Any bug or glitch that represent a choice, where the player can choose to use it or not should be left in the game, any bug that no matter what the player want automatic force itself on the game should be removed.
I meant console command type ways...you wanna cheat like that? Fine? But all the bugs in the game that are exploited, such as keeping your inventory from BG1 into BG2, should be closed/fixed.
And when i find it, will you want it to be fixed also? Mod these fixs on your game, do not impose it on other people game.
Circular logic is circular: if there's an exploit in the game, it's imposing itself on everyone by default just by being there in the first place.
If you want to cheat, use the console - that's the only form of cheating that actually is specific to the person playing.
You're falling to your own argument, how a bug or glitch that need intent, the will of the player to be used, is being imposed on another peson? This is just radical behavior being radical.
It's a question of good sense, many of the bugs and glitchs are today part of our experience with Baldur's Gate, to take them all off will make this game become something else. To use a random label on another person opinion on the attempt to make it rationally less worth is simply rhetoric.
What i state is my own opinion, but what i state is the less invasive aboard also, the bugs bound to intent of the player should be left on the game to a certain degree, if they're triggered by accident or randomly, then take them off. In the end good sense will win the day.
There's a marked difference between exploiting a bug (the famous example is being able to pause at the start of BGII to keep all your equipment) to gain an advantage, and exploiting a feature (such as the diamond in the tree at the start of BGI).
The feature is there because the developers put it there on purpose, as something secret that intrepid players could find. The bug is there because the developers forgot to account for it and players found it.
One is an exploit. The other is a bug that is being exploited.
Arguably, you might not want the bug to be fixed because you like the way it works. But there are also a lot of bugs in the game that you might not like, that someone else does. For instance, I'm quite partial to the bug that makes beggars and mages clone themselves during multiplayer, because I find it hilarious when someone is followed by a horde of angry beggars throughout their adventures. But not everybody agrees with me on that, so what do you do? Do you fix the bug even though it's hilarious, or do you leave it there even though it's interfering with people's enjoyment of the game?
So when it's a bug, we do our best to fix it. We have a lot of modders in the community who, I'm sure, will be more than happy to accommodate requests to restore a particular bug if you found it especially entertaining. But we still have to do our job to make sure that these games are as polished and pristine as they can be. Leaving bugs in there--even bugs we might enjoy--undermines that effort, and it's not something we strive for.
Not sure I get how the "feature" of the diamond is being exploited? If the devs put it there for you to find and now that you found it you use it how is that an exploit?
Clearly if they thought it was overpowering and something you should only get access to once they would have made it "random" or whatever - are you saying they had no idea that once someone found it (or was told about it) that they would probably use it for every play-through and thus this has to be "fixed" ??
Not sure I get how the "feature" of the diamond is being exploited? If the devs put it there for you to find and now that you found it you use it how is that an exploit?
Clearly if they thought it was overpowering and something you should only get access to once they would have made it "random" or whatever - are you saying they had no idea that once someone found it (or was told about it) that they would probably use it for every play-through and thus this has to be "fixed" ??
Noooo. I'm saying that's an example of a feature that was designed to work the way it does. I was trying to draw a comparison between a bug that's being exploited (keeping your gear in BGII) and an intentional secret exploit (finding the diamond in the tree).
There's also an additional issue of features working together in ways that are correct, coherent, and utterly unintentional. For example, I think recently someone pointed out that the Assassin's poison weapon ability works with Melf's Minute Meteors. This is a completely legal use of the ability, and although it's strange to imagine the assassin poisoning a meteor, it's perfectly faithful to the text of both abilities. So is the combination isn't a bug, but it is probably an exploit, because it's quite powerful and I would bet money it wasn't intentional. Should it be fixed? Hard to say. Both abilities are working perfectly, but producing an unforeseen outcome. The kensai->thief dual class is similar. Kensai equipment restrictions are working properly, and UAI is working properly, but the combination was probably totally unforeseen by the original devs.
Or to give another example, consider repeatedly stealing and selling equipment to the same fence. It's not a bug, the fence is supposed to accept stolen goods and players are supposed to be able to sell, buy, and steal the same item multiple times (say to recharge wands or correct mistakes), but it can be termed an exploit because it pretty clearly represents an oversight on the developers' part that impacts game balance.
Not sure I get how the "feature" of the diamond is being exploited? If the devs put it there for you to find and now that you found it you use it how is that an exploit?
Clearly if they thought it was overpowering and something you should only get access to once they would have made it "random" or whatever - are you saying they had no idea that once someone found it (or was told about it) that they would probably use it for every play-through and thus this has to be "fixed" ??
That diamond(and other 'hidden' objects) were placed in the original Baldur's Gate game, which didn't have the 'tab to highlight everything on the screen' feature. So you had to pixel hunt to find stuff like this. Hitting tab trivializes the hunt so that the 'reward' becomes less a reward and more 'will get by default'.
Not sure I get how the "feature" of the diamond is being exploited? If the devs put it there for you to find and now that you found it you use it how is that an exploit?
Clearly if they thought it was overpowering and something you should only get access to once they would have made it "random" or whatever - are you saying they had no idea that once someone found it (or was told about it) that they would probably use it for every play-through and thus this has to be "fixed" ??
Noooo. I'm saying that's an example of a feature that was designed to work the way it does. I was trying to draw a comparison between a bug that's being exploited (keeping your gear in BGII) and an intentional secret exploit (finding the diamond in the tree).
Ahhh...I see - using the term "exploit" to describe the "feature" confused me...thx for the clarification!
If it's a game breaker, fix dat bug. Anything else you might legitimately not know about if you were playing the game in a bubble I.e. Without access to the internet to check if it's a bug/exploit or enough game ruleset knowledge to know it shouldn't be able to happen, leave it alone. Discovering the exploit/cheat is sometimes part of the fun and you don't need to use it. & sometimes these exploits don't work as advertised, lots of people report that Boots of Speed stack with Haste but the last time I did that accidentally it didn't work & I had to reload as neither worked.
1st, bugs are annoying. If you played the original BG pre-ToTSC and before the first patch, there was a nightmare bug in the Firewine ruins where kobold commandos respawned instantaneously and endlessly. It was a major victory to kill the ogre mage at the end, but it took dozens of tries and was horribly frustrating for a beginner on a first play through. Bugs that break the game or make it nearly impossible are unacceptable. No mercy, squish the bugs!
Secondly, if you adopt rules (in this case AD&D 2nd ed.) then shouldn't you be obliged to abide by them? I'm not talking about players here. I mean the developers. There are tons of inconsistencies between the BG saga and pnp rules. Some are unavoidable and necessary, sure. What about Coran, Kagain, and Dorn? The first two have impossibly high stats and Dorn is an illegal class. (Viconia may also be illegal but I don't recall). The additional nerfs to Halflings and Dwarves also seem unfair and unnecessary. Seems a bit silly to criticize players for cheating or cheesing after all those. If people want to cheat then let that be their choice, but it shouldn't be standard in the game.
The poll is just awful. It ties the opinion about exploits to pnp puritanism, it only gives extreme options (exploits are good vs gone forever, which I assume means remove them and introduce special anti cheat code which is lame), and the OP mixes up bug exploits and legitimate strategies (import-export multiplayer based duping is cheating, and not the same as having an army of summons)
Personally, I want exploits to be optionally gone. that is, if you think they make the game more fun you could reenable them. I don't think PnP accuracy is in any way shape or form related to it.
Removing every exploit is probably not possible and even if it was, do I want the CLUA console disabled, anti-cheat code, and gaming police? I think not. One time I "lost" Imoen and couldn't remember where she was. I wandered a long time and then started to "warp" via the CLUA until I found her. It didn't break the game or give me an unfair advantage. It just saved many hours of replay due to my doofusness. What is cheese is kind of subjective, too. If it's not contrary to the rules or intended game mechanics, it's probably OK. I have no guilt over sniping and kiting Drizzt (sans boots of cheese) since he moves so fast and kills me at least 50% of the time (no reloads on him). I'm pretty sure Drizzt is not legal either.
Looks like the fire shield is bypassing magic resistance so it's technically probably a bug, but it's still pure genius that SpaceInvader found a use for that silly violet potion and developed this tactic. Kudos, mate!
Except Kagain and Coran's stats are not impossibly high. It's clear at some point they've used a dex or con manual. Totally legit (especially in the monty haul world of BG where you stumble across a full set +2, where as finding 1 would normally be stupidly rare. Now Coran's mastery in bows on the other hand.....
Drizzt is so wrong its laughable....and even the Heroes Lorebook directly contradicts his capabilities in the novels and word of god, as well as the in-game mechanics for drow.
CLUAconsole is technically a mod, rather then an exploit. You have to manually change the game files to be able to use it at all anyway.
Secondly, if you adopt rules (in this case AD&D 2nd ed.) then shouldn't you be obliged to abide by them?
This is a standard to which DMs running the game are not held, i.e. they are encouraged to "house rule" and make their own decisions about subsystems wherever necessary to keep the game fun for their group. Why should BG be held to a higher standard?
Except Kagain and Coran's stats are not impossibly high. It's clear at some point they've used a dex or con manual. Totally legit (especially in the monty haul world of BG where you stumble across a full set +2, where as finding 1 would normally be stupidly rare. Now Coran's mastery in bows on the other hand.....
Drizzt is so wrong its laughable....and even the Heroes Lorebook directly contradicts his capabilities in the novels and word of god, as well as the in-game mechanics for drow.
CLUAconsole is technically a mod, rather then an exploit. You have to manually change the game files to be able to use it at all anyway.
I believe that main NPCs, joinable ones, with set stats aren't a bug or glitch, they're intended to have those stats.
The maximum stat cap for races isn't an impenetrable barrier, it's an limit for CHARACTER CREATION. So if i find an NPC with 25 in any stat it's totally legit, cos he already have his story and adventures and during it he could have achieved those stats.
NPCs not made by the player shouldn't be restricted at the same pattern, an specialization for a bard (as Haer'Dalis can have ** in short sword on BG2 when you find him) isn't a big deal, it's just an special joinable NPC being special, besides these characters with these special abilities aren't even using the cap of their stats. The game is balanced, some NPCs have 20 in one stat, others have mastery into a proficiency, others have an amulet of cheese spells that make them the best mage ever on the game... and there's goes on.
Actually Edwins amulet should have the crap nerfed out of it. In BG1 vanilla it only give +2 spells to 1st and 2nd level which was pretty reasonable. BG2 though overpowered the crap out of it. (and yes +2 to first and 2nd level spells is FAR FAR more powerful then the amulet of power).
I wouldn't care if it gave him a -2 save penalty to all spells he casts instead of extra casts (or just a built-in affect bonus for the same, instead of the amulet)...that is what a red wizard bonus does....but +TWO spells per spell level? That's just retarded.
I might understand it, if he lost Evocation, Divination, and Abjuration....but just divination? NO.
I have no qualms with edwin being a cheese mage. In BG2 Were magic start to become a must have, edwin simple presence prevent the player of have Keldorn and Minsc in the party as he will eventually clash with any of the above. Keldorn and Minsc are the 2 potential 2 handed weapons fighters of BG2 (exception to the big bad guy in ToB that joins us) therefore Edwin have his package of limits also.
Yeah....that has nothing to do with anything. And Minsc is the only character Edwin clashes with. He gets on several people's nerves, but only Minsc will ever come to blows over it. Keldorn assaults Vicky.
And no...anyone who can put points into a 2hd weapon is a potential 2hd wielder. Minsc and Keldorn just have points in them at the start. Korgan is better then both of them at it, if you'd rather him use something besides Axes. Not that it matters, since 2hders are a waste of a weapon slot as BG is implemented. Purifier is better then Carsomyr, so no reason for Keldorn to ever use that. And I actually tend to dual-wield with Minsc, if I take him. He's speced in Maces at the start, which are one of the under-used weapon categories (usually give Anomen flails or hammers).
Yeah..........only a tiny % of people have ever had that happen, because the flags needed to cause it are ridiculously convoluted and easy to avoid. Unlike Minsc/Edwin and Keldorn/VIcky.
Yeah..........only a tiny % of people have ever had that happen, because the flags needed to cause it are ridiculously convoluted and easy to avoid. Unlike Minsc/Edwin and Keldorn/VIcky.
Hence I'm in the pool it's NEVER happened for.
Zan, i don't know in which base your made this assumption, but in MANY of my games this have happened. I can just be a very bad lucky person, but then maybe someone that know the system should have a world on this.
@kamuizin@ZanathKariashi The triggers for the Edwin/Keldorn fight are very straightforward -- the only potential issue would be that Edwin and Keldorn have to be fairly close to each other for it to occur. As a result, it is less likely to be seen -- but not hugely so, as most of the time your NPCs will be fairly close together.
Yeah, but heres the thing....I always use staggered line formation...Keldorn is melee is usually number 1 or 2...Edwin, being useless aside from spell-casting, is 6....even standing around, they are NEVER close enough to ever trigger it unless you just have your party arranged haphazardly. Hence why I've NEVER seen it happen. Even the default formation is far enough away to never have it occur.
Also, it doesn't occur while he's affected by the nether scroll either, which can easily last the entire game, unless you rest excessively.
Based on the fact that after a short search only two people out of 40 admitted to have ever seen it happen, and one had dig through the scripts to see what the requirements were to make it happen, and verify it would actually work.
Any bug or glitch that represent a choice, where the player can choose to use it or not should be left in the game, any bug that no matter what the player want automatic force itself on the game should be removed.
Actually, you are making a very good point here @kamuizin. So good in fact that you managed to change my mind on the topic, and believe me that's doesn't happen often as I tend to be very stubborn
When I've started reading this discussion I was in strong agreement with those that believe exploits should always be removed from the game no matter what.
However, some exploits actually require so much commitment, that it is in fact easier to ignore them than exploit them, those should IMO remain in the game.
Also, just to be clear, I don't need those exploits myself, as I can easily achieve the same results (if I want to, but usually I don't) with the console, savegame editors or modding tools.
However, it looks like there are many people that are for several reasons not confortable with using these alternative means. For those people removing the exploit will take away choice without improving the experience for others.
Granted that may apply to only a subset of the exploits, still I think it may be worth preserving some of them.
Damn. Both sides have good and valid arguements. Still, i really hate having to loose unintentional (yet overused) strategies such as the planetar party of 5. Or the wild mage cycle of endless casting no resting no surges. Or the ranger cleric's complete divine spell pool. If they fix "bugs" that are useful, like the above, i will honestly have a very tough time, deciding whether to buy the upcoming game or not... Which is probably not, since i am going to loose my mostly used and favored strategies. Damn.
Any bug or glitch that represent a choice, where the player can choose to use it or not should be left in the game, any bug that no matter what the player want automatic force itself on the game should be removed.
many bugs are not a choice and can easily hit by accident. Only a few them cannot be done unintentionally.
There's a marked difference between exploiting a bug (the famous example is being able to pause at the start of BGII to keep all your equipment) to gain an advantage, and exploiting a feature (such as the diamond in the tree at the start of BGI).
The feature is there because the developers put it there on purpose, as something secret that intrepid players could find. The bug is there because the developers forgot to account for it and players found it.
One is an exploit. The other is a bug that is being exploited.
This is a pretty bad example. An exploit, is by definition exploiting a BUG. The diamond, is by definition, not an exploit. It might be an unfair advantage but it is an intended unfair advantage given to you by the developers on purpose.
Comments
Any bug or glitch that represent a choice, where the player can choose to use it or not should be left in the game, any bug that no matter what the player want automatic force itself on the game should be removed.
If you want to cheat, use the console - that's the only form of cheating that actually is specific to the person playing.
It's a question of good sense, many of the bugs and glitchs are today part of our experience with Baldur's Gate, to take them all off will make this game become something else. To use a random label on another person opinion on the attempt to make it rationally less worth is simply rhetoric.
What i state is my own opinion, but what i state is the less invasive aboard also, the bugs bound to intent of the player should be left on the game to a certain degree, if they're triggered by accident or randomly, then take them off. In the end good sense will win the day.
The feature is there because the developers put it there on purpose, as something secret that intrepid players could find. The bug is there because the developers forgot to account for it and players found it.
One is an exploit. The other is a bug that is being exploited.
Arguably, you might not want the bug to be fixed because you like the way it works. But there are also a lot of bugs in the game that you might not like, that someone else does. For instance, I'm quite partial to the bug that makes beggars and mages clone themselves during multiplayer, because I find it hilarious when someone is followed by a horde of angry beggars throughout their adventures. But not everybody agrees with me on that, so what do you do? Do you fix the bug even though it's hilarious, or do you leave it there even though it's interfering with people's enjoyment of the game?
So when it's a bug, we do our best to fix it. We have a lot of modders in the community who, I'm sure, will be more than happy to accommodate requests to restore a particular bug if you found it especially entertaining. But we still have to do our job to make sure that these games are as polished and pristine as they can be. Leaving bugs in there--even bugs we might enjoy--undermines that effort, and it's not something we strive for.
Clearly if they thought it was overpowering and something you should only get access to once they would have made it "random" or whatever - are you saying they had no idea that once someone found it (or was told about it) that they would probably use it for every play-through and thus this has to be "fixed" ??
Secondly, if you adopt rules (in this case AD&D 2nd ed.) then shouldn't you be obliged to abide by them? I'm not talking about players here. I mean the developers. There are tons of inconsistencies between the BG saga and pnp rules. Some are unavoidable and necessary, sure. What about Coran, Kagain, and Dorn? The first two have impossibly high stats and Dorn is an illegal class. (Viconia may also be illegal but I don't recall). The additional nerfs to Halflings and Dwarves also seem unfair and unnecessary. Seems a bit silly to criticize players for cheating or cheesing after all those. If people want to cheat then let that be their choice, but it shouldn't be standard in the game.
taltamir has a valid point... Removing every exploit is probably not possible and even if it was, do I want the CLUA console disabled, anti-cheat code, and gaming police? I think not. One time I "lost" Imoen and couldn't remember where she was. I wandered a long time and then started to "warp" via the CLUA until I found her. It didn't break the game or give me an unfair advantage. It just saved many hours of replay due to my doofusness. What is cheese is kind of subjective, too. If it's not contrary to the rules or intended game mechanics, it's probably OK. I have no guilt over sniping and kiting Drizzt (sans boots of cheese) since he moves so fast and kills me at least 50% of the time (no reloads on him). I'm pretty sure Drizzt is not legal either.
I love this posting by SpaceInvader...
http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/11145/solo-sorcerer-vs-drizzt-melee-fight-on-insane
Looks like the fire shield is bypassing magic resistance so it's technically probably a bug, but it's still pure genius that SpaceInvader found a use for that silly violet potion and developed this tactic. Kudos, mate!
Drizzt is so wrong its laughable....and even the Heroes Lorebook directly contradicts his capabilities in the novels and word of god, as well as the in-game mechanics for drow.
CLUAconsole is technically a mod, rather then an exploit. You have to manually change the game files to be able to use it at all anyway.
The maximum stat cap for races isn't an impenetrable barrier, it's an limit for CHARACTER CREATION. So if i find an NPC with 25 in any stat it's totally legit, cos he already have his story and adventures and during it he could have achieved those stats.
NPCs not made by the player shouldn't be restricted at the same pattern, an specialization for a bard (as Haer'Dalis can have ** in short sword on BG2 when you find him) isn't a big deal, it's just an special joinable NPC being special, besides these characters with these special abilities aren't even using the cap of their stats. The game is balanced, some NPCs have 20 in one stat, others have mastery into a proficiency, others have an amulet of cheese spells that make them the best mage ever on the game... and there's goes on.
I wouldn't care if it gave him a -2 save penalty to all spells he casts instead of extra casts (or just a built-in affect bonus for the same, instead of the amulet)...that is what a red wizard bonus does....but +TWO spells per spell level? That's just retarded.
I might understand it, if he lost Evocation, Divination, and Abjuration....but just divination? NO.
And no...anyone who can put points into a 2hd weapon is a potential 2hd wielder. Minsc and Keldorn just have points in them at the start. Korgan is better then both of them at it, if you'd rather him use something besides Axes. Not that it matters, since 2hders are a waste of a weapon slot as BG is implemented. Purifier is better then Carsomyr, so no reason for Keldorn to ever use that. And I actually tend to dual-wield with Minsc, if I take him. He's speced in Maces at the start, which are one of the under-used weapon categories (usually give Anomen flails or hammers).
Hence I'm in the pool it's NEVER happened for.
@LiamEsler could you clarify this?
Also, it doesn't occur while he's affected by the nether scroll either, which can easily last the entire game, unless you rest excessively.
@kamuizin
Based on the fact that after a short search only two people out of 40 admitted to have ever seen it happen, and one had dig through the scripts to see what the requirements were to make it happen, and verify it would actually work.
When I've started reading this discussion I was in strong agreement with those that believe exploits should always be removed from the game no matter what.
However, some exploits actually require so much commitment, that it is in fact easier to ignore them than exploit them, those should IMO remain in the game.
Also, just to be clear, I don't need those exploits myself, as I can easily achieve the same results (if I want to, but usually I don't) with the console, savegame editors or modding tools.
However, it looks like there are many people that are for several reasons not confortable with using these alternative means. For those people removing the exploit will take away choice without improving the experience for others.
Granted that may apply to only a subset of the exploits, still I think it may be worth preserving some of them.
An exploit, is by definition exploiting a BUG. The diamond, is by definition, not an exploit. It might be an unfair advantage but it is an intended unfair advantage given to you by the developers on purpose.