BG compared to BG2

Remove all ads!

so im curious ... wich one does every one like more baldurs gate or baldurs gate two

 

BG2, just the romances gives it a +
And the way you can talk with your NPC's .. It's like they are alive

Thump up for BG2

 

im going to have to agree the 1st ones scenery was funnier as was it beginning and it had mor nice forest scenes but the bg2 is better because of the romances and the exellant npc interactions thks for responding . . . .

 

When asking that on the BGII forum, the outcome will probably be BGII

 

Basically, BG2 is better at everything in every way (in a technical aspect, fights, NPCs etc), but what I think BG1 excelled at and Surpassed its sequel in is Plot progression, which was good in BG2 but in no way had the tension or revelations that BG1 had, and secondly a good master villain. Don't get me wrong, Jonny was great as the evil mage, but I just felt that we knew he was the villain from the very start of the game, we chased him around for a while then killed him a few times. I was kinda expecting more (I have been telling many a person that a really good ending would have been Imoen letting Bhaal's taint overcome her and us having to fight her in the final battle, but that's a story for another day)

[This message has been edited by Memosarks (edited July 01, 2002).]

 

In terms of plot BG knocks the pants off SoA. Saverok's plan is so sly it'd make the Emperor from Star Wars weep. The intrigue... all the different organisations involved (Zhentrium, Chill, Black Talons, Iron Throne, Seven Suns etc.) and the different characters in the overarching plot make the intial experience brilliant. However with that said BG2 has similar intrigue with the Shadow Thieves and such as like but it doesn't unravel in quite the same way.

I played SoA BEFORE BG and thus found the original difficult at first. Having such low level character makes for much reloading. Let us examine the pros and cons of each:

Baldur's Gate

Pros: More NPCs
Better Plot
Greater sense of achievement
Not as linear

Cons: The blackened out maps... took a while to get used to, I'd rather areas like Cities and towns to already be laid out.

Not much good equiptment about

NPC pairs... what a pain!

Baldur's Gate 2

Pros: Better graphics
Better and more voice acting
Map already laid out in Amn
Better equiptment
Higher levels

Cons: More linear
Smaller game (although its still bloody big)
Fewer NPCs (and lack of thieves/ evil aligned chars)
The Dungeon at the start
Only really in Amn for Chapter's 2 and 6.

Difficult call I'd say. Best take them both with Throne of Bhaal and call it the best RPG saga ever on PC.

 

Technically BG2. Besides, BG2 has all sorts of additional (useless) features like romances and strongholds, if you like that sort of thing. There's also less empty maps (luckily the forest maps after underdark can be skipped), and the dungeons aren't as hard to navigate in (wider, and I once sat for hours in Durlag's Tower and the school dungeon, because I couldn't spot two turns... Sigh.) The only bad things compared to BG is that BG2 is riddled with high level mages for which you need to use spells that do *nothing* but remove protections, and several places are unnavigable (like the shadow forest, can't see what's a tree and what's normal ground in there.)

 

well for me shadows of amn i just like it a little better and the items in shadows are just more awesome in comparison to baldurs

 

I agree with Badge, the weapons are so much more powerful and fun to use in Bg2 than they were in Bg1. Also you have access to about double the spells.

 

Call me a nostalgic, but one of the things I like most from ol'BG is the lack of extra-powerful weapons. You could well run into a monster you weren't prepared to fight with. In SoA you are always prepared to face the next monster. And I think BG's plot was excellent.

Besides this, NPC interactions and romances take SoA to the same level as BG.

 

agrees with calman.....

Both are great games, but I liked the forests, and the mosters in bg1. But spells and romances are fun...

 

I reckon that BG1 is more fune due to starting at lower levels, its harder. BG11 on normal is too easy and the weopons are too powerful.

 

Both BG and BG2 have their pluses but BG2 just has so many more:
Better graphics
Better NPCs
More monsters (lots)
Better spells
Etc.
BG has one huge plus that BG2 doesn't have: better music, by far!

 

BG1 was *THE* D&D in it's day. There's no question about that.

BG2 is, without a doubt, a refined BG1. The NPC's really make all the difference in the gameplay. It's not like everyone _hates_ BG1, it's just that BG2 adds so much more to it that it really makes the game much more alive.

Personally, I like the opening story of BG1 a little better; the dungeon just doesn't do it for me. But BG2-chapter2/3 really shines.

 

I would have to say that BG2 is more fun, but BG1 is verl close, they are both excellent lets see:

BG1
I love the greater exploration factor (so many areas)
more mysterious (you dont even know you are a half god!)
More NPC's some better than BG2 (imagine Xzar, and Montaron with the NPC interaction of BG2 )
Call be a freak but I liked it better when small shield were round...
BG2
Kits
Added Race and classes
NPC interaction
Better graphics
More equipment
Better creatures
you get the point

To make BG2 better I would say add more areas like in BG1 like the endless forests, add a bunch of quests, more NPC's with intresting scriptcs, and make more divers NPC's. (I dont care for having 3 mage/thief NPC's, I want to see a Fighter/Mage, a Necromancer, and so on and so forth) But overall I like BG2 better.