Howdy, Stranger!

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

Categories

Axis & Allies 1942 Online is now available in Early Access! Buy it on Steam. The FAQ is available.
New Premium Module: Tyrants of the Moonsea! Read More
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

What the hell have you people done to my beloved game?!

12357

Comments

  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 18,822
    I studied marketing enough to understand one simple fact - you can't create anything good if you don't like what you're doing.

    The first and foremost principle of Beamdog is to create games that the developers love. This is why it has been about D&D and Axis & Allies till this point.

    According to the latest interview with Trent, Beamdog "reached the end of the line on the titles we wanted to do personally".

    SkatanDreadKhan
  • AmmarAmmar Member Posts: 962
    Raduziel wrote: »
    Ammar wrote: »
    One of my pet peeves is the implementation of the int requirement to scribe scrolls. Per PnP the correct way would be a int requirement to cast spells, which is much more meaningful and strict. Now you just circumvent the limit by passing around the Golden Ioun Stone or by drinking Potions of Genius. So now it is just annoying busy-work, instead of actually adding something to the game. According to Beamdog this was fixing a bug, as the restriction was there but not working. But who knows if part of the original team did not decide to leave it out when they tested ToB (the first time the restriction would have mattered for NPCs), when they thought about it would add little more than annoying the player?

    Actually, you're wrong. In PnP Intelligence serves to determine which circle of spell you may cast, your learning chance and the number of spells per circle you can have.
    94v64zs6q7mh.jpg

    I didn't say the maximum level of the spells you can cast was the only thing it affects. What you are saying is completely consistent with what I did.

    Though I think I how you misunderstood me.

    Of course, that Int affects the chance of scribing is completely correct per PnP, and was always implemented in BG.

    However, BG:EE changed it from the original so that you can't scribe levels at all if your int is low, but like the original games still allows you to cast them after you learned them using some sort of positive int modifier.

    That is the part that bothers me. If it was a casting limitation it would both be correct per PnP and a meaningful restriction. The way it is implemented now is an annoyance to the player.

    Grond0
  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,211
    Ammar wrote: »
    ...
    I am still happy the EEs exist - and I know that there other players like @subtledoctor who unlike me think the gameplay should have been changed more, while I personally prefer staying true to the originals and 2nd edition AD&D. In fact, how much Beamdog took from 3rd edition is another pet peeve for me. Admittedly, I am not even a fan of Sorcerers.

    Uh... okay so there's a lot wrong in that post, but where the heck did you get the idea that I wanted Beamdog to make gameplay changes?? Or that Beamdog injected 3rd Edition stuff into the game? Bioware injected 3rd Edition stuff into the game, way back in 2001, and I've always hated it. I hate 3rd Edition. I mean, I'm
    trying to figure out a way to mod level limits into the game. :lol:

    You mistaking me for someone else, perhaps?

  • AmmarAmmar Member Posts: 962
    edited February 21
    Ammar wrote: »
    ...
    I am still happy the EEs exist - and I know that there other players like @subtledoctor who unlike me think the gameplay should have been changed more, while I personally prefer staying true to the originals and 2nd edition AD&D. In fact, how much Beamdog took from 3rd edition is another pet peeve for me. Admittedly, I am not even a fan of Sorcerers.

    Uh... okay so there's a lot wrong in that post, but where the heck did you get the idea that I wanted Beamdog to make gameplay changes?? Or that Beamdog injected 3rd Edition stuff into the game? Bioware injected 3rd Edition stuff into the game, way back in 2001, and I've always hated it. I hate 3rd Edition. I mean, I'm
    trying to figure out a way to mod level limits into the game. :lol:

    You mistaking me for someone else, perhaps?

    On Beamdog and 3rd edition: Shadow Dancers, Red Dragon Disciple, Dwarven Defenders. Itemization in SoD with more +x to stats than set stat to x & also large number of items with boni to specific classes. More spontaneous spellcasters (though Bioware started that one with sorcerers).

    Regarding you personally I was looking at the Scales of Balance mod and was referring more generally to large gameplay changes not 3rd edition specifically, just large gameplay changes like giving armors dex penalties and DR, higher APR boni for specs. But speaking of 3rd Edition: the rebalancing of the stat boni and the spell slots for high intelligence feel 3rd Editionish. Not to speak of concentration checks to avoid spell casting interruption.

  • KilivitzKilivitz Member Posts: 1,456
    edited February 22
    (edit: nevermind)

    Post edited by Kilivitz on
  • AmmarAmmar Member Posts: 962
    Given that different people prefer different EE options, what would really help in my opinion is if the Steam client gave a wider choice of game versions to use via the beta option.

    Last time I checked there was one older version available, but it was not a complete offering of major previous versions. This would also help for those of us who play with mods, as it is hard to avoid forced updates with Steam.

  • AdulAdul Member Posts: 1,912
    Ammar wrote: »
    Given that different people prefer different EE options, what would really help in my opinion is if the Steam client gave a wider choice of game versions to use via the beta option.

    Last time I checked there was one older version available, but it was not a complete offering of major previous versions. This would also help for those of us who play with mods, as it is hard to avoid forced updates with Steam.

    If that's the solution Beamdog chooses, they should also do the same on other platforms and storefronts.

    Although I'd be very careful with suggesting something like this, as it could cause a version plurality nightmare in the modding sphere, making it even more difficult for people to fully enjoy those games if they're inclined to mod them.

    DreadKhanRaduzielThacoBell
  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 18,822
    edited February 21
    Raduziel wrote: »
    Ammar wrote: »
    That is the part that bothers me. If it was a casting limitation it would both be correct per PnP and a meaningful restriction. The way it is implemented now is an annoyance to the player.

    Oh, I agree. That would be the best case scenario, but IDK if is even possible within the engine.
    I studied marketing enough to understand one simple fact - you can't create anything good if you don't like what you're doing.

    The first and foremost principle of Beamdog is to create games that the developers love. This is why it has been about D&D and Axis & Allies till this point.

    According to the latest interview with Trent, Beamdog "reached the end of the line on the titles we wanted to do personally".

    That's a romanticized view of Marketing, but I can understand that. And the main problem is not Trent picking their games to satisfy his inner child, but how he handles his toys.

    Taking NWN:EE as an example: he pretty much said that Full Party Control is off the table because he doesn't see the game being played that way, even with the community claiming for that - and being an urgent need for a game with such a stupid AI.

    As for A&A, your own words give ground to my argument: too many titles for too many platforms. I understand the need for revenue, but again there are other ways to develop that (even the console ones, can be profitable even if I think that the timing was bad). Beamdog has an army of players wanting a D&D title and what is provided is something completely out of this sphere. The reason? A&A touches Trent's childhood.

    Will A&A be done from the scratch? If so, why not go after IWD2EE as it is way more required here (I think it is insane to require new games from Beamdog at this moment, but I'm trying to analyze things beyond my PoV). If not, why not go after Return to Windspear?

    And let me be absolutely clear about one thing: I think you do a helluva damn good job managing this community. When I say about marketing problems I include people who can actually solve the problem leaving you alone here with all the criticism.

    I think I can't contribute more to that thread (at least about this topic), so I'll finish my part in it.

    Best regards.

    One of the potential reasons. You can't know for sure. From a neutral standpoint, there might be other reasons.

    About FPC in NWN - Trent is the creator of the game, after all. The creator has full rights to think this or that about the creation.

    Thanks for your personal words. ;)

    Post edited by JuliusBorisov on
    Raduziel
  • AmmarAmmar Member Posts: 962
    Adul wrote: »
    Ammar wrote: »
    Given that different people prefer different EE options, what would really help in my opinion is if the Steam client gave a wider choice of game versions to use via the beta option.

    Last time I checked there was one older version available, but it was not a complete offering of major previous versions. This would also help for those of us who play with mods, as it is hard to avoid forced updates with Steam.

    If that's the solution Beamdog chooses, they should also do the same on other platforms and storefronts.

    Although I'd be very careful with suggesting something like this, as it could cause a version plurality nightmare in the modding sphere, making it even more difficult for people to fully enjoy those games if they're inclined to mod them.

    Maybe, but it an issue anyway. GoG users can have any previous version lying around even now. Certain mods are just not updated for the newer versions. And it is just super annoying if a new version drops in the middle of a walkthrough.

  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 18,822
    Adul wrote: »
    I studied marketing enough to understand one simple fact - you can't create anything good if you don't like what you're doing.

    The first and foremost principle of Beamdog is to create games that the developers love. This is why it has been about D&D and Axis & Allies till this point.

    According to the latest interview with Trent, Beamdog "reached the end of the line on the titles we wanted to do personally".

    I don't really care that much about what new titles Beamdog is going to develop going forward. If you—meaning Beamdog, not you personally—only make games from now on that I wouldn't want to play, I'm perfectly fine with that. Sure, I'd love it if you made IWD2:EE, and sure, it would be awesome if you made more content for BG:EE and BG2:EE, but I already have plenty of excellent games to play from other developers that are right up my alley. You don't owe me any new games. I'll be fine either way, and I won't hold that choice against you.

    I do, however, hold it against you that one of the game updates you've released (which is mandatory on your setup on almost all platforms) introduced a host of issues in some of your games that severely limited my personal enjoyment of those games, and despite many of your customers having given you similar feedback over the years, not only have you ignored us and failed to address these issues in almost 3 years, but you've also put out a statement that we shouldn't expect to see any fixes for a while.

    And all that despite statements made back in 2016 that you'd be looking into improving the new UI. A lot of us gave our opinions and suggestions in the "Making it work" threads spurred on by your promise that our feedback would be considered, and the implicit conclusion that at least some of it would be implemented going forward. That whole initiative went nowhere.
    Gosh, what's up with all you people?

    That's why I find it confounding that anyone would be surprised when some of your customers express their dissatisfaction with your actions when it's clear that you've ignored the wishes of those same customers for a very long time.

    Customers (after 2.3) wanted to see a lot of wishes granted. A shaman in IWD:EE. A fix for the Blade's spin. A fix for item duplication. A helluva amount of Multiplayer fixes. Adding German and Polish translations. I can go on with this list for a long time. And those customers' wishes have been heard. Because Beamdog is listening to its community and has always done so.

    The amount of wishes, though, make it so that in the end the developers are in front of the backlog of several thousands of requests which they have to triage and pick what will form the patch.

    DreadKhanSkatan
  • AdulAdul Member Posts: 1,912
    edited February 21
    Adul wrote: »
    I studied marketing enough to understand one simple fact - you can't create anything good if you don't like what you're doing.

    The first and foremost principle of Beamdog is to create games that the developers love. This is why it has been about D&D and Axis & Allies till this point.

    According to the latest interview with Trent, Beamdog "reached the end of the line on the titles we wanted to do personally".

    I don't really care that much about what new titles Beamdog is going to develop going forward. If you—meaning Beamdog, not you personally—only make games from now on that I wouldn't want to play, I'm perfectly fine with that. Sure, I'd love it if you made IWD2:EE, and sure, it would be awesome if you made more content for BG:EE and BG2:EE, but I already have plenty of excellent games to play from other developers that are right up my alley. You don't owe me any new games. I'll be fine either way, and I won't hold that choice against you.

    I do, however, hold it against you that one of the game updates you've released (which is mandatory on your setup on almost all platforms) introduced a host of issues in some of your games that severely limited my personal enjoyment of those games, and despite many of your customers having given you similar feedback over the years, not only have you ignored us and failed to address these issues in almost 3 years, but you've also put out a statement that we shouldn't expect to see any fixes for a while.

    And all that despite statements made back in 2016 that you'd be looking into improving the new UI. A lot of us gave our opinions and suggestions in the "Making it work" threads spurred on by your promise that our feedback would be considered, and the implicit conclusion that at least some of it would be implemented going forward. That whole initiative went nowhere.
    Gosh, what's up with all you people?

    That's why I find it confounding that anyone would be surprised when some of your customers express their dissatisfaction with your actions when it's clear that you've ignored the wishes of those same customers for a very long time.

    Customers (after 2.3) wanted to see a lot of wishes granted. A shaman in IWD:EE. A fix for the Blade's spin. A fix for item duplication. A helluva amount of Multiplayer fixes. Adding German and Polish translations. I can go on with this list for a long time. And those customers' wishes have been heard. Because Beamdog is listening to its community and has always done so.

    The amount of wishes, though, make it so that in the end the developers are in front of the backlog of several thousands of requests which they have to triage and pick what will form the patch.

    I'd accept that argument if we were talking about any old feature request. But my specific gripe comes from a series of bugs that were not in the game before Beamdog decided to remake the entire UI from scratch. When you call your game "Baldur's Gate: Enhanced Edition", I actually do expect all parts of the game to at least not be objectively worse than they were in the original game. Which they are, when we're talking about bugs that you've introduced in the UI.

    In other words, it shouldn't take you 3+ years to address regressions.

    Ammar
  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 18,822
    Do you call the UI in the 2.5 version as the one being objectively worse than the original UI? On which objective reasons is this statement based?

    Maybe it should be called - in this context - subjectively?

    DreadKhanSkatan
  • AdulAdul Member Posts: 1,912
    edited February 21
    Do you call the UI in the 2.5 version as the one being objectively worse than the original UI? On which objective reasons is this statement based?

    Maybe it should be called - in this context - subjectively?

    I can call parts of the UI objectively worse than the original UI. You know, the bugged parts.

    KilivitzRaduzielQuartz
  • AmmarAmmar Member Posts: 962
    I think one of the issue is that it feels like every patch introduces new gameplay and engine feature, and also changes the UI in some way. It's no wonder that every new patch not only resolved bugs, but also introduces new ones. I feel it would help to have smaller patch with a more specific scope.

    AdulThacoBell
  • megamike15megamike15 Member Posts: 1,853
    Ammar wrote: »
    Adul wrote: »
    Ammar wrote: »
    Given that different people prefer different EE options, what would really help in my opinion is if the Steam client gave a wider choice of game versions to use via the beta option.

    Last time I checked there was one older version available, but it was not a complete offering of major previous versions. This would also help for those of us who play with mods, as it is hard to avoid forced updates with Steam.

    If that's the solution Beamdog chooses, they should also do the same on other platforms and storefronts.

    Although I'd be very careful with suggesting something like this, as it could cause a version plurality nightmare in the modding sphere, making it even more difficult for people to fully enjoy those games if they're inclined to mod them.

    Maybe, but it an issue anyway. GoG users can have any previous version lying around even now. Certain mods are just not updated for the newer versions. And it is just super annoying if a new version drops in the middle of a walkthrough.

    this is why i started just playing the game outside of steam in a copied folder and modding that.

  • chimaerachimaera Member Posts: 938
    edited February 21
    Ludwig_II wrote: »
    Though there are still bugs like Ranger Stronghold bug and pathfinding issues, I think there are not many of them.

    I'm not sure what you mean by the pathfinding issues, but on my recent replay of BGEE (current patch) I've run into an issue where party characters would bump into each other and get stuck, because they'd both end up standing in the same space. And I was playing a party of two.

    AdulDreadKhan
  • RaduzielRaduziel Member Posts: 4,599
    About FPC in NWN - Trent is the creator of the game, after all. The creator has full rights to think this or that about the creation.

    Thanks for your personal words. ;)

    Ok, now I swear I'll drop it, but I can't let this go unnoticed.

    NWN is not a Trent brand, it is Bioware's. As it is now not Trent's, it is Beamdog's.

    That is exactly the point I'm raising here as a critic towards Trent's posture. He acts as he owns the game, not as he is the representative of a company that owns the games.

    And that is very unprofessional, to say the least.

    Now I promise that I'll save my thoughts to myself, as it can't be clearer than this.

    Best regards.

    realshempIsewein
  • AmmarAmmar Member Posts: 962
    edited February 21
    Raduziel wrote: »
    About FPC in NWN - Trent is the creator of the game, after all. The creator has full rights to think this or that about the creation.

    Thanks for your personal words. ;)

    Ok, now I swear I'll drop it, but I can't let this go unnoticed.

    NWN is not a Trent brand, it is Bioware's. As it is now not Trent's, it is Beamdog's.

    That is exactly the point I'm raising here as a critic towards Trent's posture. He acts as he owns the game, not as he is the representative of a company that owns the games.

    And that is very unprofessional, to say the least.

    Now I promise that I'll save my thoughts to myself, as it can't be clearer than this.

    Best regards.

    Even if he were the sole creator of the game it would only really matter if he is keeping it to himself. Otherwise customers are free to express both their dissatisfaction and their intent not to make further purchased based on these decisions.

    AdulIsewein
  • Ludwig_IILudwig_II Member Posts: 201
    chimaera wrote: »
    Ludwig_II wrote: »
    Though there are still bugs like Ranger Stronghold bug and pathfinding issues, I think there are not many of them.

    I'm not sure what you mean by the pathfinding issues, but on my recent replay of BGEE (current patch) I've run into an issue where party characters would bump into each other and get stuck, because they'd both end up standing in the same space. And I was playing a party of two.

    Haha, that's exactly what I mean. Now try that with 6 people and watch the fun of all 6 trying to get on top of each other.

    Adul
  • SteveRogers41SteveRogers41 Member Posts: 32
    It gets worse when some of them have Boots of Speed. The fast ones keep trying to push the slow ones out of the way.

    DreadKhan
  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,211
    Ammar wrote: »
    Regarding you personally I was looking at the Scales of Balance mod and was referring more generally to large gameplay changes
    I have never and would never advocate Beamdog implement that kind of stuff in the game. I would much rather have a game that is more faithful to 2E - eliminating the Blackguard, Sorcerer, Monk, etc. - but which is more moddable so that I can ally my own house rules to the 2E system (which is something tabletop 2E very much embraced).

  • chimaerachimaera Member Posts: 938
    edited February 21
    It gets worse when some of them have Boots of Speed. The fast ones keep trying to push the slow ones out of the way.

    I'm not sure if we're talking about the same bug. What happened in my game was that the characters would run into each other, and would end up with their circles overlapping and sprites displayed in the same space. As a result, neither could move. I've seen this bug before, in ye olde times of BGtutu, when multiple enemies would spawn on top of each other.
    Ludwig_II wrote: »
    Haha, that's exactly what I mean. Now try that with 6 people and watch the fun of all 6 trying to get on top of each other.
    Ouch.

  • chimaerachimaera Member Posts: 938
    edited February 21
    Kilivitz wrote: »
    A good part of BG1 is spent exploring colorful wilderness scenarios, full of grass, trees, water and dirt. The gray stone textures might look bland at first, but make the UI too colorful and you'll get a game that strains your eyes.
    There is plenty of room between "too colorful" and that unflattering stone. The perception of a color is dependent on the surroundings and that grey was not doing the background art any favors. BG2's ui color scheme was a big improvement, imo.

    ThacoBell
  • realshemprealshemp Member Posts: 27
    Kilivitz wrote: »
    Still, I wish they had done a better job when it was feasible to do so. They could at the very least prevent their promotional screenshots from displaying obvious bugs, like the vertically unaligned store panels.

    I'm sorry, maybe I'm just blind, but I can't for the life of me see anything wrong with the image you linked.

  • subtledoctorsubtledoctor Member Posts: 11,211
    Kilivitz wrote: »
    By the way, this thematic consistency is true for every other IE game.
    ...
    As of BG2, this post by Adul explains how the weird half-elvish/half-byzantine style is well-suited for the game.

    That is all wildly subjective, and we can agree to disagree on it.

    ThacoBell
Sign In or Register to comment.