What do you think about BG2?

[Delirious Nomad]

At release I thought it was the better game compared to PST. Today I stopped caring for both of them.

 

[jagged-jimmy]

DnD combat distracts me from playing it

 

[Longshanks]

great game, absolutely loved it. Also very good for mp.

God hates the fags that hate the game without a doubt.

C'mon Pastel/Lumpy stop trolling. You're attracting undesirables :wink:.

I'll rate it not bad - as in "above average". Though, comes close to pretty good.

Good:
- some nice encounters which made combat enjoyable at times
- graphics
- Irenicus was kinda cool
- strongholds

Bad:
- weak on consequences
- too many fake choices
- mostly bad dialogue
- poor, annoying attempts at humour
- mostly annoying NPCs
- far too many "trash" encounters

 

[Ebonsword]

Another thing that I really like about BG2 (and most of the other Infinity Engine games) is how you can import custom portraits and sound files in for your characters.

That is such a cool level of customization. 99% of the people that played the game probably never took advantage of it, but I always found it a very fun little feature to play around with (it's kind of amusing to run around with Darth Vader, Fairuza Balk, and Church from Red vs Blue in your party).

 

[Pastel]

That is such a cool level of customization. 99% of the people that played the game probably never took advantage of it, but I always found it a very fun little feature to play around with (it's kind of amusing to run around with Darth Vader, Fairuza Balk, and Church from Red vs Blue in your party).

But 99% of people are sane tbqh.

 

[Balthamael]

When you claim something that you know isn't true, it is lying. Just admit it.

Actually, there needs to be intent to deceive. I could claim that the sky in Finland, unlike everywhere else, is green. This would be an untrue statement, but it wouldn't be a lie because I could not expect anyone to believe it. Hence no intent to deceive anyone, and no lie. Similarly, true statements can be lies, if they are intended to deceive. I could claim I am actually president Barack Obama, and this would only be a lie if indeed that is who I am. Because the only idea that statement could possibly give to you is that I most certainly am not Obama and probably not anyone else famous either.

Thus ends our lesson in human communication.

 

[Liberal]

The sky in Finland is piss yellow. Everyone knows that.

 

[BethesdaLove]

Lumply

 

[nomask7]

To each his own.

You sound stingy, not liberal. Why is that?

 

[Liberal]

To each his own.

You sound stingy, not liberal. Why is that?

It's the other way around.

 

[Wyrmlord]

When you claim something that you know isn't true, it is lying. Just admit it.

"Admit it"? I was not the one who made the statement you referred to about +7 swords on rats.

I have not even played BG2. I can't comment on it, one way or another, whether it's good or bad.

What I was saying is: maybe it's a joking exaggerated way of saying that he found loot to easy to find in the game. Of course, phat loot will never be found on rats, which is why it was more likely a joke.

Like, when one guy links another guy to a shock site, that guy might respond, "I'll kill you if you ever do that again."

He doesn't actually mean it. He won't actually kill the guy. He was just so shocked that he made a joke about the extremities of the emotion he jokingly threatened to kill him.

It is called hyperbole. It is used very often in the English language.

 

[nomask7]

To each his own.

You sound stingy, not liberal. Why is that?

It's the other way around.

My own is very little. Can't you give me more? Oh I see. You are evil and twist words, "Liberal".

 

[Liberal]

To each his own.

You sound stingy, not liberal. Why is that?

It's the other way around.

My own is very little. Can't you give me more?

Earn it.

 

[zerotol]

great game, absolutely loved it. Also very good for mp.

God hates the fags that hate the game without a doubt.

C'mon Pastel/Lumpy stop trolling. You're attracting undesirables :wink:.

..... right, i just registered

 

[Serus]

When you claim something that you know isn't true, it is lying. Just admit it.

"Admit it"? I was not the one who made the statement you referred to about +7 swords on rats.

I have not even played BG2. I can't comment on it, one way or another, whether it's good or bad.

What I was saying is: maybe it's a joking exaggerated way of saying that he found loot to easy to find in the game. Of course, phat loot will never be found on rats, which is why it was more likely a joke.

Like, when one guy links another guy to a shock site, that guy might respond, "I'll kill you if you ever do that again."

He doesn't actually mean it. He won't actually kill the guy. He was just so shocked that he made a joke about the extremities of the emotion he jokingly threatened to kill him.

It is called hyperbole. It is used very often in the English language.

It is Volo you are talking to, you know that, right ?



BG2 is somewhere between not bad and pretty good.

Bad:
Shitty dialogues,
Not many real choices,
Linear,
Stupid romances

???:
Some NPC are annoying BUT there are a lot of them and you can avoid the worst ones, Jan Jansen or Edwin were ok, even amusing sometimes;
Combat system and character development is d&d - i strongly dislike this system as pnp BUT it works suprisingly well in BG2;
Setting is generic fantasy, forgotten realms - you can't be more cliche than this but it is not bad in BG2 (i hated BG1 tough) - the main villain is interesting and you can never go wrong with vampires;

Good:
It is big - i like big (breasts, RPGs, whatever...), there is a lot to explore, locations are varied; many items too find and spells to learn;
Wonderfull voice acting;
The game is somehow better than the sum of its parts, good design i guess.

 

[Squeek]

Baldur's Gate was a game a lot of D&D fans had been waiting for, since it offered real-time simulation using the current ruleset and formatted for groups of adventurers. BG2 was an extension and improvement on that. So yeah, it was pretty awesome at the time.

I was very happy to play a game where stuff I had only imagined up until then was being played out on the screen in real time. It was merely a novelty, but a very pleasing one. The second game did a great job of thoroughly experimenting with that and should be considered a classic for it, IMO.

But Baldur's Gate along with a handful of other great CRPGs made at the time went too far with the simulation. They set the benchmark that every other CRPG then had to meet, and it was just too high in terms of visual aesthetic simulation.

Graphic depiction is cool, but it's limiting. And there doesn't seem to be any going back. Eventually, I hope the genre splits -- on the one hand continuing to advance down the graphics path while the other takes a step back and uses the computer as a tool to enhance depiction where more is left to the imagination.

 

[almondblight]

Pressur ehas tgot a drop on you.

But the bullshit dryad talk at the beginning did suk/. "oh, he is made bacuasue he lost "herrrrr"....you know." Mysterya! Yeah I'm drunk. But that sucked. And beuing born special sucks too. Why can't we have family relationships if we are not born to gods? What about just a drunk brother that hates us, and a mother that stole all the money or something. Why always either my father is a god, BG2, or no one cares, Fallout etc.

Presssuuuuuure drop, yeah, I'm drunk.

 

[nomask7]

1. Your character, the protagonist, is a child of the dead God of Murder, who was condemned to walk the earth in mortal form during a cataclysmic era known as the Time of Troubles.

In other words, a hero with secret potential, a special ability that's both a curse and a blessing. He can either use it responsibly or turn to evil. Sounds like something taken straight from a Marvel comic. Yep, pretty standard fare. The flimsy details themselves, which serve to explain how the hero got his powers, sound like something you can read about in dozens of shitty fantasy novels, which doesn't matter if you never read, I guess.

2. One of your main companions is an addled berzerking ranger who has mistaken his normal hamster companion for the Giant Space variety.

In other words, the game developers thought that a small quirk could substitute for real character. A pretty elementary mistake for beginning writers. Might not matter if you never read.

3. Spend a crapload of development in creating a stronghold, each with a significant quest chain, for each and every class in the game

For each and every class? You mean like three or four? Anyway, I never was a fan of SimCity. Spending time managing a city or stronghold is particularly inapt in a story where you're supposed to be in a hurry.

4. Actually full developed romances, to the point where you can even have -children- with an available romance option, and where you can have as many as three or four dozen romance-specific dialogues with up to three female characters (and a male one). This is totally unoriginal, of course.

Romances in general are not only unoriginal (duh!), implementing them as something optional and irrelevant in a game like that is a complete waste of time for the developers.

5. Your protagonist's peculiar constitution actually allows you to access some intrinsic, and horribly evil, powers that make you amazingly powerful, but if you use them too much, can have permanent delibitating effects.

Is that BG2 or ToB you're talking about? Anyway, we've been through that already. It seemed more like an afterthought than a significant detail of the story. The story itself is, of course, either a revenge story or a coming-of-age story, depending on which sort of character you play, with a save-the-princess story thrown in for good measure. The hidden powers function as a flimsy plot device. The whole farce is so far removed from MotB in every way that it's almost tragic to see someone attempt comparisons between the two.

 

[Qwinn]

In other words, a hero with secret potential, a special ability that's both a curse and a blessing. He can either use it responsibly or turn to evil. Sounds like something taken straight from a Marvel comic.

Exactly like what you hail as the wonder of creative writing, MotB. Are you -trying- to parody yourself?

You appear to be another Codexer who longs for the RPG where the protagonist is a beta male who lives alone with his two cats, gets beaten up by the mailman, and gets wedgies from the arch villain's girlfriend. Talking about assuming uncomfortable roles, is it really necessary that the protagonist be just like you?

In other words, the game developers thought that a small quirk could substitute for real character. A pretty elementary mistake for beginning writers. Might not matter if you never read.

He's one of -many- NPC's. Some have depth, others don't, just like real people. Acting as if every single person in the world is a fountain of wisdom and poetic prose is an example even beginning writers are usually smart enough to evade.

Spending time managing a city or stronghold is particularly inapt in a story where you're supposed to be in a hurry.

Said logic being just as applicable to -every- side quest in any game. So, yeah, an RPG sucks unless every single quest is tied directly to the main quest. Why are they wasting their time doing those otherwise? That's what everyone wants, unwavering linearity! Seriously, the "perfect game" you are apparently pining for sounds like the worst piece of shit I've ever heard of.

For each and every class? You mean like three or four?

Uh, no, there are distinct individual strongholds with individual quest chains for fighters, paladins, rangers, mages, druids, clerics, thieves, and bards. That's not all the classes there are, of course, some share a stronghold. And that doesn't include the class kits, which every one of those classes has at least 3 of.

You know what? I'm gonna stop with this one. If you think BG2 has only 3 or 4 classes, you -obviously- don't even have the remotest -clue- what you're talking about. It's in fact impossible to believe that you've ever even played the game, to make such a monumentally ignorant statement. You are officially completely talking out of your ass.

Is that BG2 or ToB you're talking about?

In case there was any doubt... you gain the ability to transform into the Slayer in Spellhold, which you can get to very early in BG2. Yeah. You don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about.

Qwinn

 

[Liberal]

If someone likes to think ANY character in ANY Bioware game EVER had depth, let them. Tastes differ. Some people find the taste of human excrements quite engaging.

 

[Darth Roxor]

Said logic being just as applicable to -every- side quest in any game. So, yeah, an RPG sucks unless every single quest is tied directly to the main quest. Why are they wasting their time doing those otherwise? That's what everyone wants, unwavering linearity! Seriously, the "perfect game" you are apparently pining for sounds like the worst piece of shit I've ever heard of.

The truth is right here folks. Betrayal at Krondor is the worst piece of shit ever created.

 

[Qwinn]

If someone likes to think ANY character in ANY Bioware game EVER had depth, let them. Tastes differ. Some people find the taste of human excrements quite engaging.

Compared to the level of depth you can find in characters in novels, of course they're not very deep in most cases. But the thing is, the characters in -other- games that get praised for great writing and deep characters really aren't any deeper. Most of the depth you imagine those characters had, you imputed to them in your imagination, cause there really isn't that much detail in -any- game. I'd say a game where characters actually talk to you dozens of times throughout the course are deeper simply for that reason alone. There's actual content for you to base your imagination around.

Everyone around here thinks Arcanum is this amazing RPG. Please, tell me, exactly which characters in Arcanum have this awesome depth? All but maybe three or four of the dozen or two NPC's you can travel with utter at most 3 or 4 lines the entire game, FFS, and not one of those 3 or 4 have more (or better quality) lines than the quietest NPC in BG2. At least in BG2 you know -why- each of the people involved is traveling and risking their life for you. In Arcanum: "Hey, me ogre, this town has good bar, let's go drink!" Now that's depth. Yes, compared to that, Minsc is an extremely deep character.

Qwinn

 

[Liberal]

If someone likes to think ANY character in ANY Bioware game EVER had depth, let them. Tastes differ. Some people find the taste of human excrements quite engaging.

Compared to the level of depth you can find in characters in novels, of course they're not very deep in most cases.

Completely irrelevant comparison. Novels differ and so do games.

Most of the depth you imagine those characters had, you imputed to them in your imagination, cause there really isn't that much detail in -any- game.

No. Imagination starts to work when there is something to work with in the first place. BG characters cannot be taken seriously. They are purely fictional and functional, nothing like the people you meet in real life. Characters in good games - are. If you do not feel the difference between Jaheira and, say, Deionarra, I feel sorry for you.

 

[Qwinn]

Heh, yeah, you're right, if there's one person it's appropriate to accuse of not appreciating Planescape: Torment's virtues around here, clearly it's me.

How about not addressing a straw man comparison and instead answering the one I actually put forward? Arcanum is universally admired around here as a great RPG. Almost all of the NPC's in that game are -really-, -literally- only functional. They have almost nothing to say, and what they do say is completely one-dimensional.

On the other hand, the BG2 characters reveal -some- depth both in the way they interact with the protagonist and each other. There's something -there-, at least. You may not have appreciated the writing, but there was at least some level of detail to them. To claim you didn't like the writing is one thing, but to claim they were purely utilitarian when they actually have more dialogue (and importantly, not JUST with the protagonist) as party NPC's than virtually any game I can think of other than PS:T is ridiculous.

Qwinn

 

[Liberal]

How about not addressing a straw man comparison and instead answering the one I actually put forward? Arcanum...

I do not understand the point of comparing BG to Arcanum, when BG and PST have much more in common. Are you trying to bash Arcanum, sorry, can't help you, never played the game beyong the first town.

they actually have more dialogue (and importantly, not JUST with the protagonist) as party NPC's than virtually any game I can think of other than PS:T is ridiculous.

90% of their dialogue is infantile garbage. BG2 I mean. And the rest presents merely encyclopedial interest. No emotions but the most simplistic ones. Every character either cares not for the PC, or loves him, or buddies with him.

Now tell me, what kind of relationship is there between TNO and Morte? Fall-From-Grace? Even Nordom? Are you able to describe it in two or three words without leaving out important bits? Is it something you see every day between all kinds of people?