To deltago: On Beamdog not being the DM. I disagree. That is the entire purpose of the game. They build the "world" they build the dungeon, they build story and through the video game they become the DM. Part of being a good DM is knowing how to build a good story and how to gently lead the party.
On BG2 having issues. No disagreement. I actually like BG1 better for the story and the freedom. BG2 introduced a lot of game improvements and some great dungeons.
However, after those great games came a lot of free mods. SoD is coming after those free mods. SoD needs to be a lot better than the free mods. I actually think they are close. Some more dialog, better dialog, better trigger locations for dialog, better options for evil party, prod the player down the path don't beat with a sledge hammer, and generally just better storytelling. That is the polish I expect from an official expansion I have to pay for.
On TG: I actually didn't notice and didn't care. I also don't think anyone else would have either until Beamdog tried to use it as a marketing ploy that badly backfired. Unlike most everyone else that commented, I attempted to give useful ideas on how to make it better, something Beamdog said they were going to do. Sorry if commenting on the TG subject upset you.
To deltago: On Beamdog not being the DM. I disagree. That is the entire purpose of the game. They build the "world" they build the dungeon, they build story and through the video game they become the DM. Part of being a good DM is knowing how to build a good story and how to gently lead the party.
Actually BeamDog wrote the module, to use that analogy. WE are the DM's of our own games. If you want to play a Monty Haul game and console in money and items and crank the difficulty you can do that. Or play it is as. Or load mods of any variety as BeamDog hasn't stopped that practice. Or reload again and again until you get through every encounter "perfectly". It doesn't matter. It is ultimately up to the player, not Beamdog, therefore Beamdog is not the DM.
That there are two ways to make an expansion. A seamless one without much hassle, and the opposite.
They apparently chose the opposite option this time. But hey, their product. I don't dispute that. I just don't have to like it. Particularly sinced I forked out the dough for it.
They chose the P&P DM approach, which is a reset of the characters (although it's not a complete reset). Frankly, they did the smart thing, despite folks' whining. Why? Because that means they set the powerlevel of the characters. No one is blazing through. Yes, you get a lot of your items back, but the devs for SoD still reset the bar...to their specifications. That is just good story setup, like it or not.
Tutu plus a bunch of select wellpolished (FREE!!!) mods brought better overall quality to the game than this expansion did, and even way before Beamdog picked up the reins. That's simply a fact. A sore point to some, but still a fact.
Tutu has been in development for over a decade.
And before someone tries to go, "Well, Tutu was free. A professional development team should be able to develop a product that's more polished", check yourself and realize that what Beamdog has done is quite impressive from a development perspective. The technical challenges alone...are probably numerous! I am a software developer by trade, and I understand dealing with technical limitations. A lot of folks don't understand these things at all. They think that everything should fit their expectations, regardless of whether those expectations even fit the story or game that the developers created.
This expansion needs a major overhaul, before things are... "shiny".
I think we will have to disagree on this point.
Does it need improvements? Sure. But after being spoiled by the 15 years of modding, with major projects like Tutu continuing development and TweakPacks...Of course folks would forget all the problems that the original BG1 had, that TotSC had. Problems that had to be fixed by mods such as "Unfinished Business". Take your nostalgia glasses off and realize that Beamdog is doing an excellent job coding for an engine that is very old (by programming standards), out of date, and lacking in developmental friendliness.
Actually BeamDog wrote the module, to use that analogy. WE are the DM's of our own games.
Really, we're the DM once get past the introduction. Beamdog forced certain things, which I think was smart, like losing all your gold and losing certain characters (because having tons of gold to buy all the most powerful items makes your party OP right off the bat and because said characters don't fit the story that is being told).
Tutu plus a bunch of select wellpolished (FREE!!!) mods brought better overall quality to the game than this expansion did, and even way before Beamdog picked up the reins. That's simply a fact. A sore point to some, but still a fact.
What is simply a fact, is that you don't appear to understand the difference between your opinion and a fact.
I have no interest in ever playing the unenhanced Baldur's Gate games again. That's a fact. If I said that makes BGEE/SoD/BGIIEE indisputably far superior to the originals plus mods, that would be my opinion.
On TG: I actually didn't notice and didn't care. I also don't think anyone else would have either until Beamdog tried to use it as a marketing ploy that badly backfired. Unlike most everyone else that commented, I attempted to give useful ideas on how to make it better, something Beamdog said they were going to do. Sorry if commenting on the TG subject upset you.
1) This topic has been utterly done to death, and your suggestion was not original and has problematic connotations. If you didn't look at the 30 other threads about it, I cannot blame you, but you cannot expect people to be impressed when somebody suggests something that's been suggested and argued over many, many times. If you want to know what's wrong with your suggestion, you can read and find out. Otherwise, Beamdog will have likely read your suggestion, since various devs seem to read most threads on the forum.
2) Beamdog did not "try to use it as a marketing ploy". Beamdog did not even mention the character until after the coordinated attacks on the game and Amber Scott had happened. Your statement is the sheerest nonsense. In no way, shape or form was the existence of a minor vendor NPC a marketing anything.
The bug up my ass is the execution of SoD. Tales of The Sword Coast had a seamless transistion from A to B (or back), without any nonsense about partymembers suddenly jumping ship, so to speak.
Pretty much every step of my way in SoD so far has made me frown.
Tales of the Sword Coast is an add in, including three side quests of varying length and a new store, but with no story of it's own. It's a completly different thing to SoD which is a story diven adventure that takes place between BG1 and BG2.
If you are more into Bethesda style free roaming and doing your own thing SoD was never going to be for you, and Beamdog where always open about what they where making.
Once you pay for the license, you actually don't have anything to spend your money on anyway. The Adventurer's Mart is cool, but you're so flush with cash by mid-game. It's a non-issue.
What is this foolishness? 'Buy' a license? Doesn't everyone find a secluded corner and murder all the enforcers for their sweet XP and items until they give up trying to take you in?
You also save a few thousand gold, plus get lots of XP and some good scrolls. Win win all round IMO.
I really don't see the point in comparing them. It's like ordering lasagna at a restaurant and then getting mad because you don't like it as much as the pad Thai your friend makes.
What is this foolishness? 'Buy' a license? Doesn't everyone find a secluded corner and murder all the enforcers for their sweet XP and items until they give up trying to take you in?
Like I was actually going to use the 30,000 gold I had anyway?...
So I've been doing a few play throughs of the entire series and have just gotten to ToB. My memory must have been faulty, because I previously thought it was a much better expansion than it is – in fact, I've been surprised to find that SoD (a game I give about a 7.5) is VASTLY superior to ToB in terms of pacing, art, plot, dialogue, and level design.
The dialogue in ToB is significantly weaker both for the player (sooo many exclamation marks!) and for the companions, many of whom seem to speak in SMS text. *Grin*, Aerie says. *Giggle.* My balanced, neutral character frequently winds up yelling at people (often with only a single dialogue choice) and seems to have suffered a Minsc-like blow to intelligence (Gorion just appeared out of knowhere to accuse me of murdering him? Sounds totally on the level!). I would take the snark in SoD over this drivel any day – it's amazing that people accuse Beamdog of writing "fanfiction" while merely calling ToB "flawed."
The levels are both linear and lazy – if Beamdog had created the goddawful Forest of Mir, Yaga Shura's stronghold, the siege camp, or the oasis, people in these forums would be calling them traitors to the franchise. These levels are so bad, I caught myself thinking back to SoD on several occasions and wishing for even half the creativity or competence that Beamdog had delivered.
When I first defended SoD, I said it was "about on par" with ToB. But that's not true at all – SoD is superior in pretty much every aspect save for *maybe* voice acting. I know that's not a terribly high bar, but if we're going to say that SoD is "mod quality" then we need to be willing to say that Bioware's final chapter for the saga is much, much worse.
ToB is awful. It may not be loved by fans, but it doesn't get the overblown hate and dismissal that SoD has. I'd suggest taking off the rose colored glasses, actively assessing whether you may be biased against the developer for reasons beyond gameplay, playing through the whole saga, and putting this into some perspective.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have a newborn baby inventory item to go take care of.
(By the way, Purudaya is right. ToB does not hold a candle to SoD. The dungeons are much better set up in SoD. SoD makes several mistakes and needs a good bit of polish before it's great, but SoD has a solid foundation that can be built from while ToB is something of a turd that has been polished.)
Yeah, ToB feels VERY rushed. SoD, by comparison, feels like the devs/writers took the time to sit down and actually do what they wanted to do. It's odd to me, now that I think about it, because I had mods specifically to fix the "rushed quality" of ToB. I don't have to have mods to fix things in SoD. Yeah, making the new SoD bard a bit more fleshed out would be cool, but that's really the only thing that feels rushed about the expansion (and it's already been admitted that his stuff was cut due to lack of time).
When I first defended SoD, I said it was "about on par" with ToB. But that's not true at all – SoD is superior in pretty much every aspect save for *maybe* voice acting. I know that's not a terribly high bar, but if we're going to say that SoD is "mod quality" then we need to be willing to say that Bioware's final chapter for the saga is much, much worse.
I wasn't a major fan of ToB i kinda enjoyed it but it was flawed in several areas but to say it is "much much worse than SoD" is waay off the mark. ToB had issues and it's pace was one of it's weakest aspects, true, but its voice acting was far superior. At no point during my playthrough of ToB did I stop and think sheeesh that was a crappy voice over...whereas it happens in SoD many times.
They are both good in their own way and both flawed in their own way I could concede that SoD is probably better overall but to say much much better like it isnt a contest is unjust to ToB.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have a newborn baby inventory item to go take care of.
Tsk. You know that means less room for the important stuff, right? Ammo, scrolls, gems, gear?
I know, right? Why can't I just keep her in the bag of holding with all those extra longswords?
It's like having a Boo that cries and vomits.
@Mush_Mush I believed the exact same thing until yesterday. Fire up a play through – it is so much worse than you remember. You're right that it has better voice acting, but there are times when ToB is embarrassing to play. SoD is leagues better imnsho.
I've played SOA countless times since first released but managed to force myself to finish TOB only once. For one, every guard is walking around with +5 longsword of death and you and party are walking superheroes. The thing is so linear too I just really am not a fan. The villain sucks too not up to irenicus or sarevok standards.
I've played SOA countless times since first released but managed to force myself to finish TOB only once. For one, every guard is walking around with +5 longsword of death and you and party are walking superheroes. The thing is so linear too I just really am not a fan. The villain sucks too not up to irenicus or sarevok standards.
The overpowerd cityguards where already a problem in SoA, but ToB made it even more ridiculous. On the other hand I truly belive that the Black Hearted would have been a great villian if it had be BG3 instead of a rushed AddOn - her backstory alone gives her lots of potential. If she had a chance to truly show *how* she manipulated nearly everyone around you, shou would have been an epic enemy.
Also, it took me just 15 years to notice that every endboss of the trilogy (BG Soa ToB) wants to become a god with different methods.. somehow I never noticed that oO
Anyways, ToB had great potential and wasted it due to rushing, while SoD has limited potential (since there is not much room between BG and SoA..) and did a pretty good job, if you consider the circumstances. they do have some problems with bugs though.
And while their writing is not perfect I do find it pretty good. I would even say -knowing that this will make me even more unpopular =P - that the writing is better than BG1. Then again, I never was a huge fan of Baldurs Gate 1, since it really does not have that much story after you play through it once. And no, ignoring the catastrophy that is brewing and the attempts on your life to go on a sight-seeing tour is not a feature that improves the story (in fact, I feel it is rather immersion breaking)
And no, ignoring the catastrophy that is brewing and the attempts on your life to go on a sight-seeing tour is not a feature that improves the story (in fact, I feel it is rather immersion breaking)
I honestly skip like half the game because I tend to enjoy story more than I enjoy actually galavanting off to, for instance, explore the Ulcast Dungeon. The whole region is going to potentially collapse into chaos, but you're exploring a dungeon? That's cool, I guess...makes me feel like Link in the Zelda series.
Meanwhile, Ganon is turning the kingdom into a shithole.
I will probably go back and redo the TotSC content and the content I missed when following the pure story path (I got all the NPCs except Alora, including the EE ones, though), since I have a save from before you enter BG city to stop Sarevok from becoming a Duke.
In BG2, it kind of feels a bit more appropriate to explore all the random dungeons and such, because you're raising money in Ch2. There is no crisis in Ch2.
It's true. Chapter 2 has Imoen injustly held by mage cops in an asylum designed to contain such people. In theory, she's not happy there but safe. No reason to go in unprepared. Now, Chapter 3, you get a flash warning you that Imoen is no longer safe and the time for screwing about has officially ended.
And no, ignoring the catastrophy that is brewing and the attempts on your life to go on a sight-seeing tour is not a feature that improves the story (in fact, I feel it is rather immersion breaking)
I honestly skip like half the game because I tend to enjoy story more than I enjoy actually galavanting off to, for instance, explore the Ulcast Dungeon. The whole region is going to potentially collapse into chaos, but you're exploring a dungeon? That's cool, I guess...makes me feel like Link in the Zelda series.
Meanwhile, Ganon is turning the kingdom into a shithole.
I will probably go back and redo the TotSC content and the content I missed when following the pure story path (I got all the NPCs except Alora, including the EE ones, though), since I have a save from before you enter BG city to stop Sarevok from becoming a Duke.
In BG2, it kind of feels a bit more appropriate to explore all the random dungeons and such, because you're raising money in Ch2. There is no crisis in Ch2.
I find Ch2 a tad problematic, but yes it is easier to argue away. By then you are a seasoned adventure and *know* that this kind of dungeons are full of powerful and helpful stuff. You don't wander around aimlesslesly but are more or less contracted most of the time, too. What you don't really know is that Imoen suffers while you are busy, most people would think that the Cowled wizards just lock the mages away and don't experiment on them, so yeah that argument is also usable. But once you are out of the underdark you are on a rather tight time-limit. You are dying and Suldenessalar is burning - so move it! Funily ToB *could* get away with you exploring the wilderness, since after the fall of Saradush your task just boils down to "survive till all others are dead". Depending on your alignment you could just go on a vacation and wait till the enemy comes to you (outside of their powerbase) or kill each other.
In Baldurs Gate, Sarevok has a plan and you are a *minor* nuisance until you appear at the party, so running around is actually benefitial for Sarevok. In SoA Irenicus is waiting for you, but once he has met you again, he can work on his actual plan and every delay you have is benefical for him at that point (only difference of coming later would be the state of Imoen) In ToB, the plans to directly involve you, so they can't really move forward without you. Or in other words, you need to become epic before the world really revolves around you ^^
But I really liek the fact that you can now skip BG1 with some losses - I wonder if Dungeon-be-gone will be added as a mod next, since they really cought the feeling of Chateu Irenicus with the hunt for Korlasz =P
I much prefer strong story-driven content to free roaming stuff. I'm not really a huge fan of dungeon diving either. I find that without a strong incentive to proceed I tend to loose interest in the game after a couple of hours (this has happened to me in every Bethesda game ever).
The exception to this was in ToB, when I spotted who the villain was straight away, but the game forced me to have a friendly conversation, rather than introducing them to the pointy end of my sword. For that reason alone I would rate SoD as far superior to ToB.
Here is a comparative ranking, which might give a better idea of what I think of SoD than any numerical rating.
Comments
...
Wait, what?!
What is your damn point then?
On BG2 having issues. No disagreement. I actually like BG1 better for the story and the freedom. BG2 introduced a lot of game improvements and some great dungeons.
However, after those great games came a lot of free mods. SoD is coming after those free mods. SoD needs to be a lot better than the free mods. I actually think they are close. Some more dialog, better dialog, better trigger locations for dialog, better options for evil party, prod the player down the path don't beat with a sledge hammer, and generally just better storytelling. That is the polish I expect from an official expansion I have to pay for.
On TG: I actually didn't notice and didn't care. I also don't think anyone else would have either until Beamdog tried to use it as a marketing ploy that badly backfired. Unlike most everyone else that commented, I attempted to give useful ideas on how to make it better, something Beamdog said they were going to do. Sorry if commenting on the TG subject upset you.
And before someone tries to go, "Well, Tutu was free. A professional development team should be able to develop a product that's more polished", check yourself and realize that what Beamdog has done is quite impressive from a development perspective. The technical challenges alone...are probably numerous!
I am a software developer by trade, and I understand dealing with technical limitations. A lot of folks don't understand these things at all. They think that everything should fit their expectations, regardless of whether those expectations even fit the story or game that the developers created. I think we will have to disagree on this point.
Does it need improvements? Sure. But after being spoiled by the 15 years of modding, with major projects like Tutu continuing development and TweakPacks...Of course folks would forget all the problems that the original BG1 had, that TotSC had. Problems that had to be fixed by mods such as "Unfinished Business". Take your nostalgia glasses off and realize that Beamdog is doing an excellent job coding for an engine that is very old (by programming standards), out of date, and lacking in developmental friendliness. Really, we're the DM once get past the introduction. Beamdog forced certain things, which I think was smart, like losing all your gold and losing certain characters (because having tons of gold to buy all the most powerful items makes your party OP right off the bat and because said characters don't fit the story that is being told).
Also, all the party members' backpack items should appear in a chest after they are dismissed from the party.
I have no interest in ever playing the unenhanced Baldur's Gate games again. That's a fact. If I said that makes BGEE/SoD/BGIIEE indisputably far superior to the originals plus mods, that would be my opinion.
2) Beamdog did not "try to use it as a marketing ploy". Beamdog did not even mention the character until after the coordinated attacks on the game and Amber Scott had happened. Your statement is the sheerest nonsense. In no way, shape or form was the existence of a minor vendor NPC a marketing anything.
If you are more into Bethesda style free roaming and doing your own thing SoD was never going to be for you, and Beamdog where always open about what they where making.
You also save a few thousand gold, plus get lots of XP and some good scrolls. Win win all round IMO.
The dialogue in ToB is significantly weaker both for the player (sooo many exclamation marks!) and for the companions, many of whom seem to speak in SMS text. *Grin*, Aerie says. *Giggle.* My balanced, neutral character frequently winds up yelling at people (often with only a single dialogue choice) and seems to have suffered a Minsc-like blow to intelligence (Gorion just appeared out of knowhere to accuse me of murdering him? Sounds totally on the level!). I would take the snark in SoD over this drivel any day – it's amazing that people accuse Beamdog of writing "fanfiction" while merely calling ToB "flawed."
The levels are both linear and lazy – if Beamdog had created the goddawful Forest of Mir, Yaga Shura's stronghold, the siege camp, or the oasis, people in these forums would be calling them traitors to the franchise. These levels are so bad, I caught myself thinking back to SoD on several occasions and wishing for even half the creativity or competence that Beamdog had delivered.
When I first defended SoD, I said it was "about on par" with ToB. But that's not true at all – SoD is superior in pretty much every aspect save for *maybe* voice acting. I know that's not a terribly high bar, but if we're going to say that SoD is "mod quality" then we need to be willing to say that Bioware's final chapter for the saga is much, much worse.
ToB is awful. It may not be loved by fans, but it doesn't get the overblown hate and dismissal that SoD has. I'd suggest taking off the rose colored glasses, actively assessing whether you may be biased against the developer for reasons beyond gameplay, playing through the whole saga, and putting this into some perspective.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have a newborn baby inventory item to go take care of.
(By the way, Purudaya is right. ToB does not hold a candle to SoD. The dungeons are much better set up in SoD. SoD makes several mistakes and needs a good bit of polish before it's great, but SoD has a solid foundation that can be built from while ToB is something of a turd that has been polished.)
They are both good in their own way and both flawed in their own way I could concede that SoD is probably better overall but to say much much better like it isnt a contest is unjust to ToB.
It's like having a Boo that cries and vomits.
@Mush_Mush I believed the exact same thing until yesterday. Fire up a play through – it is so much worse than you remember. You're right that it has better voice acting, but there are times when ToB is embarrassing to play. SoD is leagues better imnsho.
I've played SOA countless times since first released but managed to force myself to finish TOB only once. For one, every guard is walking around with +5 longsword of death and you and party are walking superheroes. The thing is so linear too I just really am not a fan. The villain sucks too not up to irenicus or sarevok standards.
https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/40915/rp-castle-greyhawk/p1
On the other hand I truly belive that the Black Hearted would have been a great villian if it had be BG3 instead of a rushed AddOn - her backstory alone gives her lots of potential. If she had a chance to truly show *how* she manipulated nearly everyone around you, shou would have been an epic enemy.
Also, it took me just 15 years to notice that every endboss of the trilogy (BG Soa ToB) wants to become a god with different methods.. somehow I never noticed that oO
Anyways, ToB had great potential and wasted it due to rushing, while SoD has limited potential (since there is not much room between BG and SoA..) and did a pretty good job, if you consider the circumstances.
they do have some problems with bugs though.
And while their writing is not perfect I do find it pretty good. I would even say -knowing that this will make me even more unpopular =P - that the writing is better than BG1. Then again, I never was a huge fan of Baldurs Gate 1, since it really does not have that much story after you play through it once. And no, ignoring the catastrophy that is brewing and the attempts on your life to go on a sight-seeing tour is not a feature that improves the story (in fact, I feel it is rather immersion breaking)
http://www.ign.com/wikis/the-legend-of-zelda-ocarina-of-time-3d/Side_Quests_&_Mini-Games
Meanwhile, Ganon is turning the kingdom into a shithole.
I will probably go back and redo the TotSC content and the content I missed when following the pure story path (I got all the NPCs except Alora, including the EE ones, though), since I have a save from before you enter BG city to stop Sarevok from becoming a Duke.
In BG2, it kind of feels a bit more appropriate to explore all the random dungeons and such, because you're raising money in Ch2. There is no crisis in Ch2.
By then you are a seasoned adventure and *know* that this kind of dungeons are full of powerful and helpful stuff. You don't wander around aimlesslesly but are more or less contracted most of the time, too.
What you don't really know is that Imoen suffers while you are busy, most people would think that the Cowled wizards just lock the mages away and don't experiment on them, so yeah that argument is also usable.
But once you are out of the underdark you are on a rather tight time-limit. You are dying and Suldenessalar is burning - so move it!
Funily ToB *could* get away with you exploring the wilderness, since after the fall of Saradush your task just boils down to "survive till all others are dead". Depending on your alignment you could just go on a vacation and wait till the enemy comes to you (outside of their powerbase) or kill each other.
In Baldurs Gate, Sarevok has a plan and you are a *minor* nuisance until you appear at the party, so running around is actually benefitial for Sarevok.
In SoA Irenicus is waiting for you, but once he has met you again, he can work on his actual plan and every delay you have is benefical for him at that point (only difference of coming later would be the state of Imoen)
In ToB, the plans to directly involve you, so they can't really move forward without you. Or in other words, you need to become epic before the world really revolves around you ^^
But I really liek the fact that you can now skip BG1 with some losses - I wonder if Dungeon-be-gone will be added as a mod next, since they really cought the feeling of Chateu Irenicus with the hunt for Korlasz =P
The exception to this was in ToB, when I spotted who the villain was straight away, but the game forced me to have a friendly conversation, rather than introducing them to the pointy end of my sword. For that reason alone I would rate SoD as far superior to ToB.
Here is a comparative ranking, which might give a better idea of what I think of SoD than any numerical rating.
1. Planescape: Torment
2. Baldur's Gate 2
3. Siege of Dragonspear
4. NWN: HotU
5. Baldur's Gate 1
6. NWN2: MotB
7. Icewind Dale
8. Pillers of Eternity
9. BG: TotSC
10. NWN2 OC
11. NWN: SoU
12. Throne of Bhaal
13. NWN OC
14. Skyrim
15. Icewind Dale 2
Edit: Added in ToSC separately since certain people seem to think it was good.