Why Baldur's Gate sucks?

[Sodomy]

There is a character I can't remember exactly where, that depending how you solve his quest later when you get to the city you will be able to do another quest and enter a particular building that otherwise would be inaccessible. There is also another one near the end of the game related with game's main villian. Plus many quests that you will not be able to complete if you don't have certain party members with you.

So there was a character which was really deep and memorable and cool, but you can't really remember who he was.
On the other hand, me and most people on the Codex could name dozens of memorable PST characters who you meet early on. Off the top of my head, Morte, Dhall and Ei-Vene were in the starting building.

Not to mention Deinoarra, Vaxis, and Soego.

 

[Lumpy]

There is a character I can't remember exactly where, that depending how you solve his quest later when you get to the city you will be able to do another quest and enter a particular building that otherwise would be inaccessible. There is also another one near the end of the game related with game's main villian. Plus many quests that you will not be able to complete if you don't have certain party members with you.

So there was a character which was really deep and memorable and cool, but you can't really remember who he was.
On the other hand, me and most people on the Codex could name dozens of memorable PST characters who you meet early on. Off the top of my head, Morte, Dhall and Ei-Vene were in the starting building.

Not to mention Deinoarra, Vaxis, and Soego.

And of course, the zombies were definitely memorable. There was the one going in triangles, the one which had the rule-of-three earring, the skeleton which you created as a previous incarnation, and some others. That's a credit to Planescape's greatness, that unnamed, non-talking zombies could actually be memorable characters.
There could have been interesting characters in Candlekeep, in the Friendly Arm Inn, etc. There were none.

 

[Sodomy]

There is a character I can't remember exactly where, that depending how you solve his quest later when you get to the city you will be able to do another quest and enter a particular building that otherwise would be inaccessible. There is also another one near the end of the game related with game's main villian. Plus many quests that you will not be able to complete if you don't have certain party members with you.

So there was a character which was really deep and memorable and cool, but you can't really remember who he was.
On the other hand, me and most people on the Codex could name dozens of memorable PST characters who you meet early on. Off the top of my head, Morte, Dhall and Ei-Vene were in the starting building.

Not to mention Deinoarra, Vaxis, and Soego.

And of course, the zombies were definitely memorable. There was the one going in triangles, the one which had the rule-of-three earring, the skeleton which you created as a previous incarnation, and some others. That's a credit to Planescape's greatness, that unnamed, non-talking zombies could actually be memorable characters.

I always liked the one whose leg breaks off. Also brilliant was letting the player wield that leg as a club.

I thought the one going in triangles WAS the one who had the rule-of-three earring? Maybe my memory is just rusty...

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

Yeah, too bad all of those options either lead to the same response or have some quick "loopback" into the "expected path" that causes that option to be purely cosmetic.

No, there actually were honest to goodness options in quite a few dialogues in Baldur's Gate 1. They were there.

Ok, maybe. I never finished that quest at all; maybe there was a choice at "the other end". Still, it's a cheap method of forcing you to accept it.

I'll agree on that, it was pretty cheesy, but all games have cheesiness in them.

 

[Section8]

Simple.

 

[Lumpy]

Simple.

Genius.

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

Simple.

Genius.

Seems a little away from that to me. Much of the stuff seems subjective (character issues, combat balance) or inflated (pathfinding). Not saying there aren't valid points (railroading,pointless NPCs, and lack of consequences), but the general tone and some of the flaws of the analysis just lessens any impact it could have on me. It's got some good points, but I'm inclined to disagree with quite a few things.

And I'm sorry, but this memorable characters bullshit is just that. Utter bullshit. Memorable characters are in no way indicitive of great character design. Sure that helps, in some cases. But honestly, most of it is shit luck. Look at Ian and Dogmeat. How much character development was put into both of those characters? Probably around the same amount as the "average" Baldur's Gate NPC. But you kinow what? Every Fallout fan fondly remembers these two. Hell, characters like Brotherhood doorman what's his name, Vree, Laura, and Jane had talking heads. Infinitely more development than the followers who were just there to hurt people, yet nowhere near as memorable as a dog who bit stuff or a guy who would often shoot you in the back because of shitty AI.

Plus, when you are enjoying something, you're more likely to remember points about it. And seeing as Planescape is one of the most liked games on the Codex, it's not surprising just about everyone can name details about it around here. And seeing as not too many people here seem to have enjoyed Baldur's Gate, it's not too surprising people didn't remember much from it. Now if I go to a place on the internet with a lot of Baldur's Gate fans, I'm sure they'll talk a ton about "nobody" NPCs like Mad Arcand, Dradeel, and The Surgeon.

 

[Lumpy]

That's the reason I don't give a flying fuck about either Ian or Dogmeat.
In fact, had you not mentioned it I wouldn't even have remembered Ian's name. And Dogmeat I know because of all the "OMG DOGMEAT AND SULIK ARE THE B3ST EVAH" Fallout fanboy bullshit.
Sulik=Minsc.
By memorable I don't mean "which are remembered", but rather "which are remembered fondly". Yeah, I remember Gorion, Imoen, Minsc, Jaheira, Aerie, the chinese guy, etc. But I couldn't give a shit about any of them. When I remember Mebbeth, I think of how cool she was.

 

[Hamster]

The answer is simple - Baldur's Gate don't suck. Maybe it sucks as RPG but it is a FAG done right(and thats very rare), at least for me. Same goes for all IE games.

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

That's the reason I don't give a flying fuck about either Ian or Dogmeat.
In fact, had you not mentioned it I wouldn't even have remembered Ian's name. And Dogmeat I know because of all the "OMG DOGMEAT AND SULIK ARE THE B3ST EVAH" Fallout fanboy bullshit.

Yeah. But my point still stands. Look at the depth of those two characters, then look at the impact they've made.

Sulik=Minsc.

A tribal guy who spears/super sledges people looking for his sister and killing slavers is equivalent to a character who is basically satire on the whole "hero and his animal companion" thing? Sure there were similarities, but they aren't the same...like Imoen and Mission are and Korgan and Canderous (Bioware rehashing).

By memorable I don't mean "which are remembered", but rather "which are remembered fondly".

Makes enough sense. But plenty of people liked Ian, Dogmeat, Minsc, and such. I guess I should have specified that I was speaking in a more broad sense.

Yeah, I remember Gorion, Imoen, Minsc, Jaheira, Aerie, the chinese guy, etc. But I couldn't give a shit about any of them.

Because you probably weren't enjoying the game as much as you were Torment. You tend to have more favorable memories about things connected to more pleasureable experiences.

When I remember Mebbeth, I think of how cool she was.

Funny you would pick Mebbeth. Her, Ei-Vene, and rip-out-your-organs-woman all being aspects of Ravel was one of the outright dumbest things in the game (only by virtue of it being one of the only dumb things), at least to me. Not exactly one of Chris Avellone's better ideas.

 

[spacemoose]

Funny you would pick Mebbeth. Her, Ei-Vene, and rip-out-your-organs-woman all being aspects of Ravel was one of the outright dumbest things in the game

how so. in my view it was great character development. you certainly don't see many non-villain characters masquarading about in modern games

 

[Lumpy]

Funny you would pick Mebbeth. Her, Ei-Vene, and rip-out-your-organs-woman all being aspects of Ravel was one of the outright dumbest things in the game

how so. in my view it was great character development. you certainly don't see many non-villain characters masquarading about in modern games

Not to mention the fact that Mebbeth forgot that she was Ravel. That was awesomesauce.
Or how Ravel mirrored your first conversation with Mebbeth. That was nifty too.

 

[Hamster]

So, Torment was better than Baldur's Gate, that the point most people make here. Yeah, Torment was definetely better, what a surprise!!! So what?

 

[kingcomrade]

Sulik was a stupid character. Arguing about him is pointless.

 

[spacemoose]

Sulik was a stupid character. Arguing about him is pointless.

nuh uh

 

[kingcomrade]

yeah huh

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

how so. in my view it was great character development. you certainly don't see many non-villain characters masquarading about in modern games

Well, it didn't make much sense. I thought Ravel was imprisoned in the maze and that was supposed to be her torment, the lonsomeness and how she missed The Nameless One. I also was under the impression she could escape, but The Lady would eviscerate her immediately upon doing so because of all the ruckus she caused. Both of those don't make much sense with the whole running around in other shapes thing. Hell, Annah being Ravel would have made a lot more sense than what happened.

 

[aboyd]

Because the companions are as shallow as possible - they only talk to you when you hire them. Then they become combat units and nothing more. Except some like Minsc who offer you more monster killing quests. Hourah.
And they are either stupid - LOL Minsc - or they don't make any sense. Like Xzar and Montaron. When you meet the EVIL friends they offer you a healing potion as a gift and offer to help you. OH NO EVIL. They tell you to go and clear the Nashkel mines (EEEVIL), but after you do that they complain that what you did wasn't EEEEVVVIIIIILLLL enough for them. For some reason, they offer to help you without asking for anything in return, but if you help others, they hate you because they are EVUUHL.

Wow, so you didn't really play the game, did you? They're Zhents, which I guess is revealed after you gave up (odd, it's fairly early in the game). And if you have the Harpers in your party, there is some good confrontational dialogue.

And who plays the default game, anyway? I've been playing with the Tutu and NPC mods since forever. The "dialogueless" witch you mentioned had all sorts of things to say in my game.

Did you really play the default game? At 640x480? I didn't think people did that.

 

[aboyd]

I thought Ravel was imprisoned in the maze and that was supposed to be her torment, the lonsomeness and how she missed The Nameless One. I also was under the impression she could escape, but The Lady would eviscerate her immediately upon doing so because of all the ruckus she caused. Both of those don't make much sense with the whole running around in other shapes thing.

They made sense to me, but perhaps my brain works differently. I felt it was an excellent way to honor the Lady's request, but subvert it at the same time. I thought it was compelling to see this NPC standing up to a goddess.

 

[The Feral Kid]

There are plenty of interesting characters in BG. Earlier I referred to an example of depending how you interact with someone will have longtime effects, not that he was the only interesting one ffs. Plus Coran is easily the coolest NPC ever including BG2 and PS:Torment.

 

[Hamster]

I've never played BG1, but I can help you with why BG2 sucks.

Non-combat related reasons:
You are "teh chosen one"..

Not true, BG 2 is one of the few games where plot is based on your charachter and not on saving the world by being chosen one(which was only present in the add-on ).

 

[hotdognights]

I actually liked Baldur's Gate I more than II. Along the same lines, I'd rather have the stomach flu than TB.

Both were pretty dismal in terms of combat, character development, and writing.

Baldur's Gate had a pretty cool plot though, and it's villains were a lot more cunning and manipulative than the EVIL WIZARD WHO WANTS YOUR SOUL AND TO BECOME A GOD.

Regarding Baldur's Gate and its timing:

Well, yes Baldur's Gate and RPGs released after Fallout SHOULD be held to a higher stand, since it was such a watershed game. I wouldn't expect every FPS to follow in Doom's footsteps after the release of Half-Life. I regard the Neverwinter Nights OC higher than Baldur's Gate because it at least made attempts, no matter how half-heartedly and dismally, to touch that benchmark. Baldur's Gate just ignored it.

Also, there's not much to do in BG other than stab stuff or blast stuff with magic. Ultima, at least 5-7.5, had compelling stories which, despite advocating the Virtues(emphasis on the capital V) at least attempted to have some moral ambiguity and depth. Once again, Baldur's Gate I is much better about this than the second). This may be subjective, but to me, Ultima V-7.5 had far better stories, writing, and characters than BG.

And frankly, I'd take the silent NPCs of Fallout and BG1 over the catchphrase spewing one note jokes or the creepy, co-dependent "romances" of BG2.

Dungeon crawlers can be fun when there's style and depth to the hacking and slashing. Baldur's Gate sure was pretty, but hell if the setting wasn't boring as fuck. And the hacking and slashing were kinda boring too. Yeah, Wizardry was all about hack and slash, but it had some pretty damn interesting puzzles that went beyond "solve the riddle" or "read the journal" and the last game in the series was pretty much the pinnacle of strategic character development. In Baldur's Gate, after picking your class, the only choice you have in your character's development is spell selection and weapons proficiency. The only meaningful differentiation in characters is whether they stab or 'splode hordes and hordes of monsters. I'd blame this on AD&D, which was clunky and boring and terrible, but Torment and Dark Sun managed to do so much more with the same paltry material.

Also, I think there's like one quest each in both games where a dialogue alternative is offered-once with the crazy sheriff, and once to get into the insane asylum.

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

Well, yes Baldur's Gate and RPGs released after Fallout SHOULD be held to a higher stand, since it was such a watershed game.

It was released barely a year after Fallout. Too soon after to seriously change development. And let me guess, you would have wanted them to pull a Bethesda and completely remake the sequel to appeal to a totally different audience, right?

I regard the Neverwinter Nights OC higher than Baldur's Gate because it at least made attempts, no matter how half-heartedly and dismally, to touch that benchmark.

You didn't just say that. This is going to be as fun as the time someone said role-playing in Oblivion was better than in Baldur's Gate.

Also, there's not much to do in BG other than stab stuff or blast stuff with magic.

Talk? Sneak? Party interaction?

attempted to have some moral ambiguity and depth

Gargoyles....yes. Guardian and crew....not so much.

And frankly, I'd take the silent NPCs of Fallout and BG1 over the catchphrase spewing one note jokes or the creepy, co-dependent "romances" of BG2.

Really now? I'd take a party of NPCs who actually do stuff based on my actions and the group makeup over a bunch of automatons made only to kill or be cuddly, loveable killing machines.

Dungeon crawlers can be fun when there's style and depth to the hacking and slashing. Baldur's Gate sure was pretty, but hell if the setting wasn't boring as fuck.

Welcome to the land of subjectiveness. And I think Shadows of Amn broke the whole generic fantasy stuff with the clones and all that jazz.

pretty damn interesting puzzles that went beyond "solve the riddle" or "read the journal"

A little too far beyond if you ask me. Wizardry 4 comes to mind.

I'd blame this on AD&D, which was clunky and boring and terrible,

I'd blame it on lax design seeing as AD&D was pretty freeform and you could switch out a lot of stuff very easily. Heck, the books even provided ideas if I recall right.

Also, I think there's like one quest each in both games where a dialogue alternative is offered-once with the crazy sheriff, and once to get into the insane asylum.

There are a lot more times than that dialogue can pay off, in both games.

 

[hotdognights]

You didn't just say that. This is going to be as fun as the time someone said role-playing in Oblivion was better than in Baldur's Gate.

I didn't say it was good; I said it was better, and good does not equal better. And believe me, I don't have anymore love for the NWNOC than most other Codex posters.

As far as Oblivion...well, .0001 > 0, so I'm not gonna say Oblivion has more role playing than Baldur's Gate, but that's not really impressive.

Also, there's not much to do in BG other than stab stuff or blast stuff with magic.

Talk? Sneak? Party interaction?

How often was stealth a viable quest solution as opposed to a means to make stabbing more powerful? Likewise, talking was often a prelude to combat(either being to go beat somebody up or villain exposition). As for party interaction? Well, .0001 > 0, but 0 > -1. I don't think there's ever been a worse NPC in an RPG than Aerie, but Mazzy, Minsc, and the turnip guy come pretty close(well also Bastila and Mission...and, well, let's just accept Bioware kinda sucks at writing characters). I'd take the silent Ian and Dogmeat over the note repeated ad infinitum of Minsc and the gnome, or the cloyingly pathetic Aerie.

attempted to have some moral ambiguity and depth

Gargoyles....yes. Guardian and crew....not so much.

And Blackthorne. The Guardian did fall into the trap of evil for the sake of evil, but I enjoyed Ultima VII's exposition a lot more than Baldur's Gate. Subjective, I guess, so I'll let it go.

And frankly, I'd take the silent NPCs of Fallout and BG1 over the catchphrase spewing one note jokes or the creepy, co-dependent "romances" of BG2.

Really now? I'd take a party of NPCs who actually do stuff based on my actions and the group makeup over a bunch of automatons made only to kill or be cuddly, loveable killing machines.

As already stated, absence is preferable to shitty.

Welcome to the land of subjectiveness. And I think Shadows of Amn broke the whole generic fantasy stuff with the clones and all that jazz.

A glimmer of something interesting, but how extensively was that carried throughout the setting. There was some kinda interesting stuff in Baldur's Gate, but it never really panned out...for me at least, since we're in subjective land. Like little piles of diamond...well, quartz, in a heap of shit.

pretty damn interesting puzzles that went beyond "solve the riddle" or "read the journal"

A little too far beyond if you ask me. Wizardry 4 comes to mind.

I'd blame this on AD&D, which was clunky and boring and terrible,

I'd blame it on lax design seeing as AD&D was pretty freeform and you could switch out a lot of stuff very easily. Heck, the books even provided ideas if I recall right.

To be honest, my D&D experience is limited to cRPGS, so I'll take your word for it.

There are a lot more times than that dialogue can pay off, in both games.

Examples, please?

After all that nastiness though, I'll say that even though I'm not a huge fan of his work, David Gaider stands out as a pretty stand-up guy. I never played Ascension since trudging through BG once was enough, but the fact he took his own time to make it after the game had been released shows a commitment to his customer base and his work that's pretty much unheard of in the industry. Goes to show, it's not personal, it's videogames.

 

[Sodomy]

No, there actually were honest to goodness options in quite a few dialogues in Baldur's Gate 1. They were there.

Ok. That's great. Too bad I'm talking about BG2.

I'll agree on that, it was pretty cheesy, but all games have cheesiness in them.

We should forgive shitty games their suckage because all games make mistakes? Hey, maybe we should all like Oblivion, since, hey, every game has at least one throwaway NPC, and they all have at least one AI quirk, and most have at least one moment of something resembling linearity and they all have at least one choice without much if any consequence.