Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

Neverwinter Nights: Enhanced Edition has been released! Visit nwn.beamdog.com to make an order. NWN:EE FAQ is available.
Soundtracks for BG:EE, SoD, BG2:EE, IWD:EE, PST:EE are now available in the Beamdog store.
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

Does it get any better? Finished Baldur's Gate

2

Comments

  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 7,679
    ""But not enough of a "big name player" to be able to change anything?"" Well, if you were gonna just say, 'screw it, I'm going on vacation' why buy the game at all?

    Unionhack
  • gattberserkgattberserk Member Posts: 180
    edited February 2017
    What I really enjoyed in BG1 is the rate of progression of my party. As I go through the game I start to feel myself getting more and more powerful. However that feel disappear in BG2 (don't get me wrong, its fun, but I can no longer feel the magical touch).

    The other thing I really enjoyed in BG1 was the wilderness map. BG felt real! I can go to any unmarked map and make me wonder what will I encounter as I start to reveal more fog of war. (The part where Doomsayer appear after taking the idol really creep me out)

    KurumidunbarOrlonKronsteen
  • GreenWarlockGreenWarlock Member Posts: 1,344
    In BG2 you get to fulfill the potential of your PC, paying off the investment in BG1, but as I think you observe, the starting point is already so much higher, you are polishing something that starts closer to the finished article. The real progression, for me, in BG2 is collecting all the gear - which is why I always play a party of 6, to make the most use of the loot that we find. I suspect Bioware were aware of this apparent slowing of pace for the PC too, which is why the game is such a monty haul. It also helps that the story comes more to the forefront of the second game, where the delight of the first is that free-roaming spirit that lets you enjoy that growing-the-character experience.

    OrlonKronsteen
  • UnderstandMouseMagicUnderstandMouseMagic Member Posts: 2,122
    One of the things I found disappointing about SOD is that it didn't allow you to do any of the things you might have liked to have done at the end of BG.

    I would have liked to return to Candlekeep, find out for sure who survived/died and what were going to be the consequences.

    I would have liked to invest more in my NPC companions, maybe travel to their countries. OK I'm an Edwin fan, I'd love to see Thay, but there's also Rashemen, Evereska, the Northern bits with Branwyn, Zentil Keep ect. The FR are big, lots of places are mentioned but instead we are confined to a small area.

    It makes sense that a Charname restricted in their early life in Candlekeep would want to travel after hearing about places from people they met.

    There's even that meeting with a NPC by the docks in BG, where he mentions the recently discovered "New World".
    Perfect opening for Charname and companions to be commisioned to explore on behalf of the City.

    I'm assuming there won't be another FR game any time soon, so I feel cheated that this one didn't give us more FR.

    semiticgodchimericSkatan
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 7,679
  • ShapiroKeatsDarkMageShapiroKeatsDarkMage Member Posts: 2,287
    chimeric said:

    BG2 is crap.

    But I don't want to start a holy war over it. If you can tell decent writing from purple prose, sandbox from linear, spartan from Monty Haul, then you'll feel the difference between the first game and the sequel. If not, then not. Hey, maybe you like it when there are... what was it, two or three dragons to kill in BG2?

    In my opinion, the first Baldur's Gate and Torment were the only games true to the spirit of AD&D. The first Icewind Dale might have been, it had a robust scaffold, but the designers locked themselves in a linear narrative, oversaturated with action. And everything after that - repetitions.

    Same with Fallout. The series died after part 2. RIP.

    Same with Elder Scrolls. The series died after Morrowind. RIP.

    The No Mutants Allowed is strong in this one.

    ThacoBellUnionhackRaduzielMirandel
  • sarevok57sarevok57 Member Posts: 3,884
    I actually don't like SoD at all, can't stand it, and for the 3 reasons up top; number 1 didn't matter to me, #2 didn't matter to me, #3 mattered only a little bit, the reasons why I didn't like it

    1- too much dialogue, there was so much dialogue in SoD I tried at the beginning to get invested in the story to see what was all going and what not, but it felt like everybody was telling their life's story as soon as you met them, ugh, it was too much, it got to the point where I was just spamming enter, and getting to the dialogue responses that were "yes" pretty much, and also, soooo much banter between NPCs to the point of ridiculousness, yes I understand you want characters to feel more lively, but sometimes in the same area NPCs would repeat the same thing over and over again to each other making them seem more like robots than live people, it just feels too crammed, if it was a little less, I think it would have been better

    2- in my opinion it just didn't feel like a BG game, in fact, in my opinion SoD screams IWD, I have no problems with borrowing sprites from IWD in bringing them in ( that's what BG2 did) but the hordes, holy crap, the amount of baddies was crazy, the BG series has never really been a game that's about huge hordes, yes there are the very very few instances where you will fight more than 10 baddies, but they are very far and few between, BG has always been about lower amount of baddies, but making baddies interesting more than just zerging it up like IWD does

    3- the story, to be perfectly honest, the story makes absolutely no sense what so ever ( at least in my opinion) more because in bg 2 there is never any mention of any crusade that has happened just recently in the past, no one in bg2 knows who you are, and based on SoD there is no way you wouldn't get some notoriety somehow, in fact, the world of BG2 is just south of the mountains of the nashkiel mines, those mountains on the south part of the bg1 map? those are the very same mountains on the north part of the bg2 map, now granted it makes sense that bg2 doesn't have any mention of SoD since bg2 was made first, so it makes sense that there is no mention of SoD exploits in bg2

    4- the area/time where SoD takes place also doesn't make any sense to me, when you watch the beginning intro of bg2, it basically mentions you defeated your brother, and then you were whisked away by some sort of assassins shortly after, no mention of any crusade or anything to do with SoD, now again, reasons being that bg2 came out first, but in my opinion, SoD would have fit SO much better in ToB, first of all, it would make sense if there were a crusade against the bhaal spawn, since that is basically the backbone story of ToB, and plus ToB had tons of room to have such an expansion, since there is an 8 million XP cap, and im hard pressed to even hit 7 million in ToB, so tons of space to put something there, but instead, its in between bg1 and bg2 and this causes some problems for me, like the boosted xp cap to 500000, first starting bg2 with 500000 xp makes bg2 a complete joke, I play mod free, and I refuse to add mods to "balance" the game more, second you could say; well just play on LoB mode, which is a whole new can of worms given the fact that BG2 wasn't built for such a game mode and I've only ever done LoB once in bg2 and will only ever do it once, LoB is just not fun, it is so incredibly tedious and its so evident that bg2 was just not balanced for it, I just don't like, now of coarse that is just my opinion because no doubt there are people out there who may love and all the power to them, but for me, nope never again

    5- and in general I just found it kind of boring, I had such a hard time to get invested in it, I did play it twice ( well the first play through I didn't play all the way but the second one I did) and I just cant see me wanting to ever play it again, I feel that SoD is just some fan made expansion like darkside of the sword coast or something like that, in my opinion it feels out of place, and I just cant do it

    but, with all that being said, does that mean its a bad game? no, just because I don't like doesn't mean its crap, and it's actually very easy to avoid, as soon as I finish the final battle in bg1 I just skip straight to bg2 and everything is good, and plus tons of people like the expansion, so im not going to ruin their enjoyment for it, although I do like the UI layout, it does look pretty slick ( and that's basically half the reason why I got it in the first place)

    and even with that being said, I hope that one day beamdog makes their own game, not an enhanced edition, not a remake, but an original title, using the 5e rules, and will I pay for that and try it out? damn right I will, im very curious to see ( if they could that is) to see what kind of RPG game they could make, after all the knowledge and experience they have obtained from their work on the EEs

    UnderstandMouseMagiclefreutOrlonKronsteenArtona
  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 9,775
    chimeric said:

    BG2 is crap.

    But I don't want to start a holy war over it. If you can tell decent writing from purple prose, sandbox from linear, spartan from Monty Haul, then you'll feel the difference between the first game and the sequel. If not, then not. Hey, maybe you like it when there are... what was it, two or three dragons to kill in BG2?

    In my opinion, the first Baldur's Gate and Torment were the only games true to the spirit of AD&D. The first Icewind Dale might have been, it had a robust scaffold, but the designers locked themselves in a linear narrative, oversaturated with action. And everything after that - repetitions.

    I find myself shocked to say that I agree with @chimeric. :open_mouth:

    Well, except for IWD, I think that game tells a very compelling story that quite effectively links events of the past to events of the present. It's only that the PCs have no place in it. If Black Isle had effectively written a place for a Charname into the game, and provided good joinable NPCs, it probably would have been the best of the bunch.

    Seriously guys, you toss NMA around when you apparently won't brook any opinions that contradict your own?? You gotta admit, SoA is super Monty Haul...

    I also disagree about Morrowind/Oblivion... only because Oblivion had a better engine, with better mods. The best Elder Scrolls game was (is) playing Morrowind in the Oblivion engine.

  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 7,679
  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 9,775
    Eh - Monty Haul is awful. And parts of BG2 are therefore awful. But, to each his own. And overall the game is great, almost as good as BG1 :tongue:

    On-topic, based on the OP in this thread, it's probably someone who would enjoy BG2 more than BG1, so the answer is probably "yes, it gets better."

    ThacoBell
  • chimericchimeric Member Posts: 1,163
    edited May 2017
    I think someone has tried converting parts of Morrowind to the Skyrim engine, even. I don't know whether there had been a complete conversion of Morrowind to the Oblivion engine, it's possible. Did it disable Bloom? That effect ruins Oblivion's presentation. I've read an interesting article on HDR-type effects and various glows so popular in contemporary games. It suggested that they express the ideology of later-day capitalism: selling fakes in place of substance, claiming that vagueness is as good as actual drawn detail.

    One mod, a series of mods actually, for Oblivion, that I never got to play but admired on screenshots, were changes to the geography of Tamriel. Those modders made distinct regions with cliffs, forests, beautiful flowers...

    As for Morrowing, I personally wouldn't replay it on a modern engine. Just don't see much of a point. There have been such extensive updates to Morrowind's visuals over the years, with hi-res textures, shaders, faces, it looks quite decent these days. And the Red Mountain is as vile and soul-sickening as ever. If you've read the poems thrown about the place...

    Morrowind had so many things in it that won't be replicated these days. For some aspects, like stories in the books, music or the art direction, there is just a dearth of creative talent. For others there is modern players' pampered disinclination to move their ass. One of the more interesting things about Morrowind was exploration, and part of that was actually walking around and swimming from island to island. I knew Sheogorad like my own home. Another part was talking to NPC about different lands, towns, beasts, races... You would get different answers and points of view from different folks, gradually filling in your own encyclopedia of the world. Designers nowadays simplify and streamline this sort of thing, e.g. in Tyranny unfamiliar terms in dialogues are highlighted. Instead of actually digging for information in the world so you know later more than you did at the start, you get answers on a silver platter. So ingenious - and, naturally, very soon there turns out to be nothing to do. Designers don't understand that an activity creates its own meaning. It's what is called the "sunk cost fallacy," except it's not a fallacy but the definition of human life.

    A lot of this applies to the sequels of Baldur's Gate and that bad new game, Torment: Tides of Numenara... If designers were to go back to hand-drawn backgrounds and figures instead of digital crap art, stopped worrying about taking up too much of players' time and tearing out their hair trying to achieve a perfect balance, stopped customizing every aspect, stopped trying to be original but actually dared to realize ideas that come to mind... Possibly players would appreciate the result. But it's hard-going these days on both sides.

    P.S. Beamdog should make a new game and maybe its own variation on the engine and let bygones be bygones.

  • GallowglassGallowglass Member Posts: 3,356
    Yes, SoA could be called a Monty Haul game ... but it's not quite such purposeless accumulation as is implied by the original trope.

    In SoA, your characters need to reach quite high levels and obtain good equipment in order to stand a decent chance in the end-game battles ... and because of the wide variety of character classes available which have (for example) different weapon specialisations and equipment restrictions, there needs to be a pretty wide range of possible equipment in order to make sure that a party of any composition can all be well-equipped. There are relatively few items which I've never found to be the right tool for the job in any circumstances - it depends upon who is in your party.

    Some players have alleged that SoA swims in a sea of unnecessary gold, and therefore see that as a Monty Haul symptom ... but it's not so, it's necessary in order to facilitate some playing-styles. If your characters can't (or for RP reasons won't) indulge in widespread steal-and-sell-back cheese, and if they also like to fill their spellbooks and recharge all their wands (etc.), then actually there's only just barely enough gold in SoA (and until half-way through ToB, when finally you can indeed have more gold than you can usefully spend). The same applies in BG1 and SoD, by the way. Restricting the gold would therefore restrict the freedom of playing-style, which the devs clearly decided not to do. (If you've never played in a high-cost low-cheese style, then this might seem hard to believe ... but trust me, I've done it often, and you really can be chronically short of gold all the way from Candlekeep to Amkethran.)

    ThacoBellMirandel
  • chimericchimeric Member Posts: 1,163
    Why is it I hear about people recharging wands all the time? And how expensive it is? Oh, that's true enough, but why do you need wands? If you have a mage who can cast Fireball, let him cast it. It's free. And when he's out, and everyone else is out, lay down and rest. There is no time limit in the games, you know.

  • sarevok57sarevok57 Member Posts: 3,884
    chimeric said:

    Why is it I hear about people recharging wands all the time? And how expensive it is? Oh, that's true enough, but why do you need wands? If you have a mage who can cast Fireball, let him cast it. It's free. And when he's out, and everyone else is out, lay down and rest. There is no time limit in the games, you know.

    perhaps people who have mods use wands, some mods no doubt make the game significantly harder and makes wand use a better choice in come circumstances no doubt, personally I never use wands in bg2 except for ToB then I use the spell striking wands to free up level 5 spell slots, or if you have 1 mage and they happen to be an enchanter, then there's no fireball for you, so then you would probably like to have a wand of fireball, plus the wand of frost is pretty gnary, dealing 8d6 cold damage to a single target which is pretty good


    OrlonKronsteen
  • GallowglassGallowglass Member Posts: 3,356
    chimeric said:

    ... but why do you need wands? If you have a mage who can cast Fireball, let him cast it.

    I use wands so that my arcane casters can memorise something else instead. Most arcane casters (perhaps excepting Edwin) don't have loads of spell slots to waste on something you could instead do with a wand!

    There are also useful wands which do things that aren't exactly equivalent to any spell.

    Wands are particularly handy in the case of a Sorceror, for whom the number of spells known is tightly limited, so a wand frees you to learn something else instead (or two things else in the case of a Wand of Fire - a terrific advantage).

    They're also quite useful for Bards, for whom the number of spell slots is even lower than for Mages - I usually find that my Bards need most of their spell slots for their combat buffs for when I want them to fight physically, so they frequently use wands when I want them to fight magically.

    sarevok57OrlonKronsteenThacoBellMirandel
  • UnderstandMouseMagicUnderstandMouseMagic Member Posts: 2,122
    chimeric said:

    Why is it I hear about people recharging wands all the time? And how expensive it is? Oh, that's true enough, but why do you need wands? If you have a mage who can cast Fireball, let him cast it. It's free. And when he's out, and everyone else is out, lay down and rest. There is no time limit in the games, you know.

    It's expensive.

    And why?
    Because it's fun to blast everything to oblivion.

    There's nothing stopping you using the wand and the spells, that tends to put the buggers down....permanantly. It's the nuclear option.
    And I always use Edwin.
    I don't think my game is so much strategy sometimes, more like armageddon.
    Shocking I know...I'm so ashamed. :(

    sarevok57Gallowglass
  • tbone1tbone1 Member Posts: 1,932
    A few years ago my then-boss and I were having lunch in the break room with the six or seven interns we'd brought in over the summer. They asked us what w thought eye the greatest video games of all time. He thought a minute and decided on Baldur's Gate because it was epic, a game-changer, etc. I agreed (of course), though I thought Civilization was a darn close second. Then we got into a debate over BG1 and BG2, but that's another story

    Grond0OrlonKronsteenMirandel
  • MirandelMirandel Member Posts: 460
    sarevok57 said:

    I actually don't like SoD at all, can't stand it, and for the 3 reasons up top; number 1 didn't matter to me, #2 didn't matter to me, #3 mattered only a little bit, the reasons why I didn't like it

    1- too much dialogue, there was so much dialogue in SoD I tried at the beginning to get invested in the story to see what was all going and what not, but it felt like everybody was telling their life's story as soon as you met them, ugh, it was too much, it got to the point where I was just spamming enter, and getting to the dialogue responses that were "yes" pretty much, and also, soooo much banter between NPCs to the point of ridiculousness, yes I understand you want characters to feel more lively, but sometimes in the same area NPCs would repeat the same thing over and over again to each other making them seem more like robots than live people, it just feels too crammed, if it was a little less, I think it would have been better

    That would be the strangest accusation of an RPG I ever heard. "RPG has too much dialogs in it and too much banter"... Nope, still weird. I understand every word but not the meaning of the phrase: it sounds like an oxymoron to me - "that story has too much story in it".

    Ok, ok, I do get it, of course - you find the story boring, characters unappealing, setting uninteresting, but I'd say all the problems come from that, not from the amount of banters. Just trust me on that - for those who happen to like the characters and the story it could be even more dialogs and they (we) would appreciate it.

    Grond0ThacoBellSkatanUnionhack
  • UnderstandMouseMagicUnderstandMouseMagic Member Posts: 2,122
    @Mirandel

    There's a difference between dialog and story though. The problem I found with SOD re dialog was far too much "spoken" dialog and not very good writing anyway.

    So as most here play the games a lot (too much many would say) after the first couple of playthroughs, being followed down the road by NPC speechifying gets very tiresome. I can read twice as fast.
    And then on top of that, cut scenes. Cut scenes where you can't tell the person spouting complete bollox to shut up.
    Exactly how many times can you sit there listening to Caelar Argent doing her best Magaret Thatcher impression before you want to break something?
    And I'm a Conservative voter.

    sarevok57Montresor_SP
  • AndreaColomboAndreaColombo Member Posts: 5,164
    Gallenger said:

    BG2's armor looked quite different from BG1's, but for better or worse, only BG2's remain :(.

    Or does it?

    *Dun-dun-duuuuuuun*




  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 9,775
    edited May 2017
    Spoilers for being off-topic:
    chimeric said:

    I think someone has tried converting parts of Morrowind to the Skyrim engine, even. I don't know whether there had been a complete conversion of Morrowind to the Oblivion engine, it's possible.

    Skywind and Morroblivion, respectively. I believe they are both more or less complete. But why play on Skywind's engine, except that it's prettier? No stats, barely any skills, completely dumbed-down magic... I have no interest in that game.

    Whereas Oblivion has a good stat/skill system (as long as you use a good mod that alters skill increases) and a great magic system, which could extended to create interesting effects with the script extender mod. But it's not as creaky and old school as Morrowind's engine, where you could literally stick a dagger in a stationary target and it would roll a die and you might miss. For dice-roll mechanics, give me an isometric BG-style game, not a first-person perspective.
    chimeric said:

    Did it disable Bloom? That effect ruins Oblivion's presentation. I've read an interesting article on HDR-type effects and various glows so popular in contemporary games. It suggested that they express the ideology of later-day capitalism: selling fakes in place of substance, claiming that vagueness is as good as actual drawn detail.

    You can use or disable Bloom or HDR as you please, or use all sorts of advanced moddded shaders and filters that bring the graphics up to this decade's quality. Although, they're mostly beyond my ability to install.
    chimeric said:

    One mod, a series of mods actually, for Oblivion, that I never got to play but admired on screenshots, were changes to the geography of Tamriel. Those modders made distinct regions with cliffs, forests, beautiful flowers...

    Yup, it's a great series of mods, I use them all. It's still old-generation graphics, but it makes everything really varied and pretty. Between a pretty environment, and game mechanics tweaked to be satisfying and fun, and the entirety of Morrowind included (it's the equivalent of BGT/EET) Oblivion still really hits the sweet spot for me.

    Post edited by subtledoctor on
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 7,679
    @UnderstandMouseMagic You can hold "ESC" to skip cutscenes. I don't know if you will ever play SoD again, but it also works for BG and BG2.

    semiticgod
  • WesboiWesboi Member Posts: 403
    Mirandel said:

    sarevok57 said:

    I actually don't like SoD at all, can't stand it, and for the 3 reasons up top; number 1 didn't matter to me, #2 didn't matter to me, #3 mattered only a little bit, the reasons why I didn't like it

    1- too much dialogue, there was so much dialogue in SoD I tried at the beginning to get invested in the story to see what was all going and what not, but it felt like everybody was telling their life's story as soon as you met them, ugh, it was too much, it got to the point where I was just spamming enter, and getting to the dialogue responses that were "yes" pretty much, and also, soooo much banter between NPCs to the point of ridiculousness, yes I understand you want characters to feel more lively, but sometimes in the same area NPCs would repeat the same thing over and over again to each other making them seem more like robots than live people, it just feels too crammed, if it was a little less, I think it would have been better

    That would be the strangest accusation of an RPG I ever heard. "RPG has too much dialogs in it and too much banter"... Nope, still weird. I understand every word but not the meaning of the phrase: it sounds like an oxymoron to me - "that story has too much story in it".

    Ok, ok, I do get it, of course - you find the story boring, characters unappealing, setting uninteresting, but I'd say all the problems come from that, not from the amount of banters. Just trust me on that - for those who happen to like the characters and the story it could be even more dialogs and they (we) would appreciate it.
    Some people actually play rpgs for the theory crafting I skip nearly every story/dialogue /cutscenes as they very rarely interest me. Why read the dialogue when u can murder a few innocents instead.

    Grond0Montresor_SP
  • MirandelMirandel Member Posts: 460
    Wesboi said:

    Mirandel said:

    sarevok57 said:

    I actually don't like SoD at all, can't stand it, and for the 3 reasons up top; number 1 didn't matter to me, #2 didn't matter to me, #3 mattered only a little bit, the reasons why I didn't like it

    1- too much dialogue, there was so much dialogue in SoD I tried at the beginning to get invested in the story to see what was all going and what not, but it felt like everybody was telling their life's story as soon as you met them, ugh, it was too much, it got to the point where I was just spamming enter, and getting to the dialogue responses that were "yes" pretty much, and also, soooo much banter between NPCs to the point of ridiculousness, yes I understand you want characters to feel more lively, but sometimes in the same area NPCs would repeat the same thing over and over again to each other making them seem more like robots than live people, it just feels too crammed, if it was a little less, I think it would have been better

    That would be the strangest accusation of an RPG I ever heard. "RPG has too much dialogs in it and too much banter"... Nope, still weird. I understand every word but not the meaning of the phrase: it sounds like an oxymoron to me - "that story has too much story in it".

    Ok, ok, I do get it, of course - you find the story boring, characters unappealing, setting uninteresting, but I'd say all the problems come from that, not from the amount of banters. Just trust me on that - for those who happen to like the characters and the story it could be even more dialogs and they (we) would appreciate it.
    Some people actually play rpgs for the theory crafting I skip nearly every story/dialogue /cutscenes as they very rarely interest me. Why read the dialogue when u can murder a few innocents instead.
    But this is hardly RPG's fault, isn't it? If someone insists on eating soup with a fork, complaining about that soup to be "too liquid" and about fork to be unable to pick up anything but the biggest chunks, makes no sense. Either change the instrument (approach to the game) or the dish itself (play pure hack-n-slash).

    To be fair, when I was young and BG and IWD were just released, I did prefer IWD over BG. But even then it was mostly for the fact that I wanted full control over my party design, not because "there is too much story".
    I mean, I even understand where complain came from but still find it ridiculous since it's a complain about the genre.

    tbone1ThacoBellUnionhack
  • UnderstandMouseMagicUnderstandMouseMagic Member Posts: 2,122
    ThacoBell said:

    @UnderstandMouseMagic You can hold "ESC" to skip cutscenes. I don't know if you will ever play SoD again, but it also works for BG and BG2.

    Thank you, that will be a relief.

    And I will play it again but have to let some time pass to get over trying to play it this time. Get into the right mindset, it's all about the XP. :D

    ThacoBell
  • ArtonaArtona Member Posts: 909
    "SoD feels like you've been drafted." You HAVE been drafeted. Its war and you are a big name player now.


    I does not convince me, to be honest. You are not part of Flaming Fist, and I do not see what authority Baldur's Gate has over you anyway. As @Bigfish said, while ToB does something pretty much the same, they use better excuse. I mean - what is Eltan going to do if CHARNAME says "no"? Throw him into jail? Send that ridiculous, awful (as a design choice) uber-mage after him/her?
    It get particularly infuriating during
    negotiating with Cealar, where game shamelessly teases you with possibility of approaching things differently, while big battle if forced upon you. Is De Lance seriously going to fight CHARNAME, if he/she says: "you know what? I don't care about the war, I'm leaving with Cealar!"?

  • WesboiWesboi Member Posts: 403
    Mirandel said:

    Wesboi said:

    Mirandel said:

    sarevok57 said:

    I actually don't like SoD at all, can't stand it, and for the 3 reasons up top; number 1 didn't matter to me, #2 didn't matter to me, #3 mattered only a little bit, the reasons why I didn't like it

    1- too much dialogue, there was so much dialogue in SoD I tried at the beginning to get invested in the story to see what was all going and what not, but it felt like everybody was telling their life's story as soon as you met them, ugh, it was too much, it got to the point where I was just spamming enter, and getting to the dialogue responses that were "yes" pretty much, and also, soooo much banter between NPCs to the point of ridiculousness, yes I understand you want characters to feel more lively, but sometimes in the same area NPCs would repeat the same thing over and over again to each other making them seem more like robots than live people, it just feels too crammed, if it was a little less, I think it would have been better

    That would be the strangest accusation of an RPG I ever heard. "RPG has too much dialogs in it and too much banter"... Nope, still weird. I understand every word but not the meaning of the phrase: it sounds like an oxymoron to me - "that story has too much story in it".

    Ok, ok, I do get it, of course - you find the story boring, characters unappealing, setting uninteresting, but I'd say all the problems come from that, not from the amount of banters. Just trust me on that - for those who happen to like the characters and the story it could be even more dialogs and they (we) would appreciate it.
    Some people actually play rpgs for the theory crafting I skip nearly every story/dialogue /cutscenes as they very rarely interest me. Why read the dialogue when u can murder a few innocents instead.
    But this is hardly RPG's fault, isn't it? If someone insists on eating soup with a fork, complaining about that soup to be "too liquid" and about fork to be unable to pick up anything but the biggest chunks, makes no sense. Either change the instrument (approach to the game) or the dish itself (play pure hack-n-slash).

    To be fair, when I was young and BG and IWD were just released, I did prefer IWD over BG. But even then it was mostly for the fact that I wanted full control over my party design, not because "there is too much story".
    I mean, I even understand where complain came from but still find it ridiculous since it's a complain about the genre.
    And how many decent hack and slash what support cross platform Multiplayer have been released what are actually any good? If titan quest on mobile was Multiplayer and cross platform beamdog would probably lose a lot of customers.

  • MirandelMirandel Member Posts: 460
    Wesboi said:

    Mirandel said:

    Wesboi said:

    Mirandel said:

    sarevok57 said:

    I actually don't like SoD at all, can't stand it, and for the 3 reasons up top; number 1 didn't matter to me, #2 didn't matter to me, #3 mattered only a little bit, the reasons why I didn't like it

    1- too much dialogue, there was so much dialogue in SoD I tried at the beginning to get invested in the story to see what was all going and what not, but it felt like everybody was telling their life's story as soon as you met them, ugh, it was too much, it got to the point where I was just spamming enter, and getting to the dialogue responses that were "yes" pretty much, and also, soooo much banter between NPCs to the point of ridiculousness, yes I understand you want characters to feel more lively, but sometimes in the same area NPCs would repeat the same thing over and over again to each other making them seem more like robots than live people, it just feels too crammed, if it was a little less, I think it would have been better

    That would be the strangest accusation of an RPG I ever heard. "RPG has too much dialogs in it and too much banter"... Nope, still weird. I understand every word but not the meaning of the phrase: it sounds like an oxymoron to me - "that story has too much story in it".

    Ok, ok, I do get it, of course - you find the story boring, characters unappealing, setting uninteresting, but I'd say all the problems come from that, not from the amount of banters. Just trust me on that - for those who happen to like the characters and the story it could be even more dialogs and they (we) would appreciate it.
    Some people actually play rpgs for the theory crafting I skip nearly every story/dialogue /cutscenes as they very rarely interest me. Why read the dialogue when u can murder a few innocents instead.
    But this is hardly RPG's fault, isn't it? If someone insists on eating soup with a fork, complaining about that soup to be "too liquid" and about fork to be unable to pick up anything but the biggest chunks, makes no sense. Either change the instrument (approach to the game) or the dish itself (play pure hack-n-slash).

    To be fair, when I was young and BG and IWD were just released, I did prefer IWD over BG. But even then it was mostly for the fact that I wanted full control over my party design, not because "there is too much story".
    I mean, I even understand where complain came from but still find it ridiculous since it's a complain about the genre.
    And how many decent hack and slash what support cross platform Multiplayer have been released what are actually any good? If titan quest on mobile was Multiplayer and cross platform beamdog would probably lose a lot of customers.
    This is another story entirely. What one counts as "decent" - another calls "lousy" and vise versa. It is still no excuse for blaming the game of another genre, that also happen to have bits of gameplay one desires, to be "bad", because developers dares to focus on the main feature of the genre, and not those bits.

    No, seriously, if I want to see a love story but all I can get is a thriller with a well done romance on background I will not complain about too much action. Even if for me the only interesting part is a romance, I came to the theater full aware about that movie genre.

    ThacoBell
  • ShapiroKeatsDarkMageShapiroKeatsDarkMage Member Posts: 2,287
    chimeric said:





    Same with Fallout. The series died after part 2. RIP.

    Same with Elder Scrolls. The series died after Morrowind. RIP.

    What's wrong with Oblivion?

    ThacoBell
2
Sign In or Register to comment.