Was Baldur's Gate considered popamole at release?

[Malraz Alizar]

Baldur's Gate was the most popular and critically-acclaimed CRPG of 1998. The most popular and critically-acclaimed CRPGs of 1997 were Diablo and Final Fantasy VII. Seen in that context, and not the revisionist fantasy in which everyone and his dog played Fallout and immediately recognized it as the next logical step in CRPG design, Baldur's Gate was viewed simultaneously as a return to form and a much-needed modernizing of the genre.

To wit, Baldur's Gate combined all the essential elements of a traditional role-playing game...
1. Math
2. Reading
3. An official AD&D license

...with all the desirable elements of a modern multi-media experience...
1. Luscious presentation (including CGI cutscenes and limited voice acting)
2. An intuitive, mouse-driven graphical user interface
3. Real-time strategizing
4. Six-player co-op over LAN or internet (the importance of which, at least among those gamers with the means to take advantage of it - ie games journalists - CANNOT BE OVERSTATED)

...to create a "perfect storm" of interest in what was at that time still seen as a moribund genre, about equal in importance and future prospects with that other staple of the '80s and early-'90s, the graphic adventure game. (Of course, no one actually referred to it as a "perfect storm" at the time, as the film that popularized that now-ubiquitous expression wouldn't be released for another two years, but you get my drift.) If anything, Planescape: Torment only served to cement Baldur's Gate's reputation as a harbinger of the future of computer roleplaying, and it wasn't until Baldur's Gate II utterly failed to build on the concepts introduced (or, more accurately, re-introduced) by that game that the critical backlash against BioWare really started to pick up steam.

 

[Carlos' Bitch1]

Gb games are overrated - espicially on the C&C Codex. R00fles!

But, hey fighting billions of beholders at once is kewl for no reason. R00fles!

Nice try. Bring up one battle out of a series that contains hundreds of unique battles with combined arms teams. I suppose you will try and say BG combat somehow comes close to Goldbox combat next?

I didn't mind BG, and it actually had a few decent encounters here and there...however, C&C?BG?

Only part of the Codex is C&C based, and I wouldn't call Baldurs' Gate, with 'choose anything you want and arrive at the same conclusion' dialogue, choice and consequence. There were not even actions that provided virtually any C&C. At the end of the day though, I suppose having the ability to click on meaningless dialogue choices really is better than an excellent turn based combat system.

 

[Volourn]

"BG combat somehow comes close to Goldbox combat next?"

It was better. And,c ertainly the story was vastly better with better.

And, oh, the majority of Gb battles wer elike I described. They just threw shit at you to fight. Nothing wrong with that, I quite enjoy POR et a. but let's call a spade a spade. And, yeah, BG wasn't hevay on the C&C but it certainly trumps the GB games. And, BG2 certainly progresses that.

R00fles!

 

[octavius]

The BG games were fun, but they had very litte scope for role playing. You were more or less forced to go the Lawful Good route.
In comparison Oblivion for all its fault has much more scope for playing different roles.

Bur I think BG2 was a great game untill you battled "billions of beholders at once" in the Underdark. Actually I think the whole game deteriates and "breaks" when you reach the Underdark, with the game turning into a very linear (after the very open chapter 2) Monty Haul campaign. Most of my BG2 games ended in the Underdark and I only completed it once. Throne of Baal I gave up in disgust after facing yet another incarnation of Irenicus for the umpteenth time.

 

[octavius]

"BG combat somehow comes close to Goldbox combat next?"

It was better.

Even though I've wastet months of my life on the GB games, I have to agree that overall the pausable IE combat was better. But it's sad to think how good it could have been if they has used the opportunity attack/zone of control rules, and the ability to have a grid. And having different keys for Pause and Unpause would have been nice...

 

[Hobo Elf]

I actually bought Baldur's Gate on accident. Don't ask me how, but I actually managed to mistake it for Warhammer 40k: Chaos Gate. I somehow mistook Saverok on the box as a Chaos marine.
But yeah, that was pretty much my introduction to cRPGs, right there. A lot of my friends got the game around the same time as I did too, and we had lots of fun discussing all the secrets and quests and so forth that we'd all discover on our play through. We were pretty big Forgotten Realms nerds at time too.
Man, I was 10 - 11 years old when that happened. Feels kinda strange.

 

[King Crispy]

Other than Daggerfall, Baldur's Gate was my personal most-anticipated game ever at the time of its development. It seemed like the wait until its release took absolutely forever.

I'll never forget the feeling of rolling up a character and exploring Candlekeep. Finally, D&D again on my PC, authentic D&D!

Then I met Imoen. And Sarevok. And the shit just went downhill from there.

Don't get me wrong; I still enjoyed it. But BioWare tried way too hard with it. It should've been scaled WAY back, with a max level of like 5 or something.

I just learned to accept it as a very heavily sugar-coated romp through the Forgotten Realms and appreciated it for at least trying.

 

[sgc_meltdown]

I somehow mistook Saverok on the box as a Chaos marine.

 

[Rogue]

i had to obey the hivemind or i would be cast out and be alone once more. Do I want to be free? Or do i want to have a position in fools paradise ?

http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/index

See you back here in fifteen minutes bro

Whenever I see bioware's forums linked in full it gives me the shivers. Sorry for the OT (not really).

 

[octavius]

Other than Daggerfall, Baldur's Gate was my personal most-anticipated game ever at the time of its development. It seemed like the wait until its release took absolutely forever.

I'll never forget the feeling of rolling up a character and exploring Candlekeep. Finally, D&D again on my PC, authentic D&D!

Old farts like me got that feeling with the original Pool of Radiance by SSI, and we were not disappointed.
No other AD&D CRPG captured the open ended table top AD&D experience as much as that game, but then the scenario was designed by TSR's own designers.

 

[Rogue]

 

[sgc_meltdown]

Both equally unique and distinct designs.

 

[visions]

IIRC, the big deal was that BG would use (and simulate) the current D&D rules set.

Interesting note, I think, is that the original version didn't pause the game when you went into the inventory screen. So your party could get trashed while you were considering which potion to gulp! In reaction to player outrage (though some players actually preferred it to work that way), they patched it nearly right away.

They did? I've never played Baldur's Gate so that I could use the inventory while the game's paused. Last year I reinstalled it from the dvd set re-release with BG, BG2 + expansions (installed only the BG1 oc though), which I presume included the patched versions, yet I remember that inventory was as usual for me, no pause.

I've actually always thought that this was a fairly cool mechanic.

 

[Stabwound]

I'm pretty sure the "game doesn't pause in inventory" thing is only during multiplayer games.

 

[LittleJoe]

I'm pretty sure the "game doesn't pause in inventory" thing is only during multiplayer games.

No.

 

[Stabwound]

Okay, I was remembering wrong: the game actually ONLY will pause in the inventory during multiplayer mode. Regular single player won't stay paused in the inventory, even with all of the patches.

BG2 is the one with inventory pausing in SP.

 

[curry]

Okay, I was remembering wrong: the game actually ONLY will pause in the inventory during multiplayer mode. Regular single player won't stay paused in the inventory, even with all of the patches.

BG2 is the one with inventory pausing in SP.

Never liked BG2. It felt dumbed down.

 

[Shannow]

To be fair, when I joined, admitting you liked BG got you a similar treatment as when you join now and admit that you like DAO or NWN2. While now BG is still not given as an example of a stellar game it is often at least mentioned as a decent one.
The thing those retards don't seem to get is that communities (can) change and that one never gets far if one takes hyperbole to seriously. Most of the people who tried to give me grief for liking BG(2) are gone or don't bother anymore and the newer members are by and large also more tolerant to the IE games. I'm still here. I still find the BGs decent (even if I couldn't stand playing them anymore). Does that mean that "the codex" OMG flipflopped?

BG2 was considered "shit" only by a few less people. But I started reading the codex only in early 2006 so I have no idea how it go treated at release.

EDIT: Ok, I see I was quoted already. I'll read the thread and perhaps share some more wisdom foolishness when I come back from work.

 

[Volourn]

"You were more or less forced to go the Lawful Good route. "

Bullshitz.

 

[Konjad]

"You were more or less forced to go the Lawful Good route. "

Bullshitz.

Yeah. You weren't forced to be lawful, just good.

 

[DraQ]

Well, you could choose a selflessly evil route instead of selfishly good one.

For some odd reason all selflessly evil characters seem to enjoy being disliked and distrusted rather than reveling in respect and trust and exploiting the living crap out of them like any sane person with no moral principles would.

 

[Azrael the cat]

Baldur's Gate was the most popular and critically-acclaimed CRPG of 1998. The most popular and critically-acclaimed CRPGs of 1997 were Diablo and Final Fantasy VII. Seen in that context, and not the revisionist fantasy in which everyone and his dog played Fallout and immediately recognized it as the next logical step in CRPG design, Baldur's Gate was viewed simultaneously as a return to form and a much-needed modernizing of the genre.

To wit, Baldur's Gate combined all the essential elements of a traditional role-playing game...
1. Math
2. Reading
3. An official AD&D license

...with all the desirable elements of a modern multi-media experience...
1. Luscious presentation (including CGI cutscenes and limited voice acting)
2. An intuitive, mouse-driven graphical user interface
3. Real-time strategizing
4. Six-player co-op over LAN or internet (the importance of which, at least among those gamers with the means to take advantage of it - ie games journalists - CANNOT BE OVERSTATED)

...to create a "perfect storm" of interest in what was at that time still seen as a moribund genre, about equal in importance and future prospects with that other staple of the '80s and early-'90s, the graphic adventure game. (Of course, no one actually referred to it as a "perfect storm" at the time, as the film that popularized that now-ubiquitous expression wouldn't be released for another two years, but you get my drift.) If anything, Planescape: Torment only served to cement Baldur's Gate's reputation as a harbinger of the future of computer roleplaying, and it wasn't until Baldur's Gate II utterly failed to build on the concepts introduced (or, more accurately, re-introduced) by that game that the critical backlash against BioWare really started to pick up steam.

Hate to admit it, but this is pretty much true. People talk about FO as though it typified an era. It didn't. It was a sparkle of gold at a time when the industry was actually looking a little off-colour (not current-era shithouse, but a definite lull from the golden era).

Actually in some ways, the scenario was similar to ours today, just less shite - crpgs had come to mean ultra-simplified action-rpgs and emo angst jrpgs (Diablo and FFVII). Only difference was that Diablo was better for its time than todays ultra-simplified action-rpgs, and the lull had only been going for a couple of years. It was a short crpg recession but a pretty savage one. FO was a huge exception to that, and argulably the simplification of crpgs at the time meant that it missed out on being the commercial mega-influence that it should have been. It ran counter to its era, rather than defining it.

So, by virtue of its timing, BG was seen by many of the golden era folks as significant incline. Personally as a Wizardy/Ultima fan at the time, I didn't see it as surpassing the best of them, but it was just great to see something that was clearly a 'big production' event at doing a genuine crpg again. Obviously FO was the far superior game, but FO represented the 'elite pinnacle', whereas BG represented the 'mainstream big budget gaming', and if mainstream big budget gaming was interested in crpgs again then that was just peachy.

And its short-term legacy was massively boosted by the years that followed producing some of the greatest crpgs and crpg-hybrids ever made - BG2, PS:T, Deus Ex, Dagerfall, Thief+2. Sure, BG was only a mediocre crpg in itself (though the lan aspects were genuinely groundbreaking), but it was seen as the stepping stone, that first step on the recovery, that led into a fucking awesome time to be into gaming.

It's when you look at it in retrospect, with FO a bit earlier, and so many great games so soon after, that BG looks shite.

 

[DraQ]

and if mainstream big budget gaming was interested in crpgs again then that was just peachy.

What a grand and intoxicating innocence. How could we have been so naive?

 

[Luzur]

so, are we going to throw shit at Wizardry next? Arcanum?

dont we have enough new shit to throw shit on anyway?

FFS GUIZE

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

so, are we going to throw shit at Wizardry next? Arcanum?

dont we have enough new shit to throw shit on anyway?

FFS GUIZE

Looks like you don't even know what you don't know about The Codex

"You were more or less forced to go the Lawful Good route. "

Bullshitz.

Yeah. You weren't forced to be lawful, just good.

No. After some time after I got bored with BG1, I picked it up again and I started playing a chaotic evil character. Elf, Fighter/Mage/Thief. I murdered whoever I could. Actually, I can't imagine having fun in BG series without murdering lots of people and taking their stuff. Only the later Biwhore games brought the can't attack neutrals decline bullshit.
It's just important to power game and to use temples for improving reputation.

So, by virtue of its timing, BG was seen by many of the golden era folks as significant incline. Personally as a Wizardy/Ultima fan at the time, I didn't see it as surpassing the best of them, but it was just great to see something that was clearly a 'big production' event at doing a genuine crpg again. Obviously FO was the far superior game, but FO represented the 'elite pinnacle', whereas BG represented the 'mainstream big budget gaming', and if mainstream big budget gaming was interested in crpgs again then that was just peachy.

After playing Fallout and Fallout 2, I couldn't imagine that any serious isometric cRPG could ignore the incline that it brought to the genre. To me, it was obvious that Baldur's Gate will be like Fallout but better, especially that both games were released by Interplay.

And its short-term legacy was massively boosted by the years that followed producing some of the greatest crpgs and crpg-hybrids ever made - BG2, PS:T, Deus Ex, Dagerfall, Thief+2. Sure, BG was only a mediocre crpg in itself (though the lan aspects were genuinely groundbreaking), but it was seen as the stepping stone, that first step on the recovery, that led into a fucking awesome time to be into gaming.

Daggerfall? Thief? Are you serious? Daggerfall was released 2 years before Baldur's Gate. Thief was released in the same year. There was also Albion, Wizardry Gold, a few Might & Magic games and many other RPGs released a few years before Baldur's Gate.
Baldur's Gate haven't brought anything but decline (except maybe PST - still without BG, Black Isle could probably produce another decent turn-based RPG). Also, Baldur's Gate was the game that brought the whole "modern cRPGs must be turn-based" bullshit.

Gb games are overrated - espicially on the C&C Codex. R00fles!

But, hey fighting billions of beholders at once is kewl for no reason. R00fles!

Nice try. Bring up one battle out of a series that contains hundreds of unique battles with combined arms teams. I suppose you will try and say BG combat somehow comes close to Goldbox combat next?

I didn't mind BG, and it actually had a few decent encounters here and there...however, C&C?BG?

Only part of the Codex is C&C based, and I wouldn't call Baldurs' Gate, with 'choose anything you want and arrive at the same conclusion' dialogue, choice and consequence. There were not even actions that provided virtually any C&C. At the end of the day though, I suppose having the ability to click on meaningless dialogue choices really is better than an excellent turn based combat system.

The 'choose anything you want and arrive at the same conclusion' dialogues were a Baldur's Gate 2 thing. In Baldur's Gate 1 different dialogue choices often led to different outcomes.

 

[octavius]

"You were more or less forced to go the Lawful Good route. "

Bullshitz.

Yeah. You weren't forced to be lawful, just good.

I stand corrected.