Why was BG2. . . subpar?

[Theldaran]

You don't have level 5 priest spells or level 6 wizard ones when you find his body however, and the dungeon does kinda implode on itself.

The logical thing would be to carry Khalid's body, even in the inventory, and seek help. Think that the game implies that you've been traveling with him even if you actually didn't. That could have led to said quest to restore Khalid, but further, we needed Jaheira to be romanceable, so she refuses on the spot.

 

[Lhynn]

That may be true for the limited 5th level spell, but not for a quasi-miracle of 9th level. Still there's permadeath in-game (when your characters just explode), but the point is, writers have the final word. If they had wanted Khalid in the game, he could be raisable or not even dead to begin with, but clearly they didn't.

There are no level 9 miracles, they literally dont exist and even level 7 resurrection wont bring back people that have gone tru certain things. Plus even if he was ressable, you have to think why jaheira wouldnt want this to happen. Like have you thought how fucked up irenicus tortures were? maybe he manipulated khalids body into raping her, maybe khalid was forced to kill childrens, maybe he doesnt want to be resurrected and made that clear to jaheira, in which case no resurrection can bring him back. A lot is left to the imagination.
And yes, writers have the final word on everything, i dont see your point. I thought your complain was that you didnt understand how a corpse couldnt be raised, i told you how.
You just have to take jaheiras word on it, let it go, fucked up shit happen.

 

[Androv]

You don't have level 5 priest spells or level 6 wizard ones when you find his body however, and the dungeon does kinda implode on itself.

The logical thing would be to carry Khalid's body, even in the inventory, and seek help. Think that the game implies that you've been traveling with him even if you actually didn't. That could have led to said quest to restore Khalid, but further, we needed Jaheira to be romanceable, so she refuses on the spot.

I see what you're saying but the fact that she does say a prayer to Silvanus (the druid god who she was so okay with other people in the party dying for in BG1) before you leave khalid (probs a days old cold corpse) helps a bit with it not being a sudden writer thing that somehow pulls me out of the story as it seems to do for you. It is salvaged before it's a problem really with the Silvanus callback. Nothing was pulled out of a writers ass in my opinion is my point here.

 

[Theldaran]

Sorry, I was just confusing editions a bit back there.

All of my posts stem from like 2 pages ago, where a Codexer criticised Khalid's death's handling. I just wanted to reflect a bit on that. Plus, from Irenicus' views it should be more sensible to kill Minsc since he was stronger than Khalid. Maybe he was amused destroying the prequel's couples.

Enviado desde mi Edison 3 mediante Tapatalk

 

[Theldaran]

What I'm saying is that we are left with the characters who "qualify" for this game, they do okay explaining it I think. We could have had Dynaheir instead of Minsc, except that the sequel needs moar Minsc. Similarly Jaheira is much more needed than Khalid, with the neutral alignment romance option and all.

I'm not going down the resurrection thing further, it's only that in FR fiction you see main characters coming back as the writers see fit. It's stupid to let an important character die of disease in D&D, for example, with temples around the corner. The first thing that I thought when I saw the scene upon finding Khalid was "so the sucker didn't make it into the second game".

Enviado desde mi Edison 3 mediante Tapatalk

 

[Comte]

Just completed BG2 SOA for the first time. I have played this game and abandoned it many times over the years. I finally finished it and am now moving onto the Throne of Bhaal. I gotta say I felt this game was weaker then BG1 (Which I completed at the end of 2014) . The epic Mage battles were cool at first but now every encounter is the same with the enemy mage casting time stop and buffs. Bring down his defenses destroy him then his minions rinse repeat. I really feel that BG2 is subpar. Maybe it's because I'm getting old but I really started to hate this game from Bynnlaw/Spellhold on. The highlight of the game was taking down the Black Dragon and Firekraag earlier in the game which I did at lower levels. Firekraag's dungeon was the best part of the entire game. I liked romping around the Athkatla at the beginning and DÁrnise hold was pretty cool. Trademeet and the druids were pretty suck ass. Underdark would have been cool if it was bigger and more fleshed out. I feel from Spellhold on the game quality just went way down. I will finish Throne of Bhaal but I feel like it's going to really suck if the end game of SOA is any indication of things to come.

 

[DavidBVal]

I gotta say I felt this game was weaker then BG1 (Which I completed at the end of 2014) . The epic Mage battles were cool at first but now every encounter is the same with the enemy mage casting time stop and buffs. Bring down his defenses destroy him then his minions rinse repeat. I really feel that BG2 is subpar.

BG1 has a much smaller scope, which makes each new spellcasting level a wonder, and in low levels, survivavility is thrilling. I also like more BG1, especially the exploration, but I think BG2 is as good as it could have been done, considering the levels it had to span over, and how magic works in D&D. IMHO comparing which is better in term of mechanics is pointless, as it's basically comparing which D&D 2e level ranges are more fun to play. Also, even if it's the first time you finished it, if you killed the dragons at low level there must be lots of metagaming involved, which is not the way it's supposed to be played...

 

[Theldaran]

It's not subpar... It's the best adaptation of D&D rules for PC. Now hipsters today could argue all day whether D&D is shit, but the whole thing (along with BG2 itself) it's from a completely different, bygone era.

Enviado desde mi Edison 3 mediante Tapatalk

 

[pippin]

It's the best adaptation of D&D rules for PC

 

[DavidBVal]

It's the best adaptation of D&D rules for PC

It's the best we're ever going to get, though.

 

[Siveon]

It's not subpar... It's the best adaptation of D&D rules for PC.

The Goldbox games, ToEE, D&D Tactics, Knights of the Chalice*?

BG2 is a lot of things, and I would argue that "being good" is one of them, but the best adaptation of a D&D rule set? With that RTwP combat? Nope, nuh-uh, nah, no-way, I...disagree.

*

 

[pippin]

It's the best adaptation of D&D rules for PC

It's the best we're ever going to get, though.

For all its entertaining things (I don't dislike BG at all, quite the contrary) the Baldur's Gate games were normal fantasy games which had the fortune of having the D&D license attached to them. They are not "real" D&D games. I get you have to edit the ruleset to make it fit the realities of a crpg, but they simply cut down way too much for me to even consider Baldur's Gate 1, 2 or TOB as "best D&D adaptations".
Better examples were already provided by Siveon.

 

[Theldaran]

The Goldbox games, right...

One can't deny the BGs recreate a lot of the D&D universe. Mechanically and flavorwise. With graphics good enough that still hold up today, even if the hipsters abhor the game.

Compare with PoE's dull setting and items. Do you really believe ToN will be as faithful to Numanure OR PS:T?

Enviado desde mi Edison 3 mediante Tapatalk

 

[pippin]

The fact that you have to bring up PoE or the new Torment says a lot about your reasoning

 

[Theldaran]

It's because we're not getting games like BG anymore, and those which would like to be fail miserably.

Enviado desde mi Edison 3 mediante Tapatalk

 

[Theldaran]

Also playing these games for the first time well into the 21st century, is like realizing man set foot on the moon in the 80s, after all planet saw it in 1969. Talking CRPG wise of course.

Enviado desde mi Edison 3 mediante Tapatalk

 

[pippin]

I don't know what aspect of Baldur's Gate could be really worth imitating. If anything, it was a dumbing down in many aspects, and if it was a critical and commercial darling at the time it was because of that. Baldur's Gate was the beginning of the end when it comes to Bioware's tradition of dumbing down game mechanics to appeal to casuals and people who never played crpgs before.

 

[kwanzabot]

i wouldn't say bg2 is sub par but when i played it on release it didn't grip me the way fallout 1/2 or arcanum did, i liked the game(especially the first 2 chapters) but i found once you go to spellhold/underdark the game takes a pretty steep decline toward boring linear dungeon crawler.


i still liked it enough to beat it twice(albeit like 6 years in between playthroughs) but ever time i've tried to replay bg2 i either quit in the first dungeon or once i get to spellhold.

i DO think bg2 is very overrated though, people talk about it like it's the best rpg/game of all time and i really don't see that but to each their own i guess ^__^

TOB was a piece of shit though, really hated that expansion

and i did like bg1 more then bg2 :O

 

[Theldaran]

It was a critical and commercial darling, because they were thorough and elaborate games for that age. There wasn't anything like it and there hasn't been afterwards. BG1 was the equivalent for its age to modern day open world games. Lots of things to do and lots of areas to explore.

Enviado desde mi Edison 3 mediante Tapatalk

 

[Theldaran]

Kwanzabot's opinion is a sensible one. After all, he played it when the game came out.

Enviado desde mi Edison 3 mediante Tapatalk

 

[pippin]

he played it when the game came out.

That's a fallacy. Kids are saying the same about Dragon Age and Fallout 3.

 

[DavidBVal]

It's the best adaptation of D&D rules for PC

It's the best we're ever going to get, though.

For all its entertaining things (I don't dislike BG at all, quite the contrary) the Baldur's Gate games were normal fantasy games which had the fortune of having the D&D license attached to them. They are not "real" D&D games. I get you have to edit the ruleset to make it fit the realities of a crpg, but they simply cut down way too much for me to even consider Baldur's Gate 1, 2 or TOB as "best D&D adaptations".
Better examples were already provided by Siveon.

I mean, we will never get better than that in the future.

 

[Siveon]

I don't know what aspect of Baldur's Gate could be really worth imitating.

Well, those pre-rendered graphics did look pretty damn good. I think that's one aspect PoE really set out to copy.
---
You don't need to experience certain works the time it was made to truly appreciate it, that's crazy. Literature, art, movies, many of them old as sin but are still celebrated amongst critics and consumers alike. You telling me a 20 year old man born in 1996 can't appreciate The Divine Comedy because he wasn't in Italy in the 1300s?

Baldur's Gate holds up, it's good, but it isn't the gaming equivalent of Treasure Island capiche?

 

[kwanzabot]

Kwanzabot's opinion is a sensible one. After all, he played it when the game came out.

Enviado desde mi Edison 3 mediante Tapatalk

im sure alot of people here played it when it came out =/

 

[Lilura]

It's not subpar... It's the best adaptation of D&D rules for PC. Now hipsters today could argue all day whether D&D is shit, but the whole thing (along with BG2 itself) it's from a completely different, bygone era.

Every post of yours is shit.