As much as I would love to see that I am afraid it will just ruin game difficulty balance. I hate when I have to choose who should be replaced. Nevertheless with party of 7 or 8 everything will become too easy and XP will be earned muuuch slower. And it's hard to fix. Breaking things to introduce something new is usually bad idea.
Have you read this topic before or you just trolling? Nobody will force you to play with party of X members. RPGs aren't about balance - you can play solo - try it and it is totally unbalanced... What people want in this topic is a option which allow to play a big team. It may be (or even should be) somewhere in the options (and enabling it show spam you with warnings about are you concious what are you doing by enabling it) default disabled.
Everybody in this topic, who want play big party knowns that game with this feature could be imbalanced and unstable. And we accept that.
BTW Playing solo is unbalanced, but also you can unbalance your game in the other way without any changes in the game. Try to play triple class protagonist, Coran, Yeslick, Quayle, Jaheira and Tiax. So maybe this kind of party should be banned, because you can spoil your game?
------------------------
Question to the Overhaul Games team - are you considering more than 6 characters team in patch or DLC?
Wanted to chime in here and say I've so far held out of buying the EE, but I can guarantee if you raised the number of party members to 7/8/9, even optionally, you'd get my money in a heartbeart.
I'm amazed that people are still talking in this particular thread, but also a bit happy because it's something I would like also
But more to the point, just lol @nrq in all honesty, it amuses me that people would just put their two cents in without reading a thread and act like they're the only one that thought up that particular argument. What's even weirder, is the fact that you said it would break game balance yet people would level much slower (what?) these arguments have all been said in this seven paged thread, and honestly, to further argue this point, I think it would be much appreciated by both sides if people brought in better and fresher reasons for or against.
The only real reason against is that it is near impossible (no one has said that it truly IS impossible) to impliment and it might become too hard for the one feature, so no point in trying. My argument against that would be... well... then if the game is fundamentally the same as BGT or Tutu, then why buy BG:EE? Now, i DID buy BG:EE but I'm just trying to help move the conversation along, and haven't posted in here in months, and this particular thread is one of my favorites on this forum.
Sorry for writing an essay... I hope at least 20 percent of you might read... lol
I assumed that why there are "agree" and "like" buttons, @Bhaaldog. But it's also probably true that a thread with 34 pages of replies gets more attention than a single page thread with 200 "agrees" on the first post.
One of the other games that I've been following recently is X-Com: Enemy Unknown. There's an example of a completely new game based on some old ideas, and it sold very well. However, the DLC released last year (Slingshot) got quite poor reviews. Players who were still enjoying the game expected something new that would affect the entire game: New weapons, alien types, aircraft, building facilities, and so on. What they got was a handful of cosmetic options and three stand-alone missions increasing the length of a full game by (at most) a couple of hours.
The message is therefore the same: Please give us NEW features, innovations and content that existing modders (and there are lots of them) can't deliver. Then we'll hand over our money in spadefuls.
I'm amazed that people are still talking in this particular thread, but also a bit happy because it's something I would like also
Indeed, it would be a nice to have option. the key word is option. All those saying no because they don't like it or think it will upset the balance don't seem to understand what "optional" means. It means they don't have to play with that option on. Just as they don't have to play on "insane" or "easy" but instead can stick to the more "balanced" "core", they don't have to play with a limit of 7 or 8 or whatever, but stick with the current limit of 6.
The only legitimate arguement against this option is the fact the changing it from hardcoded to softcoded may be too much effort/cost for what is merely a "nice to have" option.
If it is soft-coded, 8 party members would be fun to have. Personally I always use certain characters in a play through, and therefore I always miss out on sidequests for characters, like for example Eldoth/Skie. I can never justify abandoning a party member for them.
Really one of the bigger issues is the fact that when you remove a BG party member they disappear from the world at times. So even temporarily abandoning a character to do other npc questlines isn't feasible.
I would opt for a 7 or 8 th slot, just to take around characters that I may not keep long term, and can swap them in and out as I see fit, without dismantling my main group.
I don't use any of the new BGEE characters... I ain't giving up one of my favs for one of them. With an extra slot or 2 I would try them out more in-depth.
Comments
I hate when I have to choose who should be replaced.
Nevertheless with party of 7 or 8 everything will become too easy and XP will be earned muuuch slower. And it's hard to fix. Breaking things to introduce something new is usually bad idea.
Everybody in this topic, who want play big party knowns that game with this feature could be imbalanced and unstable. And we accept that.
BTW Playing solo is unbalanced, but also you can unbalance your game in the other way without any changes in the game. Try to play triple class protagonist, Coran, Yeslick, Quayle, Jaheira and Tiax. So maybe this kind of party should be banned, because you can spoil your game?
------------------------
Question to the Overhaul Games team - are you considering more than 6 characters team in patch or DLC?
But more to the point, just lol @nrq in all honesty, it amuses me that people would just put their two cents in without reading a thread and act like they're the only one that thought up that particular argument. What's even weirder, is the fact that you said it would break game balance yet people would level much slower (what?) these arguments have all been said in this seven paged thread, and honestly, to further argue this point, I think it would be much appreciated by both sides if people brought in better and fresher reasons for or against.
The only real reason against is that it is near impossible (no one has said that it truly IS impossible) to impliment and it might become too hard for the one feature, so no point in trying. My argument against that would be... well... then if the game is fundamentally the same as BGT or Tutu, then why buy BG:EE? Now, i DID buy BG:EE but I'm just trying to help move the conversation along, and haven't posted in here in months, and this particular thread is one of my favorites on this forum.
Sorry for writing an essay... I hope at least 20 percent of you might read... lol
One of the other games that I've been following recently is X-Com: Enemy Unknown. There's an example of a completely new game based on some old ideas, and it sold very well. However, the DLC released last year (Slingshot) got quite poor reviews. Players who were still enjoying the game expected something new that would affect the entire game: New weapons, alien types, aircraft, building facilities, and so on. What they got was a handful of cosmetic options and three stand-alone missions increasing the length of a full game by (at most) a couple of hours.
The message is therefore the same: Please give us NEW features, innovations and content that existing modders (and there are lots of them) can't deliver. Then we'll hand over our money in spadefuls.
L.
The only legitimate arguement against this option is the fact the changing it from hardcoded to softcoded may be too much effort/cost for what is merely a "nice to have" option.
Really one of the bigger issues is the fact that when you remove a BG party member they disappear from the world at times. So even temporarily abandoning a character to do other npc questlines isn't feasible.
I would opt for a 7 or 8 th slot, just to take around characters that I may not keep long term, and can swap them in and out as I see fit, without dismantling my main group.
I don't use any of the new BGEE characters... I ain't giving up one of my favs for one of them. With an extra slot or 2 I would try them out more in-depth.