Baldur's, wait for it... GATE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Kinthalis]

Are you f'ing kidding me?

It looks like ex Bioware man Trent Oster, the man behind the original Neverwinter Nights (and involved with Baldur's Gate II) is doing something with the IP!!!!!!!!

http://kotaku.com/5889146/baldurs-gate-website-lurches-to-life-is-a-new-game-rising#


Is your mind blown yet?!

Glorious god of murder let it be so!

[Snarky_Kong]

Butt-kicking for goodness!

[Kinthalis]

Go for the eyes Boo, go for the eyes!!!!!!

[Mahaloth]

Are you all saying a new Baldur's Gate game might be happening? That would be cool.

We had a new Wizardry recently, too. Lots of stuff happening lately. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wizardry:_Labyrinth_of_Lost_Souls)

[Ferret Herder]

*squee!*

[D_Odds]

I'm actually currently replaying BG (beginning to end) for the umpteenth time. More Minsc (and more Viconia and more Edwin) can only be a good thing. But only if I get to pluck out whatever remain of Aerie's feathers one by one.

[Clothahump]

I lost my version of BG some time ago. Having read this, I just went over to Amazon and ordered the 4-in-1 box to replay and prep for a new release.

Boo must have his exercise, lest he bite us all in hard to reach places.

[Justin_Bailey]

The last game from Trent Oster's company was an HD remake of MDK 2. So don't get your hopes up about a new Baldur's Gate just yet.

[Kinthalis]

Yeah the more tidbits that come in, the mroe likley this is going to be an HD remake of the BG series.

Which is cool, I'll definitely pick it up, but yeah, a bit disappointing.

Hopefully it'll do well enough that it will get someone's attention and something can come of it.

Wouldn't mind a spin-off basedin the same area of the Forgotten Realms, maybe with updated D&D rule set.

[Chronos]

It'd be really funny if, here on the verge of the release of Fifth Edition, a game actually comes out (or re-comes-out) that's still using Second Edition rules.

And I wonder if there's any other work, game or otherwise, whose memorable quotes are as dominated by a single character as Minsc in Baldur's Gate.

[Shooby]

Yeah the more tidbits that come in, the mroe likley this is going to be an HD remake of the BG series.

Which is cool, I'll definitely pick it up, but yeah, a bit disappointing.

Hopefully it'll do well enough that it will get someone's attention and something can come of it.

Wouldn't mind a spin-off basedin the same area of the Forgotten Realms, maybe with updated D&D rule set.

If it does turn out to be a Baldur's Gate remake only, I'll be heavily disappointed unless they add a lot of content to it or rebalance the game system at least. I played through BG1+2+TOB enough times (3) to not need to do it again, no matter how pretty it is. BG 3 or some related spinoff with similar gameplay would pretty much be an auto-buy for me, though.

Dragon Age: Origins was decent, but definitely did not fill the BG shoes...

[Kinthalis]

If it does turn out to be a Baldur's Gate remake only, I'll be heavily disappointed unless they add a lot of content to it or rebalance the game system at least. I played through BG1+2+TOB enough times (3) to not need to do it again, no matter how pretty it is. BG 3 or some related spinoff with similar gameplay would pretty much be an auto-buy for me, though.

Dragon Age: Origins was decent, but definitely did not fill the BG shoes...

I think Dragon Age: Origins came VERY close though...

So as you can imagine, I figured they'd hit the ball out of the park with Dragon Age 2. Boy was I wrong about that!

[smiling bandit]

I think Dragon Age: Origins came VERY close though...

It was a poorly balanced mess of Bioware's trademark melodrama, in-house overused sterotypical characters, and badly done fight scenes. I mean, it was still very good despite that, but it was no Baldur's Gate.

[Jragon]

It'd be really funny if, here on the verge of the release of Fifth Edition, a game actually comes out (or re-comes-out) that's still using Second Edition rules.

And I wonder if there's any other work, game or otherwise, whose memorable quotes are as dominated by a single character as Minsc in Baldur's Gate.

If it's a remake they can, but if it's a brand new game I don't think its possible. Unless they changed their policy, I recall hearing that WOTC refuses to license the rights to old rulesets (because you're essentially marketing books they don't sell anymore if your game uses an old edition), so it would have to be 4th ed if they made BG 3 without in-house mechanics.

And I think GlaDOS is the only character that comes close to Minsc in dominating, though that's not quite fair (only speaking character and all that), though I guess she does get upstaged in Portal 2.

As far as games that match BG/2/PS:T. I think the only semi-recent game that comes close is NWN2: Mash of the Betrayer. Yeah, it's still old, but the plot was really almost as good as PS:T, the only real drawback being less unique paths through the game. Obsidian flubbed NWN2 (well, I loved it, but it wasn't as good as other D&D games up to that point), but MOTB might be the best non-PS:T D&D game made.


It was a poorly balanced mess of Bioware's trademark melodrama, in-house overused sterotypical characters, and badly done fight scenes. I mean, it was still very good despite that, but it was no Baldur's Gate.

I think the most memorable part of BG was the beginning when Sarevok kills your mentor as you flee the starting town. Nothing in Dragon Age really tops that because everything important happens in cutscenes (or whatever you want to call the dialogue tree sections). While it allows for much more flexibility and stylistic flair, I think having important story events happen "in-game" sometimes is important, and the more technology Bioware gets, the more they move to a very clear segregation between gameplay and story. I don't want to say I wish they'd rip off Valve and make everything in-game, just a little more integration would be nice.

[Jragon]

I think the most memorable part of BG was the beginning when Sarevok kills your mentor as you flee the starting town. Nothing in Dragon Age really tops that because everything important happens in cutscenes (or whatever you want to call the dialogue tree sections). While it allows for much more flexibility and stylistic flair, I think having important story events happen "in-game" sometimes is important, and the more technology Bioware gets, the more they move to a very clear segregation between gameplay and story. I don't want to say I wish they'd rip off Valve and make everything in-game, just a little more integration would be nice.

I wanted to add: the thing I liked about it was the clear "oh shit!" factor when you start reading "Gorion rolled a 10" "Sarevok rolled an 18" etc and you realize, no, this is happening. They do way more damage than you have health. Go, now, these are real game mechanics, this is NOT a drill. You had a sense of "this is really dangerous, I can actually LOSE THE GAME here if I don't move it" instead of "well, this isn't a Sierra text adventure so they sure ain't going to kill me in a dialogue box."

Amusingly though, I think since they were game mechanics, it led to a very small chance for Gorion to win and essentially bug the game out (if you stuck around long enough to see it). At least, I've heard tell it can happen (albeit with extremely low chances).

[Kobal2]

It'd be really funny if, here on the verge of the release of Fifth Edition, a game actually comes out (or re-comes-out) that's still using Second Edition rules.

And I wonder if there's any other work, game or otherwise, whose memorable quotes are as dominated by a single character as Minsc in Baldur's Gate.

Icewind Dale 2 used 3.5 rules (or something that looks kinda like it anyway).

Now that I think of it, a HD remake of BG using 3.5 rules would rock pretty hard.

[Kobal2]

You had a sense of "this is really dangerous, I can actually LOSE THE GAME here if I don't move it" instead of "well, this isn't a Sierra text adventure so they sure ain't going to kill me in a dialogue box."


And many players did lose the game shortly thereafter. Killed by that fucken wolf. You know the one. He killed your lvl 1 mage too.

[Maeglin]

I just bought the complete BG 2 on special at GOG. BG2, Planescape: Torment, and Temple of Elemental Evil for $4.99 total.

And oh yeah, I remember that fucking wolf.

[D_Odds]

And many players did lose the game shortly thereafter. Killed by that fucken wolf. You know the one. He killed your lvl 1 mage too.

A L1 mage can't even escape the first assassination attempt in Candlekeep. That's why I never played a mage in BG1.

[Cornelius Tuggerson]

That Ogre on the bridge right after you escape and find Imoen was pretty rough too. Still played through it 3 times with mage.

[FinnAgain]

A L1 mage can't even escape the first assassination attempt in Candlekeep.

They can, I did.
It's just a megabitch.

[Chronos]

Huh, the reason I never played a mage in BG 1 was that you get a perfectly competent mage fairly early on, but it's almost at the end of the game before you find a divine caster who isn't completely and utterly annoying. Jaheira's complaining about you not being good enough because you were too good for her got old, real quick.

[Grey]

Quick question since some here are saying they still play. I've got IWD II but it crashes when you open the character view. I'm guessing it's a video driver issue but is there a generic "patch" or system tweak for playing it on newer (XP SP3) machines?

[Ferret Herder]

Huh, the reason I never played a mage in BG 1 was that you get a perfectly competent mage fairly early on, but it's almost at the end of the game before you find a divine caster who isn't completely and utterly annoying. Jaheira's complaining about you not being good enough because you were too good for her got old, real quick.
God, yes. She could go eat a bag of sticks for all I cared about her opinion. :p I'm a woman and always played a female character, so I was just a little horrified when I found out that in BG2, a male character could get into a romantic relationship with her. Ugh!

[Ferret Herder]

Quick question since some here are saying they still play. I've got IWD II but it crashes when you open the character view. I'm guessing it's a video driver issue but is there a generic "patch" or system tweak for playing it on newer (XP SP3) machines?
Not sure about this particular game, but I know that the site Pocket Plane has patches and mods for these games. I found their Icewind Dale 2 (http://modlist.pocketplane.net/index.php?ax=list&cat_id=14) page, and there's an official patch and maybe some other things that might help?

[Grey]

Can't hurt to check - would be neat to try Planescape as well. Thanks.

[Terminus Est]

Huh, the reason I never played a mage in BG 1 was that you get a perfectly competent mage fairly early on, but it's almost at the end of the game before you find a divine caster who isn't completely and utterly annoying. Jaheira's complaining about you not being good enough because you were too good for her got old, real quick.

Branwen is standing right there at the Nashkel Carnival. You easily can pick her up for the cost of a Stone to Flesh scroll.

[D_Odds]

Huh, the reason I never played a mage in BG 1 was that you get a perfectly competent mage fairly early on, but it's almost at the end of the game before you find a divine caster who isn't completely and utterly annoying. Jaheira's complaining about you not being good enough because you were too good for her got old, real quick.Branwen's not too bad, but I've got the hots for Viconia.

BG1 was great for those of us who like thief characters in the party but didn't want to be the thief. Then comes BGII and we get Yoshimo (and we all know how that turns out) and Jan (who is better suited as a back-up mage who can set traps). So much for a high level thief in the party. Still, while BGII has less NPCs, their stories (once you've installed mods to iron out all the bugs) are stronger and IMNSHO better.

ETA: Jaheira brow beat the scroll out of the dude last time I played thru. Not sure if that was due to a mod, though.

[The Other Waldo Pepper]

God, yes. She could go eat a bag of sticks for all I cared about her opinion. :p I'm a woman and always played a female character, so I was just a little horrified when I found out that in BG2, a male character could get into a romantic relationship with her. Ugh!

As a male, it bugged me that the protagonist couldn't get into a romantic relationship with Mazzy.

[Ferret Herder]

Still, while BGII has less NPCs, their stories (once you've installed mods to iron out all the bugs) are stronger and IMNSHO better.
That's one thing I'd really miss with a HD update - the mods. There were some great add-ons, fixes, and new NPCs developed by the modder community for BG2 and the other related games, and I'm not sure it'd be as fun, even if it did look prettier.

[Chronos]

Yeah, Branwen was significantly better than Jaheira, but she was still neutrally-aligned and hence complained about you being too good (just not as shrilly). You didn't get an actual good-aligned cleric until that dwarf in the mines.

And from what I understand (never actually played it), in BG II, they assumed that the players had dual-classed Imoen into mage, because they had gotten rid of Dynaheir, and so she starts the game that way, and Dynaheir is officially dead. Personally, I never had a problem with Dynaheir, and found that Imoen was really effective as a thief if you took her to high level.

[Terminus Est]

Branwen's not too bad, but I've got the hots for Viconia.


Yeah, Connie's great but she's apt to get mad and leave the party if you get too good for her.

ETA: Jaheira brow beat the scroll out of the dude last time I played thru. Not sure if that was due to a mod, though.

I think that's due to the BG1NPC mod. It also gives you some additional NPC banter plus romance dialog if you choose into install them.

I've also been playing through the whole BG trilogy. My character recently made the transition to BGII and I'm considering whether to give Gaelan Bayle his money and rush to Spellhold or level up a bit more in Amn and do some more quests. Decisions, decisions.

[hogarth]

I never really understood some people like Baldur's Gate 2 so much more than Baldur's Gate 1. What really turned me off BG2 is all of the tedious fights against wizards with fifty bajillion defensive spells (via Contingency or Spell Sequencer or whatever) that you're forced to strip off with half a dozen different anti-defensive spells. (Yes, I'm exaggerating, but still...)

[Gray Ghost]

Reading the news on BG possibly coming back makes me wonder what Wesley Weimer is doing, and whether there'll be a Tactics (http://weidu.org/)-esque mod for the new BG content? The Tactics fights were incredibly exasperating, but a lot of fun when you won.

[Smapti]

I would pay good money for a Baldur's Gate remake that did the following;

-Streamlined party organization a la Mass Effect so you don't have to have your love interest in the party at all times
-Did something with all the big empty fields that you have to spend hours wandering around in looking for side quests and XP
-Imported your character decisions from the first game to the second
-Cleared the useless spells out of the spell list and added some actually worth using (admit it, you never once cast "Protection From Petrification" or "Goodberries")
-Gave me a single reason to ever want to have a bard in my party
-Let me turn off subtitles for the voiced-over lines so I don't just end up clicking past them because I read the dialogue long before the VO finishes talking

Also, if they could find some way to bring David Warner back from the dead to do some more VOs for Irenicus, that would be good.

[hogarth]

-Cleared the useless spells out of the spell list and added some actually worth using (admit it, you never once cast "Protection From Petrification" or "Goodberries")
In Baldur's Gate 1, I used both of those quite a bit! (Although Goodberries I'd only use at low levels.) I'm curious how you handled fights against basilisks without using Protection from Petrification. Scrolls?

Now Burning Hands, on the other (burning) hand....

[Gray Ghost]

In Baldur's Gate 1, I used both of those quite a bit! I'm curious how you handled fights against basilisks without using Protection from Petrification. Scrolls?

Potion of Mirror Eyes. But I didn't really use either spell in BG2. Nobody used petrification, other than maybe a few magic traps. The magic system was challenging, true, but still had way fewer choices than all of the feats and spells in 3.0/3.5, IMHO. Breach solved most issues. And if it didn't, then Dispel/Remove Magic generally did. Besides, you could use AoE spells (ah, sweet Skull Trap) to target mages and bypass most of their spell protections.

I'd love a BG reboot to do something about the inventory system. Nothing like killing an hour by sorting and resorting everyone's arrows/gems/potions, etc...

[D_Odds]

Mods with unlimited ammo stacking, potion cases, gem bags, and scroll cases solve the major inventory issues. High level mage battles, for me at least, needed high level magic removal. My first playthru of BGII, petrification ruined my Jaheira romance, and I never figured out what went wrong. What a PITA, but mods fixed that too.

[Terminus Est]

Kicking out your love interest also kills the romance. Petrification has the side effect of removing the NPC from the party.

I never could figure out which counterspell to use against which spell.

[D_Odds]

Exactly. Problem was I didn't know that on my first playthru, and I'd already pushed Aerie aside for Jaheira. I also rushed the beginning to get to Imoen, and ended up with Nalia disappearing with a bunch of good items. Plus, rushing thru ill-prepared me for all the mage fights.

That was my biggest problem with the story. To best prepare yourself, you need to level up with a lot of the sidequests, but you can get the money to move on very quickly while still underpowered for what comes in Spellhold and beyond. Personally, I think Chapter 2 should have been more linear, and then have the PC given a reason to sidequest after the Underdark.

[andros]

I never really understood some people like Baldur's Gate 2 so much more than Baldur's Gate 1. What really turned me off BG2 is all of the tedious fights against wizards with fifty bajillion defensive spells (via Contingency or Spell Sequencer or whatever) that you're forced to strip off with half a dozen different anti-defensive spells. (Yes, I'm exaggerating, but still...)

With the "fix" in ToB of all the damned wands and rods to strip protections.

But still and all, I just played through BGII again, and followed it up by finally getting to DA:O. Much prefer BG.

[Spectralist]

I never really understood some people like Baldur's Gate 2 so much more than Baldur's Gate 1. What really turned me off BG2 is all of the tedious fights against wizards with fifty bajillion defensive spells (via Contingency or Spell Sequencer or whatever) that you're forced to strip off with half a dozen different anti-defensive spells. (Yes, I'm exaggerating, but still...)

I much preferred the fist game. The second game had a major problem with the gameplay being completely at odds with the story. The story telling you to hurry, hurry, hurry while the gameplay tells you to take your time, explore, do some side quests. It's really bad at the beginning because if you hurry to try and rescue Imoen asap, as makes sense, you end up under levelled and under equipped for dealing with the Underdark. Especially if you are a sorcerer as I was. Since nearly everything down there has spell resistance, usually enough of it to need at least 2 casts of Lower Resist before you can have any chance of hitting them with a spell.

And once you have rescued Imoen "rescue Imoen asap" just gets replaced with "retrieve your souls asap" as a goal. Which has the same problem of making the gameplay mechanics of "rest often and waste time on travelling and sidequests" seem really out of place. Lots of games have that problem, of course, but most of them don't have in game time counters that show up. Noticing that it has been 50 days since Imoen was captured, or possibly hundreds since you learnt you need to recover your souls, really takes the wind out of the story for me.

Plus the exploration mechanics in the first game were a lot more fun than needing to learn about each specific location ahead of time like in the second. The saving throw mechanics from the 2nd edition did not scale very well into the mid levels either. With no spell save DCs non-buff non-summon spells just got less and less likely to succeed as you got further into the game. Which really sucked for me since I don't like buffs or summons much and had selected pretty much entirely nuke, instant death, and disable spells which all started to become worthless around level 10ish and usually wouldn't work even with a Greater Malison not much later.

I never even finished the second game. I just lost all interest shortly after finding my way out of the Underdark.

[smiling bandit]

Potion of Mirror Eyes. But I didn't really use either spell in BG2. Nobody used petrification, other than maybe a few magic traps.

The thing about having that spell was that you could memorize it, cast it on a fighter stack up some potions, and power-level a couple zones. Not every spell was meant to be a game-winner. But you always had the choice to learn it or not.

I also think Vicky was the bomb. You could also get her at level 1 if you worked on it. There was an interesting divide in how characters worked: evil characters tended to be the best sepcialists in the game. The best tank, offensive warrior, mage, and cleric were evil, for instance, although the best thief was neutral. On the other hand, good characters tended to be more generally effective.

So, for instance, you might use Minsc over Shar-Teel, because Minsc was less likely to go down like a chump when actually hit.

[Maeglin]

I never really understood some people like Baldur's Gate 2 so much more than Baldur's Gate 1. What really turned me off BG2 is all of the tedious fights against wizards with fifty bajillion defensive spells (via Contingency or Spell Sequencer or whatever) that you're forced to strip off with half a dozen different anti-defensive spells. (Yes, I'm exaggerating, but still...)

That's funny; I thought that was part of the appeal. Magic is more than just reflavored direct damage. I am playing through Torment now and that is one aspect I really miss. Magic is incredibly stylish and fun to watch, but it lacks the depth of BG2.

[hogarth]

That's funny; I thought that was part of the appeal. Magic is more than just reflavored direct damage. I am playing through Torment now and that is one aspect I really miss. Magic is incredibly stylish and fun to watch, but it lacks the depth of BG2.
It would be more interesting if it wasn't just a matter of casting the same few spells at the start of every mage fight (Breach, Dispel Illusion, Dispel Magic, etc).

[D_Odds]

It would be more interesting if it wasn't just a matter of casting the same few spells at the start of every mage fight (Breach, Dispel Illusion, Dispel Magic, etc).
You forgot Lower Resistance and Greater Malison (if you are to have any chance of a spell working).

There also the method of sending low level summons in one at a time until the big bad runs out of spells, and the prot/magic weapons has dropped.

BGII wasn't perfect, but what game is? It is my most replayed game ever, followed by Daggerfall. For me, it is 'that good'.

[smiling bandit]

The big problem with BG2 was that the enemy wizards cheated. They were a hell of a lot more powerful than your wizards were allowed to be, because they got a free instant-use Tattoo of Power. This was a "drop every defensive spell possible, as well as several which aren't, on me right now" effect.

The problem was that later on, you got to the point where their wizards had defenses you couldn't penetrate, no matter what. At all. Ever. You just had to wait them out, since they could auto-block everything you threw at them. This annoyed me to no end in Throne of Bhaal.

[D_Odds]

A lot of late game wizards were vulnerable to a breach plus an unenchanted melee weapon. You just had to survive the timestop, 16 symbols, and 4 horrid wiltings they would throw.

Your wizard could always counter with a Robe of Vecna/Staff of Power accelerated Time Stop, followed by your own spell triggers. With Vhailor's Helm, you could send a copy of your mage to strip defenses, and when he is killed, kick off your main mages storm of spells.

Bioware cheesed their mages to counter players complaints that the fights were too easy because they were using their own cheesy tactics. That said, mage battles in BGII were more involved (if cheesy) and more varied than mage battles in any other RPG I've played.

[hogarth]

You forgot Lower Resistance and Greater Malison (if you are to have any chance of a spell working).
I don't think I ever cast those spells at all; once the defenses are down, weapons can usually take down a magic-user pretty quickly.

The problem was that later on, you got to the point where their wizards had defenses you couldn't penetrate, no matter what. At all. Ever. You just had to wait them out, since they could auto-block everything you threw at them. This annoyed me to no end in Throne of Bhaal.
Ouch...I've never finished Throne of Bhaal, but I couldn't remember why. That's probably why.

[Mogle]

I don't think I ever cast those spells at all; once the defenses are down, weapons can usually take down a magic-user pretty quickly.

Which is probably why they got all those defensive spells in the first place, they would never get a spell off without them. You know, with spell casts being automatically interrupted if you take any damage.

[hogarth]

Which is probably why they got all those defensive spells in the first place, they would never get a spell off without them. You know, with spell casts being automatically interrupted if you take any damage.
Perhaps, although I'd argue that a magic-user with one or two defensive spells + some minions would be more entertaining than a super-buffed magic-user with no minions.

Ultimately, all I care about is entertainment. If the only way to make a fight last longer is to make it formulaic, that makes it a step in the wrong direction (for me).

[Maeglin]

Perhaps, although I'd argue that a magic-user with one or two defensive spells + some minions would be more entertaining than a super-buffed magic-user with no minions.

Ultimately, all I care about is entertainment. If the only way to make a fight last longer is to make it formulaic, that makes it a step in the wrong direction (for me).

But they didn't make it formulaic. You weren't locked into playing with minions, dispels, or cheesed-up buffs. The last time I played, I think I was a terrifically munchkinny kensai/wizard. I just shifted up my spells every few rest periods and did things a little differently. Sometimes I was in the mood for Tenser's Transformation; sometimes I wasn't. The game admits to several playstyles. It really is up to the player to vary them when he sees fit.

[YoudNeverGuess]

A L1 mage can't even escape the first assassination attempt in Candlekeep. That's why I never played a mage in BG1.

We got BG free with my dad's computer back in 1999 or so and I played it not knowing anything at all about how to play RPGs or even what they were! I also didn't have a manual. I played as a mage elf. Stupid in hindsight but somehow (after many, many hours) I did manage to beat the game. :p

I never even learned how to set traps until BGII IIRC. I'm not one for reading instructions or doing tutorials... :D

[hogarth]

But they didn't make it formulaic.
If every fight against wizards requires you to cast Breach, I call that formulaic. YMMV, of course.

[Scathach]

Man, I loved that game so much - first computer game I ever really got addicted to. Didn't know anything about D&D, but I played an elf ranger and just got completely hooked. (Except for nearly quitting after the goddam Friendly Arms Inn guy slaughtering me repeatedly) Definitely preferred the first game to the second, the second game sort of removed the fun wandering around fields you could do discovering tiny little things (not even worth calling quests) hidden around the place. Like the time you bump into D'rizzt.

Also, fucking Anomen. Male characters got 3 romance options, and female characters get stuck with the world's biggest jackass as the only romance? Think I ended up downloading some mods for that one.

[D_Odds]

I never even learned how to set traps until BGII IIRC. I'm not one for reading instructions or doing tutorials... :DI'm pretty sure (but not entirely sure, as I haven't played 'pure' BG in ages) that thieves could not set traps until BGII.

I always felt sorry for female players because of Anomen. Haer'Dalis was supposed to be an option, but got cut under deadline pressure. Mods have added him, and Valygar, plus just about every NPC mod includes a romance option. Sadly, most of them are more poorly written and thrice as sappy as Bioware's stuff.

[D_Odds]

If every fight against wizards requires you to cast Breach, I call that formulaic. YMMV, of course.5-starred Mazzy with Tugian's Bow is nearly as fast at dropping Stoneskin as a Breach spell. By ToB, there are two weapons with Dispel Magic on them.

What's formulaic are the scripts for every magic user. There's no Necromancer versus Enchanter versus whatever scripts. That would have been nice.

[Jragon]

I'm pretty sure (but not entirely sure, as I haven't played 'pure' BG in ages) that thieves could not set traps until BGII.

I always felt sorry for female players because of Anomen. Haer'Dalis was supposed to be an option, but got cut under deadline pressure. Mods have added him, and Valygar, plus just about every NPC mod includes a romance option. Sadly, most of them are more poorly written and thrice as sappy as Bioware's stuff.

I think they could, at least I remember that a couple guides back in the day recommended killing Sarevok with Traps (after disarming his).

[Kobal2]

In Baldur's Gate 1, I used both of those quite a bit! (Although Goodberries I'd only use at low levels.) I'm curious how you handled fights against basilisks without using Protection from Petrification. Scrolls?

Now Burning Hands, on the other (burning) hand....

Got a ton of mileage out of Burning Hands in IWD2 however. My main tank was a halfling monk, he'd basically just herd the mobs then Improved Evasion'd through the magical Armageddon (he got handed every last +Reflex save item, natch) :)

What somewhat cheesed me off in BG/IWD was how useless the defensive spells were to you - the NPCs could set theirs in contingency easily because they only had to do the one fight. Do the same on your own mage and the contingency will pop for any old goblin. Or you set them to "when at half health" or somesuch and the mobs just one-shot him. Or you encounter a Siren but because the FoV is super short, by the time you're done casting Mind Blank, half your party's already charmed.
So basically, unless you know exactly what you'll fight when, and when that particular spell will make a difference, whelp, stick to skull traps :/

And trapsetting was most definitely a BG2 addition. Thieves in BG1 plainly sucked, even more so that the Infinity Engine doesn't factor flanking. But then, thieves have always somewhat sucked in D&D. Which makes it all the more aggravating that you kinda need one in the party.
Alternatively, a cleric with the find traps spell and summoning spells will do in a pinch for floor traps, while a sorcerer with Knock takes care of all the locks. Which leaves the chest traps for the meat shield's face, the pockets for the Bard, and the scouting for the Ranger (or the Sorcerer's familiar, but that's more risky).

[Kobal2]

I think they could, at least I remember that a couple guides back in the day recommended killing Sarevok with Traps (after disarming his).

That's Skull Traps. They did the same damage as a Fireball, but more importantly they stayed up until triggered, forever. So you could cast 5, rest, cast 5 more etc...

[Gray Ghost]

That's Skull Traps. They did the same damage as a Fireball, but more importantly they stayed up until triggered, forever. So you could cast 5, rest, cast 5 more etc...

And they didn't cap at 10d6, unlike Fireball. They also dealt magical energy damage, which I found wasn't as resistible by most critters as fire or cold. As a 3rd level spell, liches ignored them, which was annoying, but they were hell on everything else. With their crappy range, it took some skill to use them and not zap your own party. And you got them quite a bit earlier than Horrid Wilting.

For making things easier for your save-or-die spells to work, I loved the Greater Malison-Slow-Emotion Helplessness sequencer. I remember the divine spell Chaotic Commands having decent enough duration that I could run around with it. Essential when fighting stuff like vampires and flayers.

Damn, y'all are getting me to want to fire up BG1 and 2 again...

[Johnny Angel]

-Cleared the useless spells out of the spell list and added some actually worth using (admit it, you never once cast "Protection From Petrification" or "Goodberries")
-Gave me a single reason to ever want to have a bard in my party
You mean not everybody played a bard in Baldur's Gate I, Baldur's Gate II, Icewind Dale, Icewind Dale II and a charming roguish Nameless One in Planescape: Torment? Takes all kinds, I guess.

I used Goodberries a lot at beginning levels, so I could heal between encounters without having to use up any actual resources. Of course, eventually those Healing potions I carefully avoided using start to crowd my packs.

[Namkcalb]

I think Dragon Age: Origins came VERY close though...

So as you can imagine, I figured they'd hit the ball out of the park with Dragon Age 2. Boy was I wrong about that!
IMHO, Dragon Age: Origins actually marginally exceeded Baldur's gate by virtue of a mechanics system tailored to computers instead of an old pen and paper one.

The graphics didn't matter too much, I ended up playing DAO in 3rd person isometric anyway, so it looked very similar to BG2

Like you, I couldn't stand DA2, it was just too streamlined, combat-focused and soueless, I gave up after the third act.
I think the worse moment was when I was forced to mow down dozens of templars in a few seconds, many of them just jumping down or apperated everywhere, removing any chance for strategy or diplomacy

[Shooby]

IMHO, Dragon Age: Origins actually marginally exceeded Baldur's gate by virtue of a mechanics system tailored to computers instead of an old pen and paper one.

The graphics didn't matter too much, I ended up playing DAO in 3rd person isometric anyway, so it looked very similar to BG2


I hated how hidden all the combat mechanics were in Dragon Age. You really didn't know what things did, how much damage they did, how effective they would be until you tried them, and even then, it was still kind of a mystery how various stats and equipment affected your performance.

In the D&D-based Baldur's Gate, you could actually know what things did since the rulebooks are everywhere, and it felt more satisfying to build your character because of it.

The biggest difference, though, is in the exploration factor. Dragon Age's environments usually felt so small and same-same-y, and encounters you discovered out in the field were usually generic hostile darkspawn or bandits/blood mages. Most of those encounters were solved by beating them to death, and there was usually very little interesting payoff. Hell, most of the exploratory sidequests were from Message Boards, and just had you fetching or killing a few things, and boom badabing, quest over.

Contrast that with the BG series, where anything could be out there beyond the next clearing or house door. It could be a wandering merchant from Amn, some bugbears with a score to settle, a little girl who lost her cat, a doppelganger pretending to be a little girl who lost her cat, a lich lord holding a secret meeting, a famous dark elf ranger looking for a temporary partner to asskick for goodness, etc. There was real flavor and diversity in the encounters, not just in cities but in wilderness and dungeons, too. Dragon Age had a spattering of interesting side encounters, but BG 1 & 2 had bucket-loads.

That's really what I miss. Dragon Age was a good game in quite a few ways, but it didn't deliver where it counted for me. Hopefully this mysterious BG-related project will...

[Animastryfe]

And from what I understand (never actually played it), in BG II, they assumed that the players had dual-classed Imoen into mage, because they had gotten rid of Dynaheir, and so she starts the game that way, and Dynaheir is officially dead.

This is correct. However, it seems that many players did dual class Imoen into a mage in BG1, and I think every guide I read recommended that she be dual classed into a mage.

[Animastryfe]

I've also been playing through the whole BG trilogy. My character recently made the transition to BGII and I'm considering whether to give Gaelan Bayle his money and rush to Spellhold or level up a bit more in Amn and do some more quests. Decisions, decisions.

The most important factor for me when I was faced with this decision was whether I wanted Imoen in my final party. I did, so I only did the quests that gave me very good rewards, including the Cult of the Unseeing Eye to get Keldorn, and were relatively quick to do

[Shooby]

This is correct. However, it seems that many players did dual class Imoen into a mage in BG1, and I think every guide I read recommended that she be dual classed into a mage.

And this is due to the fact that single class thieves are pretty useless in AD&D (or at least computer adaptations of it). You can get your relevant thief skills high enough (depending on how many things you want to be able to do) from around levels 6-13, and go mage the rest of the way, with an extra benefit of having bonus HP. The only downside is the waiting period when your mage levels have to catch up to the thief ones, during which your thief skills are not available. But the payoff of having another super-powerful mage with enough thievery to get you through is well worth it.

As much as I loved the BG series, there are a lot of unbalanced mechanics inherent in the game system. Namely, high level casters > all.

[D_Odds]

I don't know. I loved killing things with spike traps, and a stoneskinned, spelltrapped swashbuckler with the Staff of the Magi and a Cloak of Non-Detection could wreak havoc on mages. (Why yes, I bought every stoneskin scroll throughout BGII just for this reason). :cool:

[Terminus Est]

The most important factor for me when I was faced with this decision was whether I wanted Imoen in my final party. I did, so I only did the quests that gave me very good rewards, including the Cult of the Unseeing Eye to get Keldorn, and were relatively quick to do

I always include Imoen (the better to keep an eye on her as a future rival), so the main factor for me is what kind of gear I want to take with me to the Underdark. The Robe of Vecna is pretty pricy.

[Chronos]

Now, see, personally, I wouldn't touch any item with "...of Vecna" in its name with a ten-foot pole.

[Gray Ghost]

Now, see, personally, I wouldn't touch any item with "...of Vecna" in its name with a ten-foot pole.

Were I actually in the game, I'd agree. Especially the Head of Vecna (http://www.blindpanic.com/humor/vecna.htm)...

[Ferret Herder]

Now, see, personally, I wouldn't touch any item with "...of Vecna" in its name with a ten-foot pole.

I especially recommend against the Head of Vecna (http://www.sjgames.com/ill/1996/ill-dec96.html) (scroll down to the Dec. 6th entry).

[Stowed Bob]

I just bought the complete BG 2 on special at GOG. BG2, Planescape: Torment, and Temple of Elemental Evil for $4.99 total.

And oh yeah, I remember that fucking wolf.
Color me jealous. I need to pick up Planescape since everyone keeps hyping it. I keep getting distracted by Fallout 3.

[Terminus Est]

It seems apropos to link to this web comic (http://twistedspeedo.com/?p=90).

[Mahaloth]

Color me jealous. I need to pick up Planescape since everyone keeps hyping it. I keep getting distracted by Fallout 3.

Seriously, get it. It's awesome.

[Namkcalb]

I hated how hidden all the combat mechanics were in Dragon Age. You really didn't know what things did, how much damage they did, how effective they would be until you tried them, and even then, it was still kind of a mystery how various stats and equipment affected your performance.

In the D&D-based Baldur's Gate, you could actually know what things did since the rulebooks are everywhere, and it felt more satisfying to build your character because of it.
I personally found it less emersive to be able to see under the bonnet, but to each their own.

The biggest difference, though, is in the exploration factor. Dragon Age's environments usually felt so small and same-same-y, and encounters you discovered out in the field were usually generic hostile darkspawn or bandits/blood mages. Most of those encounters were solved by beating them to death, and there was usually very little interesting payoff. Hell, most of the exploratory sidequests were from Message Boards, and just had you fetching or killing a few things, and boom badabing, quest over.
I definately agree with you about the DAO random encounters.

Other than the trader and a few easter eggs, the random encounters were all about combat and just about combat. I did like the post-mission battles alongside your new allies though. There were also more engaging encounters if you started a sidequest, but it seems a bit contrived to be honest.

As for the sidequests, I think you are ignoring the depth in Dragon age, if you search around, you'll definately be entertained and engaged and you won't feel at all railroaded along one path. Though, I admit they lack the ultralong hidden sidequests like the human-flesh armour one for BGII.

Anyway, they are both awesome games

[D_Odds]

Anyway, they are both awesome games
This I agree with. I personally find the NPCs in BGII the most engaging. Minsc, Viconia, Edwin, Jan Jansen, and even the interplay between Mazzy and Valygar (the latter who was otherwise a block of wood) were more engaging than the best that could be had from pairing Morigan and Alistair, and Valygar seemed downright engaging compared to Sten. Though Zevran might have been interesting, but no matter what PC I made, I never had room for him. Always went with the hot chick.

[Kinthalis]

Hmmm...

http://www.baldursgate.com/

Looks like there's a count down timer now, 22 hours or so.

Oh, guys, btw, if you own Neverwinter Nights 2 or plan on purchasing, there's a new mod out now for it, years in the making. It's a remake of Icewind Dale!

I'll probably give it a go once I'm done with Me3.

[Terminus Est]

The site's currently 503 - Service Temporarily Unavailable, so there's still quite a bit of interest about this.

[Kinthalis]

5 Minutes!

::bites someone::

[Ferret Herder]

*twitch*

[Kinthalis]

God damn it! The wohle world is trying to load the friggin website.

[Palooka]

It's this: http://us2.campaign-archive1.com/?u=3b6c0e6ef0c1deb880f420476&id=6ae2f577cd (Probably)

[Kinthalis]

So what we expected in the end. An HD remake.

Sounds good to me! It's be a while since I've replayed, so I'll definitely be picking it up.

I wonder what kind of upgrades we'll be getting.

Will it still run on D&D 2nd edition rules?

[Palooka]

It'd be cool if you could import your previous dude. I really don't want to go back to 4 HP. Also, casting in 2e sucks so let's hope not. Given WotC's involvement, it'll probably use whatever ruleset they're trying to sling now. 4e, maybe? I don't know.

[Crowbar of Irony +3]

If they port it to 3rd or 4th edition D&D they will have to make a lot of rule changes. I don't mind AD&D2, but please touch up on the interface and path-finding issues. That you need to gather your party before venturing forth is annoying!

How is casting in 2nd edition different from D&D 3rd? You still need to consume spell slots and memorize spells, no?

[Spectralist]

Save DCs based on spell level and casting stat and simplified and intuitive saving throw stats make a world of difference.

[Palooka]

How is casting in 2nd edition different from D&D 3rd? You still need to consume spell slots and memorize spells, no?I have no idea. I just think that the casting in BG sucks. It was lame that a wizard could cast a few spells per day while a warrior could annihilate masses with his bow.

[Kinthalis]

I have no idea. I just think that the casting in BG sucks. It was lame that a wizard could cast a few spells per day while a warrior could annihilate masses with his bow.


4th edition addresses precisely this.

All characters have abilities (or spells) that they can cast continuously without running out. For a fighter that might be a standard attack, for a spell cast it's magic missile, etc. Then they have more powerful abilities or spells that they can only use once per encounter, followed by the most powerful abilities available only once per day.

Every few levels you get more "slots" in each category, and you get to choose from more powerful abilities per slot category.

Now I don't remember the specifics, but a 1st lvl wizard might have magic missile as his normal attack, a globe of fire as his encounter ability, and an acid arrow as his daily.

He can use magic missile constantly, as often as he needs to. His globe of fire he can use once per encounter, but in as many encounters as he wishes, and his acid arrow only once per day.

At lvl 5 he might have magic missile and some other minor ability available to him at all times, he probably has 2 or three encounter abilities, and 2 or possibly more dailies which he probably swapped out for something more powerful than an acid arrow.

I believe there was also another category of ability cal utility? I don't remember, but it was for spells/abilities that the player could cast between encounters. This would be your prevantitive spells, utility spells like see in the dark, etc.

[Chipacabra]

They've said they're sticking to 2e rules.

I don't think they even CAN use 4e rules if they wanted to, since Atari is still squatting on the rights.

[Terminus Est]

They've said they're sticking to 2e rules.

I don't think they even CAN use 4e rules if they wanted to, since Atari is still squatting on the rights.

Seeing as Atari is involved in this, they very well could use 4e.

The site's finally back up, after getting hammered by the entire intarwebs. From the horse's mouth:
Atari, Wizards of the Coast, and Overhaul Games are pleased to announce work has begun on the Enhanced Edition of Baldur’s Gate and Baldur’s Gate II.... Overhaul Games has assembled a talented team of artists, programmers and designers to enhance this timeless classic. To remain true to the spirit of the game, the team includes original Baldur’s Gate developers.

[Kinthalis]

Usually Wizards fo the coasts refuses to allow old rules in new products...

But then again it's a remake, so they might make an exception.

[Crowbar of Irony +3]

Much as I dislike 4e, it's perfect for a computer based rpg.

[Shooby]

4th edition addresses precisely this.

All characters have abilities (or spells) that they can cast continuously without running out. For a fighter that might be a standard attack, for a spell cast it's magic missile, etc. Then they have more powerful abilities or spells that they can only use once per encounter, followed by the most powerful abilities available only once per day.

Every few levels you get more "slots" in each category, and you get to choose from more powerful abilities per slot category.

Now I don't remember the specifics, but a 1st lvl wizard might have magic missile as his normal attack, a globe of fire as his encounter ability, and an acid arrow as his daily.

He can use magic missile constantly, as often as he needs to. His globe of fire he can use once per encounter, but in as many encounters as he wishes, and his acid arrow only once per day.

At lvl 5 he might have magic missile and some other minor ability available to him at all times, he probably has 2 or three encounter abilities, and 2 or possibly more dailies which he probably swapped out for something more powerful than an acid arrow.

I believe there was also another category of ability cal utility? I don't remember, but it was for spells/abilities that the player could cast between encounters. This would be your prevantitive spells, utility spells like see in the dark, etc.

It's probably a lot more balanced now, but that sounds awful and same-samey. Wizards being broken should be a D&D tradition! :(

[Ferret Herder]

Apparently one of the devs has been answering questions on Twitter (@TrentOster), and among other things has said that they're trying to not break existing mods (it's on the same base engine) and will be sticking to 2nd Ed rules.

[hogarth]

Usually Wizards fo the coasts refuses to allow old rules in new products...

But then again it's a remake, so they might make an exception.
Wizards of the Coast has been making an effort at luring back old-school D&D players recently (they've mentioned that they're hoping to sell them on the next edition of D&D). For instance, they're selling reproductions of the old (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Product.aspx?x=dnd/products/dndacc/02410000) D&D (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Product.aspx?x=dnd/products/dndacc/02400000) rulebooks (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Product.aspx?x=dnd/products/dndacc/02390000).

[Kinthalis]

I have mixed feelings about this. As pnp rules 2nd edition was good. As a set of rules for a video game, it was lousy, as everyone with a 4 hp 1 spell per day wizard will tell you.

It would have been nice to see the more video game friendly 4th edition take on the game.

[Tom Scud]

Honestly, 4 hp 1 spell per day wizards sucked in pencil and paper, too, which is why that was one of the most widely house-ruled elements of the game (particularly the hit points, but the "one spell and you're done" thing as well).

[Kinthalis]

Looks like they also announced Baldur's Gate II: Enhanced edition. Just not a release window for it.

BG2 is definitely a larger game, specially with the expansion pack that concludes the series. So it probably wont be out till next year some time.

[hogarth]

Honestly, 4 hp 1 spell per day wizards sucked in pencil and paper, too, which is why that was one of the most widely house-ruled elements of the game (particularly the hit points, but the "one spell and you're done" thing as well).
It's certainly not an accident that low-level wizards got more and more spells over time.

E.g.:
AD&D's Unearthed Arcana added cantrips.

2E AD&D added wizard specialists.

3E added bonus spells from high intelligence.

4E added at-will spells that never run out.

[Tom Scud]

And 1/2ED wizards were surprisingly likely to have 15-16 constitution, and tended to roll a 3 or 4 on a d4 at a rate that pretty well defies the laws of statistical probability.

[fluiddruid]

And 1/2ED wizards were surprisingly likely to have 15-16 constitution, and tended to roll a 3 or 4 on a d4 at a rate that pretty well defies the laws of statistical probability.Well, the living ones, yes.

[GargoyleWB]

Played through BG1 & 2 more than a few times. My favorite classes were as a druid (bear summons for the win!) or as a monk (grows stupidly overpowered halfway through BG2).

I never used any counter-defense spells against mages or liches, I just let summoned minions or a resistance-buffed character whittle down their spell inventory. Kiting with a hasted Imoen (with shadow armor) was also a tried and true tactic.

I am gone. I've done had enough of this!

[hogarth]

I never used any counter-defense spells against mages or liches, I just let summoned minions or a resistance-buffed character whittle down their spell inventory.
I've been known to spam a few summoned monsters in my day as well. Like in BG 1 to keep Driz'zt occupied while I fill him full of arrows. :)

[Maus Magill]

Wizards of the Coast has been making an effort at luring back old-school D&D players recently (they've mentioned that they're hoping to sell them on the next edition of D&D). For instance, they're selling reproductions of the old (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Product.aspx?x=dnd/products/dndacc/02410000) D&D (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Product.aspx?x=dnd/products/dndacc/02400000) rulebooks (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Product.aspx?x=dnd/products/dndacc/02390000).

Sweet. I still have mine sitting on the book shelf, held together by grey tape.

[smiling bandit]

The Escapist has many fun details:

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/116361-Beamdog-Boss-Reveals-More-About-Baldurs-Gate-Enhanced-Edition

[Smapti]

The Escapist has many fun details:

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/116361-Beamdog-Boss-Reveals-More-About-Baldurs-Gate-Enhanced-Edition

So they're not changing the perspective, the voice actors, the music, the rules system, the engine, the interface, the save game format, or the platform.

What ARE they changing?

[Jragon]

So they're not changing the perspective, the voice actors, the music, the rules system, the engine, the interface, the save game format, or the platform.

What ARE they changing?

Presumably higher resolution art, and they said they're adding additional content (i.e. new quests, maybe new companions).

[Shooby]

Presumably higher resolution art, and they said they're adding additional content (i.e. new quests, maybe new companions).

I can't help but greet this whole thing with a huge dose of meh. It'll be great to introduce new people to the BG saga, but I've never been able to get excited about graphical remakes. If there are extensive new questlines and such, I'll be somewhat interested.

[Least Original User Name Ever]

I can't help but greet this whole thing with a huge dose of meh. It'll be great to introduce new people to the BG saga, but I've never been able to get excited about graphical remakes. If there are extensive new questlines and such, I'll be somewhat interested.

I played it, but I wasn't very engaged through the process. If it comes out on console, I'll definitely pick it up.

[smiling bandit]

I can't help but greet this whole thing with a huge dose of meh. It'll be great to introduce new people to the BG saga, but I've never been able to get excited about graphical remakes. If there are extensive new questlines and such, I'll be somewhat interested.

But that was most of what BG needs, honestly. I think it's a great way to get interest revived, and may help new, similar games come into being. Hopefully, they'll have lots of new options, but why not? It's easy to add item and spells from the start.

There's still a thriving mod community who does that the hard way, by creating or inserting text documents, basically by deciphering existing documents and turning them into new ideas.

[Kinthalis]

I played it, but I wasn't very engaged through the process. If it comes out on console, I'll definitely pick it up.

Devs has said its a PC game. It requires a PC like interface. There's no way you're going to be able to play that game with. Gamepad without some serious reworking of the mechanics.

What might happen down the line is a tablet port. Still woud prefer mouse and keyboard over touch panel though.

[Jragon]

Devs has said its a PC game. It requires a PC like interface. There's no way you're going to be able to play that game with. Gamepad without some serious reworking of the mechanics.

What might happen down the line is a tablet port. Still woud prefer mouse and keyboard over touch panel though.

Baldur's Gate would be trivial to port the interface to console. If it was real-time it would be almost impossible, but with the pause/unpause feature all you have to do is redesign the menu structure and it would work just fine with the limited buttons on a control pad.

It may take a few more improvements to make it shine (instead of a cursor you may want to make the left stick/d-pad cycle between objects on screen, or something, with the right-stick dedicated to scrolling), but since it's not real time, you can certainly make it work at least competently with a controller.

ETA: Yes, I am talking about a "lazy port." I don't think it would be all that difficult to come up with a good console UI either, but the return may not be worth the investment, as it were.

[Kinthalis]

Lol yeah ok, Dragon age tried that. The console kids hated it. Its their number one complaint of that game, that it required too much pausing to be able to control the party effectively. It woukd be all you did. Pause, move character, pause, move another character, pause, move the last character again, because he moved out of position while you wre busy with the other character.

On dragon age lots of compromises ad to be made. The difficulty had to be made lower. On the pc you could pause and give everyone a waypoint, then unpause. Impossible on console.

Again, I didn't say it was impossible. Dumb it down enough and you can play it with kinect. But it would require extensive reworking of game mechanics. And unless they are willing to do that AND spen a few tens of millions in marketing, no one on consoles would buy it anyway.

[Jragon]

I didn't say that the console people would LIKE it, just that it's possible since the game is a tactical pause-based game. It is certainly technically possible to do a lot more than I hear Dragon Age did, though.

I'll use 360 controller, though this is easily doable by PS3 controller:

The start button pauses, left and right bumper cycle between living party members. By default, left stick scrolls the cursor on the screen, but holding left-trigger will open a (radial?) menu listing locations which will snap your cursor to a listed destination (an item, another character, a door, etc). Press "A" to select whatever your cursor is over. When a destination is selected, it will select the default action (attack an enemy, talk to an NPC, move to a location), right trigger will open a radial menu (a la Neverwinter Nights) that has your possible interactions with that character, be it talk, attack, give item, use item.

Waypoints are possible. After choosing your action assign a button, let's say "Y" (could be L3, select, any other thing) that will set that action, now you may enter a new action that will trigger after the old action. Press "X" to delete the previously entered waypoint.

Baldur's Gate really didn't require that many keys to play, if you didn't want to use the quickbar (and honestly, there was no reason to), 90% of the game was the spacebar and the mouse.

Again though, I really don't think the cost of porting the code and designing and tweaking the UI is worth the investment. I think most of the people who pick it up will pick it up on PC regardless, BG isn't a game I think most console gamers are going to pick up, especially since I'd bet money that the system requirements will probably be low enough that an office computer could run it.

[smiling bandit]

For what it's worth, they said they were interested in porting it to console, but would want to encourage the use of a mouse. Which shouldn't be that hard, since you can generally just plug a standard USB mouse (which is all of them) into a console USB port.

[Kinthalis]

For what it's worth, they said they were interested in porting it to console, but would want to encourage the use of a mouse. Which shouldn't be that hard, since you can generally just plug a standard USB mouse (which is all of them) into a console USB port.

I'm pretty sure thats only true of the PS3, and no one is gng to make a game REQUIRING a mouse and keyboard on a console.

As I said, it wouldn't be worth it anyway. Look at all the indie games that have done so much better on PC than console. Hell if they want it on Xbox,MS will demand a year exclusivity or they wont promote it, which means 0 sales.