Which Baldurs Gate?

Zulu

Ok, so following on from RopeDrinks thread, I'm looking to get into a more RPG rpg than I've played before. My only RPG experience so far has been the Mass Effect series, the Dragon Age series and Fallout 3. All of which I thoroughly enjoyed!

So people have recommended the balders gate game(s), so my question is - which one?

And/or would you recommend another RPG for me?
Thanks

KonFusion

The Neverwinter Nights series is pretty good too!

Just head over to GOG and check out the top rated RPG's if oldschool RPG's is what your after.

Witcher 1/2 are a definite.

Deus Ex. Fallout 1 & 2. There's loads!

Zulu

played witcher 1, but didn't finish it. It got too repetitive. Enjoyed it for a while. Is witcher 2 worth it?
Was thinking of pulling the trigger on the "enhanced edition" of b.gate.

MadYaker

If you want to get into RPGs then buy Skyrim. See you in a year!

Pushtrak

MadYaker wrote: »

If you want to get into RPGs then buy Skyrim. See you in a year!

There isn't a GOTY of that yet, is there? I'd suggest holding off for that. I'm not that patient, but if one has waited this long, might as well wait for the GOTY.

Overheal

Pushtrak wrote: »

There isn't a GOTY of that yet, is there? I'd suggest holding off for that. I'm not that patient, but if one has waited this long, might as well wait for the GOTY.

I dont see why. GOTY will just include DLC, which will be cheap by such time anyway, and for the average player not even necessary: I'm still playing vanilla skyrim, with 100 hours logged, and I've barely done anything with the thieves guild and nothing with the brotherhood. And thats just stuff Im thinking about. I'd say theres another 50 hours in the core game

Zulu

Sorry should have mentioned skyrim in the op. Played it for ages at first, then got a little bored with therrepetitiveness of it, stopped playing, and haven't gone back

Reekwind

Zulu wrote: »

So people have recommended the balders gate game(s), so my question is - which one?

It's not strictly necessary to have played the first to appreciate the second but I'd recommend it. Largely because BG1 is a really good game in its own right. Completely different to any modern RPG but much more interesting and nuanced

Here's a tip: buy both and you can use the EasyTutu mod to play BG1 in the BG2 engine. They're actually both on sale on GOG.com now

And once you're familiar with the BG series, the next step is Planescape: Torment. Stone cold classic

Pushtrak

Overheal wrote: »

I dont see why. GOTY will just include DLC, which will be cheap by such time anyway, and for the average player not even necessary: I'm still playing vanilla skyrim, with 100 hours logged, and I've barely done anything with the thieves guild and nothing with the brotherhood. And thats just stuff Im thinking about. I'd say theres another 50 hours in the core game

I guess its my console-centric thinking at fault here. DLC doesn't go down in prices for me, they get deals of the week or something.

Kiith

BG2 is the best RPG i've ever played, and is the one RPG i consistently come back to. So much to do, with an insane amount of quests and companions, some of who i've still never played through with. After that, i'd recommed Planescape, though it's engine is a bit older and can be a bit annoying at times. Fantastic game though, which i'm playing through at the moment.

Zulu wrote: »

Was thinking of pulling the trigger on the "enhanced edition" of b.gate.

Don't bother with the enhanced edition. Get the Baldurs Gate complete collection, and mod the 1st game to be played in the 2nd game's engine. It's simple to do, and it basically makes one absolutely massive game (consisting of 2 games and 2 expansions) which you can play through back to back. It's called BG1Tutu (www.pocketplane.net/tutu)

Mass Effect, Skyrim (or Morrowind which is better) and the Witcher series are also must play's. And System Shock 2, though it's more of a fps/rpg hybrid.

Meirleach

Well there's three hours left on this http://www.gog.com/promo/hasbro_stacking_weekend_promo_050413

You could pick up the baldurs gate series, neverwinter nights and most importantly planescape torment for not too many euros. If I'd seen this thread earlier I would have left you more than 3 hours!

mewso

I only recently got around to playing these classics and loved every minute of them. I would second buying 1 and 2 of BG so you can play the first one in the second engine. BG2 is universally considered the better of the 2 but the first is low level rpg'ing which is fun and a good way to get used to the mechanics of the game particularly as the second will be higher level and as a result tougher fights that require some thought which is great but harder if you are only starting.

I opted for easy tutu myself to play each game as a separate entity rather than both games as one huge game. With easy tutu and the mods available you basically get an enhanced Baldur's Gate anyway so I don't see the value of the Enhanced Edition myself. A good guide to install order of mods can be found here - http://forums.gibberlings3.net/index.php?showtopic=8122

With Easy Tutu (including Degrenefier) installed I added:-

Unfinished Business - for quests and stuff originally intended to be in the game but left out
NPC Project - for more chatter among your party, inspired I think by the fact that this was more common in BG2
Tweak Pack - I carefully went through what was available in this and picked some stuff I wanted like stackable potions, arrows etc. while skipping stuff like making areas available from the start which are locked out until a certain point in game normally. I didn't really want to change stuff that appeared to be by design but stacking arrows and so on is very handy.
Widescreen mod - didn't bump it up too high a resolution but you will obviously want it higher than the original.

Truly great games worth playing as much today as when they originally came out.

Zulu

Downloading as we speak, and just in time to coincide with the start of my thesis. Awesome. Thanks folks

quarryman

I've played these games a lot.

Play BG1 then BG2. Starting at level 1 and working your way from short swords and slings up to some of the uber-powerful weapons as you slowly upgrade and build your party is very satisfying. Also you'll feel the story develop rather than jumping in in BG2.

Without doubt you should play them Vanilla as much as possible, with the exception of the widescreen mod..

It doesn't change the game in any way but will make it feel a lot more modern. It's amazing how well it holds up.

COYVB

Bought the enhanced edition recently for iPad and can't hack it at all

Zillah

Playing Baldur's Gate 1 is the perfect way to burn yourself out on the series and ruin the chance to play and enjoy what is arguably the best RPG ever made (BG2). Give 1 a shot if you feel like it but if you find it boring just quit and go straight to BG2. They give you a little summary video at the start of 2 anyway.

Zulu

...just a small spanner in the works.

ride-the-spiral

Zillah wrote: »

Playing Baldur's Gate 1 is the perfect way to burn yourself out on the series and ruin the chance to play and enjoy what is arguably the best RPG ever made (BG2). Give 1 a shot if you feel like it but if you find it boring just quit and go straight to BG2. They give you a little summary video at the start of 2 anyway.

I found 1 to be more engrossing than 2 (Although 2 is still an amazing game.) I'd highly recommend playing it first though, 2 get's quite complicated at times and working up from 1 will give you a better grasp of the mechanics.

Kiith

I too found BG1 to be a lot more boring than 2. Maybe because i played 2 originally, and only went back to 1 afterwards.

Tar.Aldarion

Have to say BG1 was awesome.

Pushtrak

I've bypassed the question of whether to play BG first or go right to BG 2 by starting up Planescape Torment after taking advantage of that great offer linked a ways back.

Kiith

It's still a great game, but BG2 is better in pretty much every way. While Sarevok was a pretty entertaining bad guy, Irenicus is up there with the best of them.

Zillah

Pushtrak wrote: »

I've bypassed the question of whether to play BG first or go right to BG 2 by starting up Planescape Torment after taking advantage of that great offer linked a ways back.

I'm going to volunteer some advice here:
- Soldier on through the mortuary. That place is filled with the bodies of players that never escaped it, I'm sure. It is the worst way to start a game, so weird and dull. Just get passed it and the game gets more interesting.
- Don't be afraid to check a walkthrough for some stuff, there is a lot you can just fly right passed in this game.
- Pour points into Intelligence and Wisdom, they're by far the most fun stats in this game.
- Become a mage.
- Google how to become a mage. It is so easy to miss.

Pushtrak

Zillah wrote: »

I'm going to volunteer some advice here:
- Soldier on through the mortuary. That place is filled with the bodies of players that never escaped it, I'm sure. It is the worst way to start a game, so weird and dull. Just get passed it and the game gets more interesting.
- Don't be afraid to check a walkthrough for some stuff, there is a lot you can just fly right passed in this game.
- Pour points into Intelligence and Wisdom, they're by far the most fun stats in this game.
- Become a mage.
- Google how to become a mage. It is so easy to miss.

I've focused my points on Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma so far, putting an equal amount of the starting into those 3, so I had 16 of each. I've escaped the bit where you just start off. By pretty much just talking to someone at the main gate, and leaving that way.

I'm in the area immediately outside, have talked to lots of people who've given me some stuff to do, like trying to find some guy to deliver a message, trying to find some way to help someone stuck to get back to their own area.

Edit: If the Mortuary is dull by comparison of what comes later, then thats even better, as I still think its great. Morte is a funny fecker, for instance.

Zillah

Also, don't forget to endure. In enduring grow strong.

Reekwind

I'm not sure how anyone could find BG1 boring. In terms of storytelling and challenge it is head and shoulders above the sequel. And yes, Sarevok is the better villain

Zillah wrote: »

I'm going to volunteer some advice here:
- Soldier on through the mortuary. That place is filled with the bodies of players that never escaped it, I'm sure. It is the worst way to start a game, so weird and dull. Just get passed it and the game gets more interesting

'Weird and dull' or 'intriguing and sombre'? I'd suggest the latter. Irenicus' dungeon was boring, the mortuary was a great introduction to the Planescape multiverse

quarryman

Pushtrak wrote: »

I've focused my points on Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma so far, putting an equal amount of the starting into those 3, so I had 16 of each. I've escaped the bit where you just start off. By pretty much just talking to someone at the main gate, and leaving that way.

I'm in the area immediately outside, have talked to lots of people who've given me some stuff to do, like trying to find some guy to deliver a message, trying to find some way to help someone stuck to get back to their own area.

Edit: If the Mortuary is dull by comparison of what comes later, then thats even better, as I still think its great. Morte is a funny fecker, for instance.

You lucky bastard. I would love to be starting that game again for the 1st time. One of the greatest games I have EVER played. Here's my widescreen thread from 2008 (jaysus, 5 years ago).

Yeah, playing it again for the 1st time. Almost as if I had no memory of my previous playthroughs... hmm, that is a familiar concept for some reason...

Zillah

Sarevok was basically a villain from a children's cartoon. "Bwahaha I am evil and want to become an evil God"...he could seamlessly stand in for Skeletor when he was off getting his bones bleached. Irenicus was...I suppose I'll spoiler it

an elven mage, exiled from his own people and their wellspring of life, slowly losing all that he was and remembered - his bitterness manifests as a quest for revenge and reconnection with the elemental heart of elven-kind

. I don't know how you can even compare them, one is a cookie-cutter badguy, the other is complex and original.

Not to mention that he's voiced by the amazing David Warner. Ever pathetic, ever fools!

mewso

Have to agree with RopeDrink on everything said really.

I loved the 3 Gothics. Really really loved them. Gothic 3 patched up was a thing of beauty and obsession for me. Criticised for being too ambitious while I want more and more ambition. Just fix the problems and move forward. The original developers scaled things back with their next release, Risen (great game too in the same vein as Gothic 1 and 2), but I would love to see them attempt something on the scale of Gothic 3 again but given time to get it right. You can see where time constraints affected Gothic 3 as there are 3 huge areas and the northerly snow covered area is a total mess.

Like RopeDrink I put a lot of time into Skyrim (150+ hours) so I can't say I didn't get value for money but it really is lacking in so many ways. Simply limiting your choices of specialisation would have improved the game immeasurably. Being a master wizard, thief, fighter is not what rpgs should do.

I'm actually going through Neverwinter Nights at the moment and I enjoyed the original campaign (playing Shadows of Undrentide now). Not on a par with BG mainly because there is no party system bar being able to hire one henchman you have little control over. I believe the sequel addresses this and I grabbed it from the gog deal so much to look forward to.

I have also recently gotten a hold of Drakensang Complete from amazon (bizarrely not available on steam here but is in the US) which is a couple of rpgs based on the German Dark Eye role playing system. These guys were apparently strongly inspired by BG so I was intrigued. I'm hoping they will be fun.

One final series worthy of mention is Knights of the Old Republic. If you are a Star Wars fan they are must plays. I still haven't gotten round to the second one but the first is exceptional.

It's also worth noting that there is some serious music in these games. The music in Gothic 3, for example, is incredible. Doesn't get enough credit if you ask me. The composer, Kai Rosenkranz should be a bigger name in the business but seems to only get work from the Gothic devs. Shame really.

Oh yeah shame on you Zillah telling someone to skip the first BG. Doesn't matter which game is better I always say start at the beginning when it comes to games.

mewso

Forgot to mention the good times for crpgs are hopefully rolling around again. Drool :-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUleDEFkUtE

Tar.Aldarion

Looks lovely. As for the bad guys in baldurs gate, I dont remember interacting too much ith him, nmore travelling the world was awesome, getting companions and general stuff. Blew me away, and then I played co-op, mother of god!

Zillah

mewso wrote: »

Oh yeah shame on you Zillah telling someone to skip the first BG. Doesn't matter which game is better I always say start at the beginning when it comes to games.

I agree in principle, but I and many others found BG1 to be incredibly boring and unrewarding. It would be very easy to burn out on the series during BG1 and miss the chance at playing the far superior later elements.

Pushtrak

I'm loving Planescape. I went somewhere, and got my ass kicked by an enemy, so I've been exploring, wanting to do side quests. I just got someone to join up with me, Dak'kon. You know, in other RPGs, getting a companion is just something that doens't feel like anything special. It's just something that just happens, you know? Here, I was actually excited, it was cool and I'm going to go back see how I get on now.

mewso

Zillah wrote: »

I agree in principle, but I and many others found BG1 to be incredibly boring and unrewarding. It would be very easy to burn out on the series during BG1 and miss the chance at playing the far superior later elements.

I'm a bit surprised to be honest. Loved every minute of it and only made me want to play BG2 more. It would still probably be best maybe to play the first then take a break before jumping into BG2 since it's got so much more in it. Bear in mind anyone buying BG now will get Tales of the Sword Coast which has a fair bit more content and a large dungeon I think.

Sarky

Pushtrak wrote: »

I'm loving Planescape. I went somewhere, and got my ass kicked by an enemy, so I've been exploring, wanting to do side quests. I just got someone to join up with me, Dak'kon. You know, in other RPGs, getting a companion is just something that doens't feel like anything special. It's just something that just happens, you know? Here, I was actually excited, it was cool and I'm going to go back see how I get on now.

Oh, Dak'kon is a fascinating character. The way your relationship with him develops is very, very intriguing. Lots of theological debate, revelations and sworn oaths.

Be sure to get into arguments with hookers. Morte may learn a thing or two! :pac:

quarryman

I love how a discussion on Infinity engine games brings out all the Boards.ie Games veterans.

Creature

I'm shocked and appalled at the negative remarks about BG1. I suppose it's all personal preference really, but I find BG1 to be a much more fulfilling and interesting game than BG2 but don't get me wrong I do love 2 dearly. What I don't like about 2 is that by the end it just gets so ridiculous with all the uber gear and stupidly OTT spells and abilities. I just prefer the more down to Earth nature of the first game, also the more varied locations and the iron crisis plot.
Of course the game engine for BG1 is a bit archaic compared to 2 but the enhanced edition solves that problem nicely. Since its release I've played through it twice now and love the game more than ever.

Zillah wrote: »

Sarevok was basically a villain from a children's cartoon. "Bwahaha I am evil and want to become an evil God"...he could seamlessly stand in for Skeletor when he was off getting his bones bleached. Irenicus was...I suppose I'll spoiler it

an elven mage, exiled from his own people and their wellspring of life, slowly losing all that he was and remembered - his bitterness manifests as a quest for revenge and reconnection with the elemental heart of elven-kind

. I don't know how you can even compare them, one is a cookie-cutter badguy, the other is complex and original.


Not to mention that he's voiced by the amazing David Warner. Ever pathetic, ever fools!

Pfft Irenicus is a whinge bag who is just bitter because he lost his girlfriend and his little elven buddies wont talk to him.
David Warner though, you got me there. If everyone had his voice life would be so much more interesting.

Sycopat

Creature wrote: »

I'm shocked and appalled at the negative remarks about BG1. I suppose it's all personal preference really, but I find BG1 to be a much more fulfilling and interesting game than BG2 but don't get me wrong I do love 2 dearly. What I don't like about 2 is that by the end it just gets so ridiculous with all the uber gear and stupidly OTT spells and abilities. I just prefer the more down to Earth nature of the first game, also the more varied locations and the iron crisis plot.
Of course the game engine for BG1 is a bit archaic compared to 2 but the enhanced edition solves that problem nicely. Since its release I've played through it twice now and love the game more than ever.

I figure a lot of it must be personal preference, because I'm almost the exact opposite and my major issue with BG1 is that pretty much the first 3-4 chapters can be (imo*) an exceedingly dull grind, and the plot is relatively straightforward, whereas the more varied situations that BG2 constantly throws the player into, along with more character development for the rest of the party, keeps it interesting and fresh.

I remember reading somewhere a while back that a lot of BG1 players never even made it to Baldurs Gate. Don't know how much truth there is in that, but I can see how being overrun by gibberlings and kobolds every time you rest up after a fight could be demoralising. I thought it was a shame because it's an excellent game if you stick with it, but having to stick with it for so long is going to lose a lot of people's interest. And that's bad game design.

(*I know there's lots you technically 'can' do, but a lot of it is out of the way or too high level at this stage of the game. Particularly if it's your first time through.)

Tar.Aldarion

I loved the iron shortage plot, and the simple nature to the game, don't understand at all how people found it boring either!

Reekwind

Zillah wrote: »

Sarevok was basically a villain from a children's cartoon. "Bwahaha I am evil and want to become an evil God"...he could seamlessly stand in for Skeletor when he was off getting his bones bleached. Irenicus was...I suppose I'll spoiler it

an elven mage, exiled from his own people and their wellspring of life, slowly losing all that he was and remembered - his bitterness manifests as a quest for revenge and reconnection with the elemental heart of elven-kind

. I don't know how you can even compare them, one is a cookie-cutter badguy, the other is complex and original.

Not to mention that he's voiced by the amazing David Warner. Ever pathetic, ever fools!

Whoah, hold up. Points:

1) Sarevok was far from two dimensional, he just didn't need his backstory doled out to the player. The companions of his that do cross the PC's path (including his lover and mentor) paint a much more nuanced picture of the man than you suggest. But he always remains a shadowy figure in the background, someone to be worked towards rather than an in-your-face antagonist

2) But while Sarevok

kills Gorion and then retreats into the background, leaving it to the PC to slowly unravel his plot

Irenicus simply prances around doing not very much. There was no suspense to his activities, no mystery and no real reason to care about him (

Imoen's kidnapping was of course a great plot hook but that was the wizards, not the Big Bad. After her rescue, well you can't really compare having a soul supposedly stolen to Gorion's death

). Irenicus had far too much screen time

3) I'm sorry but Irenicus' backstory is pretty boring. It's determined to be epic without really relating it to the player.

Hoping to become a new God of Murder through starting a bloody war that will devastate a region is impressive. Poisoning some tree because the elves weren't nice to you... not so impressive

. More to the point, why should I care about that?

4) Everything we learn about Irenicus comes via exposition. We're told that he was X and that he's incredibly powerful. We're told that Y will happen if he succeeds or that the PC needs to stop him because of Z. BG1 isn't free of this sin (particularly with regards motivation) but the key activity of the game is unraveling Sarevok's plot; so that while the key motivations remain hidden until the end, the PC approaches this point from a position of knowledge, having already unpicked the details of the scheme. In contrast, in BG2 you simply

follow Irenicus around until someone explains that he's an ex-elf who's after some magic tree. He could have been building a spaceship to the moon for all you'd know prior to exiting the Underdark

Sycopat wrote:

I remember reading somewhere a while back that a lot of BG1 players never even made it to Baldurs Gate. Don't know how much truth there is in that, but I can see how being overrun by gibberlings and kobolds every time you rest up after a fight could be demoralising. I thought it was a shame because it's an excellent game if you stick with it, but having to stick with it for so long is going to lose a lot of people's interest. And that's bad game design.

I think it's true that BG1 suffers from being the first Bioware RPG and as such it sticks fairly closely to the D&D ruleset. Often that's to the detriment of the game

But I don't think that the challenge was a symptom of this. It was a tough game, one in which you could be killed by wolves on the first non-tutorial map or randomly bump into a high-level band of mercs while exploring. That is not a bad thing. The road to Nashkel was tough but there was a difficulty cure there. By the time you emerged from the mines then you knew that you were equally tough. There was a proper difficulty curve there and a plot that moved you smoothly along it

That wasn't something that I recall people complaining about at the time of release but it does jar with the increasing tendency to hand-hold players

Tar.Aldarion

I have to agree on the mystery of Sarevok behind the scenes was brilliant, you really were anticipating running into him and held him up as a badass mofothat was gonna **** you up without knowing too much bout him first hand. I really got a sense of mystery and accomplishment with the whole investigating iron ore thing.


Also anybody remember the graveyard where the ghosts would rise and **** up your ****?

Kiith

mewso wrote: »

I loved the 3 Gothics. Really really loved them. Gothic 3 patched up was a thing of beauty and obsession for me.

I loved Gothic 3, but it was a buggy mess on release. Have they patched it properly (i.e. is it playable now)?

ZeroThreat

I used to play RPGs like you people, but then I took an arr.....

ok, I'll get my coat and head for the exit..



on a serious note, I bought skyrim just after x-mas, only been playing it the past couple of weeks though. That Cicero character in the Dark brotherhood storyline really freaked me out though, it was a relief to put my enchanted Daedric greatsword through him

In fact, once you make up a legendry dragonbone armour set and daedric weapons, it seems easy to kill anything in game without dying.

nesf

Creature wrote: »

I'm shocked and appalled at the negative remarks about BG1.

Low level AD&D can be painful, even with a modified rules system (I think, it's been 10 years since I played with either). BG1 had a good story but your characters were quite narrowly limited for a long time because of the rules system's nature (be squishy at the start and build slowly into a God basically).

Compared to the older AD&D licenses, it's quite gentle but I can see how BG1 wouldn't agree with a lot of people. AD&D characters under level 5 at best are delicate things not able to do very much and while this is very much a key trope of old school roleplaying games (seriously, rolling Mage when you're starting at L1 was basically saying you had a deathwish in roleplaying games because of your hitpoints but if you got above level 10 you were God-like) it's not something someone fresh into the genre might be comfortable with.

In BG2 you get an advanced start and get a good few interesting powers on each character. While I enjoyed the story of BG1 when I played it when it came out, I had a lot more fun with the higher powered characters of BG2 because combat was a lot more interesting for me.


Edit: I will admit that RPGs, both tabletop and computer based, are often small scale wargames for me rather than things I play for plot and story. While I enjoy a well written RPG if the combat isn't at least somewhat interesting I'll probably never finish it.

Tar.Aldarion

ZeroThreat wrote: »

I used to play RPGs like you people, but then I took a kivan to the knee >_>

ok, I'll get my coat and head for the exit..

fyp >_>

nesf wrote: »

Low level AD&D can be painful, even with a modified rules system (I think, it's been 10 years since I played with either). BG1 had a good story but your characters were quite narrowly limited for a long time because of the rules system's nature (be squishy at the start and build slowly into a God basically).

Compared to the older AD&D licenses, it's quite gentle but I can see how BG1 wouldn't agree with a lot of people. AD&D characters under level 5 at best are delicate things not able to do very much and while this is very much a key trope of old school roleplaying games (seriously, rolling Mage when you're starting at L1 was basically saying you had a deathwish in roleplaying games because of your hitpoints but if you got above level 10 you were God-like) it's not something someone fresh into the genre might be comfortable with.

In BG2 you get an advanced start and get a good few interesting powers on each character. While I enjoyed the story of BG1 when I played it when it came out, I had a lot more fun with the higher powered characters of BG2 because combat was a lot more interesting for me.


Edit: I will admit that RPGs, both tabletop and computer based, are often small scale wargames for me rather than things I play for plot and story. While I enjoy a well written RPG if the combat isn't at least somewhat interesting I'll probably never finish it.

The thing I adore about some RPGs is this weakness at the start and advancing. When we used to lan in galway playing rpgs, I never had so much fun as when a friends mage was so weak at level one that he couldnt hold an empty vial with his clothes. I also pretended to be a barmaid and named my character wench, and ****ed around with people, they had no idea I wasn't an npc. Just kept serving in the tavern naked when one guy was there, he'd tell everybody and I'd put my clothes back on, no one would believe him. Good times. /ramble

Anyway, having that level of control over your stats was great. I admit baldurs gate could have given you a better option to have some strength as a mage, or did it, I can't remember? liked the way I could have some awesome skull that explodes or a cookie thing that boobytrapped chests but I could still die to some wolves or a sword. I don't like the hand holding. Did need better variety though. I can only cast so many magic missiles.


I really cant remember baldurs gate II well, did they do it up like the first one? Must pick it up anyway.

nesf

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

The thing I adore about some RPGs is this weakness at the start and advancing. When we used to lan in galway playing rpgs, I never had so much fun as when a friends mage was so weak at level one that he couldnt hold an empty vial with his clothes. I also pretended to be a barmaid and named my character wench, and ****ed around with people, they had no idea I wasn't an npc. Just kept serving in the tavern naked when one guy was there, he'd tell everybody and I'd put my clothes back on, no one would believe him. Good times. /ramble

I remember in table top games having a lot of fun with "keep the mage alive, in 10 levels we absolutely will need him." Though a strong gust of wind could crit and kill him so it was hard to do.

While I could understand the many, many problems people had with D&D 4th ed, it did fix one thing, in old D&D if you were a Mage and were low level you had a very small number of spells learned and in a long fight you could very quickly find yourself reduced to (very poorly) using a sling to help the party which sucked basically. In 4th ed with the different levels of powers, you always had some basic spell you could cast every round, even at level one, now it'd suck compared to what you'll be able to do at high level so there was still a strong progression element but at least your "core competency" remained relevant throughout fights.

Reekwind

nesf wrote: »

In BG2 you get an advanced start and get a good few interesting powers on each character. While I enjoyed the story of BG1 when I played it when it came out, I had a lot more fun with the higher powered characters of BG2 because combat was a lot more interesting for me

I actually found the opposite. First, because BG1 had plenty of amazing (and really taxing) stand-out party-v-party encounters. BG2 kept some of these but the emphasis was more on party-v-boss fights. You'd still occasionally go up against a named party of fighters, clerics, mages and thieves but not as often as the original and certainly not to the same level of difficulty

This was partly a product of the nature of computer games exerting itself but mostly due to progressing to higher D&D levels where wizards reign supreme. Basically every fight in BG2 became a matter of 'kill the mage first' and most of the key encounters were a wizard plus some mooks. At the same time the fighters in the PC's party were downgraded to tanks, simply existing to soak up damage while the wizards wove their pretty spells. That same dynamic didn't exist when magic missile was about the height of a mage's offensive capabilities

mewso

Kiith wrote: »

I loved Gothic 3, but it was a buggy mess on release. Have they patched it properly (i.e. is it playable now)?

There is a community patch which makes it perfectly playable. The only issue for me was the combat. The patch does it's best but in the end you have 2 options. Very hard combat or very easy combat. I loved the combat in the previous versions where as you got better you could chain swings into a flowing move that depended on your skills in game as well as your play skills but this hasn't been recaptured as of my play through. I opted for the easy combat simply because I wanted to explore the world but next time I might try the hard again especially if future community patches can put in the chained moves as I don't recall that being part of it.

RaZzZz

This sounds fair interesting to me, I've started playing Divinity one and I quite enjoy it, Baldur's Gate looks nicer to me, where is the besht place to buy this games lads? with the best offers of course ^^

Kiith

GOG.com is the best place to get the series. Then use the patch mentoned above (BGTutu or EasyTutu) to import the 1st game into the engine for the 2nd game.

Burgo

Kiith wrote: »

GOG.com is the best place to get the series. Then use the patch mentoned above (BGTutu or EasyTutu) to import the 1st game into the engine for the 2nd game.

Is that not what the enhanced edition basically does?