Baldur's Gate and Baldur's Gate II Enhanced Editions Announced

[Cantousent]

I wonder how much of that is sour grapes, though. I've heard howls of pain, hate, and anger about every new version of Dungeons and Dragons since Second. ...And there were probably people who bitched about changing to first edition from the boxed sets, only I didn't hear it. I will say that 4E looked a lot like it was going into an MMORPG kind of talent tree thing, but I never picked up the books or the game. With the computer taking care of the numbers, the edition doesn't matter as much I don't think.

[Monte Carlo]

I wonder how much of that is sour grapes, though. I've heard howls of pain, hate, and anger about every new version of Dungeons and Dragons since Second. ...And there were probably people who bitched about changing to first edition from the boxed sets, only I didn't hear it. I will say that 4E looked a lot like it was going into an MMORPG kind of talent tree thing, but I never picked up the books or the game. With the computer taking care of the numbers, the edition doesn't matter as much I don't think.

 

I think that's a fair question to ask... but srsly 4E sucks donkey balls. It really is that awful, an attempt to make a pen and paper game out of WoW style tropes. I'm relaxed about all the others, even 2E which was my least favourite. Put it like this, many grognards (I count myself among them) lauded 3rd Edition and Monte Cook's vision for the game (most of us old-timers hated prestige classes, but they were easily ingnored). 3.5 muddied perfectly clear water and 4E shat in it.

 

D20 was a triumph. Pathfinder's success and 4Es failure (it tanked) are evidence of that.

[greylord]

Not going to really get into an edition war here...but truthfully, for a BG3 or IWD3 I'd prefer they actually go with the older rulesets...but seeing that's not likely I'd want Pathfinder overall in my personal preference. That's why I think an IWD3 IN SPIRIT (so not actually under that name) would work, use obsidian to do it and use Pathfinder rules. Pathfinder could use a good CRPG beyond an MMORPG.

[mkreku]

You guys are wayyy too obsessed with rules.

[Monte Carlo]

You guys are wayyy too obsessed with rules.

 

Well, if you like a game it's quite important. If you like soccer and take a keen interest in the off-side rule, that makes sense. Because it is a key law of the game that impacts on outcome.

 

For computer games that adapt from pen and paper I think that the spirit and feel of the game is more important than the actuality or rules. But the architecture of the game system is not unimportant. Are we agreed, or was your comment merely a trite dig to prove you are too kool for skool?

[Volourn]

Without rules it's not a game.

[Cantousent]

Naw, rules *do* matter, even in a computer game. They don't matter as much and can certainly be more complicated without worrying about the poor bastard running the thing, but they still matter. After all, the rules dictate how you engage in combat, cast a spell, or even travel from place to place. You can simplify travel, let's say, but do you want to simplify spell casting? Do you want to keep the travel rules because it's a space based sci-fantasy game, but maybe streamline the magic? Space combat is still robust, but small party combat is simplified?

 

...But I think the question of Dungeons and Dragon rules might not be as big a deal because, from what Monte and others have told me, 4th edition might be better as a computer game than a PnP game anyway. I would love to see a really good sequel to BG2. I'd love to see a really good sequel to IWD2. Hell, I'd love to see a good game altogether, even if I don't play as much as I used to. I haven't played Diablo three for about a week I think, and that was my last big purchase.

[Monte Carlo]

^ 5th Edition is an interesting concept, in that it is attempting to allow some sort of core rules with bolt-ons from all other editions. A sort of house-rules frenzy. Agreeably old-skool and ironically the very thing Advanced D&D tried to eliminate. Pop will eat itself and all that.

 

So perhaps a 2E-heavy D&D variant that could still get away with being 5E-ish might be possible. I think it would be in Hasbro / WotCs interests cuz no publicity is bad publicity*

 

 

* POR2 notwithstanding.

[Monte Carlo]

Naw, rules *do* matter, even in a computer game.

 

Yes, agreed.

 

4th edition might be better as a computer game than a PnP game anyway.

 

Also agreed, 4E seems to use some trading-card game tropes too and those seem to translate well onto the PC (altho I am happy to stand corrected as I do not play them myself).

 

The charm of D&D computer games used to be the fact that they were based from a rule-set that originated in tabletop gaming. 4E is ironic as it is the same concept in reverse, it's a pen and paper computer game.

[Sargallath Abraxium]

...BG3 - TNO escapes ta Easthaven!!...

 

 

...1E Rules!!...

 

 

...COCONUT GRENADES!!...

 

 

...WHO LUVS YA, BABY!!...

[Cantousent]

Well, at least Sargallath isn't dead. I have no comment about the other stuff, but:

 

"TNO escapes"

 

sounds awesome. Maybe not the Nameless One, since some stories are best left resolved, but something like PS:T would be awesome.

[mkreku]

Rules matter, but which rules does not. If it suits the game, it doesn't matter what they're called. Usually, the less I know about the rules, the more I enjoy the game.

[Cantousent]

Yeah, but rules are the mechanics, and that dictates gameplay which means that you like how things are done under some systems but not as much under others. For example, I like the Bethsoft Elder Scrolls titles, but I much prefer Fallout 3. The way the rules handle things is better. ...But I suspect that we're just splittin' hares (or hairs, whatever).

 

Sometimes I enjoy the game because the rules are way in the background and I can just enjoy the story and gameplay. Sometimes I enjoy the game because I like to figure out cool things to do with da rulez. As long as it doesn't deteriorate into a puerile session of abusing the rules so you can brag aimlessly about your character, I'm pretty happy. That's what killed my PnP Dungeons and Dragon group. I'm a grown man. I don't talk in a high pitched voice to mimick an elf, I don't use optional homebrewed rules to create uber characters who are impossible to kill with level appropriate monsters, and I don't brag about my ubermensch character. That's why computer games can sometimes stack up well against PnP games. Unless the design team completely sucks, you are limited by what they allow. You might find exploits, but generally video games are balanced. I know Sawyer is always concerned with balance and, while I don't think it's the singularly important aspect, it does prevent the players from constantly breaking the game.

[Gromnir]

Rules matter, but which rules does not. If it suits the game, it doesn't matter what they're called. Usually, the less I know about the rules, the more I enjoy the game.

 

people says the weirdest things.

 

when you level in a crpg, it is traditional to, at some pre-determined point, gets new abilities. so, how does one choose abilities. am guessing one can take mkreku complete serious and just choose random or simple looks at title of ability and choose what sounds most kewl, but that is not gonna be satisfying for all but the folks who likes to game whilst fully baked. see, virtual all games has mechanics worked right into the descriptions o' the abilities. am seeing that the swtor thread is still active, so take that game as an example. we looks at abilities for troopers and and we sees such stuff as getting an improved 2% defense chance... or should we take the ability that improves our absorption rating... or perhaps shield? how 'bout a more extreme example?. am recalling when we first were leveling our sorcerer, and we helped out an assassin do a flashpoint. the guy was frustrated 'cause he were dying so much and 'cause he couldnt hit nothing neither, so we looked at his gear. poor guy had strength and cunning and aim mods and enhancements as much, if not more, than willpower and endurance. why? 'cause surely a melee character needs strength more than willpower, right? we spent a teeny bit o' time explaining basic mechanics of game and a considerable time helping him re-gear so he wouldnt be dying quite so much. fellow seemed much happier once he knew the mechanics.

 

is somewhat ironic that the only way the mk route o' gameplay for non-baked players would be satisfying is if game were complete and perfect balanced... and we know how mk feels 'bout balance. if any and all abilities were providing exactly same value to any and all character builds, then it wouldnt matter what ability were chosen, right? hey, Gromnir would be ecstatic to be playing such a game. would probable first need drop notion o' classes with prime attributes n' such, but that is another thread topic, eh?

 

complex mechanics can indeed be frustrating, so we can appreciate the folks who wanna takes a bite o' the mk brownie and just play... dude. but am also recognizing that such a limited pov would make all but the most simplistic crpg all but unplayable.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[mkreku]

I love how the overaged orc impersonator is insinuating, in his own not so subtle or clever way, that enjoying meta-gaming and reading rule books is somehow connected to intelligence.

 

Whatever.. dude.

[Nepenthe]

His theory fits the evidence, so far.

[Monte Carlo]

That isn't what he was saying, whatsoever. Altho' I doubt he needs me to point that out.

 

Taken to it's logical conclusion, your view is that games have intuitive rulesets that adapt intelligently to your playing style, like cruise control on a car.

 

We have games like this.... we call them First Person Shooters where the key metrics are the weapon you equip and your hand-eye coordination.

 

I'm crap at those, for me understanding the rules and using them properly (the meta-game as you rather disparagingly call it, which exists more brutally in other genres, like FPS and RTS games) is part of the attraction of CRPGs.

[Cantousent]

I actually love fpses, but even those have rules. I'm going to go forward into the ridiculous, and so I'll point out that I'm going past where it would be charitable to suggest mkreku meant to draw the line. With that said, here goes:

 

Even in an fps, we need to know that w goes forward and s goes back. We need to know that d strafes right and a strafes left. In one particular game I can think of offhand, w runs forward, s walks forward, and x goes backward. I find that frustrating, even though I know the reason to put it in is because in this game, stealth is just as important as speed. In some fps games, you just run over stuff to use it. You can't save anything for later use. In other games, you save up things and must access them later. Do you do it by a quick use button or by accessing the items through a menu.

 

Even if the rules are exactly the same in all other respects, the way the devs use the rules of their own devising can make a huge difference. For example, the original doom engine was great for run and gun, but if ammunition were far more scarce, it could have been used as a survival horror game instead. I guess my point is, for every single game, there's still a curve for learning the rules. ...And, for every single game, there's a point where you can forget the rules a little and just move forward. In DnD, you need to know how to build up your character by deciding on class, allocating stats, choosing skills and feats, donning kit, arming weapons, etc. Once you do that, you can almost forget most of those things and just hack, slash, spell, or sing your way over, through, or around conflicts. You don't have to think every second of what your next stat bump will be.

 

I know that was probably confusing, but I'm a bit tired today. I guess I'm just pointing out that there's no getting away from the rules in a game ever. At some point, on some level, the rules will make the game. Sometimes the rules aren't the intrusive things that kill the point of the game. Sometimes, the rules and how you use them are almost the point of the game in the first place, which is why some games license certain rulesets in the first place. They can be just as important as other licenses.

[mkreku]

...but that is not gonna be satisfying for all but the folks who likes to game whilst fully baked....

 

complex mechanics can indeed be frustrating, so we can appreciate the folks who wanna takes a bite o' the mk brownie and just play... dude. but am also recognizing that such a limited pov would make all but the most simplistic crpg all but unplayable.

That isn't what he was saying, whatsoever. Altho' I doubt he needs me to point that out.

Sure he isn't.

 

Taken to it's logical conclusion, your view is that games have intuitive rulesets that adapt intelligently to your playing style, like cruise control on a car.

Well, that's one way of putting it. At least a more interesting discussion than the one suggested by the overaged LARP:er.

 

I am somewhat interested in these new versions of Baldur's Gate since I could never get into them once I got an opportunity to play them, despite me enjoying the original Gold Box games immensely (especially the AD&D Pool of Radiance). In the back of my head I've wondered why but not given it much thought. Then I read this board and this thread and it struck me that you guys waste 10 pages discussing which rules should be used in the game. For me, this is a totally pointless discussion, and the fact that you feel that there's a need to discuss this AND you think it is normal needing to explain to some other player what he needs to do to be able to play the game efficiently.. I don't know what to say here. If you guys can't see what's wrong with that picture, then there's not much to discuss.

 

I am not after a game with so basic rules that the game plays itself or so simplistic rules that it becomes an FPS (no idea how that would happen, but you said it). But the rules need to be abstracted enough for them to be invisible to the player, and work so well that you don't need to go on a geek board or read rule books to play the game efficiently, otherwise I would consider them and the game broken.

 

I suspect I lost interest in the later editions of D&D games, not because the rules became too complex (they're actually not difficult or complex, just convoluted and uninteresting, for me), but because it feels like playing rules instead of games.

 

But you guys seem to enjoy mulling over these rules. To each their own.

[Cantousent]

I don't understand why there's animosity over it in the first place. If some of us like discussing the ruleset, why is that bad? I guess I don't take it personally. I just don't get it.

 

On the other hand, I tend to have fun either way. I think different design philosophies appeal to me at various times. Sometimes I want something with a lower learning curve. Other times, I enjoy something where I have to think about my build more. At least it's not like WoW or some other MMORPG where you're forced to go read up on class build theory and read over number crunching data for every single talent in order to create a decent character for late game raiding. Folks in the what are you playing now are discussing the tough time they had with the rescue part of KotOR 2, but I don't think I've played a single player CRPG where you completely and utterly screwed if you messed up your build as much as you can screw up an MMORPG build.

 

I mean, I think it's a perfectly legitimate point of view to say you don't like getting in the weeds on (version x) of Dungeons and Dragons, but for some of these games, I've enjoyed discussing them here more than I have had playing them. That might be sad, but having paid for them, at least I'm getting some mileage out of them one way or the other.

[Nepenthe]

I don't understand why there's animosity over it in the first place. If some of us like discussing the ruleset, why is that bad? I guess I don't take it personally. I just don't get it.

(...) was your comment merely a trite dig to prove you are too kool for skool?

[Volourn]

I ahve never played a game that didn't have rules. I have one simple rule. If something has no rules it's not a game. Period.

[Orchomene]

I wish for a game with the Rolemaster rule set.

[Nepenthe]

I wish for a game with the Rolemaster rule set.

There's one, it's called excel and microsoft even releases regular iterations of it.

Edited August 15, 2012 by Nepenthe

[Gromnir]

am not suggesting that it takes intelligence to be curious 'bout the numbers that is highly visible but not necessarily explained in the average crpg. what meager 'mount of intelligence does it require to be exhibiting the minimal 'mount o' curiosity to question game mechanics? somewhere between octopus (an admittedly very inquisitive invertebrate) and the average nfl defensive back? is Not a question o' intellect. that being said, the state o' mind required to be seeing game mechanics mentioned in virtual all skills and abilities offered in a crpg, but to have Zero curiosity 'bout the impact on your +20 hours o' gaming is requiring a state o' mind that we suspect is most easily attained via illicit drugs.

 

as stated earlier, we understand that attempting to fully decode the frequently self-contradictory and pervasively non-intuitive game mechanics seen in crpgs is a pursuit only a few die-hard gamers would seek to embrace. that being said, am finding it passing odd that anybody would question the motivation o' those who would be wanting to actually know what some o' those +, -, and % that is showing up in game descriptors.

 

HA! Good Fun!