Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Kilivitz

Recent Profile Visitors

83 profile views
  1. In other words, the new mechanic prevents players from just reloading until they succeed (A.K.A. save scumming), therefore it's an improvement. But is it, really? Consider this: the ability to save scum is an inevitable side effect of an integral aspect of BG's gameplay (you can save/load whenever, except when in combat). There's no way to prevent it altogether unless through a radical design change such as replacing the save-whenever system with a checkpoint or auto-save-only system. Granted, it doesn't have to be a slippery slope. Perhaps only partially eliminating save scumming is already an improvement. Hell, maybe they should take it further - no more rolling to learn a spell from a scroll, since you can just reload and try again (or save time and give yourself a 25 in INT). I don't agree with that, however. I come from the point of view that BD shouldn't fix that which isn't broken, and I wouldn't say a mechanic is broken just because it allows for save scumming, which harkens back to the beginning of my argument. Far from me to deny that the way he put his argument is at best, obnoxious and at worst, incoherent. My answer, however, is different from yours - I wish Beamdog had been a lot more conservative and focused on preserving rather than changing the BG games, and I would love if there were more ways to bring the EEs closer to the originals while maintaining certain technical improvements. As I said earlier, a best-of-both-worlds version. Of course, I'm not saying that my opinion is worth more than yours. The only thing I had a problem with was your caricature of EE-naysayers as irrational neckbeards, something I see as reductionist on a topic that has a lot of nuance and room for discussion.
  2. If I'm not mistaken, in the original a character would roll against its own pick pocket score. In the EEs, each item slot has a set required score that is compared to the character's pick pocket skill. If it's lower, you get a message saying the target has no items that can be stolen by a cutpurse of your skill.
  3. Not so much replying to this individual post as picking it as an example of the few replies here dismissing the whole thread as a nonsensical exercise in grognardism. I find it disingenuous to treat "rolling back Beamdog's changes" as an all-or-nothing proposition that defeats its own purpose as long as one can go play the originals. The EEs are a mixed bag of objective improvements (mostly on the technical side) with changes and additions to gameplay, some of which very much blur the line between enhancement and change for the sake of change. So much that some of the most egregious stuff already has mods that revert them: the new NPCs, the hack job UI and the new cinematics. There are three other changes I wish a mod would revert: the pickpocket mechanics (a prime example of unnecessary change), the behavior of item icons (currently mangled) and the sneakily-added changes and dialogue additions to Bioware NPCs. I understand, though, that all of those may be far from deal breakers to most players. What I'm getting at is that between the originals and the current state of the EEs lies a best-of-both-worlds version of BG in the vein of PST:EE (which was, IMHO, handled the way BG should have been handled, rather than going the Ecce Homo way).
  4. You know, solving issues that weren't issues to begin with sounds pretty spot on for Beamdog, IMHO.
  5. shawne, as I live and breathe. I remember being bummed about your banning.
  6. "Doesn't affect me, therefore, it doesn't exist." Also "It's all subjective anyway. You're wrong, though."
  7. Yes. What the doctor said. And the point I can't seem to get across to a couple of you folks. It's not whether Thacobell's reply deserves a smackdown (it actually doesn't), but the fact that if the roles were reversed (BD critic accuses BD fanboy of being a jerk), mods would come out spinning their banhammers like Thor within minutes. I'm not fixating on it as much as documenting it.
  8. I'm well aware that calling someone a jerk is pretty lame as far as personal attacks are concerned. The point was that people have been banned/jailed/reprimanded for much less.
  9. So here's one of Beamdog's most staunch defenders outright calling Adul a jerk for criticizing the studio. This kind of personal attack could be an opportunity for the moderators to prove just how impartial and unbiased they are.
  10. @Arthas at the moment, you can disable cosmetic attacks using TobEX - it's the optional component "make all attack animations genuine attacks" or something like it.
  11. Yes, I when I said "it's been out for 2 years" I meant the EE of NWN. Also, the NWN community I mentioned was specifically the NWN:EE subforums over at Beamdog. You seem to be under the impression I was referring to the NWN community as whole - I wasn't. I was addressing Borisov's remarks that the IE veterans may be out but the [Beamdog] NWN forums are going strong. From my point of view, it's only a matter of time until the people who fell under their EE hype become dissatisfied with their general clumsiness in their handling of almost every game they got their hands on. In the case of NWN, it's arguably worse, because since their player base relies so much on persistent worlds and multiplayer, the EE has pretty much fragmented a decidedly niche (and therefore small) player base, all in the name of what is so far a glorified patch.
  12. The NWN community is still active, sure, because it's only been two years. Eventually, they'll catch up to BG fans in their disappointment, unless BD manages to make good on their myriad promises in a timely fashion. If their treatment of BG is any indication, it's not going to happen.
  13. In the original BG2 engine, ToBEx allows you to disable inventory pause. It doesn't force an unpause like in BG1, though. I like both approaches. I don't think inventory management in these games is realistic enough that you simply shouldn't be able to use it during combat, but I like how the original one makes choosing quick items part of your survival strategy.
  14. You see, guys? No reason to complain. You're all a bunch of meanies who can't live up to BD's High Standards™ I mean, they even have a Warning Level System [patent pending]. So clearly, no one has ever been banned for petty reasons. It's just that you achieved level 5. How? We can't say. Moderator discussions are above your paygrade, I'm afraid. And you wouldn't understand, anyway.
  15. If you don't like people taking the conversation to a different venue, perhaps you should reflect as to why it happened in the first place. Because this is entirely on you, the moderators and the frivolity with which you remove posts and ban people. It makes sense, though, that you'd complain about it. Suddenly, you can no longer shut down the conversation just because you don't like where it's going. In other words, you are no longer in control of the narrative, something which you and the moderating team seem obsessed with. I may seem harsh, but it's the most generous explanation I can come up with in regards to how you guys behave. For a long time now, I've seen people say the BD Forums are generally more civil and welcoming than other gaming forums. And you know what? Not only I think it's true, but I also agree that the only way to achieve that is with zealous moderation. During the first years I was there, I saw this policy being applied to good results. However, over the past few years, "high standards" seem to have become "double standards", as the rules are used more and more often go after users that get on the bad side of moderators, either for personal reasons or simply for criticizing Beamdog and their products. You see, Julius, you keep going on and on and on about how neutral and consistent you are when enforcing the rules, when it's clear as day that you are not. If you were, this thread wouldn't even have gained this much traction. If you were, you wouldn't get so many long-time contributors and popular users being banned, all of them with one thing in common: they started becoming vocally critical of BD and their treatment of the games. Either that, or their banning left other users confused as to why, indicating that it was all based on behind-the-scenes drama. Then there's the fact, which anyone can observe, that being less than friendly or civil usually gets a pass when it's in defense of BD. I would know, because I've been one of them. The tone of my posts (and the way I've engaged with people there) has always been pretty much the same, except I only started getting in trouble once my opinion of the studio and the EEs started shifting to the negative side. Hate to break this to you, and I know correlation doesn't necessarily mean causation, but I see Dee Pennyway's leaving and your taking over of the community as the exact point in which things started going downhill. And this is because unlike you, Dee didn't take it upon himself to be the judge of what was valid criticism and what was not. Between 2012 and 2016 (both before and during the SoD drama), there was plenty of negative opinions on BD and the EEs going around. People didn't get banned as often, and the most common reason for it was advocating piracy - not breaking arbitrary rules such as "you can't argue with a moderator in public". I had never been accused of making a personal attack, and if I had, I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be for saying "I think this community has become very insular". And that's my point, really - I don't think you see that it doesn't hurt to have a diversity of opinions on the products a forum is supposed to support. If you did, you wouldn't do things like replying to people saying they don't like the game by posting links to favorable reviews as if you had to prove them wrong, as it makes the studio you represent seem petty. I don't even understand why you think it's your job to prove critics wrong. Has anyone told you to do so? Hell, I don't even know what the hell you're doing *here* - I mean, don't you have other things to do? It's one thing when a moderator like semiticgod comes along, but you're a BD employee - does Trent Oster know you're stalking former users and trying to rebut their opinions *outside* of your company's turf? Not to mention how sanctimonious you come across when saying things like "we have high standards" and "we're not some random community" - as if other communities had low (or no) standards and every other IE-related forum was /b/ in comparison. I like to think, however, that the overall tone-deaf way you communicate with people has less to do with your disposition and more with your less than perfect domain over the English language. Which is, of course, perfectly acceptable in any other circumstance, except when you're involved in customer service for a primarily English-speaking company. Wait, what? Who's asking to be reinstated? Have I missed that from one of Shandyr's posts, maybe? Because as far as I can see, the consensus is that your policies are so ass-backwards that being banned nowadays is gradually becoming a badge of honor. And here's just one more remark: the BD forums may not be dying right now, but they will be. As time goes by and the enthusiasm around NWN:EE and the console versions fizzle, it's going to be hard for you guys to maintain a thriving community, since you keep alienating the very people that have kept the flame alive before the EEs came along. These are the same people that will keep the IE community going on in the coming years, except they may not be very inclined to do so in your forums, where they're subject to you and your team's whims.
  • Create New...