GameBanshee Forums

Kicking off another question topic, I hear a lot of people saying that BG 2 is too easy (they're blatently better than me).

But I never really got involved in the online BG community, in fact I only payed it in the last quarter of last year so I probably missed it.

What I was wondering, is those of you know have finished both game, which was harder and why?

------------------
Quitch
"Well since you asked, I would like to register a complaint. I want to kill a dragon. Right now. No, don't look. Go kill one now. Go find one and kill it. Right now. That would be SO cool" - Lilarcor

I haven't finished BG2 yet, but I feel that BG was harder because you start off at level zero, and it feels like the bad guys you go up against are harder than they are in BG2. I remember playing BG an having to reload a game about 10 times sometimes because a battle was just too tough, but in BG2 it seems I only have to load a game 2 maybe 3 times before I beat the bad guy.

~Alexia

Personally i think that,dificulty wise;there is little to choose between the two games.
Whichever game you play first will seem harder,simply because you are less familiar with the overall concept of the game.Having spent 100hrs completing either BG1 or BG2 you are going to be familiar with most tactics for any given situation.

I'm tempted to say BG is harder, because in BG2 you have a lot more magic to deal with. If you're being attack by skeletons and a wizard, you attack the wizard with spells because the skeletons are magic resistant. If the AI faces that same situation it simply attacks the nearest enemy. Because the AI is so lacking, the close combat approach of BG is better suited to it.

But on the other hand in BG you could lure them out one at a time, and pick them off with arrows......

------------------
Quitch
"Well since you asked, I would like to register a complaint. I want to kill a dragon. Right now. No, don't look. Go kill one now. Go find one and kill it. Right now. That would be SO cool" - Lilarcor

BG1, deffinately. I never finished Durleg's (or whatever the extention was called) tower and I did finish BG2. In BG1 you were dead in a second and reviving all your partymembers really eats up your cash.

Looking back now, it's funny to think I have struggled with a bunch of hobgoblins or kobolds.

It was both difficult in their own way, but I struggled more when I first played BG1.

It really comes down to knowing IMHO BG1 was hard mainly because it was my first game of this type..

I've went back since playing BG2 and played BG1 and I don't know if it's because I know what to expect or if my gameplaying style has improved...but it (BG1) is really easy now..

IMHO

------------------
Weasel the Destroyer of Spam
Weasel the Destroyer of Flying Triangles

Hmmm, you could have a point Weasel. BG1 was my first game of this type too... Maybe I should try it again.

@Chrissy...I base this on the Gnoll Stronghold..the first time they would wipe me out..now after BG2 they just seemed easy..It might be worth trying it to see..

------------------
Weasel the Destroyer of Spam
Weasel the Destroyer of Flying Triangles

Well, when I played BG1 2nd time, I knocked off about 30 game days to go through. I felt it was getting easier.
Oh, I'm going to play again. I love it!

[This message has been edited by Minerva (edited 02-11-2001).]

Whichever you play first will probably be harder - though some quests like Durlag's Tower still seem pretty tough to me, even after playing through them a few times.

I'd say BG I because it was my first AD&D game, and as mentioned, the AI doesn't take advantage of the nuances (and basics) of the BG II combat system.

(Shadow Dragon thinks, "Looky, I have -300 AL but my resistance has been lowered to 20, and my saving throws to that of a level 1 peasant, I guess that sorcerer can wait while I axe that barbarian?"

Though, not much in BG I really stood a chance against 6 people launching fireballs and arrows of detonation.

[This message has been edited by Giles the Sorcerer (edited 02-11-2001).]

BG2 for me is a lot harder. The dragons, liches, mindflayers, Kangaxx have all presented me with very tough battles. I feel that you have all the tough monsters of BG with a few harder ones added for measure.

Bg1 was harder for me...I started over alot of times...

The first Baldur’s Gate had you walking marathons to get from one place to another. And the overall walking speed was slower. I felt like I had trekked across the entire face of Faerun by the time I passed it. Durlag’s Tower is the most trap-laden fortress you can imagine. Every manner of ‘stupid mousetraps await your toes in the dark’. I loved ever doom filled moment of it. And have you ever tried to whack Drizzt with level 8 characters? I accomplished it by gathering an army of summoned monsters (Baldur’s Gate 1 let you have a freaking horde of the buggers). And what of Sarevok? Quite difficult the first time around, but if you have Tales of the Sword Coast installed then things get really thorny.

The plot is also great, despite the lack of verbose NPCs. This was the game that brought me into the D&D world. Gorion’s battle with Sarevok still gives me chills. The old man puts up quiet a fight for someone outnumbered 4 to 1. (Though I can’t help thinking that he must have poorly picked his spells that day, seeing as he didn’t use some of the exceptional ones found in Baldur’s Gate II J) The plot was great and eerie with vicious Bounty Hunters awaiting you at every turn and the mysterious iron epidemic sweeping the coast, not to mention the rising tensions with Amn. And the first time I found out that my character was the son of the God of Murder? Very cool. Shadows of Amn is far superior in NPC interactions, graphics, spells, kits, and countless other ways, but the original moves me in a way the sequel fails to. At the end of Shadows of Amn you’re a famous damn near invincible hero. Baldur’s Gate made me feel like I was a small part of much larger world, struggling to simply survive. I remember acquiring my first magic item; a helm of infravison I think. I was so proud to have acquired it. That’s a feeling I probably won’t ever have again, not with characters loaded to the brim with the most powerful artifacts in ten kingdoms.

Alas this is getting long winded. I think Baldur’s Gate was harder, not because it had more powerful enemies, but because you start off as a callow adventurer on a simple quest to avenge his foster father and find the truth of his origin. Epic stuff really.


------------------
I become death, destroyer of worlds...

@Kayless...Thank you...you have described just how I felt the first time too. I just don't have the skill to express it in words like you.


------------------
Weasel the Destroyer of Spam
Weasel the Destroyer of Flying Triangles
But all of them there lights sure make one dorn tootin good huntin buggy

[This message has been edited by Weasel (edited 02-11-2001).]

well i must say that bg was harder, i have started to play it again and i am now better at it then when i first played it (it was my first rpg game), i am still having problems, i remember getting slaughtered when i went to the inn in nashkel (sp?) and that female cleric attacked my party and wiped em out, took me countless tries to kill her, when i did it again recently it was still a tough battle and took a few tries but i now knew how to handle fights better. also when u return from the nashkel mines quest and that mage attacks you, oh dear, the man casts magic missile on my pc which kills him instantly 9 (as he only had 12 hp). also the funny thing is starting off as a mage and only having one spell which is a magic missile that only fires one missile at a time

BG1 was the first AD&D game I played too. It took me a few days to understand what magic was all about.
Another reason BG2 might seem easier is you start the game with a high level character. This sure made me confident. Now, when I restart BG2, and I see that level 7/8 character, I think "Wow, that's low!", just because at the end the first time I was level 19, which is very near to immortality.


------------------
-Amen

Well alot was been touched on the difficulty of BGI vs BGII and it is apperant that most, like myself, agree that BGI was our first entry into this type caliber rpg. That being said, I certainly found BGI to be quite difficult. As a matter of fact a friend and I spent quite some time on "multiplayer - internet" before both spinning off and playing solo.(multiplayer was so so IMO, seemed like i always "lagged" physically behind the main pc controlled player)

In regards to which is more difficult, I believe on a straight scale - equally IMO. Where you may have more potent spellcasters and Conan-like fighters in BGII, the variety of tangents in storyline, NPC plots etc make quite difficult. Just look at the Jaheria Romance!

During my initiation with BGI, I did not have the "advantage" like i do with BGII, of the vast resources as this site, hints,and walkthroughs. I am "tempted" and have to restrain from using "truesight"

Just reading and getting wrapped up in the forum dialog reveals many 'helpful' hints.

Just how many would really 'know' how to kick that Lich's #$@ at the City Gate - especially early in the game (BGII)

All in all - the BG series Rocks, in which I end this humble opinion.

Owen

I was going to start a topic like this, because I cracked and rebought BG 1. The first time through I was frustrated by the 'scattered' nature of the quests (ie. you really needed to have inside info or bizarre good luck to pull them off). It was quite hard (in general) especially when H.P.s were in single figures (one arrow and its all over).

Second time through I think I'm more BG tuned in and I generally have just breezed through things (the previously mentioned Gnoll stronghold being a case in point - first time dread, fear and failure, this time slap slap 'Hi Dynaheir').

But one of the reasons I'm replaying it is to develop characters for a BG 2 start. In BG 1 you can dual class to a specialist mage! has anyone done this and are there anyother 'easter egg' type combinations known?

Curdis