@NWN_babaYaga, my inner coder is positively livid that you didn't close your quotes!
Anyhow, I don't think team-size is a definite qualifier for either a small game or ass-hats for management. Big companies releasing 10 hour games is commonplace, and there are 1-man studios that are just begging for a revision in hiring policy.
The point I'm trying to make is that it unbalanced the game in relation to what it's supposed to be. Fighters are supposed to whack things, mages are supposed to be walking dealers of magical death, clerics are supposed to heal, etc. and if you've ever looked at the errata for 3.5e, they solved a lot of those save problems you've mentioned.
But beyond the point of 3.5e vs 4e, I've tried playing 4e and couldn't even get past character generation cause they made the process so over complicated. Whereas the 3.5e character generation is streamlined, easy to follow, and so simple anyone but the dumbest person on earth could roll a character. Plain and simple, if the game is in 4e, regardless of how good it is, I will not be buying it. 3.5e, I'd buy in a shot and next, I hold my judgement till I have a good look through the players handbook.
4E still has Fighters whacking things, except they can also daze, knock prone, or push their victims around to spice things up or provide a more tactical edge. Wizards are still the kings of battlefield control and wide area blasting. Clerics do heal, they can just also do other things now, like attack and heal or buff in the same turn, sometimes with the same action. After playing 4E and using a power that smites an enemy and heals an ally with a single standard action, I've found it tough to play my Pathfinder Inspiring Commander and outright impossible to bother with a 3E/Pathfinder Cleric.
What's so complicated about character generation? A level 1 character chooses race, ability scores, class, a variable class feature, a feat, and a handful of powers. No different than rolling a 3E Wizard and choosing your race, ability scores, class, familiar, a feat, and a handful of spells.
Well ofcourse, it couldnt under any circumstances be anything but a cashgrab. The closest spiritual successor to BG is perhaps going to be PE? Last of the BG series was made 13 years ago on the infinity engine theres absolutely nothing to it than the value of the brand, which is what theyre gonna milk, if they are.
I think the series can continue in a very satisfying way if
- the basic feel of the game captures most of the elements that made BG1 & 2 work so well - the story has some significant bearing upon the Bhaalspawn saga, even if it is set over one hundred years in the future from the end of ToB and the player isn't BG's CHARNAME
I think there could be lots of creative ways to connect a new tale to the legacy of the BG saga.
Indeed. CHARNAME had a kid with Aerie (depending on canon Abdel Adrien might have one with some chick too), Imoen could have had kids, even reborn Sarevok..? Lots of ways for the Bhaalspawn legacy to continue in some other form.
Not even necessarily that the *new* PC is descended from Bhaalspawn - the antagonist could be, perhaps seeking to usurp CHARNAME.
@schneidend Ok, I'll grant that they can do more but what's the deal with the healing surge thing? It's like "we're about to die, let's heal everyone half a dozen times". Unbalancing the game again.
@schneidend Ok, I'll grant that they can do more but what's the deal with the healing surge thing? It's like "we're about to die, let's heal everyone half a dozen times". Unbalancing the game again.
Healing surges represent a hero's ability to personally endure, and also represent the limitations of healing magic and "encouragement" healing from Warlords. There are countless instances of heroes finishing a fight, taking a relieved breath, and then soldiering on to fight more baddies without the aid of a friend with a holy symbol. When was the last time Captain Malcolm Reynolds, Conan, Drizzt Do'Urden, or Gimli was healed magically in the middle of a heated battle or adventure? They just have within themselves the ability to keep going until the deed is done or they run out of steam completely.
By that same token, you only have so much in the way of inner reserves to draw on, and most healing just helps you more quickly draw on those reserves. Eventually, that's a resource you will run out of just like you can run out of spells. After a point, a basic healing spell like the Cleric's Healing Word or the Warlord's Inspiring Word just can't help you any more until you get back your healing surges with a full rest.
Also, without using their once-per-encounter Second Wind or a healing spell or ability being used on them, characters can only freely spend healing surges during a Short Rest, roughly 3-5 minutes of taking a breather. It's not as if characters can always just instantly heal up mid-battle on their own. Also, each healing surge typically only recovers about 25-30% of your total hit points, depending on your build and what spell or ability allowed you to spend the surge.
Dragon Age Origins and NWN, while decent games did not compare to how great BG1 + 2 were with their top down isometric gameplay.
A new up to date engine would be a must have if they ever make BG3, however top down locked isometric view has to remain to recreate the same epic strategic combat feeling.
DAO had a lot of let downs - too little maximum zoom in top down view, too few spells and abilities, very little character customization (like only 3 classes, mage, fighter, rogue), everything was too simple compared to BG and I wouldnt want a potential BG3 to go down the same route of having to be balanced to be playable in a 'zoomed in 3D first person view', which is not how I would want BG3 to be.
The game engine in NWN was just beyond clunky, awkward, and always felt like I was playing a game with something like downs syndrome or something worse.
D&D's full suite of available features is completely ruined when put into typical full 3D engines of today, and Atari are completely crap for letting anyone create a new game similar to BG (TBH Atari and their useless copyrights are what have ruined the D&D series of video games).
As I said, I don't see what a problem with BG3 is. Yes, it will never live up to anyones expectations, so they should never make a DnD game with birdview and 6 partymembers ???? Even if its a 8/10 game its still worth playing probably
I wasnt a big fan of Starcraft 2 or Diablo3, but guess what? They were still great games. If you ignore the starcraft or diablo label and just judge the game for it was, it was still great games.
That is my biggest issue/problem with a majority of gamers, they never judge a game for what it is, but what it "could've been". Yes Diablo3 was short,repetive and the story wasnt good. It was still great fun 8-10 hours of co-op and I enjoyed it. As I said, ignore the Diablo name and look at is as any new hacknslash rpg and it would be a fun/great one.
No, Diablo 3 was not a great game. Linear, no decisions, no paths, no attrribute build, no skill build, simple story, limited action, lame graphics, well... I could say sound was good but that's just it.
Baldur's Gate is just a game, not even close to be difficult to surpass, the thing is people have nostalgia and there is this magic about being the fisrt thing close to a good script people played. Gameplay is awful, story is ok but if you're not into the game, I mean like in love, passionate, seeing double rainbows and such, not a masterpiece. This game if a game for fans and that's it, Diablo 3 is for the developers only and I guess not all of them (I have hope that some of them still retain their sanity).
Old RPG fans give BG a 10, normal people would give a 5 in 2000 and a 1 or 2 in 2013.
So please, make Baldur's Gate 3, it will be a hell of a lot better than BG1 and 2
No, Diablo 3 was not a great game. Linear, no decisions, no paths, no attrribute build, no skill build...
Eh, what?
How are there no skill builds, exactly? There's tons of skills but only a few can be mapped at any given time, and your runes and passive ability slots are also limited. There's plenty of builds where you can put together and find synergy between runes and passive skills.
I'm happy the lot of you didn't turn this "another forum *****fest" that has plagued many game series these days like Final Fantasy, Metroid,etc. Seems people have forgotten what games were, and Devs always getting berated for anything new they make these days. It hurts me actually because today's gamers have gotten too spoiled with god-like expectations. Seen GameSpot and GameFAQS? Pure examples right there what is wrong with today's crowd. Given not all of them are hateful human beings, but I often ask the question: "Why do devs bother even making games if the "so-called" fans act like punks?".
If there is one pet peeve that always sets me off is telling the devs what to do with their "IP", I believe in doing what you want and having total freedom on your projects with your co-workers as well. I really don't see how a BG3 is getting to hurt the other games if it's going to be something different entirely.
Just seeing Mass Effect 3 and how people get turned off by the most petty bull**** I ever seen is the highest point of being jerks. I hate today's gamers I really do, everything is a petty *****fest nowadays in the gaming world.
I love this forum, you guys most of the time actually "get it". Probably one of the few places to actually have real debates and conversations.
Also a text relevant to the thread, I believe whatever is best for BG3 that the dev team feels because it is their project.
@Kaliesto: I think there's a substantial difference between due criticism and "*****fests". ME3 was a well-made and enjoyable game by most standards; it also had its fair share of flaws (and really, what is the Extended Cut if not Casey Hudson's mea culpa?). The Final Fantasy series has declined significantly over the past decade or so; that doesn't detract from the highs it's reached in the past.
Now, I'm not saying we're all required to take the critical stance towards our chosen forms of entertainment, but by the same token we don't need to put our brains in jars either. Beamdog got a few things right when making BG:EE; they've also made a few missteps. A sense of caution is only natural at this stage.
As for people telling devs what to do with their IP... it's not like anyone can force a team to do something they don't want to do. But you can't underestimate the value of constructive feedback - look at how well "Shadowrun Returns" is being received, and that was a project that had constant back-and-forth between the devs and the players. Conversely, look at EA's utter failure with SimCity to see what happens when you stick cotton balls in your ears while your customers tell you they don't want the features you're adding to the game.
I need to correct myself, I don't mind if the fanbase can present ideas that works, but what I mind is telling them they are not allowed to continue a series. For instance some people want Mass Effect Dead, but there is so much to be told in my opinion. This is what really bugs me with the fanbases. Some people take this for granted if say "everyone" wanted a gameworld to disappear, they have no idea what they lost. If Zelda,metroid,Forgotten Realms,etc were to disappear overnight, that be a huge loss. Maybe I'm paying attention to ignorant people too much, but it always get's under my skin. Also these gameworlds take years to make.
You also have the case of younger generations coming in that might want to experience this stuff once we all have moved on. So basically I don't want to see Faerun turn into another Greyhawk doomed to die out. Baldur's Gate is just a name of the original series, and it's not like it's going to be part of the other story, but if it's going to be then I hope they have the most kickass ideas ready to be used and this forum here will be the backbone of support.
Heck it doesn't have to be called Baldur's Gate 3, but just "Forgotten Realms-Insert Title here"
Old RPG fans give BG a 10, normal people would give a 5 in 2000 and a 1 or 2 in 2013.
Ok I'll bite. Provide evidence that "normal people" (as if there was such a thing) would give a 5 back in 2000 and a 1 or 2 in 2013.
I have tons of friends that play RPG both electronic and pen and paper. Among ~20 friends that played various games like Diablo, Ultima Online, Elder Scrolls 1 and 2 and other, 3 played Baldur's Gate to the end and 1 was a fanatic that insisted for us to play it too. I could not stand the game back then, actually it took me quite a while to play the game and only after seeing many Bioware good games through years that I decided to give another try BG, my other friends just don't feel like to.
Of course I've seen dozens of reviews through the internet stating that it is the most awesome game ever, great, but in "real life" I don't know many people who actually played the game to the end, and again, I mean among people who actually like RPG games. But of course I can't judge by my circle of friends, well through the internet it is the same, I've played MMORPGs with people from many countries, not once Baldur's Gate was mentioned by party or guild members while discussing about games that we played before entering the MMO world.
I maybe wrong, I just don't think so, I don't have a giant sample to state that my experience is valid as real data about the game but it is big enough to think that it is unlikely that Baldur's Gate is that big hit the fans talk about. Probably you are just too much into the legend of BG to see the real truth, that it is not a big hit, it was just something rare when it came out and now it has nothing special. The most important thing in an RPG for me is the story, what is so great about Baldur's Gate story anyway? It is better than Diablo 3, of course, it can't be worse, but compared to other real RPGs, nothing special at all.
Oh yeah, sure, you probably think that you have to play the game to the end to judge it, I think precisely the opposite, the game have to make you play it to the end to be considered good, it is the least a game should do.
No, Diablo 3 was not a great game. Linear, no decisions, no paths, no attrribute build, no skill build...
Eh, what?
How are there no skill builds, exactly? There's tons of skills but only a few can be mapped at any given time, and your runes and passive ability slots are also limited. There's plenty of builds where you can put together and find synergy between runes and passive skills.
There is no skill builds if you have them all and can exchange them at will, there is a recharge time penalty for selecting a new skill but you still can use all of them. For me the character is heavily defined by the choices you make including the build you make, if you have all skills you have a generic character.
For instance, if all martial artists can perform the same movements with the same expertise, same options, variations and power, I can't state that they differ from one another, even if they take 2 or 3 days praticing the moves to perform them perfectly again, it is all there.
To make it clear I will explain what I mean by build: Limitation. Or perhaps even more specific: Limited point buy system.
The skill "builds" in Diablo 3 are actually defined by your equipment, so in the end, the only build system Diablo 3 has is the equipment build.
Actually, I thought it was brilliant in D3 getting rid of costly "respec" to tweak a build. BL2 does the same thing. But this is not how D&D works and another reason not to try and compare the games too closely.
I need to correct myself, I don't mind if the fanbase can present ideas that works, but what I mind is telling them they are not allowed to continue a series. For instance some people want Mass Effect Dead, but there is so much to be told in my opinion.
Well... I can understand the impulse to a certain extent. "Mass Effect" could have been remembered as one of the greatest SF stories the video game industry ever produced, and instead it's a punchline for webcomics. And that's entirely on Casey Hudson and Mac Walters, so when people say "I don't want to see another ME game", I'm assuming they mean they don't want to see Hudson/Walters/EA drop the ball again - and since EA will never give up the property, you kind of have to assume that's exactly what will happen next time.
This is what really bugs me with the fanbases. Some people take this for granted if say "everyone" wanted a gameworld to disappear, they have no idea what they lost. If Zelda,metroid,Forgotten Realms,etc were to disappear overnight, that be a huge loss. Maybe I'm paying attention to ignorant people too much, but it always get's under my skin. Also these gameworlds take years to make.
There's another way to look at it, though: sometimes it's better to let a fictional world "die" at its peak, rather than let it churn out increasingly poor narratives just to perpetuate its own existence. Look at Joss Whedon's early career - the first time I watched "Buffy the Vampire Slayer", I was there from pilot to finale, but I never go past season 3 nowadays because I know it's almost entirely downhill from there. Meanwhile, "Firefly" still has a strong and passionate fanbase, even after all these years, because it lasted fourteen episodes and never wore out its welcome. You don't get that same feeling of "Yeah, that show was great until it wasn't anymore."
You also have the case of younger generations coming in that might want to experience this stuff once we all have moved on. So basically I don't want to see Faerun turn into another Greyhawk doomed to die out. Baldur's Gate is just a name of the original series, and it's not like it's going to be part of the other story, but if it's going to be then I hope they have the most kickass ideas ready to be used and this forum here will be the backbone of support.
Heck it doesn't have to be called Baldur's Gate 3, but just "Forgotten Realms-Insert Title here"
The problem with Faerun - as I understand it - is precisely that it's been split amongst so many companies that no one wants to bother navigating the waters anymore (you only need to look at BG:EE's current status to see how potential nightmares can come true). On the other hand, its greatest strength is that it's not confined to one medium; the Forgotten Realms will exist so long as D&D itself exists, and that doesn't seem to be going away anytime soon (no matter how people react to different rules and such).
Besides, the younger generation can always be introduced to "Planescape Torment", "Baldur's Gate" and "Neverwinter Nights" - that's what GOG is for.
Old RPG fans give BG a 10, normal people would give a 5 in 2000 and a 1 or 2 in 2013.
Ok I'll bite. Provide evidence that "normal people" (as if there was such a thing) would give a 5 back in 2000 and a 1 or 2 in 2013.
I have tons of friends that play RPG both electronic and pen and paper. Among ~20 friends that played various games like Diablo, Ultima Online, Elder Scrolls 1 and 2 and other, 3 played Baldur's Gate to the end and 1 was a fanatic that insisted for us to play it too. I could not stand the game back then, actually it took me quite a while to play the game and only after seeing many Bioware good games through years that I decided to give another try BG, my other friends just don't feel like to.
Of course I've seen dozens of reviews through the internet stating that it is the most awesome game ever, great, but in "real life" I don't know many people who actually played the game to the end, and again, I mean among people who actually like RPG games. But of course I can't judge by my circle of friends, well through the internet it is the same, I've played MMORPGs with people from many countries, not once Baldur's Gate was mentioned by party or guild members while discussing about games that we played before entering the MMO world.
I maybe wrong, I just don't think so, I don't have a giant sample to state that my experience is valid as real data about the game but it is big enough to think that it is unlikely that Baldur's Gate is that big hit the fans talk about. Probably you are just too much into the legend of BG to see the real truth, that it is not a big hit, it was just something rare when it came out and now it has nothing special. The most important thing in an RPG for me is the story, what is so great about Baldur's Gate story anyway? It is better than Diablo 3, of course, it can't be worse, but compared to other real RPGs, nothing special at all.
Oh yeah, sure, you probably think that you have to play the game to the end to judge it, I think precisely the opposite, the game have to make you play it to the end to be considered good, it is the least a game should do.
You are right 20 people isn't a large enough sample size. The 4946 user ratings on gamespot (its an example of a website that has been around since the game was released in 1998) that average a 9.1/10 for Baldur's Gate 1 is if nothing else a better indication of how "normal people" view the game.
Comments
Anyhow, I don't think team-size is a definite qualifier for either a small game or ass-hats for management. Big companies releasing 10 hour games is commonplace, and there are 1-man studios that are just begging for a revision in hiring policy.
But beyond the point of 3.5e vs 4e, I've tried playing 4e and couldn't even get past character generation cause they made the process so over complicated. Whereas the 3.5e character generation is streamlined, easy to follow, and so simple anyone but the dumbest person on earth could roll a character. Plain and simple, if the game is in 4e, regardless of how good it is, I will not be buying it. 3.5e, I'd buy in a shot and next, I hold my judgement till I have a good look through the players handbook.
What's so complicated about character generation? A level 1 character chooses race, ability scores, class, a variable class feature, a feat, and a handful of powers. No different than rolling a 3E Wizard and choosing your race, ability scores, class, familiar, a feat, and a handful of spells.
- the basic feel of the game captures most of the elements that made BG1 & 2 work so well
- the story has some significant bearing upon the Bhaalspawn saga, even if it is set over one hundred years in the future from the end of ToB and the player isn't BG's CHARNAME
I think there could be lots of creative ways to connect a new tale to the legacy of the BG saga.
Not even necessarily that the *new* PC is descended from Bhaalspawn - the antagonist could be, perhaps seeking to usurp CHARNAME.
She gave birth in the middle of the battle with Mellisan when I romanced her... :-\
By that same token, you only have so much in the way of inner reserves to draw on, and most healing just helps you more quickly draw on those reserves. Eventually, that's a resource you will run out of just like you can run out of spells. After a point, a basic healing spell like the Cleric's Healing Word or the Warlord's Inspiring Word just can't help you any more until you get back your healing surges with a full rest.
Also, without using their once-per-encounter Second Wind or a healing spell or ability being used on them, characters can only freely spend healing surges during a Short Rest, roughly 3-5 minutes of taking a breather. It's not as if characters can always just instantly heal up mid-battle on their own. Also, each healing surge typically only recovers about 25-30% of your total hit points, depending on your build and what spell or ability allowed you to spend the surge.
A new up to date engine would be a must have if they ever make BG3, however top down locked isometric view has to remain to recreate the same epic strategic combat feeling.
DAO had a lot of let downs - too little maximum zoom in top down view, too few spells and abilities, very little character customization (like only 3 classes, mage, fighter, rogue), everything was too simple compared to BG and I wouldnt want a potential BG3 to go down the same route of having to be balanced to be playable in a 'zoomed in 3D first person view', which is not how I would want BG3 to be.
The game engine in NWN was just beyond clunky, awkward, and always felt like I was playing a game with something like downs syndrome or something worse.
D&D's full suite of available features is completely ruined when put into typical full 3D engines of today, and Atari are completely crap for letting anyone create a new game similar to BG (TBH Atari and their useless copyrights are what have ruined the D&D series of video games).
Yes, it will never live up to anyones expectations, so they should never make a DnD game with birdview and 6 partymembers ????
Even if its a 8/10 game its still worth playing probably
I wasnt a big fan of Starcraft 2 or Diablo3, but guess what? They were still great games. If you ignore the starcraft or diablo label and just judge the game for it was, it was still great games.
That is my biggest issue/problem with a majority of gamers, they never judge a game for what it is, but what it "could've been".
Yes Diablo3 was short,repetive and the story wasnt good. It was still great fun 8-10 hours of co-op and I enjoyed it. As I said, ignore the Diablo name and look at is as any new hacknslash rpg and it would be a fun/great one.
Actually the latter is brilliant, but obviously going to be copyrighted by the people making it.
Baldur's Gate is just a game, not even close to be difficult to surpass, the thing is people have nostalgia and there is this magic about being the fisrt thing close to a good script people played. Gameplay is awful, story is ok but if you're not into the game, I mean like in love, passionate, seeing double rainbows and such, not a masterpiece. This game if a game for fans and that's it, Diablo 3 is for the developers only and I guess not all of them (I have hope that some of them still retain their sanity).
Old RPG fans give BG a 10, normal people would give a 5 in 2000 and a 1 or 2 in 2013.
So please, make Baldur's Gate 3, it will be a hell of a lot better than BG1 and 2
Ok I'll bite. Provide evidence that "normal people" (as if there was such a thing) would give a 5 back in 2000 and a 1 or 2 in 2013.
How are there no skill builds, exactly? There's tons of skills but only a few can be mapped at any given time, and your runes and passive ability slots are also limited. There's plenty of builds where you can put together and find synergy between runes and passive skills.
If there is one pet peeve that always sets me off is telling the devs what to do with their "IP", I believe in doing what you want and having total freedom on your projects with your co-workers as well. I really don't see how a BG3 is getting to hurt the other games if it's going to be something different entirely.
Just seeing Mass Effect 3 and how people get turned off by the most petty bull**** I ever seen is the highest point of being jerks. I hate today's gamers I really do, everything is a petty *****fest nowadays in the gaming world.
I love this forum, you guys most of the time actually "get it". Probably one of the few places to actually have real debates and conversations.
Also a text relevant to the thread, I believe whatever is best for BG3 that the dev team feels because it is their project.
Now, I'm not saying we're all required to take the critical stance towards our chosen forms of entertainment, but by the same token we don't need to put our brains in jars either. Beamdog got a few things right when making BG:EE; they've also made a few missteps. A sense of caution is only natural at this stage.
As for people telling devs what to do with their IP... it's not like anyone can force a team to do something they don't want to do. But you can't underestimate the value of constructive feedback - look at how well "Shadowrun Returns" is being received, and that was a project that had constant back-and-forth between the devs and the players. Conversely, look at EA's utter failure with SimCity to see what happens when you stick cotton balls in your ears while your customers tell you they don't want the features you're adding to the game.
You also have the case of younger generations coming in that might want to experience this stuff once we all have moved on. So basically I don't want to see Faerun turn into another Greyhawk doomed to die out. Baldur's Gate is just a name of the original series, and it's not like it's going to be part of the other story, but if it's going to be then I hope they have the most kickass ideas ready to be used and this forum here will be the backbone of support.
Heck it doesn't have to be called Baldur's Gate 3, but just "Forgotten Realms-Insert Title here"
Of course I've seen dozens of reviews through the internet stating that it is the most awesome game ever, great, but in "real life" I don't know many people who actually played the game to the end, and again, I mean among people who actually like RPG games. But of course I can't judge by my circle of friends, well through the internet it is the same, I've played MMORPGs with people from many countries, not once Baldur's Gate was mentioned by party or guild members while discussing about games that we played before entering the MMO world.
I maybe wrong, I just don't think so, I don't have a giant sample to state that my experience is valid as real data about the game but it is big enough to think that it is unlikely that Baldur's Gate is that big hit the fans talk about. Probably you are just too much into the legend of BG to see the real truth, that it is not a big hit, it was just something rare when it came out and now it has nothing special. The most important thing in an RPG for me is the story, what is so great about Baldur's Gate story anyway? It is better than Diablo 3, of course, it can't be worse, but compared to other real RPGs, nothing special at all.
Oh yeah, sure, you probably think that you have to play the game to the end to judge it, I think precisely the opposite, the game have to make you play it to the end to be considered good, it is the least a game should do.
For instance, if all martial artists can perform the same movements with the same expertise, same options, variations and power, I can't state that they differ from one another, even if they take 2 or 3 days praticing the moves to perform them perfectly again, it is all there.
To make it clear I will explain what I mean by build: Limitation. Or perhaps even more specific: Limited point buy system.
The skill "builds" in Diablo 3 are actually defined by your equipment, so in the end, the only build system Diablo 3 has is the equipment build.
Besides, the younger generation can always be introduced to "Planescape Torment", "Baldur's Gate" and "Neverwinter Nights" - that's what GOG is for.
http://www.gamespot.com/baldurs-gate/platform/pc/
I'm willing to bet that the 6247 user ratings on Gog.com that averaged the game at being 5/5 stars is not all nostalgic people.
I don't even see how I'm "too much into the legend of BG to see the real truth." The success of Baldur's Gate led to the creation of...
Icewind Dale
Baldur's Gate 2
and their success led to Icewind Dale 2.
(I'm assuming Planescape Torment would have been well on its way by the time Baldur's Gate was released).
Baldur's Gate sold around 2 million copies and TOTSC sold around 500,000. By what measure is this not a hit? (particularly for a PC RPG)
http://web.archive.org/web/20080409131841/http://www.bioware.com/bioware_info/about/