BG vs IWD: Which was better and why?

So...it finally happened. The question at teh back of every Codexian's mind has been brought to teh forefront and asked!

Which of these two gems was better and why?

Me, it was BG. I always value sotry more than hack and slash, and while both hada story and both had lots of hack and slash, BG had more of the former than the latter did. Its sad Bg only goes up to level 7, but even then its better than IWD (where its hard to understand how a bunch of people who could barely kill a wolf in the beginning saved the entire dale AND learned how to summon demons and metors from the sky in thecourse of a few days)

I remember looking at both boxes at the game store and trying to figure out the difference between the two. I still am.

They are exactly the same in my opinion too, the only difference being that BG1 came first and we had enough with one crappy dungeon hack so IWD was the useless, unworthy clone of a bitch made by Black Isle. The rest is history and the people from Black Isle who joined Obsidian still live in Bioware shadows. Sometimes producing something worth of attention in the mountain of crap.

IWD was better, as in that game you could slaughter annoying people without any serious consequences.

Disclaimer: this opinion has nothing to do with this current discussion or with the one who started it.

IMO BG's sepll graphics and spell icons were better OVERALL. (some were better in iwd ofcourse)

mjorkerina said:

the people from Black Isle who joined Obsidian still live in Bioware shadows.

Click to expand...

O RLY?

BG1 was not as much fun to me as IWD1. BG2 was a lot better than both, though.

Lestat said:

mjorkerina said:

the people from Black Isle who joined Obsidian still live in Bioware shadows.

Click to expand...

O RLY?

Click to expand...

I shouldn't feed such an obvious troll, but Obsidian ain't just the name of the RPG makers.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=ob ... gle+Search
Only one of the links in the first page talks about Obsidian Entertainment.

Half of the games produced by Obsidian were shadows of what Bioware makes. Bioware made a dungeon hack and a whole new engine (Baldur's Gate 1), Obsidian followed and introduced Icewind Crap. Bioware introduce a new engine and game again (NWN), Obsidian follows. Bioware makes a Starwars game, Obsidian follows.

One of the games that Black Isle made that was not a shadow of Bioware was a shadow of what other people made, Fallout 2. Because yeah, most of the people who made Fallout the game it was, were not working for Interplay anymore when they did FO2. Chris Overrated didn't design FO1.

mjorkerina, you destroyed the lulz.

I really shouldn't be feeding an idiot who can't recognize an obvious joke, but both KotOR 2 and NWN 2 were vastly superior to their predecessors, and I could care less whether or not they're sequels to some other company's games. Plus Obsidian is working on two original titles right now. If you don't like their games, fine, nobody asks you to.

There is still much lulz and faggotry to be found this thread, beside the obvious KOTOR debate (both shit games but still nerd rage must follow because that is the way of things), not to mention all those faggot subjets, but :

Chris Overrated

Click to expand...

For some reason I found this to be hilarious. "Hey Chris OVERRATED, how's it doing today?" and "What up Chris OVERRATED, yeah I'm talking to you, that's right, how does that feel?" and also "Hey Chris OVERRATED, the fuck do you think you're doing with my sister?"

"I am Chris and I am game designer, hello", "JESUS FUCKING CHRIST HOW OVERRATED ARE YOU, YOU THINK YOU'RE A ROCK STAR OR SOME FUCKING SHIT"

BG2>IWD1>BG1

Well between IWD and BG I'd take IWD. IWD was a fantastic answer to Diablo, and in that context it makes sense. It is a hack-and-slash game that managed to go beyond button-mashing to encourage some strategy, and as a hack-and-slash multi-dungeon-crawler it was pretty good. BG1 on the other hand, was nothing more than a dungeon crawler with inferior strategy and balance compared to IWD that tried to dress itself up as an exploration rpg. Not to say that it completely sucked - it had some good exploration elements, and the city itself was decent, but it was just such a long way (gameplay-wise) from other rpgs out around the same time (fallout) or even a few years earlier (U7).

However, I go against the hivemind when it comes to BG2. BG2 was a classic of a kind that Bioware could never produce again today - heck I don't think ANYONE will produce a game that takes the cliched 'epic' fantasy to that height. That doesn't make it my favourite RPG - just my favourite cliched fantasy RPG. It has an extraordinary length, and the sheer scope of it allows for substantial value and replay value through the different classes, strongholds, companion interactions etc. Seriously, if you have avoided this game because you hate Bioware - well I don't exactly like Bioware, but this game was the exception. Even strategically it reigns high above anything B did before or after - the strategy game revolves largely around beating the opposing combination of anti-weapon spells and anti-magic shields, which sounds dull but was actually quite satisfying. Most importantly, the characterisation surpasses anything B ever did again, and frankly provides a lesson in villain writing that has been forgotten time and time again afterwards (just look at Oblivion as a comparison). In BG2 the villains move in the same timeline as the player, and grow more powerful over the game through logical plot-based reasons. You have 6 substantial encounters with Irenicus (NOT including the VERY well performed dream sequences that seem to involve Irenicus - well he appears in the dreams, but those who have payed attention to his dialogue in the mage asylum will know why I'm not counting the dreams) and about 5 with Bodhi, not to mention 3 pitched player-controlled battles with Irenicus and 3 with Bodhi at different stages of the game. That by itself elevates BG2 over BG1, IWD, Oblivion and all the endless crapfest of games where the villain is some guy that sits at the end of a dungeon for you to come kill him with NO interaction before then (ok Saverok does SOME stuff in BG1 but it's pretty token). Can you imagine an action film where the MAIN bad guy doesn't appear on screen, or interact with the hero until the last big fight in the last couple of minutes of the movie - that would suck so bad that not even hollywood would consider producing it. And yet playing BG2 makes you realise how many lesser games follow that EXACT fricken path.

TLDR version - BG2 rocks but Bioware still sucks. IWD is better than BG1.

mjorkerina said:

Half of the games produced by Obsidian were shadows of what Bioware makes. Bioware made a dungeon hack and a whole new engine (Baldur's Gate 1), Obsidian followed and introduced Icewind Crap. Bioware introduce a new engine and game again (NWN), Obsidian follows. Bioware makes a Starwars game, Obsidian follows.

One of the games that Black Isle made that was not a shadow of Bioware was a shadow of what other people made, Fallout 2. Because yeah, most of the people who made Fallout the game it was, were not working for Interplay anymore when they did FO2. Chris Overrated didn't design FO1.

Click to expand...

except Obsidian did everything better than bioware.
and also as Black Isle they made PS:T - wonder whose shadow is that?

the only thing I'd agree on is that Chris Overrated is overrated

PS:T?

mjorkerina said:

Lestat said:

mjorkerina said:

the people from Black Isle who joined Obsidian still live in Bioware shadows.

Click to expand...

O RLY?

Click to expand...

I shouldn't feed such an obvious troll, but Obsidian ain't just the name of the RPG makers.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=ob ... gle+Search
Only one of the links in the first page talks about Obsidian Entertainment.

Half of the games produced by Obsidian were shadows of what Bioware makes. Bioware made a dungeon hack and a whole new engine (Baldur's Gate 1), Obsidian followed and introduced Icewind Crap. Bioware introduce a new engine and game again (NWN), Obsidian follows. Bioware makes a Starwars game, Obsidian follows.

One of the games that Black Isle made that was not a shadow of Bioware was a shadow of what other people made, Fallout 2. Because yeah, most of the people who made Fallout the game it was, were not working for Interplay anymore when they did FO2. Chris Overrated didn't design FO1.

Click to expand...

Pardon my ignorance, but I was under the extremely foolish impression that 'Chris Overrated' gained his following from a teensy weensy little game that no-one particularly cared about called 'Planescape: Torment'...

Ok, sarcasm off now - frankly once you've written PS:T you can crap in a jar, take a photo, convert it to a low-quality jpg and print CDs of it to sell as 'games' for the next 50 years and you're still a legend. PS:T books him into having written the greatest game script of all time, or at least one of the greatest - that's something that few game designers will ever approach.

skyway said:

mjorkerina said:

Half of the games produced by Obsidian were shadows of what Bioware makes. Bioware made a dungeon hack and a whole new engine (Baldur's Gate 1), Obsidian followed and introduced Icewind Crap. Bioware introduce a new engine and game again (NWN), Obsidian follows. Bioware makes a Starwars game, Obsidian follows.

One of the games that Black Isle made that was not a shadow of Bioware was a shadow of what other people made, Fallout 2. Because yeah, most of the people who made Fallout the game it was, were not working for Interplay anymore when they did FO2. Chris Overrated didn't design FO1.

Click to expand...

except Obsidian did everything better than bioware.
and also as Black Isle they made PS:T - wonder whose shadow is that?

Click to expand...

FF7 and some adventure game or another, duh.

</sarcasm>

Anyway, I like IWD better. I've replayed it several times, but played BG1 only once and have never had any desire to go back to it again. Obviously, IWD has several aesthetic advantages--the art, atmosphere and music are simply and unquestionably superior--but beyond that, the combat's just more fun. And it doesn't have stupid empty areas with nothing but a token NPC who does nothing meaningful and a few groups of gibberlings.

yes, Bioware decided to make it big, but made it too empty. I still don't get the complaints of BG1 gamers about BG2 not having such big world to explore.
really what was there to explore? forests that look the same all the time with random monsters infesting them?

They're both shit.

--------------------------------
The Brawl-Hall
We donkey punch Pregnant women for fun.

JarlFrank said:

mjorkerina, you destroyed the lulz.

Click to expand...

There was no lulz to begin with.

If you don't like their games, fine, nobody asks you to.

Click to expand...

This is the most retarded defense ever. When someone is criticizing something I like, I never and will never tell them "hey fine you don't like it but you don't need to say". In all those years i've been on the internet, it just never happened to me to even think about saying such stupidity. Unless I get banned or retardoed, I will use my freedom to state my opinion about such subject, deal with it, if you need i'll buy you some lubricant.

Do you think this is the proper response someone who liked Oblivion should copy and paste every time oblivion and bethesda are insulted in the codex ? "Fine you don't like oblivion, fine no one asked about what you think anyway".

and also as Black Isle they made PS:T - wonder whose shadow is that?

Click to expand...

Pardon my ignorance, but I was under the extremely foolish impression that 'Chris Overrated' gained his following from a teensy weensy little game that no-one particularly cared about called 'Planescape: Torment'...

Click to expand...

I *loved* Planescape Torment. And I often quote things about it when i'm thinking about great RPG features. But one game, no matter its quality, is not going to change the fact that Black Isle/Obsidian, are first and foremost about being Bioware shadow. I am curious about their new licenses though.

Mr Asshat said:

They are exactly the same in my opinion too, the only difference being that BG1 came first and we had enough with one crappy dungeon hack so IWD was the useless, unworthy clone of a bitch made by Black Isle.

Click to expand...

Um, pardon me, but how exactly are they the same? Is it because they use the same game engine, or is because they use the same rules? Ohh I got it, was it because of those cool portraits you could put on there rather than use the ones givin to you?

There's a huge difference between both games, and it doesn't take rocket science to figure it out. Baldur's gate was a non linear hack N slash, that had pre generated allies that could join you. Icewind dale was more of a linear game, but focused more on dungeon crawling, and letting you create your own party, rather than just creating one character...did I mention the rouge elements in some dungeons?

Not only that, but Icewind dale felt more gritty than Balder's gate, visually speaking.

Anyway, my vote goes to Icewind dale, because I think it's more fun, and visually it's a better game than BG.

Re: PS:T?

Azrael the cat said:

Ok, sarcasm off now - frankly once you've written PS:T you can crap in a jar, take a photo, convert it to a low-quality jpg and print CDs of it to sell as 'games' for the next 50 years and you're still a legend. PS:T books him into having written the greatest game script of all time, or at least one of the greatest - that's something that few game designers will ever approach.

Click to expand...

Pretty much.
But Gann&Kaelyn were a tiny morsel of greatness too.

"but both KotOR 2 and NWN 2 were vastly superior to their predecessors"

Bullshit. Only an anti BIO punk or an Obsidian fanboy would claim that.

Anyways, IWD was a decent game; but there's no comparison. IWD doesn't offer anything that BG didn't, and BG had lots that IWD did not. IWd's best bits - the people who like the game like to brag about - graphics, combat, and the like - are all due to the IE which powered BG1 and was created by BIO.

Like I said, IWD1 is a decent game; but vastly overrated by dummies.

slipgate_angel said:

There's a huge difference between both games, and it doesn't take rocket science to figure it out. Baldur's gate was a non linear hack N slash, that had pre generated allies that could join you. Icewind dale was more of a linear game, but focused more on dungeon crawling, and letting you create your own party, rather than just creating one character...did I mention the rouge elements in some dungeons?

Click to expand...

You are the one acting as an asshat here, the difference between the lifeless NPC of BG1 and creating some in IWD is nil with regard to the gameplay. And even if you want you can still do your custom party in BG1 anyway in multiplayer mode, you don't need to play with someone else to do it.

They were both focused on dungeon crawling, BG1 "freedom" is overrated by their stupid fans who always boast that freedom in comparison to BG2 and fail to understand that those maps had nothing of interest to do. The meat and the bone of BG1 was all dungeon crawling.

Not only that, but Icewind dale felt more gritty than Balder's gate, visually speaking.

Click to expand...

Oh it felt a little more gritty so it's you see completely different, yeah they are not the same games at all.

the difference between the lifeless NPC of BG1 and creating some in IWD is nil with regard to the gameplay. And even if you want you can still do your custom party in BG1 anyway in multiplayer mode, you don't need to play with someone else to do it.

Click to expand...

When playing with NPCs, you could talk to them, or they can talk among themselves. In Icewind dale, you create the party, so hence they don't have that ability to talk to anyone outside of there party.

You could play a six team party of your creation in Baldur's gate, but in Single player, it's still one man or women with several different personalities.

slipgate_angel said:

the difference between the lifeless NPC of BG1 and creating some in IWD is nil with regard to the gameplay. And even if you want you can still do your custom party in BG1 anyway in multiplayer mode, you don't need to play with someone else to do it.

Click to expand...

When playing with NPCs, you could talk to them, or they can talk among themselves. In Icewind dale, you create the party, so hence they don't have that ability to talk to anyone outside of there party.

You could play a six team party of your creation in Baldur's gate, but in Single player, it's still one man or women with several different personalities.

Click to expand...

Your memory seems to be failing you. In Baldur's Gate 1, you could not talk to NPCs, nor would they talk among themselves. Personalities were extremely sketchy, as they were developed by 5 lines of conversation.

Comparing IWD to the the BG series is much like comparing apples to oranges, I find. I enjoy both game series but for different reasons.

The IWD series I enjoy partly because I like creating alll 6 people in the party, partly because I like the explloration. I was very surprised to find that there is a decent story behind the hack n slash combat in the IWD series.

NG series were fin for me, because they has huge worlds and also had a decent main story, but a much much better story than IWD game series, I find. Especially in BG1 in whiich you discover your true origin while uncovering a political plot. BG2 I like for the romances and the interaction between characters in your party.

I don't see BG 1 as a dungeon crawler unless you count the open forested areas and the like as dungeons...