Personally I think that this game is too small

Remove all ads!

yes to small and one dimensional.
has any1 played fallout1,2? the most important advantage of this game over any other rpg i have played is freedom of movement.. the non-restricted world map. go and explore yourself! not just to npc revieled world map places. this makes you feel straight lined... and starts to annoy...
and another thing: most exp get from quests not kills... and another: no infinite monster respawning. and too few dragons. more hacknslash in free moved world map...
havnet played bg2 on internet multiplaer... any comments on that btw? i suppse quite boring isnt it?

 

Well, you just ruled out about 75% of games, in most genres, most are that way so you must not like many games?

 

If you don't like it Kasio F#@k off

 

Not Enough Dragons? I think 5 is too many. Not to mention that the ones that are there are much too easy to kill.

 

As ignorance is known to be the best weapon against low language i ll leave out of consideration SilverDragons reply and return to my main point:
The MAYOR SETBACK OF THIS GAME is: non freely explorable WORLD MAP. (An ideal would be map like in Fallout1,2, but 5 times larger). Please, pretty please Interplay, Wizards, Isle - MAKE ONE FOR US in NWN. Thats the only what misses here.

 

oh.. and ezmer..5 dragons would be enough... there are 3 only.. and thats not enough...
i would want 15 - 20 dragons...
The game is on 4 cds... 1st baldur was on 6 cd!!!
a regression!

 

I have to speak up for Kasio a bit here. I might not agree with everything you say but the comments about lack of freedom are valid and a concern to many people who have been to this forum. Perhaps its just that we were spoiled in the Fallout and BG1 games. Anyway, before you crucify poor Kasio have a read of some earlier posts that discussed BG2 limitations in depth:
http://www.sorcerers.net/ubb/Forum2/HTML/001962.html
http://www.sorcerers.net/ubb/Forum2/HTML/001760.html

Of course, this works two ways. It's easier to have a stronger storyline if you allow the player less real freedom, and some people prefer that. It's probably for this reason why some people prefer Planescape Torment to BG2:
http://www.sorcerers.net/ubb/Forum3/HTML/000092.html

In the end it all comes down to personal taste and no matter how good a game is, there will always be some things you wish they had done differently or improved. Chances are there are a load of other people who will want the opposite as you - poor game designers.

Finally most of us suffer from the 'rose tinted glasses of nostalgia' when comparing a new game to one we used to love.

Anyway, I'm waffling, which is not good for my first post back in ages. Kasio has a valid point so don't give him/her such a hard time.

 

I havent played not heard much about BG1..
Slappy, was this game with world Map of Fallout type, or strong single-lined as in BG2??????

 

Please reply urgently, cause if BG1 has Fallout-type map, i am immediatly erasing BG2 and running to buy BG1 (also immediately)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Opps, Just read Kasio's comments about Dragons (are posts crossed in the typing). I better warn you about a likely barrage of posts correcting you on this one. There are indeed 5 (five) Dragons in the game.

SPOILER!!!!

The Red Dragon in the Windspear Hills quest (Lord Fikraag - spelling)
Shadow Dragon under the Temple Ruins in the Umar Hills quest.
Silver Dragon in the Underdark near Ust Natha (spelling)
Black Dragon in the woodland clearing outside of Suldanessellar (I don't know about these spellings)
Green Dragon in Hell.

 

Kasio, for the BG1 maps, take a look here:
http://www.sorcerers.net/Games/BG/index_maps.php

Sorcerer's place always has what you need . When you start the game, you only see the parts of the map that you are on and have visited but you are free to explore in any direction. So if you go South, the areas to the south of where you are become available, etc. In this way you can eventually explore the whole map (there are a few quest specific locations to keep the storyline intact but not many).

Comparing to BG2, you see less of the map to start with but have much more freedom to go and explore where you want to. Other differences to BG2 are you start with much less experience (level 1) so no superpowerful spells, etc. Of course, the monsters you meet are scaled to reflect the lower level charcaters (so no Dragons). There is also much less interaction with the party NPC (this was BG2 bigest break through in my opinion). You also miss out on the little handy additions like stackable inventory slots, spell cases, gem bags, stuck in 640*480 resolution, etc.

Read the discussions I posted links to above to get a feel for the differences and also check out the BG1 forum and game sections here at Sorcerer's.

Finally, remember that BG1 has been out for a while so you should be able to buy it on budget (normally with the add-on pack Tales of the Sword Coast included). If you don't know where to get it, try buying through this site and Amazon. Have fun.
http://www.sorcerers.net/Games/index.php

 

Although informative, I think that Slappy's post is a bit unclear. As to the answer of your immediate question, YES. BG1 allows you to wander freely.

 

but with bg1 they put all of those areas in the main game and left no room for the expansion, to make more money they didnt wanna make this mistake again.. thus they only had a few "needed" areas so that when the expansion came they could add more.

 

this was the BG1 world map? http://www.sorcerers.net/Games/BG/image.php?image=swordmap.jpg

yeah seems to be larger than in BG2, but still not enough

what do you say.. no stackable items? this menas? every healing potion takes 1 slot?!

 

I think you need to pick up that super, boundary braking game, oh, whats it called? Diablo 2, yes, thats it! none of this 'thinking' rubbish. Hack n Slash is the way forward!!! (by the way if you have'nt guessed, i'm being SARCASTIC)

 

Hey Kasio, I just think that you're not so far in the game yet...
You've only encountered 3 dragons, so that means that you've still got a lot of exploring to do. At first I also thought that the map was small, but then I explored more and more, and now I think it's big.
And besides, it isn't about the size of the world where you're in, it's the gameplay that is the most important and I just want to say this: BG2 F*CK*NG ROCKS

 

Diablo2 sucks a lot. The only chance in my eyes for this game would be straight medieval (preferably Early Medieval) weapnry, armor, enemies etc design.
My eyes bleed seeing paladin in shining heavy jousting armor (you know knights were saddled on horses using special devices, because of their armor weight approx 70-90 kg, 160-190 pounds), running fast through the jungle(!?) and slashing leprechauns(!?) in red shorts (!?) who die calling "Caletto!"
1st diablo was more tolerable...
(as you see i am ignoring your sarcasm)...

 

Actually, medieval armour wasn't as heavy as we think today. The knights where quite easily able to mount their horses themselves, and there were examples of more agile knights making handstands while wearing full armour. But it still dosn't compare to leather armour when it comes to movement, so in this direction diablo 2 is grossly exagerating.

 

Sorry Kasio, looks like I had a bit of brainfade on the stackability thing. I thought it didn't allow you to stack spell scrolls or jewellery (potions and arrows, etc are ok). However, I've just loaded up a saved game to check and it looks like you can stack anything (of the same type). Maybe I'm getting old and the memory is failing (or maybe it was something they improved with the add-on pack). Anyway, whatever it was you don't get the freedom that BG2 allows with its bags and scroll cases - I never found it a real problem though just a bit of an inconvinience at times.

PS thanks Lothar, yep I was waffling a bit, thanks for clearing that up.

[This message has been edited by Slappy (edited May 03, 2001).]

 

Grov:
have you ever been dressed in such armor or seen it?
Full armor at least 80-90 kg. (helm, chainmail, plate mail, leggings)
I have been dressed in chainmail once. it was 20 kg. Full armor + shield + sword = at least 120 kg

[This message has been edited by kasio (edited May 03, 2001).]