Interesting news, especially the bit about a hotkey to show doors, containers and items on the ground!
As for critiquing the game, story, dialogue, etc. I just have to say I think it was well done, but my biggest gripe about the game was how one's alignment didn't really matter in the big scheme of things. This is no surprise, since that was how BG1 played out as well.
I mean, doesn't it seem silly that an evil character would work so hard to foil Sarevok's plans for the good of the Sword Coast? One would think that an evilly aligned character would work hard to supplant or replace Sarevok as the #1 BadAxe!
I was sad to see the repeat of the philosophy of a forced progression of major story points in BG2. No matter what the alignment of my PC is, it just doesn't seem to affect the "big picture" in any way. I haven't quite finished my first game yet, but I imagine that it will have a pretty monolithic outcome, that of defeating Jon Irenicus with no chance of wresting his secrets of power from him, etc.
I guess I'm just spoiled from the Fallout/Fallout 2 games where one's morality had a huge impact on how the game played out (and how that morality impacted the major groups of people and towns as well!). But what is stopping other developers from following this lead? It's not as if I'm asking for different animated movies based on alignment, just a better diversity of side quests and a chance to alter the game setting in some way when all is said and done. Kind of like my earlier comment, where I thought it would be interesting for an evil character completing BG1 having the chance to CONTINUE Sarevok's Grand Plan for Death on the Sword Coast, just taking him out and replacing him as the head honcho. Mwa-ha-haaa!
In my CRPG experience, good aligned characters always have more quests (and therefore more rewards). Not necessarily a bad thing, but it makes playing an evil character not as fun knowing that there are fewer options/quests open to them.
Just my 2 cents.
Malus
|