That's a very interesting question. I personally think that it's impossible to 100% not metagame, however after so many playthroughs and mods used I started some time ago playing in a quite interesting manner, which works for me: - revisiting vanilla version of the game (no TotSC or ToB). This one was a huge shock on how the game was back then. After that adding the mission pack. - no prebuffing, ever. Only buff when the combat begin, the basilisk area being a little exception, but I always try to use the help from Korax before drinking a potion or casting a spell. - using spells in an order. Now that's where the fun begins, when the battle starts I cast the first spell from spellbook (yes, 1 level first), if that spell is useless in this fight (like remove curse), use the next spell. Of course sometimes you have to try whether the spell is useful, in most cases the enemy resistances are unknown. - memorising spells in an order in a spellbook. Another fun one, because it forces the use of some rarely used spells, and proving that most of them can be really useful. Oh, and no multiple memorising of the same spell (the exeception being if there are more slots than spells, then memorise from the beginning etc.) - no reloading when wirting a spell in a spellbook. - using spellscrolls (if the spell is already written, or cannot be written) before memorised spells. With this one I stopped hoarding, and became a user. - using potions anytime they are useful/needed. This one ties perfectly with the ordered spell casting, as you can use potions instead of protection spell, and as they are limited in the game, it creates quite unique experience/forces using different strategies. - buying only healing potions - with some exceptions. Of course some items are essential for some characters, like shadow armor for thieves, but even then I buy those at later stages (5 chapter for example).I had one playthrough where I didn't buy any ammo for anyone, I used the ammo I found. Even though there are plenty of arrows to be found, the crossbow for example became a weapon I used carefully not to waste the bolts. - no min-maxing. Hacking through the enemies became really boring for me. I prefer the max stat to be 17-16, and that the charater has at least one weakness (low dex or con for a fighter etc.). The PC becomes a mortal and not a killing machine with sharp reflexes, extreme knowledge and education. - using unusual party. Use characters you've never had in your party, or unused compositions. The screenshot is from my playthrough I've done some time ago, and yes I have Garrick in my party. - resting only when party is fatigued.
Those points seem like a ridiculous challenge playthrough, but I have tons of fun playing this way. I would recommend this (or some of those points) for anyone trying to see the game differently with much less metagaming. I may even add to this 'Let the Fates Decide' in my next playthrough, which seems like a fun idea.
I love how this thread has become a repetitive litany of how various people *justify* metagaming, rather than giving advice for how not to do it. I guess the question has been answered: you don't not metagame.
At risk of being redundant, I'll repeat my plug for Item Randomizer. It's only one step in the direction of fun replayability, but it's a very, very good one.
However slight, there is always some, it's true. But through a sincere effort to roleplay every party member as thoroughly as possible (i.e., by putting your self in their shoes and imagining their knowledge and experience) it is possible to radically reduce metagaming to such a negligible level that it is virtually nil.
Ultimately I think its silly to worry about it too much. Your character knows far more about the actual details of their professions than we mere gamers possibly can. So we compensate by knowing how to play the GAME of it.
So my Paladin does what he does, while I do what I do...
Thats kind of what games like this are until something can wipe our memory away temporarily for a session or something.
But seriously. Besides that, D&D is supposed to be.. hum.. "dangerous". If you don't metagame, the risk of death is much greater. I think there's a joy in any dangerous games to know it well and to know how to pass through it smoothly, so thats why we metagame and all that.
But thats not the question. The only real way not to metagame is for games to be more random -> and you know what, a randomly generated BG-like game could be pretty darn amazing, but hey. Even then, you'll metagame to some degree.
Sure, you can "force" yourself not to metagame but does that really work, and does that really make sense? Thats generally seen as "roleplaying" your character as well. I've never really attempted this. I mean, I don't know how I could, in a game like this. Not knowing what happens in a lot of cases just means I die horribly and have to start again.
Even in self proclaimed challenges, some of it can be seen as metagaming. I don't think the question has that much meaning, but no, I don't think you can -not- metagame.
Ultimately I think its silly to worry about it too much. Your character knows far more about the actual details of their professions than we mere gamers possibly can. So we compensate by knowing how to play the GAME of it.
So my Paladin does what he does, while I do what I do...
I totally agree, most of the time our characters are more intelligent than us and know exactly what to do.
Our 18 or 19 Intelligence Mage is a lot better at planning his actions and at strategy than us, so we need to metagame to compensate.
I was just trying to avoid metagaming by walking right into stuff, like Silke. No positioning around her (how would I know she was going to attack?), no prebuffing.
So, she promptly killed my charname. It might have had to do with my fumbling with the pause control, but I don't know.
The second try, I did a bit of positioning, and we got her. There might have been a lucky hit interrupting her invisibility spell, though - I don't know.
The way to know you're not using metagame knowledge is to walk right into stuff that your characters would have no way of knowing about. But, that's going to leave a lot up to dice rolls. Even with my predetermined strategies, such as, "See a hostile mage, cleric casts Remove Fear", things can go south really fast with a few unlucky dicerolls (e.g. archer rolls a 1, misses, caster gets uninterrupted Horror or Hold Person).
Basically, not metagaming means lots of reloads, just like the first time we played the game. No or minimal reloading kind of *requires* metagaming, especially no reload. It's actually very easy to not metagame if you don't care how many times you have to reload.
Don't cast any buffs outside of combat, and don't do anything your characters couldn't possibly know to do beforehand. Just blunder into everything like you did the first time you played.
(Don't read this if you haven't done Rasaad's BG2 quest before)
[spoiler] How do you kill Alorgoth? He seems invincible. I get him Near Death, then he's invincible. Oh, and also, I can't seem to exit the Plane of Shadow after I've used the Wheel of Obliteration to open the portal. Why is that?
One more comment to add: I just made multiple attempts to defeat Aec without metagaming and imho it really isn't feasible, at least with my four member party. So if you're going to do that fight you do sort of have to understand what is going on. It seems doubtful to me that if the thing was really happening that anyone could grasp the mechanics during the chaos of that fight. (Sorry if this observation has already been made in this thread for this particular opponent.)
Edit: Someone with really high lore who is well versed about demons might tell the party to flee at the sight of Aec ("Fly, you fools!" ;-)) and the same well informed person would advise the following
Have the party members each use potions of mirrored eyes available in the store, in order to avoid Aec's death gaze.
Unless you're roleplaying a low wisdom character, walking around without buffs is a little strange. It's like a hunter walking with an empty gun, and only loading it when the lion is charging...
A real warrior or soldier doesn't take their armour off... so why should a wizard stop buffing.
To an extent, metagaming is part of the game. Like Dark Souls, Baldur's Gate eases you in with some initial, relatively easy fights but then eagerly ramps up the difficulty once you stray off the main roads. Failure, death, and reloading was a completely intentional mechanic added to the game.
It is understood IMO is certain encounters exist exclusively to reward caution, most notably the Amazing Amazon Ambush. That is one hell of a wakeup call if you didnt rest before stumbling onto them.
The game hugely rewards parties that scout (except the bloody jerks in bloody Firewine. Shoulda called it JERKwine!) and are prepared.
After the bandits, any non mentally disabled PC will have figured out that when you're not in town its dangerous. And several enemies use false neutrality to sneak up on you. Nobody would be trusting so easily after Tarnesh nukes Imoen with MM! Other stuff, if you cant think of a reason to do something, you should consider carefully why your PC would behave differently.
I think its perfectly reasonable to use buffs in a variety of circumstances, especially long lasting, whole party things. Like if you have a Cavalier in the party, its kind of daft to go anywhere without a Protection from Fear going (and for the record, in PNP its a continuous effect that doesn't have to be cast anyway. A party with a Cavalier is immune to fear, period). A mage/druid should never go anywhere without stoneskin/steelskin once they're high enough level to cast it. Contingency, Chain Contingency, spell sequencers etc should just ALWAYS be armed and loaded. Whether you prefer an offensive or defensive response, USE THEM! There's so many other protections that are of long duration that should be routinely used. And potions last quite a while, use them whenever you're entering a high risk area, like a deep dungeon level or approaching an obvious lair. And the shorter term, one battle only type spells? Well, there's often plenty of external clues you're about to get into serious trouble (gee we know were Irenicus has to be, let's get ready for him!)
Unless you actually mean to be role playing a moron, make the best use of your team's abilities and resources!
I think its perfectly reasonable to use buffs in a variety of circumstances, especially long lasting, whole party things. Like if you have a Cavalier in the party, its kind of daft to go anywhere without a Protection from Fear going (and for the record, in PNP its a continuous effect that doesn't have to be cast anyway. A party with a Cavalier is immune to fear, period). A mage/druid should never go anywhere without stoneskin/steelskin once they're high enough level to cast it. Contingency, Chain Contingency, spell sequencers etc should just ALWAYS be armed and loaded. Whether you prefer an offensive or defensive response, USE THEM! There's so many other protections that are of long duration that should be routinely used. And potions last quite a while, use them whenever you're entering a high risk area, like a deep dungeon level or approaching an obvious lair. And the shorter term, one battle only type spells? Well, there's often plenty of external clues you're about to get into serious trouble (gee we know were Irenicus has to be, let's get ready for him!)
Unless you actually mean to be role playing a moron, make the best use of your team's abilities and resources!
Especially in this story where there's a bounty on your head and bounty hunters, hired assassins, and highwaymen routinely lay in wait for you! Even if not for that, Volo describes the region as filled with roaming monsters and brigands (in Volo's Guide to the Sword Coast).
Stoneskin is good for several days in PNP. I pretty much always have my best warrior protected by Chaotic Commands. I guess I don't meta game in the sense I'm too lazy to change my spells memorized just for one specific battle. But I feel no qualms about using "Protection from Undead" when I'm entering a Vampire's lair...
I forget. Too many blows to the head do that to you.
However, metagaming does have its appeals for RPing too. My current character is a descendant of Balduran looking to reacquire all of his families lost artifacts. He has studied them, read up on them in Candlekeep, dreamed of wielding the sword of Balduran and practiced with Hull to become proficient in long swords. Is it metagaming that I know they exist? Or is it just crafty roleplaying because if I was playing the game for the first time, I wouldn't have been able to enjoy this character.
There's actually a really good point here. Although the story indicates that you have lived your entire life in Candlekeep, surely you must have SOME local knowledge, a fact that the game doesn't allow for. You live in a cloister for years with people coming and going, you would have heard that Beregost is about a day's walk south and that Nashkal is a bit further south than that. Certainly Baldur's Gate itself is probably the local mecca and I am sure that you would have stories about that floating around the Keep.
Beyond that, you are living in the local 'Library' repository of all knowledge and wisdom. If your Charname is literate in the slightest, there is any amount of 'Meta-knowledge' that he or she might have that can ONLY be represented by Meta-gaming. Such as having heard stories of 'Famous' long swords and therefore wanting to specialize in them "Just in case".
@subtledoctor I'm drunk, so I'm probably missing something here... but I thought the "long rationalizations" were helping the OP out... it's pretty much what he asked for in his original post.
You just can't avoid it... the item randomizer wont fix the problem, but it's a nice start. You have to try to make sense of it from a RP perspective, because the only people that care about metagaming are... roleplayers.
@subtledoctor, I'm not sure this is about being defensive. I think it's rather about delineating what should be considered metagaming and what shouldn't, which seems to me an interesting aspect of the current discussion. Some people argued that their use of long lasting spellbuffs makes perfect sense from the perpective of a reasonably intelligent and cautious charname, and I agree with them: I don't consider using Stoneskin metagaming. On the contrary, not using it is IMO sloppy roleplaying for Mages, who are supposed to be fairly to very intelligent.
I feel I might be kicking in an open door with what I'm about to say, but it's recommendable to define your character's personality in very clear terms and stay true to it whilst playing. Same with alignment and your INT/WIS stats. This means for example that some NPCs must be killed and others must be spared, that certain good loot must be ignored, etc. Any behavior that goes against personality/alignment should be rare, and somehow justifiable. High INT/WIS/lore and an observant and cautious personality make that certain behavior can be considered proper roleplaying rather than metagaming.
To avoid metagaming is to ignore knowledge about items' location (remedied to a considerable extent by Item Randomizer) and about enemies' location and behavior.
In my recent game I took on Silke after the Mines, at level 3 or 4. I was playing with SCS, as well as a mod to allow mages a chance to avoid spell disruption even if hit while casting. I had zero pre-buffs and no metagame knowledge, since I had never played SCS Silke before. It was... very hard. But I did beat her.
But that is metagaming, nothing else. Of course, you didn't know what exactly she would do, but still you knew Silke is hard for low level characters and, knowing what SCS does, assumed she would be even harder now, so you consciously delayed the fight. So I'm sorry to say that, but that was applied meta-game-knowledge at it's purest.
In my recent game I took on Silke after the Mines, at level 3 or 4. I was playing with SCS, as well as a mod to allow mages a chance to avoid spell disruption even if hit while casting. I had zero pre-buffs and no metagame knowledge, since I had never played SCS Silke before. It was... very hard. But I did beat her.
But that is metagaming, nothing else. Of course, you didn't know what exactly she would do, but still you knew Silke is hard for low level characters and, knowing what SCS does, assumed she would be even harder now, so you consciously delayed the fight. So I'm sorry to say that, but that was applied meta-game-knowledge at it's purest.
You make a valid point, but it's not necessarily metagaming. The party is railroaded into reaching Nashkel to investigate the mines. Four of the first five easily recruited NPCs put you on a time limit. Unless you make a habit of talking to many/all NPCs, it's easy to miss Garrick, who does not initiate a conversation with you. (Edit: unless all of your PCs are comfortable with mercenary work, you won't get anywhere with him anyway). Thus, no encounter with Silke. I could argue that talking to Garrick in every playthrough just to get the XP from Silke is also metagaming.
Of course, that's metagaming too. The problem is, you can't miss Garrick if you know he's there. After you have done this once, it's metagaming either way (at least as long as you remember it).
The Garrick/Silke encounter is an interesting point. I agree with @jackjack that Charname's companions might urge the party to go to Nashkel asap, leaving no time for socializing in Beregost. Besides I think Charname's alignment and personality should have a big impact on how things work out. My noncommital, evasive and ever prudent TN Fighter/Illusionist/Thief Gnome is likely to tell Garrick that she doesn't hire out as a mercenary. A sociable, helpful Paladin will have to take on Silke early on, whereas as a LE character or a whimsical/opportunistic CN one can side with Silke with no problem.
Since I've played a new rpg lately that bears some resemblance to bg, I have some insight into this. The truth is that it is impossible to not metagame once you've played through the material once, and you only ever get one blind playthrough. And I think most of us have forgotten what it's like. We think we want to have that first time subjective experience again, but do we really?
It's been so many years, I'd forgotten what it's like to have to talk to every single npc - dozens or even a hundred or more in every populated area - because you don't know who gives a quest or who has critical information.
I'd forgotten what it's like to have no idea where to go to pursue a quest, or what quests are easy as opposed to which ones are going to kick your butt if you don't get some levels first.
I'd forgotten what it's like to go into a combat with no idea what strategies to use, what the enemies are going to do, which spells are effective and which spells are lousy, and which weapons are effective and which are no better than butter knives, and against which creatures.
So, I'd forgotten how frustrating that can be. Baldur's Gate was only frustrating to me once, and that experience was over fifteen years ago. If I'm totally honest, I don't remember exactly what about it motivated me to keep plugging away at it. I know I loved D&D, so that was a huge motivation.
There was no internet, (well, there was early dialup and AOL, but most people didn't have it yet), so there was no easy way to look up maps and walkthroughs. I remember buying a paperback guide at the bookstore for Might and Magic 6 after I got stuck, but I never needed one for BG, so there's that.
I also think I'd forgotten the emotional state that is caused by that level of frustration. It makes you angry, it makes you want to lash out at something, it makes you tell yourself you're going to quit because it's no fun. But then, the next day, you find yourself still playing because you don't want to give up. Slowly, you begin to discover ways to progress further. You can restart the game and play up to the point you were before effortlessly, because you know just what to do, who to talk to, where to go, and how to win all the encounters up to that point.
What was nerve-wracking before becomes fun and engaging, accompanied by a sense of accomplishment that can be very reinforcing. You can relax and look for things you didn't see before. You notice more about the artistry of the game. Slowly, a sense of "home" can develop in that world.
I think we long-time BG players have romanticized the "first-time" experience into something that may not exist the way we imagine it. It doesn't help the phenomenon that there are so few games published in the past 15 years that are deeply written enough and challenging enough to cause that "pound your hand through the monitor" level of frustration. I think you can't get to the romanticized state of mind that is desired without going through the angry frustration first.
Maybe it's that I'm so much older now than when I played BG for the first time, but I don't really find that first time emotional state to be a pleasant or desirable thing at all. It's just something that's necessary to get through before I can appreciate the game.
So it might be a good question to ask "Why would you *want* to go back to a blind state of mind where you can't metagame?" Truly being there means constant deaths, being lost, spending hours wandering around maps unable to find what you need, and sometimes having no idea where to go or what to do, with death in every direction (that you know about).
Luckily, now there's the internet, where I can usually find information that helps me get through rough patches, because I don't think I have the fortitude to get through a true blind playthrough of a classical rpg any more with no metagaming help in the form of walkthroughs.
Please don't derail this thread by trying to discuss that game specifically here. I am comparing my experience with that to Baldur's Gate on the subject of metagaming with this post. The point of my post is to talk about metagaming in general, and to ask why the avoidance of it is to be desired.
Comments
I clicked on this just to post the same kind of picture. Now I have become obsolete.
- revisiting vanilla version of the game (no TotSC or ToB). This one was a huge shock on how the game was back then. After that adding the mission pack.
- no prebuffing, ever. Only buff when the combat begin, the basilisk area being a little exception, but I always try to use the help from Korax before drinking a potion or casting a spell.
- using spells in an order. Now that's where the fun begins, when the battle starts I cast the first spell from spellbook (yes, 1 level first), if that spell is useless in this fight (like remove curse), use the next spell. Of course sometimes you have to try whether the spell is useful, in most cases the enemy resistances are unknown.
- memorising spells in an order in a spellbook. Another fun one, because it forces the use of some rarely used spells, and proving that most of them can be really useful. Oh, and no multiple memorising of the same spell (the exeception being if there are more slots than spells, then memorise from the beginning etc.)
- no reloading when wirting a spell in a spellbook.
- using spellscrolls (if the spell is already written, or cannot be written) before memorised spells. With this one I stopped hoarding, and became a user.
- using potions anytime they are useful/needed. This one ties perfectly with the ordered spell casting, as you can use potions instead of protection spell, and as they are limited in the game, it creates quite unique experience/forces using different strategies.
- buying only healing potions - with some exceptions. Of course some items are essential for some characters, like shadow armor for thieves, but even then I buy those at later stages (5 chapter for example).I had one playthrough where I didn't buy any ammo for anyone, I used the ammo I found. Even though there are plenty of arrows to be found, the crossbow for example became a weapon I used carefully not to waste the bolts.
- no min-maxing. Hacking through the enemies became really boring for me. I prefer the max stat to be 17-16, and that the charater has at least one weakness (low dex or con for a fighter etc.). The PC becomes a mortal and not a killing machine with sharp reflexes, extreme knowledge and education.
- using unusual party. Use characters you've never had in your party, or unused compositions. The screenshot is from my playthrough I've done some time ago, and yes I have Garrick in my party.
- resting only when party is fatigued.
Those points seem like a ridiculous challenge playthrough, but I have tons of fun playing this way. I would recommend this (or some of those points) for anyone trying to see the game differently with much less metagaming. I may even add to this 'Let the Fates Decide' in my next playthrough, which seems like a fun idea.
So my Paladin does what he does, while I do what I do...
Thats kind of what games like this are until something can wipe our memory away temporarily for a session or something.
But seriously. Besides that, D&D is supposed to be.. hum.. "dangerous". If you don't metagame, the risk of death is much greater. I think there's a joy in any dangerous games to know it well and to know how to pass through it smoothly, so thats why we metagame and all that.
But thats not the question. The only real way not to metagame is for games to be more random -> and you know what, a randomly generated BG-like game could be pretty darn amazing, but hey. Even then, you'll metagame to some degree.
Sure, you can "force" yourself not to metagame but does that really work, and does that really make sense? Thats generally seen as "roleplaying" your character as well. I've never really attempted this. I mean, I don't know how I could, in a game like this. Not knowing what happens in a lot of cases just means I die horribly and have to start again.
Even in self proclaimed challenges, some of it can be seen as metagaming. I don't think the question has that much meaning, but no, I don't think you can -not- metagame.
Our 18 or 19 Intelligence Mage is a lot better at planning his actions and at strategy than us, so we need to metagame to compensate.
So, she promptly killed my charname. It might have had to do with my fumbling with the pause control, but I don't know.
The second try, I did a bit of positioning, and we got her. There might have been a lucky hit interrupting her invisibility spell, though - I don't know.
The way to know you're not using metagame knowledge is to walk right into stuff that your characters would have no way of knowing about. But, that's going to leave a lot up to dice rolls. Even with my predetermined strategies, such as, "See a hostile mage, cleric casts Remove Fear", things can go south really fast with a few unlucky dicerolls (e.g. archer rolls a 1, misses, caster gets uninterrupted Horror or Hold Person).
Basically, not metagaming means lots of reloads, just like the first time we played the game. No or minimal reloading kind of *requires* metagaming, especially no reload. It's actually very easy to not metagame if you don't care how many times you have to reload.
Don't cast any buffs outside of combat, and don't do anything your characters couldn't possibly know to do beforehand. Just blunder into everything like you did the first time you played.
(Don't read this if you haven't done Rasaad's BG2 quest before)
[spoiler] How do you kill Alorgoth? He seems invincible. I get him Near Death, then he's invincible. Oh, and also, I can't seem to exit the Plane of Shadow after I've used the Wheel of Obliteration to open the portal. Why is that?
Edit: Someone with really high lore who is well versed about demons might tell the party to flee at the sight of Aec ("Fly, you fools!" ;-)) and the same well informed person would advise the following
It's like a hunter walking with an empty gun, and only loading it when the lion is charging...
A real warrior or soldier doesn't take their armour off... so why should a wizard stop buffing.
The game hugely rewards parties that scout (except the bloody jerks in bloody Firewine. Shoulda called it JERKwine!) and are prepared.
After the bandits, any non mentally disabled PC will have figured out that when you're not in town its dangerous. And several enemies use false neutrality to sneak up on you. Nobody would be trusting so easily after Tarnesh nukes Imoen with MM! Other stuff, if you cant think of a reason to do something, you should consider carefully why your PC would behave differently.
There's so many other protections that are of long duration that should be routinely used.
And potions last quite a while, use them whenever you're entering a high risk area, like a deep dungeon level or approaching an obvious lair.
And the shorter term, one battle only type spells? Well, there's often plenty of external clues you're about to get into serious trouble (gee we know were Irenicus has to be, let's get ready for him!)
Unless you actually mean to be role playing a moron, make the best use of your team's abilities and resources!
I guess I don't meta game in the sense I'm too lazy to change my spells memorized just for one specific battle. But I feel no qualms about using "Protection from Undead" when I'm entering a Vampire's lair...
Beyond that, you are living in the local 'Library' repository of all knowledge and wisdom. If your Charname is literate in the slightest, there is any amount of 'Meta-knowledge' that he or she might have that can ONLY be represented by Meta-gaming. Such as having heard stories of 'Famous' long swords and therefore wanting to specialize in them "Just in case".
I'm drunk, so I'm probably missing something here... but I thought the "long rationalizations" were helping the OP out... it's pretty much what he asked for in his original post.
You just can't avoid it... the item randomizer wont fix the problem, but it's a nice start. You have to try to make sense of it from a RP perspective, because the only people that care about metagaming are... roleplayers.
I feel I might be kicking in an open door with what I'm about to say, but it's recommendable to define your character's personality in very clear terms and stay true to it whilst playing. Same with alignment and your INT/WIS stats. This means for example that some NPCs must be killed and others must be spared, that certain good loot must be ignored, etc. Any behavior that goes against personality/alignment should be rare, and somehow justifiable. High INT/WIS/lore and an observant and cautious personality make that certain behavior can be considered proper roleplaying rather than metagaming.
To avoid metagaming is to ignore knowledge about items' location (remedied to a considerable extent by Item Randomizer) and about enemies' location and behavior.
It's been so many years, I'd forgotten what it's like to have to talk to every single npc - dozens or even a hundred or more in every populated area - because you don't know who gives a quest or who has critical information.
I'd forgotten what it's like to have no idea where to go to pursue a quest, or what quests are easy as opposed to which ones are going to kick your butt if you don't get some levels first.
I'd forgotten what it's like to go into a combat with no idea what strategies to use, what the enemies are going to do, which spells are effective and which spells are lousy, and which weapons are effective and which are no better than butter knives, and against which creatures.
So, I'd forgotten how frustrating that can be. Baldur's Gate was only frustrating to me once, and that experience was over fifteen years ago. If I'm totally honest, I don't remember exactly what about it motivated me to keep plugging away at it. I know I loved D&D, so that was a huge motivation.
There was no internet, (well, there was early dialup and AOL, but most people didn't have it yet), so there was no easy way to look up maps and walkthroughs. I remember buying a paperback guide at the bookstore for Might and Magic 6 after I got stuck, but I never needed one for BG, so there's that.
I also think I'd forgotten the emotional state that is caused by that level of frustration. It makes you angry, it makes you want to lash out at something, it makes you tell yourself you're going to quit because it's no fun. But then, the next day, you find yourself still playing because you don't want to give up. Slowly, you begin to discover ways to progress further. You can restart the game and play up to the point you were before effortlessly, because you know just what to do, who to talk to, where to go, and how to win all the encounters up to that point.
What was nerve-wracking before becomes fun and engaging, accompanied by a sense of accomplishment that can be very reinforcing. You can relax and look for things you didn't see before. You notice more about the artistry of the game. Slowly, a sense of "home" can develop in that world.
I think we long-time BG players have romanticized the "first-time" experience into something that may not exist the way we imagine it. It doesn't help the phenomenon that there are so few games published in the past 15 years that are deeply written enough and challenging enough to cause that "pound your hand through the monitor" level of frustration. I think you can't get to the romanticized state of mind that is desired without going through the angry frustration first.
Maybe it's that I'm so much older now than when I played BG for the first time, but I don't really find that first time emotional state to be a pleasant or desirable thing at all. It's just something that's necessary to get through before I can appreciate the game.
So it might be a good question to ask "Why would you *want* to go back to a blind state of mind where you can't metagame?" Truly being there means constant deaths, being lost, spending hours wandering around maps unable to find what you need, and sometimes having no idea where to go or what to do, with death in every direction (that you know about).
Luckily, now there's the internet, where I can usually find information that helps me get through rough patches, because I don't think I have the fortitude to get through a true blind playthrough of a classical rpg any more with no metagaming help in the form of walkthroughs.
***************************
Footnote: The other game I've been struggling with is Divinity: Original Sin. There's a thread for it here:
http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/32906/divinity-original-sin/p1
Please don't derail this thread by trying to discuss that game specifically here. I am comparing my experience with that to Baldur's Gate on the subject of metagaming with this post. The point of my post is to talk about metagaming in general, and to ask why the avoidance of it is to be desired.