It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like:Chrome,Firefox,Internet Explorer orOpera

×
avatar
Hickory: No, it doesn't. Hard is never fair. If it was fair, it wouldn't be hard. Easy is fair.

The problem with most games and many gamers nowadays is consoles. Games consoles are not suited to complicated interfaces and gameplay (just look at Skyrim), and the young generation don't want it anyway, and the developers like that -- it's cheaper and easier to make games that way.
avatar
yester64: In that case you don't want to try nethack but you miss out on an experience.
Hard can be a good lessons tool. But it nevertheless reminds me about the same discussion people had with resident evil games. Main complaint was ammo. Now check what resident evil game evolved too. Horrible.
Just to be clear, I wasn't advocating 'easy', on the contrary, I despise games that are easy. I was making a point that if a thing is hard, it isn't what most people consider 'fair'.
It's a little funny that people are holding up BG as the standard of video game difficulty and complaining that modern games are "dumbed down" and "too easy" when 15 years ago Ultima fans were calling things like Baldur's Gate "dumbed down" and "too easy."
avatar
KingCrimson250: It's a little funny that people are holding up BG as the standard of video game difficulty and complaining that modern games are "dumbed down" and "too easy" when 15 years ago Ultima fans were calling things like Baldur's Gate "dumbed down" and "too easy."
If you read my posts I said that people who are complaining about the difficulty of the IE games should try playing some pre-1998 games because these were even harder and also pointed out that I missed out on playing the Ultima series (though I did play and complete some other pretty fiendishly challenging titles pre-1998). So I agree with you really : "dumbing down" began a LONG time ago, but in my opinion everything Bioware has released since the IE games, starting with Neverwinter Nights, has been designed with the modern mainstream gamer in mind rather the "hardcore" PC gamer and so a new phase of "dumbing down" began after Icewind Dale 2.

Great username by the way : King Crimson absolutely rock ! Music : now there's another thing which has been "dumbed down" gradually over the years. King Crimson is definitely NOT dumbed down !
avatar
yester64: In that case you don't want to try nethack but you miss out on an experience.
Hard can be a good lessons tool. But it nevertheless reminds me about the same discussion people had with resident evil games. Main complaint was ammo. Now check what resident evil game evolved too. Horrible.
avatar
Hickory: Just to be clear, I wasn't advocating 'easy', on the contrary, I despise games that are easy. I was making a point that if a thing is hard, it isn't what most people consider 'fair'.
True...
Since i played recently Oblivion and Skyrim what i can say is that these are enjoyable games in itself. Lot of things to do and i personally liked Oblivion a lot.
Skyrim on the other hand felt to easy in that you gained so easy levels that it took not much effort. Of course this was by default settings.
And it is true that what one thinks of hard may be for somebody else plain unfair by game design.
It takes me always some time to get adjusted to a game and therefore i can understand that some people have a hard time to like the game mechanics of Baldurs Gate.
avatar
Hickory: Just to be clear, I wasn't advocating 'easy', on the contrary, I despise games that are easy. I was making a point that if a thing is hard, it isn't what most people consider 'fair'.
avatar
yester64: True...
Since i played recently Oblivion and Skyrim what i can say is that these are enjoyable games in itself. Lot of things to do and i personally liked Oblivion a lot.
Skyrim on the other hand felt to easy in that you gained so easy levels that it took not much effort. Of course this was by default settings.
And it is true that what one thinks of hard may be for somebody else plain unfair by game design.
It takes me always some time to get adjusted to a game and therefore i can understand that some people have a hard time to like the game mechanics of Baldurs Gate.
This wasn't a reply to me so I apologise but I feel I must have my say :

I also enjoyed Oblivion but with some major qualifications. It's an absolutely wonderful landscape / gameworld to wander about in, usually somewhat aimlessly, but if you are entranced by the beauty of it most of the time (which I was) then you don't need an aim I suppose. I will have to reinstall Oblivion on my latest PC and mod it up and play it again. I'm a fan of the Elder Scrolls games if only for the sheer beauty and vastness of their gameworlds but in so many other respects Oblivion and Morrowind are flawed as games.

In Oblivion the Oblivion Gates are ALL THE SAME and yet you have to close ALL of them to complete the game (unless I'm mistaken, in which case I apologise - I really never could be bothered to complete this game, beautiful though it is). Tedious just doesn't begin to describe how torturous this repetitive chore becomes : you spot YET ANOTHER Oblivion Gate in the beautiful distance. You think despairingly to yourself, "Can I really be bothered to go there and go through the same ****ing routine AGAIN ?" You know for a fact that this Oblivion Gate is going to be almost exactly the same as the last one. It's enough to make you want to do the ironing or the dusting, the prospect really is that dull.

Then there is the combat, which is not only primitive but is not even remotely fun. The spell "system" just isn't a system at all and melee combat consists in you thrashing away at your left mouse button (and sometimes your right button if you feel like "defending" yourself) in the hope of winning. Combat in both Morrowind and Oblivion is about as tactical as a drunken brawl in your local pub. The combat in these games, whether you are a mage or a fighter, just doesn't work I'm afraid. And if you anger a wolf somewhere out in the wilderness and you can't beat it you need to run almost half the length of the entire map until it finally loses interest : the enemy AI is appalling !

The interface and inventory system in these games are also wonders of disorganisation. I noticed a [/i]slight [i] improvement in these things when playing Oblivion after playing Morrowind, but was that really the best they can could come up with ? It's just such a clumsy interface. I have Skyrim installed on my PC and have played through the first 20 minutes of it to test it and the only thing I can say for certain so far is that the developers still haven't learnt how to create an intuitive interface or inventory system ....

And then there's the dialogue .... but oh I just can't be bothered to go into how crap and robotic it was in Morrowind, how barely improved it was in Oblivion or how little hope I have that it will have been improved in Skyrim.

In spite of these objections I LIKE the Elder Scrolls games but there is no way that AS GAMES they are worthy of being put in the same class as the Infinity Engine Games. Beautiful, enchanting landscapes with lots of interesting looking locations but ultimately all appearance and no substance in my opinion. The only thing which is "difficult" about these games is enduring the boredom to get through them, which is a shame because they are so beautiful and could have been so much more.
I just starting playing recently and I've been having trouble too. Even on the easier difficulties.

I've been trying to pick my battles carefully and try to get kills (monsters not innocents :p) wherever I can. Some battles are just too much for me so I'll come back to them later. I think for these style of games that's sensible reasoning to have.

I find whenever I win a battle it's more out of sheer luck than anything. That's what happened in my fight against the assassin outside the Friendly arm inn. He killed me the first time and then the second time Imoen managed to almost instantly kill him.

The only thing I'm worried about right now is if I spend too long training, party members are going to get mad that I'm not helping them with what I asked them to join for. (I heard that was a thing that happened eventually)
Post edited April 14, 2013 by Dizzard
avatar
Dizzard: The only thing I'm worried about right now is if I spend too long training, party members are going to get mad that I'm not helping them with what I asked them to join for. (I heard that was a thing that happened eventually)
There are certain party members who nag you until you 'get on with it', so to speak. The only *real* problem with this, in an early party, is Minsc. If you pick him up and continually refuse to rescue Dynaheir, he will not only leave the party, but he will attack you. Jaheira, Khalid, Xzar and Montaron will stop nagging once you reach Nashkel and talk to the Mayor about the mines. The other party members who might nag you will not be in a rookie party (Coran, for instance), so won't be an issue.
avatar
Dizzard: The only thing I'm worried about right now is if I spend too long training, party members are going to get mad that I'm not helping them with what I asked them to join for. (I heard that was a thing that happened eventually)
avatar
Hickory: There are certain party members who nag you until you 'get on with it', so to speak. The only *real* problem with this, in an early party, is Minsc. If you pick him up and continually refuse to rescue Dynaheir, he will not only leave the party, but he will attack you. Jaheira, Khalid, Xzar and Montaron will stop nagging once you reach Nashkel and talk to the Mayor about the mines. The other party members who might nag you will not be in a rookie party (Coran, for instance), so won't be an issue.
I think I might be in trouble then. :(

I've already picked up Minsc but the enemies on the way to the fort where Dynaheir is being kept are too much for me. I can't imagine how difficult the actual fort will be.

Is the time limit forgiving or could it happen before I've developed my team/gotten to better grips with the game? Will I have to kill Minsc if he attacks?
avatar
Hickory: There are certain party members who nag you until you 'get on with it', so to speak. The only *real* problem with this, in an early party, is Minsc. If you pick him up and continually refuse to rescue Dynaheir, he will not only leave the party, but he will attack you. Jaheira, Khalid, Xzar and Montaron will stop nagging once you reach Nashkel and talk to the Mayor about the mines. The other party members who might nag you will not be in a rookie party (Coran, for instance), so won't be an issue.
avatar
Dizzard: I think I might be in trouble then. :(

I've already picked up Minsc but the enemies on the way to the fort where Dynaheir is being kept are too much for me. I can't imagine how difficult the actual fort will be.

Is the time limit forgiving or could it happen before I've developed my team/gotten to better grips with the game? Will I have to kill Minsc if he attacks?
My suggestion to you is to drop Minsc off at the Friendly Arm Inn -- he won't leave, so long as your reputation is above average. Once you've dropped him off, pick up Ajantis (even if this is just temporary). You could even go rescue Dynaheir without Minsc, and there won't be a problem.
avatar
Dizzard: I think I might be in trouble then. :(

I've already picked up Minsc but the enemies on the way to the fort where Dynaheir is being kept are too much for me. I can't imagine how difficult the actual fort will be.

Is the time limit forgiving or could it happen before I've developed my team/gotten to better grips with the game? Will I have to kill Minsc if he attacks?
avatar
Hickory: My suggestion to you is to drop Minsc off at the Friendly Arm Inn -- he won't leave, so long as your reputation is above average. Once you've dropped him off, pick up Ajantis (even if this is just temporary). You could even go rescue Dynaheir without Minsc, and there won't be a problem.
My reputation is at 13 (Popular) so I assume that' fine. Thanks I'll do that. He'll just stand in the Friendly Arm Inn until I come to pick him up?
avatar
KingCrimson250: It's a little funny that people are holding up BG as the standard of video game difficulty and complaining that modern games are "dumbed down" and "too easy" when 15 years ago Ultima fans were calling things like Baldur's Gate "dumbed down" and "too easy."
Yeahhh I'm probably one of those people.
I played AD&D gold box games for so long that Baldur's Gate seems very laid back (not BAD though). Those games would throw the kitchen sink at you! Your party of 6 would suddenly be facing a horde of Draconians, whose corpses would explode upon death, or some could self resurrect!
avatar
Hickory: My suggestion to you is to drop Minsc off at the Friendly Arm Inn -- he won't leave, so long as your reputation is above average. Once you've dropped him off, pick up Ajantis (even if this is just temporary). You could even go rescue Dynaheir without Minsc, and there won't be a problem.
avatar
Dizzard: My reputation is at 13 (Popular) so I assume that' fine. Thanks I'll do that. He'll just stand in the Friendly Arm Inn until I come to pick him up?
Yes on both counts. He'll be there when you want him. :)
avatar
Dizzard: My reputation is at 13 (Popular) so I assume that' fine. Thanks I'll do that. He'll just stand in the Friendly Arm Inn until I come to pick him up?
avatar
Hickory: Yes on both counts. He'll be there when you want him. :)
Interesting development.

I just ran into Viconia while trying to locate Ajantis. (must have taken a wrong turn) I believe Viconia is supposed to be an evil character?

Are there any benefits from trying to balance a team of good and evil characters? I want to be good but at the same time it might be kinda interesting to have a trouble maker on the team....
avatar
Hickory: Yes on both counts. He'll be there when you want him. :)
avatar
Dizzard: Interesting development.

I just ran into Viconia while trying to locate Ajantis. (must have taken a wrong turn) I believe Viconia is supposed to be an evil character?

Are there any benefits from trying to balance a team of good and evil characters? I want to be good but at the same time it might be kinda interesting to have a trouble maker on the team....
There are no benefits, as such, other than each character has strengths and weaknesses. If you want to have both good and evil characters on your team, try to keep your reputation in the neutral zone (9 - 14) ideally, but you can go higher and lower, provided you don't go above 18 and below 3. Below 3 and you will be attacked by guards (Flaming Fist), as well as your good characters leaving.

Always remember that if you take an evil character and you have Ajantis in your party, there is always a 10 percent chance that he will attack them. There are other characters that just don't get on, too, and will attack each other.

Bottom line: if you want a stable party, try to go one way or the other.