Baldur's Gate vs. Baldur's Gat II

Kawauso · Post by **Kawauso** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 11:59 am

which do you think is better?

CFM · Post by **CFM** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 1:30 pm

I voted Undecided.

BG2 had vampires, liches, beholders, & Demogorgon. BG1 gave me a heart attack when I was attacked by a wolf outside of Candlekeep.

BG2 had artifacts we've all wanted to use in a AD&D CRPG. BG1 had me jump outta my chair when I found a +1 longsword.

BG1 had too many Tedious Nameless Wilderness Areas. BG2 had too few Vast Expansive Wilderness Areas.

BG2 had dragons wielding magicks never before implemented in an AD&D CRPG. BG1 put the fear of the Almighty into my level 1 character using the tip of a bandit's arrow.

Sarevok or Irenicus? Baldur's Gate or Athkatla?

I just don't know.

Mr_Snow · Post by **Mr_Snow** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 3:39 pm

My vote goes to BG1 mainly because that's where the story started and developed for your PC. Lack of uber items and the many additional areas you can explore and lack of being railroaded by the storyline (fps style).

Klorox · Post by **Klorox** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 4:15 pm

I voted undecided.

Until very recently, I would have voted BG1, undoubtedly. But when I realize how many pointless sidequests there are in this game, while BG2 has more "storyline quests" (I know, they have stupid sidequests too, but at least there's more character development), I'm now undecided.

I like the lower power of BG1 more.

I like the character development of BG2 more.

I like the storyline of BG1 more.

I like how BG2 sticks to the storyline better.

Bottom line: they're both great!

Pellinore · Post by **Pellinore** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 5:10 pm

I voted undecided. Had BGI the NPC interaction that BGII did then I would have voted for BGI.

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 10:40 pm

BG1 for me.
While I enjoy BG2 very much, I feel it goes overboard with the amount of quests you get handed to you and the general powerlevel of the items/monsters/players. You hardly step foot outside the first area and vupti you have many quests filling your purse and already your first +3 and +4 weapons....... +4 possible

at Level 7-9?
Had it stayed a bit more closer to (A)D&D pace, I would have loved BG2 above all else as a game, but now it ranks just below BG1 for me.

I like BG1s exploration, atmosphere and pace much more (when you do find thoese rare magical items it is fun), the tactical aspect of being able to be killed by a few stray arrows so you need to move slowly, scout and look for traps.

BG2 however had better party interaction and .... well, more of everything which as mentioned above was not all good.

So I prefere BG1 over BG2, but both games are leauges ahead of most every other CRPG I've played.

Coot · Post by **Coot** » Tue Oct 03, 2006 10:43 am

Undecided. I could elaborate, but in general I've the same opinion as CFM, Klorox and Pellinore.

LordTerror · Post by **LordTerror** » Tue Oct 03, 2006 11:02 am

I like BG2 better:
-The "main plot" is MUCH longer (timewise)
-The "extras" are longer and more interesting
-More complex battles because of the increase in number of spells, kits, and items...the increased complexity makes strategy/planning more fun
-More interesting battles (dragons, liches, mages that are actually a challenge, thiefs that actually try to backstab, etc)
-More interesting NPCs
-Better non-gameplay specs (better graphics, better UI, smaller memory requirement, better config program, more config options, etc)

I like BG1, as well, though:
-Better plot (in my opinion)
-Start at level 1
-Less bugs and less exploits/cheeses
-More NPCs to choose from

DaemonJ · Post by **DaemonJ** » Tue Oct 03, 2006 12:08 pm

I voted BG1.

The side-quests and wilderness areas never bothered me because it was my choice whether I wanted to do them or not. If something didn't sound interesting or was getting tedious I started another side-quest or went back to following the main story line.

BG2 is way too over-powered in terms of magical items. Finding a magic long sword in BG1 was cause for celebration. Finding a +3 long sword in BG2 is like finding a regular short sword in BG1.

BG2 definitely has cooler creatures to fight (e.g. dragons, liches, and vampires) but BG2 has more undead than BG1 has kobolds. Playing BG2 makes me feel like I'm playing "Buffy the Vampire Slayer".

The NPC interaction in BG2 is without doubt the best feature of the game and something that BG1 is sorely lacking.

I like both games but BG2 never gave me the feeling of challenge that BG1 did.

Pellinore · Post by **Pellinore** » Tue Oct 03, 2006 4:38 pm

Ah, but BGI had crap loads od undead too.....in the form of skeletons, zombies, ghouls, and ghasts. BGII has skeleton warriors, mummies, shadows, vampires and liches. BGII has a better assortment of undead types but I bet I have fought enough skeletons and ghouls in BGI to fill up Yankee Stadium...

VonDondu · Post by **VonDondu** » Tue Oct 03, 2006 10:21 pm

I vote for BG2 simply because Boo was given a more prominent role.

The Z · Post by **The Z** » Tue Oct 03, 2006 10:34 pm

I went for BG2 because your NPC's are much more prominent and the story just feels more epic.

I'm a sucker for sideplots, interaction, and stories that are on a grand scale so that took precedence over items, gameplay, creatures, etc.

Thrifalas · Post by **Thrifalas** » Wed Oct 04, 2006 3:51 am

CFM wrote:BG2 had vampires, liches, beholders, & Demogorgon. BG1 gave me a heart attack when I was attacked by a wolf outside of Candlekeep.

And that's one of the main reasons I absolutely *love* the whole series.

At the beginning, you need to hit 'n run from wolves. Eventually you'll end up fighting kobolds, creatures so small that you actually could kill them in real life. After that you'll take on bandits and hobgoblins etc, and you can really feel how you actually gain experience in a manner other than plain numbers.

After that it'll only go on, and eventually you'll be like "Oh, it's just another pack of vampires. Well, woobi****ingdoo, have a sunray and let's get moving."

Anyway, enough nonsense. I voted BG2 for some unknown reason. Both games are wonderful and amazing, and neither would be what it is without the other.

What BG2 have and BG1 lacks though, are all these insane combos of spells and/or weapons, all these tactics... everything. But well... I've most likely enjoyed the games equally.

Jordoo · Post by **Jordoo** » Wed Oct 04, 2006 11:31 am

I voted undecieded.

Basically for a lot of the reasons already stated both games have their pluses and minuses when compared. I will say though had BGII had the same openness and freedom as BGI and not so much of the linear quest design I would have voted for it. I personally loved the open wilderness areas in BGI and the ability to meander through as you wanted. Loved the NPC interaction and development in BGII.

Barrada Kor · Post by **Barrada Kor** » Thu Oct 05, 2006 5:20 am

BG1 v BG2

You've just given me hardest decision of the week to make. Whimped out and went for undecided purely because, since I am still playing both games so many years after their release, they both must be excellent games.

Jaxe18 · Post by **Jaxe18** » Sat Feb 24, 2007 4:29 am

Both games have there pros and cons but why does the person who started this thread worry about them.
If you ask me instead of trying to find out which game is better and then go play it you should just play both of them over and over ubtil you can decide for yourself.
I do think though that so many people have gone for undicided that baldurs gate 1 with less graphics and items must be a truly awesome game to be able to compete with its still awsome sequal.
(ps. i know i have contradicted myself a few times here but there is a lot to say)

fable · Post by **fable** » Sat Feb 24, 2007 6:45 am

Jaxe18 wrote:Both games have there pros and cons but why does the person who started this thread worry about them.
If you ask me instead of trying to find out which game is better and then go play it you should just play both of them over and over ubtil you can decide for yourself.

He's not worried; he simply asked a question. There is no indication in his one-line post that he lacks either game, much less both.

wise grimwald · Post by **wise grimwald** » Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:46 am

Since I still play BG1 more than BG2, I suppose that my vote has to go there, however I must agree that it would have been better still with more party interaction.

Embry · Post by **Embry** » Mon Feb 26, 2007 1:39 pm

Baldur's Gate 2.

BG 1 was extremely good on first run - but it has no replaying value. BG 2 however, it can be played trough many times and still find lots of nifty details. And besides, the npcs in Bg 2 are just much more better and world feels more diverse.

Aqua-chan · Post by **Aqua-chan** » Mon Feb 26, 2007 1:54 pm

Embry wrote:Baldur's Gate 2.

BG 1 was extremely good on first run - but it has no replaying value.

Are you joking? I've gone through the Sword Coast just as many times as I have through Amn, and find the open-endedness that the wildnerness areas and mini quests pose to be fun. It doesn't really matter what happens in these as they have no real effect on the game plot, leaving you to act true to your alignment.

Sure, the cardboard characteristics of some NPCs is irksome (Why, oh why didn't Branwen say anything when we found Tazok?!) but still, the epic quest of struggling to find who murdered your caretaker (Not being revealed until late in the game as is) is most satisfying.

GameBanshee Forums

Baldur's Gate vs. Baldur's Gat II

BGI or BGII?

Baldur's Gate vs. Baldur's Gat II