I have not voted yet... I have a bias if you read the ReadMe:P But I will say that @CamDawg is correct, this was content based on forum posters. A team was assembled at IEEAIS and the mod was created with DG in the lead. The Sarevok/Imoen banters are already in there... they are just speeded up since most players never see them with ToB being so short.
Just so everyone is clear on what is being asked here, this is for Ascension. The "Improved Battles" were created before "Ascension" and Wes is the one who packaged them all up together with WeiDU into the current mod package. Voting for the extra battles is fine too though. Some of them are quite good and would be a worthy addition with some tweaks.
Ascension does the following with regards to gameplay: - Sarevok recognizes if you still have his sword, and if you give it to him it regains some of its former power making it a worthy ToB sword. - Balthazar is a good guy! He can be convinced to either commit suicide or join you in your final fight. The battle against him can be avoided with this mod. - Melissan brings back Irenicus from the Abyss... good fight that. - Irenicus calls upon Bodhi... who can be persuaded to join with an evil party in the final battle. - Melissan brings back the 'Five' Bhaalspawn that you have slain instead of those silly demons only. *Unless you have Balthazar in your party for this fight. - Player can gain new Bhaalspawn powers for the final fight. These alone can get you through this fight if you are clever and careful. Melissan still does summon demons, but one of your new powers allows you to control them too. During QA, I had an army of her demons on my side totally 57 at one time. - Two new epilogues written for the two new joinables: Bodhi (Quitch) and Balthazar (*grin)
There may be a few more minor tweaks that I am forgetting, will dig through the original package if and when something is considered:D
@CUV I apologize, I missed this post the first time around! Very insightful.
@CamDawg thank you for your clarifications. But since you know a lot about the history of this mod...and since it was approved by Gaider and worked on by Gaider as well...I see that you conclude that it's an obvious choice to include in a final version of BG2 EE w/ TOB. (I had to edit this sorry, just saw your next few posts as well...amazing, and thank you for your insight on this thread!)
@Anduine, what exactly do you think wouldn't be fun for you in this mod? Again, ambiguous, I'm not really getting much as to why exactly this thing turns you off so much in the details.
@Zeckul You're aware that @CamDawg is one of the authors of Ascension, aren't you? I think he knows what is the history behind it
Nononononono! I've not worked on Ascension; that's @Cuv. I've been modding for nearly a decade now (my best-known stuff is heading up BG2 Fixpack and Tweaks) but Cuv and some of the other old-timers on here (well, maybe just slightly-more-old-timers) still have me beat.
I voted not to include Ascension for pragmatic reasons, and even Gaider himself warns not to think of the mod as a should-have-been. I find the RP aspects of it worthwhile, but despite the claims of its fans I've always suspected there's a sizable group of players who don't (and the poll bears this out). We'd be doing them a disservice by essentially forcing the mod upon them; I suspect a Descension mod (Dissention?) would follow the release of BG2EE fairly quickly.
@Debaser: I'm not really interested in sitting here and debating detailed points of why I do not like the Ascension mod when my purist nature should more than suffice, but I will oblige to a minor degree. Take it or leave it as it is.
I have no interest in the additional banter, specifically referring to Imoen. I felt the final battles in ToB were just fine. I felt the fight with Melissan was more than adequate. I enjoyed my conversations with Balthazar as well as the occasion when I would decide to have him fight alongside me. I see no need to tamper with that. Ascension does not have enough to interest me in order to warrant playing a game in what I refer to as a less-than-pure form. I enjoy playing games in their base version, and if I am to sacrifice that, there had better be one seriously needed reason, and Ascension does not fulfill that requirement for me.
@Debaser: I'm not really interested in sitting here and debating detailed points of why I do not like the Ascension mod when my purist nature should more than suffice, but I will oblige to a minor degree. Take it or leave it as it is.
I have no interest in the additional banter, specifically referring to Imoen. I felt the final battles in ToB were just fine. I felt the fight with Melissan was more than adequate. I enjoyed my conversations with Balthazar as well as the occasion when I would decide to have him fight alongside me. I see no need to tamper with that. Ascension does not have enough to interest me in order to warrant playing a game in what I refer to as a less-than-pure form. I enjoy playing games in their base version, and if I am to sacrifice that, there had better be one seriously needed reason, and Ascension does not fulfill that requirement for me.
@Anduine no this is sufficient, I don't wanna talk about it all day either, I just never really got any clear reasoning, other than that you claim to be a "purist". Me...I'm not so much. I found the end-game battles to be rather lacking in challenges even on INSANE setting. I love the banter with Imoen and Sarevok, and now that @CUV has stated that it was always in there, just not on a fast enough time table, I'm really glad they fixed that error.
Most of this stuff seems to be in the game already from CUV stated, just not completed / implemented correctly the first time around. But the extra hard fights really made it a game to me. *shrug* The extra party member options near the end aren't that important to me but they're fun for a change up.
I voted not to include Ascension for pragmatic reasons, and even Gaider himself warns not to think of the mod as a should-have-been. I find the RP aspects of it worthwhile, but despite the claims of its fans I've always suspected there's a sizable group of players who don't (and the poll bears this out). We'd be doing them a disservice by essentially forcing the mod upon them; I suspect a Descension mod (Dissention?) would follow the release of BG2EE fairly quickly.
There's definitely a group of players who really don't like anything about Ascension and would be frustrated by its inclusion. I'm aware of that and yet: - There's also a large group of players who don't visit forums and don't mod their game at all. They might not even be aware that better options exist, or if they are, they don't feel like figuring out how to install them. In fact, I suspect the majority of players do not feel confident about messing with their installation in any way. We're doing this group a disservice by leaving Ascension out. - There's also a group of purists (represented by Arduine here) who simply won't play anything that hasn't the developers' seal of approval. As long as Ascension remains an unofficial add-on, they will ignore it.
Leaving Ascension out is thus a disservice to all players, except those who really don't want to see changes to the original content, or those who simply don't like the Ascension mod. It's catering to a minority who anyway, still has the original game if what they like is the vanilla experience, while leaving the majority of users without the means to easily access this content.
Be careful @Zeckul; your argument can be applied to all modded content. I'm pretty sure you don't advocate the inclusion of anything that only gets a 33% no vote.
We already have a very granular system in place for players to customize their games with the existing mod ecosystem and the majority of players know nothing about it. Amongst those who know about it there are many that don't trust it, see little benefit in it, are daunted by its complexity, or don't use it for other reasons (rational and otherwise). The solution is not to incorporate content and take away those choices, but to educate and introduce players to it--and if Beamdog feels bold, even endorse some of it.
As much as I think mods add to the game I feel taking that choice away from players is too big of a tradeoff. I've proposed one method, e.g. the CD Projekt/IWD approach, in the beta forums as a way to play to the strengths of both approaches.
Leaving Ascension out is thus a disservice to all players, except those who really don't want to see changes to the original content, or those who simply don't like the Ascension mod. It's catering to a minority who anyway, still has the original game if what they like is the vanilla experience, while leaving the majority of users without the means to easily access this content.
Except leaving Ascension out of the released version does not stop anyone from downloading it themselves, whereas including it at release removes that choice. Isn't modding about customization and choice? Not "Play this way or do not play."
@Anduine, what if it was handled as a DLC? Would you have a problem with that?
No, of course not. I have no issues with it being easily accessible. My only issue is that I do not want Ascension (or any other mod, for that matter) being a required part of the Enhanced Edition series. My preference is that "Enhanced" be kept to minimum in terms of altering the game aside from gamebreaking bugs, graphic improvements, etc.
@Debaser I would have a problem with it, if only because Beamdog would then be making money from a mod written by people who never had an opportunity to profit from it.
Including it as part of the base installation is different because it makes it a feature of the product rather than a paid add-on; Beamdog is going to make the same $20 whether 1PP is included or not, for example (and even then there's some legal issues that have to be sorted out first). A larger mod like Ascension might make sense as a DLC, it's so big, but the result is that Overhaul gets to profit directly from the work of others who never see a penny.
Now, revamping and re-releasing Ascension as an "endorsed mod" would be different, and much more palatable to me personally.
As much as I think mods add to the game I feel taking that choice away from players is too big of a tradeoff.
Yet, that tradeoff was made several times already in BG:EE. Players won't be able to choose whether they want the 1pp content being put in, or the many fixes taken from fixpacks, or to run in the ToB engine and support resolutions above 640x480. UB was even seriously considered. It was judged that these were solid enough improvements that everyone should benefit from it, and if a minority disagreed, either they could play the original or mod the old behavior back in.
In an ideal world, Overhaul could fully support both endings and make it as easy as a single click to switch between the two. Given its limited resources, only one will likely be chosen, and I argue that the better one is Ascension. To the argument that this takes away player choice, I answer two things:
1) The choice of getting Ascension or not is only available to the minority who knows about it, has the technical knowledge to do it and the confidence in the mod system to allow it. This, we agree, is not so many people. To everyone else, there is only one choice and that is what ships with the game. 2) The inclusion of any content in BG2:EE does not preclude anyone from playing the original game, nor from modding the old content back in. Modders remain free to build the game they want, they simply start from a different base. The purpose of BG:EE is not to provide choice by relying on third-party add-ons, but to provide the best possible base experience and reduce the dependency on mods.
It's not stated specifically anywhere in the readme, which we both agree upon.
Alternatively you could read the post from Cuv, one of the Ascension contributors, a bit upthread from the first time this was asserted and debunked.
@CamDawg - I'll admit I haven't read all five pages of this thread, but there certainly seems to be a lot of interest and debate about it. I did read the readme at one point and even proof-edited those docs, including Wes's addendums and Gaider's original comments which may or may not have all been preserved. What I gather is that some of the additions were planned but not implemented in the original game due to time constraints. A lot of them were later suggestions from players, as @Cuv details.
I still think my original suggestion is best and should prevent any significant further debate about logistics. Include it with the game as an optional add-on, not a mandatory one. That should satisfy both camps here, no?
What I gather is that some of the additions were planned but not implemented in the original game due to time constraints. A lot of them were later suggestions from players, as @Cuv details.
I suggest you read @Cuv's posts a little more closely, where he (twice) debunks the notion that Ascension was originally planned or cut.
I still think my original suggestion is best and should prevent any significant further debate about logistics. Include it with the game as an optional add-on, not a mandatory one. That should satisfy both camps here, no?
Yes, we had a discussion in the beta forums a few weeks ago where I proposed exactly this.
@CamDawg - well, certainly some of the engine improvements (particularly around detectable spells/stats) were never implemented in the ToB engine as released, but were at least partially implemented further by Ascension. That much is evident just by looking at the files in both, and I believe @Cuv has agreed with this elsewhere.
I dug through some old disks and found all the original versions of Ascension and at least three versions of Spork's Irenicus. Also thought one of the original readmes with version fixes would be an interesting read for those interested. This is pre-WeiDU.
Well I think the debate here, allthough quite emptied for more remarks about for or against Asc, shows that an integrated mod addon tool in BG:EE could be a solution.
I could picture - once BG:EE set sails, sells half a million copies, we'll see the DLC's. Why not make a DLC platform ingame, where addons(DLCs) can be loaded/unloaded.
Why not make the platform accessible and open source, so independent mod makers can adjust their content to match the new settings, making it easy for players to adopt indie mods, like Asc, and others.
It's been done in quite some games, and we've had it already in BGT/tutu with the self extracting "one-click and play" mods.
I've got one more thing to add. Lot's of mods fix existing bugs in the gameplay content. Now overhaul have said they only use mods which the author/s have given express permission for them to use and distribute. However, following on from this logic, this does not mean that if a set of bug fixes appears in a mod, and Overhaul can't contact it's author, that those mods are going to remain unfixed in enhanced edition, it just means that they need to fix those bugs themselves, not just copy paste code. In a lot of cases, the code they use would be to all intents and purposes the same code that was used in this hypothetical mod.
This opens the issue of Overhaul being able to add content which deals with some of the same problems that ascension deals with, without actually using ascension itself For example (apologies if I get this part wrong, I don't know asc or ToB particularly well) One of the fixes is apparently to take certain NPC dialouges which exist in game (apparently Imoen and Sarevok?) but take far to long to activate, and speed them up, so you are much more likely to encounter them in the course of events. Well, If the source material exists in the original code, it is not a stretch to think Overhaul would be able to do this fix themselves if they wish, without touching the code for ascension.
That's what I think the real issue is here. My fear is that a lot of people are judging this as "Do you like ascension?", or "Do you think ascention is an improvement over vanilla ToB?" rather than looking at the greater underlying issue here, which is whether or not Overhaul should be using mods which are not "gameplay neutral" - ie: would modify existing gameplay.
Let's leave aside the issue of whether or not Overhaul are going to be contractually able to use or modify in this fashion, either through ascension or any other mod, since that is adressing the question of "Can?" rather than "Should?"
Setting aside purism (which really doesn't hold for BG:EE anyway, since the game has already been modified and you have three new characters running around), I don't understand objections to "Ascension" based on the merits of its content.
The original version of ToB has certain inconsistencies in its plot - for example, Balthazar has no reason to try and kill a Good-aligned PC, especially since he knows you're actively trying to thwart Amelyssan, just as he is. Also, the final battle against Amelyssan has her summoning Elemental Princes to defend her, creatures with no direct relationship to Bhaal (or, really, anything that's happening at that point).
"Ascension" does away with these plotholes: Balthazar can be persuaded to join you, and Amelyssan uses Bhaal's essence - the thing she's been gathering throughout the entire game - to summon enemies who are actually related to the overall Bhaalspawn saga.
Purely in terms of story, it doesn't detract or diminish anything that already exists, it simply improves the endgame events. How is ToB better without it?
I also want to reiterate that despite my stubbornness at defending the inclusion of Ascension, I am not opposed to making it an optional component. Actually, in an ideal world, the Enhanced Edition would include a super user-friendly mod manager, and Overhaul would actively support the most popular mods, starting with Ascension of course.
The thing is, BG2:EE will have a small team working on it for about a year. Developing the Ascension mod alone took 4 months to a skilled team of modders and BG2's lead designer. I just don't think there is time to support two different endings for BG2:EE, and that it's in the project's best interest to select one, polish it as much as possible, and leave the task of providing optional components to mods.
Hence, since I doubt supporting both endings is a good investment of Overhaul's time, they will select one. Out of the two, Ascension is better choice.
I love Ascension, and I would love to see it in BG2:EE, but you would have to tone done some of the fights a bit, they would be too difficult for a lot of casual players, but please leave in the option to bring back the full wrath of them if I want to.
Also, the poll is biased with 3 yes options and one no option The options could just have easily have been Yes, it should be included as is No, It is mostly fine, but the improved battles are too difficult No, although I'd like a few components to be added seperately No, it should work as mod but not be included
That would make the total No votes to be 68% rather than 32% (at time of posting) A big difference I'm sure you will agree. So I think only the arguments themselves should be listened to, not the popularity of the poll options.
That's what I think the real issue is here. My fear is that a lot of people are judging this as "Do you like ascension?", or "Do you think ascention is an improvement over vanilla ToB?" rather than looking at the greater underlying issue here, which is whether or not Overhaul should be using mods which are not "gameplay neutral" - ie: would modify existing gameplay.
I'm not sure what you mean by "gameplay". Every improvement in BG:EE affects gameplay in one way or the other, whether or not it comes from a mod.
Also, the poll is biased with 3 yes options and one no option The options could just have easily have been Yes, it should be included as is No, It is mostly fine, but the improved battles are too difficult No, although I'd like a few components to be added seperately No, it should work as mod but not be included
That would make the total No votes to be 68% rather than 32% (at time of posting)
No because the options wouldn't mean the same thing. "No, It is mostly fine, but the improved battles are too difficult" is confusing: you don't want it included, but it's mostly fine, but the battles are too difficult? So you want it included or no?
No mods should be added even slightly. It destroys customization. If you want ascension, mod the game yourself, it's not fair to impose it on everyone else.
Hence why I don't want 1PP in BG:EE. The only things that should come with BG:EE are the bug fixpacks.
You know that the volunteers are changing encounters and creature spawn locations and amounts? Sometimes rotating creatures out for entirely different creatures in some areas? The developers are keeping in those new changes and mark them as "Bugs" fixed. Why is it so bad that after all of that that ToB gets some proper encounters?
@Zeckul When we are talking about "Ascension"... do you mean the whole WeiDU package? When I talk about Ascension, I am talking only about the actual Ascension mod... and NOT the Improved Battles that are packaged with the current download.
The poll is kinda confusing in that regard. "Ascension" itself has no components to leave out other than itself.
Comments
@CamDawg thank you for your clarifications. But since you know a lot about the history of this mod...and since it was approved by Gaider and worked on by Gaider as well...I see that you conclude that it's an obvious choice to include in a final version of BG2 EE w/ TOB. (I had to edit this sorry, just saw your next few posts as well...amazing, and thank you for your insight on this thread!)
@Anduine, what exactly do you think wouldn't be fun for you in this mod? Again, ambiguous, I'm not really getting much as to why exactly this thing turns you off so much in the details.
I voted not to include Ascension for pragmatic reasons, and even Gaider himself warns not to think of the mod as a should-have-been. I find the RP aspects of it worthwhile, but despite the claims of its fans I've always suspected there's a sizable group of players who don't (and the poll bears this out). We'd be doing them a disservice by essentially forcing the mod upon them; I suspect a Descension mod (Dissention?) would follow the release of BG2EE fairly quickly.
I have no interest in the additional banter, specifically referring to Imoen. I felt the final battles in ToB were just fine. I felt the fight with Melissan was more than adequate. I enjoyed my conversations with Balthazar as well as the occasion when I would decide to have him fight alongside me. I see no need to tamper with that. Ascension does not have enough to interest me in order to warrant playing a game in what I refer to as a less-than-pure form. I enjoy playing games in their base version, and if I am to sacrifice that, there had better be one seriously needed reason, and Ascension does not fulfill that requirement for me.
Most of this stuff seems to be in the game already from CUV stated, just not completed / implemented correctly the first time around. But the extra hard fights really made it a game to me. *shrug* The extra party member options near the end aren't that important to me but they're fun for a change up.
- There's also a large group of players who don't visit forums and don't mod their game at all. They might not even be aware that better options exist, or if they are, they don't feel like figuring out how to install them. In fact, I suspect the majority of players do not feel confident about messing with their installation in any way. We're doing this group a disservice by leaving Ascension out.
- There's also a group of purists (represented by Arduine here) who simply won't play anything that hasn't the developers' seal of approval. As long as Ascension remains an unofficial add-on, they will ignore it.
Leaving Ascension out is thus a disservice to all players, except those who really don't want to see changes to the original content, or those who simply don't like the Ascension mod. It's catering to a minority who anyway, still has the original game if what they like is the vanilla experience, while leaving the majority of users without the means to easily access this content.
We already have a very granular system in place for players to customize their games with the existing mod ecosystem and the majority of players know nothing about it. Amongst those who know about it there are many that don't trust it, see little benefit in it, are daunted by its complexity, or don't use it for other reasons (rational and otherwise). The solution is not to incorporate content and take away those choices, but to educate and introduce players to it--and if Beamdog feels bold, even endorse some of it.
As much as I think mods add to the game I feel taking that choice away from players is too big of a tradeoff. I've proposed one method, e.g. the CD Projekt/IWD approach, in the beta forums as a way to play to the strengths of both approaches.
Except leaving Ascension out of the released version does not stop anyone from downloading it themselves, whereas including it at release removes that choice. Isn't modding about customization and choice? Not "Play this way or do not play."
Including it as part of the base installation is different because it makes it a feature of the product rather than a paid add-on; Beamdog is going to make the same $20 whether 1PP is included or not, for example (and even then there's some legal issues that have to be sorted out first). A larger mod like Ascension might make sense as a DLC, it's so big, but the result is that Overhaul gets to profit directly from the work of others who never see a penny.
Now, revamping and re-releasing Ascension as an "endorsed mod" would be different, and much more palatable to me personally.
In an ideal world, Overhaul could fully support both endings and make it as easy as a single click to switch between the two. Given its limited resources, only one will likely be chosen, and I argue that the better one is Ascension. To the argument that this takes away player choice, I answer two things:
1) The choice of getting Ascension or not is only available to the minority who knows about it, has the technical knowledge to do it and the confidence in the mod system to allow it. This, we agree, is not so many people. To everyone else, there is only one choice and that is what ships with the game.
2) The inclusion of any content in BG2:EE does not preclude anyone from playing the original game, nor from modding the old content back in. Modders remain free to build the game they want, they simply start from a different base. The purpose of BG:EE is not to provide choice by relying on third-party add-ons, but to provide the best possible base experience and reduce the dependency on mods.
I still think my original suggestion is best and should prevent any significant further debate about logistics. Include it with the game as an optional add-on, not a mandatory one. That should satisfy both camps here, no?
I could picture - once BG:EE set sails, sells half a million copies, we'll see the DLC's. Why not make a DLC platform ingame, where addons(DLCs) can be loaded/unloaded.
Why not make the platform accessible and open source, so independent mod makers can adjust their content to match the new settings, making it easy for players to adopt indie mods, like Asc, and others.
It's been done in quite some games, and we've had it already in BGT/tutu with the self extracting "one-click and play" mods.
thoughts?
Lot's of mods fix existing bugs in the gameplay content.
Now overhaul have said they only use mods which the author/s have given express permission for them to use and distribute. However, following on from this logic, this does not mean that if a set of bug fixes appears in a mod, and Overhaul can't contact it's author, that those mods are going to remain unfixed in enhanced edition, it just means that they need to fix those bugs themselves, not just copy paste code. In a lot of cases, the code they use would be to all intents and purposes the same code that was used in this hypothetical mod.
This opens the issue of Overhaul being able to add content which deals with some of the same problems that ascension deals with, without actually using ascension itself
For example (apologies if I get this part wrong, I don't know asc or ToB particularly well)
One of the fixes is apparently to take certain NPC dialouges which exist in game (apparently Imoen and Sarevok?) but take far to long to activate, and speed them up, so you are much more likely to encounter them in the course of events.
Well, If the source material exists in the original code, it is not a stretch to think Overhaul would be able to do this fix themselves if they wish, without touching the code for ascension.
That's what I think the real issue is here. My fear is that a lot of people are judging this as "Do you like ascension?", or "Do you think ascention is an improvement over vanilla ToB?" rather than looking at the greater underlying issue here, which is whether or not Overhaul should be using mods which are not "gameplay neutral" - ie: would modify existing gameplay.
Let's leave aside the issue of whether or not Overhaul are going to be contractually able to use or modify in this fashion, either through ascension or any other mod, since that is adressing the question of "Can?" rather than "Should?"
The original version of ToB has certain inconsistencies in its plot - for example, Balthazar has no reason to try and kill a Good-aligned PC, especially since he knows you're actively trying to thwart Amelyssan, just as he is. Also, the final battle against Amelyssan has her summoning Elemental Princes to defend her, creatures with no direct relationship to Bhaal (or, really, anything that's happening at that point).
"Ascension" does away with these plotholes: Balthazar can be persuaded to join you, and Amelyssan uses Bhaal's essence - the thing she's been gathering throughout the entire game - to summon enemies who are actually related to the overall Bhaalspawn saga.
Purely in terms of story, it doesn't detract or diminish anything that already exists, it simply improves the endgame events. How is ToB better without it?
The thing is, BG2:EE will have a small team working on it for about a year. Developing the Ascension mod alone took 4 months to a skilled team of modders and BG2's lead designer. I just don't think there is time to support two different endings for BG2:EE, and that it's in the project's best interest to select one, polish it as much as possible, and leave the task of providing optional components to mods.
Hence, since I doubt supporting both endings is a good investment of Overhaul's time, they will select one. Out of the two, Ascension is better choice.
The options could just have easily have been
Yes, it should be included as is
No, It is mostly fine, but the improved battles are too difficult
No, although I'd like a few components to be added seperately
No, it should work as mod but not be included
That would make the total No votes to be 68% rather than 32% (at time of posting)
A big difference I'm sure you will agree. So I think only the arguments themselves should be listened to, not the popularity of the poll options.
The poll is kinda confusing in that regard. "Ascension" itself has no components to leave out other than itself.