| | | Advertisement |  | | | |
 | GameBanshee Forums
| | 
09-03-2004, 12:13 AM
|  | Super Moderator | | Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Denmark
Posts: 13,150
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by Paranitis I would rather not see the story focus on previous playable NPCs.
<snip> | I agree. I wouldn't want to play/focus on characters I already know the ending of so to speak.
Playing Sarevok in his early days knowing he is going to get killed by the hero of BG1/BG2, and so on.
I'd like new characters with possibly cameos from various "high profile" NPC from BG1+BG2 like Gorion. But I wouldn't want to play Gorion. |
09-03-2004, 12:21 AM
| | Exalted Member | | Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 344
| | | The thing that bugs me a little bit is that Gorion is the guy that is basically your father in BG1..yet he is taken out my Sarevok..yet you beat Sarevok and you can only get upto like..level 6 or something like that..so Gorion couldn't exactly be as strong as I would consider a "high profile" type character to be since he got whooped on by probably a level 6 or 7 character.
Hell, it took my pure thief like 30 seconds to take him down..and my pure fighter took around 4 seconds to take him down.
And Drizzt was a wussy stupid guy who didn't understand how to walk around a freaking lake to get to the island I was shooting him with arrows from!
Anyway..the name fits, so shaddap! |
10-16-2004, 07:45 PM
| | Exalted Member | | Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 58
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by Xandax Well - the NPCs from NwN OC do mention the Hero of Neverwinter at some points in their tales.
As for "Back to the Future" that referes to that Michael J. Fox a.k.a. McFly has to get *back* to the future from the past he accidently ended up in, and almost messed up, so that title fits quite right.
The second one - should maybe not really have been called "Back to the future", instead of something like "Back to now" or "into the future" - but hey ... not many would have liked that. 
It seems very much that titles of these games main title are named by where they take places (thus Baldurs Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Icewind Dale) instead of what they are actually about (The Bhaalspawn, The Old Ones etc...). And that Baldurs Gate 2 was called Baldurs Gate 2 was due to it being a sequel of the first one.
I can understand the confusion of Baldurs Gate 3 being called Baldurs Gate 3 - because it isn't a sequel, but the rumors point to a prequel. Thus there may be some connection to the story which could validate it to many of the "disbelivers" ( ).
However - we don't even know if BG3 will infact be called BG3.
(It will most likely due to the following of BG1/BG2 and try to capitalize on that group as well) | What if they rename the games? Think of Starwars 4 5 6 and 1 2 3 =]  |
10-16-2004, 07:48 PM
| | Exalted Member | | Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 58
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by Paranitis The thing that bugs me a little bit is that Gorion is the guy that is basically your father in BG1..yet he is taken out my Sarevok..yet you beat Sarevok and you can only get upto like..level 6 or something like that..so Gorion couldn't exactly be as strong as I would consider a "high profile" type character to be since he got whooped on by probably a level 6 or 7 character.
Hell, it took my pure thief like 30 seconds to take him down..and my pure fighter took around 4 seconds to take him down.
And Drizzt was a wussy stupid guy who didn't understand how to walk around a freaking lake to get to the island I was shooting him with arrows from!
Anyway..the name fits, so shaddap! | Agree =] Hope that doesnt mean your hero is gonna be a wimp.
let's face it, Atleast I find it hard to go back to BG1 with 7 level cap (or whatever) when you've played tob and became lvl 40 with so many abilities and spells. |
10-17-2004, 12:38 AM
| | Exalted Member | | Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 364
| | | "The thing that bugs me a little bit is that Gorion is the guy that is basically your father in BG1..yet he is taken out my Sarevok..yet you beat Sarevok and you can only get upto like..level 6 or something like that..so Gorion couldn't exactly be as strong as I would consider a "high profile" type character to be since he got whooped on by probably a level 6 or 7 character."
Fair point, although remember Gorian was an oldie, perhaps his abilities have suffered due to that and sitting in a library for the last 20(?) years.
Like sheesh, 20 years off your life (I'm assuming) and your still levl1, you leave the place then in like 19 days you levl 4. Thats a pretty big difference. |
10-17-2004, 07:47 PM
| | Exalted Member | | Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 138
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by me0w Like sheesh, 20 years off your life (I'm assuming) and your still levl1, you leave the place then in like 19 days you levl 4. Thats a pretty big difference. | HAHA!
[t-e-n] |
10-20-2004, 01:42 PM
| | Exalted Member | | Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Ohio
Posts: 91
| | | Besides the cash influence, why you would call it BG3? Because it plays in style like a BG game. If it has a central character with joinable NPC’s that are interactive, it’s set in the FR’s, romances maybe, it is a large game and it allows you to have some freedom of exploration, and has a new epic story, then in my opinion it will play like a BG game. And that’s what they are probably trying to do. The BG games had a formula for success and it wasn’t just the story. Heck all the little things in the game was a strong point for me. Anyway, they’ll try to recreate that formula for success in BG3.
If it were another game, it would be like IWD, where they wanted it to be different from BG. So you could create your own party and the game was very linear etc… A new game set in the FR’s would try to be something new and different than NWN, IWD or the BG games. If it weren’t it would get slammed for being a replica of another game (BG or NWN for example). Whereas a BG3 will try to copy the formula of the BG games and make it better. Hence, why I’m glad they’re calling it BG3. Even though the story is over I still want a game that plays like the BG series and I hope I get it with BG3. |
10-20-2004, 03:15 PM
|  | Super Moderator | | Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: The sun, the moon, and the stars.
Posts: 28,398
| | If it has a central character with joinable NPC’s that are interactive, it’s set in the FR’s, romances maybe, it is a large game and it allows you to have some freedom of exploration, and has a new epic story, then in my opinion it will play like a BG game.
Following that logic, any game with those qualities could just as well be called Ultima, Planescape: Torment (if we leave out the romances part), Gorasul, Anito, etc. In other words, these aren't qualities specific to the BG series, but ones that Bioware took as the general state of fantasy CRPGs. BG2 may have been the best-selling singleplayer CRPG to date, but that doesn't mean it exists in a vacuum. 
__________________
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe. |
10-20-2004, 03:49 PM
| | Exalted Member | | Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 364
| | | PS:T was basicly Baldurs gate, it even used the infinity engine (didn't it) I found it pretty much the same (although some classes were different)
I dunno what to say about ultima because I never played it. (only played UO, untill that damn pub17 and the major changes making items matter so much *gets upset*) |
10-20-2004, 04:56 PM
| | Super Moderator | | Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: The sun, the moon, and the stars.
Posts: 28,398
| | Planescape: Torment wasn't basically Baldur's Gate: if you played it, the game felt like a totally different team was involved. The writing, characters, items, etc, had a flavor all their own. It used the Infinity Engine just as the IWD series did, which doesn't make the IWD games anything like the BG series. PS:T was actually far more sophisticated than BG1, and the Bioware team praised it to the skies. Credit for the interactions in BG2 went to PS:T, which was developed by Black Isle Studios.
You can play Ultima VII by simply purchasing it, then downloading and installing this. It's necessary because Origin Systems was using a proprietary memory manager at the time, which is not compatible with any version of Windows. You'll find a lot of features from the Bioware games in Ultima VI and VII (the latter is far more attractive).
__________________
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.
Last edited by fable; 10-20-2004 at 07:49 PM.
|
10-21-2004, 02:18 PM
| | Exalted Member | | Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Ohio
Posts: 91
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by fable Following that logic, any game with those qualities could just as well be called Ultima, Planescape: Torment (if we leave out the romances part), Gorasul, Anito, etc. In other words, these aren't qualities specific to the BG series, but ones that Bioware took as the general state of fantasy CRPGs. BG2 may have been the best-selling singleplayer CRPG to date, but that doesn't mean it exists in a vacuum. |
Sure, why not? You could include PS:T in that statement. But, not Ultima, as it’s not set in the Forgotten Realms, nor is it a d&d game. But PS:T could have been released as Baldurs Gate: Planescape and no one would have thought any differently of it. It’s d&d, even though it’s in the Planes and Sigil these areas are referenced in the Forgotten Realms setting, and it has joinable NPC’s that interact like BG. I feel it would have fit, no problem. PS:T feels a lot more like BG than IWD does. Also, I hate to say it but NWN could have been BG3 and it would have worked. Now I’m not saying that that would have been a great idea. LOL! But since the setting, rule set, etc… all of the similar characteristics between the games would have made sense if Bio decided to call NWN BG3.
I think in hindsight you say no way could PS:T have been a BG expansion. But, if it were released that way you would have never known the difference.
Now, if you’re a strong proponent of the same engine has to be used for a series, and then no you would disagree with my statement. But, BG is becoming a franchise like Ultima and you’ll have to accept that different engines will be used.
One thing I left out in my first statement. I feel for it to be a BG game, there must be some references to the setting, previous games and/or NPC’s. Now it could be something as small as just having Lord British to connect the games. Or it could be something as small as just telling the story that went before (Wizardry8) and then jump you into a new adventure. Or it could have many relationships, NPC’s, introduction that tells the story, some of the same joinable NPC’s, finding books telling about the Bhaalspawn story, visiting same areas like the Cloakwood mines, etc… It could be small or large, but there should be some reference to the series.
Also by including this interjection I would also apply this to Baldurs Gate: Planescape if it was released that way. Add a few references at what was going on with the Bhaalspawn story, or maybe add Minsc as a joinable NPC who’s searching for his space hamster who got lost in the planes, and that would have sufficed.
The Ultima’s and Wizardry’s have used this formula fine, there’s no reason why BG has to be restricted by the story.
Last edited by Ellester; 10-21-2004 at 02:29 PM.
|
10-21-2004, 03:02 PM
| | Super Moderator | | Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: The sun, the moon, and the stars.
Posts: 28,398
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by Ellester Sure, why not? You could include PS:T in that statement. But, not Ultima, as it’s not set in the Forgotten Realms, nor is it a d&d game. | Neither are most of the other games I mentioned in that group, including Gorasul and Anito--and several I could add. In other words, calling it a "BG game" as though the qualities you've mentioned above somehow define BG games specifically doesn't hold. These qualities of yours:
It has a central character with joinable NPC’s that are interactive.
Its set in the FR’s, romances maybe,
It is a large game
It allows you to have some freedom of exploration,
It has a new epic story,
...don't define what you've called "a BG game," but a fairly broad group, applying to too many other titles, both before and after the pair of BG games appeared. I think in hindsight you say no way could PS:T have been a BG expansion. But, if it were released that way you would have never known the difference.
Sure I would, and judging from the comments over 4 years in various threads on GameBanshee, I think it's safe to say that quite a few PS:T players know how strongly it differs from the BGm series. PS:T has a unique writing style associated with its characters, and an entirely different mindset to the development of plot. It could never be mistaken for the work of the Bioware team, or vice versa. Or the IWD and BG series, either, though they use the same engine.
__________________
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.
Last edited by fable; 10-21-2004 at 03:17 PM.
|
10-21-2004, 03:22 PM
| | Exalted Member | | Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Ohio
Posts: 91
| | Quote: |
Originally Posted by fable Sure I would, and judging from the comments over 4 years in various threads on GameBanshee, I think it's safe to say that quite a few PS:T players know how strongly it differs from the BGm series. PS:T has a unique writing style associated with its character, and an entirely different mindset to the development of plot. It could never be mistaken for the work of the Bioware team, or vice versa. Or the IWD and BG series, either, though they use the same engine. | Just to point out when I’m using FR, I mean the Forgotten Realms, so it does knock out all the games that you mentioned that are not linked to the FR’s. The setting needs to be true before the story, IMO. IWD2 for example, the setting was more important than the continuation of a story.
And if you feel PS:T could not have been a BG game, then that’s fine, I respect your position. But, I still think that if they released it as Baldurs Gate: Planescape I wouldn’t have known the difference standing here today. The writing I don’t think makes a difference. If SOA had tons of dialog trees where I sat around talking to one character for 10 minutes, or just had a horrible story I still would have thought it was BG2. |
10-21-2004, 03:51 PM
| | Super Moderator | | Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: The sun, the moon, and the stars.
Posts: 28,398
| | We'll just have to agree to disagree on these points.
__________________
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe. |
10-21-2004, 04:59 PM
| | Exalted Member | | Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Ohio
Posts: 91
| | fair enough | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Rate This Thread |  Linear Mode | | 
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off |
| | | |
