Larian Studios Forums Beyond Divinity (English) General Convince me

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.