I've played a lot of past BG games. Neverwinter Nights as well. Many other games. So I know what's good entertainment and the ins and outs of game design and code and such (I don't know code itself but I know triggers and scripts).
I was watching the vid about the Kuo-toa, and honestly they just come across as far too silly. It feels like it's an easter egg that's been shoe horned in at the expense of something that could have been deeper (which is still subject to change being early access). Especially when they look like bad 70s costumes. The close ups in conversations make this very apparent. The arm/hand gestures indicate it as well. I know we're not supposed to take them TOO seriously but they feel like they're a complete joke until they actually fight you. Then they're scary and can really hurt you. But we don't really SEE it until fighting them. And even if we're not supposed to see "intimidating" it's hard to take the game seriously when it's going out of its way to look that silly. That's the Kuo-toa though. What I want to focus on is what they were talking about. And what's been made a joke of. Bhaal himself.
Let's think about this for a moment. Look back at Baldur's Gate 2 (and if you never played it, do yourself a favour and play one of the best RPG games of all time even if it is dated).
That's, what, 3 BG games plus expansions, the previous ones (technically added in 2 but referencing 1) involving bhaal and never getting to him? There's a lot of talk about bhaal but we know so little. Because he's never shown. Only talked about. All we really know is he slept with a lot of people (raping some perhaps, but that could be assumption from the NPCs claiming that) made a lot of children and that he has a thing for murder. Probably because of fighting improving people or something. Or does he just want to wipe the world out? Even if outside game lore exists on this account the games need to add more of it. I want to know more about "Boooooal". Not some pretender. So when it was all an illusion I actually felt a twinge of disappointment. Like the potential for expanding on that was there then was cruelly taken away. Makes me wonder if the scene would have gone better if they actually weren't fooling around and really had more in depth lore/knowledge about bhaal. So did the devs wuss out and take the cheap laugh approach because that's too much of a challenge? That's what I'm wondering here. It's possible they decided not to take it further because they're afraid of messing up past BG lore about bhaal. But if that's the case i say take the risk. Can always go "Fish people got stupid and assumed" later if mistakes are made and then fix things. We now have bhaal dangled on the end of the stick. And if the devs don't deliver more of that, a KEY theme about Baldur's Gate, then where does it leave us? One cheap laugh that is fleeting? When it could be more? I consider it unlikely that it will lead to more about bhaal, due to the mindflayers being the main focus in the game. But it would be nice if I was surprised later on. And perhaps simply mentioning this could be why more of bhaal gets added into the game. Keep in mind we've yet to face him.
We also don't know (and likely may never know) if the main character in this game in is a child of bhaal or not. We know they were in 1 and 2. Due to the main characters brother (Sarevok) stating that in the throne of bhaal expansion. They (and others) are children of bhaal himself. But what's the stance on 3? We seem to be playing as a different person, but are we? Or are we the same person from 2 since we were the same in 1? is BG continuing the bhaal trend or not? Even if we are playing as someone else I don't see why we can't be some other child of bhaal (or great grand child or whatever).
Basically what I'm wondering is if the devs have basically left behind bhaal and moved on and simply snuck in a quick mention. But now that he's been mentioned that's just making me want more of bhaal now. Considering we never got to face bhaal himself before. Granted he's "dead" but that's never stopped D&D characters coming back before. Be it from hell or oblivion. His whole thing is "resurrection" and his very face is on the cover on BG1 and 2. 3 we don't know yet but he HAS been mentioned in game. And maybe there's more to him then "just murder" and he's very misunderstood. At some point we've just got to get to the resurrection part and face him already (maybe with the main character being stronger if rejecting murder and weaker if they murder people). Given the tadpole is different it could even be possible to combine the two together. Lead up to it through that. Though IF this ever happens It'll probably be in an expansion after the main game is out. Since it's very unlikely that this idea has been implemented. But if it starts being added in before the game is out then maybe it can be something added into the game. Once all that bug fixing and the mindflayer story arc is done. Would be nice to have the transform into a monster ability again too (even if only as just an ability).
Basically, more "BOOOOOAL". The real kind.
Last edited by Taramafor; 08/11/20 02:05 AM.
