Skip to content

Backporting IWD:EE features into BG:EE and BG2:EE

ChorazyGlusChorazyGlus Member Posts: 151
in Feature Requests
Hi, since this topic is somewhat scattered throughout the forums, it can't hurt to make another discussion about it;)

My general idea about this is that once IWD:EE is out (30 Oct. 2014) would it be possible to port the good stuff to both BG's?

Few things that come to mind: IWD druid and cleric spell tables; IWD voicesets, moster models and lastly (ok this one bugs me big time) Heart of Fury mode for BG2:EE.

Feel free to add your own ideas.

Comments

  • sarevok57sarevok57 Member Posts: 5,975
    but isnt that what made icewind dale, icewind dale? i would feel kind of wonky if there were icewind dale things in my bg stuff, although if someone made an optional mod for it, i would say that would be okay
  • CrevsDaakCrevsDaak Member Posts: 7,155
    I don't think those are the things that should be ported (because they change big parts of the game that could change simply by modding), but engine features should be ported instead (IWD's effect opcodes and scripting actions for example).

    Some people might prefer BG's Priest and Druid spell tables, and there've been complains of how the game added that type of things that could have been left for mods.

    Animations can be easily (well, not that easy but still not too difficult) modded into the game, too, but they could add entries for them on the stuff related to walking sounds, which is actually hardcoded.
  • ChorazyGlusChorazyGlus Member Posts: 151
    @Sarevok57
    Ok I overshot it with monster models; come to think of it there is not a need for so many undead types in BG anyway. But I won't go as far as to say that spelltables or voicesets are exclusive stuff meant for either BG or IWD. I get that everyone has their own view on what makes each brand unique, but if there are same things implemented (yea I'm looking at you, druid) in both games then why should not they be the same? Especially when druids in BG sux compared to IWD.
  • ChorazyGlusChorazyGlus Member Posts: 151
    edited October 2014
    @CrevsDaak Porting benefical engine changes/features should be automatic (well maybe thats just me with my pink glasses on:D) Other things like animations, well as long as possibility exists then I guess that's enough. Though, purely from aesthetics standpoint, most of IWD spell animations look more magical i.e. superior to me than the BG ones. Heck, even casting voicesets are the same so why not animations? F.e. everytime I cast healing spell I hear Jaheira's (mabe I hear wrong, but you get the point) voice. Do I find it disturbing? Nope. I think thats Infinity games right there. Same like in Star Trek computer voice is always the same and it is good and adds to the depth.
  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 22,724
    RPGWatch: Is your IE Plus engine so reusable you can retroactively apply changes to all the games you've developed with it? Can you fix or add something (a new class kit for example) to IWD:EE and then just plop it into BG:EE with a patch?

    Liam: That's one of the major benefits to working with our updated engine, definitely. For example, one of the major improvements we've made to IWD:EE is improved pathfinding, which will be back-ported to BG:EE and BGII:EE in their next patches. This system means that any engine fix made to one game will - within a patch or two - also be applied to our other games. Pretty rad (from the most recent IWDEE interview here: http://www.rpgwatch.com/show/article?articleid=268)

    Wow, just wow!
  • ChorazyGlusChorazyGlus Member Posts: 151
    @bengoshi Hm it seems that my pink glasses are in for real this time...omg! Thanks for linking the article!
  • OzzyBotkinsOzzyBotkins Member Posts: 396
    I would like to play a Priest of Tempus in Baldurs Gate
  • SedSed Member Posts: 790
    @CrevsDaak‌ Remember that tablets won't get the benefits of mods, so to some extent you have to take them into consideration as well.

    Engine improvements should be a no-brainer, but I can also see the benefit of soundsets for Charname. I'm bored to death with the current ones ;)

    Also getting some of the druid abilities backported would lift a very underwhelming class in BG/BG2
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • RAM021RAM021 Member Posts: 403
    typo_tilly said:

    *backports IWD ranger/cleric spell progression to BG*
    *forum riots*
    *Bhaal is resurrected from the ensuing carnage*

    HElf R/C multi still works very well and it is a small price to pay for the significantly improved Paladin/Ranger casting ability.
  • nbnmarenbnmare Member Posts: 15
    Overhaul could allow us to chose between the two sets of spell animations via an option in the gameplay menu, thus allowing everyone to easily choose whichever one they want. Just a thought :).

    IWD spells in BG1/2 wouldn't be a problem for me, especially since IWD has already benefited from BG2 spells.

    For the spell progression tables, that's perhaps better done via a mod; my personal recommendation would be to use the pnp spell tables available in various existing mods.
  • GrammarsaladGrammarsalad Member Posts: 2,582
    CrevsDaak said:

    I don't think those are the things that should be ported (because they change big parts of the game that could change simply by modding), but engine features should be ported instead (IWD's effect opcodes and scripting actions for example).

    Some people might prefer BG's Priest and Druid spell tables, and there've been complains of how the game added that type of things that could have been left for mods.

    Animations can be easily (well, not that easy but still not too difficult) modded into the game, too, but they could add entries for them on the stuff related to walking sounds, which is actually hardcoded.

    This.
  • SharGuidesMyHandSharGuidesMyHand Member Posts: 2,580
    I agree with some of CrevsDaak's points about changing the fundamentals of each game, but I'd definitely love to see anything that wouldn't compromise the fundamentals (namely, voicesets) made available across both sets of games.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • argent77argent77 Member Posts: 3,433
    Theoretically it is possible to relocate the "lang" folder which contains the dialog.tlk from the install directory into the user folder without much effort. I've quickly tested it by modifying a couple of text strings in the game executable and I could play the game without any problems.
    Unless the mobile versions differ greatly from the desktop versions, it should be fairly easy for Beamdog to integrate this feature into the game.
  • CrevsDaakCrevsDaak Member Posts: 7,155
    edited November 2014
    @subtledoctor‌
    subtledoctor said:

    Sed said:

    CrevsDaak‌ Remember that tablets won't get the benefits of mods, so to some extent you have to take them into consideration as well.

    This is why the real, biggie, #1 feature request should be for Beamdog to work to make the tablet versions moddable. You can already apply some mods without jail breaking via the 'portraits' folder; all that is required in addition is exposure of the dialog.tlk file. Surely the devs could change the app structure to make that possible...
    I doubt that Apple would allow selling such a product, besides, I highly doubt that Beamdog can create a new version of Cocoa Touch just for their EE games.

    What I think that could be changed is the dialog.tlk location… maybe it could be symlinked from the Library folder to the .app's contents folder… The game might want it to be in the same directory as the chitin.key though, but I dunno about that certainly, since I'm not an IE wizard.

    Edit: ninja'd by @argent77‌ LOL!
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited November 2014
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • EndarireEndarire Member Posts: 1,512
    I agree with this backporting notion.

    Two possible exceptions.

    [i]Dimension door[/i] was barred from PCs in the BG series due to so many proximal triggers. I'd rather not break or risk breaking these games due to this spell.

    [i]Contact other plane[/i] may get overwhelmed in BG2 if it tries to apply the Q&A to all quests. Perhaps for the main quest it would help.

    In general, I'd like the new spells from [i]Icewind Dale EE[/i] to be backported to the BG series such as [i]expeditious retreat[/i[.
  • moody_magemoody_mage Member Posts: 2,054
    BG2Tweaks can do a few of these things including spell anumations.
  • BelgarathMTHBelgarathMTH Member Posts: 5,653
    What about CamDawg's IWDification mod? Doesn't it kind of already do all this?

    http://www.gibberlings3.net/iwdification/
  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,963
    I wants sneak attack in every infinity engine game
  • CrevsDaakCrevsDaak Member Posts: 7,155
    @BelgarathMTH‌ yes, but some of IWD's spells (which aren't in CamD's mod right now) require effect opcodes that aren't on BG(2)EE's engine (which can't be modded). Other than that, all I can say is that it's a pretty good mod and I always use it.
  • MessiMessi Member Posts: 738
    I'm just going to say that I don't want to see IWD spells in BG2. Things like that should be left for mods as they drastically change the balance of the game.
  • GrammarsaladGrammarsalad Member Posts: 2,582
    Messi said:

    I'm just going to say that I don't want to see IWD spells in BG2. Things like that should be left for mods as they drastically change the balance of the game.

    Sure, but we need the opcodes to make the spells
  • Avenger_teambgAvenger_teambg Member, Developer Posts: 5,862
    bengoshi said:

    RPGWatch: Is your IE Plus engine so reusable you can retroactively apply changes to all the games you've developed with it? Can you fix or add something (a new class kit for example) to IWD:EE and then just plop it into BG:EE with a patch?

    Liam: That's one of the major benefits to working with our updated engine, definitely. For example, one of the major improvements we've made to IWD:EE is improved pathfinding, which will be back-ported to BG:EE and BGII:EE in their next patches. This system means that any engine fix made to one game will - within a patch or two - also be applied to our other games. Pretty rad (from the most recent IWDEE interview here: http://www.rpgwatch.com/show/article?articleid=268)

    Wow, just wow!

    Note, that most players don't make a distinction between engine and data changes.
    Engine changes are almost guaranteed to percolate into every other game, just for code maintenance reasons.
    They might be deactivated by an option or compile time switch, but usually they make their way into the other games.
    Data (content) changes won't make it that easily. There supposed to be a difference between the games, if all data would be the same, they would be one big game. Also note, data could be moved between the games by the players themselves. Especially for stuff like portraits or soundsets.
Sign In or Register to comment.

2024 Overhaul Games, a division of Beamdog. © 2024 Hasbro, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Baldur's Gate, Dungeons & Dragons, D&D, Forgotten Realms, Baldur's Gate, Wizards of the Coast and their logos are trademarks of Wizards of the Coast LLC in the U.S.A. and other countries, and are used with permission. Hasbro and its logo are trademarks of Hasbro, Inc. and are used with permission. © 1998 BioWare Corp. All Rights Reserved. BioWare, the BioWare Infinity Engine and the BioWare logo are trademarks of Bioware Corp. Black Isle Studios and the Black Isle Studios logo are trademarks of Interplay Entertainment Corp. Atari and the Atari logo are trademarks owned by Atari Interactive, Inc. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.