Skip to content

And you make it sound like it's good news?

1246

Comments

  • ErgErg Member Posts: 1,756
    CamDawg said:

    As a whole, yes.

    Then we must agree to disagree. And not just about BGII:EE, but also about BG:EE.

    For example, IMO the current bug in BG:EE v1.3 regarding the rate of spawns in areas like the Firewine Ruins alone outweighs all the combined bugs still left in the original game, but that's just me.
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • ErgErg Member Posts: 1,756
    atcDave said:

    Except none of those bugs are serious! The current state of EE is the best BG2 has ever been. It's beautiful, it plays and loads fast, it has many built in ease of use features. It is the best version of BG2 there has been, and it will only get better with more patches.

    Any accusations of "game breaking" are silly hyperbole.

    @atcDave, with all due respect, have you ever played the original game fully modded, including mods like TobEx? If not, you don't know what you are talking about.
  • SapphireIce101SapphireIce101 Member Posts: 866
    I've played the original game, fully modded, including ToBEX, and at times it could be even more buggier than BG2EE.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited September 2014
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • DeeDee Member Posts: 10,447
    This thread stopped being about Icewind Dale a long time ago. Moving it to General Discussions now.

    And on a more serious note, I want to remind everyone that the site rules still apply when it comes to disagreeing about whether the game is "unplayably buggy" or "more or less fine as it is" or "so good it doesn't ever need another patch again". No matter what your position is, refrain from personal attacks against those who do not agree.
  • ErgErg Member Posts: 1,756

    I've played the original game, fully modded, including ToBEX, and at times it could be even more buggier than BG2EE.

    Your problem with the original fully modded game may lay between the chair and the keyboard.

    If you want to give it another try, I'm willing to help you with the installation this time :P
  • CahirCahir Member, Moderator, Translator (NDA) Posts: 2,819
    edited September 2014
    Well, I'd expect such a strong critical attitude from someone who did experience some (all?) those game-breaking bugs.

    It's more and more feel like you just enjoy arguing with the devs about the flaws of the game:)

    You just keep comparing fully patched + modded vanila BG2 to a not fully patched BG2:EE. Just wait until Beamdog release the last patch and then we can compare which game has more bugs left.

    I did not run across the game who did not need any patches at all. It is natural that devs will release new patches. You can complain that the consecutive patches pop up too slowly, but they are released nonetheless, reducing bug amount each time.

    Also, I'll give you that, old mods are updated with limited speed too and some cool ones may not even been converted at all (which as I understand is an important factor to you). But this is an unwanted result of the fact that many talented modders are working with Beamdog. I'm sure that the moment their work is done, they will back to their babies.

    As for IWD:EE, personally I do not expect many new content in the form of new quests/adventures - vanilla plot is more than enough for me, I just need all those fancy engine upgrades and I'd be content. I'm also sure that all existing mods (there are not many of them, right?) will be converted sooner than later. This time it should be win-win situation provided that EE will not introduce too many bugs on release.

    Not relevant question, cause I'm curious: did the spawn rate's the sole reason why you're playing Tutu not BGT? Did not play Tutu myself, always felt it is some sort of poor cousin of BGT...but maybe I was wrong?
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • CahirCahir Member, Moderator, Translator (NDA) Posts: 2,819
    Guys, everybody knows that heavily modded game could be bugless as well as pain in the arse depend of how you screw installation:)

    How can you compare a modded game to an unmodded one?

    There are mods that are compatible to both vanilla and EE, there are the ones that will never be updated to EE and there are the ones that will only work with EE and will never be backward compatible with vanilla. It's entirely possible that the latter will have better quality than the not converted ones even if they are short in numbers. I for one prefer fewer mods of better quality than multitude mediocre ones.
  • ErgErg Member Posts: 1,756
    Cahir said:

    Not relevant question, cause I'm curious: did the spawn rate's the sole reason why you're playing Tutu not BGT? Did not play Tutu myself, always felt it is some sort of poor cousin of BGT...but maybe I was wrong?

    I want to reply to this, because it is an interesting question. I apologise in advance for the off topic.

    The reason why I prefer Tutu over BGT has nothing to do with the spawning rate. Besides, there are mods for BGT that mimics the Tutu spawning system, including one mod that implements an even more aggressive spawning system.

    I prefer Tutu because it is more close to the original BG1 than BGT and I never understood the appeal of playing both games combined, but, as they say, to each his own.
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • CahirCahir Member, Moderator, Translator (NDA) Posts: 2,819
    Erg said:

    Cahir said:

    Not relevant question, cause I'm curious: did the spawn rate's the sole reason why you're playing Tutu not BGT? Did not play Tutu myself, always felt it is some sort of poor cousin of BGT...but maybe I was wrong?

    I want to reply to this, because it is an interesting question. I apologise in advance for the off topic.

    The reason why I prefer Tutu over BGT has nothing to do with the spawning rate. Besides, there are mods for BGT that mimics the Tutu spawning system, including one mod that implements an even more aggressive spawning system.

    I prefer Tutu because it is more close to the original BG1 than BGT and I never understood the appeal of playing both games combined, but, as they say, to each his own.
    Ok, but what do you have in mind exactly? As I understand, Tutu is just a way to play BG1 on BG2 Engine, right? And BGT is the same but with some sort of continuity provided by mod authors, right? Or am I missing something? Sorry for my ignorance, but I did not play TuTu thus far.
  • ErgErg Member Posts: 1,756
    Cahir said:

    Ok, but what do you have in mind exactly? As I understand, Tutu is just a way to play BG1 on BG2 Engine, right? And BGT is the same but with some sort of continuity provided by mod authors, right? Or am I missing something? Sorry for my ignorance, but I did not play TuTu thus far.

    A moderator may consider splitting these posts about Tutu and BGT to a different discussion. Again, I apologise for the off topic.

    Both Tutu and BGT allows to play BG1 in the BG2 engine, but the main difference is that BGT purpose is to make BG1 as much as possible similar to BG2, so that they can be played seamlessly like one giant game, while Tutu keeps the two games separate and hence it can be more faithful to the original.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited September 2014
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • CahirCahir Member, Moderator, Translator (NDA) Posts: 2,819
    edited September 2014
    Erg said:

    Cahir said:

    Ok, but what do you have in mind exactly? As I understand, Tutu is just a way to play BG1 on BG2 Engine, right? And BGT is the same but with some sort of continuity provided by mod authors, right? Or am I missing something? Sorry for my ignorance, but I did not play TuTu thus far.

    A moderator may consider splitting these posts about Tutu and BGT to a different discussion. Again, I apologise for the off topic.

    Both Tutu and BGT allows to play BG1 in the BG2 engine, but the main difference is that BGT purpose is to make BG1 as much as possible similar to BG2, so that they can be played seamlessly like one giant game, while Tutu keeps the two games separate and hence it can be more faithful to the original.
    So basically it means that you just need to import a character to BG2 just like in vanilla? I just failed to see any other faithful to original aspects.

    Besides I'm not sure, but are both BWP and BWS just basically BGT + whole bunch of mods. while if you play Tutu you need to manually install all the mods you need? Or can you use Tutu in BWP or BWS install too? I used each one of them once and it was rather nice experience.

    Me too sorry for offtopic:(
  • ErgErg Member Posts: 1,756
    Sergio said:

    I think that more than the philosophy behind it, he\she was curious about those details that made you fall in love for Tutu, instead of BGT.

    Cahir said:

    I just failed to see any other faithful to original aspects.

    The actual details are too many to list :)

    Mostly they are small details when considered individually, but they all adds up and with BGT, the BG1 part of the game feels too much like BG2.
    Cahir said:

    So basically it means that you just need to import a character to BG2 just like in vanilla?

    Yes, but I never import. Some of my characters are only for BG1, some are only for BG2. When I want to use in BG2 one of my BG1 characters I simply use NearInfinity to recreate the character and manually accounts for stuff like the tomes.
    Cahir said:

    Besides I'm not sure, but are both BWP and BWS just basically BGT + whole bunch of mods. while if you play Tutu you need to manually install all the mods you need? Or can you use Tutu in BWP or BWS install too? I used each one of them once and it was rather nice experience.

    I prefer to select and install my mods manually one by one, carefully picking them and deciding which components to install. I never use the same combination of mods/components twice. This greatly enhance replayability. Sometimes I spend weeks planning which mods/components to install.
  • CrevsDaakCrevsDaak Member Posts: 7,155
    edited September 2014
    Sergio said:

    Milo, your statement makes no sense. Thanks for making us enlightened about your opinion, anyway.

    Actually it was the least senseless post.
    Sergio said:

    Sapphire, I don't want to sound like a spoiled brat, but do you frankly believe I can believe what you say?

    I've played over 6 six playthroughs on "vanilla" bg2 and over 15 on modded bg2. Are you trying to tell me that you are more nerd than me? I doubt it. :D

    And I assure you, modded BG2 has almost no issue I could think about.

    Agreed. But hell, try playing it over a Mac, you're not going to find it very cool. The way emulators work don't let the latest version of TobEx nor Generalized Biffing to work properly, so you have to stick to TobEx v21 (which has several (read: lots of) bugs) and a 700+ MB override folder, which sucks.
    Still gotta try running the game on a VM, but I am not even sure my computer would handle so, lol.
    Erg said:

    I prefer to select and install my mods manually one by one, carefully picking them and deciding which components to install. I never use the same combination of mods/components twice. This greatly enhance replayability. Sometimes I spend weeks planning which mods/components to install.

    This.
    I basically spend around 10 hours thinking of which mods, components and which should I install in my next BGT install. From install to install the number of mods tends to install, sometimes I remove some components, install others, add another tweak pack, use SCS & SCSII instead of SCS v22+ or just stick to the latest version, give enemies 3 or 16 extra levels, etc.

    And, yes, I defend the EEs but still play a modded BGT myself. I just like BGT more, or at least they change BG2:EE's horrible UI.
  • ErgErg Member Posts: 1,756
    edited September 2014
    Milo said:

    Someone who has been complaining all day about a game he/she doesn't even own/has not played

    @Milo, trust me, I'm too busy complaining about BG:EE, that unfortunately I do own, to complain also about a game I did not buy :)

    My comments here were meant to explain why I do not intend to buy BGII:EE or IWD:EE.

    My decision is based on my direct (negative) experience with BG:EE, on the comments and bug reports of people that have played BGII:EE, and on the comments from the developers that are failing to inspire my confidence in their work.

    Mostly, because as @shawne has pointed out, the devs statements about IWD:EE remind too closely the ones about BGII:EE of last year, but we all know how that went.

    The fact that they are spreading themselves too thin, working on too many projects at once, despite being a small company, doesn't help my confidence in the successful outcome of their endeavour either.

    Add to that dubious statements like the one that the bugs in modded BG2 outweighs the one currently in BGII:EE, and you should get the full picture.

    Edit: fixed huge amount of typos :)
  • SilverstarSilverstar Member Posts: 2,207
    Apart from the showstopper that occurs in Vista ("NPC X is too busy to talk to you") that has to be spesifically patched, I don't actually remember any bugs in BGII. I'm not disputing they're there but to me they're certainly invisible. I have 2 save games/playthroughs in BGII:EE I've stopped playing due to various bugs though.

    Someone put it very nicely and I suspect pinpoint accurately in another thread; which bugs we encounter and their severity depends on the narrative of our spesific playthroughs. If there's massive showstoppers in a companion or stronghold quest for instance, a lot of people will never notice them.
  • ErgErg Member Posts: 1,756

    Apart from the showstopper that occurs in Vista ("NPC X is too busy to talk to you") that has to be spesifically patched, I don't actually remember any bugs in BGII. I'm not disputing they're there but to me they're certainly invisible.

    @Silverstar

    ... and you are talking about vanilla BG2. If you add mods like the BG2 Fixpack, the chance of encountering bugs will be even lower.
  • CrevsDaakCrevsDaak Member Posts: 7,155
    Erg said:

    Apart from the showstopper that occurs in Vista ("NPC X is too busy to talk to you") that has to be spesifically patched, I don't actually remember any bugs in BGII. I'm not disputing they're there but to me they're certainly invisible.

    Silverstar

    ... and you are talking about vanilla BG2. If you add mods like the BG2 Fixpack, the chance of encountering bugs will be even lower.
    And if you apply the (almost) latest ToB patch to fix the "NPC is busy" issue, too.
  • SilverstarSilverstar Member Posts: 2,207
    CrevsDaak said:

    And if you apply the (almost) latest ToB patch to fix the "NPC is busy" issue, too.

    Yeah I used the patch to fix it. Never used a single mod for my Baldur's Gates prior to the Branwen mod in BGII:EE. Cause Branwen... rawr!
  • deltagodeltago Member Posts: 7,811
    Whew, this thread exploded, but lemme clear something quickly up:

    deltago said:

    When beamdog came to the community and asked what we wanted a majority of people stated that they would rather have one patch that fixes everything than multiple patches that could cause other issues in the future.

    What? I don't remember any demand for "one patch to rule them all". I remember better, bigger and more stable patches being asked for, but I don't remember anyone saying "oh I only ever want one more patch".
    Yea sorry, that is what I meant. I think in patching terms they swung too far the other way. They might of wanted to create a stable base which is 1.3 to work off of before committing any fixes to any of their games but I personally wouldn't mind of seeing some quick fix patches the last couple of months.

    You also have to remember some of the b.s. that was flung their way when they released these quick patches is the past. Things like "Why are you fixing this when this is more important and still broken" at them. That is why I am patiently waiting for the patch. I know they are working hard, I know it is coming, yes I wanted it 4 months ago, but I can patiently wait for it to be ready if when it is delivered, it is delivered almost issue free.

    Once again though, announcing that they are releasing IWD:EE is by any means saying they're going to stop working on the BG:EE trilogy. If you are fearful of that, just don't order IWD:EE until the trilogy is to your satisfaction.

    ~

  • shawneshawne Member Posts: 3,239
    atcDave said:

    Except none of those bugs are serious! The current state of EE is the best BG2 has ever been. It's beautiful, it plays and loads fast, it has many built in ease of use features. It is the best version of BG2 there has been, and it will only get better with more patches.

    Any accusations of "game breaking" are silly hyperbole.

    Bull. shit.

    I stopped playing halfway through BG2:EE because I got fed up with reloading over and over again when cutscenes wouldn't trigger, or dialogues would loop, or I had to quit the game and edit my save every time I used the Slayer ability, or look up console commands to get things moving. That, by definition, is gamebreaking.
  • mlnevesemlnevese Member, Moderator Posts: 10,214
    Everybody is free to post their point of view but please mind your language when doing so. This is still a PG 13 forum.
  • BerconBercon Member Posts: 486
    It would be nice to play through IWD:EE. However, since they've provided zero support for BG2:EE, I just can't see myself wasting my money on any game from Beamdog. Hopefully they'll get their act together, so I get to enjoy IWD:EE in the future.
This discussion has been closed.