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!

Overall score - 71/100. SoD Official Reviews list (spoilers)

1235710

Comments

  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 19,166
    A new review is out, this time from Czech Republic, giving SoD 7/10

    http://games.tiscali.cz/recenze/baldur-s-gate-siege-of-dragonspear-recenze-274707

    @Southpaw , our mighty Illathid, I summon thee to translate it a bit!

  • shawneshawne Member Posts: 3,239
    Seems that with the outrage settled, the general consensus for reviews is a high 7/low 8.

    That's... not great. Not unexpected, perhaps, but not great. :|

  • FoggyFoggy Member Posts: 297
    edited April 2016
    Professional reviewers wearing their nostalgia glasses and expecting more of the same. Others are foolishly complaining about how old is the Infinity Engine, as if an expansion that bridges BG1 and BG2 was to receive the Fallout 4 treatment. Some magazines only score highly AAA titles. I usually don't trust professional reviews but in this game they are more honest than the consumers one. 7.5 isn't that bad and may help shed some light on the real value of the game since the users reviews are a joke and don't represent the game content.

    Edited cos sometimes my English skills doesn't convey my thoughts LOL. Hope this makes more sense now.

    Post edited by Foggy on
    JuliusBorisovKrotos
  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 19,166
  • FinneousPJFinneousPJ Member Posts: 6,456
    It's pretty funny that people here, on a BG fansite, complain about bias. Maybe you're biased?

  • FinneousPJFinneousPJ Member Posts: 6,456
    bengoshi said:

    It's pretty funny that people here, on a BG fansite, complain about bias. Maybe you're biased?

    Of course we are. But after all, SoD is the game for BG fans in the first place, and only then for other computer games players.
    @bengoshi So it should be immune to criticism? That's not how it works my friend. The truth is, by 2016 standards, SoD is not a great game. But it's fine, and I don't regret playing it.

  • shawneshawne Member Posts: 3,239
    bengoshi said:

    (and even more so, I think the more feedback it gets on this forum, the better the next project will come)

    Seeing as how SoD was the "next project" when they were getting feedback for BG:EE and BG2:EE, and we're still seeing criticism across the board specifically regarding the writing, I question whether that logic holds.

    Foggy
  • Mikey205Mikey205 Member Posts: 302
    Well reviews are saying its better writing and they did just hire David Gaider.

    JuliusBorisov
  • FinneousPJFinneousPJ Member Posts: 6,456
    @bengoshi Have you given your personal review of SoD? I'm sure many people here would be interested.

    JuliusBorisov
  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 19,166
    edited April 2016
    Thanks a lot for the review translation, our mighty Mind Flayer! I'll sacrifice you some cookies!

    FinneousPJ, I still haven't completed it. I'm a slow player, with a restartitis, and now there's that Iron Man Daigle run... :) I'll happily give my review when I finish, so far I shared my views on the starting dungeon and the BG city part.

    A new review is available, from http://www.gamerevolution.com/ 3,5/5

    "one design decision goes beyond a neutral take: You cannot backtrack to previously explored areas. I heard this before going in and didn’t think it would bother me, but this creates a lot of disappointment when I really want to complete a quest but went one step too far in the linear direction. This would be like Arkham Asylum eliminating the option for side quests after you complete the main story. Bad.

    The more you play Dragonspear, though, the more you realize what the game is truly about: the story. While there are some anachronisms (allies from the first game that seem to have either forgotten you completely or disappeared entirely), it stays mostly faithful as a missing piece to a puzzle.

    I will give a comparison from which many will immediately repulse: this is a lot like the Star Wars Prequel Trilogy. Looking past its much-maligned state (which it did everything in its power to earn) that trilogy filled a gap in the story about which many people were wondering. Thankfully, Siege of Dragonspear is a lot higher quality than that comparison implies."

    http://www.gamerevolution.com/review/baldurs-gate-siege-of-dragonspear

    Post edited by JuliusBorisov on
    MoradinBelgarathMTHFinneousPJKrotos
  • SouthpawSouthpaw Member Posts: 2,026
    edited April 2016
    ...actually... some of my Czech friends on this very forum have told me to also look at the comments under that review on the Czech games portal.

    Long story short - majority of them sort of put down the reviewer for being ridiculous in his complaints about the UI and quite silly comparison of the games' graphics to completely new titles - with oldschool games, it's not about the graphical interface, but about the story and the gameplay. Also some complain, that the modern games serve everything to the player on a silver plate and pose no challenge for a skilled gamer - actually liking BG's fights and it's steep learning curve.

    On the other hand, the new story-line was received with mixed feelings. Some people like it, some don't. (That was expected, though)

    JuliusBorisovCrevsDaakKrotos
  • kanisathakanisatha Member Posts: 628

    His negatives mainly focus on the fact that, to him, in 2016 there are better alternatives for the old school RPG (like PoE and DOS) and BG as a whole is now just too outdated. He refers to the ruleset and the graphics. Does that matter a dime to long time BG fans who still play the game? Of course not. In fact, they will definitely appreciate the D&D 2nd ed rule set.

    Well, I'm a longtime BG fan who's been playing it since it first came out, and am also someone who began playing D&D with 2e rules. But I hate 2e with a passion and even consider 4e rules to be better than 2e. So for me, someone pointing out that it is time to move on from 2e because that ruleset sucks is a meaningful and fair part of any review. Note that I do understand why the game needed to be in 2e, which is not the issue. But critizing the ruleset and resultant gameplay *is* fair game imho for a review.

    illathid
  • illathidillathid Member Posts: 320
    kanisatha said:

    His negatives mainly focus on the fact that, to him, in 2016 there are better alternatives for the old school RPG (like PoE and DOS) and BG as a whole is now just too outdated. He refers to the ruleset and the graphics. Does that matter a dime to long time BG fans who still play the game? Of course not. In fact, they will definitely appreciate the D&D 2nd ed rule set.

    Well, I'm a longtime BG fan who's been playing it since it first came out, and am also someone who began playing D&D with 2e rules. But I hate 2e with a passion and even consider 4e rules to be better than 2e. So for me, someone pointing out that it is time to move on from 2e because that ruleset sucks is a meaningful and fair part of any review. Note that I do understand why the game needed to be in 2e, which is not the issue. But critizing the ruleset and resultant gameplay *is* fair game imho for a review.
    While I think it can be mentioned, I also wonder about how relevant it is in a review for a game like this. It's almost like complaining that the game isn't an FPS or a MOBA. So while I think it can be mentioned, I'd not base a review around it either. Just my two cents.

    namenlosmf2112ZaferickKrotos
  • Excalibur_2102Excalibur_2102 Member Posts: 351
    kanisatha said:

    His negatives mainly focus on the fact that, to him, in 2016 there are better alternatives for the old school RPG (like PoE and DOS) and BG as a whole is now just too outdated. He refers to the ruleset and the graphics. Does that matter a dime to long time BG fans who still play the game? Of course not. In fact, they will definitely appreciate the D&D 2nd ed rule set.

    Well, I'm a longtime BG fan who's been playing it since it first came out, and am also someone who began playing D&D with 2e rules. But I hate 2e with a passion and even consider 4e rules to be better than 2e. So for me, someone pointing out that it is time to move on from 2e because that ruleset sucks is a meaningful and fair part of any review. Note that I do understand why the game needed to be in 2e, which is not the issue. But critizing the ruleset and resultant gameplay *is* fair game imho for a review.
    Hey, I didn't say it wasn't a legit criticism.. It is really, but I feel that most BG fans will like the idea of going back to 2nd ed

  • kanisathakanisatha Member Posts: 628
    illathid said:

    While I think it can be mentioned, I also wonder about how relevant it is in a review for a game like this. It's almost like complaining that the game isn't an FPS or a MOBA. So while I think it can be mentioned, I'd not base a review around it either. Just my two cents.

    The way I interpret such critiques is as follows (and this applies to criticism of the dated graphics as well): Beamdog had two options for what they could've done creating a new game. Option A - create an expansion to a 17 years old game that bridges it and its almost as old follow-on game, and as such has to use the same ruleset and graphics (and engine) to maintain consistency. Option B - create an entirely new game that is very similar to the much-beloved 17 years old game and set in the same world, but using new/current rules, UI, graphics, and engine. Beamdog chose option A, and that choice is what is being criticized.

    Now, Beamdog can come back and say they didn't have a choice because WotC made them do A over B. Fair enough, but that still doesn't negate or invalidate the criticism.

    As a separate note, none of my arguments are meant to convey that I don't like SoD. To the contrary, I've been following the game since it was still just a vague reference to Adventure Y, I pre-ordered it the day it became available to do so, and it's worth every penny I spent on it. But if I'd had a say in the choice, I would've chosen option B over A; it would've been a no-brainer for me.

    FinneousPJillathidJuliusBorisovKrotos
  • CrevsDaakCrevsDaak Member Posts: 7,139
    bengoshi said:
    I'm very sorry, but I do not have the time to make a translation of it, nor I am feeling well enough to start one if I had the time.

    So, what the say is that, the story is quite better than the other games Beamdog released (meaning it's better than the EE characters' stories and such), that it's nice that it isn't a reboot but purely new content, that there are some bits to polish (engine and story wise) but that the game feels like Baldur's Gate (meaning it's a good game), but the some of graphic changes weren't welcome (the black outlining on the character sprites) and that it had more bugs than it should at launch time. They also mention that the new interface is nice and how it respects the old BG one, and that the game's good: you should buy it if you like the genre. It was also mentioned that it'd be better as a standalone game (the term that was used in Spanish was "independent expansion".

    JuliusBorisovGozetaKrotos
Sign In or Register to comment.