IWD2 - thoughts so far >

[Olli Kalma]

Originally posted by Nightowl2: The Euro edition of the manual was cheaped out. Look on the CD for the missing info, such as the important tables. I believe the inside cover of the manual tells you exactly where.

Oh, There's no mention about where that missing info is...
And I could not find it on CD!
What kind of tables etc. are missing? I have Euro edition...

[ 11-14-2002, 07:20 AM: Message edited by: Olli Kalma ]

[SpiritWarrior]

Quite a few appendices and tables are missing. The manual should be in PDF. format- get a PDF-reading program such as Adobe and you'll be able to view/print it.

[Nightowl2]

What's not in your manual are all the tables for experience, spell levels, monk special bonuses, and all that other good stuff. 11 tables in all for that stuff.

Then there are tables for weapons, armor, and two-weapon fighting penalties.

I notice you're from Finland. The other person who posted earlier is in England. So it could be his manual and yours aren't quite the same, either. Someone else from there mentioned the inside cover of the manual told where to find the info on CD. I was hoping it would be the same for you.

But yes, do look on the CD for .pdf files, because that's probably where all the missing info is hidden.

Nightowl2

[Yggdrasil]

The IWD2 manual stinks like a leper's socks...one of the worst I've ever read.

The game's pathfinding AI sucks even worse.

Plus, the game is waaaay too linear. I'm tired of looking at beautiful areas that can't be accessed; it's window dressing. I felt the same way about IWD1; the great thing about BG1 was that you could go EVERYWHERE. Oh look, a house - let's check it out. Uh Uh, none of that in this game, me pretties...reminds of those horrible D&D scenarios I played in hischool, where the DM forces you down this path, then that path, and never mind exploration. Totally kills the role playing aspect. The developers should all be flogged; this game is nothing more than pimping out the BG engine to rake in the money.

Only thing going for it is how well it implements D&D III rules.

[Luvian]

Originally posted by Yggdrasil: The IWD2 manual stinks like a leper's socks...one of the worst I've ever read. The game's pathfinding AI sucks even worse. Plus, the game is waaaay too linear. I'm tired of looking at beautiful areas that can't be accessed; it's window dressing. I felt the same way about IWD1; the great thing about BG1 was that you could go EVERYWHERE. Oh look, a house - let's check it out. Uh Uh, none of that in this game, me pretties...reminds of those horrible D&D scenarios I played in hischool, where the DM forces you down this path, then that path, and never mind exploration. Totally kills the role playing aspect. The developers should all be flogged; this game is nothing more than pimping out the BG engine to rake in the money. Only thing going for it is how well it implements D&D III rules.

And where can we get your Roleplaying game? What? You mean you never made one?

It's easy to complain like that, but do you have any idea how hard it is to make a computer game? Do you think the devs limit their games just for the fun of it? I am sure they are all dreaming of making the perfect game, but that's impossible right now.

[Gimli]

Overall I do think they did a nice job, I really enjoy the game.

My biggest gripe is the pathfinding - I mean they had to know it was bad from even minimal play testing, and as was pointed out before, they've dealt with that technical issue in earlier games. So the step backwards is pretty dissapointing to me - I wish a future patch would address it.

[Magness]

I want to second Luvian's comments. I'm plenty happy with IWD2.

Yggdrasil, obviously, you must have been a fan of BG2's non-linearity. It was no secret that IWD2 was going to be very similar to IWD1 in terms of linearity. The fact remains that there are many who like the non-linearity of the Bioware BG series and many others that like the linearity of BIS's IWD1&2.

Every one of those houses that you'd like to explore take that much more time (and hence money, as in developers' salaries) to develop. Are all those little houses going to essentially be able to pay for themselves in terms of generating enough increased income to pay for the development time? I doubt it.

It's one thing to build "side" areas to the main plot where something is actually happening. But developing empty houses simply because a few people might want to take a look inside? Not worth the trouble. I am not bothered by this. I'd rather that the time was spent more productively.

I happen to think that it would have been nice to be able to manually select which avatar you'd like to use, even if it was only from the currently available selection.

I didn't particularly like the paladin "kits" in IWD2. I'd have prefered "kits" that resembled the cleric kits. Divine abilities endowed by the paladin's patron god. Abilities that are targeted specifically at enhancing the paladin as a fighting champion of the parton god, not one of the god's priests.

I didn't like some of the overly difficult and FedEx intensive puzzles (i.e. Dragon's Eye). Fell Wood was OK, IMHO. Justified taking one of those supposedly useless skills (Wilderness Lore).

Stats. I'm not a big fan of ridiculous Min/Maxing... actually the "min" part of it. I wish that the character generator had placed realistic floor levels on the characteristics. I've seen on the BIS board people talking about their latest new characters that they've min/maxed down to INT's and CHA's of 1. I'm sorry, but I'm of the opinion that a character with an INT of 1 would only be worthy of cleaning out some inn's stable. A sorceror with an INT of 1 would be such a moron that he would be able to figure out how to control his CHA based magics.

I'd have probably suggested setting the floor at 6 across all stats with racial penalties allowing it to go lower. (for example, a half-orc's INT could go down to 4 with the -2 penalty) I know that it seems a bit limiting. I just like to see a decent shread of logical sane realism.

The Ending.... I won't reveal any details on the ending in respect for thos ethat may not have played all the way thru. Let's just say that no less a BIS personage than JE Sawyer has admitted over on the BIS BB that they now think that they did the very ending wrong. Not satifying enough for the players. Great final battle IMHO that ends unsatisfyingly.

Rangers: I'm not particularly fond of Rangers. But perhaps some of that comes from not having a good image of what a "ranger" should be. The manual says that rangers are "hunters and woodsmen, skilled with weapons and knowledgable in wilderness lore and woodcraft". This seems more than a little vague to me.

Archery: Like Kygon-Jo, I miss the archer kit from BG2. Archery in IWD2 just doesn't seem to inspire me. Oh, I use it and select the feats. But even with all the feats, I never get the feeling that I have a budding Legolas in my midst, just another schmuck with a bow.

Some have said that the 3rd ed Rangers seem to be modeled on Drizzt, i.e. the free "virtual" dual-wielding. It might have been interesting to have 2 simple ranger flavors: the "Drizzt" free-dual-weilding kit and the (oh heck) the "Legolas" archer kit. The "Drizzt" kit would be what IWD2 has now. The "Legolas" kit would NOT have free dual weilding. But maybe it would get access to the 3rd Feat point in Bow and perhaps have 2 points in Bow to start. Maybe Rapid Shot for free as well. (heck the "drizzt" version is essentially getting 2 free feat points.) I don't see that this would really create a much better archer than can be currently created. Perhaps, the "Legolas" kit would need to pick up an additional bow-only +1 BAB and +1 damage every 2-3 levels. Whatever.

Maybe the simpler solution would have been to simply allow all rangers access to the 3rd Feat point in Bow, maybe give them a 2nd Feat point in bow at creation, and be done with it. (Heck, Battleguards of Tempus get 2 free feat points in Axe.)

Anyways .......... Regardless of whatever I've typed above, I still loved IWD2. It certainly has plenty of replay value.

[Olli Kalma]

Originally posted by Nightowl2: But yes, do look on the CD for .pdf files, because that's probably where all the missing info is hidden.

Ok Just foud that file! Thanks folks!

[Yggdrasil]

Originally posted by Luvian: And where can we get your Roleplaying game? What? You mean you never made one? It's easy to complain like that, but do you have any idea how hard it is to make a computer game? Do you think the devs limit their games just for the fun of it? I am sure they are all dreaming of making the perfect game, but that's impossible right now.

I admit I was overly harsh there. I don't detest the game; but the manual DOES reek and so does the pathfinding. Having paid $40 whatever for IWD2, I feel perfectly entitled to a little griping. Implying that I shouldn't criticize a crpg because I'm not a game developer is childish.

Basically these guys cut corners in order to ship their product that much faster (maybe they contract for Microsoft). That is not to say I don't enjoy the game; of course I do. If they'd spent (or, more accurately, been allowed to spend) more time on it, it would have been better. I'm not placing all the blame on the shoulders of the devs.

[Luvian]

Asking for the developers to be flogged is not childish?