Why is this game boring compared to BG2?
Diomedes33
Member Posts: 144
Made a party.. got up to Dragon's eye before I yawn-Xed the game. I'm not sure why either because I love BG2. Was it the fact that I created the entire party and rofl-stomped everything on the hardest level? I dont know..
1
Comments
The same is true if you are using things like fighter/mages or blades who can stoneskin/fireshield their way to victory. If you can't do any damage then damage amount means nothing. Add in +100% experience, and you just get stronger and stronger.
(2) IWD also lacks dialogue of any kind. You might just be getting bored because of the lack of interaction.
(3) IWD is also very linear. You don't have any choices. BG2 lets you go "man, I don't feel like freeing the keep. I'm going to go troll the thieves guild." You can travel around, IWD doesn't let you.
I find that it is best to play IWD spaced out. So it keeps feeling fresh. Otherwise, you do eventually get bored.
There are ways to spoil the challenge:
– create 6 powergamer characters with high stats or classes that are known to be overpowered, which is possible in IWD, and DOMINATE, while you only get one such character in BG while the rest is somewhat mediocre (read: balanced).
– raise the difficulty setting but leaving the double XP option on, therefor raising levels faster than your enemies get stronger. Game gets easier while you play, at some point easier than normal setting. BG does not grant double XP for higher difficulty, actually making the game more difficult. IWD added a switch to turn this off in 1.4 patch, it's in the gameplay options.
There are ways to keep the challenge:
– find the right difficulty setting that actually works (see above)
– make themend parties like Bards Bands, elves only, or just characters that have weaknesses along with their strengths, and use what you got
– on character creation, use the dices only once / twice / trice
– avoid to use known cheese tactics
– There is the option of using the IWD NPC mod, that adds characters that are balanced and talk to each other. Less temptation to make overpowers, and more immersion.
Multiplayer is the way to go.
I imagine it works far better as multiplayer and next time I try it I will definitely give the NPC project a go.
I guess what I would really like would be to be able to transport my Baldur's Gate NPCs into the game. If I could explore it with Imoen, Kagain, Alora, Viconia and Edwin I would probably enjoy it a lot more.
Min-maxing can really ruin the fun (not talking IWD specifically since I haven't even completed it yet) so you should consider a sub-optimal party to ramp up the challenge.
Baldur's Gate 2 TELLS a story. It's all about character interaction, emotion, adventure, discovery, twists, turns, and self-determination. It's action-oriented but it's also very dialogue-heavy. You need to play a role and interact with the environment in order to enjoy it.
Icewind Dale HAS a story. It's a tactical hack-and-slash dungeon crawl filled to the brim with difficult and strategically placed encounters. The setting, graphics, sound, and music are all designed to generate the perfect atmosphere for inspiring anxiety and desperation. You're thrown into this region with no help whatsoever and it's up to you, your wits, and your limited resources to get through it alive.
I enjoy both types of games for different reasons. But they're both absolutely terrific and neither will ever be less than the other.
Edit. Or maybe I'm missing something
But there's close to zero replayability because of how linear it is. I'd play BG2 9/10 before IWD again because while there is a path I can take major sidequests in different orders at least and stuff like that.
I would have been more thrilled for Planescape: Torment EE...
While some people may disagree, I don't think the infinity engine is particulalrly well-suited for hack'n'slash action RPGs, which is exactly what IWD is. It is simply too deliberate, mellow and slow-paced for a game that puts brawn before brains. When you take away tactical planning, banter, sidequests, diplomacy and complex spellcasting patterns (most of what made BG so memorable an experience), the shortcomings of the engine become painfully apparent.
What this game needs the most is an SCS-like mod to improve the AI and the complexity of the encounters.
With BG you get quirky personalities and quests - and NPCs that interact not only with you but with other NPCs which can be fun and entertaining. Not only that you get the flaming fist and bureaucrats and assorted mages that might arrest if you don't buy their magic license for a ridiculous amount. You actually have to be nice to some degree in order to keep your NPCs because they leave if your rep gets too high or low. Plus for those that like a romance - you can romance a character and even get a "home" in BG2. All the intrigues, and quests within quests make BG that much more entertaining than IWD.
BG2 was intentionally written and designed as an immersive role playing game.
IWD was intentionally written and designed as a hack'n'slash dungeon crawler.
Better to compare it to it's competitor of the time, Diablo II. They were both released on the same day, as competition between the two studios, Black Isle and Blizzard...that was when Blizzard was an underdog, before WoW.
I imagine that Diablo II's success so far outshined IWD that IWD never really got the love and praise that it deserves, although Black Isle did have enough success to release IWD2 before putting the infinity engine to rest and Black Isle's subsequent closure after BG:DA2.
When I compare IWD to Diablo II instead of to BG2, I truly believe that IWD is a vastly superior game, hands down. It's environments, music, story, combat, loot, characters, play style, monsters, level progression, everything is so much better than Diablo II's.
Diablo II has got IWD beat, though, in simplicity, ease of character creation, random generation of maps, and superior, easy multiplayer on the battlenet. It also does a fair job in the other areas I mentioned, as well. I believe that simplicity is why Diablo II was so much more successful. As a result of that overwhelming success, Diablo II kind of set the tone for all the hack'n'slash dungeon crawlers that we have today. I can't think of any dungeon crawlers like IWD, although I can think of tons of Diablo II ripoffs.
Who knows, if it weren't for Diablo II, maybe IWD would have set the tone for hack'n'slash dungeon crawlers. If you got bored playing Diablo II by yourself (many people do without multiplayer), you may find that you get a little bit more mileage from IWD's superior quality...but you will still probably get bored with it eventually.
But don't compare it to BG2. It's like comparing apples to oranges. You can appreciate both for what they are, like one more than the other, but never accurately say that one is better than the other. They are just too different to compare.
I'm not sure I would agree that IWD is clearly superior to Diablo II, but I do agree it is a worthy game.
BG is D&D with an even mix of role-playing and hack & slash.
PS:T would be D&D with very heavy role-playing and very little hack & slash.
IWD is D&D with very heavy hack & slash and very little role-playing.
D&D players are well known for having preferences about the mix and ratio of role-playing to hack & slash in their D&D games. I like pretty heavy hack & slash in my D&D games. I like role-playing to various extents depending on my mood, so I like both BG and IWD.
I can't get into heavy role-playing games with little hack and slash, so I can't even bring myself to play PS:T at all.
D&D is part of a genre often referred to as "classic western RPG". By contrast, "Japanese RPG" and "action RPG" are distinct genres of their own. (There is argument about these classifications. I am giving my opinion, by which I can classify games and know pretty well before I play them much whether I am going to like them or not.)
I respectfully disagree that IWD is like Diablo. Diablo defined an entire genre that is separate from classic western RPG. Action RPG's don't play the same as classic western RPG's. There are strong qualitative differences. Comparing IWD to Diablo is still comparing apples to oranges, as far as I'm concerned.
I wrote an essay explaining in detail why this is my opinion, here:
https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/comment/547304#Comment_547304
But, I feel like I'm just here to rush the game, gain XP, level up and do that again.
The fact that you create your own group, no banters, not enough side quests, not enough side maps (all the maps are related to the main quest and you're obliged to walk across them, once done, you never come back).
I like to play this game but I prefer the BG serie, its a real story-game