Skip to content

Ascension

MrSextonMrSexton Member Posts: 396
in Baldur's Gate II: Enhanced Edition
As I understood it, the Ascension Mod was made inhouse and supposed to have been included in the original game, but for some reason (I can't remember) it was cut. Question: will it be included in the new patch since it "should" have been included in the original game? And if not, is it a question of time or rights?
«13

Comments

  • elminsterelminster Member, Developer Posts: 16,315
    edited October 2014

    I stand corrected.
    Post edited by elminster on
  • MrSextonMrSexton Member Posts: 396
    @Cuv When I looked through it now I realized I had read it once before but that was more than a decade ago hence my memory was a bit fuzzy.

    However, thanks for the answers!
  • CuvCuv Member, Developer Posts: 2,535
    heh, no problem Yes, that was a looong time ago. IEEAIS is long gone too
  • SedSed Member Posts: 790
    @Cuv you name was also a lot longer back then ;)
  • CuvCuv Member, Developer Posts: 2,535
    heh, it was and thanks for noticing - Cuvieronius just got too long to type after a while
  • megwmegw Member Posts: 2
    bengoshi said:

    Dee, October 2013: "Ascension will not be included in BGII:EE at release, I can confirm that much. We may consider a more official implementation of Ascension somewhere down the line, but for the launch it will not be a part of the core experience."



    And we can't say whether it will be included into BG2:EE one day or not.

    I would be really grateful if Ascension could be added even as a DLC on steam. $2.99 or $4.99?
  • ErgErg Member Posts: 1,756
    Archaos said:

    Also it will give grounds for people to say: "Lol, those that got EE have to pay for Ascension. I have it for free on my original games."

    "Lol, those that got IWD:EE have to pay for IWD-in-BG2. I have it for free on my original games." :p
  • ArchaosArchaos Member Posts: 1,421
    edited October 2014
    @Erg I think the "IWD-in-BG2" mod is for IWDII, because of the 3E rules, not IWD 1. ;)

    Also IWD: EE is actually BG2-in-IWD. Heh.
  • ErgErg Member Posts: 1,756
    edited October 2014
    Archaos said:

    I think the "IWD-in-BG2" mod is for IWDII, because of the 3E rules, not IWD 1. ;)

    Also IWD: EE is actually BG2-in-IWD. Heh.

    @Archaos

    I was half joking, but, and now I'm serious, actually IWD:EE is not an enhanced edition of IWD, but technically an enhanced edition of IWD-in-BG2, so a more appropriate name than IWD:EE would be

    IWD-in-BGII:EE (or IWD-in-BG:EE as BG:EE and BGII:EE use the same engine)

    Edit: similarly BG:EE is not an enhanced edition of BG1, but it is more close to Tutu or BGT than BG1, because it allows to play BG1 in an engine derived by the BG2 one.

    However, BG:EE isn't an enhancement of Tutu or BGT, but more like an alternative to those, while IWD:EE instead really is an enhancement of IWD-in-BG2.
  • ArchaosArchaos Member Posts: 1,421
    Ah, I was totally not aware of that mod. But I know of a forgotten (?) mod that turned BG2 into IWD2, so for example Imoen was a Rogue/Wizard (instead of a Thief/Mage) etc.

    Anyway, IWD:EE offers more stuff than this mod so we will see how Enhanced exactly it is compared to the original.
  • VitorVitor Member Posts: 288
    Cuv said:

    This thread is getting off topic - its about Ascension (and finger pointing at me for not getting the EE version done yet)

    @Cuv, what differences your Ascension version would have in comparison with BP Ascension?
  • vanatosvanatos Member Posts: 876
    The only things i liked of Ascension was making TOB more difficult boss battles, given how absurdly OP you become, it really needed the bosses to be absurd too.

    Fighting the bhaalspawns again at the final battle is nice tho, definitely more compelling then some bhaal styled shadow wraiths.

    Everything else, i didn't really care, seeing Irenicus and Bodhi again seemed to be meh, dealt with them already and they really had little place in the bhaal-focused story, seemed like an arbitrary addition that didn't make sense.

    The epilogues, were ridiculously long for Ascension, so much that i remember it kinda ran over or broke the epilogue text screen itself, sometimes less is more, felt more like they wanted to write a novel about the 'adventures after BG2:TOB' for every character.

    I'd love if they redid ascension to be more streamlined for BG2:EE
  • CuvCuv Member, Developer Posts: 2,535
    Zeckul said:

    I did read that README a long time ago and I still think that Ascension represents the way Throne of Bhaal should have been. First let's look at the relevant text from David Gaider:



    2) Even if you really, really like what this mod has done, please don't say things like 'this is how it should have been' or somesuch. -snip-.
    -snip-

    Perhaps astonishingly, Ascension still didn't make it into BG2:EE due, again, to time constraints...

    I understand how you feel, but that is really not how it went down and that is exactly what David Gaider didn't want to be said. (Don't worry, I feel the same but the mod was based on some forum conversations/ideas and not some leftover plan). So will give you a 'like' even though I disagree with your evidence :)

    Here's the thing, at the time it was in development, it was actively talked about on the BIS boards and some people were doing testing and allowed to comment on the forums about it. So there were many threads saying this is 'how the ending should have been'. Pity I don't have any of those threads archived and the whole forum is gone now. Probably some other people here who remember this stuff and were there too.

    As for why it wasn't included in BG2:EE for release, well that was a decision based on some polls that were heavily split and wasn't time contraints - all I can say about that.

  • ErgErg Member Posts: 1,756
    edited October 2014
    Zeckul said:

    I still strongly believe that BG2:EE should simply integrate Ascension as the default ending.

    BGII:EE already lack customisability compared to the original BG2, including Ascension as default ending would reduce customisability even further.
    Post edited by Erg on
  • shawneshawne Member Posts: 3,239
    edited October 2014
    Zeckul said:

    From this and a thorough analysis of what Ascension brings to ToB and how it greatly improves both the story and combat aspects of the game (which I won't do here, but there's wide agreement on Ascension's merits), I still strongly believe that BG2:EE should simply integrate Ascension as the default ending. Considering what is the point of making an Enhanced Edition in the first place I think it's the logical thing to do.

    Exactly so. The most frequently-repeated sentiment among the broader, non-hardcore BG fanbase (ie: the GOG sub-forum, to use just one example) is that the EEs aren't different enough to justify purchasing them, especially at standard price, for people who already own the games. Integrating Ascension - or, at the very least, the story content - would have helped with that.
    Cuv said:

    As for why it wasn't included in BG2:EE for release, well that was a decision based on some polls that were heavily split and wasn't time contraints - all I can say about that.

    Yeah, I'm going to cry foul on that. Setting aside the fact that the devs have made similar decisions in the past without worrying about fan response (integrating 1PP, fixing exploits, changing/tweaking character stats, etc.), those polls @Cuv refers to were heavily split because the vast majority of them required "Yes/No" answers, despite the fact that there's still a lot of confusion as to what integration would have meant. Some of the objections expressed in those polls were explicitly centered on the Improved Battles components, which aren't part of the core mod anyway.

    If the devs had been interested in genuine feedback on the issue, they could have put together their own survey, with clear parameters, and drawn conclusions from that. So if that was the rationale behind the decision... well, just another dropped ball, I suppose.
  • ErgErg Member Posts: 1,756
    edited October 2014
    shawne said:

    Exactly so. The most frequently-repeated sentiment among the broader, non-hardcore BG fanbase (ie: the GOG sub-forum, to use just one example) is that the EEs aren't different enough to justify purchasing them, especially at standard price, for people who already own the games. Integrating Ascension - or, at the very least, the story content - would have helped with that.

    Yes, some people (and to clarify, I'm not one of those) think that the EEs aren't different enough from the original games, but only because they compare the EEs with the originals plus mods, and because you can mod the original TOB to include Ascension, your whole point is moot.
    shawne said:

    the devs have made similar decisions in the past without worrying about fan response (integrating 1PP, fixing exploits, changing/tweaking character stats, etc.)

    I personally think that including mods like 1PP was a mistake. I would rather have them remove 1PP than add even more mods.
  • CuvCuv Member, Developer Posts: 2,535
    @shawne every time you enter a thread you bring me down. Was happily willing to discuss Ascension and offer up some pieces of information, insight and talk about the mod itself. One of the very few things I can talk about on the forums. Be careful what accusations you make about my intent and presume to know what polls I am talking about or how decisions are made and why. Please don't derail this thread any further.
  • shawneshawne Member Posts: 3,239
    edited October 2014
    Dude, seriously, what do you want from me? You say a contentious issue that people were talking about on this forum practically since Day 1 was decided by polls; I participated in those polls, I saw what was discussed and how those conversations unfolded, and I know that not one of them was set up by a member of the dev team with the stated intent of making it "official". If you want to go into more detail, then sure, have at it; but you're coming at me for saying that really doesn't make sense to me?
Sign In or Register to comment.

2024 Overhaul Games, a division of Beamdog. © 2024 Hasbro, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Baldur's Gate, Dungeons & Dragons, D&D, Forgotten Realms, Baldur's Gate, Wizards of the Coast and their logos are trademarks of Wizards of the Coast LLC in the U.S.A. and other countries, and are used with permission. Hasbro and its logo are trademarks of Hasbro, Inc. and are used with permission. © 1998 BioWare Corp. All Rights Reserved. BioWare, the BioWare Infinity Engine and the BioWare logo are trademarks of Bioware Corp. Black Isle Studios and the Black Isle Studios logo are trademarks of Interplay Entertainment Corp. Atari and the Atari logo are trademarks owned by Atari Interactive, Inc. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.