The long-awaited SoD review by GameBanshee
JuliusBorisov
Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 22,725
Late is better than never, I guess. Maybe I should think about giving a detailed review for SoD as well...
Anyway, GameBanshee has finally published their review for SoD.
"A funny thing happened on my way to reviewing Baldur's Gate: Siege of Dragonspear. When I picked the game up, I realized that I hadn't played either of the original Baldur's Gate games in about 15 years. Since Siege of Dragonspear is supposed to be the bridge between the two, I decided that I'd play Baldur's Gate first so I could get reacquainted with the franchise. But then I was talking to our site admin, and he mentioned that our Baldur's Gate subsite was one of our oldest, and that it could use some updating.
No problem, I thought. I can update the subsite as I play the game. But I have a mental problem, so to speak. My brain translates "update" into "re-write," and so what should have been a simple(ish) procedure took months. As a result, when I was finally ready to play Siege of Dragonspear, I was so far past the release date that I figured I might as well write our walkthrough for it at the same time, which is more efficient for me, but which added even more months to the delay of the review.
And so here we are eight months later. The good news is that while I was working my way towards Siege of Dragonspear, a lot of its problems got fixed, and all of the dialogue that offended everybody got removed, and so what I'm reviewing here could be considered the final product rather than the initial release that everybody else looked at. The bad news, of course, is that people have probably already made up their mind about the game. But let's ignore the bad news. It's Christmastime after all, a time of hope and renewal."
"I didn't love Siege of Dragonspear, but I didn't hate it, either. I played through the campaign twice, once with a good party and once with an evil party, and I enjoyed it well enough both times. It took me well over 60 hours to complete the two playthroughs, and that's not bad for a $20 price tag. So if you liked the Infinity Engine games and you want to try something new, then Siege of Dragonspear is a worthwhile purchase. Just try to keep your expectations tempered, as Beamdog isn't quite in the same class as old BioWare."
Anyway, GameBanshee has finally published their review for SoD.
"A funny thing happened on my way to reviewing Baldur's Gate: Siege of Dragonspear. When I picked the game up, I realized that I hadn't played either of the original Baldur's Gate games in about 15 years. Since Siege of Dragonspear is supposed to be the bridge between the two, I decided that I'd play Baldur's Gate first so I could get reacquainted with the franchise. But then I was talking to our site admin, and he mentioned that our Baldur's Gate subsite was one of our oldest, and that it could use some updating.
No problem, I thought. I can update the subsite as I play the game. But I have a mental problem, so to speak. My brain translates "update" into "re-write," and so what should have been a simple(ish) procedure took months. As a result, when I was finally ready to play Siege of Dragonspear, I was so far past the release date that I figured I might as well write our walkthrough for it at the same time, which is more efficient for me, but which added even more months to the delay of the review.
And so here we are eight months later. The good news is that while I was working my way towards Siege of Dragonspear, a lot of its problems got fixed, and all of the dialogue that offended everybody got removed, and so what I'm reviewing here could be considered the final product rather than the initial release that everybody else looked at. The bad news, of course, is that people have probably already made up their mind about the game. But let's ignore the bad news. It's Christmastime after all, a time of hope and renewal."
"I didn't love Siege of Dragonspear, but I didn't hate it, either. I played through the campaign twice, once with a good party and once with an evil party, and I enjoyed it well enough both times. It took me well over 60 hours to complete the two playthroughs, and that's not bad for a $20 price tag. So if you liked the Infinity Engine games and you want to try something new, then Siege of Dragonspear is a worthwhile purchase. Just try to keep your expectations tempered, as Beamdog isn't quite in the same class as old BioWare."
18
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
What I especially agree with is the dissappointment of it being a "road trip" which has always struck me as being unecessary because of the way BG2 was set up. Irenicus was/is an outlier, an anomoly that took place against the main thrust of the saga.
The story never had to get there, so all the heavy handed foreshadowing and invented reasons for it happening ring false.
IMO, the best parts of SOD are those that have nothing to do wth BG2.
After the initial excitement died down, SoD never engaged me enough for me to bother finishing it. I got up to what I assume was the last campsite, where I was being told to sneak into Dragonspear Castle, before I decided I'd rather play a paladin than the skald I was playing, and then when I went back into BG1 to build the paladin, I completely lost interest and started playing other games before I ever got back to SoD.
Now that I'm playing BG and IWD again, I am avoiding SoD because of a mod I want to use. (Please don't derail this thread trying to get me to fix stuff. I have my setups the way I want them right now.)
I absolutely agree with the reviewer about the main story having nothing to do with BG2, and therefore failing in its ambition to bridge the gap between BG1 and BG2. I found the whole Caelar story to be "meh".
It also failed me in its role-playing opportunities, as there were a lot of moments where Caelar had me convinced to join her and give her a chance to do good, which the game doesn't allow you to do. So, I was railroaded by the game into opposing Caelar, which my character was not convinced was the right thing to do. That's another reason I lost interest in it.
A third reason I lost interest was that the combat seemed to me to be clearly designed to please SCS players, and I am not an SCS player. I was doing fine with the combat without needing to reload, but I was finding the constant difficult mob encounters to be tedious rather than fun.
I also strongly agree with the reviewer about the limited companion selection available in SoD. You're forced to make a party that includes a mix of the canon companions, Safana, the three BG:EE new companions, and the new SoD-only companions. No Ajantis, Yeslick, Branwen, Xan, Alora, Coran, Eldoth, Tiax, etc. The list of not-included companions are some of my favorites, and I think not including them was a missed opportunity.
So, I'm in the same place as the reviewer. I didn't hate SoD, but I definitely didn't love it. It will have limited replayability for me, and sadly, it will not be becoming a regular part of my future runs.
I've just read the full review too, and it seems to me that the reviewer hadn't played as thoroughly as one would have hoped. Of course that's a very common problem when reviewers are rushing to get a quick review out for a new release, but I'd have hoped that a later review like this would have been more insightful.
The reviewer makes some criticisms (such as "You never learn much more about Caelar, or about the Dragonspear Wars, or about the crusade" and "Unique, named items are few and far between") which are simply nonsense. He must have missed a great many dialogues and unique items, proving shallow exploration.
He also seems to have failed to understand correctly the mechanisms by which characters (and their equipment) are transferred from the BG1ee campaign, and also the way they're levelled after you recruit them - i.e. yes they do level up to (approximately) your protagonist's level (contrary to what he says), but they don't do so instantly (as he appears to have expected), and yes they can keep the equipment they had (contrary to his assertion that it's random). If he had played more thoroughly, he'd have understood that the SoD mechanism actually works much better than he's given it credit for.
On the other hand, some of the reviewer's criticisms are quite fair (such as the surprisingly short list of continued companions from original BG1, which we all know has disappointed many players, and that there is some feeble hand-waving at the very end to complete the explanation of the opening scenario of BG2 - although at least we had a partial explanation incorporated into the plot).
So I'll give the reviewer credit for intending to produce a serious review, but he wasn't fully successful. Beamdog actually made a better job of SoD than the reviewer realised, albeit not perfect.
It was BG that needed expansion, what charname does after killing Sarevok and after having just found out they are a Bhaalspawn.
BG2 makes it clear that charname didn't actually do very much with that knowledge and instead still had the influence of Gorion so tried very hard to bury Bhaal's influence (hence Irenicus's experiments, there's no need for any of them if Charname had really explored being a Bhaalspawn, Charname would come "ready made").
In the dreams in SOD you appear as the "slayer", something that only happens and is only known about because of Irenicus taking your soul.
Bodhi even says as much, "what is this, a creature of darkest shadow ect. I must tell Irenicus" (paraphrased).
Bottom line, IMO, is that the writers knew full well it is BG2 that's the more popular, well known game and sacrificed logical progression from BG to hook into BG2 (at the expense of both).
All the dreams in SOD should have followed the patten established in BG because (this has to be emphasised) Irenicus hasn't happened, his experiments haven't happened, his torture hasn't happened.
At least, this guess is as good as an opposite guess that Irenicus shouldn't be in SoD dreams.
Having replayed SoD ~3 times (I gave up on one character because I just wasn't enjoying it) another problem of reviewing RPGs from a "technical" standpoint becomes apparent, because we judge the older games with almost complete knowledge of their content (it's still possible to find new stuff of course), whereas, since SoD is new, it's entirely possible to discover new stuff all the time; so, we're typically only working with a small fraction of the actual content. I've played through as a mostly evil, a super-goody, and a mixed bag, and found some pretty neat things can occur along the way lol. Reviewing RPGs is a lot more like reviewing a book where certain sections of the book have been removed and hidden somewhere and it takes several read-throughs to get a good idea of what all is actually supposed to be there.
I agree that character options are limited and that the crusade isn't integrated into BG1 or 2 but that is fine with me. I think it's a great game and will play it every time I play through the series. Gameplay is challenging, music is great, art is great and the story is competent enough to push you through. It has a lot more to offer than BG1's other expansion pack which also released for $20 when it came out and I continue to play it every time I make a run through the series as well. I like SOD about as much as I like TOB but for different reasons.
I would have paid double, and still would, just for that one dungeon.
Nothing in SOD comes close.
Where it almost takes off (again for me, this is all just opinion) is when you meet the blind priestess of Bhaal.
But instead of following that atmospheric link with your heritage, it simply serves to get back to the crusade.
And the crusade is incoherent and failed to convince me as a player that any of it mattered.
NB: I don't know how many people know this, but an awful lot of what in in Durlag's Tower was in the PnP module Ghost Tower of Inverness.
Not sure how I could make it clearer that indeed I am speaking for myself than including in brackets "again for me, this is all just opinion"?
But for casual gamers, I'd say the review is good enough.
Inverness, though? That's a real place - it's the traditional capital of the Highlands region of Scotland. I've been there numerous times, and can report that it doesn't appear to contain any Tower much resembling Durlag's. That's probably a good thing for the RL inhabitants!
It's not so much the similarity of the towers, as the chess game, and the rooms full of element-themed monsters, that connects the two towers.
I enjoyed Durlags storyline, but I'm not so fond of the story after you finish with the dungeon and the cult just show up randomly AND manage to snatch the dagger from you just like that. Then you go into the nearby basement and defeat the demon... The end..
That part really lacks player agency, when I felt it was needed *shrug*
I do think Caelar trying to assault avernus with only a small part of crusade soldiers left was a little illogical though. I'm pretty sure realistically they shouldn't even have been able to reach Belhifet, without being slaughtered.
Spoilers Below:
I like that SOD connects Serevoks sword with it's appearance in SOA and I like that you get to see the temple of Bhall that you were born in where Gorian saved you as a child. I like that a bugbear lair is included in SOD. It's neat to see the underground base Serevok had and to explore north of Baldur's Gate. It's cool to finally see the place where your father was murdered and to travel to hell for the finale. I like that the dark circumstances that SOA mentioned in it's opening cinematic are now filled in a little more.
Cealar and the crusade are not very important to BG1 or 2 but I thought she was a good character and the crusade provided enough of a reason to push you forward. It felt to me like the story was more fleshed out than anything in TOTSC and character interactions were improved. I think it's cool that they connected Baldur's Gate to Icewind Dale at the end to make it feel more integrated.
The animated art pieces in the environment were great and the underground caverns is one of the nicest looking areas in the entire trilogy. I feel like a decent amount of character building was allowed and plenty of decent loot was around to be found. Overall the tactical elements in the gameplay won me over the most. I find that Beamdog's gameplay is usually more difficult at higher levels than anything in the original games. It can be frustrating at first but overcoming the challenge is very rewarding.
Perhaps Belhifet wanted her to reach him...
With the Marxist culture war with downtrodden plebs in the city and currupt war monger generals and nobility- it could have been written by Lennin with the, " Who cares about the bridge breaking and destroying your filthy capitalist land hold Tsar crop." which is more or less what the character says. Even the antihero Argent is complied by circumstances to work towards an ends justifies the means solutions. The player is manipulated to feel mercy and agreement with her just like a communist hero of the people dealt a short stick tries to pesent. Theybtry to sell the currupt game trying to warp minds into collectivist Marxist thought and for that I dislike it, even if as I hope the poor writers find some Absolutes in thier wasteland world views.
I do not see the point of wasting time and making false climaxs with dead end story points of characters you love but can not have... the impudence and outrage of berefting the character from the greatest genius and most terrible future ruler is unforgivable. they could have saved those dead end plot points and added another character or dungeon. Going around the city was more boring as the intro trap point of Bg2.
It would be cooler if they just put an extra merchant from the flaming fist in who sold your lost gearof Siege then the way it is said to be dealt with in BG2
Offended everybody? That's a good joke!
...
...
Wait, the author was serious? Ok, nevermind.