50 réponses à ce sujet

[SkittlesKat96]

So after playing DA:O (which I loved) everyone kept going on to me about BG being the best Rpg ever but to be honest from the half of the game I've played I haven't enjoyed it.

A lot of the gameplay is very repetitive, unbalanced and takes no skill or is just frustrating, and I find the characters and setting to be only decent and not that great, same with the story. (although I do like the character interactions.)

Is this game just a nostalgia based 'you had to be there' sort of thing? I just find that DA:O is much more of an improvement to be honest...by todays standards DA:O is just a whole lot more of an enjoyable experience.

[ncknck]

bg1 is a game for explorers. Try bg2.

[Dr. Freud]

Nostalgia definitely plays a big part for BG fans who experienced the game when it first came out. It's of course a matter of taste whether you prefer DA:O over BG. Dragon Age is much more accessible and the story driven nature makes it more involving to some players.

For most players who haven't tried any Infinite Engine games, I'd probably recommend to try the second BG first, since the UI and NPC interaction are a million times better than in the first one. Also, installing mods like Easy Tutu is IMO mandatory for playing BG1 these days.

Personally I still prefer the old infinite engine games over DA:O, because they were designed purely for the PC and they were not designed to please the average 12 year-old ADHD kid. There are just those little things that make BG a bit more immersive than DA:O, like the fact that your characters doesn't automatically come to life if they die during combat, mages don't automatically own wands with infinite magic missiles and IMO the art direction is way better. Don't get me wrong, DA:O is also a good game; the devs were able to find a really good balance between the old and the new.

[corey_russell]

What I like about both BG 1 and BG 2 are the class compositions...that is, I could have an all paladin party and it would play way different from the balanced party. People have done all mages, all bards and the play/strategy is different. I like too, that there were often multiple ways to deal with threats. Yes, DA:O has multiple ways, but most of them get you killed (as I found out). Also trying to do a all melee group in DA:O is pretty much impossible even with the best equipment. All cleric, all mage or all fighter, these groups are all viable in BG 1/2 they just have to play differently and I really like that.

[Moganza]

I might be in the minority but I found DA:O quite boring, I actually found the DA2 more fun believe it or not. BG1 gives a sense of adventure in the sense that you're not given a real direction as to what you should be doing which made the scenario all the more believable (Your Step-Father Gorion dying and tell you a back up plan). You spend the game investigation events. BG2 is similar but toned down exploration a tad and focused on telling a better story and as Dr Freud said Npc interaction is a million times better in BG2, so are spells, weapons and armors.

And as Corey said I've yet to play a game with more replay value.

[Forst1999]

BG-love isn't only nostalgia. This are good games (2 more than 1 in my opinion, but i'm sure some people like the exploration and investigation Moganza just mentioned). What i don't understand are comparsions between BG and DA:O. Both are fantasy RPGs with party based combat, but the similarities end right there. Combat in BG is about three things: Protection from enemies' crowd control spells, disabling enemies' protection spells and maybe drinking some potions if it is one of the mean fights. Most battles in BG1 doesn't even require any of this, but are just "click on an enemy, wait for it to die, maybe eat a sandwhich in the meantime". I find the battles in either Dragon Age much more varied. You are always occupied with using the right talent/spell at the right time, and not just in extraordinary situations.
Also the story structure of BG1 is unfamiliar to players of newer Bioware games. Since BG2 the main plot begins right away and wants you to stick to it (well some games invite you to explore the world a bit, but the plot shows itself). BG1 is much more of a paper chase. After the murder of Gorion it just leaves you standing there, only some companions nag you about an seemingly unrelated iron shortage (i quit my first game of BG because i just couldn't bring myself to care). The plot only begins to actually involve you after many hours of playing. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, but uncommon for Bioware games. Also BG1 is very weak about choices or anything else that lets you roleplay different characters. You can make your character a hero, a mercenary or a psycho, but that's about it. With BG2 it gets much better, especially ToB offers many good ways to decide your character's personality. But it takes some time to get to this parts. In DA you start developing your personality from the first conversation onwards.
All i'm trying to say is that i never understood how DA:O is the "spiritual successor" to Baldur's Gate. I don't think they are very similar.

[corey_russell]

DA:O is the spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate primarily due to it being an RPG, you can get party members, and they interact with you a lot just like BG. There's a ton of single player RPGs out there (Oblivion, anyone?), but not so many ones with NPCs like this because it takes a lot of work to make a game like this. Oblivion is a good game, but I found the extreme implausibility of it (one man/woman is more effective than an entire army? come on) takes me out of the immersion. BG and DA:0 on the hand, make it easier for me to immerse myself with their party based format.

[Crippled Jack]

Forst1999 wrote...

All i'm trying to say is that i never understood how DA:O is the "spiritual successor" to Baldur's Gate. I don't think they are very similar.

I don't understand why people are still clinging to the whole 'spiritual succesor' thing in the first place. I mean, it should be obvious that this is nothing more than just marketing strategy.

...and for the OP, you should try making a general rule not to trust 'this is the best anything X ever' lines, especially when it comes to computer games and the 'RPG' notion is thrown in the mix.

[Sarielle]

Moganza wrote...

BG1 gives a sense of adventure in the sense that you're not given a real direction as to what you should be doing which made the scenario all the more believable (Your Step-Father Gorion dying and tell you a back up plan). You spend the game investigation events.

This is what makes me think I'll really enjoy BG1. I love this type of game, and they don't really seem to make them anymore.

[Grimwald the Wise]

The BG1 NPC Project mod really makes a big improvement in my opinion. You have a lot more interaction with other party members. Other mods also improve things. SCS makes the enemy use better tactics for instance.

[Jonp382]

I agree with Dr. Frued; if you're a fan of DA:O, you should try BG2:SoA, not BG1. IMO, BG2:SoA is much more similar to DA:O then BG1. It's much more directed and focused, with a greater emphasis on character interaction and story.

A little warning though. BG2:ToB has VERY cheesy combat. I don't know if there's any mod out there that will make it easier and less cheesy, but I fully recommend such mods if they do exist and you plan to play ToB.

[Matuse]

Combat is only as cheesy as YOU make it. If you want to wish for a horde of bunnies and then wish for Horrid Wilting on all of them, that's on your head, not the game.

It's perfectly possible to beat ToB without cheese. I do it all the time.

[Humanoid_Taifun]

Why do I continually find myself subjected to these inane conversations? We should focus on shaping the destiny of all Faerun... and not discussing cheese!

[Seagloom]

I agree with all the posts suggesting Baldur's Gate II over the original. Anyone coming from DAO to the first game will find it too jarring a change and grow to hate it. Baldur's Gate was BioWare's first RPG, and it shows. As Forst noted, the story takes a long time to pick up. It does not become personal until the game's penultimate act. Exploration and side stories dominate the narrative before then. Combat is not as active in a moment to moment fashion as DAO, but party tactics and composition play a greater role.

All the praise one often reads about the Baldur's Gate "series" is usually referring to Shadows of Amn. It was with SoA that BioWare began finding its voice as an RPG developer. Many conventions now seen as standard fare for a BioWare game were originally implemented in SoA. It is sort of like a prototype of their game design. SoA introduced character specific side quests and fully developed romances. Dialogue trees became more personalized and the protagonist had a story arc from the start.

BioWare's other conventions were introduced in KotOR. Because of that, BG2 will feel like a rough diamond to anyone coming to it from DAO. Glimmers of its beauty can be seen if you glimpse it from the right light. At a cursory glance it seems much uglier, and understanding what it shares in common with DAO becomes harder to understand. And that is the sequel.

The original Baldur's Gate is a bit of an acquired taste at this point. You need an open mind; and a high tolerance for old fashioned graphics. If the average indie RPG makes your skin crawl, that game will too.

[ncknck]

For starters, Bg1 has better graphics. Better textures and higher zoom factor. Secondly bg1, morrowind, daggerfall, (fallout2), were not only successful games but, more importantly, are what the devs, and everyone else, thinks an RPG actually is. But, such a game exceeds the attention span of 10yo kids, who are disappointed there is nothing to hack. Thus sells suffer. Done deal and all these "new rpgs" like ME2 are born, which are little more than a Quake 4 with a bit of interaction and weapon upgrades. Go play Quake 4, you will be surprised how even "better" it is than an old and rusty bg1, DA:O etc, and so are the graphics. No joke. Quake 4 > DA:O. hehe

Not that i am biased towards either of the game but its Bg1 which made Bioware famous. Not bg2.

Modifié par ncknck, 23 octobre 2011 - 09:05 .

[Humanoid_Taifun]

ncknck wrote...
Bg1 has [...] higher zoom factor.

than what game?

But, such a game exceeds the attention span of 10yo kids,

While you have a point, I think you shouldn't say that it exceeds their ability, but rather that if there are easier alternatives, then those will be chosen. This is almost independent of age though, and even adults will first choose the easy games.
There is and always has been only a select few people that searches for more complex experiences. The difference is that back then PC gaming was a niche culture anyway.

[Wintersembrace]

if your going to play BG1 / 2 as Dr. Freud said easy TuTu or the big world project (easy tutu might be included in the BWP cant remember) is a must have as for the graphic and other aspects of the game (compared to DA.O) there easy to overlook considering the games age me and my partner still play lan games of both games awesome games much love for em

[Crippled Jack]

Humanoid_Taifun wrote...
The difference is that back then PC gaming was a niche culture anyway.

As opposed to today where the main target audience is the consoles crowd... probably why people need achievements for making it through the tutorial.

[HoonDing]

ncknck wrote...

For starters, Bg1 has better graphics.
Better textures and higher zoom factor. Secondly bg1, morrowind, daggerfall, (fallout2), were not only successful games but, more importantly, are what the devs, and everyone else, thinks an RPG actually is. But, such a game exceeds the attention span of 10yo kids, who are disappointed there is nothing to hack. Thus sells suffer. Done
deal and all these "new rpgs" like ME2 are born, which are little more than a Quake 4 with a bit of interaction and weapon upgrades. Go play Quake 4, you will be surprised how even "better" it is than an old and rusty bg1, DA:O etc, and so are the graphics. No joke. Quake 4 > DA:O. hehe

Not that i am biased towards either of the game but its Bg1 which made Bioware famous. Not bg2.

Funny thing, though, is that BG *is* easy compared to the big RPG series from before, i.e. mainly Wizardry and Might & Magic. RTwP makes so many cheese tactics possible (same goes for Icewind Dale) that aren't possible in turn-based gameplay.

Modifié par virumor, 24 octobre 2011 - 12:23 .

[KillerRabbit]

I picked up BG once again (I completed them X years ago, in the order of SoA, ToB and then BG1)

Thought it would be a good idea to renew some good old RPG love while I wait for Skyrim's release... well.. after today's day of frustration (and the whole weekends frustration) I am starting to think that for my nerves sake I should have atleast left BG1 to the nostalgia bin.. I can't remember whenever I have had the need to reload a game this often the last... well probably 10-11 years ago when I played through the games the first time.

Was it really acceptable to have so much death on the core rules back then? I have no idea if there is a difference since I play the BG-tutu verision and the original... but the first level is a serious pain just to get to level 2 so you get a wee bit more hit points and stop dying on every other attack and can finally survive maybe 3 hits instead. Well after 20000 reloads (specially mage battles who completely dominates my party.. literally) I am finally at the Cloakwood mines, thought I would wtfpwn the 2 fighers+2mages guarding the base. Well I'm on the 15th reload on the battle now and dont stand a chance even with use of charm cloak, webs, potions, whatever...

It's really getting frustrating because so much is purely based on luck, and always the encounters, specially the mages out-level your party so much you cant even get through their protections before you are dead!
Could be that my 5 man party at level 7 is to low to take them on.. but don't remember really.. so headed back to firewine bridge dungeon then instead... and got my ass handed to me again by a single mage "lendarn"

So yes, at least BG1 is overrated x 100.... or I really have to start using the "tactic" to outrun the enemy and wait in a corner for 5 minutes and wait for everything to wear off.. but such "tactics" I hate, and really shows something is not as it should be from start..

[Wintersembrace]

KillerRabbit wrote...
So yes, at least BG1 is overrated x 100.... or I really have to start using the "tactic" to outrun the enemy and wait in a corner for 5 minutes and wait for everything to wear off.. but such "tactics" I hate, and really shows something is not as it should be from start..

running away is a perfectly sound tactic .... though i prefer to call it a tactical retreat 

take into concideration the games age games today have made ppl lazy, yea bg1 had me reload more times then any game i currently got (maybe with the exception of TW.SH2) but the pride i felt after going back to the nearest town and looting any thing that was not bolted down then going back to battles i could not win and handin them there a** was greater then any  achievement badge (or what ever u want to call em) ......remmeber what linconar the sword said find some one rich and kill them then find some one richer and kill them to hack and slash your way to fortune

[The Cow King]

BG & BG2 represent a dead (unfortunately) genre of games that aren't aimed for 12 year olds playing xbox. Games these days are so ridiculously easy it's plain out boring, everything's about graphics (even though IE with widescreen mod has fantastic graphics even on today's standards), so that gameplay & plot are completely left in the bin.

Take something like Deus Ex 3 for example, that game just SCREAMS console in every way imaginable. I'm having hard time just trying to finish it because the plot is so boring, gameplay is 100% console, and difficulty is for your typical COD/Halo fan playing xbox where you get every aug to max without even trying.

KillerRabbit wrote...
Was it really acceptable to have so much death on the core rules back then? I have no idea if there is a difference since I play the BG-tutu verision and the original... but the first level is a serious pain just to get to level 2 so you get a wee bit more hit points and stop dying on every other attack and can finally survive maybe 3 hits instead.

I play on insane difficulty (double dmg from monsters), and battle difficulty in BG1 is just perfect. In the beginning, use ranged weapons? Going to melee against 4 monsters with 8 HP is not very smart. Modern games, you don't have to use your brain, you will win whatever you do.

BG is a game for the thinking player, where you have to (god forbid) THINK how to approach a battle/situation, in order to win it. You might even have to READ spell descriptions and (GASP) the GAME MANUAL (which is pretty much extinct in modern games, because manual is unnecessary when the game is so simple/easy there is nothing to put in the manual itself.

If you're playing TUTU, the only difficulty difference comes from random monster spawns, and you can influence those yourself when you install tutu.

KillerRabbit wrote...
Well after 20000 reloads (specially mage
battles who completely dominates my party.. literally) I am finally at
the Cloakwood mines, thought I would wtfpwn the 2 fighers+2mages
guarding the base. Well I'm on the 15th reload on the battle now and
dont stand a chance even with use of charm cloak, webs, potions,
whatever...

That battle is actually one of my favorite battles in the game, and it's certainly not difficult. I finished it in one try, but did it again because I like it.

Simply put, you are doing something wrong. You can waste the entire party with two webs, fireballs, magic missiles (against Mirror Image), and ranged weapons.

You can buff a single melee character to a semi-deity in bg1 with potions, you have almost infinite wands, there is just no excuse except your own mishandling of the situation.

Cast 3-4 fears (with spells + wands). Use wand of monster summoning for cannon fodder.

Webs + fireballs + ranged weapons (with special ammo). Magic missile vs. Mirror Image. Don't send your own melee into the web unless they have free action.

Mirror Image + Haste + Globe of Invulnerability + Web = mage who can run & tank a group of enemies while you drop fireballs in his feet without causing any damage to him.

KillerRabbit wrote...

It's really getting frustrating because so much is
purely based on luck, and always the encounters, specially the mages
out-level your party so much you cant even get through their protections
before you are dead!

A solo mage against a party in BG1 is one of the easiest encounters there is.

Haste your party.

Enemy caster has Mirror Image + Globe of Inv. = use ranged/melee weapons to break MI.

He's probably dead in a round after the MI breaks.

The guy's dropping fireballs on your party? Use your party mage to soak his spells with globe of invulnerability, THEN kill him. Simple.

USE your consumables and special arrows. BG1 has absolutely overpowered special ammunition and more gold than you can possibly spend (I had over 200k extra when I finished bg tutu the other day).

Arrows/darts/bolts of wounding, stunning, acid, cold etc... wands of monster summonings, fear, paralyzation, fire, cold, whatever.

Combat tactics in BG series are more complex than any other game I've played to date. You have so many tactics you can use, you just have to use the right ones against the right opponents.

In BG1, the only thing you need to do against a mage is to break his mirror image with a magic missile/ranged weapons, after that, he's certifiably dead.

Taking too long to break MI? Use dispel magic.

There's multiple ways to protect yourself against charms, confusions, fears, fireballs and the like.

Honestly, if you really having troubles killing a single mage, just slap a scroll of protection of magic on your melee character, left click on the enemy mage and wait. Mission accomplished.

The only even slightly difficult mage in BG1 is Davaeorn, and that's because it's a very enclosed tight space, his teleport, and the two hard hitting undead goons.

KillerRabbit wrote...

So yes, at least BG1 is
overrated x 100.... or I really have to start using the "tactic" to
outrun the enemy and wait in a corner for 5 minutes and wait for
everything to wear off.. but such "tactics" I hate, and really shows
something is not as it should be from start..

Don't blame the game for your own lack of logic and reasoning.

I just finished bg1 tutu yesterday with my wild mage, xan + eldoth, I got completely raped in my first few tries of the final battle, after which I had a check of the combat log to see who's dispelling my rape-anything buffs (he was invisible), next try I used detect invis in the start, killed him in a heartbeat, and the rest of the battle was just cakewalk.

Even something as simple as that can completely turn a fight from "impossible" to a breeze.

With all this being said, I do consider BG2 as vastly superior to BG1, simply because BG1 has very limited dialogue options, and too much clutter content. Those are the only two real downsides of BG1.

Modifié par The Cow King, 24 octobre 2011 - 08:10 .

[corey_russell]

A few quick questions, KR:
1) Are you using your cleric spells? In particular hold person/silence these can help against Drassus and his cronies. And level 7 should plenty high enough to take them on
2) You using dispel magics to remove charms on your characters?
3) Can anyone stealth, and do you have access to any kind of fireballs? If so, you can often fire 3 fireballs out of sight, then any left are easy pickings.
4) If you have the more powerful ammo (+2 bullets, acid arrows, arrows of biting, etc.) you should with that be able to charge the mages, kill them then get on the enemy melees.
5) Unless you have mods that change this, often times you can pull 1-2 of the enemy to your party, mop them up then take the remainder on. "Divide and Conquer" for the win.
6) Lendarn gets owned by a single sword and shield fighter/paladin/ranger who has potion of absorption on (or cleric who put protection from lightning on them) or protection from lightning scroll on them. The scrolls/potions are in the game for a reason!

[morbidest2]

What level of difficulty are you playing on? Core, for instance, is pretty tough for a first run through even if you played BG1 10 or 11 years ago when it first came out. You might consider starting on Easy or Normal until your party is at least level 3 and can take a little punishment without instantly dying or even being chunked. And once you get going if you find that a battle is in it's 15th reload, consider temporarily dropping back to Easy just to see what a winning strategy is. No one is looking over your shoulder checking on how Macho you are.

[KillerRabbit]

Well, apparently I was smarter 10 years ago, but at least I managed to get to Baldur's Gate now. Anyway, while I agree with Cow King no many points, I still feel the game @ core rules at least is a wee bit hard to get started with. But I started to to really consider the worth of a debate about rules in a game this old anyway, not like the developers will do anything to it any more anyway.

Another fun(?) think I noticed that my dispel/breach spells even when targeted on the enemy(mage) they move from the spot, but if I do the same the stupid spell follows me to end of the map even with boots 'o speed on!

I noticed this tuto installation package I have on my computer already have like 30 mods installed, and according to the download author "balance mods & graphical improvements (widescreen mod, degreenifier, more armor/thief graphics tutu tweaks, bg2 tweaks etc,) so maybe the AI is smarter as well compared to when I first ran through this games. Atleast my companions seem to chat happily with each other BG2 style, something I do not remeber I had on my first BG1 run.

Well, looking forward to the dreaded end boss encounter as next huge thing now then, I only remember I managed to beat it standing on one toe with all my party dead and tons of summon spells, let's hope it works better this time then!


I might have been bit frustrated when I wrote the post, I do agree games are to easy nowadays, Dragon Age 2's "normal" difficulty did not even hurt party members when you toss AoE spells around... and removal of tactical view O.o

Well, one can always hope for a Baldurs Gate 3, which takes from best of all worlds (BG,IceWind, DA,DA2)