|
On March 03 2020 03:49 Sbrubbles wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2020 02:10 Wombat_NI wrote: I shamefully haven’t played either BG 1 or 2 yet, although I do own them. Going through a lot of CRPGs lately and will start soon.
Do I play them in order ideally or are they both relatively self-contained? Slightly off topic so apologies for that, just figured I’d ask here.
Hopefully it goes better than my attempts to play Pillars of Eternity purely in real time anyway :p
TBH, I don't think BG1 has aged nearly as well as BG2, so if you think your patience is gonna be thin, just play BG2. Both are self-contained for the most part.
There is an extended edition for both BG1 and BG2 now isn't there? I don't really think BG2 needs it but 1 does for sure. Lots of the first game were empty maps and the characters had way fewer interactions. Still a great game (especially for it's time, I bought it on release).
I've played D:OS 1 for like 2-3 hours and then quit because the story sucked and the combat was equally tedious as it was rewarding so I have low hopes for this one.
|
On March 03 2020 04:14 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2020 03:49 Sbrubbles wrote:On March 03 2020 02:10 Wombat_NI wrote: I shamefully haven’t played either BG 1 or 2 yet, although I do own them. Going through a lot of CRPGs lately and will start soon.
Do I play them in order ideally or are they both relatively self-contained? Slightly off topic so apologies for that, just figured I’d ask here.
Hopefully it goes better than my attempts to play Pillars of Eternity purely in real time anyway :p
TBH, I don't think BG1 has aged nearly as well as BG2, so if you think your patience is gonna be thin, just play BG2. Both are self-contained for the most part. There is an extended edition for both BG1 and BG2 now isn't there? I don't really think BG2 needs it but 1 does for sure. Lots of the first game were empty maps and the characters had way fewer interactions. Still a great game (especially for it's time, I bought it on release).
I think so. I know for sure that there were mods that made BG 1 and 2 a seamless experience (put BG1 in BG2 engine, added spells, etc), but they were a pain in the ass to install. In my case I played BG1 near release (though didn't beat it), played and beat BG2 a few years later, then many years later bought a big bundle that included icewind date, installed a few mods and finally beat BG1.
On March 03 2020 04:14 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote: I've played D:OS 1 for like 2-3 hours and then quit because the story sucked and the combat was equally tedious as it was rewarding so I have low hopes for this one.
Yeah, this was my case as well.
|
On March 03 2020 04:12 Theoren wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2020 18:05 DrunkenSCV wrote:On March 02 2020 14:41 blunderfulguy wrote:Rambling continues, might delete later: + Show Spoiler +The idea that BG3 would ever be a "true continuation of the story and gameplay" by hardcore fans seems a little ridiculous to me. Vocal people either want it to have no impact on their precious BG1/2 story, or they want it to be 1,000% faithful to the original in every conceivable way from graphics to gameplay to writing but also be new and modern (somehow). The former is actually possible, even if it requires ignoring BG3 to maintain your own head-canon (which requires no effort on your part), but the latter is impossible and completely ridiculous. It's like hating the new Star Wars trilogy to me. Who cares. Why waste your breath on this. It isn't for you, move on.
It's probably going to be a good game, and if you don't like it then go back to playing BG1/2 over and over or find something else to do. The negativity for this, especially after that awesome cinematic of an illithid spelljammer fighting red dragon-riding githyanki, seems silly, and more so when looking at the big picture. /rant Yeah, the awesome cinematic makes all negativity about the actual game silly, a fair point that is. Very few people want (I've seen none, actually) BG3 to be a "true continuation of the story", what you claim there is not true. The story is concluded, pretty much everyone agrees with that. There are modern games like PoE and PK: KM that are true spiritual heirs of the classical CRPGs. So saying that people wanting the gameplay and graphics be modern yet faithful to BG1/2 is ridiculous and impossible is ridiculous and impossible. There are reasons why isometric camera view is so important. It gives you context as beautifully pictured locations while leaving details to your imagination. I still remember the Elven city with its airy architecture and that city with the fancy mosaic in the town square. I still remember meeting Khalid and Jaheira, Aerie, Viconia. As if those are my personal memories. I played DOS2 something like 1.5 years ago and I've already almost forgotten everything. For me when camera is behind character, it's like witnessing the story, while isometric camera make me feel more like I am part of it. Besides that, the game can be dark and even brutal at times without looking grotesque. Like, remember Dragon Age? All your characters are soaking with blood all time. The final dungeon is visually repulsive. As it's supposed to be, but I think text and visual hints work better in such cases. On the combat system now. I've seen many times this point: "What is the idea of RTwP when you pause all time anyway?". Can't say for others, but I don't pause all time. This is the point of thinking over character generation and progression, figuring mechanics out and learning how things work. If I feel tired of some dungeon I can spend some extra resources like potions and scrolls to speed up the dynamics. RTwP allows bigger party. So I find it overall more strategic and less tactical than turn based. I don't hate turn based combats, I just want to point out that there are some cons and pros. There are many more things I'd like to say, but I've already said much. Just don't think of those who didn't like how the demo looks as some weird fools with duck syndrome. I suggest reading baldur's gate subreddit if you want to know why some people are upset about BG3. I think there are many good and fair points. Baldur's gate fans can be upset all they want, but this is about selling video games and RTWP and Old School Graphics don't sell. DOS:2 sold more than twice the amount of POE, POE2, and Pathfinder sales combined. Oh and POE2 and Pathfinder both implemented turn based modes cause of popular demand. So while you and some other hardcore BG fans might have wanted something different, the general public has spoken with their wallets in the past. No company that isn't kickstarted is going to deliberately make a game that isn't going to sell and that's exactly what would happen if they went the way you wanted them to. Nah, I was answering to another post there, not expressing what I wanted or expected BG3 to be. I had a little hope that Larian would be somewhat bolder and try to surprise us with BG3 (the idea itself to make this game was surprising to me). But they went the lamest path and chose to make another DOS game. So the title is just for marketing, meh. Btw this is like the last argument one would want to use. Yeah, the best RPG game of all time didn't sell well too. Now it's even worse, people play Frontnite and some mobile games. But thankfully not everyone strives for the biggest profit. Even PK:KM sold in up to 1M copies. If it was a bit more friendly and bug-free, who knows...
|
On March 03 2020 04:12 Theoren wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2020 18:05 DrunkenSCV wrote:On March 02 2020 14:41 blunderfulguy wrote:Rambling continues, might delete later: + Show Spoiler +The idea that BG3 would ever be a "true continuation of the story and gameplay" by hardcore fans seems a little ridiculous to me. Vocal people either want it to have no impact on their precious BG1/2 story, or they want it to be 1,000% faithful to the original in every conceivable way from graphics to gameplay to writing but also be new and modern (somehow). The former is actually possible, even if it requires ignoring BG3 to maintain your own head-canon (which requires no effort on your part), but the latter is impossible and completely ridiculous. It's like hating the new Star Wars trilogy to me. Who cares. Why waste your breath on this. It isn't for you, move on.
It's probably going to be a good game, and if you don't like it then go back to playing BG1/2 over and over or find something else to do. The negativity for this, especially after that awesome cinematic of an illithid spelljammer fighting red dragon-riding githyanki, seems silly, and more so when looking at the big picture. /rant Yeah, the awesome cinematic makes all negativity about the actual game silly, a fair point that is. Very few people want (I've seen none, actually) BG3 to be a "true continuation of the story", what you claim there is not true. The story is concluded, pretty much everyone agrees with that. There are modern games like PoE and PK: KM that are true spiritual heirs of the classical CRPGs. So saying that people wanting the gameplay and graphics be modern yet faithful to BG1/2 is ridiculous and impossible is ridiculous and impossible. There are reasons why isometric camera view is so important. It gives you context as beautifully pictured locations while leaving details to your imagination. I still remember the Elven city with its airy architecture and that city with the fancy mosaic in the town square. I still remember meeting Khalid and Jaheira, Aerie, Viconia. As if those are my personal memories. I played DOS2 something like 1.5 years ago and I've already almost forgotten everything. For me when camera is behind character, it's like witnessing the story, while isometric camera make me feel more like I am part of it. Besides that, the game can be dark and even brutal at times without looking grotesque. Like, remember Dragon Age? All your characters are soaking with blood all time. The final dungeon is visually repulsive. As it's supposed to be, but I think text and visual hints work better in such cases. On the combat system now. I've seen many times this point: "What is the idea of RTwP when you pause all time anyway?". Can't say for others, but I don't pause all time. This is the point of thinking over character generation and progression, figuring mechanics out and learning how things work. If I feel tired of some dungeon I can spend some extra resources like potions and scrolls to speed up the dynamics. RTwP allows bigger party. So I find it overall more strategic and less tactical than turn based. I don't hate turn based combats, I just want to point out that there are some cons and pros. There are many more things I'd like to say, but I've already said much. Just don't think of those who didn't like how the demo looks as some weird fools with duck syndrome. I suggest reading baldur's gate subreddit if you want to know why some people are upset about BG3. I think there are many good and fair points. Baldur's gate fans can be upset all they want, but this is about selling video games and RTWP and Old School Graphics don't sell. DOS:2 sold more than twice the amount of POE, POE2, and Pathfinder sales combined. Oh and POE2 and Pathfinder both implemented turn based modes cause of popular demand. So while you and some other hardcore BG fans might have wanted something different, the general public has spoken with their wallets in the past. No company that isn't kickstarted is going to deliberately make a game that isn't going to sell and that's exactly what would happen if they went the way you wanted them to. Maybe it's about them wanting to do console ports down the line.RTWP wouldn't work as well on console I don't think.
|
It also looks a Little too DoS for me. I like DoS but i somehow never finnish them and just do the first 2-3 chapters.
But i'm kinda hyped for the D&D ruleset/options when it Comes to race/classes and so on.
Btw: Dear god i hope not every partymember has a brainworm and is "also a main character" like in DoS2...
|
On March 03 2020 20:24 Velr wrote: It also looks a Little too DoS for me. I like DoS but i somehow never finnish them and just do the first 2-3 chapters.
But i'm kinda hyped for the D&D ruleset/options when it Comes to race/classes and so on.
Btw: Dear god i hope not every partymember has a brainworm and is "also a main character" like in DoS2... How else would they do the 4 man coop like in DOS2?
Also in BG games, you were not the only bhaalspawn and you even traveled with others in your party
|
Honestly, i dislike this type of digging up popular old IPs and releasing a new game.
BG3 will almost certainly not have any connection to BG1/2. The only reason it is called BG3 is because that immediately produces free hype, no matter what you attach that name to. But it also means that you can never fulfill those expectations, no matter what game you produce. BG2 is basically a legend at this point. No real game can possibly compare to the nostalgia-fueled image of BG2 as the perfect game which a lot of people have.
This will sell, because people will buy it, hoping that it will feel to them now as people remember BG2 feeling to them when it released. But it will also disappoint these people, because these expectations are impossible to fulfill. And then it will disappear, never to be heard of again. It is almost irrelevant what the actual game attached to the BG hype will be.
It feels really cynical to me. And it seems to be effective, because a lot of those revivals are happening.
|
Weird IP to use. "Hey player, remember this?" Drizzt companion inc.
|
On March 04 2020 11:37 Trozz wrote: Weird IP to use. "Hey player, remember this?" Drizzt companion inc.
Hear me out.
Drizzt companion DLC.
|
On March 04 2020 08:15 Simberto wrote: Honestly, i dislike this type of digging up popular old IPs and releasing a new game.
BG3 will almost certainly not have any connection to BG1/2. The only reason it is called BG3 is because that immediately produces free hype, no matter what you attach that name to. But it also means that you can never fulfill those expectations, no matter what game you produce. BG2 is basically a legend at this point. No real game can possibly compare to the nostalgia-fueled image of BG2 as the perfect game which a lot of people have.
This will sell, because people will buy it, hoping that it will feel to them now as people remember BG2 feeling to them when it released. But it will also disappoint these people, because these expectations are impossible to fulfill. And then it will disappear, never to be heard of again. It is almost irrelevant what the actual game attached to the BG hype will be.
It feels really cynical to me. And it seems to be effective, because a lot of those revivals are happening. I agree with this to some degree for a lot of reboots/revivals, but I don't see Baldur's Gate as being a revival. To me, and I think a lot of long-time D&D players might agree, it never really died (okay, maybe for a little while around 3e-4e it did). It's a major location in the tabletop game and its history has grown with every edition of D&D (to a lesser or greater extent depending on the edition).
The D&D Next tabletop adventures set in Baldur's Gate were awesome, I don't think they would have written so many if the first couple weren't at least a little popular and fun, and the newest tabletop adventure in Baldur's Gate (Descent into Avernus from last September) was great too. To me, they're just keeping an already moving train moving.
It also, to me, looks like they aren't just trying to retread old ground. They're doing something different in a lot of the TRPGs and with BG3, which I appreciate. Of course I would still love to see a new IP or CRPG set in Ravenloft or Dark Sun, but that's higher risk and probably couldn't exist unless they made a BG3 or a "Planescape 2" that sold well. And I guess that's another reason I get excited about Larian doing a D&D CRPG and Owlcat doing Pathfinder APs.
|
Czech Republic12116 Posts
On March 04 2020 08:15 Simberto wrote: Honestly, i dislike this type of digging up popular old IPs and releasing a new game.
BG3 will almost certainly not have any connection to BG1/2. The only reason it is called BG3 is because that immediately produces free hype, no matter what you attach that name to. But it also means that you can never fulfill those expectations, no matter what game you produce. BG2 is basically a legend at this point. No real game can possibly compare to the nostalgia-fueled image of BG2 as the perfect game which a lot of people have.
This will sell, because people will buy it, hoping that it will feel to them now as people remember BG2 feeling to them when it released. But it will also disappoint these people, because these expectations are impossible to fulfill. And then it will disappear, never to be heard of again. It is almost irrelevant what the actual game attached to the BG hype will be.
It feels really cynical to me. And it seems to be effective, because a lot of those revivals are happening. Well it's supposed to be set in the BG territory so it's not totally disconnected but shouldn't be too much connected either.
Similarily Half Life 3 can be about a hero not named Gordon Freeman and it will still be a game from HL because it shares the world, time and age
|
I would have played any larian game set in the sword coast no matter how it was called. If you are disappointed by this not being bg2 with new story, why are you a 30+ year old gamer that is not able to like a game for what it is and not for how it is called and is not? This is not Master of Orion 3, that was not at all like moo2 and trash on top or master of Orion that simply cloned the game without adding any value. It is a larian game in the sword coast with a name that might be misleading to people with less life experience than bg2 fans.
|
On March 12 2020 20:50 Broetchenholer wrote: I would have played any larian game set in the sword coast no matter how it was called. If you are disappointed by this not being bg2 with new story, why are you a 30+ year old gamer that is not able to like a game for what it is and not for how it is called and is not? This is not Master of Orion 3, that was not at all like moo2 and trash on top or master of Orion that simply cloned the game without adding any value. It is a larian game in the sword coast with a name that might be misleading to people with less life experience than bg2 fans.
That comment fits me pretty well (30+ "old" gamer with low expectations of this).
Let's be clear here. I don't care at all how the game works from a technical standpoint. It could be a first person shooter with card based combat for all I care.
The reason people still love the BG games is because a) the story was amazing b) the writing of the dialogue was fantastic c) the game developers both avoided all the common pitfalls and managed to come up with completely new shit when it came to story that got you hooked initially and then just dragged you deeper. The game series was a 3 part epic and it felt so damn satisfying beating the last expansion.
I don't care if this games story has anything to do with the previous games TBH. But it needs to be amazing all the way through. And given the developers track record of this chances are very, very low.
Even in BG1 when they started out they managed the really hard feat of getting you attached to a completely self made character, giving him meaningful and complete backstory, fleshing out a bit of his character, imparting a sense of dread and the need to leave hastily and setting up a major story driving evet while dumping you into the wilderness at level 1. In the prologue.
Compare this to games like pillars of eternity and DO:S where you make your own character that is supposed to have lived a life somewhere previous (you even get stats from the choices). But you know *nothing* about that life and it's no where near a complete backstory. *You* never made the choice to enter the story. And for some reason your character, despite being *someone*, is for all intents a nobody. It generates very little initial attachment to your character. Can someone remind me why I am supposed to save the world again?
I could probably write down like 80 % of all the quests and a good chunk of quotes just from memory, and I didn't even play the game *that* much.
|
My only problem is that I didn't find DOS2 story very entertaining, so my expectations are not great, i don't think they will be able to do a great storyline to do baldur's gate justice aren't great.
|
On March 13 2020 02:12 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote: The reason people still love the BG games is because a) the story was amazing b) the writing of the dialogue was fantastic c) the game developers both avoided all the common pitfalls and managed to come up with completely new shit when it came to story that got you hooked initially and then just dragged you deeper. The game series was a 3 part epic and it felt so damn satisfying beating the last expansion.
Honestly, I thought Throne of Bhaal was always a huge letdown.
|
I felt like ToB could've done more in terms of story and villain and all that, but at the same time it still manages to wrap up the crazy past epic lvl stuff quite nicely. So, basically as a standalone it wouldn't have been that good, but I think it complements the overall arc well enough.
|
On March 14 2020 19:53 Bacillus wrote: I felt like ToB could've done more in terms of story and villain and all that, but at the same time it still manages to wrap up the crazy past epic lvl stuff quite nicely. So, basically as a standalone it wouldn't have been that good, but I think it complements the overall arc well enough.
This is exactly my feeling. The story was kind of "meh", especially at the beginning. But it did a good job of really letting your character and party go past 11 on the power gauge into "dragon slaying before lunch, daemon prince at 2 PM sharp" territory. It closes the experience and if you took your character from BG1 when a wolf could literally kill both you and Imoen to fighting demi-gods it's quite a journey. It also tied up the whole Bhaalspawn thing nicely into a logical and fitting conclusion, including why and what happened when Gorion saved you.
I just read that there will actually be major tie-ins to the older games which made me a bit more interested. It would be really cool to run into some of the old NPC's as older epic level power players. Imoen for example is an arch mage and supposedly started a thief guild. Would also be extremely cool if they let you input the name of your "main" character and their ToB ending and have that affect the game in a meaningful way.
+ Show Spoiler +Like having an actual religion/cult perhaps?
Edit: What were your party in BG:II?
My good party was: Main PC (paladin) Minsc (fighter) Anomen (cleric/figther) Aerie (cleric/mage) Nalia (mage) Imoen (mage/thief) - (usually Yoshimo until I got her)
My evil party was
Main PC (sorcerer) Korgan (fighter) Edwin (mage) Imoen (mage) Jan (mage thief) Viconia (cleric)
Can't remember if I ditched Jan for Sarevok in ToB. Probably not, I liked going overboard on mages.
|
I actually felt weakest in ToB though, because I felt like I had no power to affect my own destiny. Part of the trick in making customisable player character games like Baldur's Gate is making the player want to do what you have planned for them, and both Baldur's Gate and Shadows of Amn did a great job. But thinking back to Throne of Bhaal, I have a hard time even remembering why I was doing most of the stuff I did. It felt like I was being railroaded hard through a series of dungeons and encounters. Add that to the shallow characters and lack of companion content (especially if you don't take Sarevok) and I find it really hard to immerse myself in.
On March 15 2020 03:33 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote: Edit: What were your party in BG:II?
My good party was: Main PC (paladin) Minsc (fighter) Anomen (cleric/figther) Aerie (cleric/mage) Nalia (mage) Imoen (mage/thief) - (usually Yoshimo until I got her)
My evil party was
Main PC (sorcerer) Korgan (fighter) Edwin (mage) Imoen (mage) Jan (mage thief) Viconia (cleric)
Can't remember if I ditched Jan for Sarevok in ToB. Probably not, I liked going overboard on mages.
I don't always get the same party, but I usually keep Jaheira, Minsc and Imoen. After all we've been through together, it feels weird to ditch them .
Every time I've tried to play evil I've gotten bored before completing the Nashkel Mines. It's funny getting wrecked by the Flaming Fist ambushes in Beregost, but overall playing evil exposes a major flaw in most RPGs of this type to me: the game revolves around achieving three things - killing something, acquiring something, or making a roleplaying choice. And the evil roleplaying choices invariably end up being 'kill more things' and 'acquire more things' so you've just got 2/3 of the satisfaction I'd get from playing a good.
|
That is actually true. I am pretty sure i could still write down most of the major story beats of Shadows of Amn. (I was a bit too young when i played BG1 to really remember what was going on there)
In ToB, i mostly remember...nothing? I have vague recollection of a final battle in some outer dimension room, and something about water spirits at some point? Or Yuan-Ti in a fire temple? And was i in the military of some city at some point?
|
On March 15 2020 07:14 Simberto wrote: That is actually true. I am pretty sure i could still write down most of the major story beats of Shadows of Amn. (I was a bit too young when i played BG1 to really remember what was going on there)
In ToB, i mostly remember...nothing? I have vague recollection of a final battle in some outer dimension room, and something about water spirits at some point? Or Yuan-Ti in a fire temple? And was i in the military of some city at some point?
I distinctly remember dying to fire giants
|
|
|
|