Things that BG does better than BG2

[Rataxes]

Posting this in both forums since I think the subject is connected to both games.

1. Narrator - The narrator in BG is so much better than the rugged voice they had in BG2 it's silly. And for those of you who don't think this is a big deal, it is! The narrator carries the story forwards and has a vital part of the overall atmosphere of a game.

2. PC development part of the story - Maybe this is a personal thing, but I think that the narrator monolouges, accompanied by the very eerie and atmospheric music were FAR superior and added much more to the character development part of the story, than the bizarre dream sequences that take place in BG2 where Irenicus kills various creatures in front of the PC in a strange museum-like building accompanied by some disturbing sound effects. Those made no sense at all to me.

3. Story - Also personal preference maybe, but I think the layout of slowly, little by little, learning who your ultimate enemy really is, beats the crap out of knowing everything from the start. Half the story in BG2 is simply centered around rescuing Imoen and the other half is centered around killing Irenicus. In BG, you're unfolding the story as you go by instead of having the entire story already unfolded for you from the beginning. Although I suppose it is always harder to come up with a good story for a sequel.

4. NPC voices -
"I AM THE LAW!" - Flaming Fist Guard - BG
"In the name of Amn, I'm here to keep order" - Athkatla Guard - BG2
The difference really is obvious, there are many more examples. Sure, BG2 does have some original voices that are convincing and somewhat sparkling. But in BG, every single vocal is just delivered spot on and really serves to give every single NPC in the game a strong and accurate personality. And let's not forget that 70-80% of the good voice jobs in BG2 are nicked directly from BG.

5. Character models - This remains a mystery to me, just take a look at these pictures
showing the differences. Looking at it this way, it's quite obvious that Bioware, and for no apparent reason at all, changed the character and armor models for the worse. I mean, Imoen looks more like the marshmallow man than her old self! And compare the clear contrasts and shapes that makes out the BG warrior and it's very shiny armor - with the grey clump that is the BG2 warrior. I might add that these wear the exakt same outfit, are of the same class and race, and the shots were also taken in the same resolution.

Well there's really plenty more that BG does a lot better than BG2 but I can't mention them all. I would in fact consider BG vastly superior to BG2 if it wasn't for the fact that it is a quite small and unchallenging game compared to the sequel, especially if you add TOB to the latter.

[Nightmare]

*shrugs* Both are good games, although I haven't had time to play the original BG. Baldur's Gate II is, in my opinion, one of the greatest games ever created.

[Rataxes]

Eh maybe I should've formulated the last paragraph better. What I meant to say is that just about everything that has to do with the interface and exterior of the games, BG does better than BG2. Music, voices, graphic models, menu systems and fonts for instance. I still stand by BG having a better story though.

[Koveras]

I agree with you on the story of the 2 games. BG have a much better one. However, the good things about BGII makes me kinda forget the bad things. That makes the 2 games pretty much having the same fun factor, but in different categories. Btw, the topic of BG vs. BGII is very common.

[Rataxes]

I figured it might be, haven't seen any recent topics about it though. And I'd like to think that at least one or two of my comments are new, or at least not battered to death, no?

[garazdawi]

Originally posted by Rataxes
5. Character models - This remains a mystery to me, just take a look at these pictures
showing the differences. Looking at it this way, it's quite obvious that Bioware, and for no apparent reason at all, changed the character and armor models for the worse. I mean, Imoen looks more like the marshmallow man than her old self! And compare the clear contrasts and shapes that makes out the BG warrior and it's very shiny armor - with the grey clump that is the BG2 warrior. I might add that these wear the exakt same outfit, are of the same class and race, and the shots were also taken in the same resolution.

Not to be picky but the bg2 char obviously has a morning star while the bg has a long sword.... And also the shield of bg2 seems to be a medium (not sure as I never play with sheilds in bg2) while the bg1 is defenately a large shield.

[Rataxes]

When I said outfit, I meant the armor mainly, since it has the greatest impact on your models apparence. Although the large shield in BG2 is still less detailed and has a worse design than the BG shield.

One more thing about the graphics, doesn't anyone else think that the BG2 attack animation for the Two-handed swords looks plain ridiculous? To me it looks like the character is trying to whack the enemy with the hilt rather than slashing him with the blade.

[fable]

Personally, I much prefer the NPC voices in BG2. The only NPC paladin you can add to your party, Keldorn, sounds positive and commanding, whereas Ajantis in BG1 sounded like a caricature, a sort of stick soldier. BG1's Quayle has been fortunately reduced in BG2 to a very minor side part, so we don't have to hear his obnoxiousness. As for minor NPC players, at least we don't have attempts to make evil characters seem more so in BG2 by having them snicker over the smell of their own gas--as they did in BG1.

[Rataxes]

Hum yes, well the PLAYER characters are obviously better because party interaction was one of the main things Bioware sought to improve with BG2. But what I meant by NPC's were characters that you cannot control, such as guards, citizens, villains, bar keepers, hookers etc etc, hence Non Player Characters. BG2 didn't come up with many original and good voice-overs for those people. Like I said, much is simply nicked from BG, and much of the rest is simply not very exciting. Just look at the Athkatla guard VS the Flaming Fist guard example.

[fable]

Originally posted by Rataxes
But what I meant by NPC's were characters that you cannot control, such as guards, citizens, villains, bar keepers, hookers etc etc, hence Non Player Characters.

Typically, the likes of Viconia, Edwin and Jan have been referred to up here as party NPCs. After all, you don't create 'em, and that was the logic behind the distinction--which I didn't create. It's been that way for more than two years.

BG2 didn't come up with many original and good voice-overs for those people. Like I said, much is simply nicked from BG, and much of the rest is simply not very exciting. Just look at the Athkatla guard VS the Flaming Fist guard example.

We must disagree, then. As I said above, some of the most ridiculous text and voices from BG1 have been removed in BG2, and gave a particular instance: the band of evil fighters and thieves you discover at one point. From my perspective, BG2 wasn't about stealing anything from BG1; it was about refining what was already there. In terms of music and acting, I think BG2 is superior to BG1. The worst was removed, the best was kept, and new, excellent voices (such as those used for Jan, Keldorn, Aerie, and the wonderfully obnoxious Haer'dalis) were added to the mix.

[Rataxes]

I assume we must, if you by ridiculous refer to the Flaming Fist example which I hold to be one among many great and spot on comments that excellently expresses the personality of the said character. I agree that the voices of playable characters have been improved (even though I personally don't think any BG2 PC Male voice can surpass the Default PC voice in BG), but that was to be expected since they made improving party interaction one of their main goals for BG2. But the voices of the non-playable characters, everyone that makes up your surrounding world, are mainly worse than in BG, with the exception of what they nicked from it.

I know that NPC in some circles stand for all characters but the protoganist, while in others, the term is more properly used to define characters that cannot be controlled by the player

[JackOfClubs]

Originally posted by Rataxes
2. PC development part of the story - Maybe this is a personal thing, but I think that the narrator monolouges, accompanied by the very eerie and atmospheric music were FAR superior and added much more to the character development part of the story, than the bizarre dream sequences that take place in BG2 where Irenicus kills various creatures in front of the PC in a strange museum-like building accompanied by some disturbing sound effects. Those made no sense at all to me.

3. Story - Also personal preference maybe, but I think the layout of slowly, little by little, learning who your ultimate enemy really is, beats the crap out of knowing everything from the start. Half the story in BG2 is simply centered around rescuing Imoen and the other half is centered around killing Irenicus. In BG, you're unfolding the story as you go by instead of having the entire story already unfolded for you from the beginning. Although I suppose it is always harder to come up with a good story for a sequel.

2. I think you may be misunderstanding the dream-sequences. If you pay close attention, they are symbolic rather than narrative. The overall theme is your character's internal struggle with his/her supposed Bhall essence. Irenicus represents the will to power (the Id in pcychological terms) and Imoen your moral nature (SuperConscious or Conscience). I believe the entire story can be looked at in this way as an internal conflict rather than an external one, since the story begins and ends with a sort of surreal imprisonment where Irenicus is the chief opponent. (This doesn't apply to ToB which I haven't played.)

3. I am not sure that you really know more in BG2 than you did in BG1. Yes you know about the Bhaal-essence, but Irenicus' motivations are obscure and do not really unfold until Ch 5-6. The same could be said of Sarevok's in BG1.

[fable]

I believe the entire story can be looked at in this way as an internal conflict rather than an external one, since the story begins and ends with a sort of surreal imprisonment where Irenicus is the chief opponent.

Not simply looked at that way; it was intentional. I spoke with the devs at Bioware while they were working on the game. They said they'd learned a lot about the intelligence of their audience from watching how well Planescape: Torment did, and specifically referenced dream sequences as a means of showing the internal battlefield upon which your character waged a war between his human and godly/evil self.

[Rataxes]

I understand the dream sequences, I just find them very poorly executed and implented into the story, while the narrator monologues in BG really flowed well with the story and added a tremendous amount to the atmosphere. This may again just be me, but I think they told more about what was going on inside your protoganists mind than the BG2 sequences did. And it doesn't exactly hurt that the narrating and the music in those moments are incredibly good.

Regarding the story, let me put it this way. In BG, you're completely clueless in the beginning. You've been cast out of your childhood home, your protector has been murdered, all kinds of people seek your death, and you have absolutely no idea why. Much of the story in BG is concerned with learning about who you are and what situation you're in, and the rest is unfolding who is behind it all and how to stop him. That sort of plot just appeals to me more than one where you're simply on a manhunt for the duration of the game.

[Coot]

Originally posted by Rataxes
I understand the dream sequences, I just find them very poorly executed and implented into the story, while the narrator monologues in BG really flowed well with the story and added a tremendous amount to the atmosphere. This may again just be me, but I think they told more about what was going on inside your protoganists mind than the BG2 sequences did. And it doesn't exactly hurt that the narrating and the music in those moments are incredibly good.

Why do you find them poorly executed? I've nothing against the BG1 sequences but, while they were good and added to the atmosphere and the story, they were nothing more than well done monologues.
In the BG2 sequences they did something very different. Seeing Candlekeep like that actually creeped me out a little and hearing Imoens drugged-like voice only added to that.
Irenicus is in complete control, here in those dreams. It's very effective, they really build up Irenicus as a formidable and dangerous opponent that way.

The BG1 sequences were far superior, however, in letting you know how dangerous the Bhaal-influence was. 'You WILL learn!'

[Littiz]

What do you have against the new Immie avatar?
I love it!
But if want to have her look the old way, just equip her
with something like GrandMaster's Armor (obviously, this disables spells )