Supposing I'd want to replay Baldur's Gate
- Thread starter Wooz
- Start date
UniversalWolf
eaten by a grue.
I like Baldur's Gate and Baldur's Gate II, but not without reservations.
For one thing, I utterly despise the Forgotten Realms with every fibre of my being, so I can't ever completely ignore the sadness of seeing the effort put into BG wasted on FR. Put that game in Greyhawk and it instantly becomes 50% better.
The replayability of BG is also overrated. There's basically a good path and an evil path, and not much in between. Neither path really precludes you from doing all the side quests. I have replayed it once or twice, but there's no way I can enjoy it unless I allow three or more years to pass between replays, which means I'll probably never do it again.
It's also difficult to ignore the fact that BG led to NWN, which is a really horrible stinker in which it was decided to take everything good about BG and make it worse. And I say this as some one who has played NWN more than I like to admit, searching for user-made modules of quality.
If anyone is interested, the only ones I found that were capable of overcoming the ickiness of NWN were made by Stephan Gagne; his potfolio is good enough that I'd recommend it to anyone. It's the only reason the money I spent on NWN wasn't completely wasted.
FO > FO2 > BG > NWN = a worsening trend.
P.S. Delete Minsc from BG and it instantly becomes 30% better.
For one thing, I utterly despise the Forgotten Realms with every fibre of my being, so I can't ever completely ignore the sadness of seeing the effort put into BG wasted on FR. Put that game in Greyhawk and it instantly becomes 50% better.
The replayability of BG is also overrated. There's basically a good path and an evil path, and not much in between. Neither path really precludes you from doing all the side quests. I have replayed it once or twice, but there's no way I can enjoy it unless I allow three or more years to pass between replays, which means I'll probably never do it again.
It's also difficult to ignore the fact that BG led to NWN, which is a really horrible stinker in which it was decided to take everything good about BG and make it worse. And I say this as some one who has played NWN more than I like to admit, searching for user-made modules of quality.
If anyone is interested, the only ones I found that were capable of overcoming the ickiness of NWN were made by Stephan Gagne; his potfolio is good enough that I'd recommend it to anyone. It's the only reason the money I spent on NWN wasn't completely wasted.
FO > FO2 > BG > NWN = a worsening trend.
P.S. Delete Minsc from BG and it instantly becomes 30% better.
ErrantSaint
First time out of the vault
Brother None said:
I agree, but I think it's a "better than the sum of it's parts" sort of thing. For those of us that like it anyways...
UniversalWolf said:
Too true, but I still think BG1 and 2 are redeemable to this day.
I feel some of the BG hate is because of it's successors, and I don't like that at all. Using a music analogy, because I like to: It's like saying Nirvana sucks because you don't like Nickelback, or The Ramones suck because you don't like Good Charlotte, Black Sabbath sucks because of Winger, or The Beatles suck because your parents are assholes.
Feel free not to like something, but don't do it because you don't like it's unintended bastardized legacy.
ErrantSaint said:
Unintended?
The progression spiralling downwards of cRPGs has always been led by BioWare. Baldur's Gate was the first spiral, and every spiral since then is just a logical result
What makes you think it's unintended?
UniversalWolf
eaten by a grue.
Yes, I concur. Redeemable is an apt description. I would position myself even a bit further toward the positive, in fact - closer to Per's perspective. On the other hand, it's impossible for me to ignore that BG is the progenitor of NWN. Also the last time I played BG (and I went all the way through from start to finish), I played FO again right after, and I kept thinking, "Wow, this is so much better than Baldur's Gate." The overwhelming nature of that sensation surprised me.
Brother None said:
The downward spiral I think has more to do with the Japanese marketing of RPGs in America, and the fact that it was so popular, so it then leaked onto the PC and was put into the melting pot of ideas to make good computer games for many producers due to its typically high rate of sales on the console.
But Bioware did indeed help, although I think the Japanese did indeed start that downward spiral.
aronsearle
Still Mildly Glowing
I dont buy any of that, i dont see how its not the buying public that are the fault of the games market.
aronsearle
Still Mildly Glowing
xdarkyrex said:
I couldnt even tell you what capatalist econimics is, so meh.
I just dont get the hate for bioware (or anyone) and how they can be to blame for anything than their own games sucking.
requiem_for_a_starfury
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
It would be stupid to hate the progeny just because of the parentage but it's a perfectly valid reason to hate something because of it's progeny.
That said the BG series has enough reasons to dislike it on it's own demerits without even thinking of the games it's spawned.
The out door areas were too slow moving. The indoor areas so cramped with too small corridors, too narrow for an armoured lout to pass by a skiny wizard and a small thief yet at the same time large enough for a half a dozen people to fire off volley after volley of missile fire without shooting each other.
Too many npcs, it's nice to have a varied selection for each alignment, but really should a lawful good paladin be able to, want to recruit an evil mage?
Ah sod it I'll be here all day list the faults, let's just say the only thing they did right was the npc interaction and the way they'd get pissed off and leave if you did something wrong or didn't get around to their quest in good time. Though that was spoiled by having npcs stick around despite you solving their problems.
Having been playing BG II and NWN II recently they seem not to really have grasped the spirit of role playing games. What I mean is, when was the last time you'd played a session of (insert pnp) where one person (other than the GM) played a character that had to survive no matter what and the other players were allowed/expected to swap their characters with which ever npc came along?
Much better if you'd not been the central character, just someone that stumbled upon them and decided for whatever reason to help them. That also you were allowed to create your party (not just in MP) and the other npcs would join you temporarily. Like some of the characters in NWN 2, along for the particular quest but not under you direct control (it's a pity that all the npcs weren't handled that way).
That said the BG series has enough reasons to dislike it on it's own demerits without even thinking of the games it's spawned.
The out door areas were too slow moving. The indoor areas so cramped with too small corridors, too narrow for an armoured lout to pass by a skiny wizard and a small thief yet at the same time large enough for a half a dozen people to fire off volley after volley of missile fire without shooting each other.
Too many npcs, it's nice to have a varied selection for each alignment, but really should a lawful good paladin be able to, want to recruit an evil mage?
Ah sod it I'll be here all day list the faults, let's just say the only thing they did right was the npc interaction and the way they'd get pissed off and leave if you did something wrong or didn't get around to their quest in good time. Though that was spoiled by having npcs stick around despite you solving their problems.
Having been playing BG II and NWN II recently they seem not to really have grasped the spirit of role playing games. What I mean is, when was the last time you'd played a session of (insert pnp) where one person (other than the GM) played a character that had to survive no matter what and the other players were allowed/expected to swap their characters with which ever npc came along?
Much better if you'd not been the central character, just someone that stumbled upon them and decided for whatever reason to help them. That also you were allowed to create your party (not just in MP) and the other npcs would join you temporarily. Like some of the characters in NWN 2, along for the particular quest but not under you direct control (it's a pity that all the npcs weren't handled that way).
NWN 2 and BG 2 are decent dungeon crawlers at best. They're good to play when you get bored with all the other games, because they offer lots of mindless fighting, so at a point you loose the touch with the story and doing the same quests doesn't drive you mad.
Besides, their stories suck. When I replayed NWN 2 for the first time and actually *listened* npc's talking about the uber-threat "KING OF SHADOWS", it just made me laugh.
At least BG spawned KotOR 2, which is one of my favorite games (yes, it does have many flaws, but it's a good game after all)
Besides, their stories suck. When I replayed NWN 2 for the first time and actually *listened* npc's talking about the uber-threat "KING OF SHADOWS", it just made me laugh.
At least BG spawned KotOR 2, which is one of my favorite games (yes, it does have many flaws, but it's a good game after all)