Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

Axis & Allies 1942 Online is now available in Early Access! Buy it on Steam. The FAQ is available.
New Premium Module: Tyrants of the Moonsea! Read More
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

Keeping items at start in BG2:EE, like it was in BG1?

245

Comments

  • CamDawgCamDawg Member, Developer Posts: 3,394
    All of your items are available via the console and you can, indeed, kill Firkraag in a single shot as well.

  • GreenpaktoGreenpakto Member Posts: 80
    edited September 2013
    Quote:
    It's an analogy yes but not a great one, hence the straw man. Though only slightly. I'm asking for an import feature that allows me to import an already existing BG2ee char into BG2ee with items he gained in BG2ee not items from BGEE. This isn't cheating as I gained the items myself. If an ask for a button that simply kills firkraag in one shot, that's quite a bit different.
    ---

    This...

    ---
    CamDawg said:

    All of your items are available via the console and you can, indeed, kill Firkraag in a single shot as well.

    Why the trolling and all cheat references (clua)? This is a thread requesting a feature that allows us to carry over all our items when we replay our BG2:EE game, just as levels carry over. And just as it have always worked in BG and Icewind Dales series.
    Mentioning clua every single post isnt actually productive. It is NOT the same thing as importing your items, and it for sure doesnt feel FUN to have to open up a cheat-console every time you replay the game.

    Zanian
  • ElectricMonkElectricMonk Member Posts: 599

    Edvin said:



    Game+ MUST include new content or higher difficulty.
    That is definition Game+.

    Importing characters with crazy levels and even crazier gear to same game isnt game+.
    It's just a dishonorable scam.

    Actually it's not necessarily. The last of us game + was simply restarting after you finished with everything you ended the game with. Same with Bioshock.

    Actually you can reimport in BGEE from a final save and start with all the items you ended off with. Is this a dishonorable scam too? It's just a gameplay feature, in a single player game no less.
    jaysl659 said:

    @TheGreatKhan No, it's not a strawman, it's an argument from analogy. Not all comparisons are fallacies.

    As you said the Firkraag exploit makes one of the harder and more rewarding fights of the game nothing and is "simply cheating," well... having a bunch of overpowered items in your inventory at the beginning of BG2 in a way that isn't in any way justified by the story can easily be said to be a blatant exploit that literally makes one of the most rewarding parts of the game (the beginning, introduction of irenicus, struggle to gather wealth, etc.) nothing. So, to me, it is "simply cheating" as well, specifically if we're talking about importing from BG1 (which I know isn't the main request being made by the op).

    It's an analogy yes but not a great one, hence the straw man. Though only slightly. I'm asking for an import feature that allows me to import an already existing BG2ee char into BG2ee with items he gained in BG2ee not items from BGEE. This isn't cheating as I gained the items myself. If an ask for a button that simply kills firkraag in one shot, that's quite a bit different.

    I did say that the comparison applies "specifically if we're talking about importing from BG1 (which I know isn't the main request being made by the op)." So, anyway, you think that it's not a great analogy because you're able to justify one and not the other, to me these are all instances of the same type of thing (exploits, cheating, whatever you want to call it). Whether or not it's a straw man comes down to my opinion vs yours in this case, but I think it's pretty clear that it's not a poor analogy, especially given my qualifier about it specifically referring to importing from BG1.

    As for BG2 restarting specifically, your sweeping statement that starting with the items "isn't cheating as I gained the items myself" is just a case of what you are and aren't able to justify. No different in my mind than "well, I've beaten this game before and earned the ring of the ram and the staff of the woodlands, so I'm just gonna go ahead and console it in at the beginning of the game. It's not cheating because I gained the items myself in a previous playthrough." Meh, it's just a justification as far as I can tell, and it's all different levels of the same thing to my eyes, but I suppose we won't be agreeing on any of this.

    GodKaiserHellIthual
  • CamDawgCamDawg Member, Developer Posts: 3,394


    Why the trolling and all cheat references (clua)? This is a thread requesting a feature that allows us to carry over all our items when we replay our BG2:EE game, just as levels carry over. And just as it have always worked in BG and Icewind Dales series.
    Mentioning clua every single post isnt actually productive. It is NOT the same thing as importing your items, and it for sure doesnt feel FUN to have to open up a cheat-console every time you replay the game.

    This bug is fixed, and this will not be changing in the foreseeable future. I'm pointing out the built-in, developer-approved way around it.

    GodKaiserHellCrevsDaakelminster
  • GreenpaktoGreenpakto Member Posts: 80
    edited September 2013
    CamDawg said:


    Why the trolling and all cheat references (clua)? This is a thread requesting a feature that allows us to carry over all our items when we replay our BG2:EE game, just as levels carry over. And just as it have always worked in BG and Icewind Dales series.
    Mentioning clua every single post isnt actually productive. It is NOT the same thing as importing your items, and it for sure doesnt feel FUN to have to open up a cheat-console every time you replay the game.

    This bug is fixed, and this will not be changing in the foreseeable future. I'm pointing out the built-in, developer-approved way around it.
    You fixed a bug but deleted a well built feature in the process (thats a bad trade). You're clearly subjective about this, which is a shame as I believe a community needs to have a say in things, espacially when it comes to ADDING to a already perfect game.

  • kamuizinkamuizin Member Posts: 3,680

    CamDawg said:


    Why the trolling and all cheat references (clua)? This is a thread requesting a feature that allows us to carry over all our items when we replay our BG2:EE game, just as levels carry over. And just as it have always worked in BG and Icewind Dales series.
    Mentioning clua every single post isnt actually productive. It is NOT the same thing as importing your items, and it for sure doesnt feel FUN to have to open up a cheat-console every time you replay the game.

    This bug is fixed, and this will not be changing in the foreseeable future. I'm pointing out the built-in, developer-approved way around it.
    You fixed a bug but deleted a well built feature in the process (thats a bad trade). You're clearly subjective about this, which is a shame as I believe a community needs to have a say in things, espacially when it comes to ADDING to a already perfect game.
    That's not open to discussion i think @Greenpakto, when @CawDawg speak that i believe he made more an statement as a member of the devs than a comment as a forum user. We will have to work around this.

    @CawDawg, any intent of bring more BG items to BG2 through import registers, so we can find those items around the game? Pretty much as was done with the helm of balduran/cloak of balduran, chain mail+3/mail of the dead, bala's axe (this one i don't know if it's just a legend or not). I would appreciate if at least the unique named items from BG:EE, speciall the ones made for BG:EE to be imported into BG2:EE based on what was in the inventory of the imported character/party.

  • ZanathKariashiZanathKariashi Member Posts: 2,867
    If cloak of Balduran set MR instead of adding to it, it would be fine...but nothing with that much MR should ever add.

    (technically ALL of the items/class/racial features that currently add to a resistance, magic or otherwise, should set instead, unless there is a higher source in which case they do nothing).

    It's why resistance scrolls are supposed have 100% resistance for the duration, instead of +50% they do now.


    I view CLUAconsole as a mod, rather then an outright cheat, because you CANNOT access it without modifying a game file to activate it.

  • kamuizinkamuizin Member Posts: 3,680

    If cloak of Balduran set MR instead of adding to it, it would be fine...but nothing with that much MR should ever add.

    (technically ALL of the items/class/racial features that currently add to a resistance, magic or otherwise, should set instead, unless there is a higher source in which case they do nothing).

    It's why resistance scrolls are supposed have 100% resistance for the duration, instead of +50% they do now.


    I view CLUAconsole as a mod, rather then an outright cheat, because you CANNOT access it without modifying a game file to activate it.

    Just restrict it as an cloak of protection, so if you use cloak of balduran, no magic armor, ring or cloak of protection for you. To me that's balance enough for the item.

  • CamDawgCamDawg Member, Developer Posts: 3,394
    I'm going to quote myself from another thread:
    CamDawg said:

    The cloak is in BG2, but I can see why the decision to keep it unavailable was made.

    In BG magic was simple--your defenses were saves and magic resistance (and the occasional specific protection item like Helm of Charm Protection) and, if those failed, a dispel magic cures everything. MR also worked against beneficial spells so MR wasn't always a positive.

    In BG2 the complexity exploded. There were magical protections, and counters to those protections, and then more protections, and more counters. Dispel magic was no longer a universal cure (e.g. MGoI was no longer susceptible to it) but MR no longer blocked beneficial magic. In that context, +25% MR is a massive benefit.

    By comparison, the only place you see MR in BG2 are typically on the scale of +5% or +10%. A handful of very powerful artifacts exceed this--human flesh armor, Carsomyr, Purifier--but you can see how the cloak would rank in terms of BG2 power.

    JuliusBorisovelminster
  • ZanathKariashiZanathKariashi Member Posts: 2,867
    edited September 2013
    Technically ANYTHING blocking dispel magic is a bug. Not even racial immunity to spells of a particular level are supposed to stop it.

    Some spells can however potentially block it. MGoI, Spell Immunity: Abjuration, Spell-Trap, Shield of Archons, can absorb the spell to prevent it removing other spells, but dispel magic is supposed to get a chance to try and dispel them first. If it succeeds, they're removed and it moves on to attempt further dispels on other effects, if it fails, it's absorbed/blocked.

  • ElwingaElwinga Member Posts: 2
    The easy way to get items from BG:EE to BG2;EE.

    mport character, then install normal version of BGII, start game do the trick, save the game, copy saves to BG2:EE.. Good luck!

    Anyway im trying to find a way to copy items from bgII to bgI :) so i can run all again with imported character

  • kamuizinkamuizin Member Posts: 3,680
    Elwinga said:

    The easy way to get items from BG:EE to BG2;EE.

    mport character, then install normal version of BGII, start game do the trick, save the game, copy saves to BG2:EE.. Good luck!

    Anyway im trying to find a way to copy items from bgII to bgI :) so i can run all again with imported character

    Isn't easier just create the items through CLUAConsole or EE shadow keeper?

    Eudaemoniumelminster
  • animecrisisanimecrisis Member Posts: 12
    I'd like to add this was an INTENTIONAL FEATURE for veteran players... the proof is in the easter egg with the Golden, Silver, and Bronze Platoons. In BG2, ToB you can turn them in for a statue that makes you a golem and a "bazooka". I feel that Beamdog did an injustice by taking out this feature. I've been playing this game since it was made and I also enjoy the mods that have been produced... so its an error on their part.

  • animecrisisanimecrisis Member Posts: 12
    Just to note the Golden Platoons can only be acquired in the Friendly Arm Inn in BG1 while the Silver and Bronze are obtained in BG2:SoA.

  • elminsterelminster Member, Developer Posts: 15,956

    I'd like to add this was an INTENTIONAL FEATURE for veteran players... the proof is in the easter egg with the Golden, Silver, and Bronze Platoons. In BG2, ToB you can turn them in for a statue that makes you a golem and a "bazooka". I feel that Beamdog did an injustice by taking out this feature. I've been playing this game since it was made and I also enjoy the mods that have been produced... so its an error on their part.

    I don't really see how that was proof that the original developers intended for you to get all your items at the start of BG2. If anything the fact that the game removes them (if you don't use the exploit) and the fact that import01.2da, import02.2da (which doesn't work) and import03.2da exist (they are files that spell out which armor and items carry over) suggest that bioware had very specific ideas in terms of what they wanted to be carried over into BG2.

    Just to note the Golden Platoons can only be acquired in the Friendly Arm Inn in BG1 while the Silver and Bronze are obtained in BG2:SoA.

    Golden Pantaloons are obtainable in BG1, Silver Pantaloons are obtainable in SoA, Bronze Pantalettes are obtainable in ToB.

    JuliusBorisov
  • AendaeronBluescaleAendaeronBluescale Member Posts: 335
    edited May 2014
    In NWN:HotU at the start you'll also lose all your items but will get them all back in a chest [Spoiler]in the 3rd level of the Undermountain, north area[/Spoiler] which contains all your equipment you imported on your character, even toolsetted items. Why not something similar in Chateau Irenicus?

  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 19,171
    @AendaeronBluescale‌

    Well, I'm against it because many of BG1 items are actually shattered through BG2 locations so that you'll be able to find them eventually. The major absentees are only a few, e.g. the Cloak of Balduran and the Spider's Bane. Now we even have the Dagger of Venom in BG2:EE.

    There're MUCH more powerful items in BG2 and many of them can be found/bought right after the Irenicus dungeon. Nearly all these items are actually more useful than any item in BG1. Moreover, the BG1 items seem to become redundant when facing enemies in BG2.

    I think that items in BG2 in general are more diversified than they are in BG1, so I tend to forget about BG1 items as soon as I get out of the Chateau.

    And in terms of the Chateau itself, I find it a good game feature that you lose your items - it completely correlates with the plot and gives immersion so that your party should quickly regain its power after the capture.

    typo_tillyelminster
  • CamDawgCamDawg Member, Developer Posts: 3,394
    The thread is alive!

    I'd like to add this was an INTENTIONAL FEATURE for veteran players... the proof is in the easter egg with the Golden, Silver, and Bronze Platoons. In BG2, ToB you can turn them in for a statue that makes you a golem and a "bazooka". I feel that Beamdog did an injustice by taking out this feature. I've been playing this game since it was made and I also enjoy the mods that have been produced... so its an error on their part.

    The original devs had a special exception to detect and import the golden pantaloons before nuking your equipment, and EE doesn't change this. In fact, the sloppy pantaloon check was one of the reasons why this exploit existed to begin with.
    bengoshi said:

    @AendaeronBluescale‌

    Well, I'm against it because many of BG1 items are actually shattered through BG2 locations so that you'll be able to find them eventually. The major absentees are only a few, e.g. the Cloak of Balduran and the Spider's Bane. Now we even have the Dagger of Venom in BG2:EE.

    Just from a pragmatic view, this is exceptionally problematic. We could, in theory, account for known uniques imported via this fashion and sub them where they normally occur--e.g. if you brought in Ashideena, you'd have to remove/replace Ashideena in its normal location in the dungeon below the Temple District. This is difficult, but doable, but this becomes exponentially more difficult when you allow everything instead of the smaller subset on the import lists (and still doesn't solve, say, the OP nature of Balduran's Cloak).

    From a gameplay standpoint, the game expects you to come out of the dungeon more or less naked--a fully equipped party could conceivably resist Irenicus or the CWs in the escape cutscene, and being fully geared means you could probably just sell your loot and go straight to Spellhold instead of exploring the city and getting your stronghold.

    There's also the problem of whether this is a rational Irenicus action. While Irenicus would keep some items for himself--scrolls, some potions, etc.--the rest would likely be sold to fund Bohdi's ongoing war with the Shadow Thieves.

    elminstertypo_tilly
  • animecrisisanimecrisis Member Posts: 12
    edited May 2014
    As a DM who's used to the "tactic" to remove players equipment they collected I can tell you it pisses them off. As far as not "liking" the idea of importing your starting equipment I say is retarded. Saying that you could "resist" Irenicus is down right stupid, hes an Elven High Mage!!! If you know anything about DnD you would realize they can raise Mythallars and had access to High Magic! You even play pencil and paper DnD? The only way you can even defeat him is because he is using most of his power to try to steal the Elven Tree of Life's power and become a god himself, he would pretty much become the equivalent of Selderine, the Elven Gods, after, in the preceding fight you manage to defeat him because your in Bhaal's realm.

  • animecrisisanimecrisis Member Posts: 12
    I'd also like to add that there are very few +3 items in BG, and that is only if you have Tales of the Sword Coast which adds +3 items. As a veteran player this was a feature I enjoyed and when Beamdog removed it they pissed me off. If you don't like it that's fine, but I would like to see it added back.

  • AendaeronBluescaleAendaeronBluescale Member Posts: 335
    edited May 2014
    I've manipulated the script file. Put it in your override. It will keep CHARNAME's gear, gold and inventory. (And in case of Multiplayer, the stuff of other players, too).
    Can't vouch for BG1(:EE) item compatibility though.
    Tested with importing a BG2:EE-ToB test character.

    This kind of mod is the best option. Install the mod to keep your gear, don't install it to lose it.
    EDIT: I've removed the file because I've left over 2 or 3 takeItems instructions. I'll make a thread in the mod section.
    EDIT2: Fixed version here

    ErgelminsterGreenpakto
  • Demonoid_LimewireDemonoid_Limewire Member Posts: 424
    edited May 2014
    You can always start a multiplayer game with new character on 2, save game just after imoen prison breaks you, then proceed to load game and import your BG1EE characters. I bet my coin that their items will be kept (if characters are imported on a saved game AFTER imoen releases you).

  • DullSkullTheSecondDullSkullTheSecond Member Posts: 243
    CamDawg said:

    As a DM who's used to the "tactic" to remove players equipment they collected I can tell you it pisses them off. As far as not "liking" the idea of importing your starting equipment I say is retarded. Saying that you could "resist" Irenicus is down right stupid, hes an Elven High Mage!!! If you know anything about DnD you would realize they can raise Mythallars and had access to High Magic! You even play pencil and paper DnD? The only way you can even defeat him is because he is using most of his power to try to steal the Elven Tree of Life's power and become a god himself, he would pretty much become the equivalent of Selderine, the Elven Gods, after, in the preceding fight you manage to defeat him because your in Bhaal's realm.

    I just want to quote this so that it can never be edited away.

    Carry on.
    Why?

    Also I would be all okay with the fact that I lose all my equipment if the unique items like the cloak could later be found hidden in the game but only if they are imported like the pantaloons. Would be very fun to be surprised by finding your cloak of balduran in Aran Linvails drawer!

  • TvrtkoSvrdlarTvrtkoSvrdlar Member Posts: 353
    edited July 2014
    I don't give a rat's ass about this 'feature' either way since I mod my BG games to suit my own particular tastes, but I think it's hilarious how the devs removed a function so many people liked, just because it didn't mesh with their preconceived notion of what the game should be like. Bugfixing is all fine and dandy, but there's absolutely no reason to remove exploits which the wider community loves and has grown accustomed to, especially when said exploits affect only game balance (which is so hilariously unbalanced and meta-influenced in the first place).

    Those that want the cheat must now mess around with Shadow Keeper, while those that don't (or have no idea it existed in the first place, ie. all the new players purchasing the EE) wouldn't use it anyway. So you're basically pissing off one segment of the player base while doing absolutely nothing for the other, especially since this exploit wasn't game-breaking in any way save balance-wise, which, by itself, is friggin' irrelevant because the game is a *single-player* experience, and anyone even remotely mod-savvy will go ahead and cheat anyway if they want to. In thousands of different ways. All the time. Because it's doable. And easy.

    You know what else would've been piss-easy? Scattering the imported items around Chateau Irenicus. And again, people who wanted to use the 'exploit' would pick up their gear, and those who didn't, wouldn't. Win-win for everyone. It's not like such an approach would take a bunch of time to institute. And I've no idea why it wasn't implemented. Well, I do, but it doesn't speak well of the development team...

    It basically all boils down to the devs enforcing their own subjective tastes.

    And this, my friends, is why I absolutely detest post-2012. Blizzard.

    The company whose devs epitomize the 'my way or the highway' mentality.

    Beamdog, don't turn into post-2012 Blizz. Just... don't. Please?

    I still happen to like you, and I want it to stay that way! :)

    @CamDawg‌
    Personally, and from a purely objective standpoint, I appreciate the work you've done in the past on the game, and keep doing. But being a developer is more than just doing game design/tweaking - it's about listening to feedback, and making sure your customers are pleased. It's also about treating your customers with respect, instead of showering them with vitriolic replies which belittle them. The company you work for depends on these people's money.

    And, reading your condescending replies, it seems you've a lot of maturing left to do.

    In situations where you can please the fans without violating game stability/vision in gross ways, you absolutely *should* make concessions to the player base, even if you don't agree with their requests or views. That's the first rule of business. The customer is always right, remember? So, does this particular exploit harm the game? Does it impact stability? Does it make the product deviate from its previous form? No. No. No.

    So why the hell haven't you (or Beamdog in general) caved in and put the exploit back in?

    It costs you nothing. It doesn't wreck the game. It doesn't mess anything up, except balance (which is non-existent in a single-player game anyway). From the fervor with which you defend your (collective?) decision, one would think you and your fellow devs were fine-tuning Dota 2 for the International (which, btw, has a prize pool of $10M this year, hence the constant patches and fiddling). Instead, you're here debating (and mocking) a portion of the player base over a stupidly trivial 'exploit' which would add enjoyment to the games of a very large number of people and do so without it in any way whatsoever affecting those who don't feel like abusing the exploit (since they either don't know about it, or won't use it).

    You're acting like the Blizz devs when they decided Diablo 3 needed 'balance'.

    LOL to that, my friend. Ask Jay Wilson how it worked out for him.

    Here, your attitude summed up in a single pic:

    Post edited by TvrtkoSvrdlar on
    Erg
  • elminsterelminster Member, Developer Posts: 15,956

    I don't give a rat's ass about this 'feature' either way since I mod my BG games to suit my own particular tastes, but I think it's hilarious how the devs removed a function so many people liked, just because it didn't mesh with their preconceived notion of what the game should be like. Bugfixing is all fine and dandy, but there's absolutely no reason to remove exploits which the wider community loves and has grown accustomed to, especially when said exploits affect only game balance (which is so hilariously unbalanced and meta-influenced in the first place).

    Those that want the cheat must now mess around with Shadow Keeper, while those that don't (or have no idea it existed in the first place, ie. all the new players purchasing the EE) wouldn't use it anyway. So you're basically pissing off one segment of the player base while doing absolutely nothing for the other, especially since this exploit wasn't game-breaking in any way save balance-wise, which, by itself, is friggin' irrelevant because the game is a *single-player* experience, and anyone even remotely mod-savvy will go ahead and cheat anyway if they want to. In thousands of different ways. All the time. Because it's doable. And easy.

    You know what else would've been piss-easy? Scattering the imported items around Chateau Irenicus. And again, people who wanted to use the 'exploit' would pick up their gear, and those who didn't, wouldn't. Win-win for everyone. It's not like such an approach would take a bunch of time to institute. And I've no idea why it wasn't implemented. Well, I do, but it doesn't speak well of the development team...

    It basically all boils down to the devs enforcing their own subjective tastes.

    And this, my friends, is why I absolutely detest post-2012. Blizzard.

    The company whose devs epitomize the 'my way or the highway' mentality.

    Beamdog, don't turn into post-2012 Blizz. Just... don't. Please?

    I still happen to like you, and I want it to stay that way! :)

    @CamDawg‌
    Personally, and from a purely objective standpoint, I appreciate the work you've done in the past on the game, and keep doing. But being a developer is more than just doing game design/tweaking - it's about listening to feedback, and making sure your customers are pleased. It's also about treating your customers with respect, instead of showering them with vitriolic replies which belittle them. The company you work for depends on these people's money.

    And, reading your condescending replies, it seems you've a lot of maturing left to do.

    In situations where you can please the fans without violating game stability/vision in gross ways, you absolutely *should* make concessions to the player base, even if you don't agree with their requests or views. That's the first rule of business. The customer is always right, remember? So, does this particular exploit harm the game? Does it impact stability? Does it make the product deviate from its previous form? No. No. No.

    So why the hell haven't you (or Beamdog in general) caved in and put the exploit back in?

    It costs you nothing. It doesn't wreck the game. It doesn't mess anything up, except balance (which is non-existent in a single-player game anyway). From the fervor with which you defend your (collective?) decision, one would think you and your fellow devs were fine-tuning Dota 2 for the International (which, btw, has a prize pool of $10M this year, hence the constant patches and fiddling). Instead, you're here debating (and mocking) a portion of the player base over a stupidly trivial 'exploit' which would add enjoyment to the games of a very large number of people and do so without it in any way whatsoever affecting those who don't feel like abusing the exploit (since they either don't know about it, or won't use it).

    You're acting like the Blizz devs when they decided Diablo 3 needed 'balance'.

    LOL to that, my friend. Ask Jay Wilson how it worked out for him.

    Here, your attitude summed up in a single pic:

    Wow that was a rude post.

    MetallomanAstroBryGuyCrevsDaak
  • mlnevesemlnevese Member, Moderator Posts: 9,555
    Closing this thread now. This is not going to be implemented.

  • CamDawgCamDawg Member, Developer Posts: 3,394
    edited July 2014

    Also I would be all okay with the fact that I lose all my equipment if the unique items like the cloak could later be found hidden in the game but only if they are imported like the pantaloons. Would be very fun to be surprised by finding your cloak of balduran in Aran Linvails drawer!

    Again, the cloak presents severe balance problems--there's a reason it was omitted from the game originally, and it would require fundamental changes.

    Those that want the cheat must now mess around with Shadow Keeper,

    The console is faster, or @Demonoid_Limewire‌'s suggestion, or @AendaeronBluescale's script.

    You know what else would've been piss-easy? Scattering the imported items around Chateau Irenicus. And again, people who wanted to use the 'exploit' would pick up their gear, and those who didn't, wouldn't. Win-win for everyone. It's not like such an approach would take a bunch of time to institute. And I've no idea why it wasn't implemented. Well, I do, but it doesn't speak well of the development team...

    As someone who has coded up the import02 restoration and gotten it through QA: no, piss-easy is not an accurate description, and that was for a list of twelve items. More to the point, your solution breaks immersion pretty badly, which is a more important consideration.


    And, reading your condescending replies, it seems you've a lot of maturing left to do.

    Fair enough. I'm definitely used to G3, where people presenting arguments with a high ratio of vitriol:merit generally don't get the let's-all-hold-hands protection that people get here, and they learn quickly to stop advancing points on emotion. At times I come across as abrasive and dickish, and I apologize.

    There are reasons why the exploit was closed--immersion, gameplay, player feedback--and very few arguments have been advanced on the other side that don't boil down to 'I liked it' or 'man that's inconvenient'. Whenever a rational argument is presented why the old exploit makes sense we'll be happy to consider it. If you've ever wandered into the abyss of the Fixpack forums you'll see many examples of give and take, and I'd like to think I have a record of being able to listen and, yes, change my mind.

    That being said, most of the arguments here come down to the belief there's a very passionate group of players who would really like us to leave convenient exploits available. I'm sorry, but there's nothing we've seen that supports that assertion, and what little we do have in the way of direct evidence also falls in line with this. Despite half falling into the 'don't care' morass, it's currently about 7:1 supporting the abolition of exploits amongst the rest.

    And there's been no attempt to even address the gameplay or immersion problems inherent in restoring the exploit, which are also important factors.

    edit: Dammit, I didn't realize @mlnevese was going to close the thread while I was posting--sorry @TvrtkoSvrdlar, I would still be interested in discussing this, and I certainly don't want to end the conversation here.

    elminsterCrevsDaakScooter
Sign In or Register to comment.