BG2: What am I doing wrong?

everytime I spot him in something his voice and likeness always remind me of the character. I first made the connection IIRC in a Star Wars or Star Trek episode - or maybe it was something on Rome.

I was reminded again when I saw him give a 30 second statement on a "The Directors" documentary on Terry Gilliam. In Time Bandits he played the character named "Evil Genius" and it played this clip:

Evil: What sort of Supreme Being created such riffraff? Is this not the workings of a complete incompetent?
Baxi Brazilia III: But He created you, Evil One.
Evil: What did you say?
Baxi Brazilia III: Well He created you, so He can't be entirely…
Evil: [Blows Baxi to bits] Never talk to me like that again! No one created me! I am Evil. Evil existed long before good. I made myself. I cannot be unmade. *I* am all powerful!

Just wondering what the OP would personally rate BG2 as on a scale of 1-10.

what's OP?

Originally Posted by purpleblob
what's OP?

OP=Original Poster, in this case Prime Junta.

Well, I had a bit of insomnia last night and decided to fire up BG2 with my recent BG1 Tutu Character. I installed the following mods (in order) Shadows over Soubor, The Darkest Day, The Big Picture, and Ascension. It started the game fine. Hope it works from there! (I also did the newest fix pack, the one that was after Baldurdash, and will probably add the two merchants that were extra from Bioware).

@RPFan -- I dislike numeric ratings. I especially hate them when applied to games like BG2, which are incredibly good in some ways and incredibly stupid in some other ways. I ended up really liking it, and will almost certainly give it another play-through with a completely different character build and completely different party. (I'll skip ToB, though; other than Watcher's Keep and the ending it was just plain tedious.)

However, I still consider it very much a flawed jewel -- there's some really idiotic game design there that would be easy to fix, and makes it completely unnecessarily difficult to be able to get into it and enjoy it.

So I can't really express that as a single numerical score. At its strongest it's an easy 9/10, but at its weakest it's maybe a 4/10; however, averaging the two would give it a 6.5/10 which feels completely wrong -- if anything, the game isn't "average."

In this way it's a bit like Planescape: Torment, actually, although not quite as extreme -- I'd give that one a truly schizophrenic 10/10 and 2/10.

If you find it perplexing to provide an objective numerical rating, then why not just rate it on a scale of 1-10 for personal, subjective enjoyment.

1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10

1=You hated it

10=You loved/worshipped it

The decimal point can refine the expression.

BG2 is one of the few games I could honestly say I think deserves a 9\10, which is about as high as I could rate a game. There is no such thing as a 10\10 imo.

Originally Posted by RPfan95
If you find it perplexing to provide an objective numerical rating, then why not just rate it on a scale of 1-10 for personal, subjective enjoyment.

My personal, subjective enjoyment isn't a scalar. It's a multi-dimensional vector.

Edit: But… if I was writing a review of it for RPGWatch, which has a 1-5 star scale on them, and I was required to slap the stars on it, I would give it 4/5. That would feel least wrong of the scores, just like slapping 5/5 on The Witcher felt least wrong about that.

BTW, JDR, if you believe there is no 10/10 game, that simply means that your scale only goes up to 9. I've always thought that a bit pretentious. There's this French restaurant guide that supposedly grades on a scale from 10 to 20, but the highest grade they award is 19.5/20 on the grounds that only God on a good day could manage 20/20. It's a good guide, but I always found that particular characteristic irritating and snobbish…

Originally Posted by Prime Junta
BTW, JDR, if you believe there is no 10/10 game, that simply means that your scale only goes up to 9. I've always thought that a bit pretentious. There's this French restaurant guide that supposedly grades on a scale from 10 to 20, but the highest grade they award is 19.5/20 on the grounds that only God on a good day could manage 20/20. It's a good guide, but I always found that particular characteristic irritating and snobbish…

As always you're quite welcome to your opinion. However I believe that a 10\10 signifies a flawless product, something that is absolutely perfect in every way, shape, and form. I simply haven't played that game yet, it does not mean my scale only goes up to 9.

Originally Posted by JDR13
As always you're quite welcome to your opinion. However I believe that a 10\10 signifies a flawless product, something that is absolutely perfect in every way, shape, and form. I simply haven't played that game yet, it does not mean my scale only goes up to 9.

That's not what you said. You said that "there is no such thing as a 10\10 imo." If there is no 10/10, that means 9/10 is the highest score in your scale, ergo, your scale only goes up to 9.

Unless, of course, you add decimals. If there's a 9.999999 game out of there, then your scale does asymptotically approach 10, which makes 10/10 meaningful again, as the unattainable ideal of perfection you intend it to be.

Originally Posted by Prime Junta
That's not what you said. You said that "there is no such thing as a 10\10 imo." If there is no 10/10, that means 9/10 is the highest score in your scale, ergo, your scale only goes up to 9.

I know exactly what I said. You are choosing to interpret it that I said there "couldn't" be a 10\10. I'm saying there isn't one right now imo. At least not that I've played….

OK, I'm glad we got that sorted out, then.

Do you think there ever will be a game that is a flawless product, something that is absolutely perfect in every way, shape, and form?

I honestly don't know, what do you think? …… about that event occurring.

IMO a 10/10 Game should have the complexity of Realms of Arkania, the Story and Writing of Torment, the combat of TOEE, a game-world like Fallout (where my actions really influence the world), new Ideas like Arcanum, Choices & Consequences, good graphics and open ended gameplay but also a strong story-line - so it could be created in theory, but that will never happen

This whole sub-conversation should be listed in Wikipedia under "Why numeric scores for game reviews are pointless."

Originally Posted by JDR13
I honestly don't know, what do you think? …… about that event occurring.

I think it's impossible by definition, everything human being flawed, in some respect at least.

Well my install didn't go so good. Thankfully, one of the posters over at Pocketplane set me straight!

I reinstalled with this order:

1) Install BG 2: SoA
2) Install BG 2: ToB
3) Install official patch 26498
4) Install Ascension
5) Install G3 BG2 Fixpack
6) Install Shadows Over Soubar -- (SoS description)
7) Install The Darkest Day -- (TDD description/walk-thru)
8 ) Install G3 BG2 Tweak Pack

I didn't go for any of the 'tactics' type mods, because to be honest, I'm just not that great at the combat!

I ran into a new NPC, that I think launches off the Darkest Day mod, a thief in the Copper Cronnet (sp?). I didn't take him at first, then realized after a quick online search that I might need him to play the mod! Out when Yoshimo (who I never kept in anyway in any of my original go throughs).

Originally Posted by JDR13
As always you're quite welcome to your opinion. However I believe that a 10\10 signifies a flawless product, something that is absolutely perfect in every way, shape, and form. I simply haven't played that game yet, it does not mean my scale only goes up to 9.

Prime Junta makes a good point.

I don't think 10/10 means flawless, because nothing is truly flawless. Or because flaws are purely subjective. As such, I think giving a game a score of 10 just means you enjoyed the hell out of it, loved it to death - even with it's flaws.

I don't particularly like action games. Why? Too much action. That just means that to me Devil May Cry was a solid 6.5, maybe a 7. To someone who loves the genre it could be a 9 or 10. The one main flaw for me was it was too repetetive…but this is something action junkies crave. Me, I like a slower pace ala RE4 and not so much frenetic button mashing.

I'm not a graphics whore either (I still think BG2's and IWD's graphics look good even today) but Devil May Cry looked pretty damn good, enough to give it an 8 or possibly 9. But someone who has the latest, fastest dual-graphics card set up and who already has a PS3 and/or 360 XB (I'm still gaming on a PS2 and GC) may rate it a 6 or 7.

I would give BG2 a 10. It was not perfect, it was a bit too linear after that second chapter and I hated Irenicus (and not in the good kind of hate you're supposed to feel for a villian… his motives made sense but his dialogue sounded artificial, too stiff and I did not like the voice actor used) but I enjoyed every minute of it, still love the art design/graphics and music, in fact I even love the way the box looks. To me the single most positive thing I remember about it was that it was the first game that truly felt epic - it was 100+ hours of pure gameplay, not long uneccesary cinematics or endless grinding and you got to see all these greatly varied areas.

Originally Posted by blatantninja
I didn't go for any of the 'tactics' type mods, because to be honest, I'm just not that great at the combat!

Well, Ascension is mostly a tactical mod, even though its core component affects only the endgame (and makes it really memorable unlike the vanilla version), so beware .

Btw, I don't think that your choice of mods is optimal. I wouldn't bother with TDD and SOS if I was you. Those mods are big, buggy, unbalancing and empty.
There is a lot of newer mods which enhance BG2 much more seamlessly and creatively, and are simply much, much better.
If you expect similar level of quality and entertainment as was that of BG1 NPC Project, you'll be most likely dissappointed.