125 réponses à ce sujet

[Rawgrim]

How come so many BG fans can't spell "Baldur's"? This has been driving me nuts for years. If you've played the game you've seen it spelled correctly every time you start the game up

 

True! Some even spell it "Baulders Gate". Its wierd.

[Raikas]

I don't think that was ever anything more than a marketing catchphrase, and I think as time goes on that becomes less useful for that (even looking at this thread, a fair number of people are saying "Never played BG").

 

In a non-marketing sense, it depends what you mean by it.  In a broad "it's a party-based fantasy RPG", they sure.  But if you mean something narrower, it depends what that means - Is it about gameplay?  Story?  Something else?

[Rawgrim]

Baldur's Gate are still being played by a ton of people, though. And it is still being modded as well. After 15 years, that says alot about the quality of the BG games.

[Maria Caliban]

How come so many BG fans can't spell "Baldur's"? This has been driving me nuts for years. If you've played the game you've seen it spelled correctly every time you start the game up

Okay. I saw the word dozens of times over a decade ago. I also saw the word Anachronox dozens of times. The difference is that one of these words is based around existing english words (or greek mythology) while the other is a made-up name.

Baulder, Bulder, Balder, Baldur, Buldar <- This all sounds the same to me and the name is not based on a word I know. How am I to pick the right one?

[SofaJockey]

The spiritual succession is essentially because it was BioWare it was a fantasy RPG (sort of) and it was good.

Story was important then as now,

 

The original opener still brings back happy memories, though I understand why they updated it for the enhanced version.

 

[Kinthalis ThornBlade]

It lies at the core of most systems in DA, so I'd say it's still the spiritual successor, yes.

[cronshaw]

Baldur's Gate are still being played by a ton of people, though. And it is still being modded as well. After 15 years, that says alot about the quality of the BG games.

It says more about its fan base than anything else.
Not that I don't have very fond memories of BG And BG II

[Il Divo]

The spiritual succession is essentially because it was BioWare it was a fantasy RPG (sort of) and it was good.

Story was important then as now,

 

 

Maybe for BG2 at least, but from what I remember, Bioware didn't really care none too much about story or characters with the original Baldur's Gate 1. I was greatly disappointed after receiving more than a few recommendations to try out Bioware's magnum opus. 

[ForgottenWarrior]

Was DAO's sales that bad so they changed next game so drastically?

[ForgottenWarrior]

It says more about its fan base than anything else.

Such survivability of a fanbase is a straight result of a quality of a game.

[The Elder King]

Was DAO's sales that bad so they changed next game so drastically?

DAO was actually Bioware's highest commercial success at the time.

[Schreckstoff]

Well. D&D lost tons of comstumers and fans after they did that stuff to Neverwinter and The Forgotten Realms. 4th edition flopped and people jumped ship over to Pathfinder. Its Dungeons and Warcraft now.

D&D might but the Forgotten Realns are still going good at least some series.

Erin M. Evans' Brimstone Angels series and The Adversary are really well received and she got further books already in the works, Salvatore finally revived the companions of the hall, sadly Kemp's Godborn seems to have been commercially unsuccessful, after all those years of waiting, so Erevis Cales' saga is dead for now.

WoTC should really get some more authors to write new stories though. Drizzt and Elminster can't keep the Realms alive on their own.

I'm just happy the Spellplague is over.

[ForgottenWarrior]

DAO was actually Bioware's highest commercial success at the time.

Logic failure. Bioware's logic failure. Like cutting a branch you sitting on. Stupid and allogical.

[Morroian]

By the time DAO was released it was effectively not a spiritual successor.

[Beerfish]

One of the 1st time I had type Baldurs a long while back and a spell checker kept tunring it into Bladurs Gate.

[Travie]

No, not at all. 

 

If you're looking for isometric RPGs that have the spirit of the Infinity engine games of a decade ago look to Pillars of Eternity, Tides of Numeria, or Original Sin. 

[Olmerto]

Okay. I saw the word dozens of times over a decade ago. I also saw the word Anachronox dozens of times. The difference is that one of these words is based around existing english words (or greek mythology) while the other is a made-up name.

Baulder, Bulder, Balder, Baldur, Buldar <- This all sounds the same to me and the name is not based on a word I know. How am I to pick the right one?

 

No, Baldur is not "made up". Baldur is a character from Norse mythology, admittedly less well-known than Greek. If one knew the origin of the name it wouldn't be hard to remember.

[Giltspur]

Different people liked Baldur's Gate for different reasons.

 

1. Some liked it for the narrative.  Some factors that contributed to that were party banter, relationships with companions, choices made through dialogue.  And then, in BGII, there was the sympathetic villain and your connection to him (Irenicus in BGII) that you learned about while pursuing him.

 

2. Some liked it for the gameplay.  Maybe you really specifically like real-time-with-pause combat using the AD&D ruleset.  Or maybe you weren't so strict as that but like controlling party members against a group enemies with a variety of abilities.

 

3. Some liked it for the big areas that you could explore and that sense of having been somewhere.

 

It makes sense to break RPG's into three kinds of RPG's:

Narrative RPG's like Dragon Age or The Witcher.

Sandbox or Open-World RPG's like Elder Scrolls (Skyrim, Oblivion, etc)

Dungeon Crawlers like Diablo or Torchlight or, I'd say, Icewind Dale

 

The first kind keeps the gamer's attention with story and characters.  The second kind keeps your attention with ability to go anywhere and do anything (which is why there's often level scaling and a connected map).  The third kind keeps your attention by letting you try out and master all sorts of abilities and gear combinations in combat (which is why there are so many spells and so much loot).  But most RPG's have a combination of all three elements.  It's just most RPG's focus on one over the other.

 

Some people like me like all kinds of RPG's. Others may only like one kind.  For example, someone may really like the story in Bioware RPG's like Dragon Age or Mass Effect but get bored by Elder Scrolls.  They don't know their purpose while running through the world.  They think the characters are lame or that there are too many side quests bogging them down.  That just means they don't like sandbox RPG's.  Not all RPG's are the same.

 

It gets more complicated.  Not all dungeon crawlers are the same.  You like dungeon crawlers because you like mastering systems.  But not everyone likes the same kind of system.  Some people like the kind of combat like Icewind Dale has (which is a lot like the combat in Baldur's Gate, party-based real-time-with-pause combat that uses AD&D rules).  Others prefer Diablo.  Some only like casting that is Vancian and hate spells that recharge.  Different people like different things.  And people tend to think that the RPG's they like are the only real RPG's. 

 

For more, see this article: Focusing Creativity in RPG's.

 

Okay, what does this have to do with Baldur's Gate?

 

Dragon Age, I think, so far has not appealed to as many types of RPG fans as Baldur's Gate.  There was in both DAO and DA2 less of a sense of exploration--so explorers might have had less to like in DA than in BGII.  As for combat, Dragon Age does have party-based tactics. So that might satisfy some that are interested in the combat. But it's tank-healer-dps combat as opposed to the sort of combat you would have had in Baldur's Gate.  So if you don't like tank-healer-dps combat, you might not like Dragon Age's gameplay.  But if you primarily liked the narrative elements to Baldur's Gate, then Dragon Age might seem like a good spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate.  Though I liked most everything Baldur's Gate and Baldur's Gate II, the party interaction and the sense of experiencing a shared ordeal with a party on a big adventure was my favorite part.  I really liked the conversations and banter and companion side quests.  And I've found the conversations and interaction and sense of party to be even stronger in Dragon Age than it was in the Baldur's Gate games.  Dragon Age picked up where Baldur's Gate left off in that regard.

 

So is it a spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate? It's a spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate in that it picks up the narrative components that were in Baldur's Gate and continues to develop them.  But if you liked other things about Baldur's Gate more (the exploration, the combat), your mileage might vary in how much of a successor you think Dragon Age is to Baldur's Gate.

 

Or at least that's my current thinking on the matter.

[Darvins]

I'm just happy the Spellplague is over.

 

It is? What about the Elven Gods did they reverse the patently stupid choice to have half the Seldarine turn out to be secretly aspects of Torils Dieties in disguise... despite the Quessir all coming from another Prime Material as a race originally and bringing the Seldarine with them. Apparently they where these dieties in disguise before Toril Existed. ((sigh sorry I just really hated that, and Mystra dying again)) And sorry for the Tangent, it just when that was mentioned I went 'Oooh' 

 

Erm to fix that editing in... at this point the DA series is much larger than the Baldur's Gate series, I have to think it doesn't need that title anymore if it ever did. I

[Maria Caliban]

No, Baldur is not "made up". Baldur is a character from Norse mythology, admittedly less well-known than Greek. If one knew the origin of the name it wouldn't be hard to remember.

There's a Norse god named Baldr.

[Ridwan]

Origin was for sure, the other game sure as hell wasn't.

[Schreckstoff]

It is? What about the Elven Gods did they reverse the patently stupid choice to have half the Seldarine turn out to be secretly aspects of Torils Dieties in disguise... despite the Quessir all coming from another Prime Material as a race originally and bringing the Seldarine with them. Apparently they where these dieties in disguise before Toril Existed. ((sigh sorry I just really hated that, and Mystra dying again)) And sorry for the Tangent, it just when that was mentioned I went 'Oooh' 

 

Erm to fix that editing in... at this point the DA series is much larger than the Baldur's Gate series, I have to think it doesn't need that title anymore if it ever did. I

No idea but the Weave is back in order, Mystra is about to come back or came back already, Abeir seperated from Toril again so the shadovar are stranded for good, oh and Mask is back.

 

The one thing I really hate is that Mielikki determined Orcs to be iredeemably evil w/o exception, making all of Obould's accomplishments pointless.

[Olmerto]

There's a Norse god named Baldr.

 

I'm pretty sure Baldur is the common English spelling. It's the one I always knew. And if you really knew Baldr, I imagine you'd have known Baldur as well.

[cronshaw]

Such survivability of a fanbase is a straight result of a quality of a game.

Not really. 

And I'm not saying they were bad games, I love those games and still return to them every once in a while.

People who continue to play those games are looking for a very specific type of game-play

I'm sure they would say it is a superior type of game-play, but that is pretty subjective.

Uncharted was a quality game but people aren't still playing and replaying it 7 years later

because the fan base is different and the game is different. 

[Bfler]

Pillars of Eternity is the successor of Baldur's Gate, not Dragon Age.