Baldur's Gate The Baldur's Gate Series Thread

[Infinitron]

What's the concensus on what made them decline like this?

They stopped making PC D&D RPGs and started making console RPGs with an increasing focus on cinematics. There's not much else to it.

It was the same people - they evolved in that direction because they wanted to. Not everybody who makes something good realizes why it was good.

 

[Cursed Platypus]

What's the concensus on what made them decline like this?

They stopped making PC D&D RPGs and started making console RPGs with an increasing focus on cinematics. There's not much else to it.

It was the same people - they evolved in that direction because they wanted to. Not everybody who makes something good realizes why it was good.

It's just hard to believe they they were completely clueless as to what made BG2 a good game and made almost the opposite in their other games.

Why did Obsidian managed to somehow retain their philosphies and Incline awareness (As shown by their recent project) while themselves being console devellopers and corporate dogs (Pre EA Bioware was even independant)

Also when did they (bio) start pushing agendas into their games?

 

[tuluse]

Look at the sales numbers for Bg2 mass effect 3, and I think you'll find your answer.

 

[Melcar]

I was disappointed that my old chums Monty and Xzar couldn't join me in BG2. They were more entertaining than uncle Jaheira and aunt Khalid.

I always killed them (J & K). In BG2 I was actually pleased that you could romance your hot older aunt Jaheira .

 

[Infinitron]

It's just hard to believe they they were completely clueless as to what made BG2 a good game and made almost the opposite in their other games.

Well, define "clueless". They saw that people were obsessing about the romances and the characters in BG2, and decided they wanted to make games that focused more and more on those things and less on the other things. So it's not like they did a complete 180. The seeds of Bioware's fall can be seen in BG2, though it was not inevitable.

Why did Obsidian managed to somehow retain their philosphies and Incline awareness (As shown by their recent project) while themselves being console devellopers and corporate dogs (Pre EA Bioware was even independant)

It's a good question, and I guess it comes down to the personalities of the people of the top. Feargus Urquhart, Chris Avellone, etc, were just bigger geeks than the Biodocs.

 

[Cursed Platypus]

Look at the sales numbers for Bg2 mass effect 3, and I think you'll find your answer.

That's just marketing budget. You can sell a good game or a shit game regardless. Why was Obsidian smuggling elements of incline past the publsihers' nose into it's popamole game while an independant Bioware wasn't making any effort?
When did Bioware's team stopped being passionate? Surely there must have been massive amount of layoff between 2002 and 2006.

 

[Cursed Platypus]

It's just hard to believe they they were completely clueless as to what made BG2 a good game and made almost the opposite in their other games.

Well, define "clueless". They saw that people were obsessing about the romances and the characters in BG2, and decided they wanted to make games that focused more and more on those things and less on the other things. So it's not like they did a complete 180. The seeds of Bioware's fall can be seen in BG2, though it was not inevitable.

Why did Obsidian managed to somehow retain their philosphies and Incline awareness (As shown by their recent project) while themselves being console devellopers and corporate dogs (Pre EA Bioware was even independant)

It's a good question, and I guess it comes down to the personalities of the people of the top. Feargus Urquhart, Chris Avellone, etc, were just bigger geeks than the Biodocs.

I guess these must be the answers. Was fan feedback that inclined toward romance after BG2, in 2001 (and that indifferent to cool combat system, superb city and nice environments)?

 

[Monkeyfinger]

In 2001 BG2 gameplay took a lot of fire from both directions. There were masses of casuals who just got into RPGs or only played JRPGs beforehand, and they couldn't understand the rules like THAC0 and AC, or wrap their head around all the spells and skills. There was also the "hardcore" crowd who argued in depth about game mechanics - mostly old school P&P grognards who hated BG2. Too high level, too munchkin, too much phat lewt for their tastes.

The characters and writing were the aspects of BG2 that had near unanimous praise. Sure you got the occasional person complaining about how Minsc and Jan were low-IQ attempts at forced humor, or about what a blowhard Anomen was, but other than that, it was all rosy. Everyone was in love with Irenicus because David Warner voiced him. Long, systemised romances were a novel idea at the time and even the people who aren't into romancing video game characters had to praise it for originality (not to mention the hordes of lonely basement dwellers who fell in love with the romances themselves). PCs other than the controversial 3 were and still are well liked. NPCs had lots of text, with minimal but cleverly used voice acting to spice it up.

BG2 gameplay has a lot of appeal. It took fans of the game a few years to learn to articulate what they liked about it, so they could shout down all the critics.

 

[Cursed Platypus]

Looking at BG3, it did look even better than BG2. So it's not like this kind of shitty fan feedback got them in the wrong direction.

 

[Dreaad]

The answer is money. The company moved from making good games, to making money. Granted sometimes money and a good product align, but as EA will tell you, that does not have to be the case. Minimum effort for maximum money, that is all.

 

[octavius]

Anyone know if Baldur's Gate was inspired by Jagged Alliance?
Currently playing JA1 for the first time I see some similarities , like the general look and size of the maps, the voiced lines of your squad, possible in-fighting and the possibilty of scouting (using stealth if you want to) the area.

 

[Zeriel]

Baldur's Gate was based on a prototype of an RTS game, so that's probably what you're seeing. I don't know of any direct inspiration from JA, though of course it's possible.

 

[DraQ]

There was also the "hardcore" crowd who argued in depth about game mechanics - mostly old school P&P grognards who hated BG2. Too high level, too munchkin, too much phat lewt for their tastes.

Then again, it's not like BG1 was ever good in terms of gameplay.
Yeah, item rarity was ok and being low level was fine, but combat was haphazard, AI was dumb and even straightforward battle openers like scout ahead, set yourself up and open up with AoE spell barrage apparently counted as cheese.
Anyone who liked BG1, didn't really have any legs to stand on when criticizing BG2, anyone who hated BG1 but loved P&P knew what to expect.

Sure you got the occasional person complaining about how Minsc and Jan were low-IQ attempts at forced humor

It's not like Minsc in BG1 was any better.

Baldur's Gate was based on a prototype of an RTS game

Which was one of the worst ideas ever.

 

[aris]

So what's the best possible party combo in BG2 for maximum lulz?
Must include Jan.

Jan
Valygar
Mazzy
Korgan
Viconia

- The Mazzy - Valygar and Mazzy - Korgan interactions are pretty funny and interesting.
- Jan will pick on Valygar, Viconia will pick on Jan.
- Viconia and Valygar don't like each other though, a fight will erupt (I managed to keep both by casting maze, IIRC.)
- A well balanced party, you can be pretty much whatever class you want, but being a mage would be the sensible choice.

1. I would replace Korgan with edwin, the funniest dialogue I ever saw in that game was between Jan and Edwin, although it's a little bit one-sided towards Jan.

 

[aris]

I'm actually replaying it right now, almost done with SoA.

Dunno if I'll replay ToB, probably, though i kinda dislike it.

1. How did you get the italian translation?

 

[Delterius]

It's a pity there aren't enough evil companions for a full party if you decide to be really evil. Korgan, Viconia and Edwin are all pretty good, and Yoshimo kind of counts since he won't leave you because of low reputation, but a fifth companion (a barbarian, for instance) would have been nice.

I think Imoen won't leave you (after she's back, obviously) even if your Reputation gets very low, but I'm not completely sure.

To me, 5 companions are the golden number - when I first played BG2 I walked around with a party of 5, allowing a new 'guest' to enter the fray for their specific quests. Like Korgan's grave robbing and etcetera. Eventually, I settled for a permanent sixth member (I think it was Haer'dalis) but until then, each quest had a specific flavor to it.

 

[Azrael the cat]

It's a pity there aren't enough evil companions for a full party if you decide to be really evil. Korgan, Viconia and Edwin are all pretty good, and Yoshimo kind of counts since he won't leave you because of low reputation, but a fifth companion (a barbarian, for instance) would have been nice.

I think Imoen won't leave you (after she's back, obviously) even if your Reputation gets very low, but I'm not sure.

To me, 5 companions are the golden number - when I first played BG2 I walked around with a party of 5, allowing a new 'guest' to enter the fray for their specific quests. Like Korgan's grave robbing and etcetera. Eventually, I settled for a permanent sixth member (I think it was Haer'dalis) but until then, each quest had a specific flavor to it.

I'm pretty certain Imoen won't leave regardless of rep. She even gives you a major fucking guilt trip when you kick her out (especially if you boot her somewhere where she can't be recovered from, like the maze beneath the asylum).

 

[Monkeyfinger]

It's a pity there aren't enough evil companions for a full party if you decide to be really evil. Korgan, Viconia and Edwin are all pretty good, and Yoshimo kind of counts since he won't leave you because of low reputation, but a fifth companion (a barbarian, for instance) would have been nice.

I think Imoen won't leave you (after she's back, obviously) even if your Reputation gets very low, but I'm not sure.

To me, 5 companions are the golden number - when I first played BG2 I walked around with a party of 5, allowing a new 'guest' to enter the fray for their specific quests. Like Korgan's grave robbing and etcetera. Eventually, I settled for a permanent sixth member (I think it was Haer'dalis) but until then, each quest had a specific flavor to it.

I'm pretty certain Imoen won't leave regardless of rep. She even gives you a major fucking guilt trip when you kick her out (especially if you boot her somewhere where she can't be recovered from, like the maze beneath the asylum).

You could send her from the maze to the copper coronet IIRC

 

[Malpercio]

I'm actually replaying it right now, almost done with SoA.

Dunno if I'll replay ToB, probably, though i kinda dislike it.

1. How did you get the italian translation?

By buying the Italian version? Game was translated in 5 yurop languages.

 

[Coriolanus]

So what's the best possible party combo in BG2 for maximum lulz?
Must include Jan.

Jan
Valygar
Mazzy
Korgan
Viconia

- The Mazzy - Valygar and Mazzy - Korgan interactions are pretty funny and interesting.
- Jan will pick on Valygar, Viconia will pick on Jan.
- Viconia and Valygar don't like each other though, a fight will erupt (I managed to keep both by casting maze, IIRC.)
- A well balanced party, you can be pretty much whatever class you want, but being a mage would be the sensible choice.

1. I would replace Korgan with edwin, the funniest dialogue I ever saw in that game was between Jan and Edwin, although it's a little bit one-sided towards Jan.

Korgan going ham on Aerie is p fun too.

Keldorn tries to kill Viconia. He is generally fun to bring along in an "evil" party.

I though it was really brilliant about BG2, how the most fun interaction happen when you mix alignments.

 

[Outlander]

Sarevok: Ranger, turn your rodent's gaze another direction! I will not be scrutinised as though by some ridiculous divining rod!

Minsc: Boo has an uncanny judge of character, but you... you give him trouble.

Sarevok: I'll give him more than that if this continues! I nearly conquered a nation! I will not be judged by a creature that stores nuts in its cheeks!

Jan: Hey! I resemble that remark.

Sarevok: Trust me, gnome, you do not want to partake in my wrath this day.

Minsc: Food storage aside, Boo controls himself far better than you do. Do you see him ranting about mere glances? Let's look.

Sarevok: What?

Minsc: See? No rant. In fact, now he is snuffling about for a comfy place to sleep. Admirable restraint.

Sarevok: I'm still in Hell, aren't I? This is insanity.

Minsc: Ah, finally a calming look comes across your face. Boo's handiwork, no doubt? Doesn't that feel better?

Sarevok: Let's... let's go kill something. Soon.

 

[taxalot]

It is done. I have finally completed my first run ever of BG1 => BG2 => ToB.

I am not entirely too proud of myself for reasons I'll explain later.

I really do not know what to think about these games. They felt both great and terrible.

What I liked.
The game is open ended. Very open ended. Exploration is very fun, you can tell there are a lot of ways to play and a huge replay value. BG2 and TOB felt a lot more on rails, but that was a nice change of pace.
Combat was also fun, in most instances. By playing it , you can easily understand why the game became such a success. It is an entirely deserved one.

What I did not like.
There were a couple of bugs. I played vanilla and I actually had to cheat my way out of way game breaking bugs quite a few times.

But also, combat. I do not know if I just suck or if the game is exceptionally hard, especially ToB, but my god. I did Baldur's Gate 1 without cheating. I did BG2 MOSTLY without cheating, the only exceptions being Irenicus and the Bhaal apparition (there was simply NO WAY my thief character could defeat it and so I was stuck).

I did however the last half of Throne of Bhaal entirely by cheating. Both because of difficulty and tediousness. A lot of fights I know I could have gotten through easily, but really, the process of my party summoning, casting "heal" then sleeping is absolutely tedious and awful. This might be how the AD&D ruleset works, but it felt entirely inappropriate for this issue in this game. Near the end of the game, I could not be arsed anymore, and as I started doing this my party became underpowered.

So yeah, I sucked near the end but I still wanted to see the end of the story, and I did, and it was good.

For some reason, as tedious as the combat was and although it took me four mounths, it's a game I think I should replay sometime, within the next two years probably. I always have this "shame" of not completing games properly although I must admit that by that point the game had stopped being fun altogether and felt more like work. There was enough story for a real BG3 in ToB if they had actually bothered to flesh it out more, have more areas etc. That's a shame. Maybe it was their original plan and they decided to screw it and move to Neverwinter Nights. Dunno.

Anyway, yes, I will probably replay it sometime with more appropriate characters. I must admit I did not bother to check if my party was balanced or optimum and just went for guys and girls I liked. I could have probably done a lot better than that, but as you know, hindsight is 20/20.

 

[octavius]

Anyway, yes, I will probably replay it sometime with more appropriate characters. I must admit I did not bother to check if my party was balanced or optimum and just went for guys and girls I liked.

Which was...?

 

[taxalot]

I did most of BG2 with Nalia, Yoshimo, Minsc, Jaheira and Viconia. Then substituting Yoshimo with Aerie, then replacing Aerie with Imoen. I also had Keldorn at some point but I had to kill him when he turned against me.

For ToB, mostly Jaheira Viconia Imoen Minsc and that evil dwarf whose name evades me right now.

 

[Jasede]

Well, the problem wasn't your party. :<