GameBanshee Forums

I loved Bg1, but some things about BG2 where rather dissapointing, at first I was dissaponted about the few pictures for you're character and the number of sounds.
Further on in the game I started to miss the "nameless" places on the map, with only a few gbberlings and sometimes one or two items that are worth to go to.

When i finished the game, the story was also dssapointing as well as te time I spend to finish, on my second run i did every quest I could find, but still i was finished rather quick.
I do love that mages are good (they sucked in Bg1), and alot of the new kit's are great.
I did found out that it's hard to reach the expcap if you're evil (truly evil) and also to buy some good items in the beginning.

That's another point, some of the best items can be bought, i'd rather see them on a powerfull enemy.

I love the game, but some things can be better!!!

I really liked BGII over BG1

Then I love dual wield over anything else.

I have played the pen/paper game in the past
and with characters to high levels so seeing the higher levels was very exciting to me.

There was more mystery in BG1, in finding out what you were, but in all honesty the end of BGII was just as exciting to me, just it was focused more on the bag guy than the main character.

In the first game you are more or less after the bad guy and he doesn't care that much about you. In BGII they make you chase after him and then you realize you were his pawn all along. That makes one feel in less control of one's actions. The first game was not so.

I know that when my real life was not so in control that movies and games like this really made me feel disappointed when I was done with them. I actually find them interesting now.

BlackRazor and the Equalizer spell non-stopable.

It exceeded my expectations.
But i do agree there could have been more places to visit and a few more quests, or make the existing quests longer.

As for the best items being on an enemy, it would make it quiet hard to actually defeat the person.
Plus i like searching for the elements of the Crom and Wave etc.
But i would have liked more NPC's.
There were to many neutral and goods ones.
And only 3 truly evil ones.
BG1 had to many.
BG2 had to few.

My main complaint is that the game wasy too easy. Its easy even using the NPCs in the game and ridiculously easy when using 6 player made characters.

I hope that ToB will offer encounters that will be challenging for the most optimized party as well as challenges for the standard NPC party.

You have to understand, the game may be easy for you, however for the brunt of the gaming audience..it is not. I tried to get my friend to play bg2 and he found it overly difficult. Alot of my friends felt the same way. I find it pretty easy. But they need to make it fairly easy for the rest of the audience. There are some challenging little parts to bg2. Espically if you dont come here and read the strats beforehand. For instance, my first few times vs kangaxx I got raped pretty bad =/. You have to think from the developers point of view. If you make it very difficult,even for the better players, it might sell less copies.

What we know from past experience often sets our expectations for the future.

My suggestion is to try out new strategies, or new ways of doing quests. One may also think about soloing through the game, or set the game to a more difficult level where monsters do double damage to make it interesting.

Originally posted by Zartuul:
<STRONG>My main complaint is that the game wasy too easy. Its easy even using the NPCs in the game and ridiculously easy when using 6 player made characters.

I hope that ToB will offer encounters that will be challenging for the most optimized party as well as challenges for the standard NPC party.</STRONG>

What difficulty level did you play on?

[ 06-17-2001: Message edited by: Astafas ]

some of the best items can be bought, i'd rather see them on a powerfull enemy.

Don't forget that the game was designed to be playable (even for the less experienced) without the bonus merchants.

Absolutely not!

BGI got me where I am now - completely addicted, but BGII offered much more depth and a stronger storyline - definitely a more than worthy sequel!

There more choices in character creation. I am sort of a power gamer so I like powerful and high-level abilities and such. Yeah some quests could be extended and more interesting. But there are only so much time given to the development team so it's impossible to satisfy everybody. Overall, I think BG2 is better than BG1. But we'll have to see how ToB turns out.

Too short?! You're kidding, right? BG1 & 2 are very nearly the longest games I've ever played, next to Daggerfall. And with regard to BG2, some of the sub-quests are longer than the entire main storyline of BG1! I don't know about you, but I didn't miss the aimless wandering very much. Trying to cover every pixel of yet another forest with hopes that I might stumble across a cave or entrance wasn't quite my cup of tea. BG2 has much better pacing, at least in my opinion. I wasn't disappointed one bit.

(sigh) It's always annoying when someone like Hellion posts my opinion before I can. Well said.

Originally posted by TheHellion:
<STRONG>Too short?! You're kidding, right? BG1 & 2 are very nearly the longest games I've ever played, next to Daggerfall. And with regard to BG2, some of the sub-quests are longer than the entire main storyline of BG1! I don't know about you, but I didn't miss the aimless wandering very much. Trying to cover every pixel of yet another forest with hopes that I might stumble across a cave or entrance wasn't quite my cup of tea. BG2 has much better pacing, at least in my opinion. I wasn't disappointed one bit. </STRONG>

I ,on the other hand, did miss the aimless wandering. But not enough to call BG2 a disappointment. I liked being able to leave on every side of the map and having a new area, made it feel like I controlled my adventure, unlike BG2 where at times I felt pushed.

Originally posted by Weasel:
<STRONG>I ,on the other hand, did miss the aimless wandering. But not enough to call BG2 a disappointment. I liked being able to leave on every side of the map and having a new area, made it feel like I controlled my adventure, unlike BG2 where at times I felt pushed.</STRONG>

I'll back you up there Weasel

Originally posted by Cowboy:
<STRONG>In the first game you are more or less after the bad guy and he doesn't care that much about you. In BGII they make you chase after him and then you realize you were his pawn all along. That makes one feel in less control of one's actions. The first game was not so.</STRONG>

I must vehemently disagree with your opinion that Sarevok doesn’t care all that much about the PC. After all, he attacks you at Candlekeep, puts a bounty on your head, sends doppelgangers to mess with your mind, warns bandits to be on the lookout for you, and frames you for murder. Sarevok is much more focused on the PC then Irenicus ever was (who just sits on his ass waiting for you to come to him and then forgets about you after he has your soul). And I think Sarevok was a much more chilling villain as well. When I learned of Sarevok’s linage and scheme, a shutter went down my spine. If not for your interference he might very well have instigated Bhaal’s return (for more on Sarevok see [url="http://www.gamebanshee.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=2&t=004379"]here[/url]). Irenicus on the other hand under-whelmed me. In the end he’s just an exiled elf bent on hypocritical revenge against his own people. Shadows of Amn didn’t disappoint me in the slightest, but I enjoyed the original more.

@Weasel, As usual I'm in complete agreement with you.

[ 06-18-2001: Message edited by: Kayless ]

Originally posted by Weasel:
<STRONG>I ,on the other hand, did miss the aimless wandering. But not enough to call BG2 a disappointment. I liked being able to leave on every side of the map and having a new area, made it feel like I controlled my adventure, unlike BG2 where at times I felt pushed.</STRONG>

Same here, but would have still liked more NPC's and longer sub quests.

I havent played to the first one, so I cant comment on the Vs.
But there is one thing I think that went wrong for the developers with BG2 and I think they have stated that in some interview.
When you first get up from the dungeon and talk to gaylen(is that right?) and agree to find the money. After that point, you get bombarded with quests: Nalia, umar hills, tradmeet and many others in the town. I think its a bit funny that almost the whole town is looking for you, just when you get there. You rep in the town should come more slowly.
There are also alot of small things that maybe could have been done differently, but overall, BG2 is on of the best games ever and I have enjoyed every minute of it.

Best Regards
Kim Christiansen

I have enjoyed all aspects of each of the three BGs (BG I, ToSC, and BG II).

BUT

I would still like to see a game developed more on the lines (story, quests, result) of Tolkien's LOTR. Probably because I'm rereading the five main books. I enjoy Slash and Bash as well as the next person but I get real tired of it and that makes me go for the CLUAConsole, XP cap removers, etc. and powergame. I know, I don't 'need' to but the constant battles just get too boring after awhile. And even on the highest difficulty level with medeocure characters, it gets too easy after Spellhold (especially if you do most of the sub-quests in Chapter 2).

But, as usual, this is just my opinion for what it's worth.