Why Baldur's Gate sucks?

[Vault Dweller]

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.

What Lumpy said. If the mods see it, your ass is, like, gone, man.

 

[Hümmelgümpf]

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*.

When it comes to spirit nobody can beat Dogmeat! This brave creature followed you wherever you went, he was ready to defend his master with his very teeth when the need arised. Can you imagine that cowardly Boo *really* going for the eyes?

 

[Vault Dweller]

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

Why are you here then?

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.

NPCs do not an awesome RPG make.

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.

Can you show me some examples of "uniquely chosen actions, characteristics, statements, choices, which are repurcussive and impactful to the realm/world" instead of stating that "they're real, and they're spectacular!"?

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 ?

I'd give BG2, the RPG, 70%. I'd give BG2, the action-adventure game with stats, 95%.

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

*patiently* Why?

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

Statements like this will get you dumbfucked before the day is over.

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.

One more time, can you actually present your position in a non-retarded way and back it up with arguments?

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

Here's my definition of an RPG.

An RPG is a game in which you take on the role of a character, be it player-created or predetermined, inheriting all their strengths plus weaknesses and interact with a gameworld through choices and receive feedback and define your character through consequences of those choices.

Baldur's Gate has choices with consequences. They might not be all too apparent to someone who only played the first few hours, but they are there. And you inherit the strengths and weaknesses of your character. A fighter isn't going to be able to instantly bust out and start chucking fireballs out of his ass and a mage isn't going to be able to go swords akimbo with katanas.

Oblivion has no real consequences, and the choices aren't exactly too numerous. Also you don't necessarily get the character's strengths and weaknesses because it relies upon reflexive skill. You might be a barbarian who can, on paper, only smash, but since you have good reflexes you can also persuade and pick locks like no tomorrow. So it's hard to play a role outside of Virtua-LARPing and pretending....in which case there is no point to the game, you might as well crack open Notepad.

 

[hotdognights]

Keldorn's words

There's not really much of an argument here, unless faux-eloquence and a somewhat disturbing gimmick constitutes an argument nowadays.

At least Gromnir's bizzare video game role playing personality was original.

Here we have an odd kind of anti-Volourn, who manages to say even less than r00fles, "no" and liar, but with a heck of a lot more typing.

 

[Koby]

@Lumpy how important is, in your opinion, the way the player refer to his playing experience?

For example, in threads discussing diablo2 most of the players refer to their character as in: "*my* barb got nerfed by the 1.10 patch", "*my* nova/frozen orb sorceress will kick your ass, and such.

If the players refer to their gaming experience in any game in second person terms (my character/party did) isn’t automatically more of an RPG then games that the player refer to their experience in first person (I did)?

From an RPGness PoV, isn’t Diablo2 more of a RPG then BG and/or oblivion?
And what about Deus ex, SS and thief?
And how about Wiz(x), IWD and EoB?

 

[Human Shield]

BG is a simulationist RPG, it follows genre troupes and allows players to look around. The party members are there to get to know fantasy and setting archetypes. But it is a weaker sim by using the gamist D&D rules and encounters and is a poor gamist RPG by its use of dumbed down RT system and lack of challenge.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Baldur's Gate has choices with consequences. They might not be all too apparent to someone who only played the first few hours, but they are there.

*sigh* Like?

And you inherit the strengths and weaknesses of your character. A fighter isn't going to be able to instantly bust out and start chucking fireballs out of his ass and a mage isn't going to be able to go swords akimbo with katanas.

Any game that has classes does that, no? Can your Diablo 2 barbarian cast fireballs?

 

[Section8]

Moreso how you interpret combat balance. I didn't see things in the same way you did. I don't really think freak dice accidents were really controlling combat. I died when I went in unprepared or made a lousy tactical decision or two. Sure, there were a few "freak accidents" where somebody got taken out by an enemy critical, but that happens in almost every game with critical hits. You can't tell me you've never been demolishing some mutants and one of them score a very lucky critical and end your character's life.

The big differences here between Fallout and Baldur's Gate (may be due to my own perceptions, but the vibe I get) are firstly that AD&D damage mitigation is binary hit/miss, and secondly that nearly all combat is "open plan".

So in other words, in Fallout I can expect to be hit more often, but armour lessens the blow. In AD&D, I expect to be missed more often than I get hit. And when I do get hit, there's nothing to mitigate the damage (at low levels). In that respect, Fallout is far better at demonstrating a losing battle, and giving the player ample opportunity to reconsider their options. It also reduces the variance between fights with identical starting variables.

For instance, in Baldur's Gate, I can fight a bear - I haven't any real numbers handy, so I'll go with the feel. Please correct me factually if I'm off base here - say it has 20% chance to hit me, and that hit is going to kill me instantly. It's not an unreasonable outcome for the bear to only hit me on it's fifth attempt, giving me five rounds to kill it. It's equally reasonable that the bear will hit me first time and kill me, and then miss my comrade with identical AC four times. That's a pretty critical disparity that can't be blamed on "luck".

Likewise, there are a lot of other examples. A mage who has 20% chance to put me to sleep, paralyse me, cause fear, or any other number of variables that cannot be mitigated or controlled by a low-level character, but will almost certainly cause my death.

Fallout's armour providing AC I've always found counter-intuitive, since it's basically a measure of evasion, but that quirk aside, the damage threshold/damage resistance model actually allows the player to mitigate the effects of near certain damage. It's safe to assume any character over second level using their primary combat skill at point blank range will hit you, ergo you can strategically plan for exactly that, by either positioning or armour.

The second point I touched on was Baldur's Gate's "open plan" combat. Very rarely could I use the terrain to my advantage. In Fallout, I could use the tactical advantage of cover fairly often as a mitigative measure toward damage - I've made a tactical decision to avoid damage, rather than merely hoping for low rolls an the enemy's behalf.

That's what I'm getting at when I talk about Baldur's Gate lacking combat control, and being too randomly determined. Most games have fights that you'll never win. Baldur's Gate and AD&D in general have way too many fights where you might have say, 10% chance of winning. So you just quicksave and load ten times until you do win.

I don't think it's so much bad encounter design as what is between them, so to say. Encounters tax your resources. Resources you typically use as a "buffer" between baddies and you. Those fodder might have more impact if their damages weren't solved by a quick "Rest for 8 hours" button. Of course there are monster attacks when you rest...but still. Resting does have too much rejuvenation power.

I thought Baldur's Gate was good in theory in terms of making resting difficult, but again, the massive disparity was a major issue. If I can sleep and get all my spells back, heal myself and be on my way half the time, and the other half of the time get attacked by hordes of ghasts or ogres that I have little chance of beating, why wouldn't I quicksave every time I go to sleep? And again, resources are troubled by the same probability divide. If each fight took a steady toll on me, you'd have a point. But the results have been exceedingly disparite in my experience.

Maybe it's because I've spent too much time starting unfinished Baldur's Gate game and plodding through the randomly determined outcomes of lower levels and not giving higher hit point pools their due. I know Baldur's Gate 2 felt a little better in the early stages since there was a buffer by starting at level 7. But resting was even more implausible and retarded. "We gotta get out of here!" Something about "three weeks later" kinda takes the urgnecy out of things.

Well....depending on your definition of "intellectual" you could. One could discuss whether he was satire on the "hero and his animal companion" archetype or slapstick humor, whether he was truly insane or just retarded, and other topics like that. I mean people have had quite large discussions on topics with far less depth.

If it's satire, it's "satire" in the same vain as the Scary Movie series, or any of the other vapid shit the Wayans brothers see fit to turn out every few months. For instance, here is me "satirising" you in a similar vein:

"Hur hur, Baldur's Gate is the next best thing after Cheetos and Mountain Dew. My name is Edtard L Burro, and I'm a mid-thirties geek virgin who lives in my parents basement and uses the internet to talk to my Star Trek buddies about how awesome dungeons and dragons are."

See how the "bite" of the satire isn't relevant at all? It's just the sarcastic regurgitation of a retarded stereotype that could have been penned by a twelve-year-old. The whole idea of satire should be slyly suggesting that something is beneath you, not proving yourself to be beneath what you're satirising.

As for slapstick and such, I don't think it qualifies. If Minsc hit himself in the balls when he critically failed, that's slapstick. There's no physical component to "go for the eyes Boo, go for the EYES. RAAARRRRRHHHH!" The suggestions of "legitimate" insanity or retardation are barely worth making, when he's clearly a failed novelty character. Even those "crazy low prices" guys put forward a more convincing portrayal.

Inflated by the fact it never seemed to hamper my gameplay in any way. Sure, it was kind of annoying sometimes in cities if I wanted to just set a point and have my party go there and instead I was forced to utilize smaller intervals, but it wasn't game-breaking or even a constant nuisance.

Since most closed environments I traversed were full of narrow passages that necessitated the "follow the leader" formation, I'd say it's a problem. If anyone but the point man wants to get into toe-to-toe combat, I have to babysit them around the leader. It's even worse when there are multiple paths to an opponent, and upon failing to navigate around a stationary friend through what seems like a perfectly valid path, they proceed to take the "long way" around. It was a constant nuisance to me, I think you're just viewing through rose-coloured glasses.

Point taken. It's just you've got a lot of malice towards the game. Although it just wouldn't be Codex enough without it I suppose.

Well the malice is more a less a manifestation of the frustration at the popular opinion that Baldur's Gate represents a renaissance of RPGs or a pinnacle of gaming. I'd imagine any punk music community would show considerable malice in an argument intended to deconstruct a view that Avril Lavigne has revived their flagging music genre. And I guess I'm more than just a little hurt I bought Baldur's Gate on the back of Fallout's reputation, only to be bitterly disappointed, even when I knew a scant fraction of the goodness Fallout offered. I guess it had some value in compelling me to be more discerning about the games I choose to buy/play.

Isn't that "luck", though? By chance Ian was the earliest NPC and he happened to be the one to be associated with said AI malfunction, seems totally by a stroke of chance, no? It obviously wasn't intentional and supports my claim that memorable characters aren't necesarily developed ones.

I still don't think Ian is a memorable character. The action may be associated with him, but people remember the action, rather than the character. Ask someone to define Ian outside of that character, and you'll get a blank response. And by that token, ask someone to define Minsc outside of his pantomime madness, or Khalid outside of his cowardice and you'll probably get the same blank response.

Yes, but that's exactly the reason people remember her. There's some old saying about loving people for their flaws. I think that's quite applicable here.

Again, I don't think this is remembering her per se. I'd be inclined to think most people would refer to her as "that useless chick you can marry". That's little more than "that guy who gets mown down by Frank Horrigan". Or "that guy who stood in front of the tanks in Tienanmen Square" It's memory of an event or situation, not a character.

If you say so. When he took down two super mutants carrying heavy weaponry alone he seemed less "dog" and more "killing machine". But aside from that, I see your point. But I don't really think the "dog immersion" contributed as much to his popularity as the flipping out and mutilating enemies part did. So it wasn't the intended that helped, it was the (sort-of?) unintended.

Sort of, but being a super dog is still better than being a selectively mute or repetitive human.

I guess. But that also really wasn't intentional. It's just one of the many things that just happened to make Dogmeat the lovable canine killing machine we all fondly remember.

Oh, I'm sure most of what Dogmeat was isn't necessarily intentional. But I'm just saying that it's not blind luck. You can sit back and analyse why he's a memorable character, and I think that's a healthier response than attributing memorable characters to chance.

Fair enough. EXTREME (I had to....) distaste for something would possibly transfer memories quite well, but I don't think it would as well as the good memories. For instance I'm sure you don't happen to remember Minsc's lines, whereas I'm sure someone who enjoyed Baldur's Gate very much might in fact reference "going for the eyes" or "swords for everyone!" often.

"Montaron, you are sooooo aggravitink!"

You'd be surprised at what I remember from games I haven't really enjoyed, especially ones like Baldur's Gate where I've given them countless chances. Besides, the fact that Minsc said that "go for the eyes" shit pretty much every time you assigned him a target, it kind of hammers the point home, no?

I guess it really is how you see all of them. I personally saw most of the NPCs as satirical takes on certain fantasy archetypes. It was amusing enough as that, at least to me. Throw in a few references, some stolen one-liners, campy dialogue, and you've got something...interesting and sure to create some mixed opinions.

Well I guess. Duke Nukem is also popular despite being nothing more than a parrot. There are also people who think Jim Carrey pioneered the "Go ahead punk, make my day" line with the Mask. Regardless of opinion, I think there's a stronger argument in labelling Baldur's Gate as the jejune attempts at humour from someone possessing little comedic insight or wit. Of course there's nothing wrong with liking that sort of thing, but just like the folks who think Insane Clown Posse are awesome - I'm going to sneer down my intellectual snout at such an opinion and offer (what I think is) reasonable critical debate as to the merits.

Of course it is. But implementation becomes subjective as well. Let's take the Modron Maze in Torment. If you go in and interpret it as a serious dungeon, you're probably going to be disappointed, as it really wasn't meant to be one. If you see it as a comedy bonus area, you will be amused a little. If you see it as satire on dungeon crawls, you're going to be laughing quite a lot. It all depends on how you interpret implementation.

This is certainly true. I know most people don't really like Paul Verhoeven's flicks, especially the poor bastards expecting Heinlein from a movie entitled Starship Troopers, but I think they're fantasic satire of idiotic Hollywood excess. And it's the best kind of satire - indistinguishable from sincere effort. If indeed Baldur's Gate is purporting to be "satire", it's trying way to hard to be funny. Satire should be ironic parody of something very real, not thoughtless sarcastic absurdity.

"Hurrr, I'm a stoner, I eat Doritos all the time, because I always have the munchies. Duuuuuude, I've so got the munchies right now, let's get some Doritos! Hehehe, I'm so wasted right now, everything is soooo funny. Hehehehehehe, I said munchies."

 

[Lumpy]

Baldur's Gate has choices with consequences. They might not be all too apparent to someone who only played the first few hours, but they are there.

*sigh* Like?

Sigh... Don't you see? Baldur's Gate has plenty such occasions:
For example there's a hermit hidden in a wilderness area which you get to right before the ending. If you choose one dialogue option he joins your party, if you insult him he attacks you. Choices and consequences. If you had played the game at least 6 times, you would have surely found him. But no, you had to make up your mind after playing only half through the game. Because you had decided to hate it long before you had played it.

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

*sigh* Like?

First off....let's get on the same page here. I'm not trying to argue this is a great role-playing game. I'm not trying to argue it's up there with Fallout/Arcanum. I'm just trying to argue it's better than Oblivion....again.

Next thing, I doubt there's really much point to listing off specific examples because invariably you will go on about how broken the reputation system is, how little sense it makes, that money can reverse consequences, and how it doesn't offer enough, Bioware morality, shiity writing, and all that jazz. But please try to remember...I'm only trying to prove it's better than shit like Oblivion.

But it wouldn't exactly be polite to not give you an answer. Here goes...

-Choice of companions: Xzar and Montaron don't exactly work too well with Khalid and Jaheira and the two sides willeventually try to kill each other if you put them in a party together. Same thing with Edwin and the witch.

-A few bandit encounters have a way of talking your way out of things. Some make no damn sense at all, but still, the options are there.

-The whole incident with the idol in the ruins has some choices involved. You can leave the idol and suffer no consequence, you can take it and a very nasty monster with no phat lewt will attack you. Said idol can be traded in for a powerful cursed sword.

-The situation with Greywolf and Prism. You can defend Prism, or just let Greywolf whack him. And if you happened to impersonate Greywolf back in Nashkel and took his money, he'll attack you anyway. Of course he does have a very nice sword...so it's not exactly a tough choice unless you know you can't take him out.

-The situation with Aldeth and the druids has a choice. And if you happen to kill Aldeth instead of the eco-terrorists, you close off a quest and his brother will try to find you and kill you.

There's more but you get the gist of things, right?

Any game that has classes does that, no? Can your Diablo 2 barbarian cast fireballs?

Back to my definition for a second. You don't inherit the strengths of said barbarian though, all thanks to the wonderful aspect of real-time micromanagement. See, in the gameworld, said barabarian could smoothly transition to attacks and maximize his attacking potential. But because of player reflexive skill, he can't do that due to interface latency or such.

And back to your point, yeah, just about any game with classes does that. Again, I was arguing in terms of Oblivion to shut up the bullshit argument that Oblivion is better at role-playing than Baldur's Gate.

 

[hotdognights]

Trying to argue that Baldur's Gate is better than Oblivion? That's like...I don't want to say anything about winning in the special olympics, but goddamn, that's a dismal set of choices.

Here's the thing:

Pretty much everything Baldur's Gate did, it did poorly in comparison to RPGs that came before it. And let's completely forget about Fallout.

Wasteland had better choices and multiple solutions to quests. Buck FUCKING Rogers had better choices and multiple solutions to quests, and that's a game based on a 1920's sci fi comic.

Ultima VII had better party interaction and personality driven NPCs-ie, they weren't one dimensional cardboard cutouts.

Wizardry had better combat and actual puzzles. IV may have been overly punishing and arbitirary, but World of Xeen preceded BG as well.

Beyond that, Baldur's Gate is kinda crappy on its own as well. Where there are choices, the choice isn't WHETHER to fight, but WHO to fight, and if it's money or just for kicks.

Maybe if the combat system were better it'd be a good tactical party-based game, but the combat's kinda dull.

Maybe, MAYBE, Baldur's Gate stands up as a good game when held to the light of Oblivion, but if that's what it takes to make a game look decent, it's probably not very good in the first place.

 

[Keldorn]

"NPCs do not an awesome RPG make. "



Your mind is 100% closed, and therefore, you will dismiss ANY possible evidence of you being inaccurate in your biased and automatic dismissal of BG2 game elements.


I, Keldorn, played D&D, Traveller, and dozens of other Table-Top Rpg's in the 1970's & 1980's.

I, the mighty and irrefutable Keldorn, will hereby acknowledge the FACT that assembling the party and proceeding on quests, adventures, discoveries, dialogue exchanges, significant & impactful actions, decisions & choices, in a manner which involves party chemistry, banter, in-fighting, contrasts, complexities, synergy, harmony, anger, weariness, frustration, humour, camaradarie, chemistry and the entire dynamic spectrum of party interactivity, with apparently*spontaneous* and *volatile* tenous relationships, is indeed A PRIMARY ***ROOT*** of the roleplaying concept.

Too bad FO1 didn't have it. Too bad you conveniently dismiss it as an entirely insignificant RP element, when in actuality, it's part of RPG ROOTS.

And you's likely commit the same blind dismissal for any other redeeming elements which were presented to you. Instant dismissal... into the trash.

BG2 is a true Rpg, a magnificent party-based epic, with 100's if not 1000's of game-impacting decisions and actions the *party* can take part in.

Too bad the 1-dimensional tag-alongs of FO1 were 100% vacant.

But that is just 1 element, and there are many OTHER crucial elements for Rpg's to be true to the roots of roleplaying.

And if you can't see the genuine Rpg-ness that is BG2, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist, it merely means that you are *OBLIVIOUS* to it, in a self-rendered fashion.

 

[hotdognights]

It's as if Volourn's retarded kid brother got an account. Needs an editor, though. Badly.

 

[Hümmelgümpf]

James Ohlen, I know it's you.

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

For instance, in Baldur's Gate, I can fight a bear - I haven't any real numbers handy, so I'll go with the feel. Please correct me factually if I'm off base here - say it has 20% chance to hit me, and that hit is going to kill me instantly. It's not an unreasonable outcome for the bear to only hit me on it's fifth attempt, giving me five rounds to kill it. It's equally reasonable that the bear will hit me first time and kill me, and then miss my comrade with identical AC four times. That's a pretty critical disparity that can't be blamed on "luck".

Your example sounds about right. But the thing is, combat was in your control. You chose to bum rush a bear with a melee weapon. Now, considering this bear moves slower than your characters, it can only attack through melee, and it hits hard, wouldn't you want to stay away from it and perhaps use ranged weapons, or retreat? It's not so much the variability that killed you, it's the bad decision of engaging a bear head on, probably at a low level.

Likewise, there are a lot of other examples. A mage who has 20% chance to put me to sleep, paralyse me, cause fear, or any other number of variables that cannot be mitigated or controlled by a low-level character, but will almost certainly cause my death.

That's not necesarily true. Hitting a mage in combat will stop their spells. Having your party switch to ranged weaponry and throwing all their attacks at the mage could stop it. And a quick damage spell could as well. Again, variability could strike here, but missing with every character and then getting hit by the spell would be quite the stroke of bad luck., and most certainly not the norm.

The second point I touched on was Baldur's Gate's "open plan" combat. Very rarely could I use the terrain to my advantage. In Fallout, I could use the tactical advantage of cover fairly often as a mitigative measure toward damage - I've made a tactical decision to avoid damage, rather than merely hoping for low rolls an the enemy's behalf.

There's plenty of "tactics" to avoid damage in Baldur's Gate. Staying away from the enemies zone of attack is one of them. Like staying far away from the bear or ogre. Or perhaps closing range on the archer to force him to stopping firing and pull out the sword he happens to suck with (how stereotypical). Heck, you can use choke points and even close doors to use as a gated choke-point or a temporary safe haven. Not as great as Fallout, but not godawful.

That's what I'm getting at when I talk about Baldur's Gate lacking combat control, and being too randomly determined. Most games have fights that you'll never win. Baldur's Gate and AD&D in general have way too many fights where you might have say, 10% chance of winning. So you just quicksave and load ten times until you do win.

Maybe it's just me, but I really don't see that going on. Only when you are outclassed, outgunned, and/or outnumbered heavily do you ever run into one of these situations. And in these situations a retreat might be better called for, no?

If I can sleep and get all my spells back, heal myself and be on my way half the time, and the other half of the time get attacked by hordes of ghasts or ogres that I have little chance of beating, why wouldn't I quicksave every time I go to sleep?

Challenge? Because you are a man of iron will and great testicular fortitude? Maybe you could choose not to risk it and push on, or just try to retreat back to a town. Nothing is going to be more powerful than save/reload, but let's face it...save/reload is pretty cheesy.

And again, resources are troubled by the same probability divide. If each fight took a steady toll on me, you'd have a point. But the results have been exceedingly disparite in my experience.

Resources I admit can be as such. You aren't going to use your pretty wands and such on gibberlings or kobolds, but you might use up ammunition on them, or possible take a hit from them. Eventually this erosion of resources could prove dangerous. The enemies might kind of work like the Chinese "strategy" in the Korean Conflict...use up their bullets with mass rushes.

But resting was even more implausible and retarded. "We gotta get out of here!" Something about "three weeks later" kinda takes the urgnecy out of things.

Yeah...that didn't make much sense.

"Hur hur, Baldur's Gate is the next best thing after Cheetos and Mountain Dew. My name is Edtard L Burro, and I'm a mid-thirties geek virgin who lives in my parents basement and uses the internet to talk to my Star Trek buddies about how awesome dungeons and dragons are."

Me think you is funny. Hurf durf!

As for slapstick and such, I don't think it qualifies. If Minsc hit himself in the balls when he critically failed, that's slapstick. There's no physical component to "go for the eyes Boo, go for the EYES. RAAARRRRRHHHH!" The suggestions of "legitimate" insanity or retardation are barely worth making, when he's clearly a failed novelty character. Even those "crazy low prices" guys put forward a more convincing portrayal.

Like my Modron Maze example, it's all in your interpretation of things. Minsc, to me at least, fit in with the overall tone of the game. Baldur's Gate was most certainly not taking itself very seriously. It's evident in the goofy characters, silly sideplots/sidequests, a bunch of the things you can say to people, and such. If you didn't like that kind of stuff, you might interpret it as "Fucking retarded" and generally harbor quite a distaste for everything. I guess I could compare it to Army of Darkness, the Rocky Horror Picture Show, or even I'm Gonna Get You Sucka. Anyone expecting something serious, believable, or inspiring is going to be a little disappointed. But if you don't take things too seriously, you could garner some amusement from things, depending on your tastes.

Since most closed environments I traversed were full of narrow passages that necessitated the "follow the leader" formation, I'd say it's a problem. If anyone but the point man wants to get into toe-to-toe combat, I have to babysit them around the leader. It's even worse when there are multiple paths to an opponent, and upon failing to navigate around a stationary friend through what seems like a perfectly valid path, they proceed to take the "long way" around. It was a constant nuisance to me, I think you're just viewing through rose-coloured glasses.

I just never found the pathfinding causing me woes. I cranked up the search nodes a bit at the beginning as recommended in the manual and never found a problem. Sure, godawful map design (and I mean awful) caused problems in places like the Firewine Ruins, the Ulcaster School, and the maze, but I never found pathfinding to be that much of a problem on it's own.

Well the malice is more a less a manifestation of the frustration at the popular opinion that Baldur's Gate represents a renaissance of RPGs or a pinnacle of gaming.

Popular opinion? Sure, Baldur's Gate sold well and a lot of magazines and reviews hyped it to hell...but that's it. There really aren't that many people who were influenced by Baldur's Gate in the grand scheme of "RPG" gaming. Diablo/"akshun-RPGs", "Jap-RPGs", and shit like KOTOR, Neverwinter Nights, and Oblivion have done a lot more damage. Plus, it's not like they (Bioware) utterly lied about features in the game during development a la Neverwinter Nights and Oblivion/Morrowind. Sure, their priorities were a little skewed in the wrong direction, but still. It wasn't that bad for their first effort.

I still don't think Ian is a memorable character. The action may be associated with him, but people remember the action, rather than the character. Ask someone to define Ian outside of that character, and you'll get a blank response. And by that token, ask someone to define Minsc outside of his pantomime madness, or Khalid outside of his cowardice and you'll probably get the same blank response.

It still stands that he is remembered by association with the action and through no attempt by the developers.

Again, I don't think this is remembering her per se. I'd be inclined to think most people would refer to her as "that useless chick you can marry". That's little more than "that guy who gets mown down by Frank Horrigan". Or "that guy who stood in front of the tanks in Tienanmen Square" It's memory of an event or situation, not a character.

People are typically remembered by things that define them, and mostly their actions. Her action was being damn near useless unless you sold her out. And that is what people remember her for.

Oh, I'm sure most of what Dogmeat was isn't necessarily intentional. But I'm just saying that it's not blind luck. You can sit back and analyse why he's a memorable character, and I think that's a healthier response than attributing memorable characters to chance.

But I highly doubt Tim Cain and crew thought in ten years Dogmeat and Ian will be the most frequently remembered characters. I'm going to venture a guess they figured one of the talking heads would be most fondly remembered as they were far more fleshed out. Turns out the dog and the guy who shoots you in the back are the most memorable, along with Richard Grey, because he is the villian, and he was pretty unique, and still is.

"Montaron, you are sooooo aggravitink!"

You'd be surprised at what I remember from games I haven't really enjoyed, especially ones like Baldur's Gate where I've given them countless chances. Besides, the fact that Minsc said that "go for the eyes" shit pretty much every time you assigned him a target, it kind of hammers the point home, no?

I guess.

Regardless of opinion, I think there's a stronger argument in labelling Baldur's Gate as the jejune attempts at humour from someone possessing little comedic insight or wit. Of course there's nothing wrong with liking that sort of thing, but just like the folks who think Insane Clown Posse are awesome - I'm going to sneer down my intellectual snout at such an opinion and offer (what I think is) reasonable critical debate as to the merits.

Well, a humorous game can be a good thing. It provides comedy along with gameplay. I'm willing to lower my standards, so to say, in comedy for this game because it is a game first and foremost. And personally, I would much rather take some campy, if unsophisticated, humor over some far too goddamn serious, fantasy bullshit. But that's me.

This is certainly true. I know most people don't really like Paul Verhoeven's flicks, especially the poor bastards expecting Heinlein from a movie entitled Starship Troopers, but I think they're fantasic satire of idiotic Hollywood excess. And it's the best kind of satire - indistinguishable from sincere effort. If indeed Baldur's Gate is purporting to be "satire", it's trying way to hard to be funny. Satire should be ironic parody of something very real, not thoughtless sarcastic absurdity.

I admit the characters were a little on the very unsophisticated side of the humor scale at times, but a ddecent amount of the dialogue and the situations were pretty amusing to me. Call me a boorish prole if you want.

 

[Lumpy]

Baldur's Gate sucks because these are some (read: most) of the quests in the first two towns:

- An Ogre and His Belts
There is an ogre here who has a belt fetish. Kill him and take the two
belts. The larger looking belt is the Girdle of Masculinity/Feminity
(changes your gender) and the smaller one is the Girdle of Piercing + 3 vs.
piercing. You may want to wait to do this until you have more than 2
people. If you want, you can return the Girdle of Piercing to its owner,
Unshey, in the Friendly Arm Inn (see that section below).
Ogre: Area S of Friendly Arm Inn (x 4787 y 1665)

- Landrin's Spiders
Landrin's house in Beregost has been overrun by spiders, and that is why
she is hiding in the Friendly Arm Inn. She gives you a bunch of antidotes
and promises a reward if you bring back the body of the spider, her
husband's boots, and some wine. Go to Beregost, and into the house by the
Jovial Juggler. Kill the spiders, and take the 3 items and return to
Landrin for your reward: for the boots (300 exp, 120gp), for the Spider
Body (200 exp, 100gp), and for the wine (300 exp, 75gp).
Landrin: Friendly Arm Inn, Third Floor (x 796 y 735)
Spiders: Beregost (x 3078 y 3416)

- Joia's Flamedance Ring
Hobgoblins north of the Inn have swiped Joia's flamedance ring. Kill them
to get it back. Joia is in the house just to the west of the outer gate in
the inner grounds. She won't give you anything, but you get 400 exp and
Rep + 1.
Hobgoblins: Friendly Arm Inn (x 2554 y 292)
Joia: Friendly Arm Inn (x 1536 y 2484)

- Mirianne's Letter
Just south of Beregost you will find two Ogrillons, and on one of their
bodies is a letter for a Mirianne, who lives in Beregost. Take her the
letter and she will give you a Ring of Protection + 1 and 300 exp.
Mirianne: Beregost (x 4804 y 2086)
Ogrillons: Area S of Beregost (x 3850 y 1460)

- Firebead Elvenhair's Book
You'll find Firebead in Beregost (he was also in Candlekeep while you were
there) and he wants you to pick a book up for him, the History of the
Fateful Coin. You can find it across the street in the Feldepost's Inn
(for 2gp). Give him the book and you get 300 exp, the History of the Dead
Three, and a Reputation + 1. (If he doesn't give you the subquest, you can
still complete it, just buy the book and give it to him as if he had)
Firebead: Beregost (x 2044 y 2905)
Feledepost's Inn: Beregost (x 1406 y 2640)

- Gurke's Cloak
The Dwarf Gurke, whom you can find in the Jovial Juggler Inn, has had his
cloak stolen from him by some Tasloi in the Cloakwood Forest. You will
find it semi-hidden under a tree. Take it and return to Gurke, who doesn't
actually want it anymore to get your reward: 300 exp, and you get to keep
the Cloak of Non-Detection.
Gurke: Beregost (x 3760 y 3627)
Cloak: Cloakwood Forest One (x 4391 y 3472)

- Bjornin's Half-Ogres
The Paladin Bjornin, who is recuperating in the Jovial Juggler Inn, was
beaten by some nasty Half-Ogres south south-west of Beregost. (Go south
twice, then west once) Go there and defeat all the Half-Ogres that you can
find, then return to Bjornin to get your reward: Medium Shield +1, 400
exp, Reputation +1
Bjornin: Beregost (x 3760 y 3627)

- Zhurlong's Boots
In the Burning Wizard Inn you will find a "pesky" thief named Zhurlong. He
was going about his business (stealing from people like you) and had his
Boots of Stealth stolen by some Hobgoblins. You can find these Hobgoblins
to the south of Beregost. Oh, and did I mention that he swipes gold from
you everytime you talk to him? Return the boots to get your gold back, and
to get a reward: 300 exp, 100gp (plus whatever he stole from you). Or you
could keep the boots, they are Boots of Stealth (stealth +35%). Or you
could give him the boots, then kill him and take the boots back, suffering
no loss in reputation.
Zhurlong: Beregost (x 2649 y 2030)
Hobgoblins: Area S of Beregost (x 1865 y 2449)

- Perdue's Short Sword (from Operador de Sala and edwardalacey)
You can find Perdue in the Red Sheaf Inn. A Gnoll has stolen his short
sword in High Hedge. Be careful when you talk to Perdue, because you can
easily lose this subquest. He tells you about a Dog Face and you have to
say to him if the Dog Face is a Gnoll. Give the sword to Perdue for your
reward: 50 gp and 500 exp.

The correct conversation thread is 1,2,1,1.

Perdue: Red Sheaf Inn (Beregost) (x 3273 y 2124)
Gnoll: High Hedge (W of Beregost) (x 3780 y 2818)

 

[psycojester]

I, the mighty and irrefutable Keldorn, will hereby acknowledge the FACT that assembling the party and proceeding on quests, adventures, discoveries, dialogue exchanges, significant & impactful actions, decisions & choices, in a manner which involves party chemistry, banter, in-fighting, contrasts, complexities, synergy, harmony, anger, weariness, frustration, humour, camaradarie, chemistry and the entire dynamic spectrum of party interactivity, with apparently*spontaneous* and *volatile* tenous relationships, is indeed A PRIMARY ***ROOT*** of the roleplaying concept.

Well will you look at that! It is possible to masturbate with a thesaurus, i mean god damn i thought i was bad when writing narrative but this is just ridiculous.

 

[hotdognights]

Lumpy's selections from the Baldur's Gate are pretty damning evidence of Baldur's Gate quality, or lack thereof.

Compare this to the first quest in Fallout:

Rescue Tandi from the Raiders.

Go to the Raiders. Opening the door to Tandi's cell will alarm the guard in the corridor, so you'll probably have to talk to Garl. There are several ways to effect Tandi's release:

* If Garl thinks you're his father you can tell him to release Tandi if you have IN 6 and pass a CH check or a Speech check.
* With Speech 45% you can attempt to threaten him (the "threat" line, not the "soul" line).
* Barter for her (she'll cost between $400 and $1100 depending on CH and Barter). If you leave the barter interface without "buying" her, Garl will attack.
* Fight him one on one (without weapons, Stimpaks and stuff). Despite what he says about the rules, he'll kill you if he knocks you out. If you win (talk to Garl after combat ends, or kill him), you'll get whatever was in Garl's inventory. Note that Garl does not return to the camp afterwards.
* Unlock Tandi's door, talk to her and fight your way out, or kill everyone and then release her.
* Use Sneak, unlock and open Tandi's door, talk to her and leave.

Fighting Garl can be very easy or very hard depending on your stats; with a low Melee Damage you'll often do no damage, even though his armour is actually equivalent to leather and not metal. The best way to defeat him is to cripple one of his limbs or knock him out. If you have lots of AP you can use hit and run tactics: hit him once, then run to the other side of the enclosure. He'll follow you but not have enough AP to attack. Repeat until you get a few lucky criticals, optionally finish him off after he yields.

Tim Cain's off doing who knows what and Bioware's getting fellated for making a Sonic RPG. Yay for the mass market; yay for "hardcore" RPG fans who hail Baldur's Gate as the genre's rebirth.

 

[Naked Ninja]

I have a question. Its kind of from other threads I've read, but since this is where the BG bashing is going on, perhaps one of you could explain this to me.

I've seen some of you complain bitterly about how you were supposed to care for Imoen in the BG games. That it was lame forcing your character to chase her down when she was kidnapped (although, I'd just like to point out the plot also gave you the choice to chase Irenicus because you were seeking revenge. He did keep you locked in a cage and tortured you for a few weeks.)

Now, this kind of forcing is typical of Biowares shittiness and you hate it right? But what about Arcanum? One of the reasons I struggled to care about that game is the lameness of the main quest. Your balloon crashes, some arb gnome gives you a ring or something to take to some other guy because the world is in danger?

A : Thats just the lamest most overused plot ever. From what I've gathered later it has an ironic twist or soemthing. But I'm not fucking psychic, and it just seemed like terribly cliched shit.

(ASIDE : Compare that to BG2s intro area, the escaping from the cages, finding signs of the battle with the thieves, then the escape into the marketplace where Irenicus takes on a bunch of Cowled Wizards before making the tactical decision to surrender, oh man, awesome. I think I was grinning the entire time. And then to uncover the rumors of the vampire vrs thieves battle throughout the city, to play a role in it, choose a side...heaven.)

B : What if I decide my char doesn't care? What if I want to chuck the ring in a bush? Bugger it, the gnomes dead, no ones going to call me out on it.

But instead I'm forced on this arb quest and suddenly NPCs who Are More Than They Seem are joining me and telling me to seek wise ancients and.....this is fantastic how? How is this better than Imoen? At least you get told she is your childhood friend/sister. Sure, they don't give you a long time to form an emotional connection, but thats role-playing reality, you have to choose some fucking background and just go with it. Total blank slates give you the lameness of Gothics Nameless Hero.

So how is being forced to find a sister who you are at least, via backstory, given reason for your character to be attached to a fucking crime against RPGs and intelligence in general, yet Arcanum, which forces you to chase the arb ring quest of the arb stranger your character doesn't even interact with for more than 5 minutes so utterly awesome? I don't get it. Enlighten me.

 

[Lumpy]

That's because yes, it's a flaw in both cases, but Arcanum more than makes up for it with its RPG awesomeness.

 

[Relayer71]

VD, you're giving BG2 a 70% as an RPG and a 95% as an action-adventure with stats.
Forget the genre/sub-genre classifications. What about as a GAME? I'm curious as to what you think of it overall. Is there some average of the 2? Utlimately this is what counts, no?

Still, I really think this whole sub-genre argument is silly. Action-RPG, Adventure-RPG, 1st person RPG, Isometric RPG, Orthopedic RPG, blah blah blah.

I like Sci-Fi and to me The Matrix is just as much Sci-fi as Terminator is as Bladerunner is as Metropolis is as The 13th Floor is as 2001: A Space Odyssey is as... They're all different, yet they're all Sci-Fi.

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

Lumpy's selections from the Baldur's Gate are pretty damning evidence of Baldur's Gate quality, or lack thereof.

No. It's basically a straw man argument presenting the absolute worst qualities of one thing and placing it as the norm. Sure, there were a lot of shit quests, but there were some decent ones as well. Sure, they weren't Fallout quality, but not everything is. Fallout was the exception, not the norm and I guess some people won't accept that and will continue to hold a "dead" game to some very high standards. I can understand holding newer games to the standards set by a decade old game, but damn....Fallout was only out for about a year when Baldur's Gate came out.

Tim Cain's off doing who knows what and Bioware's getting fellated for making a Sonic RPG.

Far as I know, a lot of Bioware's fans are pissed that that and the MMO are siphoning time from dragon age, and even Jack Bauer in Space...I mean Mass Effect.

Yay for the mass market; yay for "hardcore" RPG fans who hail Baldur's Gate as the genre's rebirth.

You realize those types are nigh, non-existant, right? A lot of fans of Baldur's Gate also *gasp* coincidentally happened to like games such as Fallout, Arcanum, and Torment. You know why? They generally like role-playing games and Baldur's Gate scratches that itch alright. Some people just can't hold themselves to your oh so lofty standards as well.

 

[Lumpy]

No, it's not a straw man. Those were most of the quests. Not all. I never claimed that all quests were like that, but 70% were, and it is inexcusable.
And in relationship with Fallout. It doesn't matter that BG was already in development when Fallout was released. What I meant was that since Fallout proved that good role-playing could be done in 1997, Baldur's Gate has no excuse to offer quests such as the above and horrible role playing one year later. Not because they should've learned from Fallout, but because they should have known better themselves.

And allow me to post all the quests in Beregost, a major town:

Subquests:
- Mirianne's Letter
Just south of Beregost you will find two Ogrillons, and on one of their
bodies is a letter for a Mirianne, who lives in Beregost. Take her the
letter and she will give you a Ring of Protection + 1 and 300 exp.
Mirianne: Beregost (x 4804 y 2086)
Ogrillons: Area S of Beregost (x 3850 y 1460)

- Firebead Elvenhair's Book
You'll find Firebead in Beregost (he was also in Candlekeep while you were
there) and he wants you to pick a book up for him, the History of the
Fateful Coin. You can find it across the street in the Feldepost's Inn
(for 2gp). Give him the book and you get 300 exp, the History of the Dead
Three, and a Reputation + 1. (If he doesn't give you the subquest, you can
still complete it, just buy the book and give it to him as if he had)
Firebead: Beregost (x 2044 y 2905)
Feledepost's Inn: Beregost (x 1406 y 2640)

- Marl the Drunk
Marl is in the Feldepost Inn, and he has had his fill of adventurers. He
accosts you in the bar, and you can fight him (650 exp), but you can also
talk him out of fighting. Choose options 1, 1, 3, 3, 1. For your trouble
you get 900 exp. Interestingly enough, if you choose to kill him you do
not get a decrease in reputation. (which leads to this oddity found by
edwardalacey: After calming Marl down, you can kill him to get that
experience as well, with no loss of reputation!)
Marl: Beregost, Feledepost's Inn (x 1406 y 2640)

- Kagain's Quest
Kagain lost a caravan that he was protecting, and a noble's son was
kidnapped by bandits. Agree to help him get the kid back, and he will join
with you.
Kagain: Beregost (x 1516 y 2030)

- Landrin's Spiders Part 2
We first heard of this quest back in the Friendly Arm Inn, and now we can
finally complete it. Go to Landrin's house, it is the one just to the left
of the Jovial Juggler Inn. Inside will be several spiders. Kill them, and
one will leave behind a spider body for you to take. Also take the Worn
Out Boots and the Wine in the chest by the bed. (you don't want to use
either, since we are returning them to Landrin back in the Friendly Arm
Inn) Take the items back to Landrin for your reward: for the boots (300
exp, 120gp), for the Spider Body (200 exp, 100gp), and for the wine (300
exp, 75gp).
Landrin: Friendly Arm Inn, Third Floor (x 796 y 735)
Spiders: Beregost (x 3078 y 3416)

- Gurke's Cloak
The Dwarf Gurke, whom you can find in the Jovial Juggler Inn, has had his
cloak stolen from him by some Tasloi in the Cloakwood Forest. You will
find it semi-hidden under a tree. Take it and return to Gurke, who doesn't
actually want it anymore to get your reward: 300 exp, and you get to keep
the Cloak of Non-Detection.
Gurke: Beregost (x 3760 y 3627)
Cloak: Cloakwood Forest One (x 4391 y 3472)

- Bjornin's Half-Ogres
The Paladin Bjornin, who is recuperating in the Jovial Juggler Inn, was
beaten by some nasty Half-Ogres south south-west of Beregost. (Go south
twice, then west once) Go there and defeat all the Half-Ogres that you can
find, then return to Bjornin to get your reward: Medium Shield +1, 400
exp, Reputation +1
Bjornin: Beregost (x 3760 y 3627)
Half-Ogres: Area S-SW of Beregost

- Silke
If you talk to Garrick, who is in front of the Burning Wizard Inn, he asks
for your help in defending the Lady Silke. Agree to his proposal, and
follow him to Silke. Talk to Silke, if she likes the look of you she will
offer to pay more than what Garrick offered (I got 400 offered). The
"thugs" will show up, but act like Silke had hired them for some purpose,
and now she had double crossed them. Refuse to kill them and instead kill
Silke (900 exp, 400gp, Staff +1, Potion). Talk to one of the men who
Silke was going to kill to get a Potion of Defense. Lastly, if you want,
you can get Garrick to join your party.

If you do what Silke asks and kill the three men, you get 400 gp, lose
2 reputation points, and can't get Garrick to join you. Then, of course,
you could just kill Silke afterwords...

Garrick: Beregost (x 2498 y 2267)
Silke: Beregost (x 3455 y 2143)

- Zhurlong's Boots
In the Burning Wizard Inn you will find a "pesky" thief named Zhurlong. He
was going about his business (stealing from people like you) and had his
Boots of Stealth stolen by some Hobgoblins. You can find these Hobgoblins
to the south of Beregost. Oh, and did I mention that he swipes gold from
you everytime you talk to him? Return the boots to get your gold back, and
to get a reward: 300 exp, 100gp (plus whatever he stole from you). Or you
could keep the boots, they are Boots of Stealth (stealth +35%). Or you
could give him the boots, then kill him and take the boots back, suffering
no loss in reputation.
Zhurlong: Beregost (x 2649 y 2030)
Hobgoblins: Area S of Beregost (x 1865 y 2449)

- Perdue's Short Sword (from Operador de Sala and edwardalacey)
You can find Perdue in the Red Sheaf Inn. A Gnoll has stolen his short
sword in High Hedge. Be careful when you talk to Perdue, because you can
easily lose this subquest. He tells you about a Dog Face and you have to
say to him if the Dog Face is a Gnoll. Give the sword to Perdue for your
reward: 50 gp and 500 exp.

The correct conversation thread is 1,2,1,1.

Perdue: Red Sheaf Inn (Beregost) (x 3273 y 2124)
Gnoll: High Hedge (W of Beregost) (x 3780 y 2818)

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

No, it's not a straw man. Those were most of the quests. Not all. I never claimed that all quests were like that, but 70% were, and it is inexcusable.

But you picked out one of the beginning towns, which you and I both know to be the worst parts as far as role-playing goes. Why don't you list some of the ones in the Cloakwood, out in the decent wilderness areas, or in Baldur's Gate itself? Surely those would be more representitive of the overall quality and show both the good and bad?

And in relationship with Fallout. It doesn't matter that BG was already in development when Fallout was released. What I meant was that since Fallout proved that good role-playing could be done in 1997, Baldur's Gate has no excuse to offer quests such as the above and horrible role playing one year later. Not because they should've learned from Fallout, but because they should have known better themselves.

Big difference here. Interplay's RPG division had a lot of experienced members and Tim Cain's design behind it. Bioware were a bunch of rookies who made a mech game before. Saying Bioware should have been as good as Interplay is like assuming a bunch of rent-a-cops should be as efficient and successful as a S.W.A.T. team.