EET variant that doesn't require SoD?
Axwind
Member Posts: 28
Has that been developed yet? A version of EET that doesn't require SoD to even be installed but which can transfer right from BG:EE to BGII:EE like the original BGT mod? I don't have SoD and don't plan on getting it - too much bad press and too many bad decisions by Beamdog (I use mods to remove their new NPCs from the game), and I know many people have found it lacking.
Those of us who aren't interested in SoD should be able to use the EET without having to install an expansion we have no intention of playing just to get the mod to run. Requiring SoD and not having an alternate version which doesn't seems like a bit of an oversight to me. If this hasn't been done yet, are there plans to make a non-SoD version of the EET?
Those of us who aren't interested in SoD should be able to use the EET without having to install an expansion we have no intention of playing just to get the mod to run. Requiring SoD and not having an alternate version which doesn't seems like a bit of an oversight to me. If this hasn't been done yet, are there plans to make a non-SoD version of the EET?
Post edited by Axwind on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
There are ways via mods to skip the SoD campaign - which has been updated since many of the bad launch-era reviews - if you're on EET.
If on sale, SoD can be down to 5,-€ so it's really not a big deal.
I don't think it even matters what the press says, considering that the press became a paid advertizing channel even by the time SoD was released. Again, just look at Larian, they dismissed the original games in one interview and the press presented it in a way that people didn't even called them out on it - seriously, your claims about Beamdog are more applicable to that studio.
Also, the backhanded entitlement pisses me off. There's no gain in providing yet another platform variant to get all mods standardized on. It took EET a lot of effort to get where it is now and treating it having "oversights" on this front is a fairly ludicrous claim, especially considering the technical achievement of it beiing possible on a moving platform - since unlike BGT which arrived after the original patches were already finished, EET always hads to be updated after and against EE patches. And noone from this so-claimed "crowd" stood up to build that SoDless variant and stand by it. (Disclaimer: I'm contributing to EET.)
SoD is here to stay. I don't think EET ever had a plan to cut it out, while more and more mods are written to try referencing it and better integrating it to BG2. That is the only oversight from Beamdog in my eyes, that they couldn't put a DLC together to extend BG2 with some SoD-derived references to better integrate the interquel.
Besides, BGT isn't close to the originals either with the Mae'Var interlude coming from nowhere.
Surely there's a way to have a simple flag or something that checks the system upon installation of the mod - if SoD's there, certain elements would be active. If not, they wouldn't be and a player could go right from BG1EE to BG2EE in an environment where SoD doesn't exist. That actually doesn't require a separate version of EET, just a means for it to active/deactivate certain elements of it depending on SoD's presence/absence on the system.
And when I'm talking about the writing, I'm talking about things like Safana's complete personality change, Minsc's infamous comment, certain controversial NPCs, and all the social meta material the head writer injected that led to the uproar and backlash, etc. Unless there are mods that completely wipe all that out and correct everything Amber Scott did, I doubt I'd be interested in SoD.
I am not the biggest fan of SoD; however, what you are asking is going to take many long hours to mod for a very extreme, niche use case that most users of EET will not have. I'm guessing you have only read about SoD since it sounds like you don't own nor have you played it. I agree, there is a lot I do not like about it and frequently skip SoD (I'm currently undecided if I am going to complete or skip it on my current playthrough. To clarify, I play without EXP Cap, so I skip SoD so I don't enter BG2EE overleveled), but SoD is canon at this point. It's entirely your choice not to pay the $6 or so for SoD and you can enjoy BGEE and BG2EE separately. If you do buy SoD, then there are plenty of options to remove the SoD content in EET. If you haven't played it before, I would encourage playing it at least once and form your own opinions on it versus other people's perspectives.
Regarding BG3, I haven't followed anything regarding it nor have I played the beta. It seems too far removed from the series I fell in love with years ago.
EVERY mod which is installed on top of EET would also need to check for this. The current assumption is that EET provides the SoD assets and this is relevant to stuff like animation and sound lookups, map icons, the list goes on. That's not just within EET's scope but something which affects the entire scene. I have brought up this point in my previous post already. It's not an "opinion" just because you refused to comprehend it.
And I love the last paragraph showcasing the entitlement and accusations which the post wasn't about. Most of those were toned down already years ago - Safana isn't even consistent, Mizhena was toned down (and tbh Ed Greenwood always implied that the Forgotten Realms setting includes characters like such) and the Minsc line was axed. Safana doesn't matter because Safana's BG2 take was already a massive OOC compared to BG1, so there's no consistency to speak about.
If that's you best attempt at persuading people to build such a mod for you, then good luck, but maybe change your passive aggression.
Mizhena new lines with new quests are really good, far better than her initial talk at SoD launch.
I'll admit I didn't know that about other mods checking for SoD content. But perhaps the assumption you spoke of, which demands SoD be installed, shouldn't ever have been factored in. In my opinion, mods should provide options for all users, not just cater to some and leave others out. Good to know Minsc's line is gone, but nobody's tried modding Safana to be consistent across all the games? Just wondering when Ed made that implication - during the time when SoD came out, or back when FR was first created? Because if it's the former, then that might've been said only in response to the backlash. I don't know, I'm just asking.
And disagreement isn't passive aggression.
Does Mizhena still beat you over the head with what she is and what she wants to be called, or can you avoid that dialogue branch if you want to? Nothing against certain people, but there's a difference between that sort of thing being developed organically and being pushed in one's face for an agenda.
Mods do account for all play styles. They account for BGEE, BG2EE, and EET. With what you want, you'll play BGEE and import to BG2EE, and mods account for that.
Ed didn't need to say anything about the Mizhena thing, there is already a girdle of gender change and the Edwina sub-plot in the existing base game. It's already there and canon over a decade before SoD came onto the scene. New mod idea for a writer out there is to give Mizhena the girdle of gender change in BGEE as a quest under the person's birth name. In SoD, have a dialogue of "hey, you look familiar", then launch into SoD dialog.
I personally think the writing is bad, but luckily you can skip over it and work has been done to improve some rougher sections. There are some actually fun dungeons in the game with some fun encounters, best vanilla ai, and good loot.
I am entitled to tell modders how do they write theiir mods and they catering to themselves is wrong!
Oh, shut up, Karen. Despite the fact how much you don't know the setting, you act bold.
But here, have some Ed Greenwood.
Elminster - The Making of a Mage - Mystra changes Elminster's gender to better hide her. 1994.
Ed Greenwood, 2006, on the topic of Eilistraee. http://www.candlekeep.com/library/articles/sse/sse_101112-06.htm The same link also includes this excerpt from Ed:
Candlekeep is a goldmine for Ed Greenwood thoughts and I'm pretty sure I could find more. This only tookl me 3 minutes.
Later, there is another quest to save Mizhena's father from crusaders.
And Safana in BGEE have so few lines of texts, I fail to see how someone could say Safana in SoD is not faithful to her. She still flirts with men and women, cheats on you, is selfish... But there is now some hints about her darker side, which is fully revealed in BG2EE.
You really shouldn't listen so much to a vocal minority about SoD, most players like it.
I knew about the girdle, but it's possible it was just intended as a joke item. Some people think everything in the game has to have this extra double meaning, but even Frued said that sometimes a cake is just a cake. Same for the Edwina subplot - I don't much about it, but I know it's there. Could've just been meant as another joke. Like I said, not everything has to have a message attached to it.
Mods do a lot, but if they accounted for all play styles, then EET would've been developed to not require SoD to be installed, with its components only being active if it was. And the writing being bad makes sense given that it was done by an entirely different person who didn't have anything to do with the source material and didn't care what she did to it or its legacy. That kind of thing shouldn't be supported.
Also, when the game's developer (aka Julius Borisov) is disingenuously trying to discredit negative reviewers by falsely claiming they didn't play the DLC when he had to know that the time played is tracked by the base game, NOT the expansion, that alone shows the expansion is crap. One doesn't resort to lying and attempting to stifle criticism unless the product in question is not a good one.
You mean "to hide HIM" because El was only changed temporarily. He was reverted to his true self later. Also, having such people in FR doesn't mean they have to be shoved in every campaign and game and pushed in people's faces. Better to reflect reality, where only a very small percentage of people (2-5%) are that way. Them not appearing in every piece of FR content doesn't mean they don't exist, it's just being faithful to real-life statistics.
Which brings me to another gripe with Beamdog's additions. All three of their new characters (Neera, Rasaad, and Dorn) are bi, but unless you deliberately go looking for people like that, the odds of encountering three of them at once are incredibly small. Making all 3 characters that way comes across as a cheap PR stunt. Bioware, at least, learned from Dragon Age II and didn't repeat that mistake with Inquisition, where only 1 or 2 party members weren't straight, which is more realistic. Representation is fine, but only if it's done organically and unobtrusively, like DA:O and DA:I did.
Protip for GraionDilach: Mockery of any kind instantly destroys the credibility of anything you might say. Because it shows you're completely incapable of making conversation without insults or name-calling, which means you feel your argument can't stand without them. Oh, and using someone's name as an insult is very poor taste as well. It's a form of generalization, and generalizations are always wrong because there are always exceptions and people are not monolithic blocks that can be dismissed at will.
And no, I'm not telling anyone what to do with their mods. I was simply sharing an opinion - that I think it would've been better if EET had been developed to not require SoD (it wasn't part of the original BG story anyway). I didn't know you felt so threatened by it that you felt you had to twist it into something it wasn't. Disagreement and opinion are not entitlement. And Beamdog doesn't care about you, no need to go white-knighting for them.
I posted this thread asking a simple question. There was no need for you to lash out, GraionDilach. A polite answer with no vitriol or negative remarks - in other words, simply answering the question without condemning me for asking it (which you did with the "backhanded entitlement" comment and other condescending remarks about my point of view) - would've reflected much better on you and made me more willing to listen to what you had to say. Next time, watch your own aggression before going off on others for what you think is theirs.
I'll close with this scathing review of SoD (which has mixed reviews) on Steam by DumbBeard:
What you mix up is the expectation that someone, somewhere invests hours, weeks, if not months of modding to maintain two platforms and update all mods to account for it, too so you can spare 5,-€ to get SoD out of some idealistic "but I don't like it!!11"
Thoses 2-5% of people actually are far less represented in games, meaning than to reflect reality as you said, more LGBT characters should actually be put into games. Seriously, first try them before talking about Beamdog characters. Neera and Rasaad are STRAIGHT. Only Dorn is bi. SoD as the more recent game release adds many things on the technical side, components used by modders for technical resources. It's not a review, it's trolling.
If you don't want to paid some bucks to have the technical base needed by most mods, or try yourself SoD to make your own opinion about it, maybe the original edition with BGT would better fits you.
SoD is $20, I just checked yesterday. It's not as cheap as you say it is. And the point is, even if you skip SoD using those methods, you still have to have it installed to do so. It's not necessary to maintain two platforms - just a single one that checks whether SoD is installed or not. Lots of other mods already do this. Why should EET be any different?
I guess you haven't played the Dragon Age games, then. They're in there as well, but for the most part in a much better way. As for Neera and Rasaad, from what I've read, they can be romanced by either gender. Thus, not straight. About those technical resources, were any of them absolutely necessary to begin with? If SoD had never been made, could EET still have been developed? If yes, then those resources weren't strictly necessary. And I like the EE editions, so I don't want to use BGT.
As for your comment about the review, it's wrong. You provide no evidence, only an ad hominem attack. Therefore, your position on it is invalid. Disagreement is not trolling. Not liking something is not trolling. And the devs' own behavior both past and present condemns their work and proves that SoD is not a good product. Otherwise the devs would not be trying to stifle negative reviews and would never have hired a writer who cared so little for the source material. A writer who had nothing to do with the original story, which was already complete 15 years before SoD was made. Paying for SoD is condoning harassment of reviewers, stifling of criticism, lashing out at fans, lying to them, deliberately misrepresenting them, disrespecting the source material, etc. The modding community should've totally rejected SoD years ago.
To summarize your situation regarding SoD and EET, you have these main options:
-Don't play EET. Instead, play BG1EE then import your character/party into BG2EE.
-Play Baldur's Gate Trilogy (BGT), the pre-EE version of EET.
-Play EET but use a mod or some means to skip SoD.
-Play EET and play SoD between BG1EE and BG2EE.
Pick your preference. Enjoy!
I don't know where you read information about them, but I suggest reading instead the wiki or having a little more faith in real players feedbacks. Exactly what this "review" did. No evidence, many wrong assertions, "ad hominem"attacks on Beamdog...
Sorry But this piece of crap have been discussed long ago, and I don't see the point of taking time to do it again only for you, when it's obvious you have a strong bias against Beamdog .
Just a note: it's also extra work for mods to support both, but we do it anyway. You're welcome.
My last comment above was addressed at the OP who makes the mistake of not appreciating what is offered and instead complains about what is not.
I think I'll go with the first option - BG:EE to BG2:EE. I've never played BG2 before, so I'm eager to get to it. It seems kind of pointless to me to get SoD (which I don't want) merely to skip it via mod only because that mod requires it.
About Rasaad and Neera, fair enough. I thought I read that all 3 had been made romanceable both ways, but maybe that was a mod that did that instead.
You provide no evidence that it's wrong. Simply saying it is doesn't make it so. You make a claim, you have to back it up. Otherwise it's invalid. So my point still stands. And it's far from the only negative review. There are plenty, many of which Julius B. has been trying to discredit by claiming they didn't play the game when he has to know that playtime is tracked in the main game, not the DLC. Which means he's being dishonest, and that reflects badly on SoD whether you like it or not. Quit being a corporate apologist. Until I see you say something critical about them and the games, that's what you are.
I was merely asking a question in my original post. There was no need for anyone to condemn me for it. Plenty of mods check to see if certain games out of the EE series are installed or not and only install certain components if they are. Why should EET be any different in regards to SoD? And my question still hasn't been answered - could EET still have been developed if SoD had never been made? Yes or no? I'm not arguing, just trying to understand.
I don't have anything to do with Gamergate nor do I even fully know what that was all about, so don't lump me in with all that. I've heard a little about it, but that's all. And is it wrong to defend one's position? To ask questions? To provide a different point of view? Yes or no?
On a general note: If you really were "merely asking a question" you might want to reconsider the phrasings you do it with. There is a reason the whole thread is about other people telling you to notch down your claiming attitude. Sometimes, if the whole world seems to be against oneself, it might indeed be oneself.
And please, stop judging the campaign by 7 year old ranting "reviews" and make up your own mind. While I am at it: with 5,-€ I was referring to SoD being on sale, not the regular price. It's on sale on regular basis.