Skip to content

Should BG2:EE include the "Ascension" mod by David Gaider?

13468916

Comments

  • FigrutFigrut Member Posts: 109
    edited October 2012
    Anduine said:

    Let the game be itself and let mods be themselves. Not to say that I have no respect for modders, but the only content I want in the "base" game is "official" content made by sufficiently qualified and authorized individuals who have the permission of the original development team/corporation. I do not play or install mods made by random individuals who's authorization and/or credentials are alien to me, regardless of their content.

    Then do not ever sleep in the cave with the flesh golems or you will rage pretty hard. I'll take David Gaider over random "volunteer".
  • ZeckulZeckul Member Posts: 1,036
    edited October 2012
    Cuv said:

    @Zeckul When we are talking about "Ascension"... do you mean the whole WeiDU package? When I talk about Ascension, I am talking only about the actual Ascension mod... and NOT the Improved Battles that are packaged with the current download.

    The poll is kinda confusing in that regard. "Ascension" itself has no components to leave out other than itself.

    I made it clear in the OP, I'm referring to the entire package. That's why there's an option to vote for only certain components. :)

  • TanthalasTanthalas Member Posts: 6,738
    @Figrut

    As far as I can remember the only change in encounters is Flesh Golems in a certain cave, and given how much people complained about that one I don't see anything else being changed.
  • FigrutFigrut Member Posts: 109
    @Tanthalas Well, in their condecending remarks to some of the people making cases to keep them (which inspired me), they made their philsophy on their remake/mod pretty clear. If they're (developer + volunteers) not explicitly forbidden to change something, nothing ougt to be expected to be sacred. With that bubble burst, I see no reason not to include content from one of the makers of BGII completing the game after it was released. It is not like it is going to be pristine otherwise. I rather just have the best game that could be released at that point since just being able to play an official enhanced rerelease of the original without the bugs is off the table. I think they were talking about messing with Wyverns and other creatures as well. Whatever a volunteer's whim of the day is. They just have to tag it as an exploit and it gets piled on the increasingly less impressive "400+!" bugs fixed pile.
  • TanthalasTanthalas Member Posts: 6,738
    @Figrut

    No one has even mentioned touching Wyverns in the beta. Like I've already said, after all the complaints about the Flesh Golems don't expect any other spawns being touched.
  • ShinShin Member Posts: 2,345
    Never saw much of a point in changing the flesh golem spawns other than immersion, but the amount of kickback seemed way out of proportion. If you want contrived experience that bad you can just manually spawn the golems, or cut the middle man and give yourself the xp.
  • shawneshawne Member Posts: 3,239
    All fallacies aside, the reality is that BG1 has already been substantially modified for the EE, both in terms of gameplay (fixes, UI, etc.) and story (the new characters, Adventure Y if that's still happening, and any forthcoming new characters in BG2EE).

    Now you can argue - as, indeed, some already have - that there's still a line to be drawn in terms of how much the BG games can or should be changed, irrespective of contractual limitations. And for the most part, I agree with that: components like "The Darkest Day", various NPCs like Valen, Saerileth and Solaufein, and more should be optional, to be incorporated at the player's discretion.

    But we must also recognize that "Ascension" is singularly unique among BG mods by virtue of its connection to ToB's lead designer - in my eyes, that makes it equal to the inclusion of Dorn, Neera and Rasaad (pedigree aside, they don't function any differently than other character mods).
  • mlnevesemlnevese Member, Moderator Posts: 10,214
    edited October 2012
    As it has been repeated over and over by Cuv, the improved battles are not even a part of it and were created later, so no need to add extra complication by adding tactics battles that most players would be unable to win anyway.

    But as it changes original dialogues it will hit the contractual limitations. Keep it as a mod and update it to work with BG2 EE when it's out.
    Post edited by mlnevese on
  • ArcalianArcalian Member Posts: 359
    I don't need the final battle in TOB to be any harder than it already is.
  • darrenkuodarrenkuo Member Posts: 366
    It's better developers can put good features from this Mod into BG-EE.

    All of us hope BG-EE can become more powerful in game engine/feautre , but before it be real , it must there are developers monitor the totally game balance and bugs in this case
  • ZeckulZeckul Member Posts: 1,036
    ^I there not understand this totally post
  • AnduineAnduine Member Posts: 416
    Figrut said:

    Anduine said:

    Let the game be itself and let mods be themselves. Not to say that I have no respect for modders, but the only content I want in the "base" game is "official" content made by sufficiently qualified and authorized individuals who have the permission of the original development team/corporation. I do not play or install mods made by random individuals who's authorization and/or credentials are alien to me, regardless of their content.

    Then do not ever sleep in the cave with the flesh golems or you will rage pretty hard. I'll take David Gaider over random "volunteer".

    ...Why would anyone ever sleep in that cave? I'd prefer a lack of mods over David Gaider over a random "volunteer."

  • O_BruceO_Bruce Member Posts: 2,790
    It's hard to believe how this topic became so big. It's not like Ascension could *EVER* be implemented into game due to contract limitations, no matter if David Gaider worked over it, or no matter if only some components are considering to implement. Moreover, Ascension is not "almost like unfinished buisness mod" at all. What's the point of wishing for impossible?

    I believe that such mods as Ascension will surely be converted to work with BG2:EE, so installing it shouldn't be a problem for anybody, especially BG2 veterans.
  • ZeckulZeckul Member Posts: 1,036

    It's hard to believe how this topic became so big. It's not like Ascension could *EVER* be implemented into game due to contract limitations, no matter if David Gaider worked over it, or no matter if only some components are considering to implement. Moreover, Ascension is not "almost like unfinished buisness mod" at all. What's the point of wishing for impossible?

    Contractual limitations are one thing, what the game needs and what the fans want is another. This poll is about the latter. Also, if integrating Ascension goes beyond current contractual limitations, and there's a strong will to make it happen anyway, Overhaul can negotiate. There's enough time left to make things happen.

  • LemernisLemernis Member, Moderator Posts: 4,318
    I do like the content changes of Ascension, but these can be added via a mod. As for difficulty, I use SCS II and prefer its AI changes to Gaider's. So when installing Ascension I leave out Ascenion's "Tougher ___" components, as they would override David Wallace's scripts. It's that sort of customization that has me say let this be modded versus official.
  • ShinShin Member Posts: 2,345
    @Lemernis SCS II has components for SCS-ifying the AI of the improved Ascension battles as well.

    However, Ascension also alters the classes/abilities, adds etc for the five bhaalspawns and Gromnir. Illasera for instance is an archer with the Ascension component and a fighter/mage without it. If you install the SCS II AI component for her without having the Ascension component first, it won't do anything. As a fighter/mage she will still benefit from the mage AI component of SCS II of course, but imo that makes the encounter a bit less original.
  • O_BruceO_Bruce Member Posts: 2,790
    Point is, no matter how fans wants it, if something simply can't be done, then it can't. But even if Overhaul is going to negotiate about it someday and it would result in possibility of implementing Ascension, it creates other problems. First, getting David's permission. Second, implementing this mod isn't really friendly towards new players for obvious reasons. To make all battles less difficult you also need author's permission to do so.

    Well, if Overhaul can do it all, that's fine. Shame thought that had it ever going to happen, I would beat "nerfed" Ascension. Quite not the same thing, considering that I've never managed to do it.
  • imajasjamimajasjam Member Posts: 59

    Point is, no matter how fans wants it, if something simply can't be done, then it can't. But even if Overhaul is going to negotiate about it someday and it would result in possibility of implementing Ascension, it creates other problems. First, getting David's permission. Second, implementing this mod isn't really friendly towards new players for obvious reasons. To make all battles less difficult you also need author's permission to do so.

    Well, if Overhaul can do it all, that's fine. Shame thought that had it ever going to happen, I would beat "nerfed" Ascension. Quite not the same thing, considering that I've never managed to do it.

    Exactly, the contractual obligations that Beamdog are under with this BG enhanced edition project prevents changes of this type to the original game.

    Hell there are hundreds of tiny storyline and gameplay tweaks to the existing games that could be made to BG to make it fit better both within the game and general FR lore if Beamdog was allowed to.

    That being said, Ascension will be updated to work with BG2: EE by BGs active modding community anyways.

    Only question is how long it would take.

  • AHFAHF Member Posts: 1,376
    I love the Ascension mod and was therefore inclined to vote "yes" but have been persuaded by the arguments that it may be too challenging for new comers and it adds variety by having it as a mod. If it is incorporated into the base package, then I can only plays mods of the Ascension version. With it as a mod, I can play all of that but also vanilla TOB. More variety is a good thing for a game with this much replay value.
  • awin123awin123 Member Posts: 55
    I'm not a fan of the Ascension fights because honestly I think they're just needlessly over the top but I do understand that some people like the challenge. Ideally I'd like the non fight altering content installed because it helps TOB in areas that it severely lacks in such as party dialogue and overall quest choices, but overall I'd be happy if it worked as a separate mod that can be installed after the fact.

    To the "purists" out there: Get over yourselves, you have no right to come here claiming a moral high ground against mod users when we're all waiting for what is basically a gigantic unofficial mod to an original game. I do however suspect that you're far too delusional to realize this fact and will just continue to spew your "purist" nonsense about how a buggy/unbalanced original game is better than a perfectly working modded game. To clarify - I don't care for mods much myself but I'd rather have a 100% final product instead of a 85% final product, even if it means adding modded content.
  • shawneshawne Member Posts: 3,239
    edited October 2012

    Point is, no matter how fans wants it, if something simply can't be done, then it can't.

    As far as I know, there's been no definitive statement concerning this particular mod either way - it may be premature to say that Overhaul not only can't use "Ascension" but never could use it.

    Second, implementing this mod isn't really friendly towards new players for obvious reasons. To make all battles less difficult you also need author's permission to do so.

    Uh... what? The only battle "Ascension" changes is the final confrontation with Amelyssan (remember, the Improved combat components were added later - they're not part of the core mod), and by that point I'd give players the benefit of the doubt insofar as challenge is concerned...
  • pablo200783pablo200783 Member Posts: 96
    Battle difficult is not everything but real probam was slow down on Abazigal lair and final battle with Amelyssan and five, too many scripts incompatible with antivirus software, end part of Ascesion mod need bug fix, other fight with five also need tweak and balance.
  • O_BruceO_Bruce Member Posts: 2,790
    @shawne
    I'm just not a naive enought to think that anything would change regarding Overhaul's contact. And if it doesn't, Ascension will remain as a mod. Not a big problem for a BG2 veteran to install a mod, is there?

    And I can totally see new players beating final battle. For you, it may be piece of cake, but for new players and non-hardcore ones like me, beating this thing is impossible. Sure, you can nerf it, but that wouldn't be Ascesion we all know - that would be parody of Ascension.
  • WanderonWanderon Member Posts: 1,418
    awin123 said:


    To the "purists" out there: Get over yourselves, you have no right to come here claiming a moral high ground against mod users when we're all waiting for what is basically a gigantic unofficial mod to an original game. I do however suspect that you're far too delusional to realize this fact and will just continue to spew your "purist" nonsense about how a buggy/unbalanced original game is better than a perfectly working modded game. To clarify - I don't care for mods much myself but I'd rather have a 100% final product instead of a 85% final product, even if it means adding modded content.

    Seems to me there's two forms of "purists" in this discussion - and then there's some folks in between.

    1) those that want the main game to adhere as closely to the original as possible (and as promised) and have mod content remain just that - optional mod content -

    2) those that want to toss the baby out with the bathwater changing anything and everything they wish mostly because they can.

    Now I probably fall into the first category and frankly I'd prefer the new NPCs and other new content was being released as DLC myself but I'll accept it as delivered and hope for the best since it's obvious to me that it's too late to ask for changes now even though that apparently has not sunk in to everyone in this thread. After all the game was set to release last month if you recall - now is not the time to add new changes - it's the time to polish it up fix every bug you can find and send it out the door on time on Nov 30.

    As for being delusional what part of OFFICIAL ENHANCED EDITION complete with logo's from Wizards of the Coast, Hasbro, & Atari as well as Overhaul Games leads you to the conclusion that this is some giant unofficial mod??

    I can tell you for a fact that without that official sanction which assures me that there will be contractual obligations to remain true to the existing game and limit the number of things that can be changed I would not have plunked my money down the first day I heard about it nor would I likely be here discussing it today.

    And as for the whole "purist nonsense" about buggy/unbalanced originals being better- I'd have to say there is almost nothing I despise more than the fact that at the end of the day - every one of these mods vs original discussions eventually devolves into a bashing of the original game and pretty much everyone associated with it by the mod fans who seem to feel the only way to win their argument is to attack those that gave us this awesome game - without which there would never have been a single mod produced... /end rant



  • shawneshawne Member Posts: 3,239

    @shawne
    I'm just not a naive enought to think that anything would change regarding Overhaul's contact. And if it doesn't, Ascension will remain as a mod. Not a big problem for a BG2 veteran to install a mod, is there?

    It's not a question of change, it's a question of definition. For example, the contract allows Overhaul to add story content (ie: the new NPCs and "Adventure Y") but not change existing story content - however, one could interpret "Ascension" as adding rather than changing (ie: Irenicus is "added" to the final battle just as Dorn, Neera or Rasaad could be). From a purely legal standpoint, there's just enough wiggle room with this specific mod that I'd prefer a definitive statement one way or another.

    And I can totally see new players beating final battle. For you, it may be piece of cake, but for new players and non-hardcore ones like me, beating this thing is impossible. Sure, you can nerf it, but that wouldn't be Ascesion we all know - that would be parody of Ascension.

    How "new" can a player be if they've made it to the end of ToB? If you can beat Demogorgon, you can beat the Five.
  • shawneshawne Member Posts: 3,239
    Wanderon said:


    As for being delusional what part of OFFICIAL ENHANCED EDITION complete with logo's from Wizards of the Coast, Hasbro, & Atari as well as Overhaul Games leads you to the conclusion that this is some giant unofficial mod??

    I can tell you for a fact that without that official sanction which assures me that there will be contractual obligations to remain true to the existing game and limit the number of things that can be changed I would not have plunked my money down the first day I heard about it nor would I likely be here discussing it today.

    And as for the whole "purist nonsense" about buggy/unbalanced originals being better- I'd have to say there is almost nothing I despise more than the fact that at the end of the day - every one of these mods vs original discussions eventually devolves into a bashing of the original game and pretty much everyone associated with it by the mod fans who seem to feel the only way to win their argument is to attack those that gave us this awesome game - without which there would never have been a single mod produced... /end rant

    Speaking only for myself, my greatest disappointment with the Enhanced Edition is that said enhancements have been almost exclusively on the level of gameplay/mechanics. Yes, there were bugs that needed to be squashed, and that's great, but for all that BG is admired and praised, let's at least acknowledge that there are some aspects of the story and characters that could have been touched up. If we trust Beamdog to create new NPCs and address gameplay-related issues, we should have the same trust that they could have improved the plot and existing NPCs.
  • O_BruceO_Bruce Member Posts: 2,790
    @shawne
    Sorry, it's changing not adding. No four-rounds Mellysan battle. Instead we got Bodhi and Irenicus, then guardians at the "essence pool" things, then The Five + Mellysan (+eventually Gromnir/Sarevok). I can see not only additions here but change of almost entire battle concept. That's big.

    Look, I'm playing BG for years and I never managed to beat Ascension. Now imagine players who starts with BG2:EE beating it. See what I mean?
  • WanderonWanderon Member Posts: 1,418
    some aspects of the story and characters that could have been touched up. If we trust Beamdog to create new NPCs and address gameplay-related issues, we should have the same trust that they could have improved the plot and existing NPCs.
    I disagree - thats kind of the whole point in having an enhanced OFFICIAL edition - it's still the same official game - the original characters and plot are intact - it still works the same way but it's going to download and play and look good on todays machines without going through a laundry list of 3rd party mods to accomplish that - some of which play nice with each other - some don't.

    The concept here is not a remake of the game as someone else thought would be a better way to make it - it's just bringing the existing game into the 21st Century so old fans and newcomers can enjoy playing it again without the hassles involved - it will also bring a new spiffy platform for modders to work with to make the sort of changes they think will be fun but they won't have to rely on Tutu or BGT as part of their process.

    I have no problem with people making mods and I occasionally use them but I want to pick and choose which ones I use myself. This allows me to do so and also provides me with some additional new content WITHOUT changing the old content and thats what makes it "official". I have new NPCs to choose from the old ones are just the way they were before - I have a new area or two to explore but the old ones will play as I expect them to not how someone else has decided they should play.
  • gustonguston Member Posts: 70
    This whole adding but not changing thing is confusing me somewhat. Does that mean that they won't add unimplemented features (whatever they may be) or finish cut quests? Like for example in BG2 there is this evil cabal (the Twisted Rune )in some random basement. From what I can gather those guys were part of a big quest that was never finished but were left in there as a sort of easter egg/bonus boss. Would it be changing or adding for them to finish this quest?
  • O_BruceO_Bruce Member Posts: 2,790
    @guston
    If you add something to the game that leads the player to discoer about Twisted Rune existence, then it is adding. If you mess up with already existing dialouge or content, it's changing. So, about TR, there can be added quest that leads you to them, but their reactions at you finding them ought to stay as they are. Not changing dialogue/interraction/battle agains TR.
This discussion has been closed.