Baldur's Gate 1 relies much on two factors: The groundbreaking D&D ruleset and it's return as a computer rpg and introducing The Bhaal Saga storyline. Since it relies so much on the story, It doesn't feel new once you've completed it.
Now, if I were to play the game trough again, it's just a run with different kind of character. The glitterness of new world fades, mostly because npcs are already known to be nothing more than zombies with just few exceptions that rise from the crowd.
In Baldur's Gate 2 the npcs are all way too complex to get to know them all in one playing time. Add to that different strongholds and class quests and replaying value is much more greater than in BG1.
Baldur's Gate vs. Baldur's Gat II
BG1 hands down, but I must add *modded* BG1, with all the perks from BG2, ie gamplay, kits and character interactions. So for BG1+TUTU+BG1NPC is the perfect game, the best evar. BG2 feels way-way weaker after modded BG1, or at least it did to me when I had to replay BG2 after a couple years on modded BG1. ToB is especially bad.
Joinable NPCs for IWD2:
[url="http://forums.gibberlings3.net/index.php?showforum=116"]http://forums.gibberlings3.net/index.php?showforum=116[/url]
[url="http://forums.gibberlings3.net/index.php?showforum=116"]http://forums.gibberlings3.net/index.php?showforum=116[/url]
Undecided. BG2 used to be superior, but going back and playing the two... it isn't so simple.
As a few people have said, you are powerful in BG2. My gripes aren't with the fact you're overpowered, or the pace is off. Not at all. Instead I love the Baldur's Gate because of the 'struggle' aspect. The first few hours of gameplay in Baldur's Gate are a true struggle against stronger enemies. Things get easier, but there is always the true sense of being a weak acolyte of Candlekeep suddenly thrust into the big world. Baldur's Gate 2 you are the Child of Bhaal, and you might be suppressed and occasionally beaten down, but its all out there that you have the destiny to conquer/destroy/become uber etcetera.
But BG2 is more polished. The storyline, characterisation, NPCs, setting... all grander and more refined. But part of BG1's charm is its coarseness, its small scope. The appeal of its 'humble beginnings' aspect is just a preference, rather than a one-up on BG2. Only thing BG2 was missing, in my view, is a few wilderness areas. Just to offset the vast number of urban/dungeon zones and create a sense of geographical scope along with the enormity of the City.
As a few people have said, you are powerful in BG2. My gripes aren't with the fact you're overpowered, or the pace is off. Not at all. Instead I love the Baldur's Gate because of the 'struggle' aspect. The first few hours of gameplay in Baldur's Gate are a true struggle against stronger enemies. Things get easier, but there is always the true sense of being a weak acolyte of Candlekeep suddenly thrust into the big world. Baldur's Gate 2 you are the Child of Bhaal, and you might be suppressed and occasionally beaten down, but its all out there that you have the destiny to conquer/destroy/become uber etcetera.
But BG2 is more polished. The storyline, characterisation, NPCs, setting... all grander and more refined. But part of BG1's charm is its coarseness, its small scope. The appeal of its 'humble beginnings' aspect is just a preference, rather than a one-up on BG2. Only thing BG2 was missing, in my view, is a few wilderness areas. Just to offset the vast number of urban/dungeon zones and create a sense of geographical scope along with the enormity of the City.
"I fart in your general direction! Your mother was a hamster, and your father smelt of elderberries!"