A the npcs from BG1 are "one layered jokes". A consequnce of this is most people's impressions of them is mostly headcanon.
This makes it very difficult to expand on them - however you do it, you will ineviably "get it wrong" for some people.
I would say that is why Beamdog chose to expand an NPC that wasn't very popular (Safina) rather than one with a major fanclub (Tiax).
I don't entirely agree. I get what you're saying, that they were one dimensional, but most BG1 characters could be fleshed out and even had identifiable personalities. Tiax had less of a personality and more of a gimmick in the form of one repeated line with a few variations "TIAX RULES"
Glint felt like a person with a history and a personality. He filled the role of a non evil gaymance too and was a fantastic cleric/thief. I'd take Glint over Tiax any day for a hundred reasons.
Minsc, Edwin, Jaheira and Viconia had already been fleshed out by Bioware in BG2, so as long as Beamdog stuck close to that, and they did, they where okay. It's fleshing out of the characters that haven't been touched that is likely to break people's headcanon.
"Why didn't ypu have Tiax" Because Glint is an actual character and Tiax is a one layered joke that some people like, but wouldn't be able to carry a story let alone any kind of decent romance.
tiax still has more personality and feels more real to me. fardragon is right about headcanon. fortunately tiax can easily be developed in a non-controversial way because everyone understands that he's a delusional, evil gnome and not a relatively ambivalent figure such as safana who can go either way.
Minsc, Edwin, Jaheira and Viconia had already been fleshed out by Bioware in BG2, so as long as Beamdog stuck close to that, and they did, they where okay.
Beamdog's writers did stick close enough to the BG2 personalities of Minsc, Jaheira, and Viconia, but I think they screwed up Edwin.
They tried to make him the class clown - a stupid-evil buffoon who intentionally makes random awkward-funny comments. BG2 Edwin wouldn't do that.
It is true that BG2 Edwin is used for comic relief, but I get the feeling that Beamdog didn't understand that this humor was unintentional from Edwin's perspective, and indeed he doesn't find those situations in BG2 funny at all. He's very intelligent but not very wise, pretty rude to others, and takes himself and his long-term quest for power very very seriously – and that's why it's funny for us (and for other party members) when things blow up in his face.
In SoD it's like he tries to be funny, and that's just wrong.
"Why didn't ypu have Tiax" Because Glint is an actual character and Tiax is a one layered joke that some people like, but wouldn't be able to carry a story let alone any kind of decent romance.
tiax still has more personality and feels more real to me. fardragon is right about headcanon. fortunately tiax can easily be developed in a non-controversial way because everyone understands that he's a delusional, evil gnome and not a relatively ambivalent figure such as safana who can go either way.
Ah, but is he mentally ill, or is he actually the Chosen of Cyric?
Maybe right about Edwin, I haven't done an evil playthrough yet, since I'm playing from the beginning of BG1, so I haven't tried him. The Edwin bits they added to BG1 seemed okay though.
Eh, there's a difference between someone in the real world with a mental illness and an NPC who has said nothing other than variations of "Tiax rules."
Delusional people can talk about more than whatever they falsely believe. It's one aspect of them as a person. Tiax literally has nothing else to his character as he stands. Any expansion of his character would be going beyond the source material.
Even Edwin, whom I see as fairly one note, has some possible hidden depths in his friendship with Alora. It's not explored in the game but there's evidence that he has other sides to his personality than just power hungry evil wizard.
Comments
Glint felt like a person with a history and a personality. He filled the role of a non evil gaymance too and was a fantastic cleric/thief. I'd take Glint over Tiax any day for a hundred reasons.
They tried to make him the class clown - a stupid-evil buffoon who intentionally makes random awkward-funny comments. BG2 Edwin wouldn't do that.
It is true that BG2 Edwin is used for comic relief, but I get the feeling that Beamdog didn't understand that this humor was unintentional from Edwin's perspective, and indeed he doesn't find those situations in BG2 funny at all.
He's very intelligent but not very wise, pretty rude to others, and takes himself and his long-term quest for power very very seriously – and that's why it's funny for us (and for other party members) when things blow up in his face.
In SoD it's like he tries to be funny, and that's just wrong.
Delusional people can talk about more than whatever they falsely believe. It's one aspect of them as a person. Tiax literally has nothing else to his character as he stands. Any expansion of his character would be going beyond the source material.
Even Edwin, whom I see as fairly one note, has some possible hidden depths in his friendship with Alora. It's not explored in the game but there's evidence that he has other sides to his personality than just power hungry evil wizard.
EDIT: Quick idea - how cool it would be to face Tiax in fourth challenge in Pocket Plane as epic level cleric/thief of Cyric and his Favourite?