>BG1 is a soulful open ended RPG with meaning choises and good combat
>BG2 is a soulless Reddit romance social sim
What went wrong?
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
 |
Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
>BG1 is a soulful open ended RPG with meaning choises and good combat. >BG2 is a soulless Reddit romance social sim
BG1 was a combat heavy game with trash combat. BG2 improved on it so much that I would recommend most people to skip BG1 and go straight to playing BG2.
>Starting a franchise from the second game
ishygddt
I did that with KOTOR. And I have only played the 7th and 10th Final Fantasies.
>I did that with KOTOR.
but why? both kotor games are considered great
My friend told me I shouldn't bother with the first KOTOR
kill your friend
your friend sounds like a nerd. you should definitely have played kotor first. kotor 2 is a schizojank masterpiece, but kotor is more overall fun.
>My friend told me I shouldn't bother with the first KOTOR
are you kidding? the first one is better than the second one,
It's clearly not, but it's definitely worth playing.
Your friend is a bonehead who can't form his own opinions and wants you to have his opinions instead of forming your own.
You should play kotor my dude. Its breddy gud.
Do people actually play the first FF? I started on 13-2
I played one of the remasters
It was pretty good tbdesu
FF4 through 10 are all still great games. FF1 is cool in a "oh so this is how it started" sort of way but I'd hardly consider it a must play of the franchise.
The first FF is honestly no slouch, and I'd go as far to say that every FF game from 4 to 10 is totally worth playing.
I grew up with it on NES but that wasn't very standard in the US. my dad just had like 100 NES games from working at a video rental store that closed down in the early 90s.
>Do people actually play the first FF?
Do people know what 8-Bit Theatre is?
alright, play FF1, DQ1, nobunaga's ambition 1, metal gear 1, and ultima 1 before any later titles you fricking autistic lying homosexual
All of those games are straight gas though.
tear gas?
>that I would recommend most people to skip BG1 and go straight to playing BG2.
That's actually how I was able to get into it back in the 90's. I wasn't able to really connect with BG1, so gave up on it (borrowed a friend' discs).
Tried BG2 from another friend's discs, was instantly hooked (Irenicus is awesome and it was and interesting way to start the game) then bought my own copy and beat it. Went back to BG1 with the context of 2 and was able to enjoy 1.
More like you start at level 1 in BG1 so in the beginning anything can kill you and you can't really do anything.
this
>BG1
>make wizard
>cast magic missiles twice, dealing 9 damage
>"oof guys I'm tired can we rest pwease :3"
>bg1
>make wizard
>cast sleep once
>every enemy in a mile wide radius is prone for 5 minutes, send your guys to cut their throats
lariaBlack folk think this is dumb, because they don't know how to have fun.
>He uses magic missile
There are so many more useful spells Anon. Sleep and web are both great.
this guy's correct. BG1's combat is bad and BG2 is just better in every way
Thankfully you can mod BG2 combat into BG1 via tutu, and EE uses BG2 combat by default.
>But it's not balanced!
Neither is 2.
BG1 hardly had any choices and the combat had fewer options than BG2 due to lower levels.
I should add: what was better in BG1 was exploration, but OP probably hasn't even played it.
I disagree about that. 90% of maps are empty as shit and some them are truly empty and have nothing but a few fights. BG2 really wants you to go around talking to everyone to unlock fast travel areas/quests.
so which of the enhanced editions DON'T frick up the games
NWN.
just no.
the nwn enhanced edition fricks up so many things.
what you want is the diamon edition of nwn.
it runs on modern hardware. just add the nwn client extention to restore online funcitonality and remove the need for an account.
What does it frick up? EE is the first one I ever touched
I'm a long-time NWN player and although the EE doesn't do a ton, I do notice improvements over diamond. NWN:EE seems to be one of the first games where beamdog realized their content additions were terrible and they should stick to simply improving graphics/stability/compatibility. It's weird that you have to install the HD texture pack separately, and I don't think they covered everything, but the lighting rework and HD textures are an improvement over modding diamond. If you play NWN online, EE fixed the server browser (so it works again) and makes joining a new PW easy (all required files are downloaded & installed automatically instead of having to go search for them and install it all manually).
It's nothing incredible, but it's all basically positive IMO and worth paying for if you're a fan of the game.
>t. still bitter about their "enhancements" to BG1/2
soul vs soulless
I like their work overall, but I don't like how the new shader makes the metal look plasticky.
>t. still bitter about their "enhancements" to BG1/2
It still boggles my mind how there's not a classic option in the menu. That's standard issue with 99% of remasters.
what's offensive about it is that there were tons of new character mods available for years. all beandig did was pack their own gay fanmods in with the game, there's nothing special about them. it's ridiculous.
install tutu you mong
I tried both. Modded EE was less of a pain in the ass. In-game cutscenes are worse, but I can just go watch those online.
BG2 isn't better because of EE, but it's mostly intact. The only issues are the OC companions, but they aren't as egregious as in the first game.
BG1 is hurt because it's balance is destroyed by kits, it's weapon choices hindered by the changed proficiency system, and it's spells being altered to fit their BG2 counterparts, in addition to OCs and the DLC being awful.
Bg1 ee is pretty good.
2 is kind of a disaster. Original art for items and dolls is completely replaced, UI is absolute dogshit ugly, new companions are fricking terrible.
You can fix ugly as frick ui with mods.
are you mentally challenged? Prior to the EE, people would download mods just to replay BG1 in the BG2 engine because of how superior the UI elements were in BG2.
EE has a new ui you fricking moronic piece of Black person shit.
>2
>new companions are terrible
I almost uninstalled the first game when I met this character, until I realized she was OC from the troony remaster devs
oh frick really... now it makes sense why she was so out of place
This is why I tell you homosexuals to only play the originals. Unfricking the EE editions is just as much time as modding the originals and neither is necessary to enjoy the games. Just play vanilla your first time and then mess with stuff if you want more.
they will never listen. the only way to fix it is to buy out beandawg and patch the game ourselves
Playing BG1 without zoom in/out and difficulty options sucks ass. I'd be fine with vanilla if combat wasn't so terrible.
that's why you get the original dnd collection
> that let's sacrifice the white girl for the cool strong black girl quest
What a weird quest.
Planescape: Torment is Beamdog's best/least lazy remaster. BG2 works but I hate the transparent dialogue window and how they removed the connected parts of the UI from the original, looks much worse.
Don't buy any old RPGs on Steam, buy them on GOG or pirate. Steam doesn't bother making the games playable on first launch.
Mod out the new companions and you'll be fine.
I want to hate frick Lilura.
I want to see Lilura
Whisper in her ear "Oblivion with Guns is better than Jagged Alliance 2" as you go balls deep
eww s(he) is like 45
More like 35.
She dislikes what is contemporary known as the golden era rpgs which is the late '80s to early '90s and praises the rpg renaissance of the late 1990s. So she was probably in her teens in the late '90s.
Lilura is definitely a man, right? Only a man would choose a name like that, and no woman can be that autistic. Probably late 30s to early 40s since he likes games slightly older than what I like.
I've just read like 4 paragraphs from his blog and if you guys think that's a woman's prose you are beyond help.
anon I'm 30 and I was at the very most 6 years old in the late 90s
All RPGs are bad. You should stop wasting your time on this awful genre for stupid people and move on.
t. ADHD-ridden zoomer
I'm 34 years old and regret the time I've spent on RPGs. You are better off playing any other genre.
Why specifically RPGs? All time spent playing video games is wasted
Because they have zero gameplay.
If you enjoyed your time then it is not wasted at all.
If you could choose between a lifetime of enjoying videogames, or a life of hard work and effort which one would you choose?
Yes, the second option would be virtous and "meaningful", and gives something to brag about, but if you could just do nothing but enjoy yourself all your life would you seriously turn that down?
Some people would unironically choose the whole "difficult life of hard work" because they are incapable of just being happy and find meaning in life without misery and struggle. Either incredibly depressed people or robots who cant find joyful experiences fulfilling or maybe they just feel bad or shameful for getting decent things without going through the grinder.
Based.
It's sad. I'm not wasting all my life just to make someone else rich and happy, or to impress a lazy woman that doesn't like to work but would love a husband that does so that she can do nothing all day.
Frick all that. Save money, invest, retire and enjoy life.
meaningless statement, all the matters is if you enjoy it
>i regret spending time on those video games
>you better off playing other video games
homie what?
do we really have to do this all the time. you're on Ganker homie your time is not worth that much
It's sad to see the replies to this thread.
No wonder we wnded up with BG3... It seems it will only get worse from here.
No more peaceful walks through beautiful forests or exciting adventures in Gnoll Fortresses and demon-infested mines.
>exciting adventures
homie the only reason i was looking at the screen during the Knoll fortress was to make sure my party didn't die
RTwP is fricking braindead
>No more peaceful walks through beautiful forests or exciting adventures in Gnoll Fortresses and demon-infested mines.
Thank God
Nashkel is one of the worst cRPG dungeon snorefests I ever had the displeasure of slogging through. Four levels of featureless corridors packed with copypasted kobolds. What a fun crawl.
It was a simple, straight forward dungeon. Easy to navigate, progressively got more difficult with traps and fire arrow kobolds near the end and it had a pretty cool boss fight at the end. BG3 dungeons are overdesigned. Way too much verticality, too many pointless and obscure puzzles, annoying enemy placement.
>It was a simple, straight forward dungeon.
Simple, straightforward dungeons are alright if they understand what they are and thus are three rooms long.
Nashkel though is a massive four floor slog with NOTHING remotely interesting happening. Kobold, trap, kobold, trap, kobold, trap. Over and over again. You don't even get any eye candy because it's a fricking mine tunnel.
>massive four floor slog
Only floors 2 and 3 are windy kobold tunnels. Floor 1 is the operating mine with just one set of kobolds by the entrance to floor 2. Floor 4 is just the outside and inside of the boss’s tool and is otherwise mostly empty.
Honestly, in comparison with classic tabletop adventure map, BG1 is small.
You go through Nashkel mines when you are level 2 to 3, it's not supposed to be that challenging.
Its a dungeon for a level 1 party anon. Sorry, no beholder or dragons.
I thought Nashkel was good for beginners. Same with the gnoll fort. Just go to Durlag's tower if you want a dungeon experience.
The maze and Ulcaster's infinite respawning kobolds drove me nuts though.
>RTwP
yes, I too enjoy taking 200 hours to beat a 30 hour long video game. Turn based combat sure is awesome.
>turnbased
>want to kite a large enemy group into a kill zone 3 screens away
>1 hour later the combat is finished
RtwP
>want to kite a large enemy group into a kill zone 3 screens away
>this takes 30 seconds
yeah that's something I really miss in BG3. Kiting and pulling enemies feels so fricking awkward in turn based. It takes away a huge element of strategy.
It isn't that bad, the game basically forces you to gitgud at it early on with that dual Intellect Devourer encounter.
I HATE DURLAG'S TOWER
People praising BG1 are blinded by nostalgia. I played it only recently and it's honestly a mediocre game. The combat is shit (so is BG2), and the story is lackluster. Also, who cares about choices since you have only one and same ending? It literally didn't matter.
BG1 has good combat IF
>You play as a wizard
>You hit ~Level 5 and get access to Level 3 spells
With limited spells but many options, wizards can hit above their weight class as the right combination of spells can overcome any party of boses. The only exception are monsters with the high MR, and even then you can use Flame Arrow on them.
BG2 is just better all around with combat though, that can't be disputed, it's the more polished game.
>The combat is shit (so is BG2), and the story is lackluster.
BG2 specifically has a narrative. The game railroads you into specific maps and a specific route (good aligned) with specific npcs (good-aligned) because the writers didn't want to deal with an evil-aligned party.
For what he is, Sarevok is well written and characterized in BG1. The game also slowly reveals who is he is and makes hating him personal, since Sarevok goes out of his way to embarass and disgrace the MC in Candlekeep. Everything with Irenicus is told in backstory and his motivations are obscured for too much of the story.
BG2 is better because you're higher level. The low level disable spells that wizard have in BG1 are insane and probably why they're so weak
This makes BG1 an excellent candidate for an insane playthrough with a full party, something you can't say about modern cRPGs
Shit combat, no choices, unmemorable characters and no romance options. Yeah, I think I'll stick with BG 3
I agree.
BG1 was amazing until you reach Baldur's Gate.
Baldur's Gate the city is a lot of fun. BG1 stops being fun at the return to Candlekeep, and by that point the game's pretty much over.
if you play the beandog shit you can fricking have a nice day. don't stink up my baldurs gate discussions with your worthless opinions. no, it's not ok if you "hate the new characters and just play it for convenience" because that's a lie, and all of you talk about the new characters and I don't know what the frick you're even talking about because I own the games on fricking cdrom.
I own both games on the 5 disc CDroms too and I bought the enhanced editions on Steam to recently replay them. Never as much as talked to a single one of the Beamdog NPCs. Keep seething, sweaty.
I don't mind the new characters(besides the wild mage, she's stupid)
Personally i think the monk is cool, but don't have a slot for him in my party
I literally killed the monk through accidental friendly fire during one of the assassination attempts and completely forgot about him.
I talked once to Neera and Dorn and completely ignored them for the rest of the game.
I don't know why people resent them as if having 3 conversations completely ruins the game.
>bg 2 about romance
yeah sure, maybe by pixar standards, but i aint see nothing really explicit there
Is BG1 old enough where it's just painful to play through, or is it all right? The gameplay looks worrying if that's something I'm gonna do for 40 hours.
Its braindead as frick
Have a youtube essay video running on the background or smth
Asking if BG1 and 2 still plays well is like asking if Age of Empires 2, Starcraft or Diablo 2 still play well. They don't just play well, they literally were the peak of their respective genres and it only went downhill from there.
It plays well only on the Enhanced Edition
not true, shill.
It's painfully slow at the default 30fps, but you can change it to 60fps in the configuration utility for double speed. This is not cheating because one of the load screen texts tell you that you can do it.
>good combat
>rtw/p
pick one
well, if my choices are between turn based Larian combat and traditional RTWP I'd pick RTWP every time. I play video games to have fun, not to try and fall asleep while waiting for the enemy's turn to finish.
Must suck being a zoomer with adhd
wait, I thought RTWP is for boomers and turn based is the new hotness? You Larian fanboys keep mixing up your talking points.
DnD itself is turn based
How is turn based the "new hotness" you absolute baboon?
I don't know, that's what I keep hearing you weirdos say. That RTWP is for boomers and outdated and turn based is much better. You're preaching to the choir. I keep telling these people that turn based is ancient and RTWP was actually the evolution of that system because even back in 1998 game devs realized that it's simply not fun to adapt D&D's turn based systems 1 by 1 into video game format.
Just because it was an "evolution" doesn't make it better
RPG video games used to be about taking what tabletop gaming was doing and trying to do what you couldn't accomplish with pen and paper. That's what BG1 and 2 were trying to do. If Gary Gygax could fully simulate the game D&D would never have been turn based or dice based to begin with. Everything these spergs hold up as being the pinnacle of the genre were only put in place because nothing better existed.
Excellent post and 100% true. BG3 using turn based and physical dice rolls in your face is the antithesis of what CRPGs were trying to accomplish
I could probably close Ganker for the entire day because I will never see another post as high quality and true as this
BG3 (D:OS3) is literally DnD for people who don’t like DnD and otherwise would never be invited to a TT session. The True 5e Video Game Experience, complete with ADHD riddled zoomers that never shut the frick up and foam at the mouth over “content”, because like Locusts all they can do is consume.
I think this whole scenario is interesting because it finally magnified the truth that is DnD based games aren't actually good, it's the ruleset that the devs create because the DnD ruleset does NOT work in videogame format
The only reason 5e was included in BG3 was for marketing
>DnD based games aren't actually good, it's the ruleset that the devs create because the DnD ruleset does NOT work in videogame format
Spot on. But the devs decided that the mechanics were already taken care of, so now we get Wizards & Warriors: Sexual Degeneracy Simulator. Honestly, with the way this game has been designed and zoomoids jumping up & down about muh choices, i think the vast majority of these fricking clowns would really get a kick out of shit like doki doki literature club. Plenty of choices to make in games like that, and being a degenerate reprobate is assumed!
there is too much obsession these days with choices. there are more important things for a game to have, even an RPG. i dont know why choices is what everyone always focuses on.
Until we have full AI generative text videogame role-playing can only be done through choices.
its fatigue from typical AAA games of the past decade.
What exactly did they accomplish that you couldn't do with pen and paper?
They made a videogame instead of this
?t=22
A simulation of a board game in a videogame
probably to difficult of a concept for you to understand
>They made a video game
Yes, but what did they accomplish that you couldn't do in pen and paper? You didn't answer my question. You didn't answer because they didn't accomplish anything
There's nothing more boring and flow breaking than rtwp trash. Having to pause the game to issue commands to your entire party is not good game design
>what's the difference between making a videogame and making a board game simulator videogame
again you might be mentally moronic and I can see why you made this thread
>y-you're moronic
Great non argument you baboon
>Having to pause the game to issue commands to your entire party is not good game design
but if the game force pauses to do the same is? Kek, are you moronic?
RTWP always sucks because of how inherently OP the Pausing is. Just the same as VATS in Bethesda Fallout.
If the game is built around real time, then being able to Pause makes encounters trivial because it kills the importance of reaction time which is a key part of challenge in a real time game.
>being able to Pause makes encounters trivial because it kills the importance of reaction time which is a key part of challenge in a real time game.
Baldur's Gate is actually turned based.
>Having to pause the game to issue commands to your entire party is not good game design
But the game pausing every time for you somehow is? I really don't get this logic. If you wanted to, you technically could play a RTWP title the same as turn based, you just have to manually pause after every action. But because that is in fact rarely ever needed, nobody plays like that.
>I really don't get this logic
Because there is none, he's an outrage baiter and probably OP
He's just here to spew nonsense and get attention because his mother doesn't love him or something
Turn based is fine because the game is designed around it. Pausing in rtwp is simply an afterthought because they realized how moronic it is to issue commands to every character in real time.
>this game mechanic isn't real because I don't like it
why do I picture you crying sitting in a pool of your own urine?
I wish we had IDs like /misc/. It's clear, that it's the same person samegayging in the thread
Of course it is, he's the main shitposting spammer on Ganker
If you spend any amount of time talking to him you'll recognize him everywhere, particularly because he puts so much effort into not saying anything
>putting words in my mouth because he lost an argument
I accept your concession.
The DnD ruleset is meant for turn based, rtwp in those games is fundamentally flawed.
How's that
>The DnD ruleset is meant for turn based
DnD ruleset was meant to be played on a table with a human interpreting everything. Dice rolling is meant to add a layer of randomness to the infinite variety that actual roleplaying brings to the table. Playing a turnbased video game is already changing D&D beyond what it should be
obfuscating the argument by conflating out of combat ttrpg gameplay with in combat turn based crpg gameplay
There is literally no such difference. Roleplaying features in combat in a tabletop game just like talking to shopkeppers does. You can't make the argument that a video game is ever going to be "real" D&D.
Ive played “real” dnd irl since 2010 and it sure as frick looks way more like bg3 in combat than any of the rtwp games
But Baldurs Gate 1 and 2 are clearly designed for RTWP
RTWP was literally invented for BG1. It didn't exist prior to that. Clearly it wasn't an afterthought, the whole game was designed with that system in mind.
RTWP was invented because RTS games and Diablo were popular at the time. RTWP sucks because
>resolves too quickly so you pad the game with trash mobs
>encourages bland encounter design
>encourages pre-buffing and auto-attacking
>is not like tabletop despite using a tabletop stat system
>has been rejected by the market
>has consistently sucked in every game its ever been put into
RTWP is an abomination that only existed because RTS and Diablo used to be popular
that doesn't make any sense at all. Speaking of RTS though, it's honestly crazy how bad it feels to control your party in Larian games as opposed to the infinity engine games. Having the ability to select party members like you play an RTS makes the gameplay feel so much smoother than this stupid finnicky shit where you have to click on the portrait to uncouple a character from the rest of the party in order to move them individually.
press g you mouthbreathing moron
>There's nothing more boring and flow breaking than rtwp trash.
This is so bizarre in a Badur's Gate thread, the game that invented this.
BG1 and BG2 are turn based. Turns pass without the player being prompted of it happening, you are only aware of it if you set autopause on. If you never use pause it's a real time like Diablo I or II, just a big clunkier since turns are still happening under the hood.
RtWP is supposed to be the perfect blend between RT and TB. You can have either, whatever you prefer.
>RtWP is supposed to be the perfect blend between RT and TB. You can have either, whatever you prefer.
But it's actually the shitty middle ground.
As a kid in 1998, I didn't have any problem with BG1's combat system. Diablo, Zelda, and Final Fantasy all had their merits.
I don't know what RtWP is like today, maybe the evolution of it has soured gamers.
the problem with modern rtwp is that its the exact same shit. its not like its impossible to make cool fights using rtwp but owlcat/obsidian couldn't do it and owlcat gave up as there next game is only turn based too. the most forgettable fights in dos2/bg3 have more intrigue and ways they can play out than entire bosses in most rtwp games which might as well be the same fight over and over and over.
>Larian who chose to make a game based on an existing franchise because they didn't have the confidence to make their own game.
they were literally going straight to dos3 you fricking moron, but you don't turn down the opportunity to make bg3. i must remind you beamdog, troika, and obsidian all wanted the license at one point. People bought bg3 because it played like a larain game with tons of romance in its trailer. if it was made by obsidian made in the pillars engine nobody would of bought that shit. i have no idea why you think normies on mass gave a single shit about the forgotten realms
>they were literally going straight to dos3 you fricking moron, but you don't turn down the opportunity to make bg3. i must remind you beamdog, troika, and obsidian all wanted the license at one point.
so pray tell, why is the Baldur's Gate license so highly sought after among all these prestigeous RPG devs if the original games are such utter dogshit according to Larian fanboys?
it's not the same at all. the first thing I thought when playing pillars 1 was "why is the combat so fricking slow". literally the thing that makes infinity engine games fun is playing them at 2x intended speed. obsidian completely fricked that up, also they added mmo cooldown bullshit. I don't know about pathfinder, but I'm sure they also fricked it up. every rtwp implementation that isn't the infinity engine at 2x speed sucks. simple as.
i like bg1/2 despite the gameplay not because of it, and i feel like most people feel the same way or you homies would adore icewind dale and its sequel but you don't. for every 1 cool fight(usually all are in the sequel) there's 30 fights you just double fireball or melee/arrow down with zero thought like filler garbage. this is inherently not a great idea
Icewind dale 2 is my favorite IE game. 1 is dogshit where every dungeon has "the melee enemy" and "the ranged" enemy spammed constantly at you with nothing else to do.
i got bored during the goblin attack at the start, and never picked it up again.
>you homies would adore icewind dale and its sequel
75% of the morons complaining about real time have never even heard of icewind dale or neverwinter nights
I can't really think of any CRPG that I enjoy because of the combat. They're usually the worst part of those games. Going back, I end up playing most games on easy because I don't actually want to engage at all with the combat and just enjoy doing quests and role playing.
There's really no difference in how you play BG based on difficulty. Unless you're solo
I will repeat, fruitlessly. the combat isn't the point. it's a roleplaying game, not a tactical combat game. the combat is a power check for your character. lariantards will trip over themselves insisting that the combat has to be GOOD and it doesn't make SENSE to say the combat doesn't matter because it's a GAME with SWORDS so it must be about fighting things. this is exactly the same moronic incorrect line of thinking that josh sawyer applied making his terrible failures, failing do to the exact same total lack of understanding that is now so pervasive that we will never ever ever get a good rpg ever again. it's going to be games ABOUT fighting goblins forever, because you morons just won't fricking get it.
I wouldn't want to play an Icewind Dale game made by Larian either. Get it? No, of course you don't, and you never will.
>75% of the game sucking dick is okay because it just is, and changing ti so it doesn't suck dick anymore is bad
man rtwp homies are funny
I wonder why none of these games ever had the balls to just have combat be rolls similar to dialogue in the sense that you could just do a strength check roll for an encounter and it'll auto resolve and you won't have to fight anything.
Combat in CRPGs have always been the worst parts of the game.
if combat isnt the point, then what is the point? people dont want to just stay in dialogue the whole time either.
>people dont want to just stay in dialogue the whole time either.
I do.
I like the adventure of CRPGs so just talking to people, completing quests and seeing the story is all I really want.
combat is a big part of the adventure though. otherwise its basically just a visual novel
combat is a storytelling device. rpg.
it matters that your character is able to kill a kobold. you don't need to meticulously plan out your attack on a group of kobolds.
>otherwise its basically just a visual novel
Or a text adventure because that's basically what DnD is. It's why something like Roadwarden is closer to what DnD is in my mind more so than any older CRPG does by being required to turn it more into a video game.
you guys act like DnD was only about telling a story and thats just not the case.
DnD always heavily involved combat, stats, class builds, dungeons and monsters
>you guys act like DnD was only about telling a story and thats just not the case.
It depends on the campaign and your DM I guess. I've had campaigns that had a very light combat focus and was purely just about exploration and adventuring.
you don't get it. crpgs are about stats, class builds, dungeons and monsters, and combat(last place)
DnD was about combat before wotc got ahold of them
3.0 and 3.5e were anime power fantasies, 4e was an attempt by wotc to "return to form" and try and make a more combat heavy experience and their fat troony audience dilated in unison over it
to suggest that 4e is somehow more like ad&d than 3e is beyond moronic. I would say you're trolling, but 4e was so long ago at this point that it's entirely possible you just have no idea what you're talking about
4e gave every class spells in the tabletop and you had to use the spells to be viable. Fat trannies didn't like that they could just "kill jester" with their warrior while dancing around the table and actually had to use abilities like a mage.
The tabletop is for fat morons that want to play charades now and has almost no focus on combat
people didn't like that every class was basically exactly the same, yeah. it was shit. like an mmo or a card game. the art in the books was also crap, but that hasn't changed.
point being that actually making DnD more "balanced" and "combat focused" pissed everybody off
so your assertion that the tabletop is about combat is wrong, the tabletop fundamentally is about getting fellated by the DM for your charades
there's nothing about 4e's total homogenization of the system that made it any more combat focused, it just made the combat simplistic and boring.
yes because having Suzie the cleric do nothing the entire fight but heal you once so you can get back to trying to fumble through D20 rolls to advance the campaign while barely staying in character is "combat focus"
clerics in 3e are notoriously the most powerful class in the game
and?
The classes had the same amount of abilities, they didn't have the same abilities though. I feel like morons never realized this because they never played the fricking game, classes had their differences and some could play wildly differently. Even in the same class - Fighters could go Battlerager, Champion, Duelist, and they all had different mechanics that gave them different strategies. It's a hell of a lot more interesting than anything 5e's got right now.
Then you don't want to play an rpg. You want a adventure game.
Go back to watching tv
>Go back to watching tv
But enough about playing Baldur's Gate 1
You don't want a video game. You want a spreadsheet simulator to play with your polycule on game night. Frick off with that shit.
Why does combat filter so many people? Without combat what other fail states do you have? And don't tell me dialogue, because RPG writers can't write for shit and it'll devolve to "roll a d20 to see if you pass/fail this dialogue tree"
combat in a cRPG should be infrequent, brief, and decided by your parties overall status. the game should not come to a screeching halt for 5 minutes for a deep tactical battle.
same principle is what makes new vegas good.
you’re playing an offshoot of a war game and complaining that there’s too much war gaming
yeah dude jerry jyjax made dungeons and dragoons by taking this game nobody ever played called chainmail and playing lord of the rings with it, but it's not 1972 anymore and we have these things called "microcomputers" grampa.
I bet you think Diablo is a CRPG
>xcom
>alpha centauri
Pull out a list made in this decade. The definition changed a long time ago
is this person like the scaruffi of old computer games
If Diablo is a CRPG then Dark Souls is a JRPG
dark souls is basically a jrpg
>japanese
>role playing game
yeah, I'm thinking dark souls is a jrpg.
JRPG doesn't actually mean anything, which is perfect for a game like dark souls which is an unfinished concept with literal cardboard cutout interpretations of game design as if the people that made it were the equivalent of a teen in a group project that didn't participate giving the presentation and not understanding anything in it
JRPG used to mean SNES and NES pixel shit for anime neckbeards. They despised FF7, 8 and 12 because it they were "too western like".
> Old-Com is highter on the list than Fallout
Based Lilura trolling tryhards.
>shit gameplay is ok
>combat isn't a huge part of rpgs
Olympic gold in mental gymnastics
calculate everyone's turns in real time in the background, so combat encounters have a far better flow to it and feel way less tedious and boring.
Ruining the game before anyone’s even sat down at the table yet
CRPG is a very different beast to the tabletop. Mundane tasks like dungeon crawling or adventuring in town or killing low level mooks is fun in tabletop as long as you like the people and the gm you are playing with. In CRPG every thing must be "special" otherwise it becomes repetitive and boring very fast. You can also save scum in a video game and that ruins the combat. But if you limit the ability to save the players will complain about the rng, or the combat will be so easy it will become boring if you tune it down.
Closest thing you can do on computer to tabletop is a coop rpg and perma death.
>CRPG is a very different beast to the tabletop.
>video game has random rolls
>get pissed when it the rolls go bad
>TTRPG has random rolls
>accept the results with no issue when the roll goes bad, even when the result is horrible, having fun all the way
>random 1's are just as exciting as random 20s
You could make the perfect simulation of D&D in video game form and it wouldn't matter because you can never recreate that aspect of it.
Well i think people get less mad in person because it would be awkward and embarrassing to have a breakdown in front of your friends. its not like every dm bothers to improv for every 1/20 that happens pretty regularly tbh
To be fair an actual innovation for cRPGs would be implementing a system for critical failures
not a shitty flash animation of a die rolling in the middle of your screen like you're playing monopoly
You have to accept the random roll in TTRPG because the GM isn't going to reroll for you. You either accept it or quit.
Save scuming is why you cannot replicate the TTRPG experience outside of, like, an MMO.
As a G/DM in table top the rule of thumb is don't let your players roll for something if you're not prepared for them to succeed or fail.
In combat you live and die by the diceroll but the rest of the time its the DM keeping you on rails without making the players feel stuck on those rails.
In a video game you don't have a human behind the wheel accomodating every possible option and you're stuck with corridors you cant deviate from.
>coop with perma death and no reloading
This would make for a very fun BG3 play through unironically
Instead you make a new set of characters and have to find someway to get them into the story where it left off. Actually that sounds fun.
t. Zoomer
i was so happy to kill this b***h, hope it doesn’t frick me over later lmao
Icewind Dale was better.
icewind dale 1is better than baldurs gate 1
but baldurs gate 2 is a real mans game
Nerds started working and "new" fanbase of horny teens and romancegays hijacked RPGs
And how would you rate BG3?
BG1 is not good
BG1 is good, BG2 is great, BG3 is mediocre.
BG3 is so much better than both it's not even funny. Nostalgia is a hell of a drug.
Shit bait tbh
Not bait. Cope.
homer_with_purple_sandwich.jpg
costanza.png
>Nostalgia
I replay BG2 every couple of years, finished it last year the last time. It's still a fantastic game, even for today's standards.
BG1 becomes enjoyable, if you played BG2 before. Low-level AD&D combat is torture, if you are totally new to it. Won't play BG3, because the Larian style turn-based combat is simply awful
My exact take. BG1 is too difficult if it is your first Infinity game.
Not interested in BG3 or any other modern AAA. The Pathfinder games were too cheesy and I didn't finish the first one.
>Larian style turn-based combat
do zoomers really think larian invented turn based games?
Larian combat is a subset of turn based moron. A very slow and tedious one
>Larian combat is a subset of turn based moron.
in what way?
the only “larian” thing in the game is the ground effects and those are extremely muted compared to d:os
>the only “larian” thing in the game is the ground effects
And the fricking chasms + free shove on everyone
The ubiquitous broken environmental bullshit has stinky Larian hands all over it.
>stinky
Wait what's wrong with being able to utilize the environment to frick up enemies? BG3 is the closest we're going to get to an actual DnD campaign in a game for a while.
The fact that utilizing the environment effectively gives everyone a braindeadly obvious save or die cast as a bonus action that's far, far more effective than playing out the combat rules normally.
Larian style turn-based means a combat system where the player is in control of the action about 30% of the time, while 70% of the time is spent watching and waiting for the enemy to finish their turn.
id love to watch a recording of you playing the game if you actually think that’s the ratio of time you’re in control in combat
or do you just do nothing but attack and reload when you lose?
that I’ll agree with but it also has absolutely nothing to do with the game being turn based, the environment can matter in real time or rtwp combat systems too
I'm in my mid-30s. I say Larian-style, because there also were plenty of other games, that faciliated turn-based combat. Sometimes it sucked, sometimes it was good. In a game like Jagged Alliance 2 (didn't play 3 yet), turn-based was the best choice. In CRPGs, it sucks. RTWP was the step into the right direction.
but it made it better
You can also simply avoid all those romances by saying the wrong sentence once. Compare that to the bullshit bisexual frick-triangle from Kingmaker, where the half-orc is a literal cuck.
>but it made it better
No it didn't, RTWP is a clusterfrick not suited to DnD mechanics.
it worked great in BG2 and Icewind Dale. It kinda sucks at low-levels, because only bows hit reliably, but after some level-ups, the combat is fun and fast-paced. There isn't a single turn-based RPG, where the combat is even remotely fun.
>muh combat is only fun if it's fast paced
Ok so you have adhd, no one cares. Keep your shit opinions to yourself.
>muhadhd
I also mention Jagged Alliance 2 here
which is one of the best games of all times. Turn-based just doesn't fit most CRPGs, since almost all of them have some medieval high fantasy setting. Now I ask you: name one CRPG with turn-based combat, where the combat is actually fun.
d:os
d:os2
bg3
bought d:os when it was 3 bucks on steam sale and I dropped it after 10 hours. Combat is garbage and the comic-style enemy design is even worse. Didn't play d:os2 and BG3, because it's the same garbage combat (and it contains a lot of homosexualry) and won't play them. You can't even name games, that aren't made by Larian and you are calling other people zoomers? Frick off.
xcom
xcom2
fft
ffta
xcom is great and the combat is fun, but it's not a CRPG. Final Fantasy is JRPG, but let's say that counts.
what makes xcom not a crpg other than you thinking it shouldnt be one
probably not being an RPG to begin with
because you feel like it?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XCOM
also because the devs not feel like it
Why does medieval high fantasy not fit turn based? You're grasping at straws
because outside of bows/crossbows and magic, combat is melee in those settings. Turn-based melee looks dumb, feels dumb and is dumb.
The best choice would be enabling both turn-based and RTWP. I think DA:O implemented something like that.
>looks dumb, feels dumb and is dumb because it just does ok?
Can't argue with such a well reasoned logical argument.
Auto attacking a goblin for 2 min looks way dumber than killing it with one or two swings.
>2 min
>looks way dumber than killing it with one or two swings
if we take BG2 as an example, you kill the Goblin in one swing. Two, if you are very unlucky. If we take BG1 as an example, you still one-shot them with the melee classes like warrior or paladin. If you melee the goblin with a wizard, who has STR 6, well yes, it makes sense, that he can't kill the goblin in melee.
>if we take BG2 as an example, you kill the Goblin in one swing
You know that's a lie
the dungeon at the very beginning of the game is filled with goblins. Minsc one shots all of them, either with a bow or with a sword. Even Jaheira, despite having shit stats for a warrior multiclass, oneshots almost all of them. Yeah, Imoen doesn't, but she has STR 9 as a thief.
>goblin
tangent but BG1 didn't have goblins. The mooks were Gibberlings, Kobolds, Xvart and Tasloi.
Gibberlings had fast movement and 2 attacks/round, so they had high crit rate. Even a melee party could get torn apart by Gibberlings.
Tasloi had spears, so slightly higher range than , but low foot speed and 1 attack/rnd.
Kobolds had 4 HP but also had bows. Wizards could 1 shot them with melee but you could get killed fast if too many arrows were fired.
Xvarts were the big joke, slow, weak, only armed with a shortsword
If the hit chance is so low the 2 minutes of swinging in real time will turn into 10 minutes of cycling the same turns over and over in turn based.
>There isn't a single turn-based RPG, where the combat is even remotely fun.
DnD is pretty fun
moron
>What went wrong?
it was made by canadians
>BG1
>meaning choices
What? For all I remember, BG1 is just combat 90% of the time and any choice you make doesn't change anything. They're there for roleplaying mostly.
You remember right
Most choices are " who do i kill here?" they don't actually have much consequence
>What went wrong?
audiences want a hand holding experience.
bg1 is awesome because it didn't put markers on the map your you are just a subway car on rails.
bg3 is fantastic, but it's a way more guided experience than most people will admit.
You literally get told where to go in almost every conversation in BG1
>told where to go.
and by that you are given a name, perhaps cardinal directions. you don't get a giant marker on the map.
Because you don't need it, you are being held by the hand either way
So being held by the hand now means a game giving you any form of direction or goal?
If its clear and in your face, then yes.
so what cRPGs don't hold you by the hand by your definition? Every cRPG I can think of has a main quest that tells you what you should do next, whether that's oldschool titles or modern ones.
They don't, that's my point
Saying a CRPG "doesn't hold your hand" is stupid
Nta anon, but I just wanted to call you a moron for thinking a journal is handholding.
I literally had no idea where to go for Kagain's quest. You are just told to look for a caravan going from Amn to Baldur's Gate when a starting player would have no idea where either location is.
Not to mention when you meet him, you're likely going south to Nashkel, which means you're going the wrong direction to begin with.
>go south to nashkel
>see broken-down caravan and slaughtered bodies on the road
>meet Kagin
>he's looking for a caravan
>go back north to the one you just saw
>"yup, he's dead alright"
I didn't realize I had finished it, so they could've done a better job of it like give you a quest to inform his father once you got to the city of Baldur's Gate.
BG1 is a fantasy adventure in connand world or some shit, BG2 is railroaded and full of romance homosexualry, totally different and imo worse.
BG2 had 4 tasteful romances that were like 1 new dialog every 5 or so hours of gameplay, usually before resting. They never overstayed their welcome, they weren't fetish fuel and were quite well written. People talking shit about the BG2 romances are just contrarians who desperately want to fit in or Larian fanboys who are defaulting to the "every criticism against BG3 was actually always shit" type of argument.
BG2 romances were frickign cringe, i honestly cant think of any rpg with romance which wasnt some virgin neckbeard fantasy
not an argument. A virgin neckbeard fantasy of romance is simply a heterosexual romance focusing on loyalty and love, which is basically all classic romance stories.
Torment
MotB
Kotor 2
>about 2 hours into BG1
>all the combat encounters are just me auto attacking enemies and dying after missing for 2-3 minutes straight
>encounters turn into just reloading the game over and over until i dont miss
Did I just roll shitty stats or something? I basically have to run back to town any time I run out of arrows as the girl with the bow is the only one able to hit anything.
90+ are good stats
Also you need proficiency in the weapon you're using, 1 proficiency point in something just means you don't get a malus when using it, no bonus.
>put proficiency in a weapon
>never see that type of weapon
Everything I've seen so far has just been swords. I guess I should just remake my character?
What did you choose?
Flails and the sword / shield style because I figured I wanted that for paladin
If it's any consolation, some of the best endgame weapons in BG2 are flails.
There's few Flails in BG1 iirc, all the good flails are in BG2
If you don't want to wait for that just remake it into a longsword Pali or smth
That is unfortunate to hear that I effectively bricked my character as early as character creation. Wish these games would either balance shittier stats or just remove them entirely. No clue what's the point of allow you to pick useless shit.
You can also edit the save.
I'm playing it on Switch, so I'll just start over.
Roleplay
Kind of why Cavalier has a bonus against enemy types you barely see ingame, since its the "heroic knight" archetype that fights those enemy types
> A knight without a horse
Defend this, crpg sisters.
>has a bonus against enemy types you barely see ingame
>pathfinder has 90% demons
>bg3 has 90% undead
I'm so tired of these games and their shit balance. I understand campaigns have a motif so they want to throw a particular enemy at you but it really handicaps other builds and forces you down a specific path if you don't want to feel gimped.
I hate this across all games
>spec a character into a certain element or against a type of enemy
>all endgame enemies are immune to that element and there are no more of that type
yeah, better make a new character. Sword / shield is the worst weapon style. It gives you some ridiculously miniscule bonus like some extra armor against ranged attacks when wearing a shield.
The strongest weapon style by far is 2 weapon style because that didn't actually exist in the original BG1 and dualwielding completely breaks the balance of the game. Second best is 2handed style, which also works well with the paladin class fantasy, plus there are some really good 2handed swords in the game too.
You don’t need a new weapon you just need more time with the game. There’s very few impressive weapons in bg1. You can beat the game with a quarterstaff. Solider on.
The first screen or so can go this way, but 2 hours is too long.
Learn sleep, magic missile, etc. Go to Beregost and get better equipped. Get a full party together.
>Did I just roll shitty stats or something?
Maybe but that's the combat of BG1 just autoattacks, people praising it are fueled by nostalgia atleast Baldurs Gate 2 its good
Bows on everyone
Sleep, web, shoot.
Rinse, repeat. If rolls failed, reload. Welcome to low level AD&D.
That's some weak braindead b8 m8
I always wondered, can you kill Aerie with the child on her, then kick her from the party to free the inventory slot?
The whole trilogy (BG1,BG2,BG3) is amazing.
ToB sucks ass though.
The trilogy is BG1, BG2 and ToB. BG3 has nothing to do with those games, no matter Larian's stupid attempt to retcon the original.
Boomer cope.
ToB is a poorly made cash grab expansion, not a new game.
Bioware wanted to make BG3 that had nothing to do with the original saga.
what do you mean cope? The original company made those games over 20 years ago and concluded the story they wanted to tell with ToB. Also you seem a bit confused here. They originally started working on ToB planning for it to be BG3, but then they realized they didn't have quite enough new content to justify a new game, so instead they released a huge 30-40 hour long expansion instead.
Also Bioware had the D&D licence for many years after, so if they really had wanted to continue Baldur's Gate with a new story, they could have just done that instead of making NWN or Kotor.
Bioware was going through it's console wienersucking phase, that's the real reason BG3 didn't happen.
no, the reason why BG3 didn't happen is because the original games told a fully concluded story and prior to Bioware's buy-out by EA, that was enough for them. They had no desire to milk a franchize purely for its brand recognition when the story they wanted to tell had already been told.
>The game that remembered BG is about Bhaalspawns and not Jonny Incelicus
>Poorly made cash grab
the only advantage rtwp has over turn based is that it makes pointless, terrible fodder fights faster and more painless
but those fights just shouldn’t exist in the first place
Uh that's a huge plus because the main negative of turn based games is how slow and clunky they are
maybe go try fps, sounds like you don’t have enough patience for rpgs
RPGs are my favorite genre, but luckily most RPGs aren't actually turn based.
Don't forget to grab the Ryoko Kui portraits mod
Dynaheir is sex
Unfortunately she missed a few in BG1.
Where are the dwarves?
link me up bwo
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fPFBOoG_LQobRcgdVxzLnhKuI2s7G8e8/view
thank you kind sir, blessings of Ilmater upon you
Why is Montaron smiling?
Guy's interaction with everyone is literally "frick off or I'll kill you for being annoying"
Because his portrait was smiling in game, on account of being a complete psychopath.
Updated my journal is better than all of them.
so is the way to play bg1 using the original with some 3rd party tweaks or enhanced edition?
Just play Planescape: Torment. Problem solved.
Kingmaker and WotR would be the perfect CRPGs if it weren't for the narrative and writing.
And the jank and the lack of balance and the artstyle and the quests and the travel system
what else?
>travel system
Has sovl and adds a sense of time and scale to the world. Contrasted with BG3 never having a real day to night transition outside of camping and the entire story feeling like it took place over the span of 4 hours, it's a masterful inclusion to those games.
Looking forward for Larian to make BG1 and 2 playable once they remake them using BG3 as a base.
Can't imagine playing a 100+ hour long "game" with combat exactly like an auto battle gacha mobile game, RTWP is a fricking joke and so is anyone who copes saying its any good. They literally only like it because the game plays itself for them outside of prebuffing for like 5 encounters across both games because they stomp their feet and cry when they have to actually play a video game.
It also has nothing to do with how DnD is actually played since DnD is a turn based game but homosexuals who like RTWP wouldn't know that since they have no friends to it play with so they play shit like IWD and Pathfinder to autistically min max builds while fantasizing about how fun it'd be to play characters like that with their made up friends.
Theres a reason Obsidian had to be bought out by microsoft while crying about how unfair it was that they were being compared to Larian, patching in turn based mode to make their games more like Larians then gave up on making CRPGs entirely.
what are you even talking about? You make the exact same tactical choices in RTWP than you do with turn based. The only difference is that it's faster and you have to pause manually rather than the game pausing for you after every action. If anything, BG1 and 2 are way more tactical and difficult than BG3 seems to be so far.
I doubt they are remaking 1 and 2. We got Baldurs Gate reloaded for NWN2 tho, it's not bad.
>Looking forward for Larian to make BG1 and 2 playable once they remake them using BG3 as a base.
I think that would be more of a demake than a remake. Even grapghically BG2 actually looks better than BG3 does.
baldur's gate 2 is gorgeous
>BG2 is a soulless Reddit romance social sim
>this is the best bait Lariangays could come up with
Emabarassing.
It's not Larian bait, it's from the Chris-Chan of CRPGs.
"lariangays" don't exist, you can go back in the archives and look at the threads, literally 0 conversation and every post is like 5 words that had virtually nothing to do with anything with no replies
this entire shill campaign was wholly artificial
>RTWP
garbage. it died for a reason
>good rtwp games made
>moderately successful
>good turn based games made
>industry leading, powerhouse games, making a new top 5 game development studio out of thin air
so you're saying DoS1 and 2 were not good games? Because they too were nowhere near as successful as BG3 despite being turn based. What about Shadowrun and Wasteland? Those games are very modest commercial successes, if not outright flops.
the buildup of successes over dos 1, 2 and 3 juxtaposed against the lukewarm receptions of poe, tyranny, kingmaker and wotr show how turn based rpgs are simply better than rtwp
Again, Wasteland 2 and 3, Shadowrun, Solasta... Why are you ignoring all of those turn based flops?
Solasta was not a flop at all. A very small team made a game that sold really well
obviously they just werent good games
lets compare apples to apples
obsidian were highly regarded when they made their rtwp games
but Pillars 1 and 2 weren't good games. Why is New Vegas so highly regarded by Outer Worlds isn't? You are the one who is comparing apples to oranges. And again, I must remind you that it is Larian who chose to make a game based on an existing franchize because they didn't have the confidence to make their own game.
I didn't like PoE2 and bounced off it pretty hard but I thought PoE1 was good enough. Why don't people like that game?
in my case , i didn't feel like i did have enough choices
>Larian who chose to make a game based on an existing franchize because they didn't have the confidence to make their own game.
were you a game dev at some defunct studio or something holy shit the seething is unreal
I'm just stating facts here. You can shit on BG1 and 2 all you want, but Larian, your new favorite company, chose to make a game based on those previous titles you hate so much. If an author writes a fanfiction book based on another authors work, they can't really claim that their work has higher value than the original their work is based on.
larian were already kings of the genre after dos2
wotc are lucky larian gave them the time of day to revive their defunct system
I want to remind you that Larian had to attach themselves like a parasite to an already existing franchize to gain that success.
Larain was making dos3 and a dos spin off xcom game. they literally did not need the bg license like have you Black folk forgot that dos2 was still more popular than pathfinder with its own dedicated fanbase?
Larain would have been just fine
DOS2 sold over 5 million copies. It's amazing how many people know nothing about RPGs
Larian doesn't release sales figures shill
>In Swen's recent interview on Eurogamer, he mentioned that DOS2 sold around three times as many copies as DOS1. He couldn't recall any exact numbers on the spot, but back in a 2019 GDC talk* he also claims DOS1 sold a total of 2.5 Million copies. - Jul 16, 2023
You've been btfo, shill
RTWP games have 10 times the combat encounters because they are padded with trash mobs. Quality >>>>> quantity
Correct larian doesn't release sales figures so you posting in every thread an exact count of how much they sold of every game is a bald faced lie
>they dont release sales figures
Here's the CEO saying what the sales figures are
>that doesnt count!
Correct larian doesn't release sales figures so you posting in every crpg thread the exact sales of every game is nothing but an asspull and a lie and you know it
>moderately successful
Want to know how I know you weren't around for the 90's?
So what are all the CRPGs with turn based combat? After attempting to play through BG1 I found that I just can't deal with RTwP.
Are there any CRPGs I can play, even with mods? I just want more turn based ones because BG3 is some of the most fun I've had with a video game in a really long time.
it's not a rpg but wh40k sanctus has good turn based combat
Fallout 1, 2 and Tactics
Divinity: Original Sin 1 and 2
Age of Decadence
Play the Fallout games bru.
septerra core
KINO
UnderRail
my favorite part of rtwp games is when every single combat devolves into the mosh pit of melee fighters slamming into each other mindlessly
so much fun!
thats how it is until you have 2 arcane casters to throw 2 frick off fireballs at the start of everyfight to auto win 99% of encounters, repeat
By the time you get to learn fireball, most of the encounters in the game won't be a challenge, and why would they?
>farm pests
>poor bandits
>primitive demi human tribes
>wild animals
>sewer dwellers
Outside of Ulgoth's Beard, Drizzt, and Durlag's Tower, the rest of the game is balanced around Chapter 3 difficulty. You get fireball around Chapter 4 (Cloakwood) at earliest. You are literally overleveled for anything except the expansion and Baldur's Gate at that point, even considering the game tries to scale encounters with your level.
If it was turn-based you'd still have to manually select "attack" for all those rounds and wait while the enemy does the same. It's not RTWP's fault you have frick-all accuracy in the early game.
>people always talk about how much better rtwp is
>almost everyone's experience with these games is just cheesing the combat by throwing fireballs and shit from off screen
If you spend any amount of time in these threads, you find out that people that claim RTwP is superior are really people that just have a extreme hate boner for turn based combat for some reason.
turn based combat is slow and boring
combat in rpgs is generally boring and only exists as filler and as a power check for your character.
infinity engine games running at 60fps(double speed) allow you to fast forward through the drudgery of combat and get to the actual good part of the game
>combat is supposed to be shit and ignored by the player, therefore RTWP is good because its bad
RTWP cultists are delusional
you nu-CRPG fans are so tedious. baldur's gate is not a tactical combat game. the combat isn't the point. you morons will never get that through your skulls, which is why we'll never have a real CRPG ever again.
>combat is supposed to be bad and an afterthought. therefore, RTWP is good because it's bad
RTWP defenders are delusional cultists
i really hope bg3 receives rtwp mod that will prove once and for all that it is indeed superior type of combat
Real time actually requires you to balance the game
theres literally no way rtwp would work for bg3 the animations are all made for turn based. imagine your fighter trying to use any of there abilities and they have the same animation timing as a wizard casting there strongest spell.
>dude RTWP is so good!
lol.
Yes real time is good
pathfinder is a massive pile of shit and only slavs play it
>all the AoOs play out instantly instead of waiting 3 minutes for everyone to attack
This webm doesn't prove what you think it does.
>the player does literally nothing while combat auto-resolves
This webm proves RTWP is dogshit
They're attacks of opportunity, it's suposed to auto resolve, it does the same thing in turn based.
>you don't understand, the player doing nothing while his pre-buffed characters run in and auto-attack is a good combat system
RTWP is fricking dogshit
>it doesnt make any sense because I said so
not an argument
The exact same thing would play out in turnbased, just slower. Literally nothing mechanically would be different.
It doesn't make any sense because Diablo gameplay and RTWP are polar opposites. Baldur's Gate actually released a game inspired by Diablo's success, called Dark Alliance.
Player interaction in RtwP focuses on before combat starts. This philosophy is also why Graviteam tactics games blow the shit out of all other "realistic" rts games.
Delayed gratification. I set my shit up right and am rewarded by getting to watch my dudes slaughter shit with minimal input from me.
Do morons not realize that all turn based does is take those individual actions and line them up one after the other? It's still the same exact calculations and rolls, just instead of happening simultaneously, they are lined up and take 10 times longer to finish. A RTWP encounter where you have a lot of misses for instance would have those exact same amount of misses in turn based, only it would be even more annoying because every single miss happens one turn at a time
>do the people that are baiting in this obvious bait thread not understand that there are still turns in real time games, you just don't have to wait as long
no? maybe?
I'm playing it for the first time and loving it
>if you pick the first response they're like "kids these days" and wander off
gem
Damn, that screen so oozes soul, it makes me want to replay again.
90% of early conflicts in BG1 are right click till it dies.
90% of Endgame conflicts in late-game is cast confusion.
>with meaning choises and good combat
>bg1
I found BG1 to be a really boring game.
>repetitive trash fights all over the place
>companions are mildly interesting but don't seem to have much depth (good voice acting though)
>very easy to break the game by spamming rest and grinding experience to become overleveled
>roleplaying as an evil character sucks ass in terms of choices
Roleplay as evil is the ony way to challenge some of the hidden bosses like Shandalar
Posting on Ganker is turn based.
Am I winning?
How is Larian considered a AAA game dev now despite every successful game they've made starting off as a kickstarter begging campaign? Even with the BG IP and good sales from DOS2, they were still a begger tier indie studio.
Funding and employee count.
Because over time the definition of "AAA" has kind of lost all meaning and now simply refers to the amount of sales a games gets.
Don't forget they were also in Early Access for 3 years and homies are acting like the game coming out this month was the first time anybody has ever gotten their hands on it.
>Ganker now hates bg2
what happened?
I just don't get why they won't frick off back to their circlejerk threads. What's the point in b***hing about a 20+ year old game you didn't even play?
They hate Larian and are mad BG3 is a success, it's just a console war reskin
to seem more epic. it happens to everything.
Ganker is a joke and even if you point out bg1 flaws and what bg2 does is objectively better they will just cope and say well its linear so i win like to imply bg1 isn't also really linear. the only difference is that there isn't a section in the main quest your stuck doing just the main quest in bg1
You are aware people like OP haven't played any of the games they're talking about and all they do all day is make threads saying something is bad or good to piss people off right
tourists
>good combat
?
>ResetEra time with pause
No thanks.
>aspie baiter's opinions are so shit he has to go to resetera for more ammo
get a job
>b***h about BG1's writing
You could charm almost every character in BG1, they had unique dialogue and gave information you otherwise wouldn't know if charmed. Charm did nothing but mind control for combat in BG2.
BG1 was kino and a love letter to pen and paper. It gave you as much freedom as was possible in a Windows 95 game.
>wonder how to do combat at first
>now I am checking rolls in the combat log
it's RNG but still, you can do stuff to get better odds.
Enjoying turn based combat is the telltale sign that someone doesn't actually play tabletop D&D. Turns are a limitation imposed by necessity and experiencing a multi-hour slog at a physical table to resolve one combat immediately sets you on the path of wanting to find something better to streamline the monotony and downtime of waiting for your turn.
and you think you could handle doing all actions of 5 characters in real time?
no, but a computer can, that's why it's a video game. Should a D&D movie also play out turn based?
So you’d rather the computer play 80% of the game for you rather than you meticulously choosing every action for every character?
No, I just want the computer to calculate the actions in real time rather than line them up and calculate them one by one. I think you are just fundamentally not understanding what the actual difference between RTWP and turn based actually is. The computer doesn't play anything for you, if you want to use auto attacks for an easy encounter, you could do that in turn based mode too. It just means that the auto attacks happen one turn at a time rather than simultaneously.
Besides ruining the pace, it also looks very goofy to see people stare at each other until it's their turn to attack
i only want to have to control one character like in real life
>that someone dorsn't play tabletop D&D
That's a good thing
the only thing that i hated in bg1 was how my tank couldnt tank and had to kite and all my party members were honorary rangers with their short bows because everything else missed
i quit bg1 because i put on some unidentified belt on my main character that turned him into a troony woman and i couldnt figure out how to get it off and didnt wanna play the rest of the game as a troon
rule number 1 of an actual RPG is don't equip unidentified items
You are literally Edwin. The whole party would've been laughing at your ass the whole game.
What D&D teaches us is that being trans is literally a curse. Yet troons embrace it.
Curses are rad
>meaning choises
Esl trash get off this board
welcome to Ganker moron
>Esl
gtfo back to discord troony
English is literally international goyslop of languages.
>annoying voice
>cringy dialogue
>casts completely random spells in combat that can frick you over
>only positive thing is that you can get a gem bag from her right at the start of the game
this character does not need to exist
She's genuinely the worst of the new characters by far
Even the edgelorc is better
>her personal quest gives you a wild mage robe with saves vs polymorph on it
>wild mage effects are all spell saves, including the polymorph effects
Bravo
I wouldn't be surprised if it was save vs Poly back when EE first came out. They've changed so much shit for seemingly no reason over the years.
That's why you murder her the second you meet her and take the gem bag.
Having just replayed BG1 and started on BG2 again, here's my nitpicks about BG2:
>starting zones off as fully explored is lame & takes away sense of adventure
>spell scribing doesn't disable "Write Spell" if you already have the spell memorized (BG1 does this so it's odd it was undone). Another huge QoL improvement would be some indication that scrolls in inventory/being sold are already memorized by the selected caster
>travel between zones shouldn't require unlocking a quest first (within reason). Some zones that are not key to the plot are easily missed (Sahuagin city) which is in line with BG1, but most of them being locked doesn't make sense (Windspear hills, Nalia's zone, etc.) I think they could've done something like have Trademeet visible to anyone and then let you explore from there.
>fewer companions means it's sometimes difficult to get the team composition you want (eg. your only decent thief is Imeon -> Yoshi -> Imoen unless you pick-up Jan who is annoying as frick).
Other than that, I think BG2 traded open-world exploration for a more tightly driven narrative, which makes sense given that the plot is advancing. BG1 was much easier to make open-world because nothing had really happened yet. BG2 has a much better villain, deeper companion experience (incl. romances that were requested), better boss fights, etc. A lot of the exploration in BG2 is with random stuff in the city (kangaxx, twisted rune has multiple difficult to find events, etc.)
Let's face it, romances don't add much to the gameplay and are purely to satiate incel losers, but they're popular so it's shoganai. I finally admit that BG1 is the better game, but BG2 made a huge number of improvements over it.
bg1's "open world" is essentially a forest. bg2 loses the "open world" for the sake of more variety in locations. bg1 is extremely basic and is pretty much a demo for the infinity engine. bg2 taking inspiration from planescape torment while still being more "normal" was a stroke of genius. I completely reject the bg1 superiority notion. I guess it's better in the incredibly pedantic "it accomplished what it set out to do" sense, but that's a bullshit sense.
>unpetrify a guy with one item found miles away (basilisk oil)
>think I saved him
>he dies because the petrification stopped a poison, you have to beat a boss to remove it first
there is too much stuff in this game.
They were both good, but Baldurs Gate 1 was very quickly surpassed by pretty much everything that came after it. Not sure why everyone fellates the series just because it was the first. I would have rather had a follow up to Planescape Torment than a new BG if we're going full degenerate. If only so I could eyefrick that stupid shit talking skull (Morty?) I fricking hated that thing. Unless it dies in the course of the game idk I gave up like 30 or so hours in because he wouldn't shut the frick up. What was it anyways? I remember thinking that it was probably like secretly some super powerful demon God or something with a curse on it but that was like 15 years ago so idk
Are there any DnD games where being a caster is actually fun and doesn't just involve the equivalent of save scumming by just spamming rest after every encounter?
>Are there any DnD games where being a caster is actually fun and doesn't just involve the equivalent of save scumming by just spamming rest after every encounter?
Baldur's Gate when you try to cheese it as a solo mage.
If you get Algernon's Cloak early, you get unlimited charm, which means you can beat groups but not bosses. Adds an entirely new dimension to the game.
I got to the friendly inn and now and I have a full party. Time to go fight wolves and figure out where the story goes from here.
Jaheira I have no fricking clue what your purpose in life is, but take this club so you can beat enemies over the head with it. Okay let's go.
How did you like the assassin outside? He is often a shock to the new players.
He seemed suspicious as frick right away so I told him I don't know what he's talking about. He attacked anyways, of course, but I managed to get through it.
Also I think he feared my protagonist and Imoen and they both just ran around for like 20 seconds after he died. That seems like it'll get annoying.
He is harder if you are alone and not ready.
Based. BG2 is a movie game with it's voice-acting and cutscenes cancer.
Bioware has always been bad at making games and BG1/2 got by on cool ideas and a lot of content. I'd agree 1 is the better game after you finish Nashkel, but Nashkel and the side quests it tries to direct you towards before that are awful. 2 is just bad.
How is it open ended?
Everything until you reach Baldur's Gate is just a bunch of big ass maps with weird side quests and fights. It's a good frickabout sim, like TES. The campaign isn't open ended, but that's the worst part of the game.
RTWP mod for bg3 when? I like turn based too btw. they're both good systems. Turn based is only bad when the game is filled with trash encounters like kingmaker which was a game made for rtwp so understandable.
i've seen people mentioned trying to keep your party to your alignment
is that just for good and evil (i.e. don't take evil alignment companions if you're good and vice versa) or does this also apply to neutral aligned?
Evil parties like low rep and hate high rep, will leave if it gets too high.
Good parties like high rep and hate low rep.
Neutral prefers middling rep, but will only leave if you rep goes too low.
Icewind dale is the best