What do YOU like about Baldur's Gate 2?
odessa333
Member Posts: 59
So hi there.
I've been a Baldur's gate 1 fan girl since BEFORE the original game released, yet I skipped out on 2 for a long, long while after hearing what happened to favorites like Khalid and Dynaheir. Yet for all this, I have heard nothing but praise for how amazing Baldur's gate 2 is. And with Baldur's gate 3 a reality, I broke down and finally gave Baldur's gate 2 it's chance just this month.
And I hated it.
I can't think of a game I've played lately that I dislike more. From story to graphics, everything seems worse. Everything is made so dark visually I can barely see what the heck I'm doing half the time. And the tone is just 'everything is horrible.' You're forced to do horrible thing after horrible thing with no choice about it, which I don't like. It doesn't make sense that you can't do get aid from any good aligned sources in the city. I struggle here to name a single quest with a 'happy' ending. Maybe I didn't find them in my rush to get this over with it, but it seems like it was just misery after misery going for that dark, 'mature' feel.
And Irenicus. Holy hell, this guy is the biggest Mary Sue with the worst plot armor I have ever seen. For all I heard about how great a villain he was, I just found him annoying.
I spent more time planning my different parties for this game than I actually spent playing this game. I don't think I can handle going back to do a second run. I am massively disappointed with this game, and don't understand why it's so loved. I needed to vent a little, it's true, yet I also wanted to give it's fans a chance to defend their game, to try to understand what makes this game so adored. Because right now I don't see it.
What do you enjoy about Baldur's gate 2?
I've been a Baldur's gate 1 fan girl since BEFORE the original game released, yet I skipped out on 2 for a long, long while after hearing what happened to favorites like Khalid and Dynaheir. Yet for all this, I have heard nothing but praise for how amazing Baldur's gate 2 is. And with Baldur's gate 3 a reality, I broke down and finally gave Baldur's gate 2 it's chance just this month.
And I hated it.
I can't think of a game I've played lately that I dislike more. From story to graphics, everything seems worse. Everything is made so dark visually I can barely see what the heck I'm doing half the time. And the tone is just 'everything is horrible.' You're forced to do horrible thing after horrible thing with no choice about it, which I don't like. It doesn't make sense that you can't do get aid from any good aligned sources in the city. I struggle here to name a single quest with a 'happy' ending. Maybe I didn't find them in my rush to get this over with it, but it seems like it was just misery after misery going for that dark, 'mature' feel.
And Irenicus. Holy hell, this guy is the biggest Mary Sue with the worst plot armor I have ever seen. For all I heard about how great a villain he was, I just found him annoying.
I spent more time planning my different parties for this game than I actually spent playing this game. I don't think I can handle going back to do a second run. I am massively disappointed with this game, and don't understand why it's so loved. I needed to vent a little, it's true, yet I also wanted to give it's fans a chance to defend their game, to try to understand what makes this game so adored. Because right now I don't see it.
What do you enjoy about Baldur's gate 2?
Post edited by odessa333 on
8
Comments
About the 'no happy endings' criticism... are you sure we are playing the same game? As someone playing with an evil Charname right now I feel there are not enough truly evil solutions to most Quests, or at least not enough creative ones. Often times doing a Quest in and of itself means you are doing more good than evil and the only way to show "Hey, I'm evil btw." is to ask for a reward or higher reward - which is often objectively worse because you lose out on reputation or other benefits.
The game is dark visually because you are not in Mountain_Area_47 all the time but in actual dungeons, houses, cities, caves, castles, you name it... most people agree though that BG2 is vastly superior to BG1 in terms of graphics. Everything is much more lively, detailed and nuanced.
And if you didn't like the main story or side stories than only the RPG gods can help you because it's definitely one of the best stories of any CRPG ever. The chase for Irenicus with all its different stages is exceptionally well made and the plot twists (Imoen, Yoshimo, Underwater City, etc.) are amazing on a first playthrough. And that is not even mentioning ToB which easily would have been a standalone title these days and offers a brilliant conclusion to the series.
If this game isn't for you, it's not for you but I can't for the life of me figure out how someone can love BG1 and hate BG2. BG2 is basically BG1 but everything is better.
I'm not sure what you mean about tone either. There's still the mix of optimistic, dramatic, and absurd that was in BG1, albeit leaning slightly less into absurd. And everything is horrible? 95% of all the quests either have ONLY a good ending, or the option of one. If anything, there's limited options for any kind of evil playthrough.
Seriously, the only claim you make that even seems definesible is Irenicus as a Mary Sue. Everything else is just blatantly incorrect.
This is my personal taste though. I think BG2 was a large improvement on BG1 at the time, and the NPC interactions were much improved, as were graphics and gameplay. But it is also a different game experience. It is not wandering around the often empty wilderness like BG1, or worrying about falling to a couple of ogres. It is higher level play with a much higher power curve. I think neither is better or worse as a game experience, just different.
But I still prefer BG1 and am so happy BGEE helps make it a much smoother experience!
Comparing the two games, I liked the greater range of NPCs and party variety in BG and that you could explore more widely and off the beaten track. Low level campaigns are always fun and you really feel you are being hunted down and at risk.
I think Sarevok is a much better villain than any other in the series and BG2 is darker in tone, which you may not like. I also find Irenicus to be annoying, moustache twirling and not particularly interesting, even though I think David Warner (the voice actor) is great - don’t expect many people to agree with you though, I have been slapped down on here before for daring to think this.
Where BG2 wins is much better developed NPCs, more role playing options, better graphics and interface and more exotic locations, also mage combat become more involved at high level and there is something satisfying about hitting the high level abilities - though there remains something very compelling about the greater NPC variety and low level fun of BG.
Minsc started out as a regular dude. A level 1 lucky to survive a strike from a gnolls halberd rescuing dynaheir. He would do a bit more than 10 damage in a good round, a little over 20 if he were really lucky. In the end he can do more than 100 damage per second and he ignores most of the damage people try to do to him. The growth arc is massively lowered without BG1.
HOWEVER, BG2 starts you in a different place - both literally and figuratively. You should now be a reasonably high-level character at this point. Killing kobalds and xvarts in the wilderness should be a side-show, not the main attraction. Just like in a real campaign, eventually you stop the random exploration and start focusing on one or more plot lines.
I love both games, and have played full trilogy runs many, many times.
So, that said, I can see *some* of your points, but not most. I was deeply disappointed by the Imoen thing, and then again when so many BG1 companions were either killed off directly, or within minutes of you meeting them. It was ridiculous, unnecessary, and I am still irked about it. However, it is possible that, had they been allowed as companions, most people would never experience the new companions.
I also agree that Irenicus is a bit of a Mary Sue, but really, that is almost to be expected. He is the big, bad villain. If you could kill him in chapter 1, it would sort of put a damper on the rest of the game. I suppose there are still plenty of things to do, but it would devolve into a pointless, aimless series of random quests. Thus, he sort of needed that plot armor.
Now, the other points I can't agree with. Most of the quests have a positive ending unless you are either playing a thoroughly evil, or stupid, protagonist. Not all of them, because this is old school DnD, but many of them. I would remind you that not all of the BG1 quests ended so great either. Remember that farmer in the Ankheg area? Yeah, that didn't end so hot for him. Pretty sure the unmodded Tenya quest didn't end so hot for a lot of people either.
That said, if you didn't like it, you didn't like it. There is no requirement to love a game just because everyone else does. I would suggest you try some mods before ditching it, though. With the right mods, it can feel like a totally different game. I personally like Imoen4ever because it gets rid of quite possibly the stupidest decision made in BG2 (obviously IMO)
That's not to say there aren't solid reasons to prefer BG1. Maybe you like free-style exploration, or have fond memories of low-level tabletop play, or appreciate Durlag's Tower which remains the best dungeon crawl in the BG series. Or maybe you dislike intricate mage battles, or talkative companions, or the feeling that you're being railroaded into rescuing a companion about whom you don't care. None of those things push me personally into preferring BG1 but I would certainly understand someone having that point of view.
I'm with you. I think Baldur's Gate was a beautiful game and Baldur's Gate 2 was incredibly disappointing. I think it is overblown and ugly. I hate the paper dolls, I hate the sprites, I hate the mirroring. I hate waking up in a dungeon with companions I dumped in a the first game. I hate the fact they turned Imoen into a mage. And I think the characters that were dropped or turned into cameos were far more engaging than the characters that were introduced. Oh, and I hate romances.
Still, it's nowhere near as bad as Throne of Bhaal.
The thematic elements of BG2 are different from BG1 as well, SoD feels more like BG1 to me with the forests, castles, and dungeons. Neither BG1 or SoD are heavy on mage chess or the nuances of D&D, and they feel like you can grab a sword and head out into the world. BG2 seems to require degrees of meta-knowledge to play the game, and on one hand that is one reason BG2 is replayed so much by many people, but on the other hand it's a bit discouraging for casual adventuring.
Before I started playing SoD about a year ago I tried playing BG1 first. But I didn't like walking through open maps with nothing really happening, there just wasn't enough going on. But 20 years ago when I played it, I absolutely loved it and felt like an explorer. Recently SoD felt more rich and accomplishing during playtime. BG2 took richness to another level and is like a living world, but a different world.
In BG2 the main character certainly isn't in the Candlekeep mythos anymore, they are in the special world and have crossed the threshold from the ordinary world. It's a more complex and morally challenging world to do the right thing. In my current playthrough, which I plan to complete the game this time, I just rescued Imoen and have the same party composition as my 20 year old save game. As far as critiquing the game, the amazing parts are the sound design, art design, items, richness and vast depth of the writing in every corner of the game. I'm not a fan of the time and moral pressures in the beginning of the game, though I did eventually reason that Irenicus is such a high level enemy that my party would have to go adventuring to have enough experience to be able to take a shot at such a foe.
I would have enjoyed more wilderness areas in BG2, SoD had several of them and I thought they packed enough adventuring in them, but BG2's setting and campaign is different than those games and it does so many things extremely well that it's daunting to comprehend how the creators of the game could put so much in there just for one game.
Anyway, this playthrough is on SCS Hardcore and Ascension, I'm much better at the game now than I was before. I thought about what I would do differently after this playthough, and I would absolutely install the Imoen 4 Ever mod. I think it would change BG2 world to be more open and free, and ease the moral dilemma and time pressure of the rescue in the unmodded storyline.
I love the deeper and more interesting dungeons. BG1 has the amazing Durlag's Tower and I guess the Candlekeep section. But that's about it for interesting dungeons. Two just has such an excellent variety of dungeons that have puzzles, reasons to backtrack, nonlinear progression, backstories, interesting NPC's. Even the simple catacombs beneath the graveyard give the player something more interesting than almost every dungeon in BG1. And the tedious chore of fighting with the pathing in BG1? Not fun!
I love the combat of BG2. I'm sorry but the combat for about the first half of BG1 is quite repetitive. How many kobolds, gibberlings, hobgoblins do you kill? Shadows of Amn has just about the perfect range of combat, where it's not the grind of Throne of Bhaal, but it's still an interesting variety. It always keeps you on your feet while rarely feeling like it's being unfair or just a grind. The combat in BG1 does start to pick up in interest towards the end, but, that's essentially the same kind of combat you face in BG2.
I love the deeper, complicated and surprising story of BG2. The obvious thing to do with this game would have been to play off the final cinematic in BG1. And that is the expectation most players will have when they first meet the antagonist. But the writers did a clever job of sticking with the main theme of the series while creating an unexpected twist on it.
I love the non-linearity of BG2. It's just the right amount. It's not so much that you're easily stumbling on encounters where you're under-powered -- a major issue with BG1 lots of veteran players forget. There's also multiple solutions to just about every major quest. Branching paths in the main story at just about every chapter.
I love the city design of BG2. It's one of the best fantasy cities in any RPG imo. The random encounters, the timed encounters, the night/day cycle. The lack, but not total absence, of filler content. The difference in districts. The consistent, non-generic theme and sense of a shared culture among its NPC's.
Anyways, not a complete list. But there's a reason why people treat this as one of the best CRPG's ever made.
The fates of the vanilla BG1 companions
5 joinable
6 alive (and not fated to die by canon in-game events)
3 alive then dead (You physically see their avatar/sprite and then they die by canon in-game events)
5 dead (usually by reference)
6 unknown
Edwin
Imoen
Jaheira
Minsc
Viconia
6 alive (do not die by canon in-game events)
Garrick
Quayle
Coran (possibly in next category)
Tiax (Very likely in next category though)
Branwen (tutorial)
Xan (tutorial)
3 alive then dead (Physically see their sprite/avatar alive and then they die by canon in-game events)
Faldorn
Safana
Xzar
5 dead (usually by reference)
Ajantis (only directly referenced if Keldon in party)
Dynaheir
Khalid
Montaron (and you can see the body)
Skie (by events of SoD, otherwise unknown)
6 unknown (no reference in unmodded game)
Alora
Eldoth
Kagain
Kivan
Shar-Teel
Yeslick
So 11 alive, half joinable, 8 dead, 6 unknown. Seems ok to me. I never got attached to any of the dead, so I guess I just didn't mind that much seeing them dead in the sequel. My favorites are in the alive or unknown columns. (particularly Imoen, Jaheira, Viconia, Branwen, Kivan)
Some of darker tone of BG2 comes from the number of companions that die and the manner. Gorian heroically dying to save the PC is one of the oldest tropes ever and can’t have surprised many, like Obi-Wan biting the dust etc etc. BG2 immediately kills off, in a pointless and futile manner, members of the cast that didn’t have “this chap will die heroically to save you” written in neon and bold on their foreheads
@odessa333
Another thing I do like about Baldur's Gate 2 are the companions and their quests. I liked Haer'Dalis, Mazzy, Valygar, Korgan, Yoshimo even Nalia! I also liked how vocal companions are and how most of them have personal quests.
Hm, I disagree that some of this stuff was unnecessary. First off, side protagonists being killed midway through a plot are not all that uncommon in this kind of high fantasy. It's often a way of raising the stakes in the middle of the action.
But it's important for establishing extra motivation for the PC at the start of SoA. I think it was a safe way to cover all their bases with a canonical opening. If he just kidnaps Imoen, well maybe you dumped her in Nashkel. But he does something to three different good NPC's, one of which you were likely to have used for most of BG1. I mean, they could only write one story in BG2, so they cast a wide net.
Secondarily, it allowed them to import some of the popular NPC's from BG1 while breaking up the couples thing, which wasn't popular with players. I think they go a little overboard with bringing in too many NPC's as questline moments, but I think they did a great job with bringing back just enough as playable characters, while adding new, interesting ones for the setting.
Gorian dies at the start of BG being a good dad and in an unsurprising manner, the npcs that die at the start of BG2 feel they haven’t met their purpose (although some players may be thinking, why are you here, I left you at the Friendly Arm Inn / you attacked me in Nashkel). Khalid dying frees up Jaheria to romance the PC, so I agree these decisions achieve plot objectives (it also breaks up pairs of characters and the non fan favourites were culled), but the story ends of Khalid and Dynaheir feel hollow, which contributes to an immediately darker tone to BG2.
People seem to have a downer on Dynaheir but I would much rather have had her story continue than travel with Aerie, Nalia or Neera (but I enjoy all things Rashemen).
Obviously, most people play good aligned parties, so most of the choices were good-aligned (Jaheira is essentially a good aligned character, despite being labeled as TN) If you aren't terribly thrilled with those options, you can always try to sneak out, but then you miss a bunch of stuff - including any imported items that are hidden behind locked, trapped chests. (assuming, of course, that your PC doesn't have thief skills)
I get why the decision was made to have you wake up in ID, and later to have Imoen kidnapped from your party, but to me, it felt a lot like you started the game by heading out from a train station. I love BG2, and still play it today, but I always hated that aspect of the game - and it's why I'm such a fan of mods that subvert it.
Now, once you get past that, and into the Athkatla itself, it's a whole different ball of wax. There is far more depth (literally and figuratively) to that city than Baldur's Gate. While I wish other cities had been expanded, such as Trademeet or Umar Hills, Athkatla could entertain a player for a long time all by itself.
1. revenge
2. you want to save imoen
3. answers for why he wants your power.
and as for the party thing it never bothered me. if i'm not using minsc that run i just use him for the starting dungeon and once i'm out kick him out for who i want and move on with my life.
the baldurs gate games are very flexable about this. your not gonna be stuck with the same 9 or so party members like you would be in later bioware/obsidian games. you can mix and match as you see fit epically if your like me and use modded npcs.
thats my main reason i enjoy baldurs gate 2. it's very replayable. one run will be vastly different then another depending on my party and i will see new content every time.
And come on, who doesn't like to join a multiplayer game, feeblemind the host, wipe out entire Athkatla, and leave the game. Thug life.
I agree but I wish none of them had quest timers. Or at least changed them so that as long as you do them before Spellhold, that satisfies them and ditch the timers altogether
SOD really does help bridge the gap now, though. Regardless of BG1 circumstances, these 3 are in or around Charname's orbit directly going into SOA.
The plot is a hastily thrown together pile of crap. No doubt about that. It’s basically a shabby pastiche of Star Wars. A 12 year old would be ashamed.
The entire focus of the game was changed very late in development and it shows
Fortunately the amazing characters, locations and interactions carry the day.
Some of the most memorable moments in the game come BECAUSE the main plot is so weak. Players have huge flexibility to play the game the way they want, to project their thoughts into the characters, and to play those roles.
In fairness, that would explain episode 8...
Almost every single other RPG has a main quest that's go to A, then B, then C, etc. And much of BG2 is that too. But one reason the opening segment of the game is so enjoyable is that there are near infinite number of ways you can go about completing this initial quest.
This plays into the non-linearity, I previously mentioned. But, to me, no other RPG has topped this specific moment in that regard.
nah luke in ep 8 is just a grumpy old man who is only friendly to r2.
Why BG2 = Starwars
The big bad = bhaal/Emperor
The dragon = irenicus/Vader
In both plots the dragon cares nothing for the wider goal, they have their own agenda to turn the protagonists power to their own ends
In both plots the protagonist and the dragon clash early. charname/irenicus in chateaux irenicus, Luke/Vader in the cloud city.
In both plots the dragon abducts the “rogue” from the protagonists party (Vader takes Han to Jabba, Irenicus takes Imoen to the asylum)
In both plots the protagonist embarks on a hero’s journey, grows in strength and skill, meets many people that will help them later
In both plots the protagonist travels to rescue their companion and is captured and horribly tortured in the process. Then triumphantly escapes, demonstrating their full power in the process ( charname transforming into the slayer and defeating Bhodi, Luke embracing the power of the force and defeating Jabba/boba fett
In both plots the protagonist does great deeds and leaves his enemies battered and bloodied. Luke destroys the death star, charname destroys the drow city.
In both plot the protagonist, now a fully fledged hero confronts the dragon and defeats him (Vader in the throne room, irenicus at the tree)
In that defeat the nature of the true threat is revealed - the Emperor in deathstar2, bhall in hell.
The protagonist reclaims their essence from the dragon, (destroying irenicus, turning Vader to the light side)
And in doing so sets the stage for the final confrontation with the big bad (TOB and episodes 7/8/9