Why Baldur's Gate sucks?

[Vault Dweller]

Does this "Dear Lord..." drama come with arguments and points by any chance? If you've made them already, post a link to your post(s).

 

[Jasede]

Anyway, BG2 was a great action-adventure game with stats, but a god-fucking-awful RPG.

Dear Lord...

You have to keep in mind that VD doesn't consider most traditional RPGs RPGs. Goldbox games? No choices and consequences (mostly). Wizardry 5? Where are the dialogue skills! To be honest, his view is a bit skewed, but the trade-off is that he's about to make the most RPGish RPG ever.

 

[stargelman]

Yes, DSA 1 = Realms of Arkania 1. And, of course, the famous German P&P system.

The latter is what I'm talking about. Young? Hah! I haven't even played it in 15 years!

 

[Vault Dweller]

Anyway, BG2 was a great action-adventure game with stats, but a god-fucking-awful RPG.

Dear Lord...

You have to keep in mind that VD doesn't consider most traditional RPGs RPGs. Goldbox games? No choices and consequences (mostly). Wizardry 5? Where are the dialogue skills! To be honest, his view is a bit skewed, but the trade-off is that he's about to make the most RPGish RPG ever.

I have no idea what this VD fella is about to make, but if he "doesn't consider most traditional RPGs RPGs", then he is wrong. I'd like to see some posts where he states this crap or maybe his fucked up definition of what RPGs are. It sounds like you two are very close, so perhaps, you can post links to these posts, Jasede.

 

[Jasede]

It's obvious you're having a hard-on for Fallout and you have stated far too often that you're focusing on choices, consequences and the use of multiple dialogue skills, etc. Many endings, that sort of stuff.

Basicaly what you're doing is making a game that has more roleplaying than Fallout. Stop denying it.

Hence it's the most RPGish RPG there could be - from what we know so far, it's already more complex and advanced than Fallout in this regard. And don't be modest, that sucks.

Edit: Whoops, redding is teh hard.

Well, you have stated your definition of an RPG very often - and it focuses on playing a role and the world reacting on the role you chose, right? I can't be bothered to search for it because it really doesn't matter since I might, of course, be wrong, but- Those old games don't have that. They don't have the ability for you to play any role you like and get feedback for it from the world, or even branching plotlines and that. Sure, there's Daggerfall and maybe Ultima 4, but what about stuff like Dungeon Master, Eye of the Beholder or Wizardry 1-5? Those don't have that fabled role-playing you say BG 2 lacks. So how do you call those games? I am just saying, if I didn't misunderstand you, those aren't RPGs in your view. If I am mistaken, sorry. If not, how'd you call them?

 

[Keldorn]

The notion that Baldur's Gate 2 : Shadows Of Amn, was somehow "an Action-Rpg", is false, blatantly inaccurate, and entirely disingenuous. A statement such as that is engaging in blind thrashing, trashing and flailing in a dismissive and unscientific manner.

There are vast and frequent stretches at every point, where there is travelling, dialogue, exploring, purchasing, organizing, and NO combat. The enemies, minions, and monsters, when they do come, come at appropriate times and places, with no hoards of overwhelming, redundant, and insignificant *strictly quantitative* barrages of clickfesting combat in repetitious waves of relentless action.

Some individuals are indeed spreading misinformation about BG2, and that goes far beyond the acceptable realm of reasonable opinionization.

It is actually blatant, blind, blasphemous, bullyish, bitter and oblivious Baldur-Bashing.




"There Is No Baldur's Gate 3, And Nearly Everyone Is Oblivious."

 

[Lumpy]

I agree, AoD will very likely be the most advanced game so far regarding RPGness. It might still suck as a game (although personally I doubt it), but there's no denying that, even only from what we were told, it beats Fallout as an RPG.
And there's nothing wondrous about that. It's simply that, being indie, VD can put as much RPGness as he wants into the game, which cannot be said about professional development companies.

 

[Vault Dweller]

It's obvious you're having a hard-on for Fallout and you have stated far too often that you're focusing on choices, consequences and the use of multiple dialogue skills, etc. Many endings, that sort of stuff.

Basicaly what you're doing is making a game that has more roleplaying than Fallout. Stop denying it.

That is true. However, it doesn't mean that I think that any game that doesn't have the above mentioned goodness is not an RPG.

Well, you have stated your definition of an RPG very often...

From an old debate with Sarvis, courtesy of the Project Monkey:

"Imo, an RPG is a game that allows you to play in a manner fitting your character using only your character's skills and abilities. For that purpose, a game should obviously have stats and skills that indicate both your character development, and ability to undertake certain tasks. "

Sure, there's Daggerfall and maybe Ultima 4, but what about stuff like Dungeon Master, Eye of the Beholder or Wizardry 1-5?

Excellent dungeon crawlers. Like ToEE, IWD, Avernum, Pool of Radiance, roguelikes, etc. I would file them under "RPG subclass".

 

[Jasede]

That I can agree with. It just annoys me when people like Lumpy start saying (or indirectly insisting) that such old games aren't belonging to the (large) RPG genre. That's all.

We should really have a thread where we discuss what subgenres RPGs have, like "Dungeon Crawler", "Rogue-like" and "Fallout-like" for example. [Did we do that already? I can't remember.]

And for your interest, I'd call Baldur's Gate an RPG. A bad one. In the Dungeon Crawler category. (Though 2 is, in my mind, a rather good dungeon crawler, I enjoyed it for what it was).

 

[Vault Dweller]

The notion that Baldur's Gate 2 : Shadows Of Amn, was somehow "an Action-Rpg", is false, blatantly inaccurate, and entirely disingenuous. A statement such as that is engaging in blind thrashing, trashing and flailing in a dismissive and unscientific manner.

I said "action-adventure". You can read, can't you, Keldorn?

There are vast and frequent stretches at every point, where there is travelling, dialogue, exploring, purchasing, organizing, and NO combat.

Awesome. So, somehow "exploring, purchasing, organizing" make it an RPG? What about Escape from Butcher Bay? It has dialogues - you can even pick options, travelling, exploring, purchasing, and often no combat. Is it an RPG?

The enemies, minions, and monsters, when they do come, come at appropriate times and places, with no hoards of overwhelming, redundant, and insignificant *strictly quantitative* barrages of clickfesting combat in repetitious waves of relentless action.

They do? Must be an RPG then. My bad.

Some individuals are indeed spreading misinformation about BG2, and that goes far beyond the acceptable realm of reasonable opinionization.

Maybe, maybe not. Are you going to present any arguments, other than the retarded "why I think BG2 is an awesome RPG" thread?

 

[Lumpy]

Baldur's Gate 2 was decent as an RPG in my opinion, and good as a game overall.
Baldur's Gate 1 was absymal as an RPG, and average as a game overall (or good, depending on tastes).

 

[OccupatedVoid]

Halo is teh bestestest RPG evar!

 

[RK47]

It's a good game for its time and that's enough reason for me to call it a 'good game' and not a bad one.

My memory is fuzzy but maybe someone can tell me what else is there to play when Baldur's Gate was out and worth playing more. I still stuck to Daggerfall till the late 2000s I think for my a great first person dungeon fix, but other than that I wanted something new, and Baldur's Gate gave me that. I played Ultima 7 with a boot disk, Realms of Arkania etc. They're all unique in their own way. And so is Baldur's Gate.

 

[Vault Dweller]

That I can agree with. It just annoys me when people like Lumpy start saying (or indirectly insisting) that such old games aren't belonging to the (large) RPG genre. That's all.

Lumpy is a young grasshopper, so you must forgive him.

And for your interest, I'd call Baldur's Gate an RPG. A bad one.

Isn't that what I said?

 

[Lumpy]

It's a good game for its time and that's enough reason for me to call it a 'good game' and not a bad one.

My memory is fuzzy but maybe someone can tell me what else is there to play when Baldur's Gate was out and worth playing more.

Fallout. Daggerfall. Planescape (one year later).

 

[onemananadhisdroid]

Does this "Dear Lord..." drama come with arguments and points by any chance? If you've made them already, post a link to your post(s).

See what I said about assessment based on self-defined dogma a couple of posts ago (and my sig, while we're at it). Well, it doesn't seem that you didn't like BG. You just didn't like it as an RPG®. No wait, what you perceive to be an RPG®. Anyway, these are the same bullshit arguments had on many adventure gaming sites as well or any site dedicated to whatever. And frankly, they're all complete full of bollocks, while being against everything that made the games these people jerk off over so much exist in the first place. The irony!

But let's get back to "Baldur's Gate" and sorry for dragging this debate off-topic, while we're at it. A fine game according to me, regardless which goddamn made-up label Jon Doe who likes to play "The False Prophet" over and over again applies to it. I think I'm going to install SoA now. Any suggestions? I've never had any mods installed.

 

[Vault Dweller]

<snip>

I understand all that. Can you explain why you think it's a good RPG using arguments other than "it's a good RPG because I think it's a good RPG."?

 

[Jasede]

And for your interest, I'd call Baldur's Gate an RPG. A bad one.

Isn't that what I said?[/quote]

You said Action-Adventure! There's a tiny difference, but I know what you mean.

 

[stargelman]

And frankly, they're all complete full of bollocks, while being against everything that made the games these people jerk off over so much exist in the first place. The irony!

I've read that sentence five times now and I still don't get what you're trying to say.


On another note, I'm playing BG2 right now for the first time. So far, I like it a lot better than what I've seen of BG1, but there seems to be an aweful lot of fighting action in it.

 

[onemananadhisdroid]

-deleted-

 

[onemananadhisdroid]

And frankly, they're all complete full of bollocks, while being against everything that made the games these people jerk off over so much exist in the first place. The irony!

I've read that sentence five times now and I still don't get what you're trying to say.
.

Look at all these different games even covered on sites like these. What do all of them have in common exactly? Yeah. And then there's people wanting to turn this nebulous concept that somehow appears to string them all together into a hard rule. Crap on that. I mean, there are companies receiving hate mail and waves of online protest for deviating from the prescribed norms and ideals because of conservative, stalwart, militant communities like that. It's as silly as it sounds.

We should really have a thread where we discuss what subgenres RPGs have, like "Dungeon Crawler", "Rogue-like" and "Fallout-like" for example. [Did we do that already? I can't remember.

What you are ultimately talking about here is variety (a GOOD thing), and then attempting to label each divisor. The act of labelling creates the necessity for repetition. As soon as you name some horrid barely-interactive crapfest like "Dracula Resurrection" as "a pre-rendered first person puzzling adventure (or PRFPPA) then people might get the idea that this is a category in which to build another game.

Don't go there. :D

I understand all that. Can you explain why you think it's a good RPG using arguments other than "it's a good RPG because I think it's a good RPG."?

But.. but I said it's a good GAME to me, and really, that's all that matters in the end. Isn't it? And nope, it isn't a game that has as many pre-scripted choice-consequence situations as PS:T.

edit: Sorry for double posting.

 

[Keldorn]

[/quote]

I said "action-adventure". You can read, can't you, Keldorn?

Certainly. BG2 = Action-Adventure-Rpg hybrid. In your opinion. I was merely abbreviating.


I have no duty to prove to you what you are blindly refusing to acknowledge.

Any ONE of the BG2 recruitable Npc's have infinitely more depth, interactivity, dialogue, character, spirit, dynamism and complexity than Ian, Katja and Dogmeat *combined*. So, you are hypocritical in at least 1 respect.

If you believe there is a lack of individualistic, varied, aesthetic roleplaying in BG2, and if you believe there is a lack of uniquely chosen actions, characteristics, statements, choices, which are repurcussive and impactful to the realm/world , then you are truly Oblivious to Baldur's Gate 2 : SOA roleplaying magnificence.

I don't know what else you demand in roleplaying that BG2 is entirely deficient in. But that is your prerogative.

I played FO1 and BG2 within the same year, and would, if I had to, rate them both 9.7/10 .

If you actually fully completed BG2, I'd guess that you'd rate it an F, maybe a D-, possibly a C+ in your best mood ?

Well whatever you *think* of it (in the realm of opinions), I know I shall not sway you, even I, the mighty Paladin. And I would not even try.

That's one thing the *unrecruitable* NPC's had in common between both games, FO1 & BG2, characters with stubborn wills. At least BG2 HAD that in regards to the *recruitable* NPC's as well, whereas in FO1, they were just 1-dimensional tag-alongs... always tragically shooting the *friendly* doggie to a pulp... and there was never any reaction.

FU*K, in BG2, they'd be at eachother's throats, over a misdirected attack. Heck, Minsc was even going to assault Jan because he went near his bird, and Jaheira refused to allow morality choices on the polarized extremes... good OR evil.

Talk about a PARTY-Based *RPG*, it was possibly the greatest Party-Based Pc-Rpg of ALL TIME.

But again, since it was more recent and more successful than FO & PS:T, some would like it burned.

I call it misguided, envious, inaccurate and unjustified hatred of the good for being the good. Actually, change that, it is the *great*. as is FO, as is PS:T.

 

[Vault Dweller]

And for your interest, I'd call Baldur's Gate an RPG. A bad one.

Isn't that what I said?

You said Action-Adventure! There's a tiny difference, but I know what you mean.

The exact quote: "BG2 was a great action-adventure game with stats, but a god-fucking-awful RPG."

 

[Lumpy]

I call it misguided, envious, inaccurate and unjustified hatred of the good for being the good. Actually, change that, it is the *great*. as is FO, as is PS:T.

So out of the three great games of FO, PST and BG, we randomly chose one to hate, and that was Baldur's Gate. Right?

Jaheira refused to allow morality choices on the polarized extremes... good OR evil.

Because that makes a lot of sense.

FU*K

as_s

I'd watch that language, friend. Even if you replace one letter with a symbol, it's still very offensive. This isn't a site where you can just use bad words whenever you want.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I understand all that. Can you explain why you think it's a good RPG using arguments other than "it's a good RPG because I think it's a good RPG."?

But.. but I said it's a good game to me, and really, that's all that matters in the end. Isn't it?

Well, when you start arguing on a forum and all you have to say is "but...but... it's a good game to me..."?...

edit: Sorry for double posting.

I forgive you.