Baldur's Gate 3

[Vergil]

forum needs a despair emoji

a vomiting reaction option.

I cannot play the game as anything but the Dark Urge once I learned you can cut Gayle's hand off and remove him from the game immediately.

[Magick]

Regarding viewtopic.php?p=58068-hilandar777-wrote ... ing#p58068

http://twitter.com/Badmojo7A Badmojo7
Keep it in! I am sick to death of this idiots who scream racism/sexism/whateverism at people because they do not LIKE what they see and rather than be mature and accept people have different tastes, they throw shock words like rape supporter, pig, or the new buzzword misogynist. Just to change things to THEIR point of view. Here is the thing, these people. Yea, they do not even care about the game, probably will not even buy it, these trolls just hunt around the net looking to point an accusing finger at someone and scare them to do their will. The moment you censor your game because it might offend someone, then you might as well stop making games at all because someone will always have something to ***** about.

http://www.lar.net/ Swen Vincke
True

Then you get stupid ***** (or ******) like this:

http://twitter.com/Loerwyn Kathryn
Well, why wouldn’t it cause discussion? Sexism and objectifications are two big issues in gaming right now. The lack of women in the industry, the lack of female characters, reduction of female characters to some sort of ‘sexy’ level (even Homefront did this, which really annoyed me), etc., so I think it’s good that you’re trying to keep those wheels turning.

So Swen does some research on the proportion of women interested in their games:
https://web.archive.org/web/20190901151 ... the-women/

[rusty_shackleford]

forum needs a despair emoji

a vomiting reaction option.

Also, just what the **** happened, Swen?
I know there's the "I have a company to run", but still.

Admittedly, some of the topics are a bit controversial, even if we did base them on real-life issues that dominate political agendas around the world. But the wording used by our writer is pretty much in synch with Larian’s culture i.e. it’s very satiricial, and since the internet is the internet and some of the satire will be lost in translation, it’s probably inevitable that flak is going to head our way.

It also doesn’t help that our lead animator decided that on this particular game he was going to show the world what he thinks of censorship. He made the most obvious sexist camera shot ever for the introduction of the dwarven princess to the dragon knight, and then queried me whether I thought it was over the top, and whether or not such an expression of artistic freedom belonged in a game. As I was debating the issue openly I somehow managed to get half Larian around me, who vigorously let me know that censorship is a thing of the devil and what they thought about their right to aim a camera at a dwarven princess’ breasts.

I let them cook a bit by playing the devil’s advocate, but let it in because a) I’m no big fan of censorship, b) I’m no fan of enforced politically correctness because it gives media too much power to shape opinion and c) I thought there was something symbolical about this particular shot being such a discussion generator just because it was visual. I think there is much more controversial stuff than this in the way the councillors formulate their opnions , but apparently the fact that that’s just words doesn’t provoke the same emotions.

Some of the guys who saw our presentations got it though and understood that there was gameplay value in putting in things a large majority wouldn’t agree with (at least, I hope), but which a player would still contemplate because it might let him reach his goals, pretty much the same thing a politician has to do all the time.

Yes, even after all this talk about censorship, I do in general indulge in a bit of self-censorship when talking to press if only it’s because I have to promote my company and my own personal thoughts are sometimes not necessarily conductive to that

https://web.archive.org/web/20220524032 ... ensorship/
https://web.archive.org/web/20190911161 ... w.lar.net/

I read through his blog a while back which is why I strongly believe he just lost control of BG3 at some point, either through licensing issues or the company got too big. The ideology he showed in those posts is the complete opposite of what was put in BG3 after the early access release.

[pokafox]

That entry is from 2013 ... Almost a different world. Were his more recent entries similar ? The dissonance is extreme indeed.

[Anon]

a vomiting reaction option.

Also, just what the **** happened, Swen?
I know there's the "I have a company to run", but still.

Admittedly, some of the topics are a bit controversial, even if we did base them on real-life issues that dominate political agendas around the world. But the wording used by our writer is pretty much in synch with Larian’s culture i.e. it’s very satiricial, and since the internet is the internet and some of the satire will be lost in translation, it’s probably inevitable that flak is going to head our way.

It also doesn’t help that our lead animator decided that on this particular game he was going to show the world what he thinks of censorship. He made the most obvious sexist camera shot ever for the introduction of the dwarven princess to the dragon knight, and then queried me whether I thought it was over the top, and whether or not such an expression of artistic freedom belonged in a game. As I was debating the issue openly I somehow managed to get half Larian around me, who vigorously let me know that censorship is a thing of the devil and what they thought about their right to aim a camera at a dwarven princess’ breasts.

I let them cook a bit by playing the devil’s advocate, but let it in because a) I’m no big fan of censorship, b) I’m no fan of enforced politically correctness because it gives media too much power to shape opinion and c) I thought there was something symbolical about this particular shot being such a discussion generator just because it was visual. I think there is much more controversial stuff than this in the way the councillors formulate their opnions , but apparently the fact that that’s just words doesn’t provoke the same emotions.

Some of the guys who saw our presentations got it though and understood that there was gameplay value in putting in things a large majority wouldn’t agree with (at least, I hope), but which a player would still contemplate because it might let him reach his goals, pretty much the same thing a politician has to do all the time.

Yes, even after all this talk about censorship, I do in general indulge in a bit of self-censorship when talking to press if only it’s because I have to promote my company and my own personal thoughts are sometimes not necessarily conductive to that

https://web.archive.org/web/20220524032 ... ensorship/
https://web.archive.org/web/20190911161 ... w.lar.net/

I read through his blog a while back which is why I strongly believe he just lost control of BG3 at some point, either through licensing issues or the company got too big. The ideology he showed in those posts is the complete opposite of what was put in BG3 after the early access release.

Nah pretty sure he's still in control of everything, but he decided that he'd rather be extremely rich.

[Vergil]

I don't understand what the contradiction in what he said is. You anti censorship people do understand that means all this ****** stuff you hate won't be censored either right?

[rusty_shackleford]

I don't understand what the contradiction in what he said is. You anti censorship people do understand that means all this ****** stuff you hate won't be censored either right?

The setting was heavily censored for so-called "modern sensibilities"

[Anon]

I don't understand what the contradiction in what he said is. You anti censorship people do understand that means all this ****** stuff you hate won't be censored either right?

His tone was pretty clear that he was against all that woke nonsense. Which doesn't mean restricting what others can do, only that his own creations wouldn't pander to wokeism.

[Magick]

I don't understand what the contradiction in what he said is. You anti censorship people do understand that means all this ****** stuff you hate won't be censored either right?

Indeed, in which case you'd have much more of a proportional balance. BG3 as it is now (especially in Act 3) is as if it's been designed by Twitter.
EVERY ******* deep gnome is gay, EVERY SINGLE ONE. Is that proportional or normal?

Look at the comments on morality, yet "muh refugees", where you're either for them, or you're Evil and a bad bad person and that's it.
None of it seems to follow the philosophy of his mindset at the time.

I imagine some of the shock content (bear sex etc.) is classic Larian, going by that blog, but having ONLY that gay stuff and no balance seems to be a big change.
Just look at the tweets lately. Bit one-sided, isn't it?
Guarantee you that there'd be "censorship" in his company now should anyone speak out against all the woke BS, especially after they've wheeled out all their shining stars in hard-support of it.

I just hope that they realise they ****** a LOT of people off with that ****, and twittertards ARE a minority, and they'd have made a lot more money without going so hard on Woke as they have, and put more effort into making a good game.
They say they're all about women etc. (despite him realising women are an absolute minority playing these sort of games) and yet where are the dresses for them? in a medieval/renaissance FANTASY game with CAMP OUTFITS and PARTIES. There should be loads! Instead we get gay cowboy trousers for the men, and ******* modders are having to make the dresses instead as they were too busy programming their next boybumming scene.
(Again, women are a minority with this sort of game and I'm not bothered about dresses for myself lol, but it does show their hypocrisy based on where they've devoted their dev efforts).

[wndrbr]

https://www.gry-online.pl/newsroom/twor ... go/z428442

Poland is getting more and more pozzed, now in addition to CDPR they are going to have Larian.

According to information received by our website from a reliable source, the creators of Baldur's Gate 3 are planning to establish a Polish branch. We're not sure about the exact location, but Warsaw is an obvious candidate. The reports were also confirmed by a second, independent informant.

Please keep in mind that this is unconfirmed information. Larian Studio has not yet responded to our request to comment on these reports, and the job offers on the developer's official website do not mention anything about the new studio.

It is only worth noting that this would not be the second or even third branch of Larian Studios. Although for some people it is still an independent team, the developer already has 6 studios, including four in Europe: in Barcelona, Dublin, Ghent and Guildford.

It is also worth remembering the Polish contribution to the production of the company's latest hit. Well, Poles from the Katowice team of Anshar Studios (Gamedec, Zoria: Age of Shattering) helped with the third Baldur's Gate. Previously, together with the Fool's Theory team (The Thaumaturge), they developed a handful of free add-ons for Divinity: Original Sin 2, which were released in the form of the so-called Gift Bags.

So, Polish developers are no strangers to Larian. While we are convinced of the truthfulness of our two independent sources, these plans will only be confirmed after an official announcement from the studio.

[Vergil]

https://www.gry-online.pl/newsroom/twor ... go/z428442

Poland is getting more and more pozzed, now in addition to CDPR they are going to have Larian.

According to information received by our website from a reliable source, the creators of Baldur's Gate 3 are planning to establish a Polish branch. We're not sure about the exact location, but Warsaw is an obvious candidate. The reports were also confirmed by a second, independent informant.

Please keep in mind that this is unconfirmed information. Larian Studio has not yet responded to our request to comment on these reports, and the job offers on the developer's official website do not mention anything about the new studio.

It is only worth noting that this would not be the second or even third branch of Larian Studios. Although for some people it is still an independent team, the developer already has 6 studios, including four in Europe: in Barcelona, Dublin, Ghent and Guildford.

It is also worth remembering the Polish contribution to the production of the company's latest hit. Well, Poles from the Katowice team of Anshar Studios (Gamedec, Zoria: Age of Shattering) helped with the third Baldur's Gate. Previously, together with the Fool's Theory team (The Thaumaturge), they developed a handful of free add-ons for Divinity: Original Sin 2, which were released in the form of the so-called Gift Bags.

So, Polish developers are no strangers to Larian. While we are convinced of the truthfulness of our two independent sources, these plans will only be confirmed after an official announcement from the studio.

Oh great @Slavic Sorcerer will have an opportunity to input more Halsin faggotry into the game now :lol

[Nessa]

So Swen does some research on the proportion of women interested in their games:
https://web.archive.org/web/20190901151 ... the-women/

Post was from 2015 but I'm already hating the guy. First we have this: "This brings up interesting questions about how they learn about what games they’ll like. My guess would be that critic scores might be quite important here."

Right, critic scores. I haven't once looked at a critic score ever for anything to consider anything at all. They're all bought, so it's a waste of time.

Then he thinks this idiotic concept is something to consider: "Some commenters also suggested that we didn’t reach media regularly consumed by women and suggested we highlight female Larian game dev staff to do that."

Oh yeah, I'm going to buy a game just because a WOMANZ made it because I'm too stupid otherwise. THE HELL IS THAT!? That's right up there with Disney trotting out the tired old "This is the first Womanz that did X, buy our new product because we're so good." While of course ignoring usually better women that have already done whatever X is years ago. Then they wonder why women don't show up to buy their filth content. I'm more likely to avoid a game if they trot out a bunch of horrible women just because they are -women-. PATHÉTIQUE!

Yeah, yeah. I know.




Every time I consider actually buying BG3 they're either putting up gay crap on their twitter for FREAKING VALENTINES or some woke filth and virtue signalling. I'm done. This kind of garbage means is the only legitimate and right course of action. Vote with the wallet and all.

My message to Larian:

[Vergil]

So Swen does some research on the proportion of women interested in their games:
https://web.archive.org/web/20190901151 ... the-women/

This whole post is pretty wince worthy but is this unironically a furry rantsona?

[pokafox]

This kind of garbage means

I don't blame you the double downing Valentine **** made me feel sorry I ever spent a dime on that game.

At the very least I'm definitely never buying anything Larian unless it's 50% or less ever again.

I got a huuuuge backlog to play and playing early honestly brought me nothing but misery. Better wait til monetary support don't matter anymore and performance and bugs are ironed out. Finishing Act 3 right now and game honestly still feels like it's in early access anyway.

[Vergil]

Also yall ****** do know the game has explicit gay sex already right? This was the straw that broke the camel's back?

[pokafox]

Also yall ****** do know the game has explicit gay sex already right? This was the straw that broke the camel's back?

It's not even the fact it got gay stuff in itself for me. It's the way it's forced fed.

I'd honestly be ****** too if the Valentine **** was straight.

[Element]

How is it possible to have gay stuff and not have it force fed? The blatant exhibitionism is the whole point.

[Nessa]

How is it possible to have gay stuff and not have it force fed? The blatant exhibitionism is the whole point.

It's at a point now where they can't just have a gay character here and there. No, it's got to be in your face. You've got to acknowledge it and agree with it. Or if not it's the "evil" path in the game.

The refugee thing too. That whole spot there in Act 3 is an anti-private property message. They just make it "evil" because the guy that owns that house just happens to be a "bad guy". All by design. You're "evil" if you don't think refugees can take over somebody's property just because it isn't being used. That's bloody disgusting frankly.

[maidenhaver]

How is it possible to have gay stuff and not have it force fed? The blatant exhibitionism is the whole point.

It's at a point now where they can't just have a gay character here and there. No, it's got to be in your face. You've got to acknowledge it and agree with it. Or if not it's the "evil" path in the game.

The refugee thing too. That whole spot there in Act 3 is an anti-private property message. They just make it "evil" because the guy that owns that house just happens to be a "bad guy". All by design. You're "evil" if you don't think refugees can take over somebody's property just because it isn't being used. That's bloody disgusting frankly.

The point is gay characters have to tell you they're gay, because nobody wants to make characters but [insert trendy punk group] characters. Its all exhibitionism. You can't have a character who says or does gay **** and not tell the camera he's gay.

[Magick]

So Swen does some research on the proportion of women interested in their games:
https://web.archive.org/web/20190901151 ... the-women/

Post was from 2015 but I'm already hating the guy. First we have this: "This brings up interesting questions about how they learn about what games they’ll like. My guess would be that critic scores might be quite important here."

Right, critic scores. I haven't once looked at a critic score ever for anything to consider anything at all. They're all bought, so it's a waste of time.

Then he thinks this idiotic concept is something to consider: "Some commenters also suggested that we didn’t reach media regularly consumed by women and suggested we highlight female Larian game dev staff to do that."

Oh yeah, I'm going to buy a game just because a WOMANZ made it because I'm too stupid otherwise. THE HELL IS THAT!? That's right up there with Disney trotting out the tired old "This is the first Womanz that did X, buy our new product because we're so good." While of course ignoring usually better women that have already done whatever X is years ago. Then they wonder why women don't show up to buy their filth content. I'm more likely to avoid a game if they trot out a bunch of horrible women just because they are -women-. PATHÉTIQUE!

Yeah, yeah. I know.




Every time I consider actually buying BG3 they're either putting up gay crap on their twitter for FREAKING VALENTINES or some woke filth and virtue signalling. I'm done. This kind of garbage means is the only legitimate and right course of action. Vote with the wallet and all.

My message to Larian:

I think that "Women.." post was written more tongue-in-cheek / sarcastic really. It seems to be posed as a "thought experiment" but really an excuse to dump some stats (that he very likely already knew) in response to the women and simps wailing about "Sexism and objectifications are two big issues in gaming right now".
The references to highlighting female employees etc. were obviously just shallow throw-away comments, that I HOPE were said sarcastically.

Of course women DO play these games (and I know we have more on here than people think, too ) However that's in such low proportions that it's not worth "changing" how they make games due to that specific audience and followers of such "muh sexism" crap, for this genre. I think that's what his post was getting at, that they should just keep doing what they're doing because the evidence just isn't there to do otherwise.

But then you come to BG3 where they're about EVERYTHING besides "Straight White Male" and apparently sooo wanting to appeal to women, so much that they can't be bothered to put in a proper dress for you to wear at a camp party. Like, wtf? They could have given women SO many different outfits to enjoy without affecting the overall game at all, just having them be set as the camp clothes, but nope, they didn't bother.
Although I'm happy with some "skimpy" looking outfits (it is the fantasy chainmail bikini genre / setting, after all) would NOBLE women really be wearing those to a ******* inauguration of all events? Come on!! It says a lot that actual women are now fixing all that **** with mods (yet why should they have to do so??). Even then the dresses aren't ******* animated properly because Larian just couldn't be bothered.

Same with the companion "romance". Am I right in my assessments that women do like a "harem" of multiple interested men in their camps, but they want those men to only have eyes for THEM? Not busy bumming eachother or chasing other "poly" relationships instead. If so, another easy mark completely missed, in their focus of covering everything with LGBT diarrhoea and virtue signalling, rather than making a good, fleshed out game.
I really don't understand why they give anything to do with "romance" writing to ********, either. Hardly the most qualified of people to comment on such, are they. But again, probably intended.

If he's that focused on Stats (and he probably is) then they'd know the LGBT ******** is a MINORITY too, an absolute minority of minorities. Sure many people "support" it but only in the fact that they're forced to do so, or aren't explicitly "against" it.

How is it possible to have gay stuff and not have it force fed? The blatant exhibitionism is the whole point.

It's at a point now where they can't just have a gay character here and there. No, it's got to be in your face. You've got to acknowledge it and agree with it. Or if not it's the "evil" path in the game.

The refugee thing too. That whole spot there in Act 3 is an anti-private property message. They just make it "evil" because the guy that owns that house just happens to be a "bad guy". All by design. You're "evil" if you don't think refugees can take over somebody's property just because it isn't being used. That's bloody disgusting frankly.

Indeed, and it's SUCH a departure from the attitude of Swen & the team in https://web.archive.org/web/20220930234 ... deo-games/ that it can't just be an organic change. Same with the dwarf-tits issue, I can understand even Swen becoming indoctrinated but, half the team?? Going from STRONG support for anti-censorship and ambiguous morality to full-on the pushing the opposite. What did they put in Larian's water? They had a VERY strong belief that ethics should be more "morally grey" and what the player chooses to do is "correct" and should have BOTH pros and cons, not some single "this is evil and should only have cons" mantra, and that was regarding rape of all things.
Then BG3 comes out and it's completely black & white, with you being lectured and preached at with what the "correct" thing is, and that's it.

I really do wonder what happened. Was it just ESG money or what? It's suspicious when reading the anecdotes of those who played Early Access, where it looks like it started as a VERY different game, then had someone forced it to be hooked up to the tubes of rainbow crap and pumped full of it, part-way through. This is supported by the worst of it all being in Act 3, which will have had development start much later.
I think the "playersexual" companions and "bear sex" and nudity will have always been a thing, but I'm not sure about the penis-focus and pronouns & sheer amount of LGBT crap shoved in everywhere.
I guess it may be like CDProjectRed where they started as one thing, but then became dependant on ESG money. Clearly Larian had no-where near enough to fund everything themselves, due to having to sell out a THIRD to ******* Tencent. I guess the evil ***** let you get halfway through development where you're balls deep to the tune of millions in debt, then drop the hammer that you're getting no-more, or that they're going to pull everything and prevent your release, unless you bend the knee. That, or they really do just all believe in it now (there are indeed many ****** / LGBT staff there..). Hmm.

[Nessa]

Of course women DO play these games (and I know we have more on here than people think, too ) However that's in such low proportions that it's not worth "changing" how they make games due to that specific audience and followers of such "muh sexism" crap, for this genre. I think that's what his post was getting at, that they should just keep doing what they're doing because the evidence just isn't there to do otherwise.

That could very well be. Perhaps I was looking at it from the lens of today where they're so far off in woke land it's insane.

But then you come to BG3 where they're about EVERYTHING besides "Straight White Male" and apparently sooo wanting to appeal to women, so much that they can't be bothered to put in a proper dress for you to wear at a camp party. Like, wtf? They could have given women SO many different outfits to enjoy without affecting the overall game at all, just having them be set as the camp clothes, but nope, they didn't bother.
Although I'm happy with some "skimpy" looking outfits (it is the fantasy chainmail bikini genre / setting, after all) would NOBLE women really be wearing those to a ******* inauguration of all events? Come on!! It says a lot that actual women are now fixing all that **** with mods (yet why should they have to do so??). Even then the dresses aren't ******* animated properly because Larian just couldn't be bothered.

Yeah no physics based dresses (to say nothing of actual physics for hair either) but oh look: floppy guy parts! Yay Larian.

Same with the companion "romance". Am I right in my assessments that women do like a "harem" of multiple interested men in their camps, but they want those to have eyes for THEM? Not busy bumming eachother or chasing other "poly" relationships instead. If so, another easy mark completely missed, in their focus of covering everything with LGBT diarrhoea and virtue signalling, rather than making a good, fleshed out game.
I really don't understand why they give anything to do with "romance" writing to ********, either. Hardly the most qualified of people to comment on such, are they. But again, probably intended.

If he's that focused on Stats (and he probably is) then they'd know the LGBT ******** is a MINORITY too, an absolute minority of minorities. Sure many people "support" it but only in the fact that they're forced to do so, or aren't explicitly "against" it.

I personally don't. I prefer NPCs have their preferences and that's that. The trend to make everyone bi I think was either laziness (easier to just code them to go for anything) OR pushing an agenda. Perhaps some combination of both. If we look at earlier woke games like... let's say Fallout New Vegas. That was crazy woke before the term woke even existed. (I still say it was the best modern Fallout though!) But the characters had their preferences and that was that. Now every character swings both ways. It's really betraying their own characters more than anything.

Indeed, and it's SUCH a departure from the attitude of Swen & the team in https://web.archive.org/web/20220930234 ... deo-games/ that it can't just be an organic change. Same with the dwarf-tits issue, I can understand even Swen becoming indoctrinated but, half the team?? Going from STRONG support for anti-censorship and ambiguous morality to full-on the pushing the opposite. What did they put in Larian's water? They had a VERY strong belief that ethics should be more "morally grey" and what the player chooses to do is "correct" and should have BOTH pros and cons, not some single "this is evil and should only have cons" mantra, and that was regarding rape of all things.
Then BG3 comes out and it's completely black & white, with you being lectured and preached at with what the "correct" thing is, and that's it.

I really do wonder what happened. Was it just ESG money or what? It's suspicious when reading the anecdotes of those who played Early Access, where it looks like it started as a VERY different game, then had someone forced it to be hooked up to the tubes of rainbow crap and pumped full of it, part-way through. This is supported by the worst of it all being in Act 3, which will have had development start much later.
I think the "playersexual" companions and "bear sex" and nudity will have always been a thing, but I'm not sure about the penis-focus and pronouns & sheer amount of LGBT crap shoved in everywhere.
I guess it may be like CDProjectRed where they started as one thing, but then became dependant on ESG money. Clearly Larian had no-where near enough to fund everything themselves, due to having to sell out a THIRD to ******* Tencent. I guess the evil ***** let you get halfway through development where you're balls deep to the tune of millions in debt, then drop the hammer that you're getting no-more, or that they're going to pull everything and prevent your release, unless you bend the knee. That, or they really do just all believe in it now (there are indeed many ****** / LGBT staff there..). Hmm.

Wizards of the Coast is full on woke central. Seattle no less. Tencent's involvement could indicate a push for woke too. (Good way to push degeneracy in the west.) As for the team, I think after 2020 my views on humans shifted. We saw there how one day you could have a supposedly moral, upstanding citizen suddenly calling for someone to die because they weren't masked/vaxxed/social distanced/whatever. In my view, perhaps Swen was one of those types. Seems to take a stand for artistic freedom when the climate is conducive for it. Then when the climate gets a little dicey, he shifts and goes with the crowd. Standards? Integrity? Sure when it's not actually difficult to have them. As soon as the going gets tough: artistic freedom? What's that!?

Ugh, and yes. The mentally deranged should be nowhere near writing romance. That's I think why it's so crappy most of the time.

[Magick]

Of course women DO play these games (and I know we have more on here than people think, too ) However that's in such low proportions that it's not worth "changing" how they make games due to that specific audience and followers of such "muh sexism" crap, for this genre. I think that's what his post was getting at, that they should just keep doing what they're doing because the evidence just isn't there to do otherwise.

That could very well be. Perhaps I was looking at it from the lens of today where they're so far off in woke land it's insane.

But then you come to BG3 where they're about EVERYTHING besides "Straight White Male" and apparently sooo wanting to appeal to women, so much that they can't be bothered to put in a proper dress for you to wear at a camp party. Like, wtf? They could have given women SO many different outfits to enjoy without affecting the overall game at all, just having them be set as the camp clothes, but nope, they didn't bother.
Although I'm happy with some "skimpy" looking outfits (it is the fantasy chainmail bikini genre / setting, after all) would NOBLE women really be wearing those to a ******* inauguration of all events? Come on!! It says a lot that actual women are now fixing all that **** with mods (yet why should they have to do so??). Even then the dresses aren't ******* animated properly because Larian just couldn't be bothered.

Yeah no physics based dresses (to say nothing of actual physics for hair either) but oh look: floppy guy parts! Yay Larian.

Same with the companion "romance". Am I right in my assessments that women do like a "harem" of multiple interested men in their camps, but they want those to have eyes for THEM? Not busy bumming eachother or chasing other "poly" relationships instead. If so, another easy mark completely missed, in their focus of covering everything with LGBT diarrhoea and virtue signalling, rather than making a good, fleshed out game.
I really don't understand why they give anything to do with "romance" writing to ********, either. Hardly the most qualified of people to comment on such, are they. But again, probably intended.

If he's that focused on Stats (and he probably is) then they'd know the LGBT ******** is a MINORITY too, an absolute minority of minorities. Sure many people "support" it but only in the fact that they're forced to do so, or aren't explicitly "against" it.

I personally don't. I prefer NPCs have their preferences and that's that. The trend to make everyone bi I think was either laziness (easier to just code them to go for anything) OR pushing an agenda. Perhaps some combination of both. If we look at earlier woke games like... let's say Fallout New Vegas. That was crazy woke before the term woke even existed. (I still say it was the best modern Fallout though!) But the characters had their preferences and that was that. Now every character swings both ways. It's really betraying their own characters more than anything.

Indeed, and it's SUCH a departure from the attitude of Swen & the team in https://web.archive.org/web/20220930234 ... deo-games/ that it can't just be an organic change. Same with the dwarf-tits issue, I can understand even Swen becoming indoctrinated but, half the team?? Going from STRONG support for anti-censorship and ambiguous morality to full-on the pushing the opposite. What did they put in Larian's water? They had a VERY strong belief that ethics should be more "morally grey" and what the player chooses to do is "correct" and should have BOTH pros and cons, not some single "this is evil and should only have cons" mantra, and that was regarding rape of all things.
Then BG3 comes out and it's completely black & white, with you being lectured and preached at with what the "correct" thing is, and that's it.

I really do wonder what happened. Was it just ESG money or what? It's suspicious when reading the anecdotes of those who played Early Access, where it looks like it started as a VERY different game, then had someone forced it to be hooked up to the tubes of rainbow crap and pumped full of it, part-way through. This is supported by the worst of it all being in Act 3, which will have had development start much later.
I think the "playersexual" companions and "bear sex" and nudity will have always been a thing, but I'm not sure about the penis-focus and pronouns & sheer amount of LGBT crap shoved in everywhere.
I guess it may be like CDProjectRed where they started as one thing, but then became dependant on ESG money. Clearly Larian had no-where near enough to fund everything themselves, due to having to sell out a THIRD to ******* Tencent. I guess the evil ***** let you get halfway through development where you're balls deep to the tune of millions in debt, then drop the hammer that you're getting no-more, or that they're going to pull everything and prevent your release, unless you bend the knee. That, or they really do just all believe in it now (there are indeed many ****** / LGBT staff there..). Hmm.

Wizards of the Coast is full on woke central. Seattle no less. Tencent's involvement could indicate a push for woke too. (Good way to push degeneracy in the west.) As for the team, I think after 2020 my views on humans shifted. We saw there how one day you could have a supposedly moral, upstanding citizen suddenly calling for someone to die because they weren't masked/vaxxed/social distanced/whatever. In my view, perhaps Swen was one of those types. Seems to take a stand for artistic freedom when the climate is conducive for it. Then when the climate gets a little dicey, he shifts and goes with the crowd. Standards? Integrity? Sure when it's not actually difficult to have them. As soon as the going gets tough: artistic freedom? What's that!?

Ugh, and yes. The mentally deranged should be nowhere near writing romance. That's I think why it's so crappy most of the time.

Says a lot too how there's several "Penis" options, but zero for breasts.
Now on the default human female I think they've got the proportions absolutely spot on to my personal tastes, and that comes with a fantastic pair too.
But..Where's the variety? Surely women making their own characters would want to customise a bit? (where's the love for our flatter-chested ladies? Or the opposite). Also unlike the penis options, you'd actually be able to SEE the effect of the breast ones most of the time too female players (or pervy blokes) would always be getting the benefit.
But nope, better add another skanky dress or lesbian reference into the game, instead. Priorities priorities..

That's another thing I hate with all this virtue signalling ********. They spend SO much time spouting all that crap, and can't even be bothered to put any effort in to properly back it up. It's always just throw-away shallow level diarrhoea spread thinly over as much as they possibly can.

[rusty_shackleford]

Says a lot too how there's several "Penis" options, but zero for breasts.

I have it on very good authority that women discuss breast size a lot when there are no mens around. So I'm guessing it's probably so-called "male feminists" and ****** making these decisions.

[ArcaneLurker]

Of course women DO play these games (and I know we have more on here than people think, too ) However that's in such low proportions that it's not worth "changing" how they make games due to that specific audience and followers of such "muh sexism" crap, for this genre. I think that's what his post was getting at, that they should just keep doing what they're doing because the evidence just isn't there to do otherwise.

That could very well be. Perhaps I was looking at it from the lens of today where they're so far off in woke land it's insane.

But then you come to BG3 where they're about EVERYTHING besides "Straight White Male" and apparently sooo wanting to appeal to women, so much that they can't be bothered to put in a proper dress for you to wear at a camp party. Like, wtf? They could have given women SO many different outfits to enjoy without affecting the overall game at all, just having them be set as the camp clothes, but nope, they didn't bother.
Although I'm happy with some "skimpy" looking outfits (it is the fantasy chainmail bikini genre / setting, after all) would NOBLE women really be wearing those to a ******* inauguration of all events? Come on!! It says a lot that actual women are now fixing all that **** with mods (yet why should they have to do so??). Even then the dresses aren't ******* animated properly because Larian just couldn't be bothered.

Yeah no physics based dresses (to say nothing of actual physics for hair either) but oh look: floppy guy parts! Yay Larian.

Same with the companion "romance". Am I right in my assessments that women do like a "harem" of multiple interested men in their camps, but they want those to have eyes for THEM? Not busy bumming eachother or chasing other "poly" relationships instead. If so, another easy mark completely missed, in their focus of covering everything with LGBT diarrhoea and virtue signalling, rather than making a good, fleshed out game.
I really don't understand why they give anything to do with "romance" writing to ********, either. Hardly the most qualified of people to comment on such, are they. But again, probably intended.

If he's that focused on Stats (and he probably is) then they'd know the LGBT ******** is a MINORITY too, an absolute minority of minorities. Sure many people "support" it but only in the fact that they're forced to do so, or aren't explicitly "against" it.

I personally don't. I prefer NPCs have their preferences and that's that. The trend to make everyone bi I think was either laziness (easier to just code them to go for anything) OR pushing an agenda. Perhaps some combination of both. If we look at earlier woke games like... let's say Fallout New Vegas. That was crazy woke before the term woke even existed. (I still say it was the best modern Fallout though!) But the characters had their preferences and that was that. Now every character swings both ways. It's really betraying their own characters more than anything.

Indeed, and it's SUCH a departure from the attitude of Swen & the team in https://web.archive.org/web/20220930234 ... deo-games/ that it can't just be an organic change. Same with the dwarf-tits issue, I can understand even Swen becoming indoctrinated but, half the team?? Going from STRONG support for anti-censorship and ambiguous morality to full-on the pushing the opposite. What did they put in Larian's water? They had a VERY strong belief that ethics should be more "morally grey" and what the player chooses to do is "correct" and should have BOTH pros and cons, not some single "this is evil and should only have cons" mantra, and that was regarding rape of all things.
Then BG3 comes out and it's completely black & white, with you being lectured and preached at with what the "correct" thing is, and that's it.

I really do wonder what happened. Was it just ESG money or what? It's suspicious when reading the anecdotes of those who played Early Access, where it looks like it started as a VERY different game, then had someone forced it to be hooked up to the tubes of rainbow crap and pumped full of it, part-way through. This is supported by the worst of it all being in Act 3, which will have had development start much later.
I think the "playersexual" companions and "bear sex" and nudity will have always been a thing, but I'm not sure about the penis-focus and pronouns & sheer amount of LGBT crap shoved in everywhere.
I guess it may be like CDProjectRed where they started as one thing, but then became dependant on ESG money. Clearly Larian had no-where near enough to fund everything themselves, due to having to sell out a THIRD to ******* Tencent. I guess the evil ***** let you get halfway through development where you're balls deep to the tune of millions in debt, then drop the hammer that you're getting no-more, or that they're going to pull everything and prevent your release, unless you bend the knee. That, or they really do just all believe in it now (there are indeed many ****** / LGBT staff there..). Hmm.

Wizards of the Coast is full on woke central. Seattle no less. Tencent's involvement could indicate a push for woke too. (Good way to push degeneracy in the west.) As for the team, I think after 2020 my views on humans shifted. We saw there how one day you could have a supposedly moral, upstanding citizen suddenly calling for someone to die because they weren't masked/vaxxed/social distanced/whatever. In my view, perhaps Swen was one of those types. Seems to take a stand for artistic freedom when the climate is conducive for it. Then when the climate gets a little dicey, he shifts and goes with the crowd. Standards? Integrity? Sure when it's not actually difficult to have them. As soon as the going gets tough: artistic freedom? What's that!?

Ugh, and yes. The mentally deranged should be nowhere near writing romance. That's I think why it's so crappy most of the time.

Says a lot too how there's several "Penis" options, but zero for breasts.
Now on the default human female I think they've got the proportions absolutely spot on to my personal tastes, and that comes with a fantastic pair too.
But..Where's the variety? Surely women making their own characters would want to customise a bit? (where's the love for our flatter-chested ladies? Or the opposite). Also unlike the penis options, you'd actually be able to SEE the effect of the breast ones most of the time too female players (or pervy blokes) would always be getting the benefit.
But nope, better add another skanky dress or lesbian reference into the game, instead. Priorities priorities..

That's another thing I hate with all this virtue signalling ********. They spend SO much time spouting all that crap, and can't even be bothered to put any effort in to properly back it up. It's always just throw-away shallow level diarrhoea spread thinly over as much as they possibly can.

If you're wondering about the mechanics, breasts sizes in games are usually a "weight slider" deal, where the model is morphed/ stretched into a new shape, which means it's usually quite limited anyway.
The genitals are a separate model that can be swapped, and have a slight seam around them, because they wanted ****** to be able to 'mix & match'...

Uh... I don't believe I've ever seen any game make different breasts into a separate addon model, and have flat chested as the base.

[Rand]

forum needs a despair emoji

[rusty_shackleford]

A lot of this reminds me of the exact same thing Bioware did. Made popular games, devs listened to niche fandoms on tumblr and started making games that catered towards them, turns out what those fans liked wasn't actually popular with most of the playerbase.
I was hoping Larian would be smarter because they seem to collect a lot of analytics.

[Rand]

Post was from 2015 but I'm already hating the guy. First we have this: "This brings up interesting questions about how they learn about what games they’ll like. My guess would be that critic scores might be quite important here."

Right, critic scores. I haven't once looked at a critic score ever for anything to consider anything at all. They're all bought, so it's a waste of time.

No, no. He's right. The majority of women are enslaved to groupthink. The media is their go-to for what they should consume. They'll (sadly) mostly listen to "journalists" and Twitch "influencers" and other bad actors.

[DagothGeas5]

Post was from 2015 but I'm already hating the guy. First we have this: "This brings up interesting questions about how they learn about what games they’ll like. My guess would be that critic scores might be quite important here."

Right, critic scores. I haven't once looked at a critic score ever for anything to consider anything at all. They're all bought, so it's a waste of time.

No, no. He's right. The majority of women are enslaved to groupthink. The media is their go-to for what they should consume. They'll (sadly) mostly listen to "journalists" and Twitch "influencers" and other bad actors.

Don't know if true, but I remember reading that women are also more prone/likely to spend money in games. Maybe companies were trying to have "infinite easy-money" by making ****** games with group-think opinions without the "hassle" of making good games that might not be for everyone?

[Magick]

Post was from 2015 but I'm already hating the guy. First we have this: "This brings up interesting questions about how they learn about what games they’ll like. My guess would be that critic scores might be quite important here."

Right, critic scores. I haven't once looked at a critic score ever for anything to consider anything at all. They're all bought, so it's a waste of time.

No, no. He's right. The majority of women are enslaved to groupthink. The media is their go-to for what they should consume. They'll (sadly) mostly listen to "journalists" and Twitch "influencers" and other bad actors.

Don't know if true, but I remember reading that women are also more prone/likely to spend money in games. Maybe companies were trying to have "infinite easy-money" by making ****** games with group-think opinions without the "hassle" of making good games that might not be for everyone?

That would make more sense if there was a cosmetics shop or something tho.
Also it takes a good halfway into the game to really hit all the woke shite. Seems the majority of it was an afterthought, to me..

@rusty_shackleford I know you've said you were quite into the Early Access version. What exactly was the state of the game back then? Especially regarding the character creator and all that. Did they have all the penis options for women, default black character, pronouns and "body type 1 / 2" and all that **** back then? I know there's not "much" woke in Act 1 / first half of two, but was the stuff that is there now, there back then, too? Or did it all come later? I'm curious just how much of it existed from the start, or was clearly intended to be completed.
I do remember seeing something about this here, but can't remember what it said.

[rusty_shackleford]

pronouns and "body type 1 / 2" and all that **** back then?

this was added after the early access release
can't remember the rest