|
Your continuous donations keep RPGWatch running!
RPGWatch Forums » Games » General RPG » Baldur's Gate: EE impressions

Default Baldur's Gate: EE impressions

December 7th, 2012, 10:08
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
You can hardly be surprised that EE is superior to the original unmodded release?

If that was the only alternative, then EE would make a lot more sense as an investment.
That wasn't the purpose of my comparison. I mainly just wanted to see what changes I could notice in regards to plot-related encounters and the actual difference in spawn rates.
JDR13 is online now

JDR13

JDR13's Avatar
SasqWatch

#61

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Florida, US
Posts: 17,673

Default 

December 7th, 2012, 10:17
Originally Posted by JDR13 View Post
That wasn't the point of my comparison. I mainly just wanted to see what changes I could notice in regards to plot-related encounters and the actual difference in spawn rates.
Ok, then it makes more sense

But regarding the resolution, that's the primary reason I play the modded version - as well as the BG2 changes. I can't go back to 640x480..

But I have a hard time seeing what EE brings to the table beyond those things. The added content seems pretty minimal. I don't understand the appeal of the zoom function. The graphics aren't suited for digital zooming like that - and the pixellation would be horrible. Are people really using it to play?

Sure, if you don't already own the BGs or you have a tablet - there's a reason to pay up, but let's be honest: We ALL own the BGs around here
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#62

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 14,192

Default 

December 7th, 2012, 10:39
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
O
But I have a hard time seeing what EE brings to the table beyond those things. The added content seems pretty minimal. I don't understand the appeal of the zoom function. The graphics aren't suited for digital zooming like that - and the pixellation would be horrible. Are people really using it to play?
I don't doubt you would have some difficulty seeing any positives in a game you haven't played yet.

I'm not saying it's for everyone, but I have to admit that it's turning out better than I thought it would. If they continue to support it the way they have so far and fix the issues I talked about, which they seem to be doing, then I think it'll be a worthwhile experience for a lot of people.
JDR13 is online now

JDR13

JDR13's Avatar
SasqWatch

#63

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Florida, US
Posts: 17,673

Default 

December 7th, 2012, 10:49
Originally Posted by JDR13 View Post
I don't doubt you would have some difficulty seeing any positives in a game you haven't played yet.
Which is why I'm asking for them

I'm not saying it's for everyone, but I have to admit that it's turning out better than I thought it would. If they continue to support it the way they have so far and fix the issues I talked about, which they seem to be doing, then I think it'll be a worthwhile experience for a lot of people.
Turning out better in what ways? Is it better because it works? Can't anyone be specific about what's actually (truly) BETTER about this enhanced version than a modded version - beyond the separate Arena and 3 NPCs?

So far, I gather that they've changed the random spawning (however slightly) - they've created inferior cutscenes and removed some of the old ones, they've created new quest bugs, journal bugs, and visual glitches and so on. I guess I must be missing these huge positives - or maybe no one really mentioned them yet.

Maybe it's the added voices to some NPCs?
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#64

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 14,192

Default 

December 7th, 2012, 11:19
Well it looks considerably better for starters. It's nice to have higher resolutions at a proper scale. That alone makes it worthwhile to me. The UI also looks a lot better, although that's obviously subjective. I can't comment on the additional content since I haven't reached that yet and won't anytime soon. The zooming actually works quite well outside of the fact that it resets when changing areas. (Which I've been informed they're already working to fix).

It turns out that they didn't change the spawning intentionally, and they're fixing it anyways, so that's no longer an issue. I don't know anything about the supposed bugs or glitches you mention since I've seen none of them and neither have most people it would seem.

Is it a significant improvement over a heavily modded BG? I guess that would depend on who you ask, but I think it's easily worth the money for most people, and will definitely be once they fix the aforementioned issues. From what I've played so far, it just feels like it's more than the sum of its improvements.
JDR13 is online now

JDR13

JDR13's Avatar
SasqWatch

#65

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Florida, US
Posts: 17,673

Default 

December 7th, 2012, 11:24
Originally Posted by JDR13 View Post
Well it looks considerably better for starters. It's nice to have higher resolutions at a proper scale. That alone makes it worthwhile to me. The UI also looks a lot better, although that's obviously subjective. I can't comment on the additional content since I haven't reached that yet and won't anytime soon. The zooming actually works quite well outside of the fact that it resets when changing areas. (Which I've been informed they're already working to fix).
Better than modded versions? In what way? AFAIK - they haven't changed anything visually - but merely implemented a higher resolution exactly like the WS mod.

The UI - to me - looks almost identical with minimal changes. I will concede that the inventory UI looks improved - and that's a nice little addition.

The images I've seen of zoomed view look like pixellated crap - but I guess that's subjective. I wouldn't want to zoom in a tactical layout anyway.

It turns out that they didn't change the spawning intentionally, and they're fixing it anyways, so that's no longer an issue. I don't know anything about the supposed bugs or glitches you mention since I've seen none of them and neither have most people it would seem.
Most people haven't? Even Maylander talked about the journal bugs. It seems a lot of people HAVE seen them, they just don't really mind or they might have been fixed in the latest updates.

That said, it sounds pretty minimal to me - and I wouldn't mind much. It's just embarrasing for a supposedly polished up version selling for twice the price.

Is it a significant improvement over a heavily modded BG? I guess that would depend on who you ask, but I think it's easily worth the money for most people, and will definitely be once they fix the aforementioned issues. From what I've played so far, it just feels like it's more than the sum of its improvements.
Heavily modded? I'm talking about the WS mod and the Tutu or similar mods that integrate BG2 engine changes. Hardly "heavily" modded - but that's a semantic thing.

But ok, I think I'm getting where you're coming from. Maybe I'm being picky - but I honestly can't detect a single significant improvement.

The only significant thing is that you don't have to download a couple of mods and use the available modding tools. I can see how that would be daunting to people who have little experience with such things - but it really isn't very hard, honestly. They've come a long way with the BG mods.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#66

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 14,192

Default 

December 7th, 2012, 11:36
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
Better than modded versions? In what way? AFAIK - they haven't changed anything visually - but merely implemented a higher resolution exactly like the WS mod.
The WS mod doesn't properly scale the game world at higher resolutions. It makes it hard to see smaller details once you start to ramp up the resolution. Maybe not a big deal to some, but it's significant to others.


Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
The images I've seen of zoomed view look like pixellated crap - but I guess that's subjective. I wouldn't want to zoom in a tactical layout anyway.
It didn't seem that pixellated to me, but then I would never play with it zoomed in that far. I prefer a middle ground with the camera.


Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
Most people haven't? Even Maylander talked about the journal bugs. It seems most people HAVE seen them, they just don't really mind or they might have been fixed in the latest updates.
Can't say… the first patch already had a fairly meaty changelist. With how serious the devs seem to be about supporting this game, I can honestly say that bugs would be the least of my worries.


Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
Heavily modded? I'm talking about the WS mod and the Tutu or similar mods that integrate BG2 engine changes. Hardly "heavily" modded - but that's a semantic thing..
Really? So changing the entire game to another engine isn't a significant modification to you?


Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
Maybe I'm being picky
You're being picky.
JDR13 is online now

JDR13

JDR13's Avatar
SasqWatch

#67

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Florida, US
Posts: 17,673

Default 

December 7th, 2012, 11:40
Originally Posted by JDR13 View Post
The WS mod doesn't properly scale the game world at higher resolutions. It makes it hard to see smaller details once you start to ramp up the resolution. Maybe not a big deal to some, but it's significant to others.
Ehm, what? It scales 100% perfectly - at least in my experience. There's literally no difference, visually. Maybe if you're using som obscure resolution, which I haven't tried. I'm not sure what details you're referring to, as we're talking about 640x480 renders - which is pretty limited in terms of possible details. But you can always press TAB and get all the objects highlighted.

Can't say… the first patch already had a fairly meaty changelist. With how serious the devs seem to be about supporting this game, I can honestly say that bugs would be the least of my worries.
Yeah, it's not something I think will be a big problem. I just think the version released should have been more polished - considering that we're talking about a game that's 14 years old going for 20$. But that's me.

Really? So changing the entire game to another engine isn't a significant modification to you?
Significant? Sure. But I wouldn't call it heavily modded - but that's because the BG2 integration is the "standard" BG mod - and if that's heavy - then any modding will be heavy.

Semantics - but I would call using "heavily modded" a tactic to make the process seem more elaborate - which is misleading given the excellent tools available. But whatever.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#68

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 14,192

Default 

December 7th, 2012, 11:53
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
Ehm, what? It scales 100% perfectly - at least in my experience. There's literally no difference, visually. Maybe if you're using som obscure resolution, which I haven't tried. I'm not sure what details you're referring to, as we're talking about 640x480 renders - which is pretty limited in terms of possible details. But you can always press TAB and get all the objects highlighted..
Really? Is this what you what call 100% perfect? I'd say it's far from it. That's only using a resolution of 1280x720, and it almost looks like an RTS at that res. Maybe it's been too long since you've played the original unmodded game, but I can assure you that's not what the proper aspect ratio looks like.


Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
Semantics - but I would call using "heavily modded" a tactic to make the process seem more elaborate - which is misleading given the excellent tools available. But whatever.
Lol…ok. You've uncovered my attempt at a conspiracy.
JDR13 is online now

JDR13

JDR13's Avatar
SasqWatch

#69

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Florida, US
Posts: 17,673

Default 

December 7th, 2012, 11:59
Originally Posted by JDR13 View Post
Really? Is this what you what call 100% perfect? I'd say it's far from it. That's only using a resolution of 1280x720, and it almost looks like an RTS at that res. Maybe it's been too long since you've played the original unmodded game, but I can assure you that's not what the proper aspect ratio looks like.
You're talking about the game world, and I honestly don't see even the tiniest of difference in ratio - it looks EXACTLY right to me. Are you sure you're not comparing it to a widescreen improperly scaled original version?

I've tested it personally several times, because I tend to go for a lower resolution so I don't have to bother installing font mods. Incidentally, I consider that very resolution (1280x720) the perfect sweet spot.

Lol…ok. You've uncovered my attempt at a conspiracy.
It wouldn't be the first time, but that's a common form of manipulation. We all do it to a certain extent when defending our points. The interesting thing is that the more we use this tactic, the weaker our points tend to be

In any case - I think it's a waste to continue this. I asked for examples of what makes the game better - and you gave me your answers.

The fact that they make little sense to me, is irrelevant. I was just curious, really
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#70

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 14,192

Default 

December 7th, 2012, 12:07
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
You're talking about the game world, and I honestly don't see even the tiniest of difference in ratio - it looks EXACTLY right to me. Are you sure you're not comparing it to a widescreen improperly scaled original version?

I've tested it personally several times, because I tend to go for a lower resolution so I don't have to bother installing font mods. Incidentally, I consider that very resolution (1280x720) the perfect sweet spot.
Here's an example of someone trying to play at 1920x1200 using the WS mod. Let me guess… you don't see anything wrong here either?


Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
It wouldn't be the first time, but that's a common form of manipulation. We all do it to a certain extent when defending our points. The interesting thing is that the more we use this tactic, the weaker our points tend to be
Sure DArt.
JDR13 is online now

JDR13

JDR13's Avatar
SasqWatch

#71

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Florida, US
Posts: 17,673

Default 

December 7th, 2012, 12:10
After disappointment with the EE being a crapbucket I reinstalled BGT! The only thing I wish I had was the fancy journal. But since it doesn't even work who cares.

A screenshot I took: http://cloud.steampowered.com/ugc/55…F6D78156593FE/ lookin good

Running the modded game at 1080p is kinda unpleasant, that is true. If Overhaul included another means of scrolling than the arrow keys or window edges, the windowed mode in the BG:EE would be awesome! But they didn't, so it's not. Running it at full screen or this at full screen makes no difference.
darkling is offline

darkling

Keeper of the Watch

#72

Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 836

Default 

December 7th, 2012, 12:35
Originally Posted by JDR13 View Post
Here's an example of someone trying to play at 1920x1200 using the WS mod. Let me guess… you don't see anything wrong here either?
The ratio is the same, but the screen real estate isn't being fully utilised as it's 16:10 format. How does the EE handle 16:10 resolutions?

http://forum.baldursgate.com/discuss…hd-resolutions

According to the forum, the game doesn't handle UI scaling very well in higher resolutions, but I haven't tried it myself.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#73

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 14,192

Default 

December 7th, 2012, 12:40
http://forum.baldursgate.com/discuss…lved-game-ever

Here's a good example of what makes me doubt how fantastic this EE is. Obviously, I don't know how much of that is fabrication or ignorance - but if even half those issues are real - that's a pretty bad sign.

I guess all these people on the forums having issues are blind whiners, or?
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#74

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 14,192

Default 

December 7th, 2012, 13:12
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
The ratio is the same, but the screen real estate isn't being fully utilised as it's 16:10 format. How does the EE handle 16:10 resolutions?
You must mean something different when you say "ratio" because you can't seriously be telling me that looks the same. You don't notice how far out the camera is in that example or how tiny everything is because of it?
JDR13 is online now

JDR13

JDR13's Avatar
SasqWatch

#75

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Florida, US
Posts: 17,673

Default 

December 7th, 2012, 13:16
Originally Posted by JDR13 View Post
Also, I have to admit that, after all my bitching, the difference in the random encounters isn't as great as I remember. In the two areas between Candlekeep and TFAI, I was encountering single gibberlings and xvarts the same as in BGEE. I could swear I remember there being more monsters, unless maybe the GOG version was tweaked from the original retail release as well.
We're you playing BGT or BGTuTu? I've heard some people say that might be the reason for the increased encounters (something about the spawn rate just being higher in the BG2 engine). I'm actually now getting a bit annoyed at the lack of spawning after all! My whole party has leveled up and has some decent weapons/armor, so just being attacked by one creature is a bit ho-hum. But if that's the way it was originally, so be it.

A limited run feature would also have been nice, as sometimes it feels like I'm waiting forever for my party to reach a certain spot. Iirc, didn't the IWD games allow you to run by holding down the shift key?
I vaguely remember something like that. I know people used to kick up the fps on the original BG which sped up the game (although it sped up ALL the game).

————————————————-

"Ya'll can go to HELL! I'm-a-goin' to TEXAS!"

- Davy Crockett
blatantninja is offline

blatantninja

blatantninja's Avatar
Resident Redneck Facist

#76

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 4,046

Default 

December 7th, 2012, 13:18
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
You have an interesting way of not making it personal

As for what my posts do to you - that's understandable. You have a perception of me that's being enforced by your perception of my posts. But I don't feel responsible for that, and I can't correlate my actual personality with the image you seem to have of me.

I'm a completely different person - but it's ok if you don't think so. I just don't want to waste time going through crap that has nothing to do with the subjects at hand.



Many have been vocal - and that's fine. We're speaking our minds. Yes, I'm negative towards this project and I've given detailed reasons as to why. You don't agree, and that's fine.

I haven't dismissed the positive ones at all - I simply weigh them VERY differently. I don't see the positives as worth the asking price - and that's all there is to it.



I'll answer this once, because I think it's good form to be flexible and amiable when there's an apparent misunderstanding. But I'm not going to bother answering similar questions in the future - because they call my honesty into question - and then there's no reason to exchange.

Yes, I want to know why Maylander likes it so much. Apparently, I can't have a negative impression of the game and be highly sceptical towards it - and yet want to know why other people like it? I don't see the conflict.

I'm the kind of person who believes in myself and my own perceptions a lot - but if I don't ask or question things - I'll never know if I'm right or not. I'm often wrong like everyone else - and I don't have an ego problem admitting it. I just don't set aside my experience to please people or "rub them the right way" - as that would be a complete waste of energy and be deceitful.

If Maylander or someone else gives detailed and clear reasons for their high praise - I'll accept it immediately.



You've certainly missed something about me, but whatever. Let's not go into that.
I want to make a couple things clear before hopefully putting this behind us.

I at no point had any delusions that I know who you are at your core. I simply was stating how you came across to me in your posts. Not all of them but some.

I think you think I dislike you more than I do. Some of your posts rub me the wrong way so I said so. I too call things as I see them in the moment. I think that can be a good thing but also a bad thing and it doesn't always come across in the best way.

My post to you in this thread had no ulterior motive. I simply wondered if someone who was so negative about something could still look at it objectively when presented with positives about it? After reading your latests posts it seems you can which is a credit to you. Not everyone can do that.

As for questioning your honesty, I'm not sure why you think that and never intended too.

Anyway, we both post here a lot and seem to be reasonable adults. I see no reason for us to ignore each other as we both have plenty to contribute. I'm more than happy to let bygones be bygones and get back to posting about games as I'm sure you would like all so.

I'm extending an olive branch. What do you say?
sakichop is offline

sakichop

SasqWatch

#77

Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,140

Default 

December 7th, 2012, 13:21
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
The ratio is the same, but the screen real estate isn't being fully utilised as it's 16:10 format. How does the EE handle 16:10 resolutions?

http://forum.baldursgate.com/discuss…hd-resolutions

According to the forum, the game doesn't handle UI scaling very well in higher resolutions, but I haven't tried it myself.
The UI on that image was tiny! BGEE scales them up much better.

————————————————-

"Ya'll can go to HELL! I'm-a-goin' to TEXAS!"

- Davy Crockett
blatantninja is offline

blatantninja

blatantninja's Avatar
Resident Redneck Facist

#78

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NYC
Posts: 4,046

Default 

December 7th, 2012, 13:24
Originally Posted by JDR13 View Post
You must mean something different when you say "ratio" because you can't seriously be telling me that looks the same. You don't notice how far out the camera is in that example or how tiny everything is because of it?
I'm talking about the aspect ratio - as you mentioned yourself. That is retained. Obviously, a higher resolution will have a "zoomed out" look - because we're talking about low-res 2D objects being displayed in high resolution.

Since I haven't played EE myself - I can't be absolutely certain what it does. But my feeling is that it scales to your desktop resolution pr. default - and implements a compromise that corresponds to whatever resolution would have been appropriate. Probably something like 1280x720 - regardless of what your desktop resolution is.

That's what I would have done, if I'd coded it myself. I use XNA - and it has built-in scaling for 2D images (they work like textures). So, I could basically scale it however I wanted to - and I'd go with that "sweet spot" res I was talking about - which is 1280x270. That's what I play BG modded at on my 27" screen with 1920x1080 native res.

But there's no magical way to scale pre-rendered 2D images so they look perfect at higher resolutions yet retain their original size - so if it takes advantage of 100% of the screen real estate regardless of desktop resolution - they're probably scaling the UI to "fill out" the screen, so you don't get those black bars in 16:10 in a ratio. So, instead of having black bars - you're getting a scaled UI with big icons instead.

There is no technical alternative that will truly get around the fact that the assets were created at 640x480 resolution. That's simply impossible.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#79

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 14,192

Default 

December 7th, 2012, 13:25
The UI on that image was tiny! BGEE scales them up much better.
Better if you prefer having huge icons taking up screen space, sure.

Personally, I don't think it's inherently better - but a matter of personal preference depending on what monitor and native res you're running it on.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#80

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 14,192
RPGWatch Forums » Games » General RPG » Baldur's Gate: EE impressions
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 21:15.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch