BG2 is overrated, not as good as BG1 and is not a top 10 CRPG

[Generic-Giant-Spider]

When I was younger, I vastly preferred BG2 over BG1. It didn't fuck around, you jumped straight in and began owning various monsters and were getting +1 and +2 equipment like it was on clearance. Then as I got older, I started to prefer BG1 which had a much more grounded plot and this was also around the time I began to dislike D&D the higher your levels went and you essentially became a god so the low level adventure was not only captivating despite its simplicity but made normally trivial encounters much more deadly.

Overall, I like BG1 more than BG2. I still think BG2 is a very fine game and does kick the shit out of BG1 on many technical fronts but it feels too grand and overly epic. I used to find those things really cool and amazing, but nowadays just let me investigate an iron shortage and kick the shit out of organized bandit camps in the wilderness.

 

[Theldaran]

I can grant that in 1998 BG was a very big thing.

It wasn't a very impressive story, but it was well carried out for the most part and we we hadn't seen something so well rounded. Besides, where BG1 wins is the atmosphere: the music I feel is superior, and invokes that feeling of delving into something sinister -try navigating the world at night.

So, BG1 is very immersive. But BG2 keeps your hands full, too, in a different way. It's only that there's a greater disconnect between areas. But what happens there is interesting. I also feel BG2 is an incomplete product, but more complete than lots of games at the same time. Just an example, I guess that the Twisted Rune was gonna play a bigger role on it all.

 

[Lilura]

Do you have a longer form of your analysis of BG2 in light of BG1? After reading your Fallout 1 minireview, I’d read it.

You may like to read this analysis. It highlights the strengths of both, but BG wins.

 

[Generic-Giant-Spider]

Besides, where BG1 wins is the atmosphere: the music I feel is superior, and invokes that feeling of delving into something sinister -try navigating the world at night.

I agree with this. BG1 made you feel vulnerable and like at any moment something could come by and fuck your day up.

 

[purpleblob]

I seriously don't understand what's your beef with BG2, Fluent. I'm not going to waste much time on this, because if there is one thing, you are pretty set in stone with your opinion.

Simply put, BG2 is an upgraded version of BG1. Simple as that.

The first one is ultra classic. Second game I can do without. I'd remove it from the Codex top 10 and replace it with Kingmaker and BG1.

Didn't know you represent the whole of Codex

 

[Deleted Member 16721]

When I was younger, I vastly preferred BG2 over BG1. It didn't fuck around, you jumped straight in and began owning various monsters and were getting +1 and +2 equipment like it was on clearance. Then as I got older, I started to prefer BG1 which had a much more grounded plot and this was also around the time I began to dislike D&D the higher your levels went and you essentially became a god so the low level adventure was not only captivating despite its simplicity but made normally trivial encounters much more deadly.

Overall, I like BG1 more than BG2. I still think BG2 is a very fine game and does kick the shit out of BG1 on many technical fronts but it feels too grand and overly epic. I used to find those things really cool and amazing, but nowadays just let me investigate an iron shortage and kick the shit out of organized bandit camps in the wilderness.

If I could rate this post 'Perfect' I would. Well said. Give me the low level D&D exploration and being in awe when you find a +1 or +2 special weapon any day.

 

[Deleted Member 16721]

And what game has the balls to introduce an enormous, central city that the game is named for 50 hours into your adventure? The way they transition you from free wildneress exploration to exploring one of the best made cities in CRPG history is extraordinary. I played the game in 2012 and I'll never forget crossing that bridge and finally getting into the city of Baldur's Gate.

 

[purpleblob]

The city of Baldur's Gate was boring... it was just full of dopplegangers and so many freaking inns in that little space. Each sections of the city didn't have any special characteristics unlike Athkatla.

And in terms of exploration, BG1 was wandering aimlessly around the empty space most of the time, BG2 was visiting exciting places like Underdark, Spellhold, Umar Hills, Windspear Hills etc. It's just the matter of your preference in terms of exploration.

 

[Safav Hamon]

If you like exploration in Baldurs Gate, then you'll love Deadfire. True open world with no restrictions after the starting island.

 

[purpleblob]

Aaannndd getting sick of Silver Coin doppleganger name dropping PoE2 again.

 

[Kyl Von Kull]

Yeah, there are plenty of reasons someone might prefer BG over BG2, but the city ain’t one of them.

It’s a tough comparison because BG2’s design is so schizophrenic. Is it a non-linear RPG bursting at the seams with side quests and even a little C&C like Chapters 2-3, or a fairly linear dungeon crawl like the rest of the game? Chapter 2 of SoA was definitely the high point of the series for me, but BG is better than SoA post-Spellhold.

 

[Safav Hamon]

Whose alt will I be accused of next?

 

[purpleblob]

Forever Silver Coin's

 

[Yosharian]

Can Safav and Fluent be locked into one thread together to contain them from the rest of the forum?

 

[Sykar]

BG 2 is leaps and bounds better in basically every aspect. Graphics, dialogue, story, exploration, itemization, etc. you name it. The so much praised "exploration" in BG 1 devolved around mostly empty maps with a few meaningless trash mops and little loot. This can be charming but only as a reprieve not as a constant sequence drudging through meaningless trash combat after trash combat. Furthermore it is also just as linear as BG 2 masking it by having a bunch of meaningless areas to explore but the main story needs an exact order and in fact couple of areas are gated.

Can Safav and Fluent be locked into one thread together to contain them from the rest of the forum?

But whom would be left on the cRPG forum to rate "retardred"?

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

Pneumonic plague is overrated, not as good as bubonic plague and is not a top 10 disease.

 

[Deleted Member 16721]

Yeah, there are plenty of reasons someone might prefer BG over BG2, but the city ain’t one of them.

It’s a tough comparison because BG2’s design is so schizophrenic. Is it a non-linear RPG bursting at the seams with side quests and even a little C&C like Chapters 2-3, or a fairly linear dungeon crawl like the rest of the game? Chapter 2 of SoA was definitely the high point of the series for me, but BG is better than SoA post-Spellhold.

I love the city of Baldur's Gate. Tons of interactivity, houses and buildings to explore, people to meet. It took me many hours to explore and was a good break from the wilderness exploration. BG1 was just more satisfying to me. I don't need uber epic loot and spells to enjoy, just a good ol' low level D&D campaign and some intrigue, when a +2 anything can be a big deal. Or the sweet success of getting the Helm of Balduran or some great items crafted by the mage. Simple companion quests, no pressure to do things fast, no constant chattering. It's like a cozy friend to revisit and enjoy the company. BG2 is just too epic and fast-paced from the start for me.

 

[purpleblob]

There's the answer - "to you".

I'm glad to hear you enjoyed it, but that doesn't make BG1 better than BG2.

Also, I thought you enjoyed Pathfinder: Kingmaker which has timer associated with lots of quests, including companion quests. So you stating BG1 was more enjoyable since there were "no pressure to do things fast, no constant chattering" is contradicting to your Kingmaker statement.

 

[octavius]

Modded BG 1 > BG 2 > vanilla BG 1.

But the writing is terrible.

And yet it's eminently quotable.

Oh, and I feel like I've had this deja vu before.

 

[Sykar]

I love the city of Baldur's Gate. Tons of interactivity, houses and buildings to explore, people to meet. It took me many hours to explore and was a good break from the wilderness exploration. BG1 was just more satisfying to me. I don't need uber epic loot and spells to enjoy, just a good ol' low level D&D campaign and some intrigue, when a +2 anything can be a big deal. Or the sweet success of getting the Helm of Balduran or some great items crafted by the mage. Simple companion quests, no pressure to do things fast, no constant chattering. It's like a cozy friend to revisit and enjoy the company. BG2 is just too epic and fast-paced from the start for me.

+2 is a big deal in the most boring way. All it does essentially +2 average damage and +2 to to hit. Nothing really changes except for bigger numbers. Much of the "uber loot" you decry brings more to the table than just a little more damage and slightly increased chance to hit. Many have unique properties like instant kill, haste, mirror image, etc. which allows you to uniquely outfit certain party members.
How is BG 2 "fast paced"? The only thing you need to do is raising 20k gold to go after Imoen and Irenicus. Getting the Helm of Balduran is just as sweet as getting the Staff of the Magi, Ring of Gaxx or Lilacor if not sweeter.
Simple companion quests? Most companions in BG 1 did not even have quests. There is also nothing complicated about companion quests since most are straightforward.

Modded BG 1 > BG 2 > vanilla BG 1.

But the writing is terrible.

And yet it's eminently quotable.

Oh, and I feel like I've had this deja vu before.

Modded BG 2 > BG 2 > modded BG 1 > BG 1

 

[a cut of domestic sheep prime]

What's BG1 and BG2? Play BGT and shut up.

 

[Micormic]

I think it's overrated but I still enjoyed it.
BG1 again I enjoyed, but it had problems.

Are either of them in my personal top 10? Probably not but they aren't that far off either. Maybe top 20 for me. Maybe top 30. I don't KNOW.


My major problem with BG2 was aside from the world being sort of detailed and interesting there was a huge fall off in the quality of content once you go to that island to rescue Imoen. That and several nonsensical characters that do nonsensical things. Ie the girl who gives her ancestral family home away to you. The druid who wants to fuck you after her husband died a week earlier. Everything about the Villain and his retarded sister. Lots of dumb stuff.

BG1 was more general content issues. Empty maps which sometimes I didn't mind sometimes it felt lazy. Non logical gated locations(cloakwood). Some repetitive areas(all those mines...).



Of course both had plenty of annoying companions, no need to go into that. Difference is BG1 had a couple cool cats. BG2 outside of Edwin and the Sewer paladin was pretty bleak.

 

[Durian Eater]

BG1 is a better game and a top 10 CRPG though. BG2 is modern Bioware starting to go down the wrong path, IMHO. BG1 feels like a real D&D adventure. I think people like BG2 more because it's flashier, with bigger, over the top spells and higher level D&D content.

I agree with this, if only because what BG2 did differently (a cliche-spouting boogyman supervillain, an even-more-special snowflake PC, the gameworld as a collection of well-crafted locations that didn't really have the feel of an interconnected living world, a time-is-of-the-essence plot coexisting poorly with tons of sidequests, biggerer and betterer superpowers, awkward romances) informed everything they did afterwards, and not for the better. Bioware doing this stuff to death, and doing it less well each time, probably tainted my enjoyment of BG2 in retrospect. But at the time I thought it was the best game ever made.

 

[laclongquan]

What I meant were "cucky" details: off the top of my head, we got Khalid, the whiny weakling being bossed around by his wife.

It's not cucky detail, it's NTR detail. This is Gorion Ward fuck the wife of Khalid, not vice versa. Get your genre straight, for fuck's sake. (actually, it's fuck the new widow, not entireeeely NTR)

BG1 might be good with that tight story and coherent genre (same as Fallout 1) and that's why storyfags love them. But BG2 beat on the strength of gameplay and open end exploration (same as Fallout2), which is why storyfags hate them.

Thus Fluent, being a storyfag, love 1 and hate 2. Not news~

 

[Deleted Member 16721]

Kingmaker is different because it feels closest to BG1 to me so far, with some BG2 later in the game. BG2 starts by bombarding you with things that seem important and time sensitive, and everything is epic!1 right from the start. Then the maps aren't connected well in a coherent way. BG1 really felt like you were exploring and adventuring in the Forgotten Realms. I also prefer lower level content because it's more satisfying. BG2 is just too dense with content. BG1 eases you into it.

And maps being empty is a pro for BG1. There were surprises and not too much stuff around every corner. Nice, relaxing adventure, brah.