Hey people,

After browsing the BD forums on and off over the past 3 weeks, it is becoming apparent that BD is far, FAR inferior to Divine Divinity in just about every way imaginable. From reading your (the fans) posts, I've gone from hotly anticipating BD's South African release to wondering if I should even bother since the game is, by most accounts, unpolished, unbalanced and devilishly difficult. Even having read on occasion that "this game OWNZ" has done little to restore my enthusiasm.

Granted, the only sane thing to do is still to buy the game and make up my own mind, and I will probably still do so, however I am getting the feeling that this could be a waste of my time, money and effort, and that I should simply load up DD again and play it through one more time instead.

I challenge all of you reading this forum to convince me why I SHOULD bother with BD - please let me know what makes this game different to any other action/RPG out there and what features make it worth my hard-earned money. Or, failing that, just let me know what it is you love about the game. At the moment it sounds like playing BD might be an exercise in frustration. Convince me otherwise!

Thanks!

Cheers

Deon du Plessis
South Africa

Hi there...

Well I think you should get the game, but before you play patch to 1.41, or by the time you get it maybe a later patch will be out again.

People are having problems with the patch but that's because of save game compataiblity. If you start a new game with the latest patch most (if not all) problems should have been solved.

Secondly, and it's not normally my nature to say this, but some people on the forum have taken the fact that Larian people try to implement fixes and game changes according to complaints on the forum MUCH too far. Reporting bugs is fine, but demanding a game restructure isn't...

For example - attempts to bully the developers into changing the game to suit their own specific wants or needs with posts like, 'I'm not buying this game until you implement [this or that]. Or, 'Here's how it should function - fix it now!'

If I encounter a problem, I'll check it out, but I'm not bothered reading the 'bug list' forum as it is now as everyone appears to be experiencing different types of bugs with different machines. But again, most of this is old save game related (probably)!!! I may be proved wrong though if some one has started a whole new game with the latest patch and still has serious problems. Will have to wait and see.

In short I'm really enjoying the game, mostly from act 2 onwards as that's when you get more freedom, not much freedom to do what you want in act 1.

My only gripe with the game from a design point would be the skill points system...you don’t have enough points to make secondary skills useful as you'll need to keep your combat skills up to survive.

But it's starting to play much more like the old Divinity, and I hope it continues that way. Maybe someone who's further than I will explain.

Even before patching the game I only had one problem and that's because I use Win98.

I do recommend it, but it has it's flaws like any game anywhere. With a tweak to the skill system in a patch (which could happen) it could work out to be nearly as good as Divinity. Unfortunately, I don't think it can surpass the greatness of that first game and the sheer freedom of play it offered.

<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wave.gif" alt="" />

Hello.

Well, I wouldn't call a thread "convince me", but rather "what do you say" ?

Because the choice is up to you.

You might be "convinced" to something you don't like, but it can be the other way round as well. We can give only hints, reasons, articles etc. . The decision is up to you.

I will definitively buy it one day, especially because of the humour (which I like very much <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif" alt="" /> ) , but I don't really compare <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/div.gif" alt="" /> with <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beyond.gif" alt="" /> . Bot are - at least in my piint of view - different games in different universes.

That's so far from my side.

Alrik.

hello,
i personaly don't have the game right now
i'm hoping around next week or soo.

But don't always go by the opinions of other people alone.
Sometimes "things" are over exagurated (spelling?) and other are soo true.

The only thing i can say is that you should try out the DEMO first.
it gives you a first impression with the game engine and it's skill system.

And i'm sure you going to like the final product.

There are party selection hotkeys in the full game, as well as screen movement and re-centre hotkeys, which were added after the demo was released.
Voices in the game were re-done, particularly the Death Knight's. I like the new voice better, but opinions on both vary widely (in any case it gets better as the game progresses).
The demo is the first level of an act that was designed to be linear, and unfortunately does not contain much variety in quests. There is enough to hint at the style and humour of the full game, however, and give you an idea of the interface and difficulty.

I am playing on tactical, have not used Battlefields to level up or attacked from sneak mode, and have not had many problems with difficulty. I've been quite stingy using skill points, and that has not hurt any.

I'd like to just state: The plot for Beyond Divinity is fantastic, especially the more you progress. It's extremely fun and I can't help but smile at the humour. Yes the game is difficult for some, but it's all playing style and opinion. Larian did a fantastic job and the only frustrations/problems i've had were bug related, but then all games go through that on the PC. It's personal preference but i'd suggest at least trying the demo and then deciding.

To be honest I can't convince myself that it's any good, and if I hadn't stupidly written in the manual information that *should* have been included(such as what charms do) I'd have returned it by now. I would suggest you buy it from a shop that allow a 7-16 days return policy and keep it in good condition until then, make up your mind and go from there.

And as for those who haven't played the game...Stop telling everyone how good it is, you will only make yourself look foolish when you realise it's nothing like Divine Divinity. Act 1 is very typical of the rest of the game, new voices or not. BD is horribly linear, and with a lack of good NPC interaction I'd hardly rate it as a genuine RPG. It's Diablo 2 with out the style and I don't think I was even getting the full game music until the most recent patch. Maybe with a decent bugfree game I'd give it 6/10 but so far it's not getting that.

Finally I think it was a bit underhand to link it so with DD. Okay that was probally not Larians fault since they were going to call it Riftrunner. But when I saw it's title of Beyond Divinity I naturally thought it was a semi-sequel, in the same way Baldurs Gate had BG2 or Fallout had Fallout2....you expect a new improved version of the earlier game but still much the same. BD only shares the isometric view and simple clickfest combat, everything else is radically different. I tell you what, when the real DD2 comes out I'll take a long hard look first at the MBs to decide before buying it.

On the same note - has it occurred to you that some people might be playing and enjoying the game? That some people with a different oppinion than you might be posting here? So stop telling everyone how bad it is, I say <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/winkwink.gif" alt="" />

Yes, it's annoying with the bugs and all and yes I'm a bit annoyed that I cannot play right now (1.41 messed up my quests and I'm waiting for the next path to see what happens) - but still, I played the game for more or less 10 hours straight yesterday and was enjoying it a lot.

The bugs are technical problems that are annoying but they will hopefully be fixed eventualy. But the game itself is quite fun IMHO and I'm still looking forward to playing all the way through it.

- Telemachos

PS. I've never bothered to return a game in my entire life - no matter how bad or buggy it was. Is that something you do often where you come from?

Exactly my view on the game. It's still an enjoyable and extremely well written story (in Act 3 & 4 it really picks up) and I just love all RPG's in general. Call me mad but they are like a book... I may not like the Hobbit as much as Lord of the Rings, but i'd still read it all the way through and get enjoyment from it.

I think Larian should have left the name as <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/riftrunner.gif" alt="" /> (my opinion) it would of stopped a lot of these comparisons.

I finished the game with 1.2 and had a great time doing it. I never played DD so I can't compare. I had a lot of magic spells and survivor skills on my hero, my DK had melee and traps... worked out nicely.

I found the game quite easy on "action" while other people find it incredibly hard on "easy". Gonna restart playing again and this time on "hardcore" just to see if it's possible to finish <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/evilgrin1.gif" alt="" />

Never experienced any annoying bugs I have to say, only battlefield quests (and a subquest here and there in normal world) that stayed in logfile although quest was completed (I did get the xp though, so it didn't bother me too much).

I liked it, but I don't see why I should convince you, just do whatever you want <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/silly.gif" alt="" />

Nicely said man. I would get it. I've just played a bit of act 1 so far but I like it just fine. I too encountered no major bugs AT ALL so there. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

Nice Warcraft 3 record there Bosjer. Well impressesive. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/up.gif" alt="" />

To be honest, the game is still quite new, and as it is a rpg with massive quests, some problems can always occur in the beginning stages of the game.
Just like it was the same for Never Winter Nights, Diablo, Diablo 2 (where there still was a patch for after several years ...) and every other RPG ever created. For example the ultima series was very famed, but to be honest, they were games were you could do a LOT wrong ... and mess up the game.
Beyond is also a game where you can mess up, but still I think it's quite good up until the part where I've played it.

But yes, after playing Divine Divinity, Beyond doesn't really improve it ... it's just a little different with a twist too it. Just depends on what you personally like I guess, but it still is a good RPG.

I only noticed a bug after patch 1.40, and that was only one bug in Act 4. Can't say anything else has really stopped me playing, I've been playing this too much if anything.

It's a game I'm really enjoying but hey, don't let me change your mind. For all I know, you may well hate it--after all, you've been reading these forums and come to an opposite conclusion! Why should I bother? More to the point, why should I care? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif" alt="" />

The game isn't exactly far inferior to DD. I have full faith it will be fixed and working fine. I would never recommend someone not purchase this game, what I may recommend is waiting a month or two before playing it.

I haven't played the game and i will not tell everyone how good it is !

But after playing the demo and the beginning of Act 2 (during the tests) i am pretty sure to love it very much.

I am happy that the game is different from Divine Divinity, i would not like to play a clone of the first Larian game.

I am happy that the game is more difficult and more strategic than Divine Divinity, i hate to finish a game after a few hours of playing because it is too easy.

I love to play with the DeathKnight.

I love the graphics of the Larian artists and the new avatars, even if i don't really like 3D graphics.

I love the gameplay too.

I don't care about the bugs because i know that Yann is working hard to fix these problems in a new patch.

I tryed several demos of new games and i did not like them as much as the demo of Beyond Divinity.

And if there was 99,9 % of the gamers telling everybody that the game is bad, i will get the game anyway to make my own opinion.

This is my opinion and i don't try to convince anybody.

Barta

I'm playing it,

i enjoy it.

i haven't had any difficulty in terms of game balance and hardness.

maybe its just me, but some people whine for no reason.

now the issue with the current broken patch is a little annoying, but since i backed up my saves prior to installing it and haven't reached the location / scene where the issue becomes introduced, i'm hoping it shouldn't be there when the new patch arrives.

and of course if necessary i can start act 2 over again.

try it, if you don't like it... well at least you attempted it yourself.

Whether you choose to buy or not buy the game will be up to you. I think what's impressed me the most about BD is when I started playing it, I had no idea what 'lie' ahead. Not an inkling. And I played DD (and loved it, btw). I've had the game for over a week now and up until 2 days ago, I was one frustrated gamer. I could not make it through the first act's dungeon to save my (or my character's) life. So, like any good adventurer, I restarted. Lo' and behold, I slowed down the pace, found a couple of things I had over looked (one being a huge treasure chest), and two clicks later, I was back in the universe I knew as DD! And it was even better than DD.

Yeah, there are a lot of complaints in these forums. I like to decide things for myself. I'm not one to even listen to movie critics and their reviews. (Why bother? They don't have my particular tastes, do they? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/silly.gif" alt="" />)

So, if you buy the game, I hope you find the same enjoyment and surprises that I have.


Faralas <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mage.gif" alt="" />

Well In the flame wars amongst DoritofDeath and others I've noticed more than one poster claiming how great it was but admitting to having only played the demo, whilst also claiming the demo is unrepresentative of the game. If someone has played the full game and enjoyed it well kudos to them, but based on it's release schedule many outside of Germany haven't yet played the full thing. However my opinion is that the game has serious flaws and I'm not afraid of telling someone. There are many older RPGS and they compare very favourably to BD since BDs graphics and system requirements make it look 5 years old anyway. If someone has never played Planescape Torment, Fallout, Baldurs Gate, or even Divine Divinity I'd recommend they play them all first. I'm only playing BD because I have played all those earlier games and I need something new.


As for for returning games, several retailers offer satisfaction guaranteed claims, and on several occasions I've gone in and said 'This game is crap, can I have a refund' Why buy and keep something that is rubbish. Would you keep a Stereo HiFI that has crackly sound. I haven't got that kind of money to throw away. Let's see, Hostile Waters went back, Some Diablo2 clone whose name I forget went back, plus a few more that were so bug ridden they were unplayable. Haven't you heard... The Customer Is Always Right. As I've gotten older I've become more fussy in my games, perhaps since I can compare them to older games I enjoyed and fully expect something built for a better spec system to be a better game.

Not every country has this, to put your game back and get your money back. Here in Germany for example most shops exclude that.

Hm, Alrik - I had a trader who did - but from all games I possess, I only brought 1 back (a Cryo Engine game - I got sick from movement motion, my eyes couldn't stand it).

Back to topic - I don't want to convince you - why? I don't know your preferences - are you a gamer liking to hack&slash your way through an action RPG and loot? Are you one of the "kill-first-ask-later" faction?

Are you a gamer disliking to read a quest log? Do you like to click yourself out of conversations instead of thinking about them and keeping them in mind?

Do you like to experiment? Find stuff out for yourself? Do you like to understand the "game logic"? Do you like linearity? Or, are you able to understand at what point linearity has to chuck in? In other words => what is the fun factor for you? Do you like brainy riddles? Do you like to explore worlds that are at sometimes sinister?

How can I convince you, if I know nothing about the way you like to play? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/winkwink.gif" alt="" />
Kiya

Hey Alrik, I've had the same BS from shopkeepers too. I just lie. Tell them the game will not work/install properly or something. What are they gonna do? Test it right there? Not worth the hassle to them.

The worst pain's in the arses for this are Best Buy in the US, who you have to kick up a stink for to get a refund. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif" alt="" />

Alright, time for my 2 cents. Let me start off by saying that I've played both DD and BD all the way through to the finish.

I loved DD. Its one of the greatest games I've ever played, so its hard not to compare it to a game from the same company set in the same universe.

Graphics, music, and sound were all great in BD. Gameplay wise, it doesn't compare to DD. I've seen some people post with things like, "What did you expect, a clone, a rehash?" My answer is....yes. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/delight.gif" alt="" />

BD is too linear. The very fact its broken into acts makes it linear. I still remember the first time I took a look at the journal in DD and opened the map: "Holy [nocando]!!! This game is freakin' huge!! And I can go anywhere MY path takes me?"

The atmosphere in BD is not as immersive as DD overall. Maybe its because the focus of gameplay is on both the "hero" and the deathknight as opposed to just the hero. However, I think its also in the little details, too. They took out the Traits page. <shakes head> How could they take out the traits page?

I don't know, it just seems to me that theres less of everything in BD. Less attributes (same points per level, but more attributes to spread them over), less skills (you pretty much have to specialize), less loot, less non-linearity, less immersion, less journal features (no traits <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/disagree.gif" alt="" />), just less of everything.

The skill system. Yup, I'm another of the "whiners" who doesn't like it. Its the exact opposite of DD. In DD I could be anything, warrior, mage, battlemage, you name it. In BD, you can only be one thing and that not very well. I mean seriously, when I think warrior, I think master of weapons. Not in BD. The most you can hope for is master of A weapon. When I think mage, I think master of magic. Again, not in BD. The most you can hope for is a master of one spell. Granted, your characters <rationalizing mode engaged> can trip and hit their heads (and have their pockets picked while their lying unconscious on the ground) to forget their skills and learn new ones <rationalizing mode disengaged> but its just too specialized for my taste. I WANT to be a powerhouse! I want my enemies to fear the sight of me!

Overall, the game was still fun, especially Act IV, but its no <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/div.gif" alt="" />. But then again, it comes far closer to <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/div.gif" alt="" /> than any other game on the market. In the end, you must try it for yourself, for only you can be the judge!

And a special note for those who complain about complainers: We are not clones. Everyone has an opinion on the game. You are NOT the opinion police. Please don't dismiss anyone's opinion as "complaining" just because it differs from yours. Instead, express your own point of view on the game and let us all see things from a different perspective. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/delight.gif" alt="" />




Disclaimer: All opinions in this post are those of the author, and therefore outweigh anyone else's. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif" alt="" />

LordMalis, I have no prob with people not liking BD - taste, preference, personal game play etc. are clearly subjective. And this is ok - if all had the same taste, a lot of game genres would vanish from the market.

I have problems with this =>
viewing BD by wearing Div spectacles. It was not designed as Div 2.
Gamers trying to wish it into a Div "clone"
expressions such as "if this and this is implemented, I will buy/not buy"

I like BD - as much as I enjoyed the freedom in Div - I enjoy linearity now. As much as I loved the way to develop my char in Div, I enjoy development now - in a totally different, unique way. I don't even use up all skill pts. I was a pretty powerful mage in Div, until I found out, I didn't need that. In BD I enjoy my (physically) very weak archer and help her to survive. I don't use the BF, I don't even need the summoning dolls. I concentrate on quests - they are difficult to solve at times (specially Act 4). the only "trauma" I have, is the earthquake effect.

it's nice to see some effects from Div (charms) - I was totally enhanced by the new alchemy system - the strange creatures. Tibars, lava crawlers, I simply love watching them. I'm so glad, imps play a new role now. And when I think about the Raanaar and their 3 virtues - I even found myself starting to think philosophically. BD may have "less" of what Div gamers were used to - but it has one thing more: depth. Even in sub quests: Good/evil - virtuous/non-virtuous => I really had to think and wreck my brain in finding a solution to suit me, the RL person - and the way I discovered the game plot should be. It's a mature game IMO - not in the sense of "M" rating - but in taking up the philosophy of this strange, sometimes cruel world of Nemisis.
Kiya

My comment was not geared toward you. But there are others that simply dismiss anyone who finds ANY fault with the game, and the funny thing is, some of them have stated they haven't even played the game yet. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" />



I can't help wearing my "Div spectacles." That said, there were a number of new implementations that I liked, such as clicking where you want your characters to go on the mini-map. I would have bought the game regardless of what was implemented, but I can't help being disappointed about some things. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/disagree.gif" alt="" />



I also concentrate on quests, but the male testosterone in me wants to be the most powerful hero ever to walk any game world! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif" alt="" />



I agree with most of what you said. I was disappointed that the imps didn't speak the same way as in Divinity, I missed the speech impediment. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/delight.gif" alt="" />

LordMalis - I bow to you. Now I know what I'm lacking <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/up.gif" alt="" /> - BTW, I didn't imply your post was "dictatorship". Maybe I should have stressed this more in my post <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/winkwink.gif" alt="" />
Kiya

Kiya,

Unfortunately it's name and promotional hype mean it's inevitable that it will be compared to DD, and rightly so IMO. Heck even the novella paints it as a direct continuation of the first game. Now if they had called it 'Riftrunner' and somewhere in smaller print put 'A brand new game from the team who brought you Divine Divinity' then the comparision would have been lessened...and I'd probably be less disappointed.

Or to put it another way. Lots of people hate Fallout BOS for a reason <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/think.gif" alt="" />

I agree, Ben <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/up.gif" alt="" /> - RR would have maybe been better.

I agree too. I can't see the reasoning behind calling it Beyond Divinity, that was just asking for people to compare games.

<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/riftrunner.gif" alt="" /> sounded cool too, I really like that name for an RPG. Maybe it's just me though.

Hmmm, I could swear I've seen something on the box...

"Let yourself be absorbed in the Divinity universe...explore your dark side in the follow up to this (e.g. DD) adventure..."

It was also sold as a pack containing DD and BD with the remark "the quest continues".

For Pete's sake, Lets face it people...BD IS DD2!!! You can deny it, but Larian clearly wanted to lift this game on the (unexpected but justified) hype that was DD. Too bad they changed the best elements, which are now being corrected (because of popular demand???) with numerous patches.

Anyway, should you buy this game??? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

Yes, you should. But not now. Wait for patch 1.999 after which the game will work at an exceptable level or just wait a few months for the price to drop so you get actual value for money (10 euro is fair). If you have the cash and it's hot in your pocket, buy Sacred instead...

I can see you're expecting DD 2. In this case I have to disapoint you. Like I said they stripped the fun things and kept the same (great, but still the same) design. Act 1 is a pain, and the battlefields are dirt-cheap (and extremly buggy) Diablo 2 ripoffs. In the second half of Act 2 things lift up, and after that it becomes more and more of a real game. Still damn linear though...

I know "I don't know how you play" or "Everybody had their own journey to travel" or "yadayadayada" makes sense (open doors people!). But if you expect a game like (or god forbid, better than) DD you WILL be dissapointed...

How many patches for Sacred at the moment ? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

I had one patch (8 MB) for Sacred and even before that it worked flawless. I had 2 for BD (25 MB each on ISDN, nice!) and it still had some major flaws. Sacred never crashed, never let items lose their value or has dungeons with NO monster. It has problems with some quests, but these are minor and not important to the game in general. In BD I started over once and once in Act 2...NEED I SAY MORE???

PLUS Sacred has a non linear world like DD had, lots of items, lots of merchants and HORSES!!! DD is better, but BD isn't. But that is of course "just a personal opinion". <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" />

Have you actually played Sacred or are you just someone who counts the patches? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/silly.gif" alt="" />

It's so hard to talk to fanboyz & girlz (try dissing IDOLS winners on a 14 year old, same effect)... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/evilgrin1.gif" alt="" />

I have to raise my eyebrow about that, because I've had Sacred for two weeks, and it's just now barely playable. They're up to a 1.66 patch--that's 6 major patches, and 6 minor ones--and many game features still don't work properly. They've actually just asked players what they want fixed, next.



Just as a word of advice, you'll find it becomes even harder talking to people after you've sneered at them as fanboyz and girlz. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif" alt="" /> Personally, I consider both Sacred and <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beyond.gif" alt="" /> pretty damned buggy and badly balanced, though I'm sure both will soon deliver what they promised. I'd be more sympathetic to what you write if you hadn't chosen a product that's been lambasted for bugs even worse than <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beyond.gif" alt="" /> as the epitome of quickly repaired problems.

No i have not played Sacred but i have heard that Sacred has also many bugs and several patches already.
So you can say that i am someone who counts the patches <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" />

After playing Beyond Divinity i will probably buy Sacred but i am pretty sure to prefer Beyond Divinity because most of the people say that there is a lot of hack and slash in Sacred.
In Beyond Divinity the fights are more difficult and more strategic.

I understand you it's hard to talk to fanboys/fangirls.
I am definitively a fangirl and i wish i am only 14 years old <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" />

Barta

I played Sacred, Zed - nearly the first day it came out (German version), because I liked the demo very much - for about 20 hrs. Then I was bored and uninstalled it => too repetitive and I don't like unlimited monster respawn. Quests were not challenging my brains. Graphics, world and humour was nice though => but this doesn't tie me to a game.

As you see, I play differently. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/winkwink.gif" alt="" /> (was the Dark Elf in the game and the Seraphim in the demo)

Ahhhhh, and about the horse => I did not want it get hurt, so I thought, I'd clear the map first (wild land) and then solve quests (time limited ones) - only to see a large streak of enemies running after me. Was too aggravating for me on long term. You can say, I can't judge a game after 20 hrs completely => correct. But I can see after 20 hrs, if I wish to carry on or not. If monster respawn had been said clearly (note: German version came out far earlier than the English one), I wouldn't even have bought it. My game play is => clear and be done. Some game magazines claimed proudly to have had the "honour" and convince the Devs to make this => well, they lost a customer in me.

It's all a matter of taste, obviously. I played Sacred for a while but like Kiya got bored. It might have horses but it has no dialogue trees and the quests are completely meaningless - it's simply an action game and not a RPG for my taste. I found it totally bug-ridden - easily worse than BD although the comparison is fairly worthless. I remember when I arrived at my destination for one quest (based on the arrow) it suddenly shot 180 degrees and started moving away. Confused (because nothing was there), I chased the arrow...it turned out to be a rabbit instead of the appropriate enemy. My partner is playing it while I replay BD and she swears at the quest bugs continuously.

At any rate, if want a deeper RPG experience with dialogue and interactivity, Sacred just doesn't have those elements.

I have played up through part of act 3, and I can easily say that the game is good, and if you enjoy rpg's you should by it. The game isn't great, as of yet, I haven't finished the game yet, but it is very good now that the patches have been released. I have had no major problems, like the game crashing or anything. My biggest complaint with the game was the inventory system, but now that that is fixed, I don't have any big complaints. Personally I like the voices, and I like the fact that they gave everyone a voice. I especially like the voice of the billboard. It is classic Larian. And while the game is too difficult during the first act if you play on tactical or higher, once you get to the second act and beyond the fighting is managable. The gameplay is very similar to Divinity, so if you liked it you will like Beyond Divinity's game play. The skill system is nothing special, they could have left it the same, but I think it is slightly better, and I am glad they experimented with it. With a few tweaks it could be really good for Divinity 2. I think the coolest addition to this game, from the original are the spells. The spells look tremendous, and there a such a wide variety to cast. It was also a good addition to up the intelligence of the various monsters. They work together, and many different techniques are needed to defeat them. That makes the game harder, but in my opinion better. Right now by biggest gripe with the game is that most all of the quests are straight forward kill some monsters and bring back an item. I was under the impression from reading previews, that there would be many more puzzles to solve in the game compared to Divinity, and maybe there still will be and I just haven't gotten to them yet.

Overall I would say definetly buy the game. I think many of the people who are complaining had unrealistic expectations of the game, and are remembering DD as better than it really was. The fisrt act of DD was very linear, hack and slash, not all that fun and really long, just like the first act in BD, but once you get past that the game is really good. So go buy it already.

Zed, I have Sacred and played it for a short while before I received BD. In another post you were practically knocking the fact that BD is a Diablo 2 knock-off. Well, what do you call Sacred? Original? ROFL

Anyway, you're lucky to have had flawless gameplay with Sacred. Many gamers haven't had such a fortunate experience. The Sacred developers [Encore?? I think] have, indeed, created 6 new patches and are working on another one (if I remember correctly). I had a lot of trouble with the game and one bug that I absolutely adored (worked out better for the player) got fixed, so that kinda took the fun out of it in a way. Nevertheless, I'm not that enamored with hack 'n slash games and that's pretty much all Sacred is. (It's Diablo 2 on sparkles. *g*) It's impossible to clear out any battlefield sections because the respawn rate is astronomical. But for those people who enjoy that type of play, Sacred is definitely their game.

It's hard to compare one game to another because invariably there is something unique to each game. They may appear to be "Diabloesque" tone to BD but that's true for a lot of other major games that are on the market. It's abundantly clear that DD was your favorite thus far (between the two games). I'm having fun with BD as are a lot of others here on this board. So don't knock us 'cuz we like the game. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/suspicion.gif" alt="" /> (LOL)


Faralas <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mage.gif" alt="" /> *who doesn't even remember what 14 was like* <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cry.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cry.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cry.gif" alt="" />

Ah, Sacred...

Not to slaughter anyone's sacred's bull, I think Sacred is just a step higher from the Diablo evolution chart. There's no point in comparing Sacred with Beyond Divinity, 'cos there are two different types of games? Sacred, a RPG? I don't know, that's like calling Diablo a RPG and that kind-of open up a can of worms.

1) Sacred has no conversation trees. The game don't need any, for it is just pure hack and slash. BD gives you choices to make, hence the need for a conversation tree.

2) Quests. Quests in Sacred are much simpler when compared to BD.

3) Crashes, bugs and fixes. Good Lord, don't you know Sacred is already at 1.66? And 1.7 is coming out soon? Diablo II takes 5 years to reach 1.10 and BD now is only at 1.4...

4) Non-linear world. Yeah, an open-room dungeon. What's the point? Is there any significane in doing the Abducted quest before the Eye of the Wolves?

You put it into very clear words, Rana <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/up.gif" alt="" />
I think this:
As Diablo revolutioned (or destroyed) the classical meaning of how an RPG is meant to be - gamers liking this action way, think a "good" RPG has to be similar (kill, loot, collect) - and Sacred is one of these. And each of these so-called RPG are a brick to the tombstone burying classical RPG.

In order to convince the thread starter, I therefore wrote a questional post. So, if she/he is an Diablo gamer, he might not like BD.

My personal definition of an RPG (coming from the pen&paper faction) =>
a world, consistent in itself - where I can explore and delve into it to understand its rules, atmosphere, psychograms of the races there - and the humour I love about Larian games.

Quests bringing me into moral twists - making me think, cuss and swear.

Dialogues, telling me more about this world, so I wish to become a part of it.

Interaction with the items of this world (e.g. plants, charms, quest combos etc.)- gathering clues by deciphering these rune manuscripts e.g.

BD has this IMO and - no class restriction thankfully (bothered me most in AD&D games - therefore a specified skill system. Yes, I can't use all, I have to decide - but I think this is logical for Nemisis and the role my char plays in it: disciple (pupil) trying to survive in a world with changing, powerful enemies - so I have to modify my strategy or die. And find a way home, of course.
Kiya

About bugs => Div had them, too in the beginning and some still exist. I can only talk for myself - they did not keep me from playing BD. And I'm looking forward to more improvement. What I would find disappointing though - if survival in Nemisis would turn into a cake walk. I think, this would destroy the atmosphere - just my personal opinion. And I don't think 10 $ would do this game justice, as one gamer mentioned.

as a fan of DD, BD was a big disappointment. immersive world, i can't say (bought the game but was left wanting).

my disappointment was in the game graphic's, storyline, and the fact that Larian was trying to say BD was not a re-hash of DD.
on the BD box, the product say's it uses Directx9.0b, even ask's to install Direct9 after game installation. why??? the graphic's were extremely poor, in fact they used the same tilesets from DD, how can one not compare the 2 titles, they use the same game engine, same tileset's but have slightly different game tweaks.
as for being a Directx 9 game, it is sadly not, the only great artwork in-game could be found on pieces of paper lying around, paper that weigh's a pound each :P.

don't get me wrong, the Divinity engine is truly unique and awesome. the capability of interacting with one's environment made me a fan of DD and Larian (still smile when i take a look at the house i had "furnished" in DD :P). trying to sell BD as a whole new game with new feature's imo is a let down, even if the title was Riftrunner, the 2 game's are too similar not to compare em. comparing BD to sacred well, apple's and oranges. seeing how sacred is a Diablo clone like soo many other title's, hack fest, heavy character developement geared for combat only, little to no storyline, linear quest's. (hack fest games can be fun, better for online play but should not be classified as an RPG)
if BD was sold or advertised as an extension of DD i wouldn't have been so keen and critical of the game, but it wasn't, that's my personal gripe.

the difficulty of the game came from the lack of information on equipemnt, lack of storyline (yes lack of a story, if one has played Neverwinter Nights, Knight's of the Republic, the BG or Icewind dale title's, Torment or even more classic titles such as Bard's tale or the Ultima title's, can't forget about the older Wiardry title's, the storyline is seriously lacking.)
as for the quest's, linear, one recieve's the quest, must find and fight a monster, kill it, return to the giver of the quest, return item, recieve reward, linear. i personally believe that Dungeon Siege's quest were more non-linear than BD's. if BD had a more immersive storyline, where a player could get lost in the history, culture, or feel of the world, than the linear quests' wouldn't be an issue. sadly most current "rpg" game quest's are like this, very few title's have it where one can go thru a deep conversation tree and "solve" the quest by talking or negotiating things out, very few title's....

game balance, well larian unlike other studio's listen's to their fan's and customer's, so the balance will be fine tuned, game play tweaked, but this is a minor issue, combat diffuclties is due to game style (BD is NOT a hack fest, buff up one's character and go kill everything, in fact larian, in their hint's state that one can not always kill everything....sneaking around monsters is better or come back later), understand that concept and the game is not too difficult...in fact it's easy.
imo if one is looking for a hack fest game, BD is not it, if one is looking for a "tactical" rpg, BD is not it, if one is looking for a truly immersive world to get lost in, BD is not it.
DD was a good game, BD feel's like a product that was rushed to market to satisfy customer demand. for me personally BD is not a worthwhile product. i do believe that Larian has the tool's to make a GREAT RPG, they have the Divinity engine, they have a loyal fan base, they as a studio listen to suggestions ( <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> and demand's heheh), they have a universe in which to expand on.

would i recommend one to purchase the game, even with lack of story, linear quest's, poor graphics, and me being personally dissapointed with the game, my answer would still be, yes.

because BD has enough creative aspects to it to make the game worthwhile, the skill tree imo is the best of all the approach of utilizing a skill tree (regardless of how many points are given), the Divinity engine is truly awesome (move that crate, or pile of trash, take that chest and use it to store item's, light up the torch, put out the torch, etc and now they added a Zoom feature :P) just wished they used different graphic tileset's or added new ones.

just with these key features, BD is decent.

as a hardcore gamer, a loyal RPG fan (been a fan since the beginning, pen & paper...still recall the ol Chainmail day's) i personally will support Larian, in the hopes that future Larian product's will have more, more graphics, more story, more non-linear quest's, more in character development for non-combat situations, more to satisfy my personal hunger for more <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

just my .02 cent opinion on a product that cost me 40 bucks

oh yeh, as for the bug's in-game, why complain. ??? in the Micro$oft world, bug's are common, should be expected. in fact it is IMPOSSIBLE to relaeas a product that will work flawlessly on ALL platform's. mix in the wide variety of hardware the problem's just gets compounded. bug's should be expected. are the bug's in-game that serious, no (the only one i came across was the memory leak in the skill plate window), the bug's are mere nuisances. frustrating at times but expected (in fact only one company releases product's in which i don't expect any bug's and that's Blizzard, just the mere fact that they will postpone the release of a title to the anguish of their fan's, just to work the bug's out first has made me a loyal customer for LIFE. sadly Blizzard's attitude is not shared with the rest of the industry. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> hope to add Larian with Blizzard in this regard...

another .02 cent opinion, would that make it .04 cents?? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

peace

It's funny, all this talk about Diablo and what makes a RPG. BD is a step up from Diablo, but not by much. It's very like Dungeon Seige but with lesser graphics. I wouldn't say BD is a RPG, and DD only just scraped in. DD had too many scripted points were the player lost control so the the developers could progress the story (A major mistake in my mind). Also there was little in the way of branching dialogue in DD and there is little in BD as well.

Now true RPGs, well the best examples you can get in recent years are Fallout and Planescape Torment. Both offered highly detailed worlds, full modification of the PC, complex NPCs and clever dialogue branches that depended on your PC (and the player) and resulted in very different outcomes. If you never played them go find them in a second hand shop somewhere. As far as I know these are the only games where you could fight or talk your way into beating the enemies...or any number of other clever things.

Hi everyone,

Wow, I was not expecting so many impassioned responses, thank you all so much!

Kiya: Since your first response was directed at me, I thought it only fair to answer your inquiry as to my preferred style of play, and the best way to give you an idea of what I am hoping for/expecting from BD is to tell you how I played DD and what I particularly enjoyed about it. So here goes:

The first time through BD I played as a Survivor since I like the ability to steal, fight and cast magic, even though that play style usually makes me a jack of all trades and a master of none. My second choice is usually a fighter type character who carries the biggest sword he can find and wears as much armour as his physique will allow without him falling over. Admittedly, kicking everything's butt gets old after a while, but thankfully small things amuse small minds and "after a while" for me usually means only towards the end of whatever game I am playing. This was definitely the case with DD, as I LOVED dominating everything that was thrown at me, even in the final fights with the Black Ring.

I am not fond of using magic. I guess what puts me off is that even though mages are powerhouses come the end of most RPGs, they are incredibly weak at the start, and for me the start of the game is usually where I get sucked in to a game if I am going to get sucked in at all. Actually, in all fairness I must admit I've never completed any game by focussing on my magic spells and ability to store mana only, so it might be something worth looking in to with BD.

I LOVE games with a compelling story. I also love NPC interactions where the outcome is actually dependent on my choice of dialogue options, and isn't simply cast in stone because that's what the designers want to happen. This, to me, is what makes an RPG. Actions alone do not make you whatever class you are choosing to role play, conversations that reflect the mindset of a particular class, now THAT is roleplaying. At least it is to me. Fallout 1 and 2 are good examples of games that meet these criteria.

Being drawn in to a game, feeling a part of its unfolding history is another appealing trait of good roleplaying games. I felt that way in DD, I felt good about helping the people of Rivellon, I liked repelling the Orc invasion, I enjoyed laughing with (and sometimes at) the characters I met. I don't need to be so immersed in the game that I forget about reality (although that IS nice when it happens), but I like to feel emotionally drawn in to the game. For me what is missing from a lot of modern games is heart, and the most pleasant discovery of the last year was Divine Divinity, a game that had heart, and lots of it. That made Larian a studio to take note of in my book.

As an aside, and <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/offtopic.gif" alt="" />, let me add that I believe that if you want to REALLY sell a modern game, you need to establish an emotional connection between the game and the gamer. My personal recommendation would be through the use of romance, for instance. Every person alive wants to fall in love (regardless of outward appearances), and in my own experience there has been nothing quite as thrilling as finding that someone special to whom I want to give everything I have inside me to give, and I firmly believe that it is easy to reproduce in a computer game because all you are really doing is telling a story. Give the gamer something to connect with, someone to carry on fighting for, someone who they will want to do anything for, and you will have a winner on your hands. I believe that adding a touch of romance, even as a series of minor side quests will add to the game's appeal. But that's just me.

What I don't recommend is going about it the Max Payne way, by killing off the player's "love interest" and using the greatness of that love as the motivation for a spree of revenge killings. Kinda cancels out the beauty and puts the emphasis on rage, doesn't it? Besides that, I never got the impression that Max loved Mona (his rebound relationship) in any meaningful way (if at all), she just happened to be some chick he was fighting with and her fun bits happened to conveniently fit his. Perhaps that is because modern society and particularly the media doesn't truly understand or even care about true love anymore, or just as likely, I completely missed what the writers were attempting to convey and it is in fact my understanding of the concept of love that is lacking. Whatever the case, even though I didn't feel the love in either game, there was still an attempt to draw the player in emotionally, and think it is fair to say that based on the series' success, it worked. Arguably "bullet time" had more to do with that than any emotional connection did, but it was still very much part of what made the series special.

Right, back on topic. I enjoy hacking and slashing just as much as the next guy, I also liked the tactical nature of some of the encounters in DD and the ability to pause my game in the middle of combat to catch my breath, drink potions or choose which spell to cast next on those rare occasions I chose to do so. I DON'T, however, like long, drawn out fights that take everything out of my character only to stumble two steps later into a similarly taxing fight. As much as I like Bioware, I hated Icewind Dale II, as all that game amounted to was a continuous string of difficult fights, to the point where I got bored and annoyed. It was not so much the challenge as the repetition of the combat that got to me.

I enjoy puzzles in my games, I like figuring things out, and I enjoy exploring and finding loot in obscure, difficult to find places. I like dialogue, and lots of it, conversation trees that branch interestingly, characters that pull at my heartstrings as well as characters that I love to hate. I enjoy combat, but I don’t enjoy games that are totally combat-focused to the point where there is nothing else to them but a mindless click-fest.

Have I missed anything? I hope not, this has taken me the whole day to write.

I think that gives you a pretty good idea of my RPG preferences. As for being convinced that BD is worth my time, you lot have done a great job in encouraging me to simply go out and buy it and make up my own mind.

Thanks again for all your input!

Cheers

PS: I have just called one of our largest newsagents over here and BD has been confirmed to be arriving in stores here by the middle of next week!! I can't wait! To any South Africans reading this, CNA will have it by next Wednesday! Yayyyy!

Hi! I was wondering if you decided to buy it or not! Good news. Hope you enjoy it as much as I am. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wave.gif" alt="" />


Faralas <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mage.gif" alt="" />

Deon, thank you very much for answering <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/up.gif" alt="" /> - I can only say this => no love affair, sorry. This game is about getting home and escaping Nemisis.

Combat difficulty is high - cause you start off with a weak char. Humour is there (typical Larian one <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/winkwink.gif" alt="" /> )- brain combination to solve some quests is mainly in Act 4.

I developed emotions for some races on Nemisis - and there were enemies I hated and feared (am a bad fighter). Hm, and about taking sides => the game is linear, but you can make your life easier by behaving like a sneaky survivor => disguise, infiltrate. Get a knack for times where you should take the advice of your unwilling companion and times, where you should disregard it.

Well, I'm really looking forward to your response, as soon as you have survived Act 1 (this is similar to Aleroth dungeons in Div )

The only advice I can give is this => have a nice large partition for this game - so you can make different saves and don't rely on the 5 quicksaves - just to prevent you from frustration, ok? YEAH, and take pickpocket at lvl 3 as I do => stealing is sooooooo much fun <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/evilgrin1.gif" alt="" />
Kiya

And I hope, you have the same fun and develop your cussing skill ability at times - as I did <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wave.gif" alt="" />

Many people think this way :

Directx -> better graphics.

What they do not know, forget, or overlook - thus being supported by Microsoft, maybe - is that Directx has underlying, non-graphical elements as well ! Things you might not necessarily notice throughout the program, even.

About that "love thing" : I agree with the "emotional binding" towards the customer/player.

I don't agree with romance as an effective thing in games - because they are games, and real Love is just too serious for me. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/winkwink.gif" alt="" />

Anyway, Humour is such another "emotional binding", like tragic, curses (Broken Sword), funny events and such things. I think that's at least partly what makes Monkey Island so great. In short : Depth. As a result of combinations of all these points.


I had once the idea of a story called "the indestructible couple", about two warriors, male and female, married or at least bound in a deep friendship, which work together in such a unique way that they both are "indestructible" as long as they work together. I haven't written it out, but the outlines still exist in my head.

But how completely different are games compared to games? Warcraft builds on the numerous concepts Starcraft pioneered, and I don't think it worth complaining. Saying that BD is just DD with a couple of features thrown in is, IMHO, not doing the designer justice. Why so?

Because we are dealing with a RPG here. We do not pay Larians for just the interface, graphics and music. We are also paying for a storyline, voice-acting and new art to boot. Repetition and recycling are unavoidable. What's commendable is that the Larians have added a compelling twist (the Death Knight) and think of some changes to make the game stand apart from DD.



As sword sharpens sword, so does mind sharpens mind. KoTR has a compelling storyline, but one of the biggest problem is the linearlity. Actually, anyone who has studied interactive studies could say that linearlity in a computer RPG is an illusion. The developer, at most, can create only two or three paths of significant events. Side-quests, side-storylines, mini-games -- those are just minor detour which has little impact on the main branch. Now Fallout II a good example of the illusion of non-linearlity. Yes, there are a lot of complex NPCs and side-quests, but the main plot remains simple - Save your village. I am not saying that's bad -- I am just saying that it is still an illusion, but heck it makes the game fun. Every game has non-linearity. In Diablo II, you can choose to kill Blood Raven first before attempting the Den of Evil. In Neverwinter Nights, the very first campagin, you can kill the Mind Devourer before finding the Dryad. It does not make an iota of difference, though. There is non-linearity, but there is no impact whatsoever.

The only non-linear thing about DD is how at one point you can stop the main plot and go about having fun till you feel you are ready to resume the plot. Doesn't do much to suspend my disbelief, that's how I see it.

You can feel free to disagree with me, but I don't particularly find NWN or Baldur's Gate story compelling. Cliche is what I called them. Consider BG I's beginning - you are the Chosen One. Your mentor "died" in the first few squences, and have a "Gandalf's Moment of Resurrection" later. NWN is even worst. All the three official campagins never once did try to "hook" you into the game. You are always the observer on the sideline, and you are doing the quests because you are lawful good, or you want experience points and the gold reward.



It is a very unfortunate fact of life that RPG tends to be combat-oriented, due to their wargame roots, and combat is one of life's most obivious conflict. If you are inclined towards such games, I would like to point the way to the Quest for Glory Series, which ends at QFG V - Dragon Fire. However, the game are old and except for the last one, all are DOS-based. QFG is a hybrid of RPG game and adventure games. Fighter will hack and slash to win whereas Magic Users and Thieves have to use a combination of their skills and ingenuity. For example, to clear the path of a big boulder blocking the way, the Magic User cast a Frost Bite spell on it, to freeze it, then cast a Flame Dart spell at it, to make it shatter.

However, those sequences are scripted. They are just puzzles waiting to be solved, and once solved, are not replayable. Combat,in a sense, is one of the easiest conflict to design and to make varied.



I don't understand the gist of your statements. I afraid when the word "tactical" is invoked, I would not think of history or an immersive world. Chess is very tactical. I don't need to know the evolution of the Queen (from how it could just move one step diagonally to its present form where she can make sweeping moves) to appreciate the game. Likewise, all I need to appreciate the tactical aspect of BD combat is how the damage model works, how can I conquer and divide, what are my back-up plans and etc.

As usual, IMHO.

Very much like Dungeon Siege? Last I play the game, I cannot mix healing potions from herbs growing around, drag items around the place, have conversations with NPCs in body, got any type of meaningful conversation tree and my NPC members are pretty much on auto-run.

Like I said, just like BD <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/winkwink.gif" alt="" />

There aren't dialogue tress in BD. You talk to people, you pick the glaringly obvious options, and if you mess up...well you just talk again and pick the other options again and again. Dialogue trees are like those in Torment, where you have several options and the outcome of the immediate task alters depending on what you say and you can only say it once.. The party members are exactly the same as Dungeon Siege so how can you claim otherwise. You equip them, they attack the enemy, that's all. There is no party interaction since summons don't talk much...nor does the hero for that matter. I've taken rather a shine to the Deathknight since he's the only one with a personality...an evil sarcastic personality, but at least he has one.

Okay sure you can mix potions, but I wouldn't class that as gameplay, but rather as gamesmanship. Why not just cut out the alchemy plants and replace them with additional potions, they serve the same purpose and simplify that aspect. Now item charming is an example of gameplay since it produce results you couldn't normally get, but potions, no way.

And dragging items around the place...what use does that serve? I used it once or twice an act. Personally I've never been one for getting an ingame house and 'decorating' it. Too much like real life for my liking, It why I loath 'The Sims' as well

Almost the same games I reckon.

PS:T (and for that matter, BG2) were highly unusual in that regard. The same applies to A-Sharp's King of Dragon Pass--which you ought to like a lot, since it really offers an enormous variety of choices at every turn. (It's among my favorites.) But even extremely non-Diablo like games eliminate dialog trees: Ultima VII, for example, KotoR and Betrayal at Krondor. Dialog trees have to lead to multiple outcomes, or they're phony and looks it. Judging <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beyond.gif" alt="" /> by the absence of dialog trees is a bit of a non-starter, in that sense. Each to their own, but I prefer to judge a CRPG by its interactivity with the environment. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beyond.gif" alt="" /> scores pretty well there. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Not all always possible - and regarding the questions on the forum, where gamers missed points, I'd say options are not so glaringly obvious. Same for having to trigger new speech options (something I know more from adventure games) => BD has this, too.
In some cases, your speech decision decides over combat or not - I'm not talking about a certain race. Just about decision options.
Tried "interaction" with a skeleton? 2 reactions
Tried the dishwashing in Act 3? Luckily not so complicated as in Div
Tried dragging a certain book upon a certain spot in Act 4?
Shoving stuff around is handy to find items or even new possibilities. I like this thrill.
What about the rune manuscripts? Tried to decipher them on your own and find out hints?

And I like the alchemy aspect in this game => gathering plants and having to take care for all sorts for what I wish to do. Only potions? Bah, that's dull.

Furthermore, we can expect <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beyond.gif" alt="" /> and <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/div.gif" alt="" /> as experimental fields, as "trest-drives" for Larian - if they learn from us, the better ! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/winkwink.gif" alt="" />

Didn't Larian also make the Realms of Arkania (under a different name). If so then they have quite a heritage so DD is fairly far down their development timeline. Of course I could be thinking of someone else.

Anyway to address a few points. Alchemy really doesn't do anything for me as it is. It's so basic it's no different to buying/finding a potion. Ideally Alchemy should be the potion equivalent of the spellmaker system in Morrowind. There should also be many more options, such as elemental resistance potions, or even the original posion potions which can be thrown at an enemy. Anyone here ever played the Moria/Nethack type games. I loved the potions in that. So many and you had to drink them all to identify them! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" />
I have disagree with some of the game elements Kiya mentions because it feels bolted on rather than integral to the game. It's like hack&slash, hack&slash, oh we better add a puzzle or useful bit of dialogue for a change, hack&slash. It should be Hack&Slash(or not if you prefer to do it differently), Hack&Slash(or maybe use that sneak skill for a change without losing the experience points gained in combat) and so on. I can forgive Diablo since it only ever pretended to be Hack&Slash. DD and BD though could both be so much more. They get a 'C' for the game but a 'F' for effort.

Let me add that KOTOR whilst looking great was kind of RPG lite I feel. Thankfully the sequel looks to have greater depth and at least turning the your teammates evil! Betrayal at Kondor was dialogue lite, but it had so much freedom it was amazing really, especially when you consider its age. Chapter 1 in BaK for example could be done very quickly or you could spend an age exploring, and it made sense in game terms to do so.

Didn't Larian also make the Realms of Arkania (under a different name). If so then they have quite a heritage so DD is fairly far down their development timeline. Of course I could be thinking of someone else.

Attic Entertainment. Different folks, with a team led by the estimable Guido Henkel (who also was Project Leader for Planescape: Torment until a couple of months before release).

Anyway to address a few points. Alchemy really doesn't do anything for me as it is. It's so basic it's no different to buying/finding a potion.

Agreed. But it isn't a major feature of the game.

Let me add that KOTOR whilst looking great was kind of RPG lite I feel. Thankfully the sequel looks to have greater depth and at least turning the your teammates evil!

The important thing isn't turning your teammates evil, but whether the field of actions you can take increase, and whether these actions have repercussions. Five dialogs that lead back to the same dialog tree trunk are useless. Turning your teammates evil so they can snarl better and attack good guys won't amount to much, unless it opens up different abilities, different goals, and different rewards.

Betrayal at Kondor was dialogue lite, but it had so much freedom it was amazing really, especially when you consider its age.

"When you consider its age"? Though far leaner on visual options, at least a few earlier games had far greater options because they were designed before the air-tight boxes of modern, consolidated game publishers were built. Check out Chris Crawford's 1980s titles, for instance, and his extraordinary ability to create quickly shifting alliances and emotions among AI players. Or Will Wright's first SimCity. Or Garriott's Ultima VII. Or Jim Gasparini's complex Hidden Agenda, with its uncanny ability to mimic the tensions and complexities of Central American culture.

[b]Chapter 1 in BaK for example could be done very quickly or you could spend an age exploring, and it made sense in game terms to do so.[/b}

BaK was a remarkable game, no question. Unfortunately, the team that made it was fired right after the game was released by a Dynamix Vice President who had argued endlessly with the Project Leader. But the game itself did so many things right. Interestingly, none of 'em had to do with the creater of the Krondor books, who stayed aloof from the project. He only got involved in Return to Krondor--and sadly enough, insisted upon a much more stereotypical magic system. The assembly line production of AD&D strikes again!

History of the Lost Kingdom Books

There is everything you need to know about that and some more.

To fable. I understand the team on KOTR 2 is made up of ex Fallout and Torment developers, so lets hope things are good. But to address your comment about meangful dialogue, I'd hope that dialogue is how you turn your teammates evil rather than them just matching the player. I would have liked to have corrupted Mission via her brothers story line in the first game for example. To tie this into Larian. Remember DD. I so knew that the prince was an evil little turd. It was so obvious I expected it to be a bluff. So instead of sucking up to him I would have liked the option call his bluff and smack the git about the head with my twohander. BD2, It's quite clear that the Shaman is a up to no good. Why mess around talking nice to him. Why not put an arrow through his head...problem solved!. Hopefully DD2 will offer that kind of freedom. It takes more work, but I'd rather the time be spent on that than on randomised game elements for example.

Great, the there is no spoon arugment again. No, not going to a philisophical wrangle here. Suit yourself, if you want to think of it as such




Because it gives you decisions to make. I reckoning this from DD's alchemy systems.



So, you don't know about the jamming the pit at the end of the BD demo?

Hack & Slash, you say? Well, I find BD's hack and slash more intelligent than Dungeon Siege or Diablo II, so it is more like think & hack, rather than click & hack. Find me a RPG which doesn't involve any form of hack & slash - and for the record, I will name Harvest Moon. But what else? The game which you have some diligently endorse, Mirrowind for example, spends most of its time hack and slash. Torment too has moments of hack and slash. Most rpgs follow the standard formula of hack and slash, then puzzles.

[qupte]
Let me add that KOTOR whilst looking great was kind of RPG lite I feel. Thankfully the sequel looks to have greater depth and at least turning the your teammates evil! [/quote]

Apparently we two shares different tastes. I have scant regard for KoTR. The game is ridiclously easy, the weapons unbalanced and well, I have this thing about D20 -- all you need to do to be uber is to pump Strength.

At any rate, this has been an enlightening discussion.

Interesting thread, lot's of great answers here which have helped me. I just recieved <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beyond.gif" alt="" /> today in the post. I understand it's a bit buggy at the moment so I'm going to wait awhile before installing. I'm busy playing Sacred at the moment, yeah I know that's buggy as well, but I'm still enjoying playing the game, and to be honest most of the bugs havn't affected me as I only play SP. I absolutely loved <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/div.gif" alt="" /> but now realise I will have to play BD as a completely new game and not expect it to be DD2. Although the sooner they make DD2 the better. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif" alt="" />

So you're doing as I am--setting aside <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beyond.gif" alt="" /> for a bit, and playing Sacred until the bug and balance issues are resolved? GMTA. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif" alt="" /> I did play through Act I of <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beyond.gif" alt="" /> and have to say that Sacred doesn't come near it in sophistication or complexity as a game. Visually, hell, Sacred is superb. And its interface is better. Other than that, there's no comparison. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beyond.gif" alt="" /> has so much more to offer, in my opinion.

I just hope I enjoy <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beyond.gif" alt="" /> as much as <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/div.gif" alt="" />, but yes I'm waiting for the bugs to be ironed out. Although I'm just messing with Sacred at the moment as I'm waiting for patch 1.7. I seem to spend my life waiting for patches. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" /> I am seriously considering re-installing <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/div.gif" alt="" /> untill both games are fully playable, I miss the music. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I just purchased the fan pack from Digital Jesters which includes the Kirill's music from DD and an autographed copy of "Child of Chaos" by Rhianna Pratchett. (The whole set cost $19.99, which I think is a decent price). Here's the website if you're interested. Beyond Divinity Fan Pack (in US Dollars)


Faralas <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/mage.gif" alt="" />

why should i bother? your call kid!

soooooooooooo much more!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/up.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif" alt="" />

To address the Hack and Slash. Yes of course Torment had HS. It wouldnt be a RPG if it hadn't, but it was heavy on the intellectual stuff as well. Fallout was probably even heavier. My point is that there need to be other alternatives throughout the games, and conversation, thief skills, and just plain old lateral thinking should allow other ways of doing stuff rather than just killing critters. Morrowind was primarily HS, but it had some very clever elements in regards to potions and magic which kept me entertained for a while, though I soon found it a chore to have to stop and kill cliffracers every 50 yards.

As to KOTR. Yes it was pretty easy. Dumbed down for the XBOX and I'm not afraid to say so! But on the otherhand it looked glorious and the Star Wars thing helps. Plus the story was fairly good. I wouldn't say the weapons were unbalanced, especially since your enemies used them as well.

While I'm on a roll...Magic needs to do more than just be a way to hurt monsters and heal yourself, otherwise it's just a fancy sword. I quite liked the way magic in BG2TOB was used, but that was mainly because enemy spellcasters had such an impressive array of spells it forced your team to have counterspells, and counter-counterspells etc.