BG: Siege of Dragonspear: semi-review

Now that I have finished SoD, I thought I'd share my impressions. Perhaps it might help a few folk jump off the fence one way or another! Please be aware that some spoilers will occur.

Disclaimer: I am a big Baldur's Gate fan; I've played it through probably 6 or 7 times. I probably prefer it to BG2, actually, although that is probably due to my bias for low-mid level D&D rather than high level adventures.

Rather than launch into a full scale review or rant, I'm just going to point out the things that seemed notable - one way or another. I'd be interested to hear if other people had a similar experience with the game …

The Writing

It is, in a word, uneven. For the most part, the actual plot is fine - and, as some have mentioned previously, a touch linear - but the exposition used to convey it is somewhat haphazard. On more than one occasion I knew where I had to go next, but I didn't really know why; in my view, this is a storytelling issue more than anything else. Both BG1 and BG2 had a great mix of freedom and plot, but SoD doesn't quite get there.

The writing probably also lacks the charm of the original game. There's clearly some witty folks writing some of the dialogue at Beamdog, but it's all pretty one-paced. I'm reminded of the work of David Eddings, in which every character seemed to have exactly the same sense of humour; even if you like that sense of humour, it can get a little monotonous. Indeed, the monotony of the "good/neutral/evil" response choices in dialog gets on the nerves; it feels a little lazy.

The Mechanics

I won't mention the re-skin of the interface too much; I liked it but I can see how different people might not. The weird creeping fog effect on the local map screen confused me; I thought it had some sort of significance at first, but when it kept appearing in different dungeons, I came to the conclusion it was cosmetic only.

Itemisation is … fair. I feel they tried to be too clever with new items; many seem to be variations on a theme rather than innovative. I'd have preferred less novelty value, and more usefulness. My longsword-specialised character was still using Varscona in the final battle.

The NPC's and companions are, for the most part, quite well done. Not too many stereotypes are broken, but that's ok. Kudos to Beamdog for adding companions with interesting class combinations (I hadn't really appreciated the archer subclass for ranger, for example, but once you equip Corwin it's like she's got a machine gun!). I didn't play with the Shaman class at all (main or companion); to me, it felt like a 2nd edition retro-fit of the favoured soul class from NWN2.

Ok, this is getting longer than intended; I shall wrap it up. In summary, I would score SoD at a 6.5 out of 10, maybe a 7. If I was a teacher, I'd be saying "That's good for a first try". Whether or not it actually is a first try is debatable, I guess. There's enough in there to be worth a playthrough, but it's clear that SoD is made by a different generation of creators with a different skillset.

Keen to hear what others thought. I seriously wonder what other people think. I could write quite the rant about the ending …

Was really good to read your take on the game Furnok.
I would actually have liked to have read even more details from your point of view considering your love of the entire Baldur's Gate saga and your obvious experience with these titles.
But sounds good enough to give it a try anyway.

Thanks for the kind words, Warmark.

If there's anything in particular you'd like to inquire about, I'm more than happy to offer my take on it. There's certainly a lot that could be said.

One thing that does spring to mind is the whole "social justice warrior" debate about the fact that there's a (very minor and unimportant) NPC who is transgender. In my eyes, it's a complete non-issue and the debate is unjustified. Whether or not the "writer" of that character had an agenda or not (I use quote marks for "writer" because that character has so few lines), I have no idea, but I didn't find it offensive or "in your face" at all. One could argue that the writer was following that old rule of dungeonmastering that recommends giving your unimportant NPCs one or two unusual traits to help define them, so they are fleshed out a tiny bit and not completely forgettable.

In terms of that character's importance, she is on a par with Bentley Mirrorshade from the original game. If you ask "who?", then that proves my point.