Review RPG Codex Review: Baldur's Gate: Siege of Dragonspear

[Kaivokz]

I kind of liked Lionheart.

I would have liked a demo of Lionheart only containing New Barcelona. And then I would have been disappointed when I brought it home and undressed it.

 

[Lurker King]

Minsc has a rare prompt line where he satirizes an Internet mudslinging contest known as Gamergate.

What? This is madness, complete madness.

 

[Delterius]

Have you come seeking the Light, my friend?

 

[ArchAngel]

Minsc has a rare prompt line where he satirizes an Internet mudslinging contest known as Gamergate.

What? This is madness, complete madness.

That has been removed in last patch anyways. Trent said he didn't know about it and would not let it go into the game if he did.

 

[Dreaad]

And that's all there is to say about that.

 

[Jinn]

Jesus, that new UI font is hideous.

Also, thank you for a nice review.

 

[PorkyThePaladin]

Yeah let's make the same fucking shit ever, forever. This constant reuse is part of why games today are banal, unimaginative shit.

There have been 6 games in this engine already. Enough is enough. Everything it can offer was already experienced well over a decade ago.

Because playing the same fucking game over and over again sucks. Not to mention that it wasn't a good game to begin with.

I think you guys might have missed this part in the original post: "to produce similar type isometric games". I am not arguing for everyone to keep using IE, if people do actually want to make something new and innovative, great! But with something like PoE, it was Obsidian's stated goal from the very beginning to produce a game very similar to the IE games. So it's not like they set out to do something innovative here. On top of that, Obsidian has generally specialized in using other companies' engines to make their games, and their expertise lies largely in producing quality content (dialogue, storylines, characters, quests, places), not making/adopting engines or innovative gameplay, so using the actual IE engine in this case seems like a no-brainer, at least from the game development side.

And the attitude of all IE games being the same is strange to me. All five real IE games are on the top 70 list, and they are quite different from each other. So it's really not difficult for me to imagine another IE game with Obsidian's writing behind it that would be quite different from the others.

 

[Kz3r0]

May Farrow

 

[Trashos]

What is this, where am I?

 

[Mexi]

A bit of a shit review, but it was a lot better than Vault Dweller's review of Wasteland: 2. Now, his review was a fucking abortion. Guy took writing lessons from Amber Scott.

 

[Mustawd]

Because playing the same fucking game over and over again sucks.

Yes, fine. But playing different stories in the same universe has plenty of demand IMO. One only has to look at what mods did to extend the life of Skyrim or look at how NWN1 and NWN2 modules are still being played and created today.

 

[Mustawd]

Minsc has a rare prompt line where he satirizes an Internet mudslinging contest known as Gamergate.

What? This is madness, complete madness.

Can we start a thread about this? I need to rage.

 

[Ellef]

I assume the review would have been branded 'ridiculous' and a panel of twenty consultants recruited to manage PR if the review didn't sneer at the detractors for the last third.

 

[InD_ImaginE]

Fair review and I completely agree with the last third part of the review.

 

[Whisky]

So, what's the big plot twist at the end of the game that Delterius left out?

 

[Telengard]

Infinite copy pasta clones of the same game. Hmm, sounds familiar. Where have I heard this business model before?

Oh yeah. Call of Duty. Battlefield. HALO. Infinitely fighting the same enemies in the exact same way in the same levels with minor recolors, for infinity. The joy of the infinite sameness. Quite an idea. I hereby dub it Baldurs of Duty.

 

[Mustawd]

Infinite copy pasta clones of the same game. Hmm, sounds familiar. Where have I heard this business model before?

Oh yeah. Call of Duty. Battlefield. HALO. Infinitely fighting the same enemies in the exact same way in the same levels with minor recolors, for infinity. The joy of the infinite sameness. Quite an idea. I hereby dub it Baldurs of Duty.

Goldbox Games

Stop trying so hard to find made up reasons to hate IE games. It's embarrassing. Instead, just hate IE games purely for their shitty RTwP combat system like I do.

EDIT: Also, add the Exile/Avernum/Geneforge games to the list of things that re-use assets and engines.

 

[AwesomeButton]

The review is too forgiving. It doesn't change my opinion that playing a game with the "writing" and linearity of SoD is an insult to the player's intelligence.

Because playing the same fucking game over and over again sucks.

So what, new games are better than old games, because they are newer? Blanket statements like that say nothing meaningful. I'd happily play more AoD even in the same engine as long as I have the same combat and the same reactivity. I don't think it would suck.

Playing more D&D adventures in the same Infinity engine would be fine too, as long as they are well designed. The medium is good enough, finding authors with something interesting to say is the real problem (as I'm sure you know).

 

[PhantasmaNL]

The review probably took some effort for which Delterius is thanked, but it isnt the hard hitting brutal Codex roast this game deserves. It is a mellow flower power mainstream piece of writing, maybe an attempt to get into the game journo bizz for reals?

Where is the bleeding edginess, the deserved bloody butchering of the writing, the holy codex crusade against the sjw retards who deemed the originals (and their customers) sexist? Beamdog may aswell copy paste some text and use it in their marketing, or put blurbs of it on their Collectors Edition box.

 

[commie]

I'll debate you with my fists.

I'll debate you with your oneliners.

I am rubber, you are glue!

How appropriate! You fight like a cow!

Who would waste the necessary time to review a beamdog game? Hiver?

fixed.

 

[ArchAngel]

The review probably took some effort for which Delterius is thanked, but it isnt the hard hitting brutal Codex roast this game deserves. It is a mellow flower power mainstream piece of writing, maybe an attempt to get into the game journo bizz for reals?

Where is the bleeding edginess, the deserved bloody butchering of the writing, the holy codex crusade against the sjw retards who deemed the originals (and their customers) sexist? Beamdog may aswell copy paste some text and use it in their marketing, or put blurbs of it on their Collectors Edition box.

If you don't like it, write your own review.

 

[Prime Junta]

Good review. Will definitely buy and play this... when it hits the bargain bin.

 

[Telengard]

Infinite copy pasta clones of the same game. Hmm, sounds familiar. Where have I heard this business model before?

Oh yeah. Call of Duty. Battlefield. HALO. Infinitely fighting the same enemies in the exact same way in the same levels with minor recolors, for infinity. The joy of the infinite sameness. Quite an idea. I hereby dub it Baldurs of Duty.

Goldbox Games

Stop trying so hard to find made up reasons to hate IE games. It's embarrassing. Instead, just hate IE games purely for their shitty RTwP combat system like I do.

EDIT: Also, add the Exile/Avernum/Geneforge games to the list of things that re-use assets and engines.

If one looks at the sales trajectory of the Gold Box games, they go down and down and down. Because regular people (not the fanatics) get bored with the same-old same-old. Trilogies are the normal limit for a reason. Those franchises who stick with something past three and into boredom territory generally last about six before even the die-hards start to abandon ship.

There are any number of posts on this very forum complaining about endless Call of Duty reskins. Is that really where you want RPGs to go? No changes, no new ideas, just endless iterations of the same thing?

Never, then, complain about Call of Duty fans who want the exact same thing.

 

[ST'Ranger]

Infinite copy pasta clones of the same game. Hmm, sounds familiar. Where have I heard this business model before?

Oh yeah. Call of Duty. Battlefield. HALO. Infinitely fighting the same enemies in the exact same way in the same levels with minor recolors, for infinity. The joy of the infinite sameness. Quite an idea. I hereby dub it Baldurs of Duty.

Goldbox Games

Stop trying so hard to find made up reasons to hate IE games. It's embarrassing. Instead, just hate IE games purely for their shitty RTwP combat system like I do.

EDIT: Also, add the Exile/Avernum/Geneforge games to the list of things that re-use assets and engines.

If one looks at the sales trajectory of the Gold Box games, they go down and down and down. Because people get bored with the same-old same-old. Trilogies are the normal limit for a reason. Those franchises who stick with something past three and into boredom territory generally last about six before even the die-hards start to abandon ship.

There are any number of posts on this very forum complaining about endless Call of Duty reskins. Is that really where you want RPGs to go? No changes, no new ideas, just endless iterations of the same thing?

Never, then, complain about Call of Duty fans who want the exact same thing.

Wizardry VII and Wizardry 8 not only defy this trend but prove that even if your parent company is run by incompetents, solid developers can still breathe life into a good thing if they are skilled in evolving the gameplay in a measured way. Look at the differences between Wizardry IV and Wizardry VII - truly massive leaps in design/implementation. And yet that beloved core of Wizardry gameplay is 100% present in VII. The same argument goes for VII to 8 - and in fact the missteps present in 8 (mostly due to technical/financial issues) prove that a Wizardry 9 could be just as solid an experience.

What's missing (and the reason your generalization is ultimately correct) is an industry filled with individuals whose defining traits are their skills and their passions. This is why the resurgence of "indie" games happened. Yes, a near-infinite amount of schlock arose from the indie garbage factory, but you can see the real successes of the past decade have been the tiny developers who had the skill and the drive and poured it all into releasing a gem - a game that could stand the test of time when Call of Duty 23 is a foggy memory of the civilization of man.

And to steer us back towards the topic, this latter part is the reason that small "indie"-sized companies producing half-hearted, undercooked failures is so much more disappointing - especially when they are intentionally pressing peoples' nostalgia buttons for effect.

 

[Mustawd]

There are any number of posts on this very forum complaining about endless Call of Duty reskins. Is that really where you want RPGs to go? No changes, no new ideas, just endless iterations of the same thing?

Are you asking if I'd play great games, like Fallout, over and over even if there were no "innovations"? Yes. Yes I would. More please.

But really this is more of difference of opinion and tastes. Assets/engines don't make a game. It's everything coming together that does. And you can have vastly different stories and even different flavors to games when using the same engine and even assets.

How many PnP D&D games have been set in the FR within the same gaming group? Is change good? Sure. But there's nothing that says you can't make a completely different game with slightly different assets and using the same engine.

Never, then, complain about Call of Duty fans who want the exact same thing.

What's Call of Duty and why do I care? Is it turn-based? If not, then I hardly see why it's relevant to this discussion.