Mass Effect: Hype, Praise, Criticisms, Minor Spoilers

[Volourn]

Huh? Your logic is pathetic. Both KOTOR, and NWN are BIO games so preferring one or the other doesn't make you more or less of a fanboy.

 

[aboyd]

Bioware's worst overall game, from those that I have played, has to be Baldurs Gate. The 2d drawn backgrounds were pretty... thats about it. The plot was poorly explained, and it was just a hack n slash the whole way through.

Huh. I loved the plot. The whole Iron Throne scheme was exceptionally well-done in my opinion, because it really hit home with some corruption I've seen in real life. I liked that it was so tangible, and at least for me it came across as well-told.

Of course, I never play the game exactly as it came in the box. I always use Tutu, so I can play the game at 1280x1024 resolution, and with all the BG2 ToB features like extra pause options and highlighting of clickable regions.

Also, I never understood the "no C&C" stuff -- the Harper vs. Zentharim undercurrent in the story leads to some real changes in the game. For example, keep Monty & what's-his-name in your party, and they will provide additional pathways through some quests. And since I usually play with an NPC-enhancement mod, I typically have a boatload of extra quests and interesting fun interactions to have. They're very well-done. Coran has excellent, odd quests, and I can rarely tell where the official Bioware stuff ends and the modders' stuff begins.

So, yeah, I guess buying BG1 and playing it "as is" would be a less than ideal gaming situation. But even then it would still have some real good stuff. However, the way I play it, I'd have to say that it is probably the best Bioware game I've played. I think I've had 6 or 7 playthroughs now.

 

[RK47]

I agree as well with what aboyd said. BG was a real eye opener to me, especially when Khalid & his wife started attacking Monty & that necro while in party.

I loved the country side exploration, those fucking ankhegs never cease to scare me.

 

[MasPingon]

Huh? Your logic is pathetic. Both KOTOR, and NWN are BIO games so preferring one or the other doesn't make you more or less of a fanboy.

Wasn't Bioware more involved in KOTOR then NWN?

 

[Nerve Gas]

I was talking about Baldur's Gate, NOT BG2, and to the troll who posted the pictures, definitely not about PST.

All I was saying was that the backgrounds sucked compared to PST. So I wouldn't give BG even that.

 

[Serious_Business]

Huh? Your logic is pathetic. Both KOTOR, and NWN are BIO games so preferring one or the other doesn't make you more or less of a fanboy.

Wasn't Bioware more involved in KOTOR then NWN?

No

Bioware's idea of "C&C" (what is that, command and conquer) is only self-contained, meaning that yes quests have different outcomes sometimes, you'll definitively get different results depending on your choices, but those results will be extremely limited. Exemple : different rewards, reaction from NPCs, etc. I'm not even going to try to present this anymore elaborately because some people are pursposedly giving their game much more credit then they're due. Or rather, some people don't have the same definition of "C&C", apparently.

"course there are not long term C&C"

This simply isn't true.

That seems to be a load of bullshit but if anyone is willing to give me exemple of this, i.e. "long term C&C" (which is, to me, the only real "C&C"), then I'll be gadly surprised. The only thing I can think of is the choice of factions you could make in BG2, in one of the first chapters (thieves or vampires, right). I would consider this rather eventful because it cut off some quests and opened others, even if that chapter was totally self-contained, and short. This was a real big trick for Bioware to pull off and I don't think they ever tried something like this again. Don't talk to me about the "crucial choice" at the end of a bioware game, obviously.

 

[aboyd]

I guess I'm comfortable with BG1's "short term C&C" -- so long as something really changes based upon my choices, I guess I don't need the whole game world to shift around. If a choice in BG1 opens up one new option related to a quest I'll get in an hour, and another choice means I keep or lose a companion, well, to me, those small things are enough. Those small things are greater than my experience with NWN 2, for example. When I replay BG1, I can have a different experience each time. With NWN 2, I will follow the exact same path, do the exact same quests in the same order, and with the exact same companions.

For example, from Wikipedia, about my previously mentioned Monty C&C:

At one point in the game members of the Zhentarim will attack you unless Xzar and Montaron are in your party. A Zhentarim agent will also appear and offer the party some advice on defeating Sarevok if Monty and Xzar accompany the party during the game's final chapter.

There are lots of little things like that, and they change the experience enough to make replays not only tolerable, but enjoyable. Also, since so many areas are optional, you can work out various paths and have new activities for a number of playthroughs.

The only part that grates on me is "running the gauntlet" of 6 or 7 required areas leading up to the city. I didn't mind them the first two times, but having to fight all those spiders for the 7th time got a little lame. Still, even in that, there are choices. For example, I've skipped Coran to avoid his wyvern caverns, making those required areas a bit faster to complete.

 

[Jasede]

aboyd, I never knew that about the Zhentarim! I see that my liking for BG 1 and 2 seems to be more than just nostalgia.

 

[Trash]

Aboyd, what npc mod are you using? All this talk of BG makes me want to replay it again.