Since I deleted Starfield (maybe I’ll redownload it one day) from Steam I’m thinking of getting Baldurs Gate 3. I hear it can be fun if you ignore the gay stuff. Are 1 and 2 worth it? Also gonna look for some older RPGs on Steam or hack and slash
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (101)
sorted by:
I preferred BG1 over BG2 tenfold, because BG2 was far more linear and had far fewer "open-world" locations to visit. The story was more streamlined and you didn't do as much exploring. BG1's world map was much closer to Jagged Alliance 2, giving players a bit more freedom just up until near the end game where it became more linear.
BG2 expanded on a lot of things but also felt a lot more restricted as well to ensure people didn't move too far down the wrong path in terms of character growth and end up being doused in the end game with no way to win like in BG1. I didn't particularly care for that.
BG1, however, is peak late 90s PC gaming. They really nailed it. Awesome story. Great side-quests. Lots of exploration opportunities, and an amazing soundtrack. BG2 laid a lot of the foundations that BioWare utilised for KotoR, and for people who enjoy it that's fine, but if you want a more open-ended adventure then BG1 is definitely worth playing.
Eh, this is fake news.
BG1 is a completely linear series of dungeons with some random encounters spread around them. Yes you can explore an open map but there's basically one interesting character or fight on each screen, and they are each one and done.
BG2 is very open from the beginning, there are dozens of questlines to pursue, from factions to full dungeons, to dragons, to strongholds, and it's all 100% optional. BG2 saved the best content for the side quests, whereas BG1's side content is dull filler.
This is 100% false. Once you leave Candlekeep the map is designed very similar in structure to Jagged Alliance. Here is the map:
https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/baldursgategame/images/6/64/BG1eemap.jpg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/600?cb=20170720123852
That doesn't actually give you all of the map you can travel to since some of those locations have multiple grids per map. The maps in BG2 were much more linear. No idea where you're getting the "very open from the beginning" from since it is extremely linear during the first hour or two, and after that it strings you along very similar to how KoToR is designed. Also the map has far fewer places to visit, as you can see here: https://cdn.mobygames.com/covers/8096423-baldurs-gate-ii-shadows-of-amn-collectors-edition-windows-map.jpg
Not sure where you're getting your information from about both games, but I played through BG2 about two or three times, and BG1 like half a dozen times. Had both games on the original CD-Rom where they came on multiple discs.
EDIT: Just looked it up again because I thought I was misremembering how many discs both games came on, and yeah, BG2 and BG1 both had multiple discs, but BG1 had more discs because it had way more locations to visit and that's what filled up the discs, since BG2 streamlined its story and had more voice acting but fewer locations. I remember it used to take a long time for BG1 to install some of the location data because of how large they were when it came to file size.
The GOG BG1 original installer on torrents is 700 mb smaller, the BG1:EE installed folder is 400 mb smaller, and the BG1:EE data/ folder containing BIF game files is 400 mb smaller (the gay BG2:EE content looks like just a small fraction of that).
Areas:
483 BG1
355 BG2
So you're right about number of areas, wrong about the size. Most of the difference is because BG1 has lots of tiny filler areas; twice as many random encounter areas, Nashkel Carnival has 9 tents, and there's 119 Generic Homes - going to floor 2 to get the 3 gp in generic home, what great content!
"You must gather your party before venturing forth to Generic Home 22..." /wrist
What you call "linear" other people call "story". The areas in BG2 have a story reason to exist and stories are told from start to finish. You can tell a story not in linear order, like Pulp Fiction, but it rarely works out so well.
You may be right about the digital versions (have no clue since I haven't checked), but for the original CD-ROM versions, the file sizes were quite different.
For BG1, discs 2 and 3 were for the middle of the map filler areas you mentioned, both took up more than 600mb. Disc 5 was solely dedicated to the various areas of Baldur's Gate at the end of the game. Not sure how they managed to squeeze the file sizes down so much for the digital versions, but I guess that's just advancements in compression these days.
You're right about that -- BG2 definitely had more story in fewer zones. I preferred the more free-form nature of BG1 where there was less hand-holding, and you could venture to more areas and explore more locations on your own time, and do some semi-grinding to level up at your own pace. But that's all preference -- some people prefer more linear, hand-holdy games.
It doesn't matter how big the map is in BG1, because you visit 4 dungeons in strict linear order. There's nothing else to do on each map besides kill some random enemies. Comparing it to JA2 is insane, because that game actually allows you to tackle the map in any order. BG1 is a linear set of dungeons with some trash mobs sprinkled between them.
BG2 has the entire town of Athkatla to explore from the beginning, which is smaller than BG1's wilderness but much denser with content. There are dozens of questlines featuring full dungeons and unique map zones that are totally optional, unlike BG2.
Either you're a troll or you're just really dumb.
Simply wrong
I have no idea what you're talking about because none of that is true, I think you're getting yourself confused with another game.
BG1 lets you explore all adjacent/conecting maps outside of Candlekeep in any order you please, including going to maps with enemies a much higher level than you. It's why when I played it and others played it and we compared our playthroughs, ALL of them were different, because I hung around the forests grinding and exploring and fighting bandits, gathering their gear and selling them at the local shops. Others followed the story through as a linear pathway, and some also deviated to find teammates.
Bg2 is the complete opposite -- it hand-holds you through the story and streamlines the side-quests to avoid what happened in BG1, where you could breeze through the main story and end up being too low level to fight Baal at the end, where he will one-shot all of your teammates. BG2 makes sure you have enough side-quests completed so you're close to max level by the time you fight Irenecus or however it is you spell his name. There are a lot more story quests in BG2, but you don't have as much freedom to just go exploring the map as you please since a lot of the places are locked behind story progression.