Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Baldur's Gate Baldur's Gate 3 Rumors [CONFIRMED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

Deleted Member 16721

Guest
BG1 is superior to BG2. BG2 is simply too dense, too filled to the brim and railroaded that you get no room to breathe and enjoy exploration. There really is no exploration without !important quests! popping up everywhere and set piece areas to explore that are not worth exploring. BG1 was a grand adventure, you explored, yes some maps were empty but who cares, you were immersed in the exploration and adventure of it. BG2 just sucks in comparison to those qualities.

I hope Owlcat would do BG3, or Beamdog. But hey, I'll take a BG3 from any dev and see how they handle it. As long as it's immersive more like the first game than the second, I'll be good with it.
 
JDR13

JDR13

Arcane
Joined
Nov 2, 2006
Messages
4,000
Location
The Swamp
Both games were great, but BG2 was better in most ways. It simply had more of everything - more enemies, more spells, more unique weapons, armors, and special items, high-level abilities, etc. It also had the more interesting locations even if the exploration was less open.

Plus the bestiary was so much more varied and interesting in BG2. The monsters in BG1 were pretty mundane by comparison, and you mostly just fought the same Gnolls, Kobolds, and Hobgoblins over and over again.
 
Lady_Error

Lady_Error

█▓▒░ ░▒▓█
Patron
Joined
Oct 14, 2012
Messages
1,879,250
Lacrymas said:
It's a very good and enjoyable game to (re)play, whose flaws don't detract from that. The same can't be said about recent RtwP offerings, where you have to constantly compromise to squeeze some enjoyment out of them, and that doesn't take into account the technical issues, poor performance and ridiculous loading times.
Click to expand...

You may be right regarding loading times (if you don't have SSD), but Deadfire and Tyranny come pretty close to the quality of the Baldur's Gate games. Just because there are edgelords who still cannot get over their disappointment in PoE1 doesn't mean that later games in that engine didn't improve a lot.
 
Zarniwoop

Zarniwoop

Gorgeousness and gorgeousity made flesh
Patron
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
19,324
Shadorwun: Hong Kong
Tranny is miles better than Pillars of Eternal Paths and waaay better than Numanuma.

Only problem with it is being too short and combat being ridiculously easy compared to PoE or Pathfinder:Frustrationmaker (on hard)
 
Lacrymas

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
18,839
Pathfinder: Wrath
Tyranny and Deadfire have this immature, amateurish quality to them. This mostly has to do with the writing, but the pacing and structure also show signs of that. You aren't on а grand adventure in DF, you are in the kindergarten sandbox. Tyranny is much the same way, with only the first act C&C being above average. They definitely do not come close to BG2, let alone BG1.
 
Zarniwoop

Zarniwoop

Gorgeousness and gorgeousity made flesh
Patron
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
19,324
Shadorwun: Hong Kong
Lacrymas said:
Tyranny and Deadfire have this immature, amateurish quality to them. This mostly has to do with the writing, but the pacing and structure also show signs of that. You aren't on а grand adventure in DF, you are in the kindergarten sandbox. Tyranny is much the same way, with only the first act C&C being above average. They definitely do not come close to BG2, let alone BG1.
Click to expand...

At least in Tranny you get the purple ending, red ending or FUCK YOU, YOU'RE NOT MY REAL DAD endings, based on your choices.
 
Lacrymas

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
18,839
Pathfinder: Wrath
It's not the same thing. BG1 has a "table-top with a not very creative DM" feel, while DF and Tyranny feel like a bunch of 15-year-old teenagers playing in the kiddy sandbox, trying to be mature. DF is Joss Whedon-esque, complete with smarmy "witticisms" and one-liners. It's what young, not very smart Americans steeped in modern popular culture would make and oh, boy, does it show. Tyranny exhibits this perfectly, the writers don't have a clue what they are writing about and don't have enough/varied life experience to do such a heavy topic justice, and the end result is apparent.

BG1 is also not immature, it's a reasonable campaign and the writing doesn't grate most of the time. It might not be all that good, but it isn't cringe-y. It doesn't try to tackle questions of colonialism, evil, the psychological and economic consequences of war, justice, personal responsibility in a seemingly unjust system, and whatever else they tried to do with DF and Tyranny.
 
Last edited:
Lacrymas

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
18,839
Pathfinder: Wrath
Controversial opinion - Beamdog would do a better job than most studios right now. Siege of Dragonspear is better than both PoEs (maybe not WM), both Divinities and especially better than the rest of the garbage that has recently come out from AA studios. I still haven't played Kingmaker yet, so I don't know about Owlcat.
 
Roguey

Roguey

Codex Staff
Staff Member
Sawyerite
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
36,888
Lacrymas said:
It's not the same thing. BG1 has a "table-top with a not very creative DM" feel, while DF and Tyranny feel like a bunch of 15-year-old teenagers playing in the kiddy sandbox, trying to be mature. DF is Joss Whedon-esque, complete with smarmy "witticisms" and one-liners. It's what young, not very smart Americans steeped in modern popular culture would make and oh, boy, does it show. Tyranny exhibits this perfectly, the writers don't have a clue what they are writing about and don't have enough/varied life experience to do such a heavy topic justice, and the end result is apparent.

BG1 is also not immature, it's a reasonable campaign and the writing doesn't grate most of the time. It might not be all that good, but it isn't cringe-y. It doesn't try to tackle questions of colonialism, evil, the psychological and economic consequences of war, justice, personal responsibility in a seemingly unjust system, and whatever else they tried to do with DF and Tyranny.
Click to expand...
:hmmm:

BG tried (and succeeded) in being melodramatic and its writing reflects nerd culture at the time. https://baldursgate.fandom.com/wiki/Cultural_references Cringe is subjective.

Lacrymas said:
Controversial opinion - Beamdog would do a better job than most studios right now. Siege of Dragonspear is better than both PoEs (maybe not WM), both Divinities and especially better than the rest of the garbage that has recently come out from AA studios. I still haven't played Kingmaker yet, so I don't know about Owlcat.
Click to expand...
Everything good about SoD came solely from aVENGER who no longer works for them.
 
Riddler

Riddler

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jan 5, 2009
Messages
2,394
Bubbles In Memoria
Roguey said:
Everything good about SoD came solely from aVENGER who no longer works for them
Click to expand...

This much I can at least agree with. What is he doing now? Would love to play something more made by him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom