Replaying Baldur's Gate

[Section8]

Okay, I'm undertaking the supreme feat of patience - trying to actually play Baldur's Gate from start to finish. Given that my memories of the game are that it's something like slamming your balls in a gate, repeatedly, until it latches, and then gnawing on your tongue as you slowly die, I can only be pleasantly surprised, right?

Anyway, I'm only just into Chapter 2, and I'm already beginning to doubt I'll actually make it. How the fuck did this game ever get so popular? Just because it's D&D? Since it's been a long time since I've ranted on the topic (with the demise of Black Isle's forums and all) here's what's troubling me -

• Pathfinding: My fucking god, how can a game, which at its very core, is built around real-time, close-quarters combat get pathfinding so horribly wrong? I spend so much time micromanaging the movement of my fucking idiot party because they're constantly tripping over each other. I feel dirty knowing that my processor is being wasted on 60 ticks of utter stupidity every second.
• AI: I can't trust my fucking idiot party to do anything right, so I'm forced to control them. However, I find myself wanting to control the enemy NPCs/monsters too, because their stupitity cheapens my gaming experience. "I cast paralyse!" again and again! On the same three characters that are already paralysed! While the other three are clusterfucking me at long range! Idiots.
• Level design with no regard for gameplay space: Doors hidden under rooftops, narrow spaces, bottlenecks everywhere, etc. Okay, you're developing a game, you've noticed that one of it's biggest shortcomings is pathfinding, so what do you do? You certainly don't fucking create endless environments to exascerbate the problem. But Bioware did. Go Bioware!
• Combat balance: Low level D&D characters are pretty fragile. And any combat involving them needs to be carefully designed, and at times, peppering a few rolls can be essential. Baldur's Gate however, basically has the player in a series of combat situations, where all participants can die instantly at any given moment. It's very fortunate that I rarely get hit, because it seems every time I do, it's fatal. It will get better with time, but it's a real struggle.
• Random Encounters: Closely tied to the above point. I have 6 level one characters, on the 4 hour (!) trip from Nashkel to its mines, I get raped and tortured by about 4 skeletons and a couple of Wargs. I sleep in the wilderness, and get set upon by a band of ogres, etc. Horrible shit.

Now, that's just the core combat portion of the gameplay, and not RPG specific opinions. How the fuck did so many people avoid such frustration? It's like playing one of the infinite number of bad RTSs that came out ~1998. Anyway, on to the rest of the bad stuff -

• Vacant NPCs: Why are there so many NPCs around that exist solely to say something trivial and then despawn? "Hey yuo r teh grrat avdenturar!! k thx bywe!" <pop!>
• Lack of RP consequence: Aside from a couple of exceptions, nearly everything I say or do results in the same thing.

NPC: Hey, r u boy of Groin?
Me: Yeah, that's me.
NPC: RArrrr111!! I keel u!!!! kekekekekeke

NPC: Hey, r u boy of Groin?
Me: No, you must have mistaken me for someone else.
NPC: RArrrr111!! I keel u!!!! kekekekekeke

NPC: Hey, r u boy of Groin?
Me: You're a fucking idiot mate, do you really think you can take all six of us?
NPC: RArrrr111!! I keel u!!!! kekekekekeke

etc.

• Piss poor implementation of alignment/reputation:

Camp-as-fuck prancing necromancer trying to peel off his own face: Hey there, big boy. Oh, you paladins are adorable! You must let me join you!
Me: Er, well, it's just me and this annoying pink bitch, so I could use the extra manpower. You and your midget ponce of a comrade can tag along.
Camp-as-fuck prancing necromancer trying to peel off his own face: Oh, thanks gorgeous! Let's go to Nashkel!
Me: Er, dude, it says on your character sheets that you're both evil.
Camp-as-fuck prancing necromancer trying to peel off his own face: Er, yeah... about that...[/b]

On top of all that, there are some opinions:

• Piss poor attempts at humour: Are Canadians bad at comedy or something? Wait no, there's that seven minute abs guy from Something About Mary. Must just be Bioware.

Har, har! I r a fukin space hamstarr! lolz

• Unanimously irritating NPCs and party members: Every single character in this game shits me to tears. They're all fucking annoying, without exception, and even with all NPC VO disabled in options, I still can't shut the fuckers up. Plus, they pipe up with random shit at inappropriate times.

On arrival in Nashkel:

Jaheira wut u do? we need go nashkel, k?
Camp-as-fuck prancing necromancer trying to peel off his own face: wut u do? we need go nashkel, k?

• "My establishment's as clean as an open arse": Huh?

Anyway, I'm puzzled, so I'm curious to hear from anyone who actually liked it. It completely put me off Infinity Engine games, so I never bought Torment, Icewind Dale or any of the other shite. Maybe I'll pirate them one day.

 

[Naked_Lunch]

Get Torment, it'll purge your brain of the pain from BG.

 

[Walks with the Snails]

I dunno, it really didn't seem so bad to me at the time. Then again it was the first PC RPG I had played since Ultima VII. I beat it once way back and haven't made it past Chapter 2 since then, though, I invariably lose patience, it's not one of the replayable classics and the gameplay issues you're talking about really make it show its age. Torment and Icewind Dale have managed to hold up a little better IMO.

And I'm pretty sure it's Elven Arse.

 

[Roqua]

I never saw the big thrills behind BG, mainly due to the combat. Excpet I thought it was too easy. Way to easy and stupid and annoying and gay. Thats the future though, easy and streamlined. Millions of really easy to kill enemies. I dont mind poor pathfinding, bugs, journals, maps, anything like that in any game so I'm not really with you on that crap. But I whole heartedly agree with the lack of meanigful choices and poor combat.

 

[Spazmo]

Going back to BG is... difficult. Same for any of the Infinity Engine games, really, simply because that engine just sucked so damn hard. Torment is generally playable, but it's in spite of the engine.

 

[DemonKing]

Well you are playing a game from 1998 in 2005 - and also it was the first IE engine game, so it is surely going to seem somewhat limited in that context, particulalry considering what has come since in terms of graphics/interface/storytelling.

Even the most diehard Fallout fan would have to admit that the interface is not up to much compared to today's possibilities, and while PS:T had a much more complex dialog/storyline than BG, I felt the circular interface was a step backwards.

 

[Zomg]

A one-character game of BG is much more tolerable, aside from exacerbating the shit combat in low level D&D (although you get out of the low-level doldrums faster with unsplit XP). It helps with the pathfinding stuff and makes the RTw/P combat much more tolerable when you don't have to keep six people's shit together, and it creates a few interesting combat set pieces that are otherwise just speedbumps to a full party.

You're using BGtutu, right? It makes the experience somewhat nicer and provides perks like kits.

 

[Rat Keeng]

Playing BG 1 with more than one controllable character is pointless, it's damn near impossible to position your party properly. I've replayed it once, and I took much joy and pride in killing Minsc, Imoen and all those other whinging little fucks who wanted to tag along, and mooch off my hard earned cash and success.

I soloed a thief, and it was nowhere near as frustrating as hogging a party around. I didn't know of any mods back then, but I've heard of one that converts the BG 1 content to the BG 2 engine, which means somewhat improved pathfinding. 'Course, you'll probably need a full install of BG 2 as well, so it seems a lot of effort just to relive an old horrid experience.

EDIT: Huh, seems that's the one called TuTu: http://pocketplane.net/mambo/index.php? ... &Itemid=98

 

[fizzelopeguss]

Even the most diehard Fallout fan would have to admit that the interface is not up to much compared to today's possibilities.

I dunno, i only have problems with the inventory....all that clicking on the "down" cycle button is a pain in the arse.

 

[bryce777]

I have to agree with most of this. ESPECIALLY the pathfinding ESPECIALLY ESPECIALLY considering the ludicrously bad level designs that they had which made this even worse.

I disagree with the NPCs - some of them were great. All of the evil ones are great, and all the good ones except for minsc are pretty much intolerable. He is intolerable in that unless you clear the way beforehand, you get attacked by the stupid fucker.


Combat - the combat is actually too easy. The problem is this - realtime = arcade, plain and simple. THAT IS ALL THERE IS TO IT. Realtime strategy is the biggest oxymoron ever created. I am pretty sure you could complete BG using just a halfling with a sling. There are probably a couple of gotcha levels like those damn kobolds which have ONE fire arrow each and yield 10 exp even though a squad can easily take out your whole 5th level party. Oterwise the whole game is just like stellar 7:

run backwards, run backwards, runbackwards, shoot/cast spell/stop and attack, runbackwards runbackwards runbackwards...etc. etc. etc.

When my first level charachter toasted that bounty hunter guy with a +3 sword, I just gave up in disgust even though I had the total conversion which (ALMOST) makes the game work properly using the BG II engine.

At least the writing etc. was much better in II. And the engine. Thank fuck they let you move faster....

 

[bryce777]

Well you are playing a game from 1998 in 2005 - and also it was the first IE engine game, so it is surely going to seem somewhat limited in that context, particulalry considering what has come since in terms of graphics/interface/storytelling.

Even the most diehard Fallout fan would have to admit that the interface is not up to much compared to today's possibilities, and while PS:T had a much more complex dialog/storyline than BG, I felt the circular interface was a step backwards.

I like fallout's inventory much better than BG's. All my slots would be filled up with fucking gems and necklaces and nonsense, which was completely ludicrous. Also, quick slots are for fucking morons. Basically it is saying "Oops our inventory sucks let's put a bandage on it."

 

[Atrokkus]

Well you are playing a game from 1998 in 2005 - and also it was the first IE engine game, so it is surely going to seem somewhat limited in that context, particulalry considering what has come since in terms of graphics/interface/storytelling.

Release date doesn't mean shit, let's face it. I mean, Fallout was released aroudn that time, as well, so what? You consider it somehow limited in comparison with 2000+ games? I don't. Shit, there are almost *no* 2000+ rpgs worth noticing.

I don't understand why someone would find pathfinding and certain inteface features sooo difficult to cope with. It's not a tactics game, alright?

I like fallout's inventory much better than BG's. All my slots would be filled up with fucking gems and necklaces and nonsense, which was completely ludicrous.

What's wrong with gems and jewelry? What's wrong with useless items? Face it: Fallout aslo had useless items, albeit not a lot really. Don't want it, don't grab it. However, yeah, inventory is a bit clunky overall. The item dimensions were not taken into account, just looked a bit odd and unrealistic.


Oh, and now there is one thing that really amazes me: how you all hate some of the npcs, especially Minsc. Why, prey tell? You hate him, you despise his manners and his sick quirks? Well, fine, that's okay, and it's completely palatable. That means the character is a success: it instills emotions, it does not go unnoticed by the player. Minsc is a friggin jewel, along with Morte and other magnificent and memorable npcs.
NPC does not have to make the player like it, it just needs to have a personality of his own, and express it.

 

[Ryuken]

I've replayed it once, and I took much joy and pride in killing Minsc, Imoen and all those other whinging little fucks who wanted to tag along, and mooch off my hard earned cash and success.

The only thing an npc-party member could 'mooch off' was experience and in the case of Viconia perhaps alignment (or was that only in BGII?). For the rest I found the npc's good enough. BG was fine for its time, and I rather prefer a complete control over 'stupid' party-members (I never trusted in the Infinity-engine friendly AI actually) than some silly AI-friends who'll just shoot anything in combat (Fallout). You have to babysit a lot in BG because of the combat system and the bad pathfinding though idd but for me it didn't get in the way of the main strengths of the game; exploring every little bit, trying to equip every npc with good stuff and just advancing the story (which imo had more appeal than that of BGII, it felt more right/realistic). Quite linear also yes but for a first time it was decent enough.

 

[Drakron]

Fallout have a shitty inventory, anyone that says its better that BG/IWD/PS:T is full of shit or have forgotten how bad it is.

Saying IWD combat was better that BG1 because you died less is also full of shit, IWD offered tactical combat and that was it deadly ... or someone fogotten the tomb dungeon at the start of the game? the drow attack squads at the dwarf area?

BG1 was a good game and in many aspects better that Fallout, for me BG2 was a step down despite having improved the game in several areas.

And PS:T combat was shit, anyone that suffered the Curst underground knows that (and it was not much better before that).

 

[Section8]

And I'm pretty sure it's Elven Arse.

Well, that makes more sense. Must be that terrible fake accent.

Well you are playing a game from 1998 in 2005 - and also it was the first IE engine game, so it is surely going to seem somewhat limited in that context, particulalry considering what has come since in terms of graphics/interface/storytelling.

I'm doing my best to take that into account, and I generally don't have a problem with dated games that were good in the first place. I'm also coming at the the game from a perspective where I played it back in the day, and never finished it because I'd get fed up and frustrated with it.

Even the most diehard Fallout fan would have to admit that the interface is not up to much compared to today's possibilities, and while PS:T had a much more complex dialog/storyline than BG, I felt the circular interface was a step backwards.

Well, Fallout did have some horrible interface aspects, such as inventory scrolling and the 999 limit, but on the whole it's far from awful. Also, Fallout is focused on a single player character, so sketchy NPC behaviour is a little more forgivable than a game where the bulk of the gameplay revolves around combat with a party of six.

I'm actually interested in Torment, given its cult status, but I'm not keen enough to go to the effort of tracking down a legit copy, and there's other stuff I'd rather spend my bandwidth on.

A one-character game of BG is much more tolerable, aside from exacerbating the shit combat in low level D&D (although you get out of the low-level doldrums faster with unsplit XP). It helps with the pathfinding stuff and makes the RTw/P combat much more tolerable when you don't have to keep six people's shit together, and it creates a few interesting combat set pieces that are otherwise just speedbumps to a full party.

I wouldn't have thought it possible, especially given the 7th level cap, but I guess it would go faster, since 90% of the gameplay currently is fighting the pathfinding.

I'm also trying to play as it was intended. I seriously thought about creating my own "multiplayer" party, just to avoid the overly irritating fucks that Bioware saw fit to create as party members. Maybe I'll just hack them all up and go it alone. Wouldn't do much good for my paladinship though.

You're using BGtutu, right? It makes the experience somewhat nicer and provides perks like kits.

I didn't even realise such a thing existed, but I haven't got Baldur's Gate II anyway. I avoided Bioware and Black Isle like the plague after Baldur's Gate. Until Neverwinter Nights, anyway. Now I'm back to avoiding them again.

I disagree with the NPCs - some of them were great. All of the evil ones are great, and all the good ones except for minsc are pretty much intolerable. He is intolerable in that unless you clear the way beforehand, you get attacked by the stupid fucker.

I'm not convinced. Every single party member I've recruited has irritated the fuck out of me. My party at the moment is:

* Me, with one of the three shit voice set options.
* Anime Inspired Irritating Little Pink Helium Bag.
* Whiny Little Stuttering Elf Bitch and his Uppity Heal Bot.
* Oppenheimer-Quoting, Limp-Wristed, Street Theatre Fairy and his giggling Midget Manservant.

I'm hoping the evil members of my party turn on me soon, because I really want them dead, but I have no idea who to recruit. I've already turned down Unfunny Gerbil Fajet and some other wanker.

Combat - the combat is actually too easy. The problem is this - realtime = arcade, plain and simple. THAT IS ALL THERE IS TO IT. Realtime strategy is the biggest oxymoron ever created. I am pretty sure you could complete BG using just a halfling with a sling. There are probably a couple of gotcha levels like those damn kobolds which have ONE fire arrow each and yield 10 exp even though a squad can easily take out your whole 5th level party.

I kind of suspected this, given that one of the most popular arguments in favour of RT over on the Black Isle boards was that you need it to get through all the pointless battles quicker. But at the moment, combat resolution is either monsters dead, or party member dead. I very rarely just get hurt, which makes my heal bot kind of superfluous.

I don't understand why someone would find pathfinding and certain inteface features sooo difficult to cope with. It's not a tactics game, alright?

Then what the hell kind of game is it? All I've done is walk around, and kill things, with the occasional minimal NPC interaction, which is usually little more than a couple of lines of useless fluff.

"Ima jump of teh clfffi!11! Oh noes, I won't. lolz."
"can't stop now! I just force conversation with u to tell u how much hurry i in!11!"
"u ward of goron? i pwn j00 now, snapz."
"adventurars r balls. kil u now"
"teh iron is h4x0rzed!!!"
"hlep plz!!11 teh dogz aggro me!!"

Aside from that, the storyline isn't much chop, and even munchkinism/treadmilling is difficult with only 6 level ups to play with. So what should I be hanging out for here? Mowing the fog of war?

Oh, and now there is one thing that really amazes me: how you all hate some of the npcs, especially Minsc. Why, prey tell? You hate him, you despise his manners and his sick quirks? Well, fine, that's okay, and it's completely palatable. That means the character is a success: it instills emotions, it does not go unnoticed by the player. Minsc is a friggin jewel, along with Morte and other magnificent and memorable npcs.
NPC does not have to make the player like it, it just needs to have a personality of his own, and express it.

It's not that his "personality" irritates me, it's the fact that he's an utterly innane, wasted effort at humour. If he had a pet turd instead of a gerbil, he could have been in Fallout Tactics!

 

[Atrokkus]

Again, combats means shit. You can't say that an RPG is a failure because its combat system sucks legs. It is a valuable aspect, but far from being a decisive one.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Again, combats means shit. You can't say that an RPG is a failure because its combat system sucks legs. It is a valuable aspect, but far from being a decisive one.

He saying it's shit for many reasons including combat.

Overall, agree with the Section8. The design was completely idiotic.

 

[Claw]

Thanks for the reminder that I still have to finish BG. Also, thanks for reminding me why I haven't yet.

 

[Atrokkus]

Well, actually, I've never played BG1, but I did play BG2 and found it to be a very pleasant RP experience. Definately, it is shaking on a verge of adventure and RPG, but it's not crossing that boundary and stays a pretty solid RPG, mayhap not containing a lot of unlinearity. The character, however, may alter his fate, as well as the fate of others, to an extent, and interact with the environment on a level that is, at least for me, was enough to get me glued to the gameworld. The side-quests allow for the nonlinearity and choice, although the main plotline is pretty much restrained in one direction.

 

[bryce777]

Well you are playing a game from 1998 in 2005 - and also it was the first IE engine game, so it is surely going to seem somewhat limited in that context, particulalry considering what has come since in terms of graphics/interface/storytelling.

Release date doesn't mean shit, let's face it. I mean, Fallout was released aroudn that time, as well, so what? You consider it somehow limited in comparison with 2000+ games? I don't. Shit, there are almost *no* 2000+ rpgs worth noticing.

I don't understand why someone would find pathfinding and certain inteface features sooo difficult to cope with. It's not a tactics game, alright?

I like fallout's inventory much better than BG's. All my slots would be filled up with fucking gems and necklaces and nonsense, which was completely ludicrous.

What's wrong with gems and jewelry? What's wrong with useless items? Face it: Fallout aslo had useless items, albeit not a lot really. Don't want it, don't grab it. However, yeah, inventory is a bit clunky overall. The item dimensions were not taken into account, just looked a bit odd and unrealistic.


Oh, and now there is one thing that really amazes me: how you all hate some of the npcs, especially Minsc. Why, prey tell? You hate him, you despise his manners and his sick quirks? Well, fine, that's okay, and it's completely palatable. That means the character is a success: it instills emotions, it does not go unnoticed by the player. Minsc is a friggin jewel, along with Morte and other magnificent and memorable npcs.
NPC does not have to make the player like it, it just needs to have a personality of his own, and express it.

Because they fill up the inventory. That's ludicrous. half a pound of jewelry and your inventory is full. In fallout it went by weight. Having some limited slots is one thing when done in a rational manner but the inventory in bg where a suit of armor is the same as a gem in just a joke.

 

[bryce777]

Fallout have a shitty inventory, anyone that says its better that BG/IWD/PS:T is full of shit or have forgotten how bad it is.

The difference between fallout and BG is that in fallout you can scroll down, in BG it forces you to only use 20 slots. If you think that is an advantage, you are full of shit.

 

[bryce777]

Again, combats means shit. You can't say that an RPG is a failure because its combat system sucks legs. It is a valuable aspect, but far from being a decisive one.

To YOU it means shit. An rpg with no combat may as well have no stats and you may as well make it an adventure game.

It is also what you spend most of your time doing in most ganes, so if it is total shit, then it is a pretty big detractor from game enjoyment.

 

[Araanor]

Again, combats means shit. You can't say that an RPG is a failure because its combat system sucks legs. It is a valuable aspect, but far from being a decisive one.

Given that combat is nearly all the gaming you do in BG, I daresay it's very important to the assesment of the game.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Oh, and now there is one thing that really amazes me: how you all hate some of the npcs, especially Minsc. Why, prey tell? You hate him, you despise his manners and his sick quirks? Well, fine, that's okay, and it's completely palatable. That means the character is a success: it instills emotions, it does not go unnoticed by the player. Minsc is a friggin jewel, along with Morte and other magnificent and memorable npcs.
NPC does not have to make the player like it, it just needs to have a personality of his own, and express it.

From that point of view, MW's Fargoth is a great and deep NPC because everyone hated that fucker. Please don't compare Minsc aka "a guy with a few cheesy lines and a hamster" to PST NPCs in the future. It's embarrassing for you.

 

[Jinxed]

I say both inventory systems were bad. BG has weight and so does fallout.

BG

All the slots displayed at the same time +
Very small amount of slots -
Armor the same as a jewel -
Because the limited amount of slots and the fact that a jewel takes a slot, jewel bags, scroll cases and other things WERE ACTUALLY WORTH SOMETHING +

Fallout

Inventory became ultra annoying after you had many items -
Sacks or bags were useless -
Unlimited inventory space +

The fact that the inventory in fallout is so annoying is why your car has a trunk in part 2. Another thing is that fallout 1 had no take all button.

I probably couldn't go back to BG after all this time. When it came out, I enjoyed them a lot, but I've tried twice to complete IWD 2, and gave up. BG has nice music, overall not bad voice acting, nice artwork. The pathfinding and retarded combat is not something I want to experience again. Last time I tried IWD 2 I was bored to tears.

Pathfinding has always been an issue however. ToEE which is relatively fresh compared and has its share of problems with it as well.

 

[Claw]

I disagree that containers were useless. Of course it would have been even greater if containers expanded the inventory Ultima7-style.
At the least I liked to organize my inventory with them.
Allright, so they maybe weren't awfully useful, but there weren't too many so I was happy for every bad I got.