Editorial Matt Chat: Baldur's Gate

[J_C]

Can somebody pklease tell me how the FUCK Baldurs Gate and Baldurs Gate 2 are great CRPGs?

I mean, for FUCKS SAKE, this is really pissing me off. It is as if Fallout, Fallout 2, Planescape Torment, Fallout: New Vegas etc don't exist. Those are RPGs, they have choices and consequences. The BG series is just fucking combat, and shit combat at that.

Damn C&C fag. It's like C&C is the only thing that makes a good RPG. In this regard, many of the golden classics from the 80's are shit RPGs.

Oh and FYI, Matt made videos about FAllout and PST before, and he was droolig over them how great RPG are they. He just likes the BG series. So do I for that matter, but I'm probably a fag for that.

 

[MMXI]

cookie cutter fantasy

Just like 90% of RPGs before it, with 9% being cookie cutter science fiction.

no stat checks

Other than all of those statistical checks during combat, which happens to make up 95% of the game's content. And those charisma checks upon receiving quest rewards. It may not have anywhere near as many non-combat statistical checks as Fallout does, but only a handful of RPGs before Fallout had more than it (Darklands, Realms of Arkania).

no C&C

Other than a few instances. But since when was narrative branching a big part of the genre back then? One year earlier, with Fallout?

extreme linearity poorly disguised by relative freedom of movement

Linearity as in the main quest? I agree. It's probably worse than most RPGs that came before it in that respect. I guess you also get locked out of Baldur's Gate city's side quests before you finish Cloakwood mines, too. This is something I greatly dislike. Do not incrementally unlock the game world in my RPGs!

infantile morality

Unlike how many RPGs that came before it? At least you could complete the game being evil unlike the much loved Ultima games. And this is coming from a massive Ultima fan myself.

and shit combat.

Yep. Baldur's Gate would have been far better with turn-based combat. I have no idea why BioWare made it real-time with pause (okay, I do, because the engine was made for an RTS originally). However, it still has most of the (relative) depth of AD&D which automatically places it far higher than most RPGs that came before (and pretty much all of the ones that came after).

Baldur's Gate II is the game you should be ripping the shit out of. While Baldur's Gate was likely in development before Fallout was released, BioWare had plenty of time to reflect on what Fallout brought to the genre before developing Baldur's Gate II. Instead of including lots of choices and consequences and non-combat statistical checks such as during dialogue, they created lots of emotionally retarded characters who actually talk to you after their recruitment, dating simulation elements (romances), even more linearity and a JRPG-like villain who you bump in to repeatedly without being able to kill. Baldur's Gate II is the Oblivion of its time. Baldur's Gate just happened to be an old-school AD&D game but with an unfortunate real-time with pause combat system, released during the same period as a game that revolutionised the entire genre (Fallout).

 

[Volourn]

FLIP FLOP COMING:

BG1 is overrated. Fun little game that is well past its prime. It's out of date, and is playbale but nowhere near one of BIO's best games.

I originally rated 90%, but now replaying it 10+ years later.. I'd rate it 75-80...


P.S. I haven't played BG2 again yet but I doubt it is worse than BG1. LMFAO

 

[relootz]

BG is one of the best RPG's, combat encounter wise.

The story is decent too.

Not many RPG's have REAL CnC anyway..

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

Really, for the most part, the flaws in Baldur's Gate 2 that remain present from Baldur's Gate 1 really boil down to the game engine/perspective/combat system than anything else, and I think that's to be expected given the game was made in (if memory serves) less than a year. It's actually surprising just how much of an improvement it is over the original considering... which also makes it sadder just how fucking awful Neverwinter Nights turned out, but that's another story.

NWN simply shows that Bioware simply couldn't handle making a modern cRPG.
NWN finally got on with times and had a semi decent combat system, stat-based dialogues but they had to fuck up everything because it was too much for them. Even ID 1 and 2 managed to make BG1 and BG2 to look like a relict as they had modern dialogue despite being just slam-dunk hack & slash games.

Baldur's Gate II is the game you should be ripping the shit out of. While Baldur's Gate was likely in development before Fallout was released, BioWare had plenty of time to reflect on what Fallout brought to the genre before developing Baldur's Gate II. Instead of including lots of choices and consequences and non-combat statistical checks such as during dialogue, they created lots of emotionally retarded characters who actually talk to you after their recruitment, dating simulation elements (romances), even more linearity and a JRPG-like villain who you bump in to repeatedly without being able to kill. Baldur's Gate II is the Oblivion of its time. Baldur's Gate just happened to be an old-school AD&D game but with an unfortunate real-time with pause combat system, released during the same period as a game that revolutionised the entire genre (Fallout).

It was released after Fallout 2 and its developers were in contact and were exchanging ideas with the Fallout team even during the development of Fallout 1.

Generally, just like BG1 was a massive decline after Fallout, BG2 was a massive decline after Torment.

All the character stuff, linearity and jRPG-style was a poor attempt of copying something from Torment.

 

[Volourn]

No. Don't be stupid.

 

[J_C]

FLIP FLOP COMING:

BG1 is overrated. Fun little game that is well past its prime. It's out of date, and is playbale but nowhere near one of BIO's best games.

I originally rated 90%, but now replaying it 10+ years later.. I'd rate it 75-80...


P.S. I haven't played BG2 again yet but I doubt it is worse than BG1. LMFAO

We know that DA2 is your real love now.

 

[Volourn]

No. Don't lie.

 

[Johannes]

As far as combat goes BGs still totally trash Fallout or PS:T. Even if that isn't saying much.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

As far as combat goes BGs still totally trash Fallout or PS:T. Even if that isn't saying much.

Yeah, because clicking and waiting for character to attack and watching it repeat the same attack over and over with shitty hitpoint attrition system, totally, like trashes ability to immediately attack, choose the body part to attack, getting critical hits with cool descriptions, ability to blind, break limbs, stun and knock out with these critical hits .

 

[MMXI]

It was released after Fallout 2 and its developers were in contact and were exchanging ideas with the Fallout team even during the development of Fallout 1.

Yep. You obviously know nothing about game development if you think that communicating with a development team is enough to gauge just how their game will play out. By the time the reactions and reviews for Fallout came in they were most likely well on their way to the end product, even though they were a year away from release.

Generally, just like BG1 was a massive decline after Fallout, BG2 was a massive decline after Torment.

Baldur's Gate was a massive decline after Fallout? In lots of things, yeah. But Fallout was also a massive decline after plenty that came before it. It lacked full party control, an actual use for turn-based combat and tactics.

All the character stuff, linearity and jRPG-style was a poor attempt of copying something from Torment.

And Torment was an even poorer RPG than any other Infinity Engine game. Point?

 

[Jasede]

BG is one of the best RPG's, combat encounter wise.

Really, this. We're not saying "combat" in this statement. But combat encounters as well as encounter placement. I'm sorry to say, I don't know many games that had better combat encounters than BG 1 and 2. But that's probably because I didn't play many of the Goldbox games, and never really finished IWD 1 or 2.

Clarification: I am not referring to endless kobolds. Of course that was in there. But the parties of adventurers you meet, the different wizards, liches, beholders, illithids in their variants, in the way they were planned and placed and in the way the encounters were paced.

 

[MMXI]

shitty hitpoint attrition system

Because Sarevok's 135 hit-points are far higher than your own. Have you even played the games?

ability to immediately attack, choose the body part to attack, getting critical hits with cool descriptions, ability to blind, break limbs, stun and knock out with these critical hits .

Awesome! It's like Baldur's Gate doesn't have countless status effects, resistances, critical hits, weapon proficiencies and damage types!

 

[commie]

Can somebody pklease tell me how the FUCK Baldurs Gate and Baldurs Gate 2 are great CRPGs?

I mean, for FUCKS SAKE, this is really pissing me off. It is as if Fallout, Fallout 2, Planescape Torment, Fallout: New Vegas etc don't exist. Those are RPGs, they have choices and consequences. The BG series is just fucking combat, and shit combat at that.

You never played TRUE RPG's then I see. They were ALL ABOUT COMBAT!

And what's all this shit about lack of C&C and linearity of BG from people here as if that's a fault??

This was the fucking default of almost every RPG before! Games were all about creating a party and fucking shit up in corridors until the end.

I love C&C as much as the next guy, but to slag off BG for lacking it is pretty retarded.

You're talking about magic and magical weapons. I'm talking about what options a fighter has, about the combat system.

Could you tell me of games before BG that gave a fighter all these options then? There weren't all that many, so singling out BG for not having these options is pretty weak.

 

[Johannes]

Not to mention there's a pretty huge world to just roam freely in, even if the main plot is mostly linear.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

My ignore list. Was updated.

shitty hitpoint attrition system

Because Sarevok's 135 hit-points are far higher than your own. Have you even played the games?

You can't knock him out with a critical hit to the head or blind him with a critical hit to the eyes, so you have to just get remove all his hitpoints to stop him. Hell, he's even resistant to the magic.

ability to immediately attack, choose the body part to attack, getting critical hits with cool descriptions, ability to blind, break limbs, stun and knock out with these critical hits .

Awesome! It's like Baldur's Gate doesn't have countless status effects, resistances, critical hits, weapon proficiencies and damage types!

You're talking about magic and magical weapons. I'm talking about what options a fighter has, about the combat system.

Can somebody pklease tell me how the FUCK Baldurs Gate and Baldurs Gate 2 are great CRPGs?

I mean, for FUCKS SAKE, this is really pissing me off. It is as if Fallout, Fallout 2, Planescape Torment, Fallout: New Vegas etc don't exist. Those are RPGs, they have choices and consequences. The BG series is just fucking combat, and shit combat at that.

You never played TRUE RPG's then I see. They were ALL ABOUT COMBAT!

And what's all this shit about lack of C&C and linearity of BG from people here as if that's a fault??

This was the fucking default of almost every RPG before! Games were all about creating a party and fucking shit up in corridors until the end.

I love C&C as much as the next guy, but to slag off BG for lacking it is pretty retarded.

Baldur's Gate isn't a dungeon crawler and isn't all about combat. Stuff outside combat is important, but outdated. Also, it doesn't matter. It was released after both Fallout 1 and Fallout 2. So, one wouldn't play it after playing games with old outdated designs but after playing two modern cRPGs which were non-linear, had stat-checks in dialogues, ability to finish quests in many ways, etc.

As far as combat goes BGs still totally trash Fallout or PS:T. Even if that isn't saying much.

Yeah, because clicking and waiting for character to attack and watching it repeat the same attack over and over with shitty hitpoint attrition system, totally, like trashes ability to immediately attack, choose the body part to attack, getting critical hits with cool descriptions, ability to blind, break limbs, stun and knock out with these critical hits .

By your criticism, Fallout 3 must have some of the greatest combat ever in a RPG: you can immediately attack, choose body parts, get critical hits(minus cool descriptions but awesum visual feedback), ability to blind, break limbs, stun and knock out with these critical hits.

I have never played Fallout 3, so I can't say anything about its combat system.

 

[Jasede]

Baldur's Gate isn't a dungeon crawler.

If it wasn't a dungeon crawler, what the hell was it?

By the way, I think we all should get tags based on our RPG preferences... like story-fag, oldschool-fag, combat-fag, tactics-fag, hybrid-fag and omni-fag... so people with conflicting preferences don't waste time talking to each other and both missing the point at the same time because their perspectives are just too damn different.

 

[Orgasm]

BLADERS GAYT 4 LIFE YO

 

[commie]

Baldur's Gate isn't a dungeon crawler.

No, it's not explicitly a dungeon crawler, but more of a H&S which is more or less the same thing though with a more immediate and 'visceral(tm) take on combat. Regardless, that isn't the point. The point is that people rage about the lack of C&C when few RPG's had it before, being limited to the same 'help character x and get item y or instead help some other guy and get a different item'.

I have never played Fallout 3, so I can't say anything about its combat system.

Well then you're missing out on a lot. EDIT: Only after I wrote that did I see your explanation that you were talking about the kinds of specific class combat options that allow you to attack, parry, focus etc. and not what I assumed. In light of this I retracted my statement.

 

[Excidium]

You're wasting your time, Awor. BG was the first RPG for a lot of people here, it's pointless to fight against nostalgia.

Let's just agree that Baldur's Gate is a good RPG, but not "the best of the best" like some person on the internet claimed.

 

[commie]

I never finished either game, just never had enough of a pull to not be distracted by other things, but I still see it as a kind of anachronistic throwback, what with the AD&D rules that reminded me of my Gold box days, something familiar and comforting even if the execution with the mass clickety combat was too much for me in the end. Though had it replicated the Gold Box combat I would unreservedly rank the games among the best RPG's, warts and all.

 

[Johannes]

Baldur's Gate isn't a dungeon crawler.

If it wasn't a dungeon crawler, what the hell was it?

Wilderness crawler?

 

[Johannes]

You're wasting your time, Awor. BG was the first RPG for a lot of people here, it's pointless to fight against nostalgia.

Let's just agree that Baldur's Gate is a good RPG, but not "the best of the best" like some person on the internet claimed.

There's very little nostalgia-driven arguments here that I'd see, mostly the arguments against it are really inane (it isn't like Fallout therefore it's shit). Nobody here even claimed it's best of the best, even if Matt Chat thought o.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

Baldur's Gate isn't a dungeon crawler.

If it wasn't a dungeon crawler, what the hell was it?

A game where you visit towns, villages and a city, collect allies, talk to people and do quests and from time to time you go through a dungeon in order to find out who wants to kill you.

Baldur's Gate isn't a dungeon crawler.

No, it's not explicitly a dungeon crawler, but more of a H&S which is more or less the same thing.

The same can be said about Fallout. You even go through dungeons in Fallout. And the non-dungeon part is as prominent in BG as in Fallout. The problem is that is simply outdated in comparison to Fallout.
And at the same somehow ID1 and 2 had modern Fallout-style dialogues despite being slam-dunk simplistic dungeon crawlers.

The point is that people rage about the lack of C&C when few RPG's had it before, being limited to the same 'help character x and get item y or instead help some other guy and get a different item'.

Baldur's Gate has this kind of C&C. The main C&C that it lacks is the stuff like inability to create a diplomatic character which will play distinctly different from a combat character, obtaining some item/info or not having a high impact on story later, etc.

As for linearity. Weren't Ultima games before Ultima VIII non-linear?

I never finished either game, just never had enough of a pull to not be distracted by other things, but I still see it as a kind of anachronistic throwback, what with the AD&D rules that reminded me of my Gold box days, something familiar and comforting even if the execution with the mass clickety combat was too much for me in the end.

It was a Forgotten Realms game so it had AD&D rules. Nothing anachronistic about it. AD&D was replaced with D&D 3rd ed after BG1, so it was still a current edition when BG1 was released.

 

[MMXI]

You can't knock him out with a critical hit to the head or blind him with a critical hit to the eyes, so you have to just get remove all his hitpoints to stop him. Hell, he's even resistant to the magic.

He may be resistant to magic but magic is not useless against him. Think about buffs.

You're talking about magic and magical weapons. I'm talking about what options a fighter has, about the combat system.

That's retarded. Fallout doesn't have a class system and you only control a single character. You are effectively comparing all combat possibilities in Fallout with the options of a lone single class fighter in Baldur's Gate. Why not compare Fallout's combat to soloing a kensai/mage or ranger/cleric?

But fine. If you want to compare physical attack possibilities then Fallout wins. Congratulations. Now let's compare magic. Oh, wait, Fallout doesn't have any. It's simply retarded making the comparisons you are making. Don't you see it? You have to compare combat system with combat system, not combat system with a fragment of a combat system. Ignoring magic and ignoring the 5 other party members under your direct control just isn't right.

You're wasting your time, Awor. BG was the first RPG for a lot of people here, it's pointless to fight against nostalgia.

Speak for yourself. The Infinity Engine and maybe up to Temple of Elemental Evil (patched) is just about as far as I go with RPGs. I stick to the 80s and early 90s for the most part. I'm sure Awor thinks that Fallout kick started a golden age of RPGs and "outdated" (as he keeps putting it) everything that came before, but in reality it didn't happen.