I wouldn't get your hopes too high for PVP in a later release. If the developers suddenly fell into a pile of money, they have many things they could do, only one of which is to rewrite the engine and rebalance every power for PVP.
Which feature they add, if they fell into an ankheg treasure horde, depends as much on "will people buy this?" as it does upon "which of our staff is free right now?" or "whom can we hire?"
Among the things on the wish list that take money to do: 1. Redo all the graphics (artists and modelers and animators) 2. Rewriting the scripting language to add a 7th party member and change hard code to soft code (coders and scripters) 3. Hire more writers to produce more PVE content (authors) 4. Clean up and add music and effects (sound designers, mixers, musicians) 5. Advertising 6. PVP (coders and testers) 7. Beef up the spell effects (artists and animators)
So ... yeah, I don't recommend you interpret "no PVP in the near term" as "they definitely will put it in BGII:EE for sure." You could disappoint yourself.
Absolutely not. First it would pull effort away from the core game. Second, the mechanics in dnd can be absurdly broken in an overpowered way. Just think of all the things we do in pve...if we had dedicated pvp, players would Bitch and moan for balance which would then detract from the pve experience, which is the core game.
I don't think PvP in BG1 would be all that hard to balance with a level cap of 161k as you can't do the 'absurd' things that BG2 allows.
The way I would envisage PvP would be as a stand alone entity (no importing or such), where you start at 0 exp with 100 or so gold to buy equipment from a merchant and build up from there. I realise that opens up other avenues such as 'pay to win', but I'm just genuinely interested to see what startegies develop and such from playing against human opponents.
I don't think the devs will do it in either BG1 or 2 EE, but if there is better online functionality and mod support then I think some modders will more than likely have a go.
In Badur's Gate you come across many parties and things get to fighting, the way you fight then is basically PvP only one of those player parties is controlled by AI.
Everyone on this board is in a way a hardcore fan. Seeing that people register here that actually ask for PvP, that shows there already is a crowd that loves old style RPG and want to have turn or pause based PvP.
It's a more tactical take to the whole concept, it's not about how fast you click, but your actual decisions that count.
The interesting thing is, i have yet to see the naysayers come with a valid reason why it shouldnt belong in the game. Although it is ofc not required.
You aren't looking very hard. My "VALID" reason for not wanting it is clearly stated. it is "VALID" because I like all adult human beings have the right to my opinion.
Uhh you must think very highly of yourself if you think your opinion is qualified as a reason for well, anything. Unless by reason you mean this: "PvP is...not in sync with what the game is about"? All Bioware's games based on D&D which came after BG had PvP and it, surprise, worked very well. In fact NWN was completely multiplayer oriented game, and it still has an active player base. More than bg, which has none but a bunch of hardcore oldschool players like me and maybe some theorycrafting tabletop players who are ignorant enough of being afraid of any change to their beloved core tabletop rules, which BG isnt anyway. ohemgee.
No, because.. Well.. BG is not a PVPing game. It's original release was intended for a storyline without Player to Player combat. The thing that makes this game special and has numerous people paying for it's Re-polish and Re-release is that it is Baldur's Gate.
The interesting thing is, i have yet to see the naysayers come with a valid reason why it shouldnt belong in the game. Although it is ofc not required.
You aren't looking very hard. My "VALID" reason for not wanting it is clearly stated. it is "VALID" because I like all adult human beings have the right to my opinion.
Uhh you must think very highly of yourself if you think your opinion is qualified as a reason for well, anything. Unless by reason you mean this: "PvP is...not in sync with what the game is about"? All Bioware's games based on D&D which came after BG had PvP and it, surprise, worked very well. In fact NWN was completely multiplayer oriented game, and it still has an active player base. More than bg, which has none but a bunch of hardcore oldschool players like me and maybe some theorycrafting tabletop players who are ignorant enough of being afraid of any change to their beloved core tabletop rules, which BG isnt anyway. ohemgee.
Give me one reason that YOUR opinion is better than mine :-D And of course back it up with Business case study and cost benefit analysis if your reason involves pseudo sales projections.
There is a difference between "why PVP doesn't belong" and "why PVP ought not be implemented." One argument is from aesthetics and theme, one is from economics and target market. If we got everything that "belonged" in Baldur's Gate, it'd cost a lot more than what we're paying (and the contracts would look much different!).
Just want to raise an point, i would really like a MMORPG game made based on D&D Faerûn and placed on the sword coast (or the entire Faerûn if the devs for this game accept this challenge). I would really like if this MMORPG had just happened some years later than BG and BG2, and some references to events from other single game RPGs like Neverwinter nights, Icewind Dale, Planescape:Torment among others took place in this MMORPG.
But for BG and BG2 again i say, i don't see much reason for a PvP, from the engine point of view to the prupose of the game point of view.
Let's face it, if you REALLY want PvP, just do multiplayer with somebody, and attack eachother. Theoretically you do the same amount, and take the same amount of damage as with the NPC enemies you face... so there you have it. bgee already has PvP. Have a happy Multiplayer Games, and may the odds be ever in your favor.
Comments
Which feature they add, if they fell into an ankheg treasure horde, depends as much on "will people buy this?" as it does upon "which of our staff is free right now?" or "whom can we hire?"
Among the things on the wish list that take money to do:
1. Redo all the graphics (artists and modelers and animators)
2. Rewriting the scripting language to add a 7th party member and change hard code to soft code (coders and scripters)
3. Hire more writers to produce more PVE content (authors)
4. Clean up and add music and effects (sound designers, mixers, musicians)
5. Advertising
6. PVP (coders and testers)
7. Beef up the spell effects (artists and animators)
So ... yeah, I don't recommend you interpret "no PVP in the near term" as "they definitely will put it in BGII:EE for sure." You could disappoint yourself.
The way I would envisage PvP would be as a stand alone entity (no importing or such), where you start at 0 exp with 100 or so gold to buy equipment from a merchant and build up from there. I realise that opens up other avenues such as 'pay to win', but I'm just genuinely interested to see what startegies develop and such from playing against human opponents.
I don't think the devs will do it in either BG1 or 2 EE, but if there is better online functionality and mod support then I think some modders will more than likely have a go.
Everyone on this board is in a way a hardcore fan. Seeing that people register here that actually ask for PvP, that shows there already is a crowd that loves old style RPG and want to have turn or pause based PvP.
It's a more tactical take to the whole concept, it's not about how fast you click, but your actual decisions that count.
But for BG and BG2 again i say, i don't see much reason for a PvP, from the engine point of view to the prupose of the game point of view.
bgee already has PvP.
Have a happy Multiplayer Games, and may the odds be ever in your favor.