Why the hype?

[Hellraiser789]

Don't know if you are the same Hellrazer from the NWN2 forums (and I don't really care either way).

 

Post count has little to do with much IMHO. I am a Kickstarter and Beta Tester.

 

Done with you now.

 

Wish there was a way to filter posts by posters *sigh*

 

As I mentioned OP, you have my sympathy.

 

First, thats not me - never played NWN2 and never been on their forums.

 

Second, You're right, post count has very little to do with anything  (and upon rereading my comment, I didnt mean that my opinion is worth more because of it - I simply meant that, as someone with only 120 posts, I can't judge compared to someone who, say, has 1000 posts. Only thing I think posts show is how long you've been around (as more posts = probably been around longer), but thats not necessarily true, obviously).

 

My apologies if I offended you over that. As a non-backer, I am really grateful to you (the Kickstarters and Beta Testers) as you've given me a chance to play an awesome game when I wasn't able to finance it myself. So thank you. I just meant that you could have perhaps phrased that post so people didn't find it so initially offense (as I did. Maybe I am just immature and need to stop and think a bit more before I post  ). But I think my second paragraph was fair, personally. 

 

Sorry if I came off like a d*** myself, the internet can have the effect sometimes 

Edited April 3, 2015 by Hellraiser789

[vectorix]

Well first of i think saying tha bg2 is better is completely based on personal preferance and opinion, i

 

think obsidian have done a great job with this game i have only been through 9 hours of gameplay so

 

far and i am completely immersed in the amount of tactics available and i keep on thinking of diffrent

 

formations for my squad so plety of stuff to do and i think replayibility is not an issue since you can

 

make all soarts of diffrent squads, my favorit would be the all ranger squad aka:(bear squad ) .

[Rostere]

There's a huge difference between writing and plot. A good writer can take a banal plot and turn it into a memorable experience. In stories there are of course also micro-plots, the smaller plot parts of the main plot.

 

To clarify what I wrote earlier: I think PoE has a far better general plot than BG1. If you were trying to explain the plot in BG1 to someone they would believe that BG1 was the worst kind of kitsch fantasy story that does not take itself seriously at all. In a way, BG1 is of course not very serious but humorous and kitschy, if you look at the extreme companions for example. If your main villain has a skull for a helmet, glowing eyes, and the story starts with him killing your father, then you're literally not above this level:

 

 

The parts of the BG1 story who actually were interesting were not very well developed. As it was to be, these themes were increasingly explored in BG2. IMO the story in PoE is slightly above the story of BG2.

 

However! I am now only making a judgement on the general story concept and not the small parts like joinable NPCs, non-joinable NPCs and so on. I think Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 and great voice acting (complete with OUTRAGEOUS accents), with voice actors really acting out their roles. More of that please (if you have voice acting at all). The companions were very unique and interesting, and even some with only a few slices of dialogue like Shar-Teel or Tiax have personalities that you remember very vividly.

 

Admittedly I am playing PoE with a custom party in my main playthrough and so I have saved all companions except Edér and Aloth (both of whom I eventually kicked out around the end of Chapter 1) for later, so I can't really talk a lot about the others except for what I've seen in "Let's Play" videos. My impression of the joinable NPCs in PoE is that most have far more subdued personalities than their counterparts in the BG games (noting also that the new companions in BG2 were typically more beige than the BG1 companions). IMO Edér has a great premise considering the PoE world lore, but his personality is just a tiny bit too bland to be considered among the BG greats. Same with Aloth, they should have taken the same concept but turned it up to 11. A lot of people have said they thought Durance was the best NPC in PoE, that is possibly because he would fit in better with the BG crowd of companions with extreme personalities. IMO this is also one indication that Chris Avellone should have written all the companions of PoE.

 

Now here's what a typical party of mine in BG2 could look like:

 

Player Character

Minsc (likeable village idiot with a hamster)

Anomen (pompous ass)

Viconia (psychopathic drow supremacist)

Edwin (narcissist and megalomaniac)

Jan Jansen (overly talkative mythomaniac)

 

That's a merry band of fools with enough personality for half a dozen sitcoms. The intra-party banter you get is hilarious. From what I've seen thus far from the PoE companions they're good, but not with sufficiently extreme personalities to be counted among the best of the BG series.

[Odd Hermit]

My impression of the joinable NPCs in PoE is that most have far more subdued personalities than their counterparts in the BG games (noting also that the new companions in BG2 were typically more beige than the BG1 companions). IMO Edér has a great premise considering the PoE world lore, but his personality is just a tiny bit too bland to be considered among the BG greats. Same with Aloth, they should have taken the same concept but turned it up to 11. A lot of people have said they thought Durance was the best NPC in PoE, that is possibly because he would fit in better with the BG crowd of companions with extreme personalities. IMO this is also one indication that Chris Avellone should have written all the companions of PoE.

 

I prefer subdued to absurd. Less is more, when it comes to personalities usually extreme characters feel fake to me.

 

Pallegina was my favorite companion in PoE. Jaheira was my favorite in BGII. I did like Durance as well but I didn't find him nearly as extreme as some BGII characters.

 

Granted, some races and classes and so on have more reason to be extreme than others, and it's nice to have options.

[Monte Carlo]

Obsidian have, to be fair, never really been noted for humour. At their best they are dry and sophisticated. At their worst they can totter on the edge of pretentiousness.

 

I like some fourth-wall breaking humour and silly NPCs to lighten the mood. But I know for others that's like nails down a chalk-board.

 

But yeah, the PoE NPCs I've met so far haven't set my world on fire yet.

Edited April 3, 2015 by Monte Carlo

[Rostere]

I prefer subdued to absurd. Less is more, when it comes to personalities usually extreme characters feel fake to me.

 

I would have agreed to this, this really sounds like something I would agree with, however now we are talking about the BG1 characters, who I found great.

 

IMO they best of them were the extreme BG1 characters re-written in BG2 (Minsc, Edwin, to some degree Viconia - not Emoen Imoen however). Slightly more realistic, but just as funny.

 

There's also the fact that there were 25 joinable NPCs in BG1. If Obsidian had written 25 NPCs for Pillars of Eternity, I think the sheer amount would have made everyone find enough interesting companions.

 

It would have been interesting to see Shar-Teel, Tiax, Alora, Safana, Xan, Xzar and Montaron as more subdued joinable NPCs in BG2. Eventually we met them, but it would have been fun with more content.

 

And let's not even get into the PS:T companions. They were pretty much as extreme as you can get. AND better and more realistically written (considering their conditions) than any of the BG companions. Which brings us to Chris Avellone writing characters again...

[Katarack21]

A good chunk of those 25 joinable NPC's had little to no real characterization or interaction, though. Like that ranger you meet out in the wild.

So forgettable I forgot his name entirely.

[Rostere]

A good chunk of those 25 joinable NPC's had little to no real characterization or interaction, though. Like that ranger you meet out in the wild.

 

So forgettable I forgot his name entirely.

 

First when reading this: Uh, you mean Minsc?

 

Okay. You mean Kivan. Yeah, he's definitely one of the more beige ones.

[Katarack21]

 

A good chunk of those 25 joinable NPC's had little to no real characterization or interaction, though. Like that ranger you meet out in the wild.

 

So forgettable I forgot his name entirely.

 

First when reading this: Uh, you mean Minsc?

 

Okay. You mean Kivan. Yeah, he's definitely one of the more beige ones.

 

In my heart, Minsc will always be a barbarian.

[PIP-Clownboy]

For the PoE expansion hoping  we get a Xaurip rogue/Barb and an evil Shar-teelish type. 

[Odd Hermit]

 

I prefer subdued to absurd. Less is more, when it comes to personalities usually extreme characters feel fake to me.

There's also the fact that there were 25 joinable NPCs in BG1. If Obsidian had written 25 NPCs for Pillars of Eternity, I think the sheer amount would have made everyone find enough interesting companions.

 

They focused on quality over quantity. I recall them saying they didn't do a lot of companion stuff until after getting the story planned out, so they could have them interact and respond to it in more interesting ways. In my opinion it paid off. There were a few very good conversations over the course of the game that are of memorable quality and I don't think that would've been the case had they split the love between 25 rather than 8. 

 

Perhaps we'll get more companion options in the expansion and/or sequel.

 

You also have to consider that while times have changed many things in video games, writing hasn't really that much, other than voice acting being more limiting if you go typical full-voiced AAA game style which I'm very glad they didn't. And I'm pretty sure PoE had a much smaller budget than BG1 or BGII especially if adjusted for inflation, and a smaller team. Hopefully the success means bigger and better things are coming, but all things considered I'm very happy with what we got.

Edited April 3, 2015 by Odd Hermit

[Atheosis]

It's definitely better than the Baldur's Gate games in my opinion.  The world is much more interesting and the story is better, and since that's why I play games like this it wins in my eyes.  Though even if you think it isn't better or even as good as those games, why ruin your enjoyment of new classic-style CRPG that isn't just another action game once you get past the stats and character customization like all the games we've been subjected to in recent years?  Just enjoy it.

[DocDoomII]

Baldur's Gate 1 had 25 companions.

Whit almost no dialogues, banters, and silly super small quests.

 

And PS:T companions... you can count them in my signature (the green thing is just a vanity pet, not a companion).

Edited April 3, 2015 by DocDoomII

[Hellraiser789]

Baldur's Gate 1 had 25 companions.

Whit almost no dialogues, banters, and silly super small quests.

 

And PS:T companions... you can count them in my signature (the green thing is just a vanity pet, not a companion).

 

IDK, I liked, what, about half the BG1 companions, maybe like 15 of them? Although, I can't say they were particularly deep, but some of them were cool. BG2 was definitely a lot better in that regard though. Of course, I still didn't love every character, but they were much better.

[Lord Weh]

I can tell you interesting things about all of the companions in PoE (what motivates them, their opinions on matters of the world) which I can't do for most of the BG companions aside from the core favourites.

[Blovski]

^

Also worth noting that BG 1 may have had 25 companions but really who ever used Quayle, Tiax, Elona (the halfling thief, is that her name?) or Skye. A lot of them came so late in the game that it was completely impractical to use them. Hell, even the Cloakwood ones (mad druid lady, Eldoth, Coran) would come when you already had a full party. I think Garrick had such abysmal stats that noone in their right mind would take him. Lots of the other ones were redundant (I mean, really, two good and two neutral pure thieves...).

In short, it's nice to have the variety but the old I.E. games' lack of a stronghold type feature (Throne of Bhaal was the first game I can think of that really had this) to leave and pick up companions resulted in much less of the variety being a reasonable choice.

[Katarack21]

 

Baldur's Gate 1 had 25 companions.

Whit almost no dialogues, banters, and silly super small quests.

 

And PS:T companions... you can count them in my signature (the green thing is just a vanity pet, not a companion).

 

IDK, I liked, what, about half the BG1 companions, maybe like 15 of them? Although, I can't say they were particularly deep, but some of them were cool. BG2 was definitely a lot better in that regard though. Of course, I still didn't love every character, but they were much better.

 

And BGII had what, 17 recruitable companions? It really is a direct trade off--the more companions you have the longer and more complicated it would be to give each of them a fully developed plot, full characterization, etc. So some of them get shafted.

 

Like Kivan. Nobody cares about Kivan and you know it.

[tinderbox]

I liked Kivan! >.> *sadface*

[DocDoomII]

And BGII had what, 17 recruitable companions? It really is a direct trade off--the more companions you have the longer and more complicated it would be to give each of them a fully developed plot, full characterization, etc. So some of them get shafted.

 

Like Kivan. Nobody cares about Kivan and you know it.

Without the expansion Throne of Bhaal it had 16 characters.

And some of them could be intended as "limited" time characters. Such as Imoen, Yoshimo and Valygar, because they either are not accessible for a huge amount of time, or they get killed off as part of a main/side quest.

[Spivo]

Of the 25 BG characters some came with the expansion? And some are from enhanced edition?

 

And of the original ones, half of them were useless to my knowledge, and a good deal also very boring.

Pretty sure most who played BG used the same group of 10 or so npc's?

[Rosveen]

 

 

 

 

Baldur's Gate 1 had 25 companions.

Whit almost no dialogues, banters, and silly super small quests.

 

And PS:T companions... you can count them in my signature (the green thing is just a vanity pet, not a companion).

IDK, I liked, what, about half the BG1 companions, maybe like 15 of them? Although, I can't say they were particularly deep, but some of them were cool. BG2 was definitely a lot better in that regard though. Of course, I still didn't love every character, but they were much better.

And BGII had what, 17 recruitable companions? It really is a direct trade off--the more companions you have the longer and more complicated it would be to give each of them a fully developed plot, full characterization, etc. So some of them get shafted.

 

Like Kivan. Nobody cares about Kivan and you know it.

Somebody cared enough to mod his story into BG2.

 

Actually, Kivan was a part of my canon BG1 team. But I guess I'm weird, I didn't recruit Minsc...

[Katarack21]

 

And BGII had what, 17 recruitable companions? It really is a direct trade off--the more companions you have the longer and more complicated it would be to give each of them a fully developed plot, full characterization, etc. So some of them get shafted.

 

Like Kivan. Nobody cares about Kivan and you know it.

Without the expansion Throne of Bhaal it had 16 characters.

And some of them could be intended as "limited" time characters. Such as Imoen, Yoshimo and Valygar, because they either are not accessible for a huge amount of time, or they get killed off as part of a main/side quest.

 

And one of them was Jan Jansen, whom I always let join my party, take somewhere private, murder, and leave to rot.

 

So 15, really.

[DocDoomII]

Of the 25 BG characters some came with the expansion? And some are from enhanced edition?

No no, BG I had 25 characters from the beginning. Tales of the Sword Coast only added locations and quests. No companions.

 

It's just that some of them are so far into the game that nobody ever recruits them. Also some of them had peculiar recruitment condition, like Shar-Teel, that could lead to miss her entirely.

• In order to get Shar-Teel to join the party, a male party member must best her in a duel.
• If your party is already above the Reputation threshold for evil party members (19+), she will still join the party, but will leave as soon as you win an xp reward, even if it is still mid-battle.
• If you lose the duel, she will give you a second chance, but no more.
• If approached by an all-female party, she asks you to return later when you have a male party member.

[Hellraiser789]

 

 

Baldur's Gate 1 had 25 companions.

Whit almost no dialogues, banters, and silly super small quests.

 

And PS:T companions... you can count them in my signature (the green thing is just a vanity pet, not a companion).

 

IDK, I liked, what, about half the BG1 companions, maybe like 15 of them? Although, I can't say they were particularly deep, but some of them were cool. BG2 was definitely a lot better in that regard though. Of course, I still didn't love every character, but they were much better.

 

And BGII had what, 17 recruitable companions? It really is a direct trade off--the more companions you have the longer and more complicated it would be to give each of them a fully developed plot, full characterization, etc. So some of them get shafted.

 

Like Kivan. Nobody cares about Kivan and you know it.

 

 

Hey he was just the stoic, silent type that's all....yeah, his story and character development was poor, not gonna lie. But his pic was awesome - used that just about every time I made a custom archer type character. I thought he was cool though - man seeking vengeance on the enemy who killed his wife. Cliche and not explored at all (similar to Branwen, pretty sure killing their arch enemies - Tazok and Tranzig, respectively - didn't even do anything and they didn't even comment on it.) Such a shame. Although I think BG1 was so buggy they probably HAD questlines that just never triggered for me lol.

 

^

 

Also worth noting that BG 1 may have had 25 companions but really who ever used Quayle, Tiax, Elona (the halfling thief, is that her name?) or Skye. A lot of them came so late in the game that it was completely impractical to use them. Hell, even the Cloakwood ones (mad druid lady, Eldoth, Coran) would come when you already had a full party. I think Garrick had such abysmal stats that noone in their right mind would take him. Lots of the other ones were redundant (I mean, really, two good and two neutral pure thieves...).

 

In short, it's nice to have the variety but the old I.E. games' lack of a stronghold type feature (Throne of Bhaal was the first game I can think of that really had this) to leave and pick up companions resulted in much less of the variety being a reasonable choice.

 

I loved having the fighter's stronghold and just keeping all the companions there. Either that or the Copper Coronet (?). I'd just collect all the NPCs and bring them back to my "stronghold". Did the same thing with Kagain's mercenary shop in BG1. It was a big empty room so I just had them wait there (when I could). Was so happy for the pocket plane in ToB.     (Of course I didn't do this on every playthrough - only like once. Or twice. Okay, maybe a couple times, but still. It was funny)

[Katarack21]

Yeah, Kivan did take the best archer portrait. That's no lie.