Great Rumbler Wrote:Default Baldur's Gate would be a lot more fun if...

A Black Falcon Wrote:Baldur's Gate I is every bit as great a game as Baldur's Gate II is, overall. The second game is slightly better, and improves on the first one in interface design -- bags, 40 arrows per stack, notes on the map, etc -- but in gameplay and game design, the first game is just as good. It depends on what you like, the more open world of BG1 or the more linear one of BGII. I know I criticize the TES games for being too open (see my post earlier in this thread), but BG1's style of open-endedness I like. The main quest is always there and is fascinating and very well done. You just also have the option of wandering around in the wilderness or city for pretty much as long as you want, doing sidequests and exploring. BGII removes most of that, getting rid of the first game's numerous mostly-empty zones and replacing them with fewer, much more densely packed zones. And honestly, as amazingly great as BGII was, I often found myself wishing for the more spread out nature of the first game.

The Underdark is amazingly cool... but it's mostly squeezed into one main zone?
Athkatla is great... but you can only visit certain parts of it, and not the whole city like you could Baldur's Gate? And you spend more than half or two thirds of the game not being able to go back to it or anywhere other than the area you're currently in? Things like these make the game much more focused, but really, was having bunches of forest zones with one or two sidequests in them really all that bad? I don't think that BGI suffered from it. Indeed, its main quest is very interesting and well done, just as much so as the second game's is. The game just lets you do more other things along the way.

The subject of your NPC allies who join your party is similarly mixed. On the one hand, BGII has MUCH, MUCH more detailed allies. They have real stories, quests, will leave your party if you don't do things they like or ignore their quests, etc. They talk to eachother and with you. The game has relationships you can form with certain characters. But... it has very few NPCs who can join your party. The first game has only basic characters with minimal characterizations beyond what their voice lines are (with only a few exceptions), but at least it gives you lots of options so you can build your party pretty much exactly as you want it. But BGII? Want a mage? Well, do you mind a dual-classed mage who will level slow? There are two of those... but if you want a real mage, one who will be at full power in a game where mages are incredibly, incredibly powerful... how many choices do you have? Three. And one of those three is gone for the first half of the game. This leaves two. And one of those two is Chaotic Evil and is a horrible character who any Good character will probably kill (particularly if you have Minsc in your party or cared about Dynaheir). That leaves one. Who has low Wisdom.

The Cleric situation is even worse... if you have both Aeire and Jahera it's covered well enough, but the only full cleric is Evil aligned and hard to keep in a Good party...

However, I know that when you're putting that much detail into each character, it's impossible to have as many of them as the first game had. So overall it's an acceptable limitation, and I'd say the second game is better overall in characters thanks to the fact that characters actually develop, unlike in the first game where only yours really did. But the limitations should also be recognized.

A Black Falcon Wrote:First, the huge, folding cardboard case (folder?) the five (six with expansion) discs come in is impressive and probably my favorite game CD case of all the ones I have. Sure, parts of mine are torn now so the discs don't stay in all the time, and with a full install like I have all I actually need is the expansion disc for the CD check, but I still keep it around. Torment also had a cardboard fold-out case, for the four discs, but that was only single height, not double height like BG1's. It's also cool that there's a sixth slot there, for the expansion disc. BGII just has a normal dual jewel, with no extra spot for the expansion disc. On the other hand, it does have a really awesome spiral bound manual, while BG1 just has a smaller, standard bound manual...

Right from the beginning, it's one of the best RPGs ever. The CG intro is awesome, if confusing until you figure out the plot. Even so, it's very well done, and the music playing there is really good. And seeing the TSR, BioWare, and Black Isle logos all together... awesome. :)

Just everything about Baldur's Gate is amazing. Graphics, music, sound, gameplay, design, writing, story... all exceptional. When replaying the game, I was impressed by all of the hidden ties from the first game to the later parts of the series; they obviously had the whole plot mapped out from the beginning. Other connections, like the three sets of pantaloons to collect across the three titles, are pretty cool too... :) Then there's the always-entertaining Noober and Neeber too, of course. BG1 ties in very closely to the second game. Sure, half of the game's plot seems to be about a seemingly unrelated iron shortage, but in the end it all makes sense. And I think the iron shortage plot is just fine -- you're a fledgling adventurer. Of course you're going to start with a small problem, like a local crisis like the iron shortage! And it ties directly in to the main plot anyway, given who is orchestrating the shortage. There is lots of reason to want to solve the problem, too, with the way that swords have a tendency to simply crumble. :)

It's easy to spend a huge amount of time exploring before you solve the shortage, though. Indeed, I have often just spent my time wandering around there, and stopped playing the game before I ever get around to going to the enemy camp... I've beaten the Nashkell Mines like six or eight times or something, but I've only got past the enemy camp once. It's very easy to ignore the plot at that point. :D

"Ohh, I'm so tired..."

... yeah, I'm kind of sick of the Nashkell Mines. :)

Of course, it stays easy to ignore the plot later -- Baldur's Gate is a huge city. There's a lot to do there... still, the story is interesting and well told. It's clear from the beginning that you are special somehow, but you don't know how, except that somebody put a price on your head and you have to keep killing bounty hunters...

I already mentioned Xan. Depressing, sure, but entertaining, I think... "around you, I almost feel that we have a chance!"

Garrick is awesome too... I don't usually keep him because I am not convinced about the usefulness of bards, but he is an entertaining character. :)

Anyway, in the end, it's just a great, great game. It should be played. You don't even have to finish it, really... the ending is obvious, once you've gotten far enough into the plot to know the main villain, and you can import any save file to BG2, not just a completed game. Just spend a good while playing the game and have fun.

Great Rumbler Wrote:It didn't feel like I was constantly being punished for playing it. All of my characters are level 1 retards which means they constantly die fighting ANYTHING so I have to save all the time and load all the time, I don't have enough money for healing items, I can barely even make it through the newbie dungeon, resting heals like 1 HP for every 8 hours, and the enemies I actually CAN beat give me 1 experience point when I need over a 1000 to get to the next level.

Oh and I just LOVE getting ambushed in THE MIDDLE OF TOWN by someone who completely wipes out my party in a matter of seconds.

Quote:This is an impossible statement, Baldur's Gate I couldn't be any more fun than it is.

Quote:Level 1: Yes, you are weak at level 1 in D&D. Mages are particularly weak, with just one or two spells until they're useless until you rest again, and an average of four hit points... and yes, in Baldur's Gate I you level up very, very slowly, more slowly than about any other single player D&D RPG I know of. It's a 75+ hour game and at the end you're only level 7 or 8, depending on class. Don't expect to level fast. You won't.

The challenge is added to by the fact that you don't get resurrect in this game, I'm pretty sure. If you do, it's quite late in the game. Lose a character and you've got to pick up all their gear and begin a tedious trek back to the last temple... I prefer to simply reload my last save if anyone dies in combat. It's easier that way.

Saving: There's a quicksave button for a reason. Use it often. Make regular hard saves too, into multiple files. And remember the autosaves it creates when you zone, those can also be helpful.

Healing items: In D&D, you really shouldn't use healing items much... healing should generally be done through magic and resting. Once you're out of healing spells and are low on health, it's time to rest... just get away from any enemies and quicksave before you hit the rest button, so that if you get ambushed and lose someone you can load the file.

Remember to always cast all of your healing spells before you rest, because unlike BG2, BG1 doesn't have an automatic "cast all healing spells on rest" option. And always check your spellbooks when your characters level up and fill in those new spell slots!

"Newbie dungeon" -- which? The Nashkel Mines? There are some hard encounters in there, I agree... some traps, too, and a challenging boss. You've got to be careful and use strategy, for sure...

Oh, and be careful in exploring the many wilderness zones. The game lets you go into any wilderness zone you want, but a great many of them are much, much too difficult for a low-level party. For instance, get out of the zone you end up in after you finish the Nashkel mines as soon as possible, going straight left! If you accidentally go up a bit (not far at all), you'll run in to a party of enemies that are impossibly hard for your level at the time.

After the Nashkell Mines, getting Minsc and heading for the Gnoll Fortress is a common next (side) quest. It's either that or trying to find the enemy camp for the next chapter, where the bad iron is coming from... and there's always exploring the towns, of course. There's a lot to do in Beregost and Nashkell and their surroundings.

As for your last point, well, you have a bounty on your head! What do you expect, to be ignored by all the people trying to collect it just because you're in town? I've been attacked too, and a few times it has caused me to lose someone and have to load from my last save, but it's not unfair. For one thing, each of those encounters only happens once. Once you've fought one of the bounty hunters, there won't be another fight the next time you go to that location. So they aren't that common, really. And thanks to the autosave, it's unlikely that it'll cause you to lose much progress. It just adds realism and interest to the plot.