But pointing that out goes against the narrative.

After the SJWs defended the unethical behavior, they retaliated by intentionally trying to ruin games by forcing as much out of placed forced "diversity" as possible, so Gamergate also became about preventing the games industry (and media in general) from being ruined by extremist political views. If you ever went to a Gamergate forum like /v/KotakuInAction, you'd see that they support SJWs actually making their own games if they want those issues to be involved in a game. They only take issue with when either SJWs harass a company into censoring a game (like Blizzard this past week) or they get hired into a company (like the writer for Dragonspear in the linked article) who then use their position to add irrelevant and immersion breaking politics into a game that has nothing to do with their agenda.

It's more like using 'homo' or 'lesbo' instead of their longer forms; yes, they are shorter, and horribly insulting slurs to boot.
Um... What? That seems needlessly convoluted, to say the least.

What I'd like to know is if the new characters/storylines are actually badly written. For me, that would be the only valid point of criticizing them.
You can't tell writers what to write based on your own principles. You can disagree on the execution of the subject, not on the subject itself.
(Actually, that's not absolutely true: there are quite a lot of subjects I strongly disagree about, so don't even start...)

Again, the only people working themselves into a "tizzy" to pressure art to conform to your worldview is Amber Scott from beamdog. I'm saying that the art's integrity should be untouched.

And the original art *is* untouched; the original Baldur's Gate is still there and unchanged. The only art that has been touched is an expansion made by different people. Again, I'm not seeing a revisionism problem.

Absolutely right. Gamergate is all about a bulwark against SJW political correctness. You saw the massive backlash against Anita Sarkesian's feminist crusade against gaming.

My gosh, is there no place left that hasn't been ruined by this crap? When I play or watch fantasy I want to escape from politics, that's the definition of it, an escape. They got star trek and now star wars. But, I thought, well at least they haven't got to D&D yet. Nope, they've got that too.

Thanks beamdog, for shatting all over yet another of my childhood pasttimes.

As I said, if son of Tolkien introduced LGBT to Middle-Earth in some new book or story, it would STILL be a problem even if the original works of JRR Tolkien were untouched.

I say we should start boycotting Beamdog products across the board to protest this. The next game they announce, we should make it a point not to buy it, and use this game as an example of why, and explain that giving BeamDog your money is like giving then free reign to hijack your favourite franchises, gut out its soul and replace it with vapid bowdlerized maxims about social justice. They already ruined MDK 2 with a god-awful port that they refused to fix.

While you're at it, email GoG explaining your dissatisfaction with this game, and ask for a refund.

It would not, in my book. As long as he published under his own name, why shouldn't he?
Lots of great works of art are based on others.when they are well done, they contribute something, even if I don't agree.

No, it wouldn't. As long as he published under his own name.

Ahh well, maybe a bit blunt, but she didn't get much chance to prove the depth of her characterisation there, did she?
I really don't see the problem.

Poor writing, the "trans" having nothing to do with the plot (the person is just a down cleric / shopkeeper), plus extremely limited dialogue options that don't even give the option of a negative reaction. If you really want to push SJW politics into a game, have the guts to let people actually role play and decide if they want to react positively or negatively.

I'm pretty sure it would. It would show disrespect to the original concept and its creator.

Right! I've noticed this, too. This is a role-playing game in which you can be a chaotic evil character, murdering and harrassing everyone in your way, but you are given no option of being cheeky at a transsexual person? That's just ridiculous. There should at least be an option of calling her a weirdo.