No it isn't. In BG1 you naturally explore maps, which open new maps in an organic way. Go west, go further through the mountains, maybe head south this time and open a new map, like a real adventure. BG2 is literally bounce from set piece to set piece.
Can we get an exact explanation on what you mean when you say that BG2 'literally' bounces from 'set piece to set piece'? What exactly is a 'set piece' in your opinion?
Can we get an exact explanation on what you mean when you say that BG2 'literally' bounces from 'set piece to set piece'? What exactly is a 'set piece' in your opinion?
Don't you find the combat super boring in BG1 compare to BG2?Am I the only one who enjoys both ? Should I have walls built in my brain to be more normal ? Help me codex !
Their one great game of the original Baldur's Gate has been unmatched since and there's a reason everyone agrees with me. .
Not really. Opponents are less interesting in 1 but you die easier, so it makes up for it.Don't you find the combat super boring in BG1 compare to BG2?
I get that roaming the landscape is charming for you, but isnt that more of an open world-type game, rather than a story-driven RPG?Can we get an exact explanation on what you mean when you say that BG2 'literally' bounces from 'set piece to set piece'? What exactly is a 'set piece' in your opinion?
A set piece is a map like in Mass Effect. You don't explore the world in a natural way, you don't go from map to map looking for adventure. You pick a map, are transported there and it's built to be a quest with a simple working of - get quest, do quest, kill boss, etc.. Go back to the hub, restock/buy/whatever, go on to the next one. Each map in BG2 is a set piece for some quest rather than roaming the landscape looking for things. Yes, the things to find in BG1 are sparse and small in comparison, but that is what makes it charming. You're just exploring rather than going from quest map to quest map.
I get that roaming the landscape is charming for you, but isnt that more of an open world-type game, rather than a story-driven RPG?
OK. Doesn't that contradict your title? You said it yourself, that it's a difference of pacing and atmosphere, rather than 'good' and 'bad.I get that roaming the landscape is charming for you, but isnt that more of an open world-type game, rather than a story-driven RPG?
Well yeah. It's kind of like the difference between Morrowind (free-roam, no pressure exploration) and Oblivion (immediate action, need to close Oblivion gates, Kvatch, etc..) It's a difference in pacing and atmosphere. I personally prefer the relaxing, open exploration of something like the first BG over the "Quick, everyone needs help ASAP!!" style of BG2. They overcompensated in the second game just like Bethesda did thinking their players didn't want another relaxing, eased in start. They went quick for the "EPIC ASAP!!" thing and it ruined the game (for me, your mileage may vary.)
But what about being so low level and only having very limited magic?Not really. Opponents are less interesting in 1 but you die easier, so it makes up for it.Don't you find the combat super boring in BG1 compare to BG2?
He needs the soul (or a fragment of such) of a god, not just an elf's soul.Fresh from a replay of BG2:
- BG2 story is less coherent and there are huge plot holes. Why Irenicus needs exactly your soul? Can't he just steal an elf's? Why doesn't he react to you killing Bodhi?
- BG2 main plot is also less intimate and less rewarding. Imoen this Imoen that.
- Late game is seriously missing content. I loved the Underdark, but Ust Natha is small and with little to do. Same with everything after ChapII (Brynnlaw, the Sea City...)
- Athankla feels less than a city than Baldur's gate.
- Extremely railroaded after ChaptII.
- High level ADnD is just less funny.
Whereas BG1 fans don't display any fanatical characteristics at all, no sirIt might be easier for people who like BG1 better to simply agree that BG2 is better. Otherwise it will just keep going. The BG2 people are complete fanatics.
OK. Doesn't that contradict your title? You said it yourself, that it's a difference of pacing and atmosphere, rather than 'good' and 'bad.
Just as a reminder, your title is:
"BG2 is overrated, not as good as BG1 and is not a top 10 CRPG"
Whereas a more reasoned title might be:
"I prefer the relaxing, open exploration of BG1 over the EPIC ASAP!! style of BG2"
The fuck would an elfs soul do? he wants a bhaalspawns soul. There are thousands, you are just the one he managed to find first.- BG2 story is less coherent and there are huge plot holes. Why Irenicus needs exactly your soul? Can't he just steal an elf's? Why doesn't he react to you killing Bodhi?
Wut? This is bullshit. First game is about sarevok, second game is about irenicus. Imoen doesnt matter and you can tell her to fuck off.BG2 main plot is also less intimate and less rewarding. Imoen this Imoen that.
The thing about this is that you can do all the quests in chapter 2, or you do them in chapter 5. Tho i agree, theres just not enough of baldurs gate 2, more content would have been nice..Late game is seriously missing content. I loved the Underdark, but Ust Natha is small and with little to do. Same with everything after ChapII (Brynnlaw, the Sea City...)
Extremely railroaded after ChaptII.
Well, yeah, higher stakes. Plus BG2 gave us a much darker story.High level ADnD is just less funny.
I thought BG1 was shit too, but BG2 is a very different game believe it or not. I suggest you try it.I have not played BG2 but BG1 was the most overrated piece of shit Codex-recommended cRPG I've ever played. A 6/10 if I've ever seen one.
The beast reveals himself...Fellas, the title is just trolling...It got 11 pages of discussion, so I guess it worked.
Not really. Opponents are less interesting in 1 but you die easier, so it makes up for it.