If you find a bug, please go to the BG:EE Bugs forum and take a look at Shandyr's thread describing the known issues. If you don't see your bug there, please create a new thread describing both the observed behavior, and the expected behavior.
Overhaul has been very conscientious about addressing as many bugs as they can in each build, but they can't fix bugs they don't know about.
@moopy You are responding like a real douche, do you know that? I am personally a bit let down by the game too and everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Just ridiculing someone else's opinion is very immature. (Like calling you a douche is. I guess.) 1 to 4 are issues for some people. I personally do not like that zoom-feature either and wish I could select my own resolution without UI-scaling and that ugly zooming for instance. The game does have a lot of bugs and while that may not be Overhaul's fault due to contracts and stuff, we all have the right to be a bit disappointed with the results so far.
Edit: Another thing. Overpowered kits and familiars... Why is that so ridiculous to not like? It gives you an insane amount of HP at the start if you're a mage, and some kits like the Cavalier are intant killing-machines in some cases.
@cerevant The discussion here is whether the game was shipped early. I have already finished the game twice and while Overhaul has been quick with the patches, there is still a lot of work to be done. Problem is that many players may not be here when that is done.
@moopy Saying that I'm trolling when most of your comments are superfluous "lols" i think it is the other way round. I will nonetheless try to reply to your comments.
The point with the zoom is that I prefer for example a 800x600 resolution instead of a higher one because then the graphics are too small for my monitor. If the game autoselects a higher resolution and then I try to zoom in I get lower quality graphics due to the zoom-in algorithm which is not what I want. NPCs not retreating from battle when ordered or archers trying to attack from close range is a serious bug and the spacebar is not a solution if I have to do it too many times. I'm glad that you're not facing this bug but to me it happens frequently. Have you ever played with the Quasit??? The amount of hps and magic resistances it has makes it a killing machine early game. Just send your NPCs for a coffee and attack Tarnesh with Quasit alone. He will go down in a few seconds. Again I wonder if the game was playtested with certain kits before shipping. Try killing Rasaad before talking to Gamaz and then resurrect him in a temple. I doubt his quest can continue. This is new material and it was not tested. Why? Good thing for you that the game runs smoothly on your computer but for many gamers, including me, it freezes and crashes too often. While vanilla BG runs perfectly and without any bugs.
@cerevant The discussion here is whether the game was shipped early. I have already finished the game twice and while Overhaul has been quick with the patches, there is still a lot of work to be done. Problem is that many players may not be here when that is done.
@Cerevant Those are very constructive thoughts you've expressed, and I agree with them. But I do also agree with Beamdog's own assessment that they could and should have done better at anticipating the Intel issues. They really should have detected the Intel problems and forewarned customers that can't play the game because of it.
While the intel graphics chipset problem is certainly annoying, we didn't find it to be game-braking. The Open GL fix actually took care of the problem on my daughter's laptop, so she's gathering her party and venturing forth with the best of us.
A lot of people are very quick to say, "Did you report the bugs?" I think a very valid response to that is, "We're not bug testers. That's an actual job, that actual people can and should be hired to do." And while it's very nice that some of those who like the game/product are willing to be helpful and report bugs, it shouldn't be considered a pre-requisite to dissatisfaction. It isn't a moral failing on the part of the OP that he doesn't want to do the job that should have been done by the people whose supposedly finished and ready product he bought.
I'm very satisfied with the game, but I've experienced several of the bugs that srvk mentions. To deny that the game is still buggy is foolish, especially using Moopy's line of logic of, "I haven't experienced this bug... Therefore it doesn't exist."
It is impossible for any software developer to anticipate every bug on everybody's hardware with everybody's different, often mismanaged/conflicting software pre-release.
It is, however, substantially more possible to eithe rpatch in or find workarounds for individual problems once they are reported to developers.
There is a very gray area in gaming that has existed ever since the post-release patch came into being. When does a game stop being a beta and become a release? You can't anticipate every bug before release, but that doesn't mean you should just throw up your hands and release whatever crappy mess you have on your hard drive.
That line has been steadily pushing in the direction of releasing a beta as a finished product. The more bugs a developer can rely on a customer finding, the less they need to pay for internal testers. Why pay people to find the bugs when the people paying them will find the bugs? There's really no mechanism to enforce a happy medium of pre-release and post-release testing. It falls to the developers to take the high road.
I, for one, feel like there were way too many issues to call this a finished product when I paid for it. Others will have different values and experiences, but I still crash way too much in multiplayer.
I don't think that's how it works. You can't just say, "hey I found a bug at X and it does Y instead of Z" and the developers go on ahead and fix the problem right there. They need to be able to recreate it. Testers need to be able to recreate it. Then they can work out a process to try and fix it once they've narrowed it down.
Companies run on time and resources. They can only test a product for so long. It is possible that people are just finding bugs that they never encountered, that does make them lazy and it doesn't mean they're trying to save money making other people find bugs. They were just doing the best they could with the time and money they were given. The fact that they continue to work on it and try to patch what else they can after figuring out a way to fix it shows that they do care about the product.
There is a very gray area in gaming that has existed ever since the post-release patch came into being. When does a game stop being a beta and become a release? You can't anticipate every bug before release, but that doesn't mean you should just throw up your hands and release whatever crappy mess you have on your hard drive.
That line has been steadily pushing in the direction of releasing a beta as a finished product. The more bugs a developer can rely on a customer finding, the less they need to pay for internal testers. Why pay people to find the bugs when the people paying them will find the bugs? There's really no mechanism to enforce a happy medium of pre-release and post-release testing. It falls to the developers to take the high road.
I, for one, feel like there were way too many issues to call this a finished product when I paid for it. Others will have different values and experiences, but I still crash way too much in multiplayer.
Negative.
Today's gamers are spoiled. They are a console generation. Pretty much every 360 is identical - running virtually the same hardware and only certain allowed software with regularly updated firmware. Nobody at Overhaul has your exact computer. Nobody at Overhaul can anticipate the errors that occur when your computer attempts to communicate with your buddy's computer when you're both running different windows installs with different antivirus programs, etc.
Find a bug? Report it; that's what the forums are here for.
I'm not new to games, and I'm not spoiled. But just like you can point to a situation where all hardware is identical, and is thus easier to plan around, I can point to a time where "downloading patches" wasn't an option, and games had to be released as finished products. Hence that thing Xriah was talking about, about the moving line of releasing a beta as a finished product. More and more games do it because more and more people accept it. If people didn't accept it, you'd see that behavior stop instantaneously. If you went to a new restaurant, and your meal wasn't fully cooked when it came out, you wouldn't say, "Well, the restaurant is new. It's up to the customer to help them figure out what dishes aren't done yet." You wouldn't wait at your table while the chef was fixed. You'd leave, and you wouldn't come back.
I'm not a bug tester. I paid them, not the other way around.
And while it's true that hardware variances make for a far more complex environment to beta-test, the multiplayer issues are wide-spread enough that I struggle to believe they did exhaustive testing. They don't earn my benefit of the doubt on that. Likewise, how is it possible that they didn't know about the issues with Intel graphics drivers? Aren't Intel graphics drivers somewhat... Um... What's the opposite of "obscure"?
It's fine to like the game. I like the game. It's fine to support the company. I support the company. But it's not fine to tell dissatisfied people that they have no right to be dissatisfied. They clearly do (despite Cerevant's well-written rant).
Why would anyone care that a person is uninstalling their game? I wish I could put the OP's face through his monitor for being such a lame-ass.
There's bugs, but the game breaking ones were fixed within a week of release, so there isn't much to complain about anymore. People really only talk about personal preference changes nowadays for whatever item or spell they think should follow a certain rule.
Saying "I quit because of bugs" is SoOoOo 3 weeks ago.
The problem is all one of perception. A calm discussion about issues, and what can be done to fix them, is helpful for everyone concerned. But making accusations only makes defenses go up and makes people cranky on both sides. I still remember back in the day buying DOS games that wouldn't run was a constant frustration, it often involved phone calls to support, modifications to one's own config.sys or autoexec.bat files, or waiting weeks for a patch to arrive on a floppy disc. I am excited and pleased to see such a quick response from Overhaul, and I am baffled by those who can't wait a couple weeks to get things sorted out, or get hostile about a few bugs or quirks. Most of them will get fixed, certainly they will get the game running for everyone soon. Remember that some of these are even legacy bugs, that is, things that were wrong with the original game too. By the time it all gets sorted out, we should have a faster, more efficient program working for everyone.
I'm not new to games, and I'm not spoiled. But just like you can point to a situation where all hardware is identical, and is thus easier to plan around, I can point to a time where "downloading patches" wasn't an option, and games had to be released as finished products. Hence that thing Xriah was talking about, about the moving line of releasing a beta as a finished product. More and more games do it because more and more people accept it. If people didn't accept it, you'd see that behavior stop instantaneously. If you went to a new restaurant, and your meal wasn't fully cooked when it came out, you wouldn't say, "Well, the restaurant is new. It's up to the customer to help them figure out what dishes aren't done yet." You wouldn't wait at your table while the chef was fixed. You'd leave, and you wouldn't come back.
I'm not a bug tester. I paid them, not the other way around.
And while it's true that hardware variances make for a far more complex environment to beta-test, the multiplayer issues are wide-spread enough that I struggle to believe they did exhaustive testing. They don't earn my benefit of the doubt on that. Likewise, how is it possible that they didn't know about the issues with Intel graphics drivers? Aren't Intel graphics drivers somewhat... Um... What's the opposite of "obscure"?
It's fine to like the game. I like the game. It's fine to support the company. I support the company. But it's not fine to tell dissatisfied people that they have no right to be dissatisfied. They clearly do (despite Cerevant's well-written rant).
Do you remember the original Baldur's Gate release? If you do then you know that this mythical age before bugged releases never existed.
As @Rhyme says there's nothing morally objectionable about being dissatisfied about the bugs in a game. It's in fact an healthy behavior from a consumer point of view. The same can't be said of anyone belittling dissatisfied customers.
@Zutti says that today gamers are spoiled. That they don't respect the fact it's hard to make fully working games in modern PCs. I'd argue against that; blanket statements are always easy to argue against, in any case. Gamers don't have to understand anything about making games. Much less how hard they are to make. That's not a prerogative to be a consumer in the gaming industry. If we were so condescending about our car manufacturers as we are about games, we all would be walking to work.
In any case every gamer has a general personal idea of what they perceive as acceptable and non acceptable bugs. It's this concept that defines their satisfaction or dissatisfaction. The computer gaming industry has been trying to lower that bar for decades. Gamers aren't spoiled, they are more tolerant of an industry that has become more and more buggy. Not to the fault of the computer gaming industry itself (not always, that is), but mostly due to a computer architecture that is starting to become too chaotic to handle. It's about time we tried to get away from this architecture and into a new one.
But none of this is cause against a consumer feeling dissatisfied. On the contrary. The growing number of dissatisfied consumers and reports of dissatisfied consumers all over the internet on about any game that is being made these days isn't a case of being spoiled, @Zutti. It's a real fact about how people feel about this type of product that you shouldn't so easily ignore. It's clear to me, or anyone caring to look, that while games are trying to break new grounds, they are doing it on a platform that is showing its incapacity to follow them.
The lack of standards, the proliferation of hardware makers each and one of them trying to outsmart the other with incompatible features, the total and complete discrepancy between all sorts of software development libraries, is putting a burden on software developers everywhere for sure. But also on their consumers. And, as much as you may find it hard to accept, consumers are the ones being damaged by this the most. The computer gaming industry thrives regardless. It's been reported to have even surpassed the film industry.
Spoiled gamers? Some perhaps. But spoiled has a double meaning that you probably don't want to know about since it could include you and your blind acceptance of a defective product.
Do you remember the original Baldur's Gate release? If you do then you know that this mythical age before bugged releases never existed.
Games didn't started with Baldur's Gate 1 (apparently this would surprise you). @Rhymes was also very careful in not stating that games didn't come with bugs before. You failed to notice that.
He speaks instead of a time when downloading patches wasn't an option. And because of that it was true in fact that the released product had to go through a much more rigorous inspection than these days. Today's QA teams and project managers work together on the knowledge of patches that can be distributed through the internet on the blink of an eye. For that reason bugs are actually sorted between those that should be addressed now and those that should be addressed sometime after release. Make no mistake.
Bugs always existed. No one contests that. My first recalled bug experience was the infamous Attic Bug in Jet Set Willy for the ZX Spectrum. Thankfully my father would make frequent trips to the UK and would always bring me the Crash magazine issues as I requested. So I was able to POKE the bug out (POKE 59901,82 -- I will never forget it) when I noticed it on one issue. The trouble is that it was very hard for a company to release fixes and so games had to be carefully developed. QA teams and project managers worked on the knowledge releasing a buggy version of the game could lead to a terrible backfire. Especially because at that time they were legally expected to offer refunds.
I'm going to start you off with this so you might can understand where I'm coming from, but most of these issues are NOT a reason for the game to be denied to the rest of us. And everyone came into this knowing the BG2 engine was being used. So no, a kit that is over a decade old isn't a new kit. If the guy had, had a problem with those issues and BUG REPORTED them, we would have a different story here. What he did was suggest I shouldn't be getting to play the game right now so they could program a guard in candle keep to attack a guy you should be one shotting and moving on from, and then you expected me to take the rest of it seriously.
Options: 1) Get a refund 2) Bug report it and wait
Saying I shouldn't get to be playing a game right now that some how mystically I, and most other people, are having either none or very small issues with isn't an option that should be taken seriously, thus it wasn't
@Rhyme On the issue with archers, unless other people have been having this same issue, which I haven't really seen a lot of, then it is a pretty safe bet to assume user error. So riddle me this, how can the exact same code make my archers never move forward? And his do it all the time?
OHHHHHH I think I may have figured it out, @srvk is it happening when your ranged fighters run out of a specific type of ammo and should be switching to a new one? This happens to me any time they run out of, lets say, +1 arrows and should be falling back to the other slot of regular arrows. Its a mildly irritating bug, but since I'm aware of it I notice before my archers run out of ammo of a specific type and click the new ammo and re-start their attack.
But if that is the case Rhyme, what he said doesn't happen. They don't randomly start doing that, because if they did, then YES, I would have experienced that at some point. There is a reason they do it, and it is a bug, but it isn't random.
Cavalier isn't a new kit. It is new to BG1, but BG:EE was always going to be running on the BG2 engine. What you are really complaining about here is the BG2 engine on BG1.
If you want BG1 vanilla please go buy that, but seriously, calling something a bad feature and acting as if it needs to be removed when that was one of the entire points of the product is ridiculous. As were almost all of his points, so no I'm not being a douche for finding it ridiculous that someone is unhappy that the BG2 engine was used when that was one of the main selling points of BG:EE.
Preferring to set the resolution instead of using zoom is a reasonable request and would make a good feature request, but the game is far from unusable at this point, and acting as if the game needed to be delayed longer for those of us who are able to enjoy it with no problems because you don't like the zoom feature is a bit selfish, I hope they implement resolution settings in the future.
@srvk I can roll a berserker or barbarian, hit rage, click attack on Tarnesh and go get a drink and come back with him dead too. Does that mean berserker and barbarian are over powered too? Your example is only over powered, as are mine, in the very early game, and are part of the BG2 engine which was a selling point for BG:EE to be using.
Since the issue here is being over powered early game for some kits / spells, get on BG1 vanilla, use any class, run straight to the basilisks, kill them all solo using the ghoul, now you are level 4-5 and can do the exact thing you just described. So by your definition, the basilisk area is over powered, and by your logic this must now also be removed from the game.
I had trouble taking points 1-3 seriously which is why they got lols, but since you were serious I'll explain why I found them to be ridiculous.
1) No speech is so messed up as to stop you from being able to follow dialogue and follow the story, and yet you think this was a reason to delay the game? No. If I can follow the story, the game is good enough to ship.
2) You want programming for guards to assist you in candle keep where the only 2 things that can ever attack you have like 1 HP each or something equally ridiculous and small. And this is a reason for the game not to ship? I know for a fact the guards help you kill Tarnesh.
3) Commoners are common, they are probably too stupid to run away. Look at them they are dumb, this is hardly game breaking.
I'm guessing now after writing this that none of the people I was responding to played BG2 or they wouldn't be so shocked right now. I came prepared for the ammo switching thing and other various issues that I had hoped would be fixed in the BG2 engine, but am happy enough to have them fix it between 1 and 2. I am happy enough to have the BG2 engine on BG1 without mods. Most importantly it is like you expected some completely different game. I expected BG1 on the BG2 engine with some, not all, of the BG2 engine bugs fixed, with 3 new characters, and that is exactly what I got.
Being disappointed is fair enough, but it's nowhere near a 'buggy mess', and it's a bit harsh on Overhaul to call it that. Half of the people whinging about 'bugs' on here don't even seem to know what bugs are. Bugs aren't features you'd personally like to see in the game, they are programming faults that stop the game working or responding as originally intended (not as YOU'D like to see it respond).
I do feel for folks who have been looking forward to play and were stopped from doing so by network and video card problems, but that stuff was ironed out a while back now. It's like you're looking for reasons not to play the game - if you don't want to play it, don't. Don't hang on to the few little niggles that remain like you'd ever be satisfied if they were fixed tomorrow. It is perfectly playable all the way through, and it's a damn sight less buggy than the 6 CD set I was playing a couple of years back.
I think some are being too defensive as well, but it's for the same reasons - a slightly hysterical level of BG fandom (I know, I've got it too). But surely a BG fan can see how worthwhile this release is, to new players if nothing else. None of the problems brought up in this thread would completely ruin the enjoyment for a BG newbie.
That was more or less the point I was trying to make and failed at. Thanks for saying that so clearly.
The biggest issue I have with threads like this are the major complaints about things that aren't bugs that are just features they don't like, or minor bugs that need to go on the tracker and left there for a while, because they have major bugs to sort out like multiplayer with 3+ people, and promises like multiplayer match making to work on.
Being upset with the game at the current state it is in because you wanted bug free and better featured multiplayer like you might have been expecting is really reasonable.
Being upset because you don't like familiars or kits is ridiculous, just don't use them or don't play the game.
What threads? There's nothing wrong with this thread, except for the fact we are still discussing it.
Is it so hard to let him go with his opinion? Do we must be always so aggressively self-assured on someone being wrong about not liking something? If we are willing to trust the OP that he uninstalled the game, then clearly he was upset. Instead of asking him to deal with it, you deal with it. He's long gone. Hasn't posted since.
Apparently the lack of reading comprehension fad takes on these forums. Can't count the times I've seen someone saying that to someone else in here.
It's especially funny when the one doing the accusation is the one that actually failed to understand what he read.
The OP never said anything about kits or familiars, or candle keep guards. He wasn't specific about any bugs. You are talking about one poster that on the middle of this thread pointed out some things he didn't like but that you and your high horse felt should be belittled to exhaustion and worth extending to the whole thread. You even conveniently failed to realize that poster acknowledged the kits aren't bugs.
This is how you replied to someone else opinion:
1) Lol
2) Are you serious?
3) Seriously?
[...] 9) LAWL. LAWL. LAWL. LAWL. LAWL. LAWL. LAWL. LAWL. See my response to 7. LAWL.
People like you, I just wished they disappeared. You do a disservice to this great game and those politely trying to address a disatisfied customer and fellow gamer and contribute nothing to it.
Today's gamers are spoiled. They are a console generation. Pretty much every 360 is identical - running virtually the same hardware and only certain allowed software with regularly updated firmware. Nobody at Overhaul has your exact computer. Nobody at Overhaul can anticipate the errors that occur when your computer attempts to communicate with your buddy's computer when you're both running different windows installs with different antivirus programs, etc.
Are you gonna go on about how back in your day, people walked 500 miles in the snow with no shoes on too? I remember the earlier days of PC gaming. Trying to get OMF:2097 to talk to my soundblaster was a frusturating experience for a kid without internet. Systems today are MUCH more standardized and much more stable than they were in the pre directx days. If it were such a herculean task for small developers to develop for pc, every indie game out there would be a buggy mess.
Find a bug? Report it; that's what the forums are here for.
How about no.
The game is over 10 years old and if you're gonna charge me 20 bucks for it, I would hope a bit of that went towards beta testing. I did not pay 20 bucks for BG:DIY Edition. How about YOU submit the bug reports.
I had a lengthy post here, then I realized you used the word opinion again to defend svrk's post.
Not liking kits, and minor bugs do not constitute a reason to delay shipping. Unless you can point out a bug in svrk's list that should have delayed shipping, other than the intel driver issues which has been largely addressed and wasn't foreseen, then this isn't a valid opinion.
Unless your take on the situation is that all opinions are valid opinions, in which case my opinion on his opinion is completely valid as well.
I've done nothing to antagonize you into being as hostile as you are, and I'm sorry you, svrk, and anyone else had their feelings hurt that I loled at items on a list that managed to ruin someones game experience and was called a reason to delay shipping, but its honestly my opinion that most of those reasons are ridiculous.
Candle Keep guards not defending you are a minor issue before chapter 1 even begins, the other issues with Rasaad were more serious, but that doesn't mean all of those items belong on a list of reasons the game ruined someones experience and should have caused the game to be delayed (again)
I don't think that is completely fair in that they haven't had 10 years to work on it. There are still bugs in the BG2 engine that modders haven't fixed in that 10 years and they have been modding it that long. I think BG:EE is a more stable and more bug free version than any modded version I've seen of BG1 on BG2's engine yet. There is no way around 12 people in the time they took could fix the entire engine that way more modders haven't completely fixed in 10 years.
Don't uninstall it...if you are unhappy then leave and come back to it later...I did it with Skyrim and I'm glad I did. Don't throw the game away like that. I'm actually enjoying it. Yes there are a few bugs (espeically with the quest log) but I haven't recently seen any game breaking bugs. Maybe come back in a few months and check patch updates. I do agree that we aren't beta testers though...but it is a good game.
Comments
Overhaul has been very conscientious about addressing as many bugs as they can in each build, but they can't fix bugs they don't know about.
Edit: Another thing. Overpowered kits and familiars... Why is that so ridiculous to not like? It gives you an insane amount of HP at the start if you're a mage, and some kits like the Cavalier are intant killing-machines in some cases.
The discussion here is whether the game was shipped early. I have already finished the game twice and while Overhaul has been quick with the patches, there is still a lot of work to be done. Problem is that many players may not be here when that is done.
@moopy
Saying that I'm trolling when most of your comments are superfluous "lols" i think it is the other way round. I will nonetheless try to reply to your comments.
The point with the zoom is that I prefer for example a 800x600 resolution instead of a higher one because then the graphics are too small for my monitor. If the game autoselects a higher resolution and then I try to zoom in I get lower quality graphics due to the zoom-in algorithm which is not what I want. NPCs not retreating from battle when ordered or archers trying to attack from close range is a serious bug and the spacebar is not a solution if I have to do it too many times. I'm glad that you're not facing this bug but to me it happens frequently.
Have you ever played with the Quasit??? The amount of hps and magic resistances it has makes it a killing machine early game. Just send your NPCs for a coffee and attack Tarnesh with Quasit alone. He will go down in a few seconds. Again I wonder if the game was playtested with certain kits before shipping.
Try killing Rasaad before talking to Gamaz and then resurrect him in a temple. I doubt his quest can continue. This is new material and it was not tested. Why?
Good thing for you that the game runs smoothly on your computer but for many gamers, including me, it freezes and crashes too often. While vanilla BG runs perfectly and without any bugs.
http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/10965/on-the-development-of-quality-software/p1
I'm very satisfied with the game, but I've experienced several of the bugs that srvk mentions. To deny that the game is still buggy is foolish, especially using Moopy's line of logic of, "I haven't experienced this bug... Therefore it doesn't exist."
Please report the bug, in case the developers do not know it exists.
"Why weren't all of the bugs fixed before release?"
See my linked thread above.
It is impossible for any software developer to anticipate every bug on everybody's hardware with everybody's different, often mismanaged/conflicting software pre-release.
It is, however, substantially more possible to eithe rpatch in or find workarounds for individual problems once they are reported to developers.
That line has been steadily pushing in the direction of releasing a beta as a finished product. The more bugs a developer can rely on a customer finding, the less they need to pay for internal testers. Why pay people to find the bugs when the people paying them will find the bugs? There's really no mechanism to enforce a happy medium of pre-release and post-release testing. It falls to the developers to take the high road.
I, for one, feel like there were way too many issues to call this a finished product when I paid for it. Others will have different values and experiences, but I still crash way too much in multiplayer.
Companies run on time and resources. They can only test a product for so long. It is possible that people are just finding bugs that they never encountered, that does make them lazy and it doesn't mean they're trying to save money making other people find bugs. They were just doing the best they could with the time and money they were given. The fact that they continue to work on it and try to patch what else they can after figuring out a way to fix it shows that they do care about the product.
Today's gamers are spoiled. They are a console generation. Pretty much every 360 is identical - running virtually the same hardware and only certain allowed software with regularly updated firmware. Nobody at Overhaul has your exact computer. Nobody at Overhaul can anticipate the errors that occur when your computer attempts to communicate with your buddy's computer when you're both running different windows installs with different antivirus programs, etc.
Find a bug? Report it; that's what the forums are here for.
I'm not a bug tester. I paid them, not the other way around.
And while it's true that hardware variances make for a far more complex environment to beta-test, the multiplayer issues are wide-spread enough that I struggle to believe they did exhaustive testing. They don't earn my benefit of the doubt on that. Likewise, how is it possible that they didn't know about the issues with Intel graphics drivers? Aren't Intel graphics drivers somewhat... Um... What's the opposite of "obscure"?
It's fine to like the game. I like the game. It's fine to support the company. I support the company. But it's not fine to tell dissatisfied people that they have no right to be dissatisfied. They clearly do (despite Cerevant's well-written rant).
There's bugs, but the game breaking ones were fixed within a week of release, so there isn't much to complain about anymore. People really only talk about personal preference changes nowadays for whatever item or spell they think should follow a certain rule.
Saying "I quit because of bugs" is SoOoOo 3 weeks ago.
I am excited and pleased to see such a quick response from Overhaul, and I am baffled by those who can't wait a couple weeks to get things sorted out, or get hostile about a few bugs or quirks. Most of them will get fixed, certainly they will get the game running for everyone soon. Remember that some of these are even legacy bugs, that is, things that were wrong with the original game too. By the time it all gets sorted out, we should have a faster, more efficient program working for everyone.
@Zutti says that today gamers are spoiled. That they don't respect the fact it's hard to make fully working games in modern PCs. I'd argue against that; blanket statements are always easy to argue against, in any case. Gamers don't have to understand anything about making games. Much less how hard they are to make. That's not a prerogative to be a consumer in the gaming industry. If we were so condescending about our car manufacturers as we are about games, we all would be walking to work.
In any case every gamer has a general personal idea of what they perceive as acceptable and non acceptable bugs. It's this concept that defines their satisfaction or dissatisfaction. The computer gaming industry has been trying to lower that bar for decades. Gamers aren't spoiled, they are more tolerant of an industry that has become more and more buggy. Not to the fault of the computer gaming industry itself (not always, that is), but mostly due to a computer architecture that is starting to become too chaotic to handle. It's about time we tried to get away from this architecture and into a new one.
But none of this is cause against a consumer feeling dissatisfied. On the contrary. The growing number of dissatisfied consumers and reports of dissatisfied consumers all over the internet on about any game that is being made these days isn't a case of being spoiled, @Zutti. It's a real fact about how people feel about this type of product that you shouldn't so easily ignore. It's clear to me, or anyone caring to look, that while games are trying to break new grounds, they are doing it on a platform that is showing its incapacity to follow them.
The lack of standards, the proliferation of hardware makers each and one of them trying to outsmart the other with incompatible features, the total and complete discrepancy between all sorts of software development libraries, is putting a burden on software developers everywhere for sure. But also on their consumers. And, as much as you may find it hard to accept, consumers are the ones being damaged by this the most. The computer gaming industry thrives regardless. It's been reported to have even surpassed the film industry.
Spoiled gamers? Some perhaps. But spoiled has a double meaning that you probably don't want to know about since it could include you and your blind acceptance of a defective product.
He speaks instead of a time when downloading patches wasn't an option. And because of that it was true in fact that the released product had to go through a much more rigorous inspection than these days. Today's QA teams and project managers work together on the knowledge of patches that can be distributed through the internet on the blink of an eye. For that reason bugs are actually sorted between those that should be addressed now and those that should be addressed sometime after release. Make no mistake.
Bugs always existed. No one contests that. My first recalled bug experience was the infamous Attic Bug in Jet Set Willy for the ZX Spectrum. Thankfully my father would make frequent trips to the UK and would always bring me the Crash magazine issues as I requested. So I was able to POKE the bug out (POKE 59901,82 -- I will never forget it) when I noticed it on one issue. The trouble is that it was very hard for a company to release fixes and so games had to be carefully developed. QA teams and project managers worked on the knowledge releasing a buggy version of the game could lead to a terrible backfire. Especially because at that time they were legally expected to offer refunds.
@LukevanV
@Rhyme
I'm going to start you off with this so you might can understand where I'm coming from, but most of these issues are NOT a reason for the game to be denied to the rest of us. And everyone came into this knowing the BG2 engine was being used. So no, a kit that is over a decade old isn't a new kit. If the guy had, had a problem with those issues and BUG REPORTED them, we would have a different story here. What he did was suggest I shouldn't be getting to play the game right now so they could program a guard in candle keep to attack a guy you should be one shotting and moving on from, and then you expected me to take the rest of it seriously.
Options:
1) Get a refund
2) Bug report it and wait
Saying I shouldn't get to be playing a game right now that some how mystically I, and most other people, are having either none or very small issues with isn't an option that should be taken seriously, thus it wasn't
@Rhyme
On the issue with archers, unless other people have been having this same issue, which I haven't really seen a lot of, then it is a pretty safe bet to assume user error. So riddle me this, how can the exact same code make my archers never move forward? And his do it all the time?
OHHHHHH I think I may have figured it out, @srvk is it happening when your ranged fighters run out of a specific type of ammo and should be switching to a new one? This happens to me any time they run out of, lets say, +1 arrows and should be falling back to the other slot of regular arrows. Its a mildly irritating bug, but since I'm aware of it I notice before my archers run out of ammo of a specific type and click the new ammo and re-start their attack.
But if that is the case Rhyme, what he said doesn't happen. They don't randomly start doing that, because if they did, then YES, I would have experienced that at some point. There is a reason they do it, and it is a bug, but it isn't random.
@LukevanV
Cavalier isn't a new kit. It is new to BG1, but BG:EE was always going to be running on the BG2 engine. What you are really complaining about here is the BG2 engine on BG1.
If you want BG1 vanilla please go buy that, but seriously, calling something a bad feature and acting as if it needs to be removed when that was one of the entire points of the product is ridiculous. As were almost all of his points, so no I'm not being a douche for finding it ridiculous that someone is unhappy that the BG2 engine was used when that was one of the main selling points of BG:EE.
Preferring to set the resolution instead of using zoom is a reasonable request and would make a good feature request, but the game is far from unusable at this point, and acting as if the game needed to be delayed longer for those of us who are able to enjoy it with no problems because you don't like the zoom feature is a bit selfish, I hope they implement resolution settings in the future.
@srvk
I can roll a berserker or barbarian, hit rage, click attack on Tarnesh and go get a drink and come back with him dead too. Does that mean berserker and barbarian are over powered too? Your example is only over powered, as are mine, in the very early game, and are part of the BG2 engine which was a selling point for BG:EE to be using.
Since the issue here is being over powered early game for some kits / spells, get on BG1 vanilla, use any class, run straight to the basilisks, kill them all solo using the ghoul, now you are level 4-5 and can do the exact thing you just described. So by your definition, the basilisk area is over powered, and by your logic this must now also be removed from the game.
I had trouble taking points 1-3 seriously which is why they got lols, but since you were serious I'll explain why I found them to be ridiculous.
1) No speech is so messed up as to stop you from being able to follow dialogue and follow the story, and yet you think this was a reason to delay the game? No. If I can follow the story, the game is good enough to ship.
2) You want programming for guards to assist you in candle keep where the only 2 things that can ever attack you have like 1 HP each or something equally ridiculous and small. And this is a reason for the game not to ship? I know for a fact the guards help you kill Tarnesh.
3) Commoners are common, they are probably too stupid to run away. Look at them they are dumb, this is hardly game breaking.
I'm guessing now after writing this that none of the people I was responding to played BG2 or they wouldn't be so shocked right now. I came prepared for the ammo switching thing and other various issues that I had hoped would be fixed in the BG2 engine, but am happy enough to have them fix it between 1 and 2. I am happy enough to have the BG2 engine on BG1 without mods. Most importantly it is like you expected some completely different game. I expected BG1 on the BG2 engine with some, not all, of the BG2 engine bugs fixed, with 3 new characters, and that is exactly what I got.
I do feel for folks who have been looking forward to play and were stopped from doing so by network and video card problems, but that stuff was ironed out a while back now. It's like you're looking for reasons not to play the game - if you don't want to play it, don't. Don't hang on to the few little niggles that remain like you'd ever be satisfied if they were fixed tomorrow. It is perfectly playable all the way through, and it's a damn sight less buggy than the 6 CD set I was playing a couple of years back.
I think some are being too defensive as well, but it's for the same reasons - a slightly hysterical level of BG fandom (I know, I've got it too). But surely a BG fan can see how worthwhile this release is, to new players if nothing else. None of the problems brought up in this thread would completely ruin the enjoyment for a BG newbie.
That was more or less the point I was trying to make and failed at. Thanks for saying that so clearly.
The biggest issue I have with threads like this are the major complaints about things that aren't bugs that are just features they don't like, or minor bugs that need to go on the tracker and left there for a while, because they have major bugs to sort out like multiplayer with 3+ people, and promises like multiplayer match making to work on.
Being upset with the game at the current state it is in because you wanted bug free and better featured multiplayer like you might have been expecting is really reasonable.
Being upset because you don't like familiars or kits is ridiculous, just don't use them or don't play the game.
Is it so hard to let him go with his opinion? Do we must be always so aggressively self-assured on someone being wrong about not liking something? If we are willing to trust the OP that he uninstalled the game, then clearly he was upset. Instead of asking him to deal with it, you deal with it. He's long gone. Hasn't posted since.
I was actually talking about what was being discussed as game breaking bugs that should have delayed shipping after the original poster.
Sorry I wasn't clear on that, I didn't realize reading comprehension would be so difficult, given I brought up familiars or kits.
You knew that though, not sure why you get off to confrontation when you are clearly wrong.
Not liking a kit from BG2 isn't a bug, and candle keep guards defending you aren't game breaking bugs.
That isn't an opinion this is a fact, so as you said, deal with it.
It's especially funny when the one doing the accusation is the one that actually failed to understand what he read.
The OP never said anything about kits or familiars, or candle keep guards. He wasn't specific about any bugs. You are talking about one poster that on the middle of this thread pointed out some things he didn't like but that you and your high horse felt should be belittled to exhaustion and worth extending to the whole thread. You even conveniently failed to realize that poster acknowledged the kits aren't bugs.
This is how you replied to someone else opinion: People like you, I just wished they disappeared. You do a disservice to this great game and those politely trying to address a disatisfied customer and fellow gamer and contribute nothing to it.
That's the last I'll say to you on this matter.
The game is over 10 years old and if you're gonna charge me 20 bucks for it, I would hope a bit of that went towards beta testing. I did not pay 20 bucks for BG:DIY Edition. How about YOU submit the bug reports.
Wow...just...wow. Am I the only one who thinks this might be the worst way possible to get people to take what you have to say seriously?
I had a lengthy post here, then I realized you used the word opinion again to defend svrk's post.
Not liking kits, and minor bugs do not constitute a reason to delay shipping. Unless you can point out a bug in svrk's list that should have delayed shipping, other than the intel driver issues which has been largely addressed and wasn't foreseen, then this isn't a valid opinion.
Unless your take on the situation is that all opinions are valid opinions, in which case my opinion on his opinion is completely valid as well.
I've done nothing to antagonize you into being as hostile as you are, and I'm sorry you, svrk, and anyone else had their feelings hurt that I loled at items on a list that managed to ruin someones game experience and was called a reason to delay shipping, but its honestly my opinion that most of those reasons are ridiculous.
Candle Keep guards not defending you are a minor issue before chapter 1 even begins, the other issues with Rasaad were more serious, but that doesn't mean all of those items belong on a list of reasons the game ruined someones experience and should have caused the game to be delayed (again)
@Xriah
I don't think that is completely fair in that they haven't had 10 years to work on it. There are still bugs in the BG2 engine that modders haven't fixed in that 10 years and they have been modding it that long.
I think BG:EE is a more stable and more bug free version than any modded version I've seen of BG1 on BG2's engine yet. There is no way around 12 people in the time they took could fix the entire engine that way more modders haven't completely fixed in 10 years.
I'm actually enjoying it. Yes there are a few bugs (espeically with the quest log) but I haven't recently seen any game breaking bugs. Maybe come back in a few months and check patch updates. I do agree that we aren't beta testers though...but it is a good game.