It's an opinion site. They are pretty much a written form version of TED that is exclusively about games. Most of the stuff they write is about business or design and is aimed at game developers.

Opinion site when it matters and they're one of those same sites that claims they're journalists when it would better suit them to be called such. Can't have both.

Why don't you just look at the site yourself? Yes they have news stories, but that doesn't mean everything they say is a news story. Like I said they are a game information site aimed at developers. So that involves everything from the latest tech (which would be news) to the social status of potential customers and how you should decide which group to aim for (business related opinion). So yes they can have it both, why can't they?

You're complaining about a site without even attempting to understand what the purpose of it is.

Both could probably be solved if GOG barred reviews from non-owners for all day-1 releases rather than just the one game. Older games are another issue entirely since there's plenty of time to have bought and played through such a game in its entirety by the time it shows up, but for games released at the same time as Steam, it doesn't seem like too much to ask for people to only be able to review the game where they purchase it. At least, for a reasonable period of time.

That probably seems pretty skewed in favor of something like Siege of Dragonspear, but it would also keep those offended by a game from taking it out in a review, which could prove to be a valuable ward against the perpetually outraged. For example, I remember when Huniepop came here (not a day-1 release, but still) and the first few reviews were of the "get a life" variety. While that was just a few people, it'd help stave off that kind of thing if it were to happen on a larger scale, and to be honest, Dragonspear getting hit with a ton of 1-star reviews doesn't look to be a good result for anyone; everyone just suddenly seems really angry at the fictitious versions of "the other side" that exists in their heads, and I don't see how anyone could possibly stand to gain from that.

i barely ever read the revie
ws on gog (or somewhere else)

most often they are biased... filled with 1 star hatred negative "reviews" of just ranting about one MINOR problem that even possibly comes from the reviewer itself and his computer rather than just the game... other who dont give objective facts and/or are making up their opinion on early moments of the games...
damn i ever saw gogmixes of people pretentiously claim/label numerous games as shit/worthless/bad even when many of them already have a large enough base of happy satisfied gamers (including me most of time)

so, no, i dont really give a fuck about random reviews

now detailed and factual reviews by someone i can figure out the rough gamer profile and taste throughout previous writings in a way accurate enough to be able to sort out which parts of his tastes are similar to mine or against them so i canfigure out for myself how much i would like a game myself, wether he gave a bad review or a good one... that i'll consider reading and listening

problem is: on gog, there is no way to display a whole user profile page of each review already posted to manage to understand the person's tastes and history, nor there is a way to search for gogmix using keywords... damn, i cant even FIND BACK my own gogmixes for editing or updating if i ever LOST the textfile where i stored the link before...

gog does a very lousy job regarding users interaction and communauty functions and features. so as they are useless and bad at the actual point, i dont even need them to "polish" them with day one embargos or ownership checks (when you polish a turd well, you wont get much more than turd anyway)

No one said it needed to be boycotted. Who boycotts what is their own decision. That employee has regularly violated written down journalistic ethics and the editors did nothing about it. As you said, its mostly an opinion site, but there is a difference in not going to a restaurant that serves food you don't like and not going to one where the cook spits in your food.
Well then you should have said the proper definition of what you were saying first. All this time I didn't understand this reference at all. Anyway, learned a new concept so thanks for explaining it.
As you may know, most people in GG aren't using SJW as a method of dismissing criticism. Neither do people consider the term in a definition of what you said. All most people say about ''SJWs'' is that they hate all art and that they are ideologues and censors and of course the eternal ''no fun allowed''.

I don't think GG is arguing for the removed pose to be put in as much as they are whining about its removal; which is completely reasonable. And no, GG doesn't have any ops where they're pushing their own interpretation of Tracer to justify the pose. The only person who seems to have pushed their interpretation is that ''concerned parent'' retard.

There's a temporary spell, but it's not permanent and you have to find a mage willing to cast it on you. So that's not a real solution. There is a permanent item, but it's extremely rare.


I don't think they've changed the script of the original. But let's be real - BG was good but it had some problems. It's not perfect. Criticizing it is perfectly legitimate.

All that the writer said was basically 'Writing everyone the same is boring and feels forced to me, so I like to write different kinds of characters to keep things like real life'. That's not an agenda, that's an artist thinking about her art. This is an artist doing a good job. Nobody is making anyone like it, but it's perfectly normal for a writer to write things she feels better reflect reality.

Here, this article talks about it better than I can: http://www.craveonline.com/entertainment/973517-debunking-absurdity-transphobic-baldurs-gate-controversy


You do realize that Dungeons & Dragons, as well as the original IE games, were pretty progressive for their time, right? Half-breeds, cross-dressing, gender-changing items, gay characters, etc were all a huge controversy when D&D got started. BD is just continuing that tradition.

http://www.craveonline.com/entertainment/973847-forgotten-realms-creator-ed-greenwood-saddened-baldurs-gate-controversy

You: Politics, social issues and memes are totally out of place in BG!
Me: Actually, discussing political and social issues and having memes are very traditional for both D&D and BG.
You: Whatever.

Clearer now?

Guys I'd like to take a post to remind you the media has successfully twisted and ignored by exclusion and strawmanning the facts surrounding the Baldur's Gate incident and have convinced most people that its only about ''angry transphobic gamers(or gamergators) reviewbombing a game for having a trans cahracter''.
Well yeah, but you seem to include ogres crossdressing and sex changing potions of fantasy with real life transgender issues.

I'd heard about this fuss and wondered what it was all about. Good article, thanks for the link :)

Hope you're having fun continuing to chat with these guys...

Say they guy that regularly use "gaters" exactly the same way, how wonderful hypocrisy....

Things have changed. The fighting on the forum sucked out (most) of the fighting in this thread. And most topics will lower your rep and not just this one.

That's a very nice strawman mate, and I must say, you did an admirable job in tearing it down.

There were no such things as internet memes around the time the BG saga was written, and discussing political and social issues exists in every medium ever. But there is a clear difference between political / social discussion and cramming tokens / badly designed characters for the sake of it, and then flipping off the community for not liking it.

Seriously ? this is beyond silly, even a triple face-palm is not enough anymore (I had to check to make sure that it wasn't a Onion like site making this news :) ).

Some peoples really don't know what to find to be offended by, it's just a cream that remove age spots or sun related spots, not some sort of toxic cream that some peoples used to whiten their skin.

What's next complain about anti-age cream, and insult those doing commercial for them, because they are promoting ageism ?