Interjection during Quest Options

[Domi]

Heh, I agree, but I think the main thing is still to please both those who does and does not like a particular feature. And it can only be achieved by the elective presence of the content. And of course there is a point where it's better when everyone is behaiving reasonable by getting what they want without forbidding the other party their enjoyement.

And I think in this particular case, putting interjections from party members in is that happy case when it suits both party-player and solo-player.

This post has been edited by Domi: Oct 27 2004, 05:18 PM

[Salk]

Out of curiosity, a piece of trivia:

Do you know that you can select kits and classes for your BG1 original characters with TUTU?
Do you know that you can ajust their stats, classes, portraits etc whichever way you want with simple modding tools?
Now, knowing this, why do you still prefer the multiplayer NPCs who say nothing but their select sounds?

Sorry to disappoint, Demi, but I would still walk the "old" way. I am indeed aware of the changes that TuTu might bring to Baldurs Gate 1. That's why I do not intend to install it. The fact that one can adjust stats,classes and choose among kits doesnt make it an improvement, in my opinion. I spent days (no kidding) rolling dice when I created my own characters. I played fair and I put up a party I am very proud of. I didnt need to cheat or anything of the sort to have real champions. I play Baldurs Gate in such a way that if my leader dies, the game ends. I start it over. I still stick to AD&D Rules 2nd Edition. There has been many modifications since but we must remember that not every change is automatically an improvement over the past. I find the world created by Baldurs Gate fascinating beyond measure with no need of added interactions among NPC. I am sorry I am such a stubborn person and by no means I intend to say I am on the right side. What I do mean is this: I welcome modifications that are made in the spirit of preserving, keeping and enduring the atmosphere, the background, the "tradition" of the original Baldur's Gate. I cannot welcome what revolutions the original concept of the game itself. The original concept has, in my opinion, created a wonderful balance. Such balance could easily be overthrown by external add-ons. Baldur's Gate has/had only some small problems to be addressed/fixed and that's been already done largely (Baldurdash, Dudleyville). Its world can be expanded profitably but only if the expansions are made keeping the original idea and concept in mind. These two are, in my opinon, the two ways to follow: bugfixing and modding. I don't need the graphic of Baldurs Gate 2. I don't want it actually. But I realize it could be me being strange.

I think you have mistook the point - the point is not to see 'all that could possibly happen'. The point is to saturate game so that no matter what is your party's composition, you get interesting and sometimes unexpected dialogue options

Ditto. My limit. I do get your point and I do agree when it comes to playing RPG around a table with dice and pen. Nevertheless I can't share the same feelings when I play a computer game. When I play a computer game I want it to put me in a situation when I dont need, out of curiosity, to play it hundreds times to see what it could have happened. I want it to take me through a world where I do feel I took the best steps and dont need to regret my actions if they are not been stupid. Some games are meant to be played over and over (Pro Evolution Soccer, for instance... ) and others should not have such goal but be more like a "one time experience". The mods can give new life to such masterpieces but I ask you: why should I benefit of a nice subquest just because I have in my party a member that one other doesnt ? Do I have a special merit for it ? Did I play better ? Is it fair I cannot "live" such emotions for a reason that cant be considered my fault during the game ? I wonder if you can get my point but I hope so. Thanks!

This post has been edited by Salk: Oct 27 2004, 06:16 PM

[Domi]

Sorry to disappoint, Domi, but I would still walk the "old" way. I am indeed aware of the changes that TuTu might bring to Baldurs Gate 1. That's why I do not intend to install it. The fact that one can adjust stats,classes and choose among kits doesnt make it an improvement, in my opinion. I spent days (no kidding) rolling dice when I created my own characters. I played fair and I put up a party I am very proud of. I didnt need to cheat or anything of the sort to have real champions. I play Baldurs Gate in such a way that if my leader dies, the game ends. I start it over. I still stick to AD&D Rules 2nd Edition.

Again your logic eludes me. You believe it 'cheating' to tweak the stats of NPCs a bit, while rolling dice 'for days' to create the your custom 'most fitting' NPCs is not?

I would have understood your critisism of 'tweaking' if you just rolled the dice once and invented the character who fit the role and gave him/her an interesting backstory... Or created a story about NPC and then created a CRE that fitted it. What you have spent days on using the IE (Infinity Engine that Bio uses), modding tool NI (NearInfinity created by a fan) you can do it in 2 minutes instead of 'rolling' the dice till you get your 94 perfect points score and a headache.

In both cases it's you and only you who controls what NPC ended up to be - '18 where it counts' dummies or stats distributed to fit characters biographies and profiles. I *gasp* reduced my rolls via a modding tool when I was creating a custom NPC. Because I trusted myself, rather than the 'random number generator'

There has been many modifications since but we must remember that not every change is automatically an improvement over the past. I find the world created by Baldurs Gate fascinating beyond measure with no need of added interactions among NPC.

No, you are not against 'added interactions' What you do not like in truth are BG1's original NPCs. Who are the part of the original game and the original world. I do not think you can argue that. No matter what campaign you play they are there. Always. The game was designed to be played with them and learn about them.

I welcome modifications that are made in the spirit of preserving, keeping and enduring the atmosphere, the background, the "tradition" of the original Baldur's Gate.

Meaning narrowly 'solo/quazi-solo campaign' and excluding what made the game unique - the cast of BioWARE made NPCs .

I cannot welcome what revolutions the original concept of the game itself. The original concept has, in my opinion, created a wonderful balance. Such balance could easily be overthrown by external add-ons. Baldur's Gate has/had only some small problems to be addressed/fixed and that's been already done largely (Baldurdash, Dudleyville). Its world can be expanded profitably but only if the expansions are made keeping the original idea and concept in mind. These two are, in my opinon, the two ways to follow: bugfixing and modding. I don't need the graphic of Baldurs Gate 2. I don't want it actually. But I realize it could be me being strange.

Mod stands for 'modification'. People argue till they froth in their mouth what is 'acceptable' and what is 'not acceptable' level of modding. What makes your post 'different' is that you exclude the original Bio NPCs from the list of original Bio content. You have a strong preference for Quest and Fix-it modules. You are not alone. But you are not a single target for modders everywhere either. So some quaint modders like I will be spending 40 hours a week on making NPC related mods And arguing that their MODZ art Z GREATYYYST.

Ditto. My limit. I do get your point and I do agree when it comes to playing RPG around a table with dice and pen. Nevertheless I can't share the same feelings when I play a computer game. When I play a computer game I want it to put me in a situation when I dont need, out of curiosity, to play it hundreds times to see what it could have happened.

Uhm... and that is why you aim to fobidd work that increases one of the most cherished features of any game - replayability? You prefer BG1 as static solo campaign you played once and for all. Yet you want more quests added to it. But nothing using the original NPC cast. I understand. That's your recipy for a good mod. Go, do one if you have it in you. Find the ones that suit your taste. I do not object that you do. I object that you pretend to be a 'purist' and 'should' the modders.

I want it to take me through a world where I do feel I took the best steps and dont need to regret my actions if they are not been stupid.

Right. Well, I have news for you. You are a power gamer. There is no need to be ashamed of it, you know. Others are way more curious and want their PC rewarded and punished for taking sides by their party members. I want to see if doing a particular thing in the game would tick off Jaheira or make Kivan smile. IF I have Jaheira or Kivan in the party. I am not going to run around changing NPC cast before I lift my leg by a particular tree.

Some games are meant to be played over and over (Pro Evolution Soccer, for instance... ) and others should not have such goal but be more like a "one time experience".

Yakes. Thanks a million. Soccer *shudders*

The mods can give new life to such masterpieces but I ask you: why should I benefit of a nice subquest just because I have in my party a member that one other doesnt ?

Because it's not about you, silly. It's about the NPC. In a good CRPG NPC is not a meatshield and has a simulated life of his/her own. So her biography says "was abducted and turned into stone by a mage T." it is to be expected that when we meet the mage T she'd go beserk. The more complex NPC is, the more complex would be the story that evolves around him/her. It's called character development.

Do I have a special merit for it? Did I play better?

No, no special merit. BG1 is not a competitive sport, ya know. Nobody is going to give you a gold medal for completing every quest in the game using Dudley's checklist. Gaming is about enjoyement, not scoring per se.

What happens with NPC-based add-ons is that if you were intersted in the NPC more than the next player, you got to know him or her better (NPC, not player).

Is it fair I cannot "live" such emotions for a reason that cant be considered my fault during the game?

Fault? Missing a quest is somehow a player's fault? Do you expect to be punished by someone for it? You are starting to seriously scare me.

I wonder if you can get my point but I hope so.

I got your point, and it is addressed very easily: BG1NPC is not a mod for you. BW Quest Pack is. However, there is no way that interjections in the Quest Pack (interjections being character's reactions) going to affect your game. You will get your checklist all filled out, do not worry.

Thanks!

My pleasure.

[Salk]

Again your logic eludes me. You believe it 'cheating' to tweak the stats of NPCs a bit, while rolling dice 'for days' to create the your custom 'most fitting' NPCs is not?

There is a perfect logic here. The gaming rules *allow* the player to roll dice as much as he wants but *doesn't allow* kits and stats modification. Simple. I might be a bit nuts but I imagine the rolling of the dice like the evaluation of champions which should form an elite party. This is because they're gonna do something big, you know.

No, you are not against 'added interactions' What you do not like in truth are BG1's original NPCs. Who are the part of the original game and the original world. I do not think you can argue that. No matter what campaign you play they are there. Always. The game was designed to be played with them and learn about them.

Yes, I dont like the BG1 original characters for I dont feel them as really mine. I need characters to stay permanently in my group. But its not true that the game was designed only to be played with them and learn about them. As you can see, I play the game without them and the game itself lets me do it. It's just a choice.

Meaning narrowly 'solo/quazi-solo campaign' and excluding what made the game unique - the cast of BioWARE made NPCs .

Well, you see...I see my party as a "single" entity which is facing an adventure. You think of it as a group of individuals with different perspectives and backgrounds. My party is together for a reason I myself invented and have a background I have set for them (there is a biography one might write just for that). It's a bit sad, you are right, to see them not develop their own life *during* the game too but this is a sacrifice I had to take to have me really enjoy the game to the fullest.

I object that you pretend to be a 'purist' and 'should' the modders.

No,not at all! I just think that some modifications are going against the spirit of the game itself whereas others just expand the world of Baldur's Gate the way it was meant. Bioware's NPCs are there to either be joined or not. I decided to not do it and I miss part of the fun. But still I move in the boundaries of the game concept. If you just introduce kits or stats modifications or just convert the game engine in something that doesn't belong to it, well...The least I can say is just that Baldur's Gate is not Baldur's Gate any longer.

Right. Well, I have news for you. You are a power gamer. There is no need to be ashamed of it, you know. Others are way more curious and want their PC rewarded and punished for taking sides by their party members. I want to see if doing a particular thing in the game would tick off Jaheira or make Kivan smile.

Well, I might be a power gamer but you are probably one of those that, to see and not miss anything or any NPCs reaction, would load the game thouasands of time "just to see what happens if I choose line number 3 in the dialogue instead of number 2". The game would lose much of its charm and atmosphere if I would want to play it over and over just to see how NPCs or different choices would bring in. It would be like dismantling it piece by piece. It would spoil it, in short. The sense of epic would fall before my eyes and so the feeling I am living something "unique". Of course with modding, I would start the game again eventually and I will find myself before situations I already know. But the choices there would be the same.

Yakes. Thanks a million. Soccer *shudders*

It was just an example to mean that some games are built to be played over and over while others are not. Baldur's Gate is not. That's not something under dispute, I think. Baldur's Gate is meant to give "one time fantastic experience" because it's undeniable that the feelings would not be the same in the rerun. You would know what it's gonna happen. You would know how the plot "develops". You would know "what to do next" and what the consequences would be. Of course, one might just do it to see how new NPCs would fit into the game or to see what different dialogue's options would affect it. But thats just the sallad around the meat. The meat would be the same, no matter what.

Fault? Missing a quest is somehow a player's fault? Do you expect to be punished by someone for it? You are starting to seriously scare me.

It should be clear how I intend to play the game by now. For my own experience, expanding the game in such a way that quests can be obtained only by having a character in the party is a limitation. It's a limitation because this concept of NPCs sown reactions and dedicated subquests is an attempt to moke reality. NPCs are not the core of the game. The party is. What tha party is set up to is. Again, I intend the party to be a single entity and others simply do not.

Thanks!

P.S. I am a novice so I ignore how to move this OT I started with Demi somewhere else. I do not want to bother and piss others so if one of the moderators wishes to start a new topic where we can go on ( ), please be welcome.

This post has been edited by Salk: Oct 28 2004, 06:45 AM

[Rabain]

I think the pro's and con's of Interjections during quests have been discussed enough now! Everyone has their own idea of what is best for them and discussing it forever won't necessarily change that.

We will have interjections during quests by relevant NPc's, like jahiera commenting on a druid quest perhaps but I will point out that not having Jahiera in the party will not stop you from completing the quest. We are adding quests for the player to do not quests that are NPC specific. Some NPC's might have more to say on a quest topic than others but then thats only natural, having every NPC in the party comment on every quest would not be a good thing as far as I am concerned.

If you guys want to discuss this further feel free to continue the discussion on IRC (the link to Blackwyrms IRC chat is on the main site page) or in PM.

I thank everyone for their interest in the project, it's good to know there are some people looking forward to what we are doing!

Thanks guys!

[Domi]

quotes

There is a perfect logic here. The gaming rules *allow* the player to roll dice as much as he wants but *doesn't allow* kits and stats modification. Simple. I might be a bit nuts but I imagine the rolling of the dice like the evaluation of champions which should form an elite party. This is because they're gonna do something big, you know.

*Shrug* You know, it is a game that suppose to tease your imagination. Rules are there to serve your enjoyment, not to make you to serve the rules. Is there D&D police out there? Besides, iirc, 2ED D&D allows kitting. As for rolling stats for days - it is gambling of sorts, so if it entertains you - why not. I prefer playing the game to it, since I have very little time.

But its not true that the game was designed only to be played with them and learn about them. As you can see, I play the game without them and the game itself lets me do it. It's just a choice

A very important choice that makes Bg1 singulary different from IWD.

Well, you see...I see my party as a "single" entity which is facing an adventure.

you see them as an accessory to your PC, a bunch of golems. Try differently for once.

My party is together for a reason I myself invented and have a background I have set for them (there is a biography one might write just for that).

I know. I filled these windows up to the brims when playing IWD for my party. Out of curiosity - have you? I suspect that you did not. In this case 'for the reasons of their own' turns into the 'convenient set of abilities and stats'.


No,not at all! I just think that some modifications are going against the spirit of the game itself whereas others just expand the world of Baldur's Gate the way it was meant.

You contradict yourself here: you say "not at all" and then say that 'some modifications' are 'in the spirit' and the 'way it was meant'. To me it sounds like 'good' modifications and 'bad' ones.

But you are incorrect.

BG1 had always have party interactivity element, unlike IWD which was indeed 'meant' to have the player-created party with player-created NPCs. BG had the choice. And developpers clearly indicated their preference of interactive party over player-created by strengthening and augmenting this element in the sequel. If their prefernce was for player-created, they would not have done the loving character development of BG2.


If you just introduce kits or stats modifications or just convert the game engine in something that doesn't belong to it, well...The least I can say is just that Baldur's Gate is not Baldur's Gate any longer.

I think we understand differently what 'the game' meant. For me 'the game' is the story and the adventures. For you it is the version of the Infinity Engine. BG2 utilizes the same engine, that BG1. Next generation though.

And my biggest objection is that you do not *have* to use the 'logical' as opposite to 'mechanical' additions which BG2 version of infinity brings. You can still create single classed fighter, without using a kit.

It's a bit sad, you are right, to see them not develop their own life *during* the game too but this is a sacrifice I had to take to have me really enjoy the game to the fullest. Bioware's NPCs are there to either be joined or not. I decided to not do it and I miss part of the fun.

And I told you that you can have your cake and eat it too by slightly modifying the existing NPCs with personalities to fit your game's mechanics needs. Simple. Cheap. Efficient. Win-win situation.

Well, I might be a power gamer but you are probably one of those that, to see and not miss anything or any NPCs reaction, would load the game thouasands of time "just to see what happens if I choose line number 3 in the dialogue instead of number 2".

Nope. I play it the way it plays and see what I can see. I played BG1 twice and BG2 twice; ToB - once before going to modding. Now I obviously have to test every encounter a few times to see if the dialogue implemented properly. It annoys the living Hell out of me. I do not see a missed quest or a missed dialogue as something horrible. In BG2 I never did Edwin's or Jaheira's quests, because I did not like the characters... I did not die of that.


Baldur's Gate is not. That's not something under dispute, I think. Baldur's Gate is meant to give "one time fantastic experience" because it's undeniable that the feelings would not be the same in the rerun.

Actually it is. There are people who played BG2 dozens of times with different mods and different characters, doing quests in a different way. It is what gives the game replayability.

It should be clear how I intend to play the game by now. For my own experience, expanding the game in such a way that quests can be obtained only by having a character in the party is a limitation.

In my own experience playing the game with a party of highly-efficient zombies is a huge, horrible limitation. It's playing IWD, not BG.

It's a limitation because this concept of NPCs sown reactions and dedicated subquests is an attempt to moke reality.

So is any art form. As GRR Martin says - 'I am a liar' (ever read Martin btw? Fantastic books). The game itself is a horrible parody of reality. You do understand that, right?

NPCs are not the core of the game. The party is. What tha party is set up to is.

They are not equated to a plot, I agree, but they can sure make the plot much, much more fascinating. It is the difference between a book with the strong twisted plot but very weak pale characters, and the book which has both the strong, fascinated story realted by smashingly good, incredible characters. It is the difference between GRR Martin and some salvatore of the day.

P.S. I am a novice so I ignore how to move this OT I started with Demi somewhere else.

The name is Domi. Domi Sotto.

You know, after all is said and done (and Rabain, I am sorry for posting again.. maybe you can move these 2 last posts in General?) I am feeling that you are lobbying and fighting with the stubborness of an offended teenager for *my way is the right way* and *be away with your dirty modder's hands from the true spirit of BG1* because you have sold BG2 and do not want to buy it again to try TUTU. You have convinced yourself that BG2 is junk, and therefore, anything touched by it turns to junk by extension. I suggest that you try to get out of the 'spirit' of this argument and some time down the road do try TUTU. Honestly, it makes game more complex and fun

I do not think I can convince you to try original NPCs... but they actually are wonderful, have beautiful stories fit to the setting and are a lovely bunch. And of course our team have put in well over thousand dialogues in banter, existing encounter expansions and added quests content which I like very much

This post has been edited by Domi: Oct 28 2004, 05:05 PM

[NiGHTMARE]

There is a perfect logic here. The gaming rules *allow* the player to roll dice as much as he wants but *doesn't allow* kits and stats modification.

Actually, while the game may allow endless dice rolls, the actual gaming rules do not. The Player's Handbook describes six methods of using dice to generate your character's stats, none of which involve constantly rolling the dice until you've got the perfect score for every single stat.

This post has been edited by NiGHTMARE: Oct 28 2004, 04:24 PM

[SimDing0]

The least I can say is just that Baldur's Gate is not Baldur's Gate any longer.

If that's all it comes down to, then it's a terribly weak argument. So what if you're not playing the game the developers intended, so long as it's more fun?