Howdy, Stranger!

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

Categories

Neverwinter Nights: Enhanced Edition has been released! Visit nwn.beamdog.com to make an order. NWN:EE FAQ is available.
Soundtracks for BG:EE, SoD, BG2:EE, IWD:EE, PST:EE are now available in the Beamdog store.
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

Backporting IWD:EE features into BG:EE and BG2:EE

Hi, since this topic is somewhat scattered throughout the forums, it can't hurt to make another discussion about it;)

My general idea about this is that once IWD:EE is out (30 Oct. 2014) would it be possible to port the good stuff to both BG's?

Few things that come to mind: IWD druid and cleric spell tables; IWD voicesets, moster models and lastly (ok this one bugs me big time) Heart of Fury mode for BG2:EE.

Feel free to add your own ideas.

CrevsDaakJuliusBorisovRAM021SertoriusSharGuidesMyHandrorikon

Comments

  • sarevok57sarevok57 Member Posts: 4,032
    but isnt that what made icewind dale, icewind dale? i would feel kind of wonky if there were icewind dale things in my bg stuff, although if someone made an optional mod for it, i would say that would be okay

    CrevsDaak
  • CrevsDaakCrevsDaak Member Posts: 7,081
    I don't think those are the things that should be ported (because they change big parts of the game that could change simply by modding), but engine features should be ported instead (IWD's effect opcodes and scripting actions for example).

    Some people might prefer BG's Priest and Druid spell tables, and there've been complains of how the game added that type of things that could have been left for mods.

    Animations can be easily (well, not that easy but still not too difficult) modded into the game, too, but they could add entries for them on the stuff related to walking sounds, which is actually hardcoded.

    GrammarsaladSharGuidesMyHandelminsterMessi
  • ChorazyGlusChorazyGlus Member Posts: 151
    @Sarevok57
    Ok I overshot it with monster models; come to think of it there is not a need for so many undead types in BG anyway. But I won't go as far as to say that spelltables or voicesets are exclusive stuff meant for either BG or IWD. I get that everyone has their own view on what makes each brand unique, but if there are same things implemented (yea I'm looking at you, druid) in both games then why should not they be the same? Especially when druids in BG sux compared to IWD.

  • ChorazyGlusChorazyGlus Member Posts: 151
    edited October 2014
    @CrevsDaak Porting benefical engine changes/features should be automatic (well maybe thats just me with my pink glasses on:D) Other things like animations, well as long as possibility exists then I guess that's enough. Though, purely from aesthetics standpoint, most of IWD spell animations look more magical i.e. superior to me than the BG ones. Heck, even casting voicesets are the same so why not animations? F.e. everytime I cast healing spell I hear Jaheira's (mabe I hear wrong, but you get the point) voice. Do I find it disturbing? Nope. I think thats Infinity games right there. Same like in Star Trek computer voice is always the same and it is good and adds to the depth.

  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 17,060
    RPGWatch: Is your IE Plus engine so reusable you can retroactively apply changes to all the games you've developed with it? Can you fix or add something (a new class kit for example) to IWD:EE and then just plop it into BG:EE with a patch?

    Liam: That's one of the major benefits to working with our updated engine, definitely. For example, one of the major improvements we've made to IWD:EE is improved pathfinding, which will be back-ported to BG:EE and BGII:EE in their next patches. This system means that any engine fix made to one game will - within a patch or two - also be applied to our other games. Pretty rad (from the most recent IWDEE interview here: http://www.rpgwatch.com/show/article?articleid=268)

    Wow, just wow!

    ChorazyGlusRAM021CrevsDaaklolien
  • ChorazyGlusChorazyGlus Member Posts: 151
    @bengoshi Hm it seems that my pink glasses are in for real this time...omg! Thanks for linking the article!

    JuliusBorisov
  • OzzyBotkinsOzzyBotkins Member Posts: 396
    I would like to play a Priest of Tempus in Baldurs Gate

    JuliusBorisovAedan
  • SedSed Member Posts: 788
    @CrevsDaak‌ Remember that tablets won't get the benefits of mods, so to some extent you have to take them into consideration as well.

    Engine improvements should be a no-brainer, but I can also see the benefit of soundsets for Charname. I'm bored to death with the current ones ;)

    Also getting some of the druid abilities backported would lift a very underwhelming class in BG/BG2

    CrevsDaak
  • typo_tillytypo_tilly Member Posts: 5,565
    *backports IWD ranger/cleric spell progression to BG*
    *forum riots*
    *Bhaal is resurrected from the ensuing carnage*

    JuliusBorisovCrevsDaakAedan
  • RAM021RAM021 Member Posts: 371

    *backports IWD ranger/cleric spell progression to BG*
    *forum riots*
    *Bhaal is resurrected from the ensuing carnage*

    HElf R/C multi still works very well and it is a small price to pay for the significantly improved Paladin/Ranger casting ability.

    typo_tilly
  • nbnmarenbnmare Member Posts: 15
    Overhaul could allow us to chose between the two sets of spell animations via an option in the gameplay menu, thus allowing everyone to easily choose whichever one they want. Just a thought :).

    IWD spells in BG1/2 wouldn't be a problem for me, especially since IWD has already benefited from BG2 spells.

    For the spell progression tables, that's perhaps better done via a mod; my personal recommendation would be to use the pnp spell tables available in various existing mods.

    RAM021ChorazyGlus
  • GrammarsaladGrammarsalad Member Posts: 2,398
    CrevsDaak said:

    I don't think those are the things that should be ported (because they change big parts of the game that could change simply by modding), but engine features should be ported instead (IWD's effect opcodes and scripting actions for example).

    Some people might prefer BG's Priest and Druid spell tables, and there've been complains of how the game added that type of things that could have been left for mods.

    Animations can be easily (well, not that easy but still not too difficult) modded into the game, too, but they could add entries for them on the stuff related to walking sounds, which is actually hardcoded.

    This.

  • SharGuidesMyHandSharGuidesMyHand Member Posts: 2,425
    I agree with some of CrevsDaak's points about changing the fundamentals of each game, but I'd definitely love to see anything that wouldn't compromise the fundamentals (namely, voicesets) made available across both sets of games.

    elminsterGrammarsalad
  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 10,051
    Sed said:

    @CrevsDaak‌ Remember that tablets won't get the benefits of mods, so to some extent you have to take them into consideration as well.

    This is why the real, biggie, #1 feature request should be for Beamdog to work to make the tablet versions moddable. You can already apply some mods without jail breaking via the 'portraits' folder; all that is required in addition is exposure of the dialog.tlk file. Surely the devs could change the app structure to make that possible...

  • argent77argent77 Member Posts: 2,667
    Theoretically it is possible to relocate the "lang" folder which contains the dialog.tlk from the install directory into the user folder without much effort. I've quickly tested it by modifying a couple of text strings in the game executable and I could play the game without any problems.
    Unless the mobile versions differ greatly from the desktop versions, it should be fairly easy for Beamdog to integrate this feature into the game.

    CrevsDaak
  • CrevsDaakCrevsDaak Member Posts: 7,081
    edited November 2014
    @subtledoctor‌

    Sed said:

    CrevsDaak‌ Remember that tablets won't get the benefits of mods, so to some extent you have to take them into consideration as well.

    This is why the real, biggie, #1 feature request should be for Beamdog to work to make the tablet versions moddable. You can already apply some mods without jail breaking via the 'portraits' folder; all that is required in addition is exposure of the dialog.tlk file. Surely the devs could change the app structure to make that possible...
    I doubt that Apple would allow selling such a product, besides, I highly doubt that Beamdog can create a new version of Cocoa Touch just for their EE games.

    What I think that could be changed is the dialog.tlk location… maybe it could be symlinked from the Library folder to the .app's contents folder… The game might want it to be in the same directory as the chitin.key though, but I dunno about that certainly, since I'm not an IE wizard.

    Edit: ninja'd by @argent77‌ LOL!

  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 10,051
    edited November 2014
    Precisely. Just put dialog.tlk where a user can mess with it, and symlink it to the usual place. Or whatever works. (I mean me personally, I just jailbroke my new ipad for this reason, I hear the new iOS 8.1.1 is going to defeat the current jailbreak...)

  • EndarireEndarire Member Posts: 131
    I agree with this backporting notion.

    Two possible exceptions.

    [i]Dimension door[/i] was barred from PCs in the BG series due to so many proximal triggers. I'd rather not break or risk breaking these games due to this spell.

    [i]Contact other plane[/i] may get overwhelmed in BG2 if it tries to apply the Q&A to all quests. Perhaps for the main quest it would help.

    In general, I'd like the new spells from [i]Icewind Dale EE[/i] to be backported to the BG series such as [i]expeditious retreat[/i[.

    CrevsDaak
  • moody_magemoody_mage Member Posts: 2,051
    BG2Tweaks can do a few of these things including spell anumations.

  • BelgarathMTHBelgarathMTH Member Posts: 4,824
    What about CamDawg's IWDification mod? Doesn't it kind of already do all this?

    http://www.gibberlings3.net/iwdification/

    JuliusBorisov
  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 6,453
    I wants sneak attack in every infinity engine game

    Grammarsalad
  • CrevsDaakCrevsDaak Member Posts: 7,081
    @BelgarathMTH‌ yes, but some of IWD's spells (which aren't in CamD's mod right now) require effect opcodes that aren't on BG(2)EE's engine (which can't be modded). Other than that, all I can say is that it's a pretty good mod and I always use it.

    JuliusBorisov
  • MessiMessi Member Posts: 738
    I'm just going to say that I don't want to see IWD spells in BG2. Things like that should be left for mods as they drastically change the balance of the game.

  • GrammarsaladGrammarsalad Member Posts: 2,398
    Messi said:

    I'm just going to say that I don't want to see IWD spells in BG2. Things like that should be left for mods as they drastically change the balance of the game.

    Sure, but we need the opcodes to make the spells

  • Avenger_teambgAvenger_teambg Member, Developer Posts: 5,862
    bengoshi said:

    RPGWatch: Is your IE Plus engine so reusable you can retroactively apply changes to all the games you've developed with it? Can you fix or add something (a new class kit for example) to IWD:EE and then just plop it into BG:EE with a patch?

    Liam: That's one of the major benefits to working with our updated engine, definitely. For example, one of the major improvements we've made to IWD:EE is improved pathfinding, which will be back-ported to BG:EE and BGII:EE in their next patches. This system means that any engine fix made to one game will - within a patch or two - also be applied to our other games. Pretty rad (from the most recent IWDEE interview here: http://www.rpgwatch.com/show/article?articleid=268)

    Wow, just wow!

    Note, that most players don't make a distinction between engine and data changes.
    Engine changes are almost guaranteed to percolate into every other game, just for code maintenance reasons.
    They might be deactivated by an option or compile time switch, but usually they make their way into the other games.
    Data (content) changes won't make it that easily. There supposed to be a difference between the games, if all data would be the same, they would be one big game. Also note, data could be moved between the games by the players themselves. Especially for stuff like portraits or soundsets.

    JuliusBorisovGrammarsaladGalactygonelminster
Sign In or Register to comment.