Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Replaying Baldur's Gate

Volourn

Pretty Princess
Pretty Princess Glory to Ukraine
Joined
Mar 10, 2003
Messages
24,986
People who hate BG are stupid. They also don't deserve to like FO. Period.

Pepple who whine about BG's AI, pathfinding, and inventory and then go on to praise FO's inventory are retarded since those are three things that BG easily does better than FO.

Same with joinable npcs. I'll take the worst Bg npc over the overrated Dogmeat any day of the weak. Even overrated Minsc is better than overrated Dogmeat.

That is all.
 

bryce777

Erudite
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
4,225
Location
In my country the system operates YOU
Jinxed said:
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.

Greta except THERE ARE NO CONTAINERS in baldur's gate. That is BG II. It is better, but still a pain in the ass.

I am not an idiot who picks up every single item, but when you are first level and have like 10 gold pieces IT WOULD BE NICE TO BE ABLE TO PICK UP THOSE GEMS WITHOUT SPENDING COUNTLESS TIME REARRANGING YOUR STUPID INVENTORY.
 

bryce777

Erudite
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
4,225
Location
In my country the system operates YOU
Volourn said:
People who hate BG are stupid. They also don't deserve to like FO. Period.

Pepple who whine about BG's AI, pathfinding, and inventory and then go on to praise FO's inventory are retarded since those are three things that BG easily does better than FO.

Same with joinable npcs. I'll take the worst Bg npc over the overrated Dogmeat any day of the weak. Even overrated Minsc is better than overrated Dogmeat.

That is all.

no
 

Jinxed

Liturgist
Joined
Aug 5, 2002
Messages
901
Location
Special Encounter
bryce777 said:
Greta except THERE ARE NO CONTAINERS in baldur's gate. That is BG II. It is better, but still a pain in the ass.

I dunno, it's been years since I played it and you might be right.
I am not an idiot who picks up every single item, but when you are first level and have like 10 gold pieces IT WOULD BE NICE TO BE ABLE TO PICK UP THOSE GEMS WITHOUT SPENDING COUNTLESS TIME REARRANGING YOUR STUPID INVENTORY.

About as much time as you can spend scrolling down your fo inventory during combat to get to the stims. Of course, after a while I started to dump items and pick them up again so that they would come up on the top of the list... But we're not talking about players having to rely on cheap tricks to go around a petty design flaw.
Same goes for BG. I always split item types between characters depending on their str. The trick was to remember who should pick up what.
If they wanted to go along with a slot limit inventory system, it would be better to have seperate inventories for all the item types.
A page down button in FO would really help out as well. However having to click the scroll button every time would be a bother anyway. A huge inventory screen is the only good way to go.

BTW, when does realism brake the gameplay concerning inventory? Being able to carry 5 sets of armor just because you have enough str is not realistic, but a small inventory space + weight ala Arcanum is a pain in the ass.

However, I've never been in a PnP game where the dm would allow me to carry 5 sets of armor, and I never had a problem with that. How come it's such a bother in CRPGs?
 

Section8

Cipher
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
4,321
Location
Wardenclyffe
BTW, when does realism brake the gameplay concerning inventory? Being able to carry 5 sets of armor just because you have enough str is not realistic, but a small inventory space + weight ala Arcanum is a pain in the ass.

All a system like Baldur's Gate's inventory needs is for most of the items to be stackable. I should be able to carry about a dozen quarterstaves in one bundled fagot that takes up a single slot.

However, I've never been in a PnP game where the dm would allow me to carry 5 sets of armor, and I never had a problem with that. How come it's such a bother in CRPGs?

Funny that. I can't recall ever caring much about loot in PnP games. I certainly didn't go around picking up every single mundane weapon dropped. In fact, I don't really recall ever being concerned with finances at all in any of the P&P games I've played. Bit of an indictment on the nature of the CRPG, really.

I think the finiteness and absolutism of CRPGs really promotes completism. In P&P, the DM is likely to say something like. "There's a whole stack of barely serviceable swords in a barrel here. There's too many to carry," and then the player might search, appraise, detect magic, etc. In a CRPG, there's n swords, all worth x gold pieces, and weighing w pounds. Each one takes up 1x3 squares of inventory space, etc.

It's an exercise in measurement and statistical evaluation, instead of "My character wouldn't want to lug all that shit around just for a few coppers." Also, if a P&P party finds that it needs money for something in particular, the DM can tailor a suitable activity/situation/quest to provide it in a reasonable manner.

CRPG shopping usually works the other way. "I've been selling a whole bunch of random junk, because I know there will be something ph4t to spend my savings on," and the sources of income are usually finite. Unless you can fucking smash "Card Pairs" in Fable. ;)
 

Relien

Scholar
Joined
Nov 24, 2005
Messages
380
Location
Tremere chantry
Volourn said:
People who hate BG are stupid. They also don't deserve to like FO. Period.

Hardly. When I finished Fallout 2 and started playing BG, I was impressed and I thought BG will be a great game. This was quickly gone and I had to force myself to playing it several times. Finally I gave up. Not because of AI, pathfinding or inventory, but because of:

The Infinity Engine - I loved the turn-based system from FO, but sorry, I hate this realtime shit with pauses. The only game where I could stand it was PS:T.

The lack of good dialogue and also one small detail that was present in FO - NPCs were able to say small irrelevant and often amusing things by displaying them over their heads, not forcing you to 'listen'. In BG they initiate a dialog only to say some stupid crap. It would be better if they kept these things to themselves.

Many incredibly stupid wilderness 'areas' where all you had to do was uncover the FOW over the rectangular bitmap.

And this bitmap approach in general. It could be good, but not with so few interactive items. I prefer tiles (or generally objects), they give some interaction to it and it's ok everytime it appears in the game world. In the bitmap approach anytime something is highlighted it cries 'I AM A SPECIAL AREA ON THE BITMAP! CLICK ME!'

And I'm sure there are other things.
 

aboyd

Liturgist
Joined
Oct 28, 2004
Messages
843
Location
USA
bryce777 said:
Greta except THERE ARE NO CONTAINERS in baldur's gate. That is BG II.
Huh. I've been playing BG1 using Tutu for so long, I completely forgot that limitation. With Tutu, I play BG1 at 1024x768, get containers, maxed-out pathfinding, extra auto-pause options, and the option of extra dialogue mods & NPCs.

Don't play BG1 in its original form. There's no good reason to do that. I'm quite happy with it, using Tutu.

-Tony
 

Section8

Cipher
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
4,321
Location
Wardenclyffe
The lack of good dialogue and also one small detail that was present in FO - NPCs were able to say small irrelevant and often amusing things by displaying them over their heads, not forcing you to 'listen'. In BG they initiate a dialog only to say some stupid crap. It would be better if they kept these things to themselves.

Wow, I'd completed repressed that memory. Not only did they have this idiot design feature, with constant forced dialogue/monologue, they actually included an NPC specifically to frustrate and irritate the fuck out of the player, because that's super funny.

Anyway, to get back to the original concept behind this thread, it seems that nearly everyone seems to be of the opinion that Baldur's Gate in its vanilla form is ultimately a frustrating and mediocre gaming experience. So why did everyone rush out to buy the sequel and spinoffs? I don't know many people who rushed out to get Black & White 2.
 

Twinfalls

Erudite
Joined
Jan 4, 2005
Messages
3,903
Tried the demo of this years back but quickly bolted in horror from what I found, so basically I haven't played it. But I loved that rant S8, hilarious stuff.
 

kingcomrade

Kingcomrade
Edgy
Joined
Oct 16, 2005
Messages
26,884
Location
Cognitive Elite HQ
I got this game for Christmas a long time ago, and I've never forgiven the giver. I didn't get much past the second town before I said, "God, this game is like sandpaper on my balls. It offends every one of my (so-called) 'gamer sensibilities'."

I reinstalled it a few months later to try again, and forced myself to play up until I found whoever the guy is with the hamster. I'm with them on this one. I don't hate that character because he's so cleverly designed to evoke such an emotional response. I hate him because he's a pathetic, failed, attempt at humor.

I actually couldn't play Planescape: Torment. I didn't get very far, but it just didn't hold me, I didn't like the interface or the artwork, I didn't run into any interesting dialogue. I also didn't much like having to run around and talk to every character on-screen in the hopes that they would have something worthwhile to say.

Fallout's inventory was kinda irritating, but hey, it forced me to roleplay. I just didn't pick up shit I didn't need. Just ammunition, sometimes guns and armor to trade, mostly. Fallout 2 lets you hit PageUp and PageDown for your inventory, but not Fallout 1.
 

Crichton

Prophet
Joined
Jul 7, 2004
Messages
1,220
Anyway, to get back to the original concept behind this thread, it seems that nearly everyone seems to be of the opinion that Baldur's Gate in its vanilla form is ultimately a frustrating and mediocre gaming experience. So why did everyone rush out to buy the sequel and spinoffs? I don't know many people who rushed out to get Black & White 2.

I think the missing piece of the puzzle is that everyone agrees that its mediocre compared to the later (and better) IE games. At the time, compared to what else was out there, it was incredible.

It combined:

- The first RPG to have small-unit-tactics since the old SSI gold box games.

- very good graphics (for the time)

- 3rd person ISO

- high production value music and voice overs

- dolly-dress-up equipment-showing charecter models.

- a simple, but compelling story and narration.

- a pseudo tolkein high fantasy world with dwarves and elves

- many joinable NPCs that interacted with each other

I've only played it once and really prefer pretty much all of the other IE games to it, but it should get credit for being the first. Baldur's gate really changed people's expectations and afterward 1st person invisable party games (wizardry) and games with 12 charecter models (fallout) were pretty much dead as far as the masses were concerned. This does not of course mean that they were worse, matters of taste aren't disputable, but baldur's gate is higher on my replay list than any RPG that came before it (except darksun: shattered lands which I'm always replaying with a different party trying desperately to become strong enough to keep the suicidal NPC's alive in the final battle).
 

Volourn

Pretty Princess
Pretty Princess Glory to Ukraine
Joined
Mar 10, 2003
Messages
24,986
"yway, to get back to the original concept behind this thread, it seems that nearly everyone seems to be of the opinion that Baldur's Gate in its vanilla form is ultimately a frustrating and mediocre gaming experience. So why did everyone rush out to buy the sequel and spinoffs? I don't know many people who rushed out to get Black & White 2."

That's because the handful of people who make up the group of anti BGers who make up the Codex don't represent the million + people who bought BG1, dumbass. Then again, most of the dumbfucks who bashed BG1 also ran out tripping over their slobber to buy BG2.

Morons.
 

roguefrog

Liturgist
Joined
Aug 6, 2003
Messages
590
Location
Tokyo, Japan
Coming from a different perspective, Baldur's Gate was my first cRPG. Being the first, I was very much into the game. The open-ended wilderness, classes, character creation, joinable npcs, quests and the like were all new to me. Suffice to say I enjoyed it in spite of all the flaws. It was the initial experience so its hard to not like it.

Now, looking back and thinking critically, many of its elements are oh so dull (a lot of the stuff already mentioned in this thread). However the open-ended wilderness concept is still appealing. I have completed the game twice - the first playthrough and then again with the expansion years later. Something to note though, I have attempted to play through it many more times then that (before getting the expansion) and always stopped before the mines because the game gets tedius. I easily lose interest.

There are just so much better cRPGs...
 

Section8

Cipher
Joined
Oct 23, 2002
Messages
4,321
Location
Wardenclyffe
- First RPG to have small-unit-tactics since the old SSI gold box games.

I'd debate that, games such as the Wizardry series may not have allowed free movement of characters, but they still had a healthy serve of party tactics. Jagged Alliance and its sequel aren't purely RPGs, but they're more of one that Baldur's Gate.

Still, the trend at the time for similar isometric titles seemed to be that of a single protagonist (Fallout, Diablo, etc) so point taken. I've always prefered a single player character, but I can see a certain charm to parties.

- very good graphics (for the time)

Agreed. 5 CDs full of bitmap environments did make for a visual striking experience, but like always, at the cost of gameplay, sadly.

- high production value music and voice overs

It's more opinion than science, but the VO was horrible:

  • "Euuu pow?"
  • "Heya"
  • "Open (elven) arse"
  • "Duh, I serve the Flaming fiast"

It may have aimed for high production value, because there is a lot of recorded VO, but it seems poorly directed. It seems to me like they just let each actor put on whatever ridiculous accent they wanted for whichever characters they were giving voice to. Aside from that, nearly every single character is scripted to be utterly irritating, and then, poorly acted, although I'm sure there are exceptions I haven't come across yet.

- dolly-dress-up equipment-showing charecter models.

That was another cute little overuse of resources, but I do remember regarding it highly at the time. Of course, I've since repressed my graphics whore side. ;)

- a simple, but compelling story and narration.

Once again, another aspect that passed me by. I've never been a fan of story telling that's separable from the actual game, and that's pretty much what BG did, by dragging the player out of the game at the start of each chapter to feed them a big block of narrative. But, once again, personal preference on my account.

- a pseudo tolkein high fantasy world with dwarves and elves

That's a very valid point, although I'd say the D&D and Forgotten Realms branding was a pretty powerful factor in the popularity too.

I've only played it once and really prefer pretty much all of the other IE games to it, but it should get credit for being the first. Baldur's gate really changed people's expectations and afterward 1st person invisable party games (wizardry) and games with 12 charecter models (fallout) were pretty much dead as far as the masses were concerned.

Maybe it's just the way I came at it. On the back of Fallout and Fallout 2, I kept seeing this new Black Isle game advertised on Planet Half-Life (back in the day when the Something Awful goons ran Planet Quake and Planet Half-Life) and got myself all excited about it, only to find it was a glitzy, but mostly vacant gaming experience.

Sadly, as you say, it increased the visceral expectations of the masses, which irreparably damaged the whole genre. Maybe I'm giving too much credit to supposed RPG gamers placing more faith in gameplay than graphics. Too much time spent at the Codex methinks. Maybe I should gradually expose myself to the haven of idiocy that is the ES forum, now that there's no Black Isle forum in which to be confronted by the misled masses. I think the Codex must be sheltering me a great deal from the brutish reality that most gamers have no taste. :P

This does not of course mean that they were worse, matters of taste aren't disputable, but baldur's gate is higher on my replay list than any RPG that came before it (except darksun: shattered lands which I'm always replaying with a different party trying desperately to become strong enough to keep the suicidal NPC's alive in the final battle).

You've only played it once, but it's high on your replay list? Or perhaps you meant the sequel? No matter. Anyway, thanks for your comments.

That's because the handful of people who make up the group of anti BGers who make up the Codex don't represent the million + people who bought BG1, dumbass. Then again, most of the dumbfucks who bashed BG1 also ran out tripping over their slobber to buy BG2.

Baldur's Gate had a fair showing in the unofficial top ten a month or two ago, and there's a few Black Isle forum refugees here, so I figured someone would have some positive things to say about it.
 

Shagnak

Shagadelic
Joined
Sep 6, 2003
Messages
4,638
Location
Arse of the world, New Zealand
Crichton said:
I've only played it once and really prefer pretty much all of the other IE games to it, but it should get credit for being the first. Baldur's gate really changed people's expectations and afterward 1st person invisable party games (wizardry) and games with 12 charecter models (fallout) were pretty much dead as far as the masses were concerned. This does not of course mean that they were worse, matters of taste aren't disputable, but baldur's gate is higher on my replay list than any RPG that came before it
Played only a few hours of BG1. Never even bothered with BG2.

The only IE games I' ve finished are IWD 1 and 2. They were okay entertainment as far as hack 'n' slash goes, but I suspect the things that I found annoying in them will be exacerbated in more 'epic' games like the Baldurs Gates.

I have this blind area in my rpg vision that excludes a lot of games that came out in the very late 90's; mainly due to not having a decent PC for a period. And trying to catch up is a bitch.

Hence my glory days are actually pre-BG1, or even pre-Fallout. (I actually first played Fallout around 2000 or so, as a part of my "catch up" phase)
There are quite few games I intend to play, but my limited experience with the IE games has not convinced me that they deserve any more attention than others I have missed.

One day. Maybe.
 

Jinxed

Liturgist
Joined
Aug 5, 2002
Messages
901
Location
Special Encounter
Section8 said:
Jagged Alliance and its sequel aren't purely RPGs, but they're more of one that Baldur's Gate.

How do you figure? The dialog was very limited in JA2, that's not even taking dialog trees into account.

Quests? There weren't that many in JA or JA2, the only way to get xp is by killing things, which again says something about its orientation.

The way JA2 played was nice though, you weren't really forced to do anything, you could hire noob mercs and then roll straight for the capital, albeit being quite suicidal, it was still possible. But what makes it more of an RPG than BG?
 

Rehfeld

Novice
Joined
Dec 7, 2005
Messages
8
I liked the combat, it was cool. I remember taking my level one wiz out the first time and picking of that ogre with the sex change belt with color spray :lol:. I think this was one the first crpg's I've played that didn't totaly screw a low level wiz with some excuse like 'but their so powerfull at higher levels we decided that that spell shouldn't work. Granted controlling a large party can sometimes be anoying, but you can set the autopause to end of round and play it like a turnbased without having to hit the space bar all the time. As far as bad level design goes the only one that realy bugged me was that realy tight dungeon under the bridge. The rest was pretty good with the exception of a hard to find door or two. But I've only played this with the tales of the sword coast addon, don't know what the basic version is like. The last time I played this I downloaded the Darkside of the Swordcoast mod and found it to be a fun change. I think you just need to realise that BG is an RPG and like any RPG you only get out of it what your imagination invests in it.
 

Crichton

Prophet
Joined
Jul 7, 2004
Messages
1,220
You've only played it once, but it's high on your replay list? Or perhaps you meant the sequel? No matter. Anyway, thanks for your comments.

I've only completed it once (never completed the expansion, though I did play with it installed). But I meant the first one way pretty high on my replay list, I've played the 2nd one twice and it is a better game, despite the pseudo-scifi beginning, phat loot overload and all the damn dragons.

There are quite few games I intend to play, but my limited experience with the IE games has not convinced me that they deserve any more attention than others I have missed.

One day. Maybe.

My personal ranking runs

Planescape
IWD
BG2
IWDII
BG

Planescape is probably the most interesting of the lot, but while there are multiple ways to play, I was only willing to progress through the story one way (the pure good way) and the combat encounter design is crummy. The first icewind dale game has a fairly gripping story, good music, good encounter design, high production values, nice graphics and has a far more gritty, down-to-earth feel than BG2. BG2 has lots of nifty spells and abilities, so much loot that you won't be able to carry it and some interesting choices on charecter setup. BG has a lot of flaws that were fixed the sequel, but isn't as overblown with loot, levels and high magic. Most people would probably rate both Baldur's gate games far far ahead of IWDII, I'm one of its few fans.
 

bryce777

Erudite
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
4,225
Location
In my country the system operates YOU
Baldur's gate pretty much had nothing at all original to it.

That argument is pretty weak. The Ultima games were far superior and it basically ripped them off in basic style and mangled it all badly. Realtime combat, good models. and character interactiona re nothing new. The game world was actually much, much larger and more seamless in U7 than in BG. As for gameworld, that is one way BG II took a step backwards - less free exploration, more missionlike maps. It's not so much it doesn't compare well to other infinity games, it just doesn't compare that well to any game. If it were a true classic, then even years later it would still be great to play, but it isn't so it's not.

As for someone liking it and it being their first game, well There have only been like 5 good rpgs since 1995, so that does not say a hell of a lot...you simply have no basis to compare it to.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom