Originally posted by fable I don't see how trying to find out who your great enemy is and confront them (as in BG1) is any more focused a tale than knowing who your enemy is and trying to confront them (as in BG2).
It is more teh exploring of WHO u are that makes it more story oriented then BG2, but I guess that in BG2 u already know WHO you are but now u have to find out WHAT you are. It's just my personal oppinion that a tale is better told if the protagonist tries to find out who rather then what he/she is...
Originally posted by fable What makes a story focused is how well it handles momentary or apparent lesser goals, linking them and leading up to a final confrontation. One of the more complex plots in gaming history, that of Betrayal at Krondor, was actually very focused, despite discovering that the actual conflict was completely different than what you suspected all along, and the villain was a well-meaning hero, and a friend. That's because of an over-arching theme, protection of the land, which ran throughout the game in many different guises.
it also had originality. A very important element in any story. When I was playing BG2 I had a feeling that I knew what was going to happen next, except the drop into the underdark that really surprised me. Otherwise I could almost figure out who Irenicus was very early in the game and as the elven priestess told me who Irenicus really was I wasn't surprised at all. While in BG1 when Tamora told me that Sarevok was my BROTHER, I was like ???????? . Might have been because I was alot more naive when I was younger but still....
Originally posted by fable From that perspective, BG2 wins out. The reoccuring dreams of the hero that depict a loss and tearing of self; the need to find the hero's friend, who turns out to be his sister--in effect, part of himself; the loss of the godlike part of the hero to Irenicus--all these show an element of continuing thematic focus that is missing from BG1, IMO.
This I agree with BG2 seem to be more connected than BG1, all the plots seem to be linked together better and as you said this element is great fro any plot.
"Those who control the past control the future, those who control the present control the past" And I rule the PRESENT!!
I put the 'laughter' back in 'slaughter'
Originally posted by fable LOL! You mean, you didn't get the agreement you wanted in the BG2 thread, and created the identical thread and opening post over here? I think you should have started over here; but even so, that doesn't mean there has to be a unanimity of view. For those who are interested, here's a link to that BG2 thread.
Hey! I did create this thread first, and then copied it to the BG2 board a few minutes later Did it mostly to reach out to a bigger audience and to get more total replies but also because it probably concerns those on the BG2 board just as much.
Originally posted by Rataxes Hey! I did create this thread first, and then copied it to the BG2 board a few minutes later Did it mostly to reach out to a bigger audience and to get more total replies but also because it probably concerns those on the BG2 board just as much.
Fair enough. To be honest, I still like BG1, and I think the game does one thing much better than BG2: it maintains a controlled access to power. In other words, your characters don't get so many levels and objects that the game bogs down in a sort of "my nuke is bigger than your nuke" approach. BG2/SoA aims in that direction, and I think gets there in ToB. By keeping things more limited, BG1 forces you to think more creatively in terms of combat strategy. At any rate, that's my POV.
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.
Originally posted by garazdawi there are also alot of more side quests that the player can do then in BG2.
Now that I think about it... While there may well have been more side quests in an absolute manner, BG2 has a large number of huge side quests. BG1's side quests were of the "fetch my book" type (a recurring theme in ToB, which fails miserably on the side quest side), while the BG2 side quests are epic stories in themselves where you clean out evil overlord dungeons and rescue whole villages.
Originally posted by fable By keeping things more limited, BG1 forces you to think more creatively in terms of combat strategy. At any rate, that's my POV.
By keeping things more limited, BG1 also manages to remain fairly honest. In BG1, enemies are naturally powerful enough to present a challenge. In BG2, they cheat left and right. Mages get to cast spells without fear of disruption, bosses get unexplained immunities and hit point totals far higher than any die roll could theoretically get them. In ToB, all trace of fairness is washed away in a tidal wave of molten Limburger. All mages forcecast, all bosses have unreal damage resistances and are immune to anything that could end the fight quickly.
[url="http://www.sorcerers.net/Games/BG2/SpellsReference/Main.htm"]Baldur's Gate 2 Spells Reference[/url]: Strategy, tips, tricks, bugs, cheese and corrections to the manual.
that I loved both games, but I have to admit that I liked BG1 a little bit more.
I liked the story better, the slow revelation of the mystery, as you mention.
For some reason I liked most of the NPCs in BG1 better despite the fact that you interacted with them more in BG2, which I did like.
I liked how there was a central story you were following in BG1, but you definitely felt free to wander the wilderness areas along the way, and I liked that feeling of freedom better.
You are right on about the character models......not sure why some look "worse" in BG2. I was so weirded out that Imoen looked so "big", she looks bigger than any other character.
Also, I know it's minor, but I HATE the spiky look of the shields in BG2. I think it's supposed to be because that's how shields look in that part of the realm, but I much prefer the more "realistic" traditional shield types in BG1.
Along the same line, I also hate the way horned helmets look in BG2......what is up with the horns sticking straight out to the sides?!..........that looks so stupid that I hate putting that type of helmet on my guys in BG2.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Xyx Now that I think about it... While there may well have been more side quests in an absolute manner, BG2 has a large number of huge side quests. BG1's side quests were of the "fetch my book" type (a recurring theme in ToB, which fails miserably on the side quest side), while the BG2 side quests are epic stories in themselves where you clean out evil overlord dungeons and rescue whole villages.
And while in BG it's not neccessary or useful to do the sidequests for experience(if you are lucky you get reputation bonus, what doesn't help alot, though), because u earn even more while doing easy random encounters, u are in BGII often dependant on the sidequests to do the fights in the main plot line.
Originally posted by Xyx And while in BG it's not neccessary or useful to do the sidequests for experience(if you are lucky you get reputation bonus, what doesn't help alot, though), because u earn even more while doing easy random encounters, u are in BGII often dependant on the sidequests to do the fights in the main plot line.
I think it's at least arguably true that side quests (or some form of apparent non-linearity) are what set apart computerized CRPGs. I really enjoy the IWD series, but to me it plays like a tactical merc game. Every mission is offered in a certain order. The BG series gives you the sense of being able to go where you will and do what you want, which is also what makes PnP RPGs so much fun.
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.
Indeed is this what is being strived afer in CRPG at the moment. It might have been fulfilled with the release of NWN, but it all depends on how much time the RPG cummunity is willing to spend in developing thsi game to its full potential. It will never have the freedom as a PnP RPG has but if we give it time it will come eventually.
"Those who control the past control the future, those who control the present control the past" And I rule the PRESENT!!
I put the 'laughter' back in 'slaughter'
My POV is that there are two large differences between BGI and BGII. Some of this has been said, but I will try to tie things together.
1. Story.
In BGI you are basically a kid just learning how to be an adventurer. This entails things like being intimidated by wolves. You are more scared, as a kid just striking out on his own should be. In essence, you are coming of age. In real life we are worried about things like our career, etc. at this stage of our lives.
In BGII you are now an adult. An established, somewhat powerful adult. You aren't intimidated by day to day events. You get to do things like rescue towns, and even manage a stronghold. You aren't worried about your own behind, you are more concerned about the world around you, and those you care about. In real life, this would place us as somewhat successful people in our careers that turn our attention to the community and loved ones.
Both of the BG's (the games not the 70's band) are at different times of life, and magnify real life. They are fantasy stories, and a lot of fun. In my opinion, there is no clear winner here. Both are good, and we can all find a point or two to be nitpicky about.
2. The technical game.
You can relate things like powerful equipment, to the story. In BGI you wouldn't even think of cleaning out a keep full of trolls. In BGII, you are rewarded for that with an awesome flail.
By technical game, I mean the programming. You have more areas to explore (that aren't forest), sub-quests are stories themselves, and NPC's have stories and quests of their own. You have kits you can use and new classes.
In my opinion, here there is no contest. BGII is better programmed because it is second, and a few years later. Could you imagine when BGI came out a game asking for over 3GB of hard drive space! How about the RAM or graphics card. I hope I have made my point.
Another techinical issue is mods. BGII has some excellent mods. My opinion again, but this is largely due to the advancement of technology, mainly the internet. It is much easier to distribute these mods, and get further ideas as well. If you are going to make a mod, you might as well do it for the latest and greatest. If you don't like a technical point of BGII, chances are you can find something to change that.
3. Both of the above.
Now that we are more advanced in life, and more powerful, we need better foes. BGII delivers. No, we aren't scared of being mugged, but now that we are more powerful, we are going after more powerful foes. Specifically, these foes often use magic, and have immunities. Here BGII moves slightly away from core DnD rules and adds uniqueness to our enemies. From a story point of view, they either acquired these bonuses in their travels (the same as we did), or these bonuses is what helped them become powerful (again, the same as our PC). The additional extras the baddies is only fitting in a richer story, especially since the PC and the NPC's have extras as well.
To sum up, BGI and BGII both tell an excellent story and make sense from where you are at. BGII is better technically, primarily because technology has advanced, and that is a good thing.
Those are my thoughts, or was that a rant? Whatever.
It's just my opinion, but the point is how the side quests are connected to the story. In BG1 you can do all side quests because realisticaly you don't know what else to do. At the start of the game, unless you are Sherlock Holmes or Batman, you can't imagine the iron shortage, the bandit attacks, the armored figure and yourself are all linked together. So you wander from town to town, helping people in need (if you are good), getting rich (if evil) or preserving balance (if neutral), all the while discovering little bits of information that give you insights about the greater conspiracy taking place.
In BG2, the logical course of action would be Get 20,000 (15,000) gp, go rescue immie, get out of the underdark, kill Bodhi, go to Suldanessalar. Altough you as a player know that there is millions of things to do in the city, the character (at least those of mine), be it Good, Neutral or Evil, would stop at nothing knowing that his sister is on the hands of a maniac, or else stop when they know a elven city is besieged and they must rush to save it. There goes when you realise the game would be pretty dull if you does it like this, so you go out of character and do the side quests to make the game more interesting - and a great game, by the way.
I like BG1 better because I think that, if I was in a PnP session, I would enjoy it much more than the sequel. You just have to play letting your imagination loose. Just because the NPC interactions does not appear on screen it doesn't mean you can't imagine them.
I loved BG2, but it had a hard time trying to surpass the impact caused by BG1. And while it performed great, did not manage to. If it were not for the technological tidbits (better graphics, new opponents, new spells, weapons and such) I don't think it would be enjoyable.
And of course, BG1 does best because you actually go to Baldur's Gate. BG2 only has BG in it's title for marketing reasons.
"No one expects the Brazilian Inquisitor!"
Abazigal: "Oh my god! They killed Yaga-Shura!"
Sendai: "You bastards!"
In BG2, the logical course of action would be Get 20,000 (15,000) gp, go rescue immie, get out of the underdark, kill Bodhi, go to Suldanessalar...
But would it be logical? Imoen has been taken by a seemingly powerful group of mages to an undisclosed location. Even if she should escape, there's still Irenicus to deal with. What do you have to fight him with at the game's start? A few wands with a couple of charges, some unenchanted weapons, and good will. Half a league, half a league, half a league onward, all in the valley of Death rode the six hundred... And we all know what happened to the Light Brigade after they made their glorious charge.
No matter how compelling the need to deal with Imoen and Irenicus, a decent PC knows that he needs 1) experience, 2) party comrades with experience, 3) good, powerful items to attack and defend; 4) outside help that will assist him as needed. To me, at least, it logically follows that the PC goes in search of these things as he journeys around Baldur's Gate and accepts quests. He doesn't do it simply for The Good. He does it out of need. Just my POV.
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.
No matter how compelling the need to deal with Imoen and Irenicus, a decent PC knows that he needs 1) experience, 2) party comrades with experience, 3) good, powerful items to attack and defend; 4) outside help that will assist him as needed.
But there is a thin line between doing that and "tending to every single being in need in the face of Faerun, gathering a cache of weapons that would put an army to shy, taking control of your own castle/sphere/theather/guild and helping a talking skull recover it's arms and legs". Of course the PC know it needs gear and comrades to suceed against the mage who so easily caught him before; but it's just weird that he thinks he'd rather help a village solve it's problems with wolves than going to save his childhood companion.
"No one expects the Brazilian Inquisitor!"
Abazigal: "Oh my god! They killed Yaga-Shura!"
Sendai: "You bastards!"
Originally posted by Leonardo But there is a thin line between doing that and "tending to every single being in need in the face of Faerun, gathering a cache of weapons that would put an army to shy, taking control of your own castle/sphere/theather/guild and helping a talking skull recover it's arms and legs".
True. I'd say this is a matter of enhancing gameplay that frays the plot thread. You have a level of unprecedented depth in a CRPG as regards activities you can do, and the devs obviously hope that you'll not notice how distant you've grown from the main quest. However, we both know that many CRPGers won't care a bit about the main plot: they want depth and non-linearity. Can you blame 'em?
Of course the PC know it needs gear and comrades to suceed against the mage who so easily caught him before; but it's just weird that he thinks he'd rather help a village solve it's problems with wolves than going to save his childhood companion.
Now there, I must disagree with you. If I felt that in aiding the village I might acquire something which could help me rescue my childhood friend and deal with an extremely powerful mage, I'd do it in that environment. Hell, even if there wasn't something nice in it for me, provided you're there dealing with other tasks that could include helpful merchandise, a "good" character would help out since he was there. And in Trademeet, you're already dealing with the djinn who offers an item reward; so why not?
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.
Most players seem to assume that you HAVE to finish every quest, kill every monster, and find every single item in the game, and if you don't, you have "failed". That's what games like this are all about: the acquisition of experience points and treasure and generally being the biggest, baddest character in the realms. Roleplaying and following the story have a part in all of it, but becoming more powerful is an end in itself.
Now there, I must disagree with you. If I felt that in aiding the village I might acquire something which could help me rescue my childhood friend and deal with an extremely powerful mage, I'd do it in that environment. Hell, even if there wasn't something nice in it for me, provided you're there dealing with other tasks that could include helpful merchandise, a "good" character would help out since he was there. And in Trademeet, you're already dealing with the djinn who offers an item reward; so why not?
But he was not originally there. He only went to these villages because Delon and the other guy asked them to help while still in Athkatla.
Most players seem to assume that you HAVE to finish every quest, kill every monster, and find every single item in the game, and if you don't, you have "failed". That's what games like this are all about: the acquisition of experience points and treasure and generally being the biggest, baddest character in the realms. Roleplaying and following the story have a part in all of it, but becoming more powerful is an end in itself.
And that is exactly why BG1 has such a great story. It gives you freedom, but always keep you around the main plot (because the plot has such wide proportions); at the same time providing you with the reason to go wander collecting experience and riches.
"No one expects the Brazilian Inquisitor!"
Abazigal: "Oh my god! They killed Yaga-Shura!"
Sendai: "You bastards!"
But he was not originally there. He only went to these villages because Delon and the other guy asked them to help while still in Athkatla.
With the prospect of reward and honing one's skills, very necessary before tackling these wizards holding Imoen (not to mention Irenicus). Again, I just don't see a mad dash to rescue Imoen as the only feasible psychological profile for your hero after emerging from the first BG2 dungeon. In fact, any hero who used the mad dash approach is likely to end up pan-fried, very quickly.
And that is exactly why BG1 has such a great story. It gives you freedom, but always keep you around the main plot (because the plot has such wide proportions); at the same time providing you with the reason to go wander collecting experience and riches.
Let's be realistic, here: there is no great story in either game. BG1 is simply a lot of strung-together quests in different areas, awaiting the next attack that will lead you a step further to the Big Baddie who slew your substitute father. BG2 is a bit more sophisticated, but only a bit: the apparent plot is to rescue a childhood friend, but in fact it's used by the Big Baddie to lure you into a trap and steal your godlike essence. If you really want a good plot that keeps you wondering what's going on and doesn't sound like it was devised in a PnP session of the Hardy Boys, check out Planescape: Torment.
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.
Originally posted by fable If you really want a good plot that keeps you wondering what's going on and doesn't sound like it was devised in a PnP session of the Hardy Boys, check out Planescape: Torment.
I'll second that. After VonDondu convinced me I needed to buy Ps:T in another thread, I have discovered what a well-written plot can be in a game. Neither BG game compares.
My 2 cents to justify stalling while Imoen rots: without actually knowing whats going on in spellhold, the protagonist can easily assume she is relatively safe there. Prisons are designed to be hard to get out of, which makes them hard to get into (under one's own free will, that is ) as well. With Irenicus also there, the PC is free to build up the strength to crush his opposition whilst those 2 are "safely" tied up.
Between BG I & II, my vote goes to the former for better story. Its more fun to play the first time through. BGII has a plot that is more replay-freindly IMHO, but the story suffers because of it.
Originally posted by Skooter327 without actually knowing whats going on in spellhold, the protagonist can easily assume she is relatively safe there.
Indeed. Those cutscenes telling you what big bad Jonny does to little sis Immy give you (the player) knowledge that your character doesn't have. It is impossible to save Imoen in only a few days without some heavy metagame knowledge. If she's still alive after a week, chances are she'll be alive after a month. If jonny wanted to off her, he'd do so on day 1.
[url="http://www.sorcerers.net/Games/BG2/SpellsReference/Main.htm"]Baldur's Gate 2 Spells Reference[/url]: Strategy, tips, tricks, bugs, cheese and corrections to the manual.
without actually knowing whats going on in spellhold, the protagonist can easily assume she is relatively safe there
Even if it does not occur to the PC she may be being tortured and/or experimented on; I don't think he would leave her jailed for any more time than necessary. Just my opinion.
"No one expects the Brazilian Inquisitor!"
Abazigal: "Oh my god! They killed Yaga-Shura!"
Sendai: "You bastards!"
Originally posted by Leonardo Even if it does not occur to the PC she may be being tortured and/or experimented on; I don't think he would leave her jailed for any more time than necessary. Just my opinion.
Indeed but, it might give less priority to the quest if u just want to save Imoen from a safe (but maddening) place than to save from your evil tormentor that happen to be the same guy who seems to know everything about you that you don't
"Those who control the past control the future, those who control the present control the past" And I rule the PRESENT!!
I put the 'laughter' back in 'slaughter'