Just listening to the Throne of Bhaal menu theme brings a tear to my eye to this day. BG2, Arcanum, Fallout 2, and Planescape Torment are unbeatable. Anything that came after couldn't match them.
I don't know about BG1 being better than BG3, but BG2 being better than BG3 (not just because of it's influence, but as a game itself) is a plain and simple truth
This tbh. If BG3 had a sequel that was a higher-level adventure and refined everything like BG2 did, that could surpass this game. Unfortunately that's not on the cards.
Baldurs gate 3 is fantastic. But has no forgotten realms feal to it. Baldurs gate 2 still lives in my head. And i played it at release. Old have i become.
@@Automaton35555 definetly agree with that sentiment. Larian games, while fun, have a very different feel to them than any of the classic DND games. A lot lighter, almost silly fantasy. Don't worry about being old, according to my channel stats we are all getting near due for a hip replacement haha.
yeah the atmosphere is so good atkhatla is the best city in any rpg the atmosphere is so good baldurs gate 3 is a fun game but not a good baldurs gate its more like divinity sin 3 and thats what i was afraid of played it back in the day at release and then multiple times after that 3 years i wanted to know if the game was really as good as i remembered or if there was just nostalgica speaking IT IS THAT GOOD! no rpg comes even close in my opinion in terms of spacing, activity, atmosphere and loot the gameplay aged of course
What is pretty insane is that BG2 was released just 18 months after the first game, and even though BG2 is yuge game already, there was apparently sizable chunks cut out of it partway through the development, but afaik it's not known what that content would've been and how early in the development the cuts were made and how complete the cut content was.
It's always mind blowing to me when I'm doing research for these games and see stuff like that. Like damn how did they make a game this amazing in barely over a year? Like damn a triple A game nowadays takes them a decade and flops half the time.
i kept my saved game on a floppy hoping for a sequel man i was so happy when i loaded my guy up for a brand new adventure and the ending was beyond satisfying
It's a sin not to have Jan Jansen Anyway, hot take: while I like it, I prefer the first one more. I really preferred pr3ferref exploring the wilderness and finding various secrets there over being confined to one city for like 3/4 of the game. Yeah it's huge and full of content but it feels claustrophobic at times. More minor arguments include the fact the encounters feel less diversed: buff party / debuff opponent / fight / repeat. BGI with your limited power level required more thought to think about the tactics I think. I also preferred bigger rooster of party members to them being like actual characters here. I like the bigger choice I was given.
@@emkalina you know I was going to grab Jan, and for the life of me I don't know why I didn't. I think I was just excited to do the planar sphere and got distracted. To be honest, everything you said for arguments are true, and despite the review it would be hard for me to say which game I prefer. I think each has major advantages over the other but it's impossible to pick a clear winner for me. If nothing else, I have played BG1 a lot more than BG2, so the fresher feel of it definitely sways my opinion.
I enjoy BG3 as a game. But compered to the old Bioware games its night and day. The tone is completely different, and while going full turn based may be more true to tabletop DnD , I will forever stan real time-with pause gameplay.
Absolutely! I always hear the argument that "well DND is turn based!". And as much as I get that, I think it's fair to say converting something from a tabletop to video game warrants a bit of change. The higher control RTWP offers is hard to beat.
While I absolutely agree that BG2 is better than 3, I feel like I might be the only person who actually thinks 1 is better than 2. For all 2's objective improvements, I just feel like 1 was better balanced. Eh, to each their own, 2 is still excellent.
@@lawfulstupid3924 I absolutely love both of them to be honest, I can't play 2 without playing 1 first, and 1 had a much larger impact on the RPG community as a whole I think. 2 was just so absolutely jam packed with stuff, most of it so damn good!
I think to a large extent that's due to the underlying system - "the game gets much harder to balance after level 10 or so" has been true of D&D to some extent long before 5e
@@WombatProphecy Yeah absolutely, even from a player perspective if you know the systems well you can pretty much break the game with high level magic. Sometimes the best the game can do to counteract you is just add more enemies.
I agree. I think Sarevok was a much more interesting villain. I like that he used political machinations to further his goals vs just being a really powerful wizard like Irenicus.
@@tacotuesday2949 I think Serevok was a better fleshed out character, but Irenicus' felt much more daunting to face. He was set up as so untouchable at the start of the game, it felt really wild to overtake him at the end. I love both though. I don't think I could pick one over the other, both great antagonists.
I really don't think there is a better RPG than BG2. And I've been playing every one I could get my hands on since Kevin Bales Castle Adventure and 2600 Adventure. The only other game that could possibly approach that throne is Torment. Fallout 2 shoutout for good measure. That one is as flawed as they say, but I love it none the less.
Torment for sure is right up there... outside that its hard to think of another that even comes close, and having the first game and ToB as well to tie it all together is just icing on top.
Another amazing video. I can feel your excitement playing this game through the video. Tell the editors they are doing a great job for me. See you in the next video
I mean, the game does revolve around the city of Baldur's Gate. And it has characters from the original series in it. But sure, the comparisons kind of end there.
All the Baldur's Gate entries are fantastic, can't forget Icewind Dale, planescape, Neverwinter Nights and such. I enjoyed all of them just for different reasons. Endless possibilities and replayability.
I consider BG2 to be the gold standard for RPGs and number 1 all-time for me. This game actually had a meaningful impact on my life as an adolescent. And I'm not alone - others have shared similar experiences with me. BG3 is a very good RPG, but it has serious flaws that recency bias overlooks.
Of course undeniably better. It was the perfect embodiment of the whole forgotten realms setting. This was never achieved again on screen. Open world too in terms of options. People simply have not played this game for the most part, franchise was never popular enough back then to get the attraction it deserved. It was a niche genre. 2nd game was the peak in rpg gaming and it's not even close and it really was never surpassed. There's not much you can touch upon but simply say that the multilayered narration and sublayers in the story, but also the memorable characters with their quirks are something that never happened again in gaming, not at this level at least. As for gameplay, you never had this amount of gameplay options in terms of spells and skills. Like literally. And it was all balanced and fair, fun even. The balance pace between combat and non-combat, simply perfection. That engrossing experience can never be relived, you could never stop playing. The stuff you could do with a high level mage, is the stuff of legend, no other game ever represented this in such a mindblowing way even after all these years. Watcher's keep is like the ultimate DLC expansion ever made for an rpg. It was THAT good. And it was challenging as hell. And it was exactly what you wanted when you became good in the game. Epic beyond words. PS: You'll probably get downvoted to hell though despite speaking the truth, simply because of mindless bg3 fans.
The part about magic is so true. I feel like people who aren't into the retro games scene, or are just young, see me gush about the power fantasy of a high level mage in this game and think I'm nuts, but literally nothing has ever matched it. It's especially true when you consider how weak low level mages are in this game, to go from being one shot by a gibberling, to being able to wipe out an entire floor of enemies solo without even being touched, is such a wild feeling. Playing through with my main as a wizard this time was an especially special experience, to be able to see how strong Irenicus is at the start, that untouchable power, then to realize that by the end you are more than his match in magic is truly one of a kind. I'll take the dislikes for speaking the truth, though so far its not so bad, just a few naysayers haha.
@@aquawalrus Yup and that's exactly what the mage class was in dnd, even back in the early 90s. So weak at the first levels, yet the most powerful being you could ever imagine, on real high levels. BG2 embodied that so well, that it was a feat I would never have imagined to see in this life from paper to screen. And yet they did so masterfully. The enemy liches in this game also, and one particular lich/demon mixed party that I remember, truly made you realize the pure raw power of magic. It made you want to feel that power yourself. Its insane that you could actually do that. Dragon battles were absolutely bonkers as well. Didn't prepare well to protect yourself from that specific element and you were simply toast. Leave all your party on the same side, and watch them get destroyed by those area attacks. Yes some "hidden" items in the game were clearly OP, but on a 1 to 10 scaling in terms of pure fun and potential, they ranked like 20/10. It was such a good feeling. I think that's what it comes down to. We as gamers don't really care if there are hidden mechanics in a game that make you almost broken. In fact we yearn for them, because "having pure fun" with all those shenanigans is what you will always remember. I wish more modern game devs fully realized this. You don't have to nerf everything to make a good balanced game. Magic was perhaps a bit complex, oldschool even, perhaps more complex than in many other similar games, but once you realized what you could do? You were literally flying. Tell me one other game that managed to make you feel like you felt here playing a wizard with a staff of invisibility, going head to toe invisible into a huge amount of powerful enemies while in stoneskin, only to unleash the ultimate nightmare of aoe spells and triggers, bringing death and destruction all around you. Or the time stop shenanigan combos. There is not a single other rpg game you could do this, like you could here. Did fantasy gaming ever become as epic? Clearly not.
@@kobarsos82 yeah the whole need to make specifically single player games super "balanced" drives me nuts. Like if it's multiplayer I get it you want a fair experience, but as a solo player sometimes I want to build that super broken party. It's fun to find ways to exploit the systems you're given. Nowadays I feel like you find the slightest advantage in these games that lets you play "the wrong way" and it gets patched out to protect some sort of envisioned single player experience. People who want to play in a strictly ruled world will, and people that want to mess with it should be able to as well!
Baldur's Gate 3 is just as bad as Divinity: Original Sin II. They are good games but compared to the originals they are just bad. The same applies to the Fallout series. Part 3 and 4 are just bad compared to 1 and 2. Larian Studios and especially Bethesda have a lot to learn to make a really good game.
There is nothing in BG 3 that makes it feel like the Forgotten Realms setting, where as the original games embodied it perfectly. Also Larian took a huge dump on the original lore from the first games and the characters from it, almost as if they wanted to erase it.
@@Sothpawman yeah, I'm not a huge fan of Larians games, they have this weird sort of jokey feel about everything and it just does not fit the setting at all. Everything is so weirdly light hearted, like they can't commit to a serious story. I have no issue with others enjoying their games, but it really felt like they butchered what BG was with the third game. Would have preferred they at least created their own story in the forgotten realms, rather than just piggybacking on an existing IP.
@@aquawalrusI feel you on that lighthearted, jokey tone. I basically hadn’t played an RPG since Neverwinter Nights until I saw BG3 released, and remembered how much I loved BGII. I jumped in expecting danger and betrayal at every turn, and was surprised when everyone with a speaking part was essentially extremely amicable. I felt most aware that this was a different era, one of narrative handholding the player, when Astarion puts a knife to your throat at first introduction, and when your PC breaks free, we all stay friends. Why wasn’t that just a straight-up initiate combat? Not at all immersive.
@ThalesWell yeah that particular part always annoyed me as well, and like if you have Shadowheart or someone else with you they just sort of jokingly don't seem to really care. It doesn't need to be like, Warhammer levels of dark, but Larians games just have this everything is a punch line vibe that I just cannot stand, and it really doesn't match the energy of the original games at all.
@@justaquietpeacefuldance right around the time you hit the underdark the game gets wildly hard, if you aren't maxing the potential of your casters it gets so rough.
While Bg2 just improved on everything in bg1 i think the most important one was the increase in quality of the level design of villages, open areas and the dungeos. In BG1 most of the open areas were just flat terrain that you could go in any direction and had a quirk encounter/npc or/and a quick ques while the dungeons were a collection of small corridors in the form of little mazes with one or two textures/colors for all of it +was a nightmare for your characters to pathfind thru, the only real good dungeon in bg1 being Durlarg Tower , and Durlag puts a few of dungeons in BG2 to shame imo. The only thing realy lost was the "free" exploration of the open areas that gave you a sense of adventure as you slowly opened more and more areas to go by exploring every inch of the greater map, while in BG2 exploration is a little more "quest focused", as in you probably will find a quest that will open that new area in the map for you.
@@Ziklawz absolutely hit the nail on the head. BG1 had a great sense of discovery and exploration, but 2 was just so absolutely filled with things to do, so many of them just wildly outlandish and unexpected.
For mind flayers there is a cleric spell chaotic commands that renders all their shit useless. Haste a fighter and give em chaotic commands and resist paralysis. Pound town.
350+ Hours in a blink of an Eye. IT WAS AN EPIC JOURNEY ! And iam happy i finished my Childhood Game now in a row. Because i was never be able to fully focus on the Series and ignored it for decades. To age like a fine wine.
I don’t think this is a bad game and I can see why someone would enjoy it. For me, even though I enjoyed BG1, I didn’t enjoy BG2 and after giving it a try, I just watched my brother play through it when we were teenagers. I think the reason was that BG1 felt grounded and more like an adventure that I could relate to. BG2 pulls out all the stops and everything about it is just so over the top. I know this is because you continue playing with your BG1 high level character and so now things need to be bigger and badder. Yet for me, I just got tired of every encounter being a super saiyan riding a black dragon riding a tarasque while you cast nuclear blasts that rain vorpal swords while fighting in the middle of an erupting volcano as the planet is knocked out of orbit and careens into the sun. Something like that once is a while is cool, but all the time? I just couldn’t get into it.
@@CptSamel totally can understand that. I enjoyed the over the top nature of it, the plane jumping world saving stuff goes hand in hand with those high level DND encounters and I definitely love how even the smallest side quest would feel like it could be an epic adventure on its own, but definitely find myself missing the more grounded world of BG1. Killing dragons and wiping out beholder cults is great, but sometimes it's just nice to save a village from some uppity bandits.
I have played through baldurs gate 1 and 2 many times. I played through one more times than two, because I always start in first one and I don't always play it all the way through the second, and I do like the first one better. To me baldur's gate one is like a good meal, but balders gate two is dessert. You really start to feel powerful, and get good items everywhere. It feels really good after playing through the first one, where the power creeps up much slower.
You know that meme where people stand around a person's grave and doing victory hand-signs? It's strangely fitting that the player and Imoen are dead and Bhaal and Sarevok are gloating over their grave. Because if your character was killed in Cabdlekeep, five minutes into the game, that's how you get BG3. Now, I don't blame Larion for this, Wizard's has been ruining D&D lore for some time now. I really wanted to support a friendly studio like Larion,but the woke stuff alongside the lore retcones killed any desire to play the game (not to mention how I find the companions very unappealing).
@@Cyricist001 for me it was like you said, unappealing companions, but also I just hated what they did to the setting. It's just so fluffy, it feels like the game wants to take itself seriously but can't help but add in a joke every 3 minutes. BG isn't what I would call a super dark tone, but it was always a serious game with a touch of light heartedness here and there. BG3 felt like they were trying to make a sitcom.
My ranking is in numerical order, 1 being my favorite and 3 being my least favorite. I really like the world and polish of the second game, but I tend to prefer the more grounded fantasy of the first game whereas SoA was so over the top with powers and locations that it was hard for me to get immersed in the same way. Still, very enjoyable overall.
I can understand that... The game can be a touch jarring with the tonal shifts, even Irenicus' lab is so fantastical compared to anything you see in the first game. It works for me, but it's a bit outside that normal fantasy setting.
ROFL that last review....what planet are they on? They TOLD YOU the reasons for Jon Irenicus's betrayal. It's more than "Oh I need to do that to level myself up for no reason." Never got a gleam of what the review said was going on between Jon and Bodi never hinted at either.
Yeah that was the biggest WTF in the review, like Irenicus has so many motivations outside raw power, and is one of my top villains of all time with a great arc throughout the game. That last bit on him and Bhodi is also like, completely unfounded. Nothing in the game hints toward that in the slightest just pure fantasy. Wild stuff.
Its definitely a better narrative, but bg3 does gameplay better. I would say bg3 largely fails as a narrative game, if people didnt simp so hard for the companions i think many would agree
@@joshuanowlin443 I definetly like the variety in character build in BG3, but I'm such a huge fan of RTWP it's hard for me to get into the turn based. I have to agree a big part of why I'm not as big on BG3 is the companions. I just don't get why people vibe with them so much. There is not one companion in that game I find even remotely interesting. Maybe Minthara, but that's just because I'm a Drizzt nerd.
I really like the companions, i like the gameplay but i dont like much of the "acts" hard to explain... I just feel e.g. act 1 on the overworld is "here is x setpieces" it doesn't feel as "big" or as grandiose in a lot of ways due to that. It feels a bit "crammed" to me in a way... but yeah tough to explain what i mean i think
It's perhaps the only game of this kind without anything that feels like grind. (Compare this to Dragon Age: Origins, for example, where you have very annoyingly long parts of grindy combat areas to fight through, like those tunnels under the dwarven city). While I probably will play Baldurs Gate 3 at some point, I don't expect it to come even close to this game here.
@@garnauklaufen6704 it's funny you mention dragon age, I was considering giving it a go next but as much as I absolutely love that game, it has stretches that I cannot stand. The fade being the worst offender for me but others come close. It also isn't supported by a strong series. DAO is mostly good, but DA2 is pretty bland and inquisition is fun but a mega grind if you want to experience the whole thing. BG3 I've tried to get through 3 times, always burn out around act 2. It just gets super tedious for me, and I've heard the third act is even more so. Glad others are enjoying it but it's not for me.
BG2, after 20 or so years, has yet to be de-throned from my number one game. I used to played it once a year, but eventually got worn out about six years ago. I told myself I'd played it enough, and though nothing would probably knock it out of my number one, I'd had my time with it. When BG3 game out I was very skeptical, since BG in general did not need a sequel. Throne of Bhaal had a pretty definitive ending. Become a god or walk off into the sunset? I didn't get BG3 when it came out, but knew I would eventually. And when I did I was pleasantly surprised. It's a good game. But it didn't take long for me to realize it was a crap BG game. I put about 60 hours into it, and most of it was great. But I never beat it because all I could think about was the real BG games. In the end all BG3 ended up accomplishing for me was to get me to install the entire OG saga and run through it again after a six year hiatus. And my god does it hold up. BG3 is better it some ways, certainly. Presentation, graphics, reactivity... but as far as characters, romances, writing, story, world building, and general immersion, the old games (especially 2) still blows it out of the water.
@@nicholasrova3698 couldn't have put it better myself. Same here I got BG3 a few months past release, and I've since tried to get through it 3 times but never made it past act 2. It's not necessarily "bad" or anything, but it's just not a good BG game.
@@aquawalrus My biggest issue with BG3 is it's connection to the old games. I feel if it wasn't related to the old games, or they were very slightly mentioned (since the Bhaalspawn Crisis was a big deal) then I probably would have stuck with BG3 a lot more, and would have subsequently loved it, instead of merely enjoying it. Their story about Githyanki and Mindflayers and what not is pretty good, and could have held up on its own without being dragged down by the poorly implemented 'old BG stuff'. Hell, even the original BG3 wasn't going to have anything to do with the Bhaalspawn Saga. Larian should have just taken a page out of the Black Hound's book and gone that route.
@nicholasrova3698 honestly same. Im fine with it being a forgotten realms game, but it feels like they robbed the grave of BG for the hype. Could have just made their own DND adventure without ransacking the remains of an already beloved, and complete, franchise.
Bgee and bg2ee and bgSOD are all great. I love playing those games, play on hardest difficulty and cheeze my way true impossible battles xD Everyone said shaman is bad, my solo shaman is now level 38 and i had to back out of 1 duel in durlags tower, but all I need is the staff of woodlands to summon mounds to give me time to set up for that battle and they will go down like everyone Else! So i will be back with that staff, and if that somehow fail i found a way that shaman can survive slayer form taking no magic damage over time, so i will use my hla to have sick ac/thaco/regen/magical resists/physical resist and immune to most elemental damage. People also claim monk is bad, yes it takes time in legacy of bhaal, but my monk is now level 18 in SOD, slaying all. And i made a Vampire monk kit for later use as well. So much you can do in this game, fun with and without mods.
We wouldn't even have the great games and great genes we have now without the older games first making it a reality and evolving over time. Mad respect for Ultima, Wizardry, Old DnD games (too many to count), Dragon Quest, Final Fantasy, Baldur's Gate... the list goes on. Young people these days are pampered, but they should show respect for what's come before because what they have now wouldn't even be possible without it.😇
As for the mind flayers, going with the brine potions is the optimum strategy here. Kudos on you for doing those encounters without the brine potions. I always use those (though you won't have enough for all encounters, so I recommend people to save some for the elder brain battle).
I used them once, but tend to get lazy with them since their duration is so short. I always felt they were a bit of a risk in themselves as they can run out mid combat. Also by the time I grabbed them I was far too invented in my sword strategy and too stubborn to change.
After going through everything, watching John getting what he deserves in the hells was SOOO satisfying. I ended up passing all the final tests except 1 that resulted in me becoming Neutral Evil. Just couldnt put my wrath aside 😤
I also failed one of the tests... I'm debating going back and redoing it before ToB, though I did kill a good dragon maybe I deserve to be branded evil. I absolutely love the final scene for BG2, Irenicus is pretty well the definition of evil it's so satisfying seeing him totally powerless.
I wonder if you tried giving some mods, like SCS chance. They really can change the way you play the game, SCS especially. Ascension for Throne of Bhaal does some really nice changes fo the story here and there, and also massively improves final battle.
I need to get to playing that series again... Played them years ago but it's been so long I don't have strong memories. I do really look forward to building a full custom party for them.
@@aquawalrus Pretty late, I just wanted to say that the Icewind Dales are different. They are fairly linear and their environmental and character art is better than that of the Baldur's Gates. They too have great music, especially the first one and I think their atmosphere is at least as strong as that of Shadows of Amn. They also have actual reactivity, the second one moreso than the first one. Encounter design overall seems to be better, especially in the second one. However it's somewhat hard to compare as SoA is more magically oriented and I frankly haven't played it in a long, long time. The difficulty especially of the second one is comparatively high as well. Their stories aren't any worse than SoA in my opinion. It's just not there much of the time, as they are more focussed on their dungeon-crawling. Though I'd say that Icwind Dale 1 had the better world building and story and environments were more coherent than in the second game. The second one can seem like a somewhat random progression in comparison.
BG3 did not compare, and in several instances was embarrassing in comparison to BG2. It had its good parts but overall simply did not live up. I am dismayed at people who played 3 and did not go through 1 or 2.
This sounds like your bias and nostalgia talking rather than anything even remotely objective. I just finished Throne of Bhaal and beginning a first playthrough of BG3, the combat and the world interactivity is WAAAAY better which is what an RPG is in a nutshell. To say "was embarrassing in comparison" is a plain lie. Story can be competent but going from SoA to ToB felt rushed. Don't be a boomer.
i still kinda remember the day when i bought the first game from my pocket money around the 2000s with the expansion pack on i think 8 or so CDs. It was HUGE i mean i knew that RPGs could be on several CDs ont he PLaystation but on PC? Also it included a big booklet not only with "history" of the world of the sword coast but also with some basic rules from AD&D which was a totally new thing for me. I knew TTRPGs but never did see AD&D stuff around my area. In Germany D&D wasn't that big at the time (not until 5e hit the market). our System was The Dark Eye / Das Schwarze Auge and while i had the base rulebox and two adventure modules i didn't had friends to play it with (it took two more years before i finally could play a TTRPG for the first time). So reading the AD&D rules were kinda confusing (TAC0 vs the combat rules in The Dark eye and stuff). I loved the game, the weird german voice overs (they included some weird German accents) the good text and the (for me) werid combat. While i never made it far i really liked it. Until today i never have finished any BG game but my goal for the new year is to at least finish BG Enhanced Edition.
Definetly still worth playing today! There is a certain amount of jank in the engine and ADND but it's so fun once you start to learn the ins and outs. BG2 takes it to the limit in terms of what this style of game can do!
48:28 - unless the game grips you, this is actually a very true review There's a reason things are called "hooks" in 'entertainment' and 'media', and that is because Being Hooked On It is a very different experience to the hook failing to penetrate. If it doesn't grip you, that is what BG2 is - an interface full of chores, a bunch of annoyingly timed quests and highly robotic gameplay. (Oh? A door? Yeah sure let me get out my pocket rogue! Oh wait, I don't have any!!! hahAAa) (Oh? A corridor in this silly place? Wanna bet it has a dozen inexplicable traps just to force rogues being relevant? WOW DIDN'T SEE THAT ONE COMING) If the hook captures you, you sort of overlook this because "wow, cool story, cool characters, man I wanna know more [keeps pushing through metaphorical mud]", but I would not discard the validity of that review. Who am I to know these things, and know both sides of the coin? Silence, dog. Your only purpose in life is to die by my hand. I shall answer none of your questions, go fetch a MacGuffin and find someone that wishes to spill the beans. [teleports away disparagingly in French]
@@TheDoomerBlox I mean, I think the statement that things are only good if they "hook you" is true for literally anything in any form of entertainment media, and especially in the case of video games, describing them as a series of chores is pretty well the literal definition. The difference on whether something is a chore or enjoyable is completely based on the subjective experience of the one interacting with it. In this particular case, I would argue the points made generally contradict the commonly accepted view this game has amongst it's fan base, and in a pretty spectacular way. Who am I to judge though? I also hold the highly unfavorable view that Larian studios makes immersive, but largely unenjoyable games. I'm sure someone out there would just as readily disparage my viewpoint given the chance!
@@aquawalrus I can add to the point you raise at the end by summarizing my experience with playing Original Sin 2, where I would purposefully quit playing the game because the story being woven inside my head was a far more gripping story than what the game would ultimately end up presenting. (I would then later replay the game, and confirm this) There are a few games where this is not the case, but it's hard to quantify that exact state of "raises a great theater scene, but ends up having a bunch of clowns playing on it" that Larian seem like masters of capturing.
Can't a high level magic user cast a pretty mean magic missile? Been a while since I've looked at the rules but doesn't the number of missiles cast go up with the levels?
@@jamesstaggs4160 it does, it's a great spell too because it literally cannot miss, only be resisted. It's actually weirdly effective on dragons if you can drop their magical resistances a bit before casting. Still takes a ton of hits, but you can pretty well machine gun them once you hit high levels.
"Across the board improvement" you say, and yet you start the video with BG1 soundtrack :) About the illithids, the typical strategy is to use Chaotic Commands for psionics immunity and potions of genius/mind focusing to protect against brain devouring (though even then it's still wise to keep them at range, potions just give you some buffer, not immunity).
@@Mrityugata hah, good catch on the music you're totally right. I love that particular soundtrack. Love all the music but it's definitely my favorite of the bunch.
Baldur's Gate 1 is a masterpiece, but it wasn't even close to being the first CRPG to feature reactive, open world exploration and storytelling. The Ultima franchise was really the pioneer in this regard, and Ultima 7 in particular remains unsurpassed in its complex world simulation. It's more accurate to say that BG1 built off the successes of previous games, and helped reignite the roleplaying genre on PC. But I totally agree that BG2 is the reigning champion of the genre. BG3 is excellent in its own right, but BG2 is unmatched in its scope and execution.
@@matternicuss absolutely agree, I've only just played U7 for the first time this year and it's absolutely amazing, even coming from someone with no nostalgia for it it stands the test of time.
I really enjoyed BG3 and it did deserve the GOTY award it got, but nothing will ever beat BG2 as my favourite RPG, I think I have at least a couple of thousand playtime hours in BG2, and I still play it once a year. I think it also has to do with the new d&d ruleset. Some of the classes dont really click for me as they did in the old rules. I do think gameplay and NPC wise, BG3 is the better game. Story, setting and especially the villains, BG2 is better.
its sad that rpg has never reached the level of bg2 even after two decades. Quality and quantity of dialogues will never be the same bc they gave up depth of writing and replaced with motion graphics and voiced dialogues
@@guji369 sadly true, the closest we've gotten is maybe Dragon Age Origins, but even then there were far more limitations. I'm stealing from another commenter, but they compared it to modern games being more like movies while older ones are more like books, I think that's sadly a good description of what the modern RPG experience has become.
BG1,2, and throne of bhaal have been my favorite games since I played them at 12 years old. I like the third game, but I gave it a bad review for trying to ride the coattails of greatness. The only thing in my opinion 3 has done better, is its replayability and variety of choices. Not that 1 and 2 aren't replayable, they are more replayable in the way of I've certainly missed many many quests and secrets even having beaten it 4 times now. The third one is replayble in a way that you will be able to do the same quests in many many different ways and this is is pretty awesome I will not lie. However the originals writing, emersion, world design, sound, characters, just simply cannot be beat, they are the best and I will die on this hill.
@@Gong-Fu_Hermit absolutely agree. I don't even really dislike 3, I just felt they changed so much not only with the story, but with gameplay and just general atmosphere that it's so clear the game has almost nothing to do with the original series. For me the originals replayability comes from the massive amount of different ways you could build your party, the huge number of companions and the choices you're going to have with reaching such a high level.
@aquawalrus great point, I remember the first time fighting each 3 end game bosses on my first playthrough and not being able to beat them due to lack of my experience with DND and low levels because I didn't do nearly enough questing and just grinded through each hard encounter and save scummed like crazy. Had to play through each game again and still didn't realize just how much there is to do, until my 3rd.
@@Gong-Fu_Hermit Serevok was always the huge challenge for me before I got better at the game. He was such a check on your party composition and mastery of abilities like nothing else in the game up to that point.
I liked BG3, but the title was clearly just a means to make more money. It has nothing to do with BG and BG II and could have easily be named differently or the third act moved to another place.
@@hansmeier8953 yeah, it really could have just been another Divinity game. It's far too different in story, tone, gameplay, pretty much everything, to really be considered a true entry in the series. I would have much preferred Larian just make their own adventure in the forgotten realms and leave the legacy of BG alone, though I think that's a somewhat unpopular opinion these days.
I like all 3 games but absolutely think black isle just made better overall experience. On larions part I actually prefer divinity original sin 2 over bg3.
Really good video, you're doing the game justice, good job :) I spent countless hours with this game, bought it on launch day in September and have been still playing it during Christmas brake. Absolute masterpiece. I think people don't remember anymore but bg2 brought so much to the table it's insane. Bg3 while still an amazing game, especially judged by today's standards, but imo it it's just another of the new divinities (btw would love to see our take on the original divine divinity as well). Anyway, this channel is becoming one of my favorites here on yt, binge watched all your stuff and eagerly waiting for more ❤
@@cRPGeek I'm glad you've been enjoying the vids, makes my day. I would like to cover Divinity if just to have the motivation to finish it off. Something about Larians games I tend to put a lot of hours into them but never make it to the end.
@@aquawalrus I am really enjoying them ;) and yeah, I totally get what you mean about those divinity games, they tend to drag for some reason and are sometimes on the more grindy side, esspecialy the first two, although the first one much more than the second.
baldurs gate 3 sucks. RTWP >>>>> TB combat. But apart from the combat itself, BG2 had soul. passion, little easter eggs that you found so much glee discovering. BG3 unfortunately is a soulless corporate moneygrab. BG2 will stand as the greatest rpg of all time until the end of PC gaming. Only other game that I found on the level of BG2 was Pillars of Eternity: Deadfire.
I grew up with 1997s Fallout, Fallout 2 and Tactics, 2001s Arcanum, and I can for the life of me not get into Baldur's Gate 1-2. I'm not a modern gamer that likes the shinier thing, I'm not a nostalgia chaser, I just like high quality games; Baldur's Gate 3 is just straight up a superior game to Baldur's Gate 1-2, it's not even a question.
Sounds like it's just not your style, which is totally fine, but it's definitely not nostalgia in this case. BG2 is easily one of the best RPGs ever made, and when taken as a whole the original trilogy is unmatched as a roleplaying experience. Now when I say obscure SSI dungeon crawlers are the best RPGs ever, you can bet that is pure nostalgia haha.
@@aquawalrus The thing is that BG1-2 sounds exactly like the thing I like, but for some reason it is not. I have heard the exact same thing from my gamer friends. Maybe it is a cultural thing. I wonder if you like "Pillars of Eternity" that was very much a game I was looking forward to and I did not enjoy it either.
@@TheRealSoldatmesteren the way you feel about BG1/2 is exactly how I feel about BG3. I feel like I should be enjoying myself but I'm not. I do love POE, so it seems just a difference of tastes!
@@TheRealSoldatmesteren I had never heard of it, just watched the trailer and read a bit about it, sounds like I would like it I'll have to put it on my wishlist.
@@adrianalexanderveidt344 every time I play I am amazed all over again at how amazing it is. I just finished and I'm chomping at the bit to try another build or try a single character run.
The infinity engine (and later Aurora engine for NWN) is shockingly solid. I wouldn’t call it clunky. There are certain aspects that were never intended to be customizable, but the engine supports way more modifications via game files than necessary and runs those modifications smoothly. When I play BG3, the sheer number of bugs and graphical glitches in the dialogue trees makes it feel like they scrapped all the previous iterations of the concept - like they reinvented the wheel and made it square and out of stone. You basically need a whole development studio team to create a single new NPC with dialogue in BG3.
@@Zapdos7471 the only part I found to be clunky was the pathfinding, and even that could have been mostly fixed with slightly larger maps, which BG2 improved on I felt. The EEs for all the infinity games are great for quality of life, but not even necessary with how well the engine holds up on modern machines. A lot of the older games I play have that learning curve to get used to, infinity engine stands out as one you can drop onto after years not playing and just feel right at home.
@@aquawalrus it was definitely a step up from Fallout 1, 😆 When BG1 released, the infinity engine was still under development and there were massive QoL improvements between 1 & 2. So much so that people created a mod for BG2 (called TuTu of all things) that ported all the content from BG1 into the updated engine. Still, it is no small feat to turn D&D into software, or a turn based game into a real-time engine that feels the same. Also, somehow I feel like EE made the path finding worse! Oh well, it beats having to manage a dozen patch and QoL mods.
@@Zapdos7471 yeah that's my feel with EE as well. Original is probably a bit better with some patching an improvements, but it's nice to just have something that can be dropped right into with no fiddling required.
Creating BG3 is mistake in the first place, and even bigger mistake is give it to Larian. larian is just bunch of clowns, who think they are funny but in reality they are not. Yes they can make good game gameplaywise, but when it come to story and atmosphere Larian can only make same old freak show. Also Sven Winke always have inferiority complex to OG BioWare, and you can clearly see how he piss on they grave in BG3.
@@michaelbayley9432so you despise her because you couldn't firx her? ironic. I mean I don't love her either but I find it unrealistic that someone who has spent their entire life living a certain way and has cemented their beliefs to the point of being fanatic would suddenly completely turn around because someone said one or two nice things to them.
Still find weird how Jaheira is a RO like she literally got widowed and started hitting on us? (And I know in game time differs from IRL time but still) I still remember my first playthrough and how shocked I was when she started flirting with the MC like "bro I know you just got widowed and stuff but I respect and love uncle Khalid I can't do that to him." And I know there's people who is into that but I ain't one of those :P
Yeah, its sort of an abrupt shift too, like she talks about him for the first few chats, then it feels like she literally forgets about him completely. Minsc as well seems to move on from Dynaheir pretty quick, but that's more forgivable on account of the massive head trauma.
People who live through conflict and constantly risked their lives, tend to see thing different, then we are. You can find many similar stories in WW1, WW2 etc.
For me BG3 is more like a game adaptation of the Critical Role show rather than a game in the FR setting. I just can't immerse myself in the story. I look at characters - I see lampooning roleplayers who can't take anything seriously.
@@Вася-о3ф7ь that's a huge sticking point for me as well. BG was always a fairly serious game with the occasional bit of humor sprinkled in, BG3 it just feels like everything is silly and jokey. It refuses to take itself seriously. It's the same thing that makes it hard for me to get into the Divinity games, it's like they want to tell a serious story but can't commit.
Problem with today's games is they are more focused on visual the the gameplay/story content. Back then when i was a kid in late 90's, i had wish that graphics would improve in the future. Now i always coming to older titles. 😅
So true. I find the quest for hyper realism in games has compromised everything else. Developers used to have to be really artistic and creative to make games with the limited technology of the time, and that passion shows. Now it's just making everything look real, which I think was never supposed to be the point!
Played 1, 2 and 3. I see your point, even if I don't share it. For me, the changes in 3 weren't that big of a deal. There's a gap of 120 years between BG 2 and 3, so a lot can happen. BG3 is a more polished modern game, that's unrefutable, and personally I prefer the turn based combat, as is more close to the tabletop game. I love the FR setting, in all games, and I don't think there's a lot of differences. True, Larian has their own spin to fantasy, wich is very close to european fantasy RPGs, with a more "fairy tale with a dark twist" feeling that I personally welcome, but I can understand if it's not one's thing. That being said, being "different" doesn't mean "bad", it means different. Also, I really love BG2, but at least BG3 has the actual Baldur's Gate city in it. Even if I disagree on your take, I really like your channel. Great work 👍
To be honest as lame as it sounds at this point, I don't even necessarily think BG3 is bad, I just have a really hard time with it being a BG game. It feels so much like Divinity, I really wish it could have just been Larian's own Forgotten realms story and left BG where it was. I get that unrealistic, but it's hard to not feel a bit jaded, I had expected something along the lines of triple a pillars of eternity, and while what we got is by no means bad, it's just really not what I had hoped. I am legitimately glad at the reach it's had to get more new players into D&D. As much as it's really not my style it's done a lot of good to bring the setting into the mainstream again.
@@aquawalrus Don't get me wrong, not liking something and being able to explain why you don't like something is not lame, it's perfectly fine (and I get it, BG3 is not a perfect game for me, I think it looses steam by the final acts, and it is too centered in romantic interactions with the companions for my taste). I wasn't accusing you of hate-bating or anything. I was speaking in general because I do have a problem with some of the commentors here (which is not your fault), because what they say is not criticism, it's reduced to "I don't like it, so that mean it's bad", and that's the biggest bs argument I've ever heard (and don't get me started with the ones who say "it's bad because it's woke", because that's another can of ignorant worms).
When you are talking exceptional vs fantastic vs brilliant.................who really cares. 1, 2 and 3, are all very good indeed, each in their own way. BG2 is only DENIABLY better.............and should you even try to compare 2 and 3, the time difference between them makes them totally different games. You cannot make a modern game the same way you made the older games - for example look at the sheer number of companions available in BG2. Because of the cost it takes to bring each BG3 companion to life (compared to BG1 and BG2) it means there are fewer companions, even though the graphical look of each BG3 companion is great. That is one of the reasons the party size is smaller these days (from the 6 person party size in BG1 & 2, to the 4 person party in BG3). Celebrate each iteration of BG for what it is. Calling them great games one and all is soooo much better (and cooler) than trying to push one of them over another.
I mean, to be fair I think many people care quite deeply which is better. Just the comment section on this video can be a testament to that. On both sides of the coin people have pretty strong opinions. Fully taking your point though, while it may seem unfair to compare a title from the 90's to one from the current day, you will never avoid that. They choose to resurrect a series that was finished and beloved, and for better or worse, people are going to have a reaction to that and draw conclusions and comparisons. If they didn't want comparisons, they could have released a forgotten realms game of their own and left BG's legacy alone. You absolutely can make a modern game like an old game, there are multiple spiritual successors to BG that are beloved in the community and did a much better job keeping the feel of the original (Pillars of Eternity is my favorite, but Kingmaker is popular as well). All that said, I don't have a problem with BG3, and I agree its a decent RPG, I've even just started a new casual playthrough of it to try and understand the hype a bit better. But I'll always prefer the originals just like others may always prefer the new one. Has nothing to do with pushing anything, neither Bioware or Larian need my help, its just a subjective review on my tiny corner of TH-cam. Fully respect your viewpoint, but to me they are leagues different!
Yah I got thousands of hrs on bg1 and 2 and still get excited to play a new campaign.. I got out of the flayer ship and was instantly bored as fuck it’s to slow no tavern stories no epic tales just feels like a dead fuckn game slow and boring..
Yeah I don't know how people get invested in it. Didn't feel any sort of attachment to characters, didn't really care about the story. Just didn't grab me. I've tried so many times to play it again but I can't get past the second act without losing interest.
@ omg the banter and all the characters are lame as fuck it’s like comparing Pokémon to mtg and pokemon is bg3 and mtg is bg1 and 2 .. the shit was made for slow ppl and toddlers.. not to mention 5e is fuckn absolute trash..
I wouldn't call BG1&2 better per say, there's a LOT of issues with the games and especially the engine (sorry, but Infnity engine is trash even if it was the best they could do at the time). But the one thing that original BG "Trilogy" has is the scope, from zero to hero journey is incredible. Nothing comes close to it in BG3 and by level 10 you are easily killing god like beings and max spell level is barely 6. In 3 even at lower levels after you finish act 1 almost nothing poses a challenge anymore, while BG2 and Throne of Bhall have instances where battles can become incredibly hard especially if you don't abuse some of the overpowered HLAs like Spike Traps for example. The feeling is just not the same and I hate what they did to Viconia and Sarevok.
I can agree with all this except the infinity engine, I absolutely love it so much. Pathfinding is super bad, but outside that the engine is amazing, they could make a game on it today and I would be excited. I may be slightly blinded by nostalgia though 😸
@@aquawalrus I have other issues with the engine beside pathfinding, like how buggy it can be and especially with some "instant" casting skills that lag your round for some reason, and other small idiosyncrasies. The only game without these problems was Planescape, but most of it was because the lack of chaotic and challenging combat. At least it's better than NWNs Aurora engine that I loath. About nostalgia for me, I certainly don't hold it in high regard, I was too spoiled by Fallout 1&2 engine because they offered much more on the RP factor.
Absolutely correct. I have close to 1000 hours in bg2 and I didn't even play it for the first time until about 8 years ago. It's had me in a death grip ever since. It holds up so well that it's ridiculous.
Baldur's Gate 3 was akin to someone taking someone else's toys and creating different backstories and motives for them. Sarevok regressed for no reason, Viconia became a child harming zealot when her characterization in the first two games was as a rebel against God. It's bad and should feel bad.
Couldn't have said it better myself... They took something very important to a lot of people and just decided to change the narrative and style completely. They should have just made a new IP in the forgotten realms and left BG alone IMO.
@@aquawalrus That's another thing BG3 is better at, you're right. Because most crpgs you don't get to see your character's face at all and it completely lacks immersion.
Thats not true at all. Nothing about the graphics is like the forgotten realms setting, its fantastical unicorn land of Divinity. The voice acting is all british and euro, and doesn't have the classical mature voice actors from the first games. THe original games were far more darker and grittier, the beautiful old style scrolls and artwork of the UI was far better than the modern day microsoft spread sheet, bland boring crap of BG3. The magical items you could find were so much more detailed in lore and description and way cooler in the first games. The music from the old games is way better, not the nordic viking crap of BG3. SO MUCH MORE WAS BETTER IN THE OLD GAMES.
@@Sothpawman "So much more was better in the original games" yet you mention inconsequential things like UI. You neglect things like how BG3 has far more reactivity and choice, significantly better immersion in not only the story and characters but also how you interact with the world, better loot system where items can actually change how your build works instead of merely being stat boosts, significantly better build variety with more balanced and interesting classes, enemy encounters where each one actually matters and wasn't a couple of goblins plopped in a forest, significantly better and more rewarding exploration, etc. The few things the originals do better do not make up for the enormous amount of things BG3 objectively does better.
The plot, world-building, art style in BG2 is much better than in BG3. If one considers BG3 as part of the series at all. Throne of Bhaal completes the plot of the Children of Bhaal saga. It can even be said that the combat in BG2 is better despite the fact that it is based primarily on accurate knowledge of spells.
@@piotrd7355 I definetly prefer the RTWP of the originals, definetly a subjective opinion but I find turn based to be really distracting and often just so drawn out. RTWP makes those big encounters feel so much more frantic and engaging.
Sorry mate, but I'm almost tempted to down-vote this one for how uncaring you were towards poor old Yoshi. I don't know, maybe he was played better in Polish dub, maybe it's just that part of my brain which still holds the memories of long dead, naive and compassionate child who couldn't help but see good even in the worst people, but to this very day I just _believe_ him when he exclaims regret. In my heart he deserves a spot right next to other tragic, ambiguous, video game characters like Javik or John Marston.
@@EvilTurtle97 honestly, I play a lot of older games and love them all. I'm fully willing to admit a lot of that love comes from nostalgia. This game it does not. It is legitimately one of the best RPGs ever made. You won't regret it. I would recommend starting with BG1, though it is more of a slow burn to get going.
Sorry but i have to disagree. BG 3 was an awesome game. It has a great story and the gameplay with all the possibilities are transcendent. But...like i said to my friends who played the original series with me, as much as i love BG3, my heart still belongs to the original series.
@@damagedgoods2663 get no need to be sorry! Difference of opinion is a good thing, makes the world more interesting. For me personally I don't think BG3 is bad or anything, it more just didn't feel like a BG game to me. The tone is so different from the originals. I found it to feel almost slapstick at times, and the companions constant need to flirt with me was very distracting. Fending off Wyll just to walk five feet and have Gale start trying to hit me up when I've shown zero interest in either of them is a very odd experience lol.
Undeniably better? Hmm. That's an interesting call. I love them both so I can entertain the idea. One thing I can comfortably say is that BG3 was a worthy addition to the story. It was in no way a letdown for me. It's harder to compare games built on technology that's over 20 years apart. Love the Icewind Dale games as well.
BG3 butchered previous characters for no reason. Sarevok by the end of Throne of Bhaal was a remorseful, changed man dedicated to ending Bhaal's legacy. His resurrection and forgiveness by the protagonist confuse him and after doing some adventuring, he travels to the lands of his lover to bury her body. In BG3 he is a leader in the Bhaal cult. Complete 180. Viconia's backstory is that Lolth wanted her to sacrifice a child to prove her loyalty and she rebelled against her God and refused to do it, ruining her house and forcing her on the surface. The trauma of what she was asked to do gives her nightmares. Over the course of the game and by Throne of Bhaal she finds a level of acceptance and peace of mind, dedicating herself to either the elvish people to the point where the queen of the elves honors her or she and the protagonist have a child together, but she is tragically slain by an agent of Lolth. In BG3 she is alive, so not ending 2, but instead kidnaps and kills elves and tortures children for her God. Also a complete 180. There are other characters also changed but frankly Larian was a not a good steward of BG's legacy. If they wanted to tell a tale unconnected to previous characters, they had the option to do so, instead they rather twist and break previously established motives.
@@chrisbaldwin8570 I agree regarding Sarevok. He was thrown in with a simplistic story and boss fight for some nostalgia. It was handled poorly. The addition of a character for nostalgia purposes that was cheaply done doesn't undermine the whole experience for me. BG3 is the best RPG I have played in many years. For context I've been playing RPGs since the era of the gold box. If you're old enough you'll know what that is. I loved having Minsc in my party again (although he had to be respecced because his stats where garbage). I think Larion did a very good job building on a series with absurdly high expectations.
Yeah it's just way too different, wish they would have just made a separate forgotten realms game and not resurrected a series that was fine how it was.
@aquawalrus truth be told, as far as stories go, i love 3, but I get it. 1 and 2 story wise are pretty damn dope. And i also get why people would be pissed at how 3 does viconia and seravok. Im a bit too weak to enjoy how old school crpgs play though...hell, i get down with the world and story of those original fallout games too. They paved the way for all that lore i love now, and for that i cant help but respect em.
I need to play that game, I've heard so many people say that and I still haven't actually played it. By all accounts I would love it. POE is a great spiritual successor as well.
@@marcosdheleno 5 is the McDonalds of D&D editions: vapid, meant to appeal to the widest audience and plastic as all hell. Fits perfectly with BG3, in hindsight.
@@nocturnal8171 doesnt matter if you think 5e is vapid. its still far superior to AD&D. its not even a fair comparison. there's an argument about 3.5e since it was the right level of customization. but at the same time, it had some arbitrary rules that just were there to piss people off. like classes tied to alignment. 5e subclasses are great. but are far from perfect. there's still ways to make it better. but AD&D is not. it has too many stupid mechanics, just for the sake of being obtuse.
@@marcosdheleno doesn't matter if you think 5e is superior to AD&D, its still vapid. It's shallow garbage for the masses. It's a baby version for people who are scared of numbers and can't focus on a piece of reading for more than 5 seconds. No choices, no customisation, the same class abilities rebranded between classes and everything normalised under the guise of "balance". 3.5 wasn't perfect, but at least it wasn't targeted at people with ADD and literacy issues.
BG3 is so fake and glittery. i cannot and will not ever play it. its reddit incarnate with the baldurs gate name slapped on it. comment section is wild. great video. havent even started it yet 10/10 ❤
Just listening to the Throne of Bhaal menu theme brings a tear to my eye to this day. BG2, Arcanum, Fallout 2, and Planescape Torment are unbeatable. Anything that came after couldn't match them.
@@mfo6892 absolutely, there have been good games since but these games were the peak for RPGs.
I don't know about BG1 being better than BG3, but BG2 being better than BG3 (not just because of it's influence, but as a game itself) is a plain and simple truth
@@msh-l33t absolutely, even after so many years I always find a new way to experience the game every playthrough.
Yes.
Bg1 better than 2 it feels like your adventure.
This tbh. If BG3 had a sequel that was a higher-level adventure and refined everything like BG2 did, that could surpass this game. Unfortunately that's not on the cards.
@@Zuron sadly true, but at least there have been some decent spiritual successors in the last few years to help fill the gap a little bit.
Baldurs gate 3 is fantastic. But has no forgotten realms feal to it. Baldurs gate 2 still lives in my head. And i played it at release. Old have i become.
@@Automaton35555 definetly agree with that sentiment. Larian games, while fun, have a very different feel to them than any of the classic DND games. A lot lighter, almost silly fantasy.
Don't worry about being old, according to my channel stats we are all getting near due for a hip replacement haha.
yeah
the atmosphere is so good
atkhatla is the best city in any rpg
the atmosphere is so good
baldurs gate 3 is a fun game but not a good baldurs gate
its more like divinity sin 3
and thats what i was afraid of
played it back in the day at release and then multiple times after that
3 years i wanted to know if the game was really as good as i remembered
or if there was just nostalgica speaking
IT IS THAT GOOD! no rpg comes even close in my opinion
in terms of spacing, activity, atmosphere and loot
the gameplay aged of course
What is pretty insane is that BG2 was released just 18 months after the first game, and even though BG2 is yuge game already, there was apparently sizable chunks cut out of it partway through the development, but afaik it's not known what that content would've been and how early in the development the cuts were made and how complete the cut content was.
It's always mind blowing to me when I'm doing research for these games and see stuff like that. Like damn how did they make a game this amazing in barely over a year? Like damn a triple A game nowadays takes them a decade and flops half the time.
i kept my saved game on a floppy hoping for a sequel man i was so happy when i loaded my guy up for a brand new adventure and the ending was beyond satisfying
I remember to read somewhere that the first game took longer to make because the infinite Engine wasnt finished.
@@Erololo makes sense, it was a totally new engine then so getting it off the ground was probably a lot more work than enhancing it for BG2.
Much of that content is out there in the form of a mod, Unfinished Business.
BG2 is more comfortable to play then BG3. And has great music.
It's a sin not to have Jan Jansen
Anyway, hot take: while I like it, I prefer the first one more. I really preferred pr3ferref exploring the wilderness and finding various secrets there over being confined to one city for like 3/4 of the game. Yeah it's huge and full of content but it feels claustrophobic at times.
More minor arguments include the fact the encounters feel less diversed: buff party / debuff opponent / fight / repeat. BGI with your limited power level required more thought to think about the tactics I think.
I also preferred bigger rooster of party members to them being like actual characters here. I like the bigger choice I was given.
@@emkalina you know I was going to grab Jan, and for the life of me I don't know why I didn't. I think I was just excited to do the planar sphere and got distracted.
To be honest, everything you said for arguments are true, and despite the review it would be hard for me to say which game I prefer. I think each has major advantages over the other but it's impossible to pick a clear winner for me.
If nothing else, I have played BG1 a lot more than BG2, so the fresher feel of it definitely sways my opinion.
I enjoy BG3 as a game. But compered to the old Bioware games its night and day. The tone is completely different, and while going full turn based may be more true to tabletop DnD , I will forever stan real time-with pause gameplay.
Absolutely! I always hear the argument that "well DND is turn based!". And as much as I get that, I think it's fair to say converting something from a tabletop to video game warrants a bit of change. The higher control RTWP offers is hard to beat.
While I absolutely agree that BG2 is better than 3, I feel like I might be the only person who actually thinks 1 is better than 2. For all 2's objective improvements, I just feel like 1 was better balanced. Eh, to each their own, 2 is still excellent.
@@lawfulstupid3924 I absolutely love both of them to be honest, I can't play 2 without playing 1 first, and 1 had a much larger impact on the RPG community as a whole I think. 2 was just so absolutely jam packed with stuff, most of it so damn good!
I think to a large extent that's due to the underlying system - "the game gets much harder to balance after level 10 or so" has been true of D&D to some extent long before 5e
@@WombatProphecy Yeah absolutely, even from a player perspective if you know the systems well you can pretty much break the game with high level magic. Sometimes the best the game can do to counteract you is just add more enemies.
I agree. I think Sarevok was a much more interesting villain. I like that he used political machinations to further his goals vs just being a really powerful wizard like Irenicus.
@@tacotuesday2949 I think Serevok was a better fleshed out character, but Irenicus' felt much more daunting to face. He was set up as so untouchable at the start of the game, it felt really wild to overtake him at the end.
I love both though. I don't think I could pick one over the other, both great antagonists.
I really don't think there is a better RPG than BG2. And I've been playing every one I could get my hands on since Kevin Bales Castle Adventure and 2600 Adventure. The only other game that could possibly approach that throne is Torment. Fallout 2 shoutout for good measure. That one is as flawed as they say, but I love it none the less.
Torment for sure is right up there... outside that its hard to think of another that even comes close, and having the first game and ToB as well to tie it all together is just icing on top.
@@aquawalrus Torment has way better story than BG2 way better, however it falls in gameplay compared to it.
BG 1 and 2 are the best rpg of all time
Another amazing video. I can feel your excitement playing this game through the video. Tell the editors they are doing a great job for me. See you in the next video
@@not_jon_vendi I had so much fun with this one. Looking forward to all the other infinity games.
BG1 and 2 are far superior gaming experiences to the third one, which just uses the name for no apparent reason.
@@mojebi3804 yeah, agree. I don't really have a problem with the third game just would have preferred they left BG alone and made their own adventure.
I mean, the game does revolve around the city of Baldur's Gate. And it has characters from the original series in it. But sure, the comparisons kind of end there.
All the Baldur's Gate entries are fantastic, can't forget Icewind Dale, planescape, Neverwinter Nights and such.
I enjoyed all of them just for different reasons. Endless possibilities and replayability.
Some of the best games ever released, I can't stop myself from going back to play them on repeat.
I consider BG2 to be the gold standard for RPGs and number 1 all-time for me. This game actually had a meaningful impact on my life as an adolescent. And I'm not alone - others have shared similar experiences with me. BG3 is a very good RPG, but it has serious flaws that recency bias overlooks.
Here for the algorithm for now. Hopefully this blows up like your last Baldurs vid! Can't wait to watch this I'll be back once I do!
@@not_jon_vendi would be cool, but if it doesn't I still got to play BG2 so that's a win in itself.
Ohohohoho shots fired SHOTS FIRED. Gonna watch later to find out if this is bait title :D
@@GregDevStuff I would be lying if I said it wasn't a LITTLE baity, but absolutely true regardless ;)
Of course undeniably better. It was the perfect embodiment of the whole forgotten realms setting. This was never achieved again on screen. Open world too in terms of options. People simply have not played this game for the most part, franchise was never popular enough back then to get the attraction it deserved. It was a niche genre. 2nd game was the peak in rpg gaming and it's not even close and it really was never surpassed.
There's not much you can touch upon but simply say that the multilayered narration and sublayers in the story, but also the memorable characters with their quirks are something that never happened again in gaming, not at this level at least. As for gameplay, you never had this amount of gameplay options in terms of spells and skills. Like literally. And it was all balanced and fair, fun even. The balance pace between combat and non-combat, simply perfection. That engrossing experience can never be relived, you could never stop playing. The stuff you could do with a high level mage, is the stuff of legend, no other game ever represented this in such a mindblowing way even after all these years.
Watcher's keep is like the ultimate DLC expansion ever made for an rpg. It was THAT good. And it was challenging as hell. And it was exactly what you wanted when you became good in the game. Epic beyond words.
PS: You'll probably get downvoted to hell though despite speaking the truth, simply because of mindless bg3 fans.
The part about magic is so true. I feel like people who aren't into the retro games scene, or are just young, see me gush about the power fantasy of a high level mage in this game and think I'm nuts, but literally nothing has ever matched it. It's especially true when you consider how weak low level mages are in this game, to go from being one shot by a gibberling, to being able to wipe out an entire floor of enemies solo without even being touched, is such a wild feeling.
Playing through with my main as a wizard this time was an especially special experience, to be able to see how strong Irenicus is at the start, that untouchable power, then to realize that by the end you are more than his match in magic is truly one of a kind.
I'll take the dislikes for speaking the truth, though so far its not so bad, just a few naysayers haha.
@@aquawalrus Yup and that's exactly what the mage class was in dnd, even back in the early 90s. So weak at the first levels, yet the most powerful being you could ever imagine, on real high levels. BG2 embodied that so well, that it was a feat I would never have imagined to see in this life from paper to screen. And yet they did so masterfully.
The enemy liches in this game also, and one particular lich/demon mixed party that I remember, truly made you realize the pure raw power of magic. It made you want to feel that power yourself. Its insane that you could actually do that. Dragon battles were absolutely bonkers as well. Didn't prepare well to protect yourself from that specific element and you were simply toast. Leave all your party on the same side, and watch them get destroyed by those area attacks.
Yes some "hidden" items in the game were clearly OP, but on a 1 to 10 scaling in terms of pure fun and potential, they ranked like 20/10. It was such a good feeling. I think that's what it comes down to. We as gamers don't really care if there are hidden mechanics in a game that make you almost broken. In fact we yearn for them, because "having pure fun" with all those shenanigans is what you will always remember. I wish more modern game devs fully realized this. You don't have to nerf everything to make a good balanced game.
Magic was perhaps a bit complex, oldschool even, perhaps more complex than in many other similar games, but once you realized what you could do? You were literally flying. Tell me one other game that managed to make you feel like you felt here playing a wizard with a staff of invisibility, going head to toe invisible into a huge amount of powerful enemies while in stoneskin, only to unleash the ultimate nightmare of aoe spells and triggers, bringing death and destruction all around you. Or the time stop shenanigan combos. There is not a single other rpg game you could do this, like you could here. Did fantasy gaming ever become as epic? Clearly not.
@@kobarsos82 yeah the whole need to make specifically single player games super "balanced" drives me nuts. Like if it's multiplayer I get it you want a fair experience, but as a solo player sometimes I want to build that super broken party. It's fun to find ways to exploit the systems you're given.
Nowadays I feel like you find the slightest advantage in these games that lets you play "the wrong way" and it gets patched out to protect some sort of envisioned single player experience.
People who want to play in a strictly ruled world will, and people that want to mess with it should be able to as well!
Baldur's Gate 3 is just as bad as Divinity: Original Sin II. They are good games but compared to the originals they are just bad. The same applies to the Fallout series. Part 3 and 4 are just bad compared to 1 and 2. Larian Studios and especially Bethesda have a lot to learn to make a really good game.
There is nothing in BG 3 that makes it feel like the Forgotten Realms setting, where as the original games embodied it perfectly. Also Larian took a huge dump on the original lore from the first games and the characters from it, almost as if they wanted to erase it.
@@Sothpawman yeah, I'm not a huge fan of Larians games, they have this weird sort of jokey feel about everything and it just does not fit the setting at all. Everything is so weirdly light hearted, like they can't commit to a serious story.
I have no issue with others enjoying their games, but it really felt like they butchered what BG was with the third game. Would have preferred they at least created their own story in the forgotten realms, rather than just piggybacking on an existing IP.
@@aquawalrusI feel you on that lighthearted, jokey tone. I basically hadn’t played an RPG since Neverwinter Nights until I saw BG3 released, and remembered how much I loved BGII. I jumped in expecting danger and betrayal at every turn, and was surprised when everyone with a speaking part was essentially extremely amicable. I felt most aware that this was a different era, one of narrative handholding the player, when Astarion puts a knife to your throat at first introduction, and when your PC breaks free, we all stay friends. Why wasn’t that just a straight-up initiate combat? Not at all immersive.
@ThalesWell yeah that particular part always annoyed me as well, and like if you have Shadowheart or someone else with you they just sort of jokingly don't seem to really care.
It doesn't need to be like, Warhammer levels of dark, but Larians games just have this everything is a punch line vibe that I just cannot stand, and it really doesn't match the energy of the original games at all.
Larian didn't retcon the lore - Wizards did it. In the books. Books are canon, not ToB, and Larian had to go with that.
those areas are sooo beautiful, game of my childhood (it was SO. DAMN. DIFFICULT.)
@@justaquietpeacefuldance right around the time you hit the underdark the game gets wildly hard, if you aren't maxing the potential of your casters it gets so rough.
I 100% agree with your take on this.
While Bg2 just improved on everything in bg1 i think the most important one was the increase in quality of the level design of villages, open areas and the dungeos. In BG1 most of the open areas were just flat terrain that you could go in any direction and had a quirk encounter/npc or/and a quick ques while the dungeons were a collection of small corridors in the form of little mazes with one or two textures/colors for all of it +was a nightmare for your characters to pathfind thru, the only real good dungeon in bg1 being Durlarg Tower , and Durlag puts a few of dungeons in BG2 to shame imo.
The only thing realy lost was the "free" exploration of the open areas that gave you a sense of adventure as you slowly opened more and more areas to go by exploring every inch of the greater map, while in BG2 exploration is a little more "quest focused", as in you probably will find a quest that will open that new area in the map for you.
@@Ziklawz absolutely hit the nail on the head. BG1 had a great sense of discovery and exploration, but 2 was just so absolutely filled with things to do, so many of them just wildly outlandish and unexpected.
Least controversial statement ever made
@@kurgtv5725 that's what I thought as well! 😸
For mind flayers there is a cleric spell chaotic commands that renders all their shit useless. Haste a fighter and give em chaotic commands and resist paralysis. Pound town.
350+ Hours in a blink of an Eye.
IT WAS AN EPIC JOURNEY !
And iam happy i finished my Childhood Game now in a row.
Because i was never be able to fully focus on the Series and ignored it for decades.
To age like a fine wine.
Absolutely no lies detected.
I don’t think this is a bad game and I can see why someone would enjoy it. For me, even though I enjoyed BG1, I didn’t enjoy BG2 and after giving it a try, I just watched my brother play through it when we were teenagers. I think the reason was that BG1 felt grounded and more like an adventure that I could relate to. BG2 pulls out all the stops and everything about it is just so over the top. I know this is because you continue playing with your BG1 high level character and so now things need to be bigger and badder. Yet for me, I just got tired of every encounter being a super saiyan riding a black dragon riding a tarasque while you cast nuclear blasts that rain vorpal swords while fighting in the middle of an erupting volcano as the planet is knocked out of orbit and careens into the sun. Something like that once is a while is cool, but all the time? I just couldn’t get into it.
@@CptSamel totally can understand that. I enjoyed the over the top nature of it, the plane jumping world saving stuff goes hand in hand with those high level DND encounters and I definitely love how even the smallest side quest would feel like it could be an epic adventure on its own, but definitely find myself missing the more grounded world of BG1.
Killing dragons and wiping out beholder cults is great, but sometimes it's just nice to save a village from some uppity bandits.
I have played through baldurs gate 1 and 2 many times. I played through one more times than two, because I always start in first one and I don't always play it all the way through the second, and I do like the first one better. To me baldur's gate one is like a good meal, but balders gate two is dessert. You really start to feel powerful, and get good items everywhere. It feels really good after playing through the first one, where the power creeps up much slower.
You know that meme where people stand around a person's grave and doing victory hand-signs? It's strangely fitting that the player and Imoen are dead and Bhaal and Sarevok are gloating over their grave.
Because if your character was killed in Cabdlekeep, five minutes into the game, that's how you get BG3.
Now, I don't blame Larion for this, Wizard's has been ruining D&D lore for some time now. I really wanted to support a friendly studio like Larion,but the woke stuff alongside the lore retcones killed any desire to play the game (not to mention how I find the companions very unappealing).
@@Cyricist001 for me it was like you said, unappealing companions, but also I just hated what they did to the setting. It's just so fluffy, it feels like the game wants to take itself seriously but can't help but add in a joke every 3 minutes.
BG isn't what I would call a super dark tone, but it was always a serious game with a touch of light heartedness here and there. BG3 felt like they were trying to make a sitcom.
My ranking is in numerical order, 1 being my favorite and 3 being my least favorite. I really like the world and polish of the second game, but I tend to prefer the more grounded fantasy of the first game whereas SoA was so over the top with powers and locations that it was hard for me to get immersed in the same way. Still, very enjoyable overall.
I can understand that... The game can be a touch jarring with the tonal shifts, even Irenicus' lab is so fantastical compared to anything you see in the first game.
It works for me, but it's a bit outside that normal fantasy setting.
ROFL that last review....what planet are they on? They TOLD YOU the reasons for Jon Irenicus's betrayal. It's more than "Oh I need to do that to level myself up for no reason." Never got a gleam of what the review said was going on between Jon and Bodi never hinted at either.
Yeah that was the biggest WTF in the review, like Irenicus has so many motivations outside raw power, and is one of my top villains of all time with a great arc throughout the game.
That last bit on him and Bhodi is also like, completely unfounded. Nothing in the game hints toward that in the slightest just pure fantasy. Wild stuff.
I do a full playthrough of bg2 at least a few times a year. Currently doing a 13shadowdancer dualed to mage run, so much fun
Its definitely a better narrative, but bg3 does gameplay better. I would say bg3 largely fails as a narrative game, if people didnt simp so hard for the companions i think many would agree
@@joshuanowlin443 I definetly like the variety in character build in BG3, but I'm such a huge fan of RTWP it's hard for me to get into the turn based.
I have to agree a big part of why I'm not as big on BG3 is the companions. I just don't get why people vibe with them so much. There is not one companion in that game I find even remotely interesting. Maybe Minthara, but that's just because I'm a Drizzt nerd.
I really like the companions, i like the gameplay but i dont like much of the "acts" hard to explain... I just feel e.g. act 1 on the overworld is "here is x setpieces" it doesn't feel as "big" or as grandiose in a lot of ways due to that.
It feels a bit "crammed" to me in a way... but yeah tough to explain what i mean i think
It's perhaps the only game of this kind without anything that feels like grind. (Compare this to Dragon Age: Origins, for example, where you have very annoyingly long parts of grindy combat areas to fight through, like those tunnels under the dwarven city).
While I probably will play Baldurs Gate 3 at some point, I don't expect it to come even close to this game here.
@@garnauklaufen6704 it's funny you mention dragon age, I was considering giving it a go next but as much as I absolutely love that game, it has stretches that I cannot stand. The fade being the worst offender for me but others come close. It also isn't supported by a strong series. DAO is mostly good, but DA2 is pretty bland and inquisition is fun but a mega grind if you want to experience the whole thing.
BG3 I've tried to get through 3 times, always burn out around act 2. It just gets super tedious for me, and I've heard the third act is even more so. Glad others are enjoying it but it's not for me.
BG2, after 20 or so years, has yet to be de-throned from my number one game. I used to played it once a year, but eventually got worn out about six years ago. I told myself I'd played it enough, and though nothing would probably knock it out of my number one, I'd had my time with it. When BG3 game out I was very skeptical, since BG in general did not need a sequel. Throne of Bhaal had a pretty definitive ending. Become a god or walk off into the sunset? I didn't get BG3 when it came out, but knew I would eventually. And when I did I was pleasantly surprised. It's a good game. But it didn't take long for me to realize it was a crap BG game. I put about 60 hours into it, and most of it was great. But I never beat it because all I could think about was the real BG games. In the end all BG3 ended up accomplishing for me was to get me to install the entire OG saga and run through it again after a six year hiatus. And my god does it hold up. BG3 is better it some ways, certainly. Presentation, graphics, reactivity... but as far as characters, romances, writing, story, world building, and general immersion, the old games (especially 2) still blows it out of the water.
@@nicholasrova3698 couldn't have put it better myself. Same here I got BG3 a few months past release, and I've since tried to get through it 3 times but never made it past act 2.
It's not necessarily "bad" or anything, but it's just not a good BG game.
@@aquawalrus My biggest issue with BG3 is it's connection to the old games. I feel if it wasn't related to the old games, or they were very slightly mentioned (since the Bhaalspawn Crisis was a big deal) then I probably would have stuck with BG3 a lot more, and would have subsequently loved it, instead of merely enjoying it. Their story about Githyanki and Mindflayers and what not is pretty good, and could have held up on its own without being dragged down by the poorly implemented 'old BG stuff'. Hell, even the original BG3 wasn't going to have anything to do with the Bhaalspawn Saga. Larian should have just taken a page out of the Black Hound's book and gone that route.
@nicholasrova3698 honestly same. Im fine with it being a forgotten realms game, but it feels like they robbed the grave of BG for the hype.
Could have just made their own DND adventure without ransacking the remains of an already beloved, and complete, franchise.
Bgee and bg2ee and bgSOD are all great.
I love playing those games, play on hardest difficulty and cheeze my way true impossible battles xD
Everyone said shaman is bad, my solo shaman is now level 38 and i had to back out of 1 duel in durlags tower, but all I need is the staff of woodlands to summon mounds to give me time to set up for that battle and they will go down like everyone Else! So i will be back with that staff, and if that somehow fail i found a way that shaman can survive slayer form taking no magic damage over time, so i will use my hla to have sick ac/thaco/regen/magical resists/physical resist and immune to most elemental damage.
People also claim monk is bad, yes it takes time in legacy of bhaal, but my monk is now level 18 in SOD, slaying all. And i made a Vampire monk kit for later use as well.
So much you can do in this game, fun with and without mods.
@@gel87Kjetil vampire monk sounds interesting for sure.
I need to give SOD a try, maybe after I finish off TOB I'll go back to give it a shot.
We wouldn't even have the great games and great genes we have now without the older games first making it a reality and evolving over time. Mad respect for Ultima, Wizardry, Old DnD games (too many to count), Dragon Quest, Final Fantasy, Baldur's Gate... the list goes on. Young people these days are pampered, but they should show respect for what's come before because what they have now wouldn't even be possible without it.😇
@@EonEsper-Kriz absolutely, even the games that didn't do so well helped pave the way for the games of today.
Here's my take: BG1 did more for CRPGs than any other game, to date.
@@sydhamelin1265 Absolutely agree.
i replay this game every year, still amazing like no other crpg i play, maybe kotor1 can be similar feeling to me, incredible
@@miguelgomes6849 I haven't played KOTR since it released... Man I miss old Bioware, best RPGs out there.
As for the mind flayers, going with the brine potions is the optimum strategy here. Kudos on you for doing those encounters without the brine potions. I always use those (though you won't have enough for all encounters, so I recommend people to save some for the elder brain battle).
I used them once, but tend to get lazy with them since their duration is so short. I always felt they were a bit of a risk in themselves as they can run out mid combat. Also by the time I grabbed them I was far too invented in my sword strategy and too stubborn to change.
Or Berserker Rage, an acceleration spell and a mantle of reflection.
After going through everything, watching John getting what he deserves in the hells was SOOO satisfying. I ended up passing all the final tests except 1 that resulted in me becoming Neutral Evil. Just couldnt put my wrath aside 😤
I also failed one of the tests... I'm debating going back and redoing it before ToB, though I did kill a good dragon maybe I deserve to be branded evil.
I absolutely love the final scene for BG2, Irenicus is pretty well the definition of evil it's so satisfying seeing him totally powerless.
I wonder if you tried giving some mods, like SCS chance. They really can change the way you play the game, SCS especially. Ascension for Throne of Bhaal does some really nice changes fo the story here and there, and also massively improves final battle.
I hadn't heard of SCS until I made these videos, but it sounds like a mod I would love, I will definitely be giving it as try on my next playthrough.
FACTS! BG3 was cool, but it was just Divinity OS with a DnD system. People liked it, but I had hoped it would've been more like BG in many ways
@@GC_Rallo my exact feeling as well. It was much more Divinity than it was BG.
The ideal party must include Jan Jansen, Korgan Bloodaxe and Edwin.
@@piotrd7355 I need to do an evil playthrough. I had Edwin in the party very briefly for this run but he wasn't jiving with my good guy mage vibes.
Jan the best thief to have. I mean, we need somebody with an accurate knowledge of turnips for our party.
@@JimmyMon666 there is no amount of turnip knowledge that is too much.
Icewind Dale gameplay-wise surpasses BG1 and BG2 but never got close to the story quality until Underrated Icewind Dale 2.
I need to get to playing that series again... Played them years ago but it's been so long I don't have strong memories. I do really look forward to building a full custom party for them.
@@aquawalrus Pretty late, I just wanted to say that the Icewind Dales are different. They are fairly linear and their environmental and character art is better than that of the Baldur's Gates. They too have great music, especially the first one and I think their atmosphere is at least as strong as that of Shadows of Amn. They also have actual reactivity, the second one moreso than the first one.
Encounter design overall seems to be better, especially in the second one. However it's somewhat hard to compare as SoA is more magically oriented and I frankly haven't played it in a long, long time. The difficulty especially of the second one is comparatively high as well.
Their stories aren't any worse than SoA in my opinion. It's just not there much of the time, as they are more focussed on their dungeon-crawling. Though I'd say that Icwind Dale 1 had the better world building and story and environments were more coherent than in the second game. The second one can seem like a somewhat random progression in comparison.
BG3 did not compare, and in several instances was embarrassing in comparison to BG2. It had its good parts but overall simply did not live up. I am dismayed at people who played 3 and did not go through 1 or 2.
This sounds like your bias and nostalgia talking rather than anything even remotely objective. I just finished Throne of Bhaal and beginning a first playthrough of BG3, the combat and the world interactivity is WAAAAY better which is what an RPG is in a nutshell. To say "was embarrassing in comparison" is a plain lie. Story can be competent but going from SoA to ToB felt rushed. Don't be a boomer.
@@fabiodlx nah you're just uncultured swine
Agree with first statement made from someone who is 21 and played bg3 first
Totally agree. My only regret was that I played bg2 before 1.. thus ruining the first game for myself
@@jorixpalorn3738 the good news is they are such a relatable series there's always the next trip through to play in order.
i still kinda remember the day when i bought the first game from my pocket money around the 2000s with the expansion pack on i think 8 or so CDs. It was HUGE i mean i knew that RPGs could be on several CDs ont he PLaystation but on PC? Also it included a big booklet not only with "history" of the world of the sword coast but also with some basic rules from AD&D which was a totally new thing for me. I knew TTRPGs but never did see AD&D stuff around my area. In Germany D&D wasn't that big at the time (not until 5e hit the market). our System was The Dark Eye / Das Schwarze Auge and while i had the base rulebox and two adventure modules i didn't had friends to play it with (it took two more years before i finally could play a TTRPG for the first time). So reading the AD&D rules were kinda confusing (TAC0 vs the combat rules in The Dark eye and stuff).
I loved the game, the weird german voice overs (they included some weird German accents) the good text and the (for me) werid combat. While i never made it far i really liked it. Until today i never have finished any BG game but my goal for the new year is to at least finish BG Enhanced Edition.
Definetly still worth playing today! There is a certain amount of jank in the engine and ADND but it's so fun once you start to learn the ins and outs. BG2 takes it to the limit in terms of what this style of game can do!
True statement
I don't know what I'm gonna title ToB "Super Duper Better than the Third One"
48:28 - unless the game grips you, this is actually a very true review
There's a reason things are called "hooks" in 'entertainment' and 'media', and that is because Being Hooked On It is a very different experience to the hook failing to penetrate.
If it doesn't grip you, that is what BG2 is - an interface full of chores, a bunch of annoyingly timed quests and highly robotic gameplay.
(Oh? A door? Yeah sure let me get out my pocket rogue! Oh wait, I don't have any!!! hahAAa)
(Oh? A corridor in this silly place? Wanna bet it has a dozen inexplicable traps just to force rogues being relevant? WOW DIDN'T SEE THAT ONE COMING)
If the hook captures you, you sort of overlook this because "wow, cool story, cool characters, man I wanna know more [keeps pushing through metaphorical mud]", but I would not discard the validity of that review.
Who am I to know these things, and know both sides of the coin?
Silence, dog. Your only purpose in life is to die by my hand. I shall answer none of your questions, go fetch a MacGuffin and find someone that wishes to spill the beans.
[teleports away disparagingly in French]
@@TheDoomerBlox I mean, I think the statement that things are only good if they "hook you" is true for literally anything in any form of entertainment media, and especially in the case of video games, describing them as a series of chores is pretty well the literal definition. The difference on whether something is a chore or enjoyable is completely based on the subjective experience of the one interacting with it.
In this particular case, I would argue the points made generally contradict the commonly accepted view this game has amongst it's fan base, and in a pretty spectacular way.
Who am I to judge though? I also hold the highly unfavorable view that Larian studios makes immersive, but largely unenjoyable games. I'm sure someone out there would just as readily disparage my viewpoint given the chance!
@@aquawalrus I can add to the point you raise at the end by summarizing my experience with playing Original Sin 2, where I would purposefully quit playing the game because the story being woven inside my head was a far more gripping story than what the game would ultimately end up presenting.
(I would then later replay the game, and confirm this)
There are a few games where this is not the case, but it's hard to quantify that exact state of "raises a great theater scene, but ends up having a bunch of clowns playing on it" that Larian seem like masters of capturing.
Can't a high level magic user cast a pretty mean magic missile? Been a while since I've looked at the rules but doesn't the number of missiles cast go up with the levels?
@@jamesstaggs4160 it does, it's a great spell too because it literally cannot miss, only be resisted. It's actually weirdly effective on dragons if you can drop their magical resistances a bit before casting. Still takes a ton of hits, but you can pretty well machine gun them once you hit high levels.
"Across the board improvement" you say, and yet you start the video with BG1 soundtrack :)
About the illithids, the typical strategy is to use Chaotic Commands for psionics immunity and potions of genius/mind focusing to protect against brain devouring (though even then it's still wise to keep them at range, potions just give you some buffer, not immunity).
@@Mrityugata hah, good catch on the music you're totally right. I love that particular soundtrack. Love all the music but it's definitely my favorite of the bunch.
Baldur's Gate 1 is a masterpiece, but it wasn't even close to being the first CRPG to feature reactive, open world exploration and storytelling. The Ultima franchise was really the pioneer in this regard, and Ultima 7 in particular remains unsurpassed in its complex world simulation.
It's more accurate to say that BG1 built off the successes of previous games, and helped reignite the roleplaying genre on PC.
But I totally agree that BG2 is the reigning champion of the genre. BG3 is excellent in its own right, but BG2 is unmatched in its scope and execution.
@@matternicuss absolutely agree, I've only just played U7 for the first time this year and it's absolutely amazing, even coming from someone with no nostalgia for it it stands the test of time.
I really enjoyed BG3 and it did deserve the GOTY award it got, but nothing will ever beat BG2 as my favourite RPG, I think I have at least a couple of thousand playtime hours in BG2, and I still play it once a year. I think it also has to do with the new d&d ruleset. Some of the classes dont really click for me as they did in the old rules. I do think gameplay and NPC wise, BG3 is the better game. Story, setting and especially the villains, BG2 is better.
@@MrWazzietje yeah, I know it had its flaws but 2nd edition DND will always hold a special place for me.
The interparty banter in BG2 was spectacular. Only DA Origins is as good.
@@ThomB1031 it really is amazing, and adds a surprising amount to the experience.
its sad that rpg has never reached the level of bg2 even after two decades. Quality and quantity of dialogues will never be the same bc they gave up depth of writing and replaced with motion graphics and voiced dialogues
@@guji369 sadly true, the closest we've gotten is maybe Dragon Age Origins, but even then there were far more limitations.
I'm stealing from another commenter, but they compared it to modern games being more like movies while older ones are more like books, I think that's sadly a good description of what the modern RPG experience has become.
BG1,2, and throne of bhaal have been my favorite games since I played them at 12 years old. I like the third game, but I gave it a bad review for trying to ride the coattails of greatness. The only thing in my opinion 3 has done better, is its replayability and variety of choices. Not that 1 and 2 aren't replayable, they are more replayable in the way of I've certainly missed many many quests and secrets even having beaten it 4 times now. The third one is replayble in a way that you will be able to do the same quests in many many different ways and this is is pretty awesome I will not lie. However the originals writing, emersion, world design, sound, characters, just simply cannot be beat, they are the best and I will die on this hill.
@@Gong-Fu_Hermit absolutely agree. I don't even really dislike 3, I just felt they changed so much not only with the story, but with gameplay and just general atmosphere that it's so clear the game has almost nothing to do with the original series.
For me the originals replayability comes from the massive amount of different ways you could build your party, the huge number of companions and the choices you're going to have with reaching such a high level.
@aquawalrus great point, I remember the first time fighting each 3 end game bosses on my first playthrough and not being able to beat them due to lack of my experience with DND and low levels because I didn't do nearly enough questing and just grinded through each hard encounter and save scummed like crazy. Had to play through each game again and still didn't realize just how much there is to do, until my 3rd.
@@Gong-Fu_Hermit Serevok was always the huge challenge for me before I got better at the game. He was such a check on your party composition and mastery of abilities like nothing else in the game up to that point.
I liked BG3, but the title was clearly just a means to make more money.
It has nothing to do with BG and BG II and could have easily be named differently or the third act moved to another place.
@@hansmeier8953 yeah, it really could have just been another Divinity game. It's far too different in story, tone, gameplay, pretty much everything, to really be considered a true entry in the series.
I would have much preferred Larian just make their own adventure in the forgotten realms and leave the legacy of BG alone, though I think that's a somewhat unpopular opinion these days.
I like all 3 games but absolutely think black isle just made better overall experience. On larions part I actually prefer divinity original sin 2 over bg3.
Is it safe to assume the next video is NWN?
Probably not next... but definitely before too long. It's installed!
Really good video, you're doing the game justice, good job :) I spent countless hours with this game, bought it on launch day in September and have been still playing it during Christmas brake. Absolute masterpiece. I think people don't remember anymore but bg2 brought so much to the table it's insane. Bg3 while still an amazing game, especially judged by today's standards, but imo it it's just another of the new divinities (btw would love to see our take on the original divine divinity as well). Anyway, this channel is becoming one of my favorites here on yt, binge watched all your stuff and eagerly waiting for more ❤
@@cRPGeek I'm glad you've been enjoying the vids, makes my day. I would like to cover Divinity if just to have the motivation to finish it off. Something about Larians games I tend to put a lot of hours into them but never make it to the end.
@@aquawalrus I am really enjoying them ;) and yeah, I totally get what you mean about those divinity games, they tend to drag for some reason and are sometimes on the more grindy side, esspecialy the first two, although the first one much more than the second.
You think you could remove Boo from Minsc with ANY kind of magic? Of course he's still there. :)
@@tubeincompetence the power of a miniature giant space hamster cannot be denied!
True
😁. Nice engagement bait. Good business sense. 👍
@@Mike-r4h the gospel of the gate must be spread to the masses.
baldurs gate 3 sucks. RTWP >>>>> TB combat.
But apart from the combat itself,
BG2 had soul. passion, little easter eggs that you found so much glee discovering.
BG3 unfortunately is a soulless corporate moneygrab.
BG2 will stand as the greatest rpg of all time until the end of PC gaming.
Only other game that I found on the level of BG2 was Pillars of Eternity: Deadfire.
I absolutely loved both PoE games, dead fire especially was the first game I've played that gave me that real BG feel.
I havent played bg3 and have no opinion, but love bg1/2!
@@rainbowcrash6990 BG3 isn't bad really, it's just not a great BG game, if that makes sense.
@aquawalrus i get you. Personally, I love Divinity OS 2, Larian-wise.
I wanted a non-dnd system, and its definitely great. Maybe we'll see it here 😊
Such an enjoyable 50:25
I grew up with 1997s Fallout, Fallout 2 and Tactics, 2001s Arcanum, and I can for the life of me not get into Baldur's Gate 1-2. I'm not a modern gamer that likes the shinier thing, I'm not a nostalgia chaser, I just like high quality games; Baldur's Gate 3 is just straight up a superior game to Baldur's Gate 1-2, it's not even a question.
Sounds like it's just not your style, which is totally fine, but it's definitely not nostalgia in this case.
BG2 is easily one of the best RPGs ever made, and when taken as a whole the original trilogy is unmatched as a roleplaying experience.
Now when I say obscure SSI dungeon crawlers are the best RPGs ever, you can bet that is pure nostalgia haha.
@@aquawalrus The thing is that BG1-2 sounds exactly like the thing I like, but for some reason it is not. I have heard the exact same thing from my gamer friends. Maybe it is a cultural thing.
I wonder if you like "Pillars of Eternity" that was very much a game I was looking forward to and I did not enjoy it either.
@@TheRealSoldatmesteren the way you feel about BG1/2 is exactly how I feel about BG3. I feel like I should be enjoying myself but I'm not.
I do love POE, so it seems just a difference of tastes!
@@aquawalrus That's very interesting. Now I'm very curious; did you play "UnderRail" ? That is a game I love.
@@TheRealSoldatmesteren I had never heard of it, just watched the trailer and read a bit about it, sounds like I would like it I'll have to put it on my wishlist.
I don't see the problem.
The title is a true statement.
And yes, this game is amazing.
@@adrianalexanderveidt344 every time I play I am amazed all over again at how amazing it is. I just finished and I'm chomping at the bit to try another build or try a single character run.
@@aquawalrus Looking forward to hearing your thoughts on the Watchers Keep.
@@adrianalexanderveidt344 Demogorgon is waiting for me at the bottom.
@@aquawalrus Yupp... the only creature in the first two games I never managed to beat.
Best of luck!
@@adrianalexanderveidt344 in the spirit of complete honesty... also the only boss I have never beaten in the series. Our battle will be legendary!
The infinity engine (and later Aurora engine for NWN) is shockingly solid. I wouldn’t call it clunky. There are certain aspects that were never intended to be customizable, but the engine supports way more modifications via game files than necessary and runs those modifications smoothly.
When I play BG3, the sheer number of bugs and graphical glitches in the dialogue trees makes it feel like they scrapped all the previous iterations of the concept - like they reinvented the wheel and made it square and out of stone.
You basically need a whole development studio team to create a single new NPC with dialogue in BG3.
@@Zapdos7471 the only part I found to be clunky was the pathfinding, and even that could have been mostly fixed with slightly larger maps, which BG2 improved on I felt.
The EEs for all the infinity games are great for quality of life, but not even necessary with how well the engine holds up on modern machines. A lot of the older games I play have that learning curve to get used to, infinity engine stands out as one you can drop onto after years not playing and just feel right at home.
@@aquawalrus it was definitely a step up from Fallout 1, 😆
When BG1 released, the infinity engine was still under development and there were massive QoL improvements between 1 & 2. So much so that people created a mod for BG2 (called TuTu of all things) that ported all the content from BG1 into the updated engine. Still, it is no small feat to turn D&D into software, or a turn based game into a real-time engine that feels the same.
Also, somehow I feel like EE made the path finding worse! Oh well, it beats having to manage a dozen patch and QoL mods.
@@Zapdos7471 yeah that's my feel with EE as well. Original is probably a bit better with some patching an improvements, but it's nice to just have something that can be dropped right into with no fiddling required.
BG3 is fine, but it is not a true successor to the real time gameplay of the old games.
My feelings as well.
Creating BG3 is mistake in the first place, and even bigger mistake is give it to Larian. larian is just bunch of clowns, who think they are funny but in reality they are not. Yes they can make good game gameplaywise, but when it come to story and atmosphere Larian can only make same old freak show. Also Sven Winke always have inferiority complex to OG BioWare, and you can clearly see how he piss on they grave in BG3.
BG2 was amazing, however...
Turn-base > Real-time Strategy, checkmate Atheist.
@@Sekainoowaride you'll never turn me from the cult of the real time with pause.
@aquawalrus PIANO FINGERS!
@Sekainoowaride skill issue
This is just a summary of BG2's story, you didn't give a single reason why it's better than BG3 or make any comparisons
@@naturalunnatural I also didn't visit Baldur's Gate. But here's a free one, Viconia is the better cleric of Shar, Shadowheart is a hack!
Ironically despise Viconia very much a “I can fix her” character yet she just stays a terrible person.
@@michaelbayley9432 she stays true to her convictions, that's something I guess haha.
@@michaelbayley9432so you despise her because you couldn't firx her? ironic. I mean I don't love her either but I find it unrealistic that someone who has spent their entire life living a certain way and has cemented their beliefs to the point of being fanatic would suddenly completely turn around because someone said one or two nice things to them.
BG3 is a Baldur's Gate game in name only.
@@aaronhumphrey3514 Divinity 3 is a more accurate title as far as I'm concerned.
I agree and I didn't event start watching the video
@@CptBladd you're a real one ;)
My computer would explode if I even downloaded bg3....but I much prefer bg2 over bg1...even if Imoen was a bit of a downer.
@@jimmylittle9393 it's her goth / emo phase.
Still find weird how Jaheira is a RO like she literally got widowed and started hitting on us? (And I know in game time differs from IRL time but still) I still remember my first playthrough and how shocked I was when she started flirting with the MC like "bro I know you just got widowed and stuff but I respect and love uncle Khalid I can't do that to him."
And I know there's people who is into that but I ain't one of those :P
Yeah, its sort of an abrupt shift too, like she talks about him for the first few chats, then it feels like she literally forgets about him completely. Minsc as well seems to move on from Dynaheir pretty quick, but that's more forgivable on account of the massive head trauma.
People who live through conflict and constantly risked their lives, tend to see thing different, then we are. You can find many similar stories in WW1, WW2 etc.
For me BG3 is more like a game adaptation of the Critical Role show rather than a game in the FR setting. I just can't immerse myself in the story. I look at characters - I see lampooning roleplayers who can't take anything seriously.
@@Вася-о3ф7ь that's a huge sticking point for me as well. BG was always a fairly serious game with the occasional bit of humor sprinkled in, BG3 it just feels like everything is silly and jokey. It refuses to take itself seriously.
It's the same thing that makes it hard for me to get into the Divinity games, it's like they want to tell a serious story but can't commit.
Problem with today's games is they are more focused on visual the the gameplay/story content.
Back then when i was a kid in late 90's, i had wish that graphics would improve in the future.
Now i always coming to older titles. 😅
So true. I find the quest for hyper realism in games has compromised everything else.
Developers used to have to be really artistic and creative to make games with the limited technology of the time, and that passion shows. Now it's just making everything look real, which I think was never supposed to be the point!
Played 1, 2 and 3. I see your point, even if I don't share it. For me, the changes in 3 weren't that big of a deal. There's a gap of 120 years between BG 2 and 3, so a lot can happen. BG3 is a more polished modern game, that's unrefutable, and personally I prefer the turn based combat, as is more close to the tabletop game. I love the FR setting, in all games, and I don't think there's a lot of differences. True, Larian has their own spin to fantasy, wich is very close to european fantasy RPGs, with a more "fairy tale with a dark twist" feeling that I personally welcome, but I can understand if it's not one's thing. That being said, being "different" doesn't mean "bad", it means different.
Also, I really love BG2, but at least BG3 has the actual Baldur's Gate city in it.
Even if I disagree on your take, I really like your channel. Great work 👍
To be honest as lame as it sounds at this point, I don't even necessarily think BG3 is bad, I just have a really hard time with it being a BG game.
It feels so much like Divinity, I really wish it could have just been Larian's own Forgotten realms story and left BG where it was.
I get that unrealistic, but it's hard to not feel a bit jaded, I had expected something along the lines of triple a pillars of eternity, and while what we got is by no means bad, it's just really not what I had hoped.
I am legitimately glad at the reach it's had to get more new players into D&D. As much as it's really not my style it's done a lot of good to bring the setting into the mainstream again.
@@aquawalrus Don't get me wrong, not liking something and being able to explain why you don't like something is not lame, it's perfectly fine (and I get it, BG3 is not a perfect game for me, I think it looses steam by the final acts, and it is too centered in romantic interactions with the companions for my taste). I wasn't accusing you of hate-bating or anything.
I was speaking in general because I do have a problem with some of the commentors here (which is not your fault), because what they say is not criticism, it's reduced to "I don't like it, so that mean it's bad", and that's the biggest bs argument I've ever heard (and don't get me started with the ones who say "it's bad because it's woke", because that's another can of ignorant worms).
When you are talking exceptional vs fantastic vs brilliant.................who really cares. 1, 2 and 3, are all very good indeed, each in their own way.
BG2 is only DENIABLY better.............and should you even try to compare 2 and 3, the time difference between them makes them totally different games.
You cannot make a modern game the same way you made the older games - for example look at the sheer number of companions available in BG2. Because of the cost it takes to bring each BG3 companion to life (compared to BG1 and BG2) it means there are fewer companions, even though the graphical look of each BG3 companion is great. That is one of the reasons the party size is smaller these days (from the 6 person party size in BG1 & 2, to the 4 person party in BG3).
Celebrate each iteration of BG for what it is. Calling them great games one and all is soooo much better (and cooler) than trying to push one of them over another.
I mean, to be fair I think many people care quite deeply which is better. Just the comment section on this video can be a testament to that. On both sides of the coin people have pretty strong opinions. Fully taking your point though, while it may seem unfair to compare a title from the 90's to one from the current day, you will never avoid that. They choose to resurrect a series that was finished and beloved, and for better or worse, people are going to have a reaction to that and draw conclusions and comparisons. If they didn't want comparisons, they could have released a forgotten realms game of their own and left BG's legacy alone.
You absolutely can make a modern game like an old game, there are multiple spiritual successors to BG that are beloved in the community and did a much better job keeping the feel of the original (Pillars of Eternity is my favorite, but Kingmaker is popular as well). All that said, I don't have a problem with BG3, and I agree its a decent RPG, I've even just started a new casual playthrough of it to try and understand the hype a bit better. But I'll always prefer the originals just like others may always prefer the new one. Has nothing to do with pushing anything, neither Bioware or Larian need my help, its just a subjective review on my tiny corner of TH-cam.
Fully respect your viewpoint, but to me they are leagues different!
Yah I got thousands of hrs on bg1 and 2 and still get excited to play a new campaign.. I got out of the flayer ship and was instantly bored as fuck it’s to slow no tavern stories no epic tales just feels like a dead fuckn game slow and boring..
Yeah I don't know how people get invested in it. Didn't feel any sort of attachment to characters, didn't really care about the story. Just didn't grab me. I've tried so many times to play it again but I can't get past the second act without losing interest.
@ omg the banter and all the characters are lame as fuck it’s like comparing Pokémon to mtg and pokemon is bg3 and mtg is bg1 and 2 .. the shit was made for slow ppl and toddlers.. not to mention 5e is fuckn absolute trash..
I wouldn't call BG1&2 better per say, there's a LOT of issues with the games and especially the engine (sorry, but Infnity engine is trash even if it was the best they could do at the time).
But the one thing that original BG "Trilogy" has is the scope, from zero to hero journey is incredible. Nothing comes close to it in BG3 and by level 10 you are easily killing god like beings and max spell level is barely 6. In 3 even at lower levels after you finish act 1 almost nothing poses a challenge anymore, while BG2 and Throne of Bhall have instances where battles can become incredibly hard especially if you don't abuse some of the overpowered HLAs like Spike Traps for example. The feeling is just not the same and I hate what they did to Viconia and Sarevok.
I can agree with all this except the infinity engine, I absolutely love it so much. Pathfinding is super bad, but outside that the engine is amazing, they could make a game on it today and I would be excited.
I may be slightly blinded by nostalgia though 😸
@@aquawalrus I have other issues with the engine beside pathfinding, like how buggy it can be and especially with some "instant" casting skills that lag your round for some reason, and other small idiosyncrasies.
The only game without these problems was Planescape, but most of it was because the lack of chaotic and challenging combat.
At least it's better than NWNs Aurora engine that I loath.
About nostalgia for me, I certainly don't hold it in high regard, I was too spoiled by Fallout 1&2 engine because they offered much more on the RP factor.
Absolutely correct. I have close to 1000 hours in bg2 and I didn't even play it for the first time until about 8 years ago. It's had me in a death grip ever since. It holds up so well that it's ridiculous.
@@Someguy-xu3oy it's pretty well an annual event for me. Already I'm planning the next playthrough.
@aquawalrus and the crazy part is you find new things every single playthrough. It's really special and worth all the time
Baldur's Gate 3 was akin to someone taking someone else's toys and creating different backstories and motives for them. Sarevok regressed for no reason, Viconia became a child harming zealot when her characterization in the first two games was as a rebel against God. It's bad and should feel bad.
Couldn't have said it better myself... They took something very important to a lot of people and just decided to change the narrative and style completely.
They should have just made a new IP in the forgotten realms and left BG alone IMO.
planar: PLAI-nuhr. As in "of a plane."
@@Timorio I've been speaking the language for nearing 4 decades now, I'm afraid the chances of me getting better at it are quite low by now.
The ONLY thing BG2 has over BG3 is writing. Literally everything else BG3 is better at, and its writing isn't even bad.
@@SolarisKane BG3 is better at having your character constantly make silly faces during dialogue.
@@aquawalrus That's another thing BG3 is better at, you're right. Because most crpgs you don't get to see your character's face at all and it completely lacks immersion.
@@SolarisKane 🙀
Thats not true at all. Nothing about the graphics is like the forgotten realms setting, its fantastical unicorn land of Divinity. The voice acting is all british and euro, and doesn't have the classical mature voice actors from the first games. THe original games were far more darker and grittier, the beautiful old style scrolls and artwork of the UI was far better than the modern day microsoft spread sheet, bland boring crap of BG3. The magical items you could find were so much more detailed in lore and description and way cooler in the first games. The music from the old games is way better, not the nordic viking crap of BG3. SO MUCH MORE WAS BETTER IN THE OLD GAMES.
@@Sothpawman "So much more was better in the original games" yet you mention inconsequential things like UI. You neglect things like how BG3 has far more reactivity and choice, significantly better immersion in not only the story and characters but also how you interact with the world, better loot system where items can actually change how your build works instead of merely being stat boosts, significantly better build variety with more balanced and interesting classes, enemy encounters where each one actually matters and wasn't a couple of goblins plopped in a forest, significantly better and more rewarding exploration, etc.
The few things the originals do better do not make up for the enormous amount of things BG3 objectively does better.
The plot, world-building, art style in BG2 is much better than in BG3. If one considers BG3 as part of the series at all. Throne of Bhaal completes the plot of the Children of Bhaal saga. It can even be said that the combat in BG2 is better despite the fact that it is based primarily on accurate knowledge of spells.
@@piotrd7355 I definetly prefer the RTWP of the originals, definetly a subjective opinion but I find turn based to be really distracting and often just so drawn out. RTWP makes those big encounters feel so much more frantic and engaging.
Sorry mate, but I'm almost tempted to down-vote this one for how uncaring you were towards poor old Yoshi.
I don't know, maybe he was played better in Polish dub, maybe it's just that part of my brain which still holds the memories of long dead, naive and compassionate child who couldn't help but see good even in the worst people, but to this very day I just _believe_ him when he exclaims regret.
In my heart he deserves a spot right next to other tragic, ambiguous, video game characters like Javik or John Marston.
@@milczyciel if it makes you feel better, I took his heart to the temple to be cleansed later.
@@aquawalrus we're cool ;)
... Ath-Latka?
Perhaps I will try 2 after this one after having loved 3. But I feel like there is a hard dosage of rose tinted glasses going on here but we will see.
@@EvilTurtle97 honestly, I play a lot of older games and love them all. I'm fully willing to admit a lot of that love comes from nostalgia. This game it does not. It is legitimately one of the best RPGs ever made.
You won't regret it. I would recommend starting with BG1, though it is more of a slow burn to get going.
Sorry but i have to disagree. BG 3 was an awesome game. It has a great story and the gameplay with all the possibilities are transcendent.
But...like i said to my friends who played the original series with me, as much as i love BG3, my heart still belongs to the original series.
@@damagedgoods2663 get no need to be sorry! Difference of opinion is a good thing, makes the world more interesting.
For me personally I don't think BG3 is bad or anything, it more just didn't feel like a BG game to me. The tone is so different from the originals. I found it to feel almost slapstick at times, and the companions constant need to flirt with me was very distracting.
Fending off Wyll just to walk five feet and have Gale start trying to hit me up when I've shown zero interest in either of them is a very odd experience lol.
Undeniably better? Hmm. That's an interesting call. I love them both so I can entertain the idea. One thing I can comfortably say is that BG3 was a worthy addition to the story. It was in no way a letdown for me.
It's harder to compare games built on technology that's over 20 years apart.
Love the Icewind Dale games as well.
BG3 butchered previous characters for no reason. Sarevok by the end of Throne of Bhaal was a remorseful, changed man dedicated to ending Bhaal's legacy. His resurrection and forgiveness by the protagonist confuse him and after doing some adventuring, he travels to the lands of his lover to bury her body. In BG3 he is a leader in the Bhaal cult. Complete 180.
Viconia's backstory is that Lolth wanted her to sacrifice a child to prove her loyalty and she rebelled against her God and refused to do it, ruining her house and forcing her on the surface. The trauma of what she was asked to do gives her nightmares. Over the course of the game and by Throne of Bhaal she finds a level of acceptance and peace of mind, dedicating herself to either the elvish people to the point where the queen of the elves honors her or she and the protagonist have a child together, but she is tragically slain by an agent of Lolth. In BG3 she is alive, so not ending 2, but instead kidnaps and kills elves and tortures children for her God. Also a complete 180.
There are other characters also changed but frankly Larian was a not a good steward of BG's legacy. If they wanted to tell a tale unconnected to previous characters, they had the option to do so, instead they rather twist and break previously established motives.
@@chrisbaldwin8570 I agree regarding Sarevok. He was thrown in with a simplistic story and boss fight for some nostalgia. It was handled poorly.
The addition of a character for nostalgia purposes that was cheaply done doesn't undermine the whole experience for me.
BG3 is the best RPG I have played in many years. For context I've been playing RPGs since the era of the gold box. If you're old enough you'll know what that is.
I loved having Minsc in my party again (although he had to be respecced because his stats where garbage).
I think Larion did a very good job building on a series with absurdly high expectations.
The new one is woke trash, not even in the spirit of the original game.
Yeah it's just way too different, wish they would have just made a separate forgotten realms game and not resurrected a series that was fine how it was.
Lol hey man, more power to ya. Imma stick with the new and shiny
@@whovegas say hi to Astarion for me.
@aquawalrus truth be told,
as far as stories go, i love 3, but I get it. 1 and 2 story wise are pretty damn dope. And i also get why people would be pissed at how 3 does viconia and seravok. Im a bit too weak to enjoy how old school crpgs play though...hell, i get down with the world and story of those original fallout games too. They paved the way for all that lore i love now, and for that i cant help but respect em.
I think Pathfinder WOTR is more BG3 than BG3, and I will die on that hill.
I need to play that game, I've heard so many people say that and I still haven't actually played it.
By all accounts I would love it. POE is a great spiritual successor as well.
"Undeniably Better Than the Third One" it uses AD&D. that alone is enough to makes it inferior to 3.
But it has advanced right there in the title!
@@aquawalrus but advanced is trash compared with 3rd, 3.5 and even 5.
who the hell likes tac0 calculations?
or worse, the whole dual class nonsense?
@@marcosdheleno 5 is the McDonalds of D&D editions: vapid, meant to appeal to the widest audience and plastic as all hell. Fits perfectly with BG3, in hindsight.
@@nocturnal8171 doesnt matter if you think 5e is vapid. its still far superior to AD&D.
its not even a fair comparison.
there's an argument about 3.5e since it was the right level of customization. but at the same time, it had some arbitrary rules that just were there to piss people off.
like classes tied to alignment.
5e subclasses are great. but are far from perfect. there's still ways to make it better.
but AD&D is not. it has too many stupid mechanics, just for the sake of being obtuse.
@@marcosdheleno doesn't matter if you think 5e is superior to AD&D, its still vapid.
It's shallow garbage for the masses. It's a baby version for people who are scared of numbers and can't focus on a piece of reading for more than 5 seconds. No choices, no customisation, the same class abilities rebranded between classes and everything normalised under the guise of "balance".
3.5 wasn't perfect, but at least it wasn't targeted at people with ADD and literacy issues.
Disagree.
I'm crushed with disappointment.
BG3 is so fake and glittery. i cannot and will not ever play it. its reddit incarnate with the baldurs gate name slapped on it. comment section is wild. great video. havent even started it yet 10/10 ❤
@@FinnegansCake I tried so hard to like it, but it's just not BG.
I'll probably finish it some day, but it makes me sad at what could have been.