BG3 Is a Fake GOTY - This game do not deserve this title. (IMO)

[XGear]

Poor character customization, cannot modify body structures such as face, body, height, etc. There are no tattoos for the body, or variety of faces and hair. Players even use pirated MODS to try to reverse the lack of customization within the game, risking the integrity of the computer itself, simply due to the lack of good official customization not implemented by the game's developers. There are more variations of genitals than customization of the entire body in general in this game, with many duplicate NPCs with the same face. Some even have your character's face on them.

Little diversity of skills. Practically the magical classes use the same spells, making the type of magical class you choose irrelevant, as they all use the same spells.

Archer and hiding classes are buggy and poorly designed. You can shoot arrows and hide by freezing enemies, making the game uninteresting and with a "Chese" feeling playing with these classes.

Game genres chosen in character creation do not influence in-game interaction. All NPCs that interact with you don't care about your chosen gender and just see your character as a "Sex Doll"and they cannot identify whether the player wants homosexual or heterosexual interactions. The game can't even understand that you don't like sexual interactions with animal bears, making the NPCs become animals to interact with the player like a couple.

The game's AI is very poorly done, the group's characters are not able to follow or avoid traps, and there is no "Auto Play" option to let the machine play with companions and help with strategies like in renowned strategy games from past.

Cannot customize companion characters

Lots of bugs, feeling like the game was rushed and poorly taken care of by the development team. It looks like they didn't play their own game.

The game's original story makes no sense. It revolves around removing Tadpole from the brain, but there is no satisfactory endgame for those who wish to follow this path.

Your choices are irrelevant, leading you down a predetermined and defined path. False sense of RPG, where your choices do not affect the journey.

Poorly optimized game, demanding a lot from the GPU, CPU and memory at 1080P res, if you don't play with DLSS turned on. (Or Ryzen in case you have it).

Poorly designed control interface with few customizations. It is not even possible to lock the gamepad cursor while customizing the radial to attach the skills to the slots.

Terrible save system, the game is not capable of handling auto saves, creating hundreds of auto saves, causing the player to have to save manually.

Terrible exploration system, where characters cannot jump, pick up items or break boxes without invoking the Radial Menu. The Radial Menu should only be used in battles and not in exploration mode.

Weak and discouraging world exploration. The game has many loot items such as boxes, jars, etc., making opening them a "Boring" habit where you won't find anything useful. Just polluting the game world and delaying the player by looking for precious items in places that will never exist. The world is also very small and with just a few steps you can practically walk around the entire map.

Poorly designed and meaningless character stories. As in the case of Dark Urge, there are the biggest narrative holes. Several narrative holes can also be found during a casual game with a custom character (TaV).


And there are still many more things that if I continue, I will stay here until next year. HOW IS THIS GAME THE GAME OF THE YEAR? What parameter was used for this? As a veteran RPG player, saying this game is GOTY rated is insulting.

[Altimely]

Publicado originalmente por Gracey Face:

See? "THEIR INTOLERANCE IS BAD, MY INTOLERANCE IS GOOD, BECAUSE I SAY SO!!!!!!!"

You are unable to address my argument without grossly misrepresenting it and continue to make fallacious claims.

To simplify it:

There is a group of people containing persons A, B, C, D, and E. They don't get along perfectly but they tolerate each other.

Suddenly, E says "I don't like A and B, and I'm not going to tolerate them anymore."

A, B, C, and D ask E why, and E says "I don't like their skin colors, they're too different from me. Let's kick them out of our group."

A, B, C, and D say "well their skin color doesn't impact you in any way. please reconsider and continue tolerating them. We won't kick them out."

E refuses and insists on being intolerant to A and B and insists on kicking them out.

So A, B, C, and D, who all tolerate each other despite their differences, tell E to buzz off. They won't tolerate E if E won't tolerate A and B.

E claims they are being discriminated against for no reason, and that A, B, C, and D are excluding E for the same reason that E wants to exclude A and B. <---YOU ARE HERE

It's a gross false equivalency to say they're the same.

[Gracey Face]

Publicado originalmente por Altimely:

Suddenly, E says "I don't like A and B, and I'm not going to tolerate them anymore."

A, B, C, and D ask E why, and E says "I don't like their skin colors, they're too different from me. Let's kick them out of our group."

I have misrepresented nothing, especially since you outright confirm it in this post. You're at the point of needing to lie now. If you need to lie, why not admit to being in the wrong?

And the worst part is even your ridiculous post glosses over a significant thing which is WHY DOES E SUDDENLY DECIDE HE ISN'T TOLERANT ANYMORE? If he was always hateful of them purely for their skin colour he'd have always been hateful.

You genuinely do not have your own opinions. That is why you can't elucidate them coherently. As soon as there's a gap in your programming you lack the ability to fill it.

[Altimely]

Publicado originalmente por Gracey Face:

If he was always hateful of them purely for their skin colour he'd have always been hateful.

I started the analogy with "to simplify it" which, apparently wasn't simple enough for you.

A, B, C, D are okay with E.

E is not okay with A and B because of their skin color.

A, B, C, D say they're not excluding A and B.

E can either leave or be okay with A and B (A and B are okay with E)

Tell me: is E wanting to exclude A and B because of their skin color the same as excluding E purely because they want to exclude A and B?

Yes or no, simple question: is it the same?

[Dork_Stalker_310]

Publicado originalmente por Gracey Face:

... while the highest profile "white supremacist" arrested in America in the last 20 years was a half black half hispanic guy who led a white supremacist group that was more racially diverse than the general population.

Enrique Tarrio, right? Wasn't he a fed? I'm sure that actuall white supremasists weren't that happy when that info came out.

[Gracey Face]

Publicado originalmente por Dork_Stalker_310:

Enrique Tarrio, right? Wasn't he a fed? I'm sure that actuall white supremasists weren't that happy when that info came out.

Yeah he was. Most people in groups like that are. It's "be an informant or get thrown in a hole forever" (though for Tarrio it didn't help in the end).

A nice example is Ruby Ridge, where the ATF murdered a guy's wife and son because he refused to be an informant in a white supremacist group he wasn't a part of. A white supremacist group which's membership was ~50% federal agent informers, who would all inform on each other to try to gain favor, who were all known as informants by the actual white supremacists who would use them to get money and drugs. Because feds are feds!

[Zaracchi]

Let me guess. Completed the game in around 30-40 hrs (if completed even), rushing through the main story with as little long rests as possible, missing out on important story and character events. Skipped most of the dialogues, missing all the information, never played D&D, or any similar decision based RPG.

Basically, most likely just bought the game 'couse you heard it is a hit, then you ran through it and now you're flaming and whimping as it is not what you wanted it to be. All coming from a level 0 and private profile, is a bit unnecessary and strange.

[Adam__86]

86 pages of I DON'T LIKE THEREFORE NOBODY SHOULD

[Altimely]

Eh, I accept Gracey Face's concession.

They can't seem to comprehend simple proofs or address arguments without misrepresenting them.

why are people kicking me out of the group after I tried to kick them out of the group?! it isn't fair!

[Gracey Face]

Publicado originalmente por Altimely:

I bold and underlined a part of your post confirming that what I had typed was not a misrepresentation. Why are you okay with lying? And I am seriously asking this. If you have to lie then you must know you're in the wrong surely.

[Altimely]

Publicado originalmente por Gracey Face:

Publicado originalmente por Altimely:

I bold and underlined a part of your post confirming that what I had typed was not a misrepresentation. Why are you okay with lying?

That doesn't counter my argument. E has superficial reasons for wanting to kick people out, despite A and B otherwise being okay with E.

I'm not lying: your argument is that they're same and I've proven that they're not.

[Lt.Lee Roy]

Publicado originalmente por XGear:

Publicado originalmente por LordNibbler:

Go see a doctor as soon as possible, tell them to make a CT scan. You have obviously worms in your brain.

If this was meant to be an insult, it actually made me laugh. Take a few laughs, it was fun.

You havent explained anything. You just stated false statement. And you cant even prove your statement with an example. If what you say is true , and your choices doesnt matter , then no choices matter storywise in any videogames. This game is what Bioware hoped they would be able to make in their wet dreams. What are you on. Why is not being able to customise companion character an issue? Their based on real actors using a technology your probably too braindead to understand. How is it poorly optimised? It runs at 60 FPS on an old 1060,settings on high. Control interface? Poor? You can customise literally everything. Theres a window called custom,in wich you can drag any actions you want. You dont like X or Y actions? You can remove them. This is the most customisable interface ever made except maybe in an MMORPG. Terrible Save system? Game auto save at every important story points or important decisions,before every boss fights. Terrible exploration? Im close to 100% the game and i havent, ONCE , explored one single place whitout it having a sidequest or an optionnal cool items that fits with one of the dozen classes avaible , or their 8-9 available subclasses. Meaningless characters stories? .... Do i really have to explain this one? Game AI is poorly done? Hey kid. You try coding pathfinding and,when you finally, figure it out with your small brain, come back and apologize,then erect a statue to Larian studios (Seriously,this amazes me , especially since i know how ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ hard it can be with all thoses rules the game uses) About your gender? What? What are you on? Every characters has different interactions wheter your male or female. Archer and ... what? Stealth class? Ok. Now i know you just havent played the game. Yet. I wanted to make this post just in case,for the lurkers.

[Dork_Stalker_310]

Publicado originalmente por Gracey Face:

Yeah he was. Most people in groups like that are. It's "be an informant or get thrown in a hole forever" (though for Tarrio it didn't help in the end).

Yeah, Ruby Ridge sucked.

However, to be back on topic, you said that they have reasons to believe what they believe – that doesn’t really contradict that they will enforce their believes through violence if necessary, doesn’t it? No one thinks about themselves as villains, everyone think that they are fighting a good fight for a better world. The point of “intolerance paradox” isn’t that you should stop those who you disagree with, the point is that by allowing people, who are openly against ideas of tolerance, to gain prominence, you will undermine the tolerant society.

It’s not like these types of groups are extremely secretive about their goals and what they’ll do when they gain power. That’s why it’s important to put limits on your tolerance – otherwise you get clowns like “Gays for Palestine”, who are willing to embrace those, who will throw them off rooftops.

[Lt.Lee Roy]

Publicado originalmente por Gracey Face:

Publicado originalmente por Altimely:

I bold and underlined a part of your post confirming that what I had typed was not a misrepresentation. Why are you okay with lying? And I am seriously asking this. If you have to lie then you must know you're in the wrong surely.

Can you stop judging people behind your screen and stop saying edgy ♥♥♥♥♥ like, enjoy your life being wrong blahblah. You sound like Haze.

[Gracey Face]

Publicado originalmente por Dork_Stalker_310:

However, to be back on topic, you said that they have reasons to believe what they believe – that doesn’t really contradict that they will enforce their believes through violence if necessary, doesn’t it?

All politics is violence, all ideologies are enforced through violence. But assuming you're being more specific in the whole "they're going to march through the streets murdering people", historically only one side of the aisle tends towards that. But even so not necessarily no. If you actually listen to them they're absolutely in favour of integration, the kinds of people "anti racists" have labels for like "UT" (don't want to outright post it because it might be bannable).

It's not about skin colour to racists, the idea that it is has become common but that is just propaganda. It's about culture and behaviour to racists, and skin colour happens to be a very strong indicator of cultural adherence.

Also regarding "embracing those who'll throw them off rooftops, look up Afansy Shaur's wedding. The simple version is that the communists strongly emphasised the rights of homosexuals and people with abnormal sexualities and went on a campaign to normalize them, up to the point of legalizing gay marriage in their draft constitution. They did this because they believed those kinds of thing helped to destabilise society and they wanted to destabilise imperial Russia. However a couple of years after winning the revolution they then started rounding those same people up and vanishing them away in "reeducation camps", Afansy Shaur's wedding being notable because it was a sting operation and they arrested all of the high profile homosexuals in St. Peterburg (the imperial russian capital) in a single night. They arrested them for the same reason they originally supported them in that they viewed them as a destabilising element.

Everyone who pushes for gay rights is using them as a tool and historically will crush them once their usefulness ends.

[Dork_Stalker_310]

Publicado originalmente por Gracey Face:

All politics is violence, all ideologies are enforced through violence. But assuming you're being more specific in the whole "they're going to march through the streets murdering people", historically only one side of the aisle tends towards that. But even so not necessarily no.

Everyone who pushes for gay rights is using them as a tool and historically will crush them once their usefulness ends.

The extend of violence matters though. Some societies are absolutely more violent to dissidents than others. And optics also exist - obviously, extremists won't proclaim about their final solution before they gain political power.

And it's not like commies were the only people to put gays in camps, at the time.