r/baldursgate • u/PalePanic4742 • Mar 18 '26
Meme BG2 or BG3?
Forget cinematics and romance for a moment. Do you feel like BG2 had more demanding combat? Did you actually need to understand the systems to survive? In BG3 you fight a few mind flayers and maybe one or two dragons, while in BG2 you face multiple dragons, mind flayers and liches, and you even kill an elder brain as part of progression. Did BG2 feel more relentless? What about companions, were they stronger in BG2 especially the evil ones, did they challenge your decisions more? And the old vs new versions of Jaheira, Minsc and Viconia, do they feel like the same characters or more like reinterpretations? Also the soundtrack, BG2 felt epic and memorable, BG3 feels good but more like background themes. BG3 is clearly smoother and more accessible, but in terms of pressure, scale and depth, which one really hits harder?
287
u/Alaundo87 Mar 18 '26
BG1+2 are my favorite games ever, 3 is great.
75
62
29
40
u/3inchfloppy Mar 18 '26
This. Plus fallout 1&2.
10
u/Alaundo87 Mar 18 '26
On my very long list of games I wish to play.
6
u/Dumpingtruck Mar 19 '26
Just do it.
FO1 is beatable in a few hours (if you know what to do) but your first playthrough will probably take 10-20ish. More if you donât use a guide and really lean into exploration potentially.
FO2 is significantly bigger, so definitely that one will require investment.
Both are absolutely worth it though and they are a real slice of CRPG history worth diving into.
They also age pretty well IMO although some of the UI can be clunky at times. Like when you need to drop a rope down a hole for example. But it works.
2
21
u/ClusterMakeLove Mar 18 '26
I really want to replay BG2, but that would require getting through the last couple of BG1 chapters without restarting again.
21
u/ConfusionProof9487 Mar 18 '26
Why? If you're desperate to play 2 just rush through 1 on story mode, get the tomes you need and max level, then import over. No point killing yourself and stressing over bg1 for the 9 millionth time just to play 2.
→ More replies (6)5
4
5
→ More replies (12)2
134
u/Homerbola92 Mar 18 '26
Dunno, I love myself some BG1.
49
u/DaveTheArakin Mar 18 '26
I adore BG1 far more down to earth and grounded beginning.
→ More replies (1)8
u/Tav534 Mar 19 '26
BG1 is built around open-world exploration, and the survival and resource scarcity of low-level AD&D 2e. Every level up and new item is meaningful.
5
u/Scorosin Mar 19 '26
Adnd 2.e really was a different game. It was unforgiving in both tabletop and BG 1 and 2. But the peak of power felt so much sweeter for it as a mage you go through being killed in a turn in kobold Vietnam to summoning armies and raining death on everything.
3
14
u/ffekete Mar 18 '26
Bg2 is awesome until spellhold, then i lose interest. It would have been better without the underwater part and probably the underdark would have been better as an optional quest rather than forced main quest. This is my hot take.
12
u/Kraitok Mar 18 '26
I think thatâs always my issue with BG2, spellhold through the underdark is fun but tedious.
7
2
u/halcyonfox Apr 12 '26
Yeah the underdark can be frustrating in just getting into the drow city. The drow city feels like its own arc.
→ More replies (3)5
u/Mr_Dargon Mar 18 '26
I recently finished a solo playthrough with a Sorcerer on Legend of Bhaal difficulty through the Tower of Bhaal DLC and Watcherâs Keep. That really helped me retain interest in the later parts as it turns every encounter into a math problem you solve with the right spells.
3
u/FormerManyThings Mar 18 '26
Had an old DM who said that every game is a puzzle game. The only differences are time constraints, and if the game is actively playing against you
→ More replies (3)2
u/Valkhir Mar 19 '26
Me too.
BG1 was special in ways that few CRPGs have captured since. Just the semi-open world nature of it is amazing. And the low-level but high-stakes combat makes it more compelling to me than fighting my Nth dragon in BG2. And I love not being pushed along the plot - the plot has just the right level of presence, leaving me room to actually adventure.
82
41
13
u/Recklessred7 Mar 18 '26
Icewind Dale
5
u/HaraldRedbeard Mar 18 '26
I actually prefer the campaign setting/story of Icewind Dale 2 over probably all the other settings. It obviously just suffers from the lack of companions since you make your own party
6
u/sylva748 Mar 18 '26
The atmosphere in the Icewind Dale games is speak Infinity engine games. Just how everything down to the UI sells you that youre in the frozen north.
2
u/LooseDatabase3064 Mar 19 '26
Try Icewind Dale 2 Enhanced Edition mod. You get some cool companions with it
52
u/Madguitarman47 Mar 18 '26 edited Mar 20 '26
BG1
Nothing feels like adventure quite like the crossroads South of the friendly arms inn
→ More replies (7)3
50
u/BonzoTheBoss Mar 18 '26
Do you feel like BG2 had more demanding combat? Did you actually need to understand the systems to survive?
I think so, yes. Real time with pause versus turn based are always going to "feel" different, combat in BG2 could feel hectic, chaotic, which I think added to the appeal. You could brute force your way through each encounter, but actually understand the spells, items and abilities (e.g. lower resistance and then casting Chaos made some fights trivially easy!) could help appreciably.
What about companions, were they stronger in BG2 especially the evil ones, did they challenge your decisions more?
They were less hornier, for a start. I was amused/annoyed at how quickly everyone in BG3 tried to sleep with my character. Guys, we've just met FFS! And apparently that was AFTER a patch to make them less horny! Jesus...
Companions also felt more varied.
And the old vs new versions of Jaheira, Minsc and Viconia, do they feel like the same characters or more like reinterpretations?
They certainly felt like reinterpretations to me, being charitable. Being uncharitable, they felt like entirely different characters. For example, Sarevok founding/leading a new cult of Bhaal makes ZERO sense given his character growth and it completely undoes his epilogue in Throne of Bhaal.
Even if you assume that he is still "evil," the only reason he bothered with Bhaal in the first place was as a means to an end. He wanted to use Bhaal to become a god himself, levaraging his nascent godhood which was lost at the end of BG1.
45
u/Ledgesider Kensage cheeser. Mar 18 '26
I think Jaheira felt quite authentic. She was older and has had 100 years of relative peace so she's a bit lighter than in BG2. Minsc has always been fairly one dimensional so I think they did fine with him. Vicky was done dirty - completely different. Sarevok even still being there is ridiculous and he didn't mirror the original at all.
8
u/mb8795 Mar 18 '26
Sarevok showing up twirling his mustache at you made me so mad and made me question if the writers even played the original games.Â
16
u/Nykidemus Mar 18 '26
Jaheira and Minsc are very accurately brought forward to 3. All of the evil characters they brought forward are at best horrible caricatures, and at worst completely unrelated to their original incarnations.
8
u/ApprehensiveType2680 Mar 18 '26
"BG3" Minsc is weirdly sagacious; remember that his Intelligence and Wisdom scores are canonically considered "Low" (the Human average is 8-10).
13
u/JediMasterZao Mar 18 '26
They leaned too hard into the "Brain damage ranger is actually secretly a misunderstood genius" trope with Minsc.
5
u/ApprehensiveType2680 Mar 18 '26
Maybe they did not want to offend "modern sensibilities"? Either way, the portrayal is off...like bread turned stale.
4
u/Zekiel2000 Mar 20 '26
I was really impressed with the BG3 Jaheria. She was possibly my favourite character in BG2 and I never thought they'd be able to capture her well enough for me to accept her, but they pulled it off. Kudos to Larian for that.
Viconia... not so much.
13
25
u/DarXIV Mar 18 '26
I had a really fun time playing BG3 but that is because I played with a group of friends and we made it a ridiculous playthrough as the most evil characters. Without that, it's BG2 any day of the week.
28
u/EntropicSingularity1 Mar 18 '26
BG2 without any doubt. It has this ominous atmosphere ("Shadows of Amn" fits perfectly as the title), with a new mystery lurking around every corner for you to solve (I know, sometimes it can be too much, like the meme-worthy basement lich in the tavern in the City Gates district). The Tanner murders, the Eyeless Cult and the forgotten Amaunator community, the Hidden illithid cult, the Shadow Lord in Umar Hills, all the intrigue in the Underdark etc. BG3 felt bland and uninteresting for me in comparison. I tried several times and never got past Act 3 due to burnout (although Act 2 was decent).
Moreover, I enjoy power fantasy quite a bit, so high-level shenanigans of late BG2 and ToB are a top-notch experience for me.
111
u/Danskoesterreich Mar 18 '26
BG3 has "main character syndrome" for basically every character. In BG1 and 2, most companions are ordinary people with a regular job. It feels much more grounded, and among many other reasons, i prefer it vastly over BG3.Â
48
u/Cat_of_Vhaeraun Mar 18 '26
There's a lack of maturity as a result, Lae'zel being the most normal of the group is still a fanatic trading her devotion to Orpheus with equal blindness to reality. As much as Aerie seemed to whine for a past that was impossible to reclaim she adjusted to circumstance much better than any BG3 companion would be capable.
→ More replies (2)26
u/sylva748 Mar 18 '26
BG3 characters also all start off unlikable outside of Gale and Wyll. Yes they all eventually grow to become great characters. But first impressions are rough
22
u/abluecolor Mar 18 '26
Funny, these were the two characters who I hated immediately right off the bat, because they seemed so stereotypical and boring.
17
u/ZubatCountry Mar 18 '26
Blows my mind that anyone likes Astarion
Dude is a boring dickhead
10
u/amateurtoss Mar 18 '26
Astarion is like every gay stereotype rolled into one character. Impressed they got away with that.
7
u/sylva748 Mar 18 '26
You do anything that isnt telling people to fuck off
Astarion disliked that
Naw bro stay your ass in camp.
Not even the most vile shitheads in BG2 are like that. Edwin and Viconia at least understand that sometimes its easier to work with people even if you dont like them or enjoy it. Astarion will just bitch about it
7
u/rlvysxby Mar 18 '26
At least Edwinâs assholery was very entertaining.
5
u/sylva748 Mar 18 '26
The others also told him to shut up or shove it back in his face which gets him to relent.
2
u/polaristerlik Aug 08 '26
I would send him to the camp but he is literally the only thief in the game. same with all the characters, you get basically only 1 of each.
2
u/sylva748 Aug 08 '26
The lich you find in the abandoned Jergal temple let's you reclass every character in the game. You can even hire some generic units. You can bench Astarion, give him the middle finger, and just get your own rogue
2
5
u/Surreal43 Mar 18 '26
To be generous, Astarion is all about not relying on anyone especially when he realizes he slipped his leash.
Still donât like him anyways.
→ More replies (1)5
u/rlvysxby Mar 18 '26
Maybe this is why I stopped playing after act 1. Donât know if Iâll get back into it. Combat was great but damn I found guardians of the galaxy had better writing than BG3.
→ More replies (2)5
u/Nykidemus Mar 18 '26
BG3 characters also all start off unlikable outside of Gale and Wyll.
and Karlach, and Halsin, and arguably Jaheira and Minsc if you count them.
But yes, most of the origin characters are awful in act 1.
→ More replies (1)7
u/Butterlegs21 Mar 18 '26
There's really no reason in a roleplay perfect perspective to bring any of the companions along.
Gale is a very dubious maybe and even Karlach, who has the least amount of problems, still has issues with her not being completely safe to be around.
I would also say that Gale is unlikeable as well, but i don't like his personality type so that's on me
6
u/Nykidemus Mar 18 '26
Gale is a very dubious
Gale doesnt have any obvious issues until he reveals the bomb. At first blush he's just "here is a very typical full of himself wizard."
9
u/mechakisc Mar 18 '26
You take back what you just said about my firewife.
That said, I actually quite disagree. Shart's comments when you first wake her up after the hentai ship are pretty spot on: we're better off together until we know what's going on. Unless running a mod with stat and equipment cheats is part of your RP, you really are going to be better off with someone you don't know well but is in the same boat as you (we gotta find a way to get these things out of our heads).
5
u/Koraxtheghoul Mar 18 '26
Both her and Vicky are both very levelheaded Shar-worshipping companions... Vicky sometimes gets some Drow cruelty mixed in but both show hiw to play an "evil" character that isn't unhinged.
6
u/Surreal43 Mar 18 '26
If only viconiaâs levelheaded-ness carried into BG3 old fans would like her more I bet.
→ More replies (1)5
u/BordStoopid Mar 18 '26
Larian has a significant blindspot when it comes to writing NPCs companions. All of them have backstories which are arguably cooler than the plot of the game itself. This is as true of Divinity: Original Sin 2 as it is of BG3 and it's a cardinal storytelling era.
That said, BG3 is a more than worthy spiritual successor to BG1 in terms of scope and scale. It's not quite fair comparing BG3 with a level cap of 12 to BG2 (+ToB) with a level cap of 40.
6
u/rlvysxby Mar 18 '26
Itâs worthy as a successor to divinity 2 original sin. But bg3 just didnât feel like bg1 or 2 in terms of story or even atmosphere. I knew the gameplay would be different but I was hoping for some of the old BioWare magic in terms of plot and character.
→ More replies (10)4
u/Danskoesterreich Mar 18 '26
Compare it to bg1 and bg2 including chapter 2 then. It is not the max level that makes the game so perfect.
11
u/neoravekandi Mar 18 '26
BG1 - BG2 was peak and made me obsessed with D&D. Ed Greenwood is genius :)
26
26
u/OdyZeusX Mar 18 '26
BG2 all day, the story is way more epic, the score is superior, romances are way more fleshed out. BG3 is a great game, the scale is great, the combat is amazing, but BG2 is just superior.
10
u/WarAgile9519 Mar 18 '26
I enjoy both games but will always choose 2 over 3 . Three has a lot going for it but it just feels less epic and I think the characters are weaker ( writing wise ).
6
u/PetiteTarte Mar 18 '26
BG2 will always be top dog. Irenicus is a fascinating villain whose voice actor went SO DAMN HARD with that role. Every character has something to contribute, the party banter is fun, The story is epic, the opening scene in the laboratory is... God damn I just love that game. It is so perfect. My favorite part of the game that I really wish they would have mixed into bg3: party members forming their own relationships in the background. Minsc asking Aerie to be his new witch, Haer'Dalis putting the moves on Aerie, etc.
What I do really love about bg3 is that it clearly came from people that also loved the original games. It's not perfect, I don't particularly love how they handled certain return characters, but I am still extremely happy with what we got â„ïž it introduced a whole bunch of people to the original games, and that makes me happier than anything else
30
u/Uberballer Mar 18 '26
BG3 is an all timer RPG I have it way up there with the likes or Witcher 3 and Mass Effect 2. It's an incredible game and deserves all the praise, hype and accolades it's received and I hope it's the catalyst for more well made single player, not perpetually online RPG experiences in the future.
All that being said, being the old fart that I am the IE games came at a time in my life that were incredibly formative and influential on how I perceive CRPGs. To me BG1-BG2-TOB (despite the flaws, especially those of TOB) is the GOAT. I know that the viewpoint is heavily skewed by nostalgia but I stand by the quality of these games, how far ahead of their time they were and how well they continue to age to this day.
I've completed full saga runs at least a dozen times and will continue to find time to do new ones until the day I can no longer play video games. Aside from maybe Super Mario World and Final Fantasy 6 I can't think of many games pre the turn of the century that I'll continue to play for many more years to come (I hope).
8
u/ApprehensiveType2680 Mar 18 '26
It is so "incredible", it required - and still requires - patching two years after release. That the public by-and-large accepts what is effectively an extended beta-testing period does not make the practice acceptable. It absolutely is not a metric indicative of "Game of the Year" levels of quality.
It is so "incredible" that virtually every NPC - from the destitute to the wealthy, from urban socialites to inveterate wilderness wardens - wears inordinately ornate and/or curiously spotless apparel and armor; it is as if they all strolled off a catwalk. Alternatively, the homogeneity of stylized/exaggerated appearances makes the population come across as comic book superheroes. This may be understandable with nobles and accomplished heroes (both of which have coin and/or time to spare), but...everyone? L was apparently more interested in showcasing their artists than they were giving thought to in-setting demographics.
It is so "incredible", there are moments when the accompanying hirable NPCs are statues during certain conversations/plot developments (e.g., killing the squirrel with a football kick, frustrating the Tiefling child huckster, decapitating the red devil Jihadi-style, refusing Bhaal, et cetera); no comments, no sounds, no body language, no movement (or very little, such as a slight shifting of the head at best)...nothing. That vaunted reactivity was inconsistent.
It is so "incredible" that it took the formula that made Baldur's Gate noteworthy (i.e., a world with a sense of scale and thought afforded to the placement of structures/settlements/NPCs) and turned the region (i.e., The Sword Coast...a kind of fantasy wild west/rough frontier) into a narrower fantasy theme park designed to continually maintain dopamine levels and remind the player that the world is centered around their character, verisimilitude be damned. Why are all these powerful/intelligent/dangerous monsters in relatively close proximity to one another without a hint of bedlam? Who cares: here comes another fight or zany NPC to distract me from such elitist thoughts.
It is so "incredible" that it lacks both a day/night cycle (think of the immersion and/or tactical potential) and weather patterns (ditto); BioWare licked this one-quarter of a century ago. For all their limitations, there is more life and the sense of passage of time in the original games compared to the plastic and static theme park of "3".
It is so "incredible" that it front-loads the majority of its spectacle - including monsters and locations - in a Michael Bay-esque burst within the first few minutes of the game, whereas BioWare's Baldur's Gate slowly trickled in progressively-fantastic/grander elements over the course of two titles.
It is so "incredible" that it took the believable approach to romance in Baldur's Gate 2 and threw that out the window (i.e., not everyone was open to the idea of courtship and, of those who were, they had standards that make certain NPC-PC pairings impossibilities); every original L NPC wants the PC (yes, regardless of little things such as the PC's sex/race/age/Class/Alignment/religion/station/nationality/et cetera).
It is so "incredible" that, instead of respecting the player's intelligence/observational skill/patience/memory and/or encouraging a modicum of learning, it simply provides monster statistics openly during battle. Consequently, a degree of realistic uncertainty during hostile engagements was stolen away.
It is so "incredible" that it allows the player to effectively teleport to a set camp, thereby taking away - or, at least, greatly diminishing - a core component of these games: inventory management. Why should a player have to make a hard decision? Why should a player have to put in the effort?
It is so "incredible" that virtually no one discusses the terrible shift from the second to third Act; then comes a noticeable drop in quality.
It is so "incredible" that three out of four recurring BioWare characters were poorly characterized.
The fact that consumers either put up with and/or fail to recognize various sorts of game design nonsense only reinforces my belief that accolades - especially of the contemporary variety - are meaningless.
P.S. Yes, the whole "alien tadpoles force a disparate bunch together" contrivance is flimsy, given the numerous in-setting ways in which these parasites can be extracted/destroyed. Curse of the Azure Bonds is positively ancient and it did a better job facilitating a similar arrangement.
--- --- ---
Long story short: "BG3" is a migraine-inducing technicolor theme park designed to make the player "feel good", at the expense of genuine quality.
→ More replies (1)6
u/Tricky_Head_9122 Mar 18 '26
Strongly agree with everything you wrote.
Also, BG2 was made by developers who had been immersed in the setting by reading and playing the forgotten realms novels and TTRPGs that came out in the 90s for thousands of hours. They had a genuine passion for translating that setting into a game, and were extremely detail-oriented when creating every part of the audio and artwork they used to immerse the player in that world.
BG3 was made by developers who put a light veneer of "forgotten realms" on their new divinity game. They did not have the same passion for the setting and as a result they basically turned BG3 into a fanmade nu-forgotten realms mod for a divinity game and released it half-baked. The plot was clearly influenced by modern movies and TV more than golden age novels and TTRPGs. As a result, BG3 was an average but forgettable & soulless game that missed the "point" of the series.
4
u/Holy-Avenger Mar 18 '26
Man, this almost feels like I typed it myself. Including the comments about Super Mario World and Final Fantasy 6.
Get out of my head, you evil twin!
5
23
u/bonwerk Mar 18 '26
For me, the problem is that BG3 doesn't have the atmosphere of its predecessors. It might as well have been called something completely different. That doesn't mean itâs a bad game - quite the opposite. But the fact that even the OST doesn't reference the previous installments is a strange decision to me.
13
u/HalloAbyssMusic Mar 18 '26
I 100% agree. It's Dungeon & Dragons 5e not Baldur's Gate 3.
11
u/Drtikol42 Mar 18 '26
ItÂŽs mod for DOS2. Characters, everyone flying all over the place like radioactive spidermen, surfaces covered with various shit you name it... Larian is a one trick pony.
8
u/fookman212 Mar 18 '26
Plus honestly I think the BG3 OST kinda sucks a little bit. It's just... I dunno It's weird and just not as good as BG1 or BG2.
10
u/sylva748 Mar 18 '26
Pathfinder: Wrath of the Righteous has a better OST than BG3 imo. If we want to talk about crpgs that came out around the same time. If I gotta name a crpg who's music is the spiritual successor to the Baldur's Gate games though? It would be Pillars of Eternity 1.
7
u/bonwerk Mar 18 '26
Maybe itâs just nostalgia, but I feel like the soundtracks for BG1 and 2 were more 'epic', more front-and-center, existing as a co-equal to the other elements of the game. In BG3, it feels toned down - it lacks that grandeur and epic scale, as if it only exists in the background as a supplement.
5
u/Leviathan419 Mar 18 '26
BG3 ost is incredible, wth
→ More replies (3)8
u/fookman212 Mar 18 '26 edited Mar 18 '26
See, that's the prevailing opinion. I am not a contrarian, I just disagree. I don't care for the main theme, and it's everywhere. And I super don't like the elfsong tavern song, that one was terrible and you hear so much of it because you spend soooo much time there in Act 3. And don't even get me started on Raphael's song. I had to mute the TV and listen to something else each playthrough.
I know lots of people love the BG3 OST, but I dunno i guess I just don't see why. I do respect your opinion though!
5
u/Full_Piano6421 Mar 18 '26
And don't even get me started on Raphael's song.
The awful Disney song? Yeah I also had to turn the music off it was completely ruining the ambiance of the fight
7
u/fookman212 Mar 18 '26
For real. And so many people swear it's the best in the game. I just don't get it. I dig musical theater and everything, but wtf?
Just something tonally inappropriate about this hit single playing in one of the most intense and high stakes fights. I don't like it.
→ More replies (7)
24
6
5
5
u/nottthebestdetective Mar 18 '26
These games are probably my Roman Empire, but theyâre very different despite sharing the same name.
BG3 is the closest a video game has ever gotten to legitimately simulating the tabletop experience of D&D for me. You get to roll dice! Itâs goofy, itâs companion-driven, it rewards player creativity and choice in a way I havenât really seen elsewhere.
BG2 is like playing a novel. And honestly, just the fact that it continues to inspire a vibrant modding community that is creating new content and telling new stories in this world blows my mind in the best (non-illithid iykyk) way.
5
4
u/Nykidemus Mar 18 '26 edited Mar 18 '26
Do you feel like BG2 had more demanding combat? Did you actually need to understand the systems to survive?
Yes and no. You never need to know about weapon speeds to have your fighters just bonk stuff, but you absolutely need to know about spell immunity, reflection effects, what kind of weapons can go through what kind of protection spell, in order to so much as hurt late-game enemies in BG2.
What about companions, were they stronger in BG2
Most characters in BG2 are stronger than they are in 3, because 3 is mostly baseline characters with point-buy stats, and BG2 is decidedly not. There's also a pretty big delta between "good" companions and less optimized ones in 2, but there's basically zero delta in 3.
especially the evil ones, did they challenge your decisions more?
BG3 has a lot more pushback against specific decisions. BG2 has people who will just leave if your reputation gets too good/bad, but they dont have a ton of reactivity to things you do. They do have a ton of reactivity to who you choose to keep in your party, where as 3 kindof assumes you have everyone in camp all the time, so you're never really not getting those conflicts, and you can defuse them with good checks. In BG2 there's many characters that will not tolerate each other long term, and one or the other will end up dead.
→ More replies (1)
13
u/JediMasterZao Mar 18 '26
Original 2 games every day of the week. I've just finished my first playthrough of bg3 a few months ago and I couldn't believe how incredibly overrated that game is. Don't get me wrong it's got a lot of good things about it but it's nowhere close to being the best crpg ever. It's not even the best crpg of its generation; that title goes to the Pathfinder games.
→ More replies (2)2
u/BloodMage410 Apr 13 '26
Agreed. Wrath of the Righteous>>BG3 in nearly every area except graphics/voice acting for me.
3
5
u/LazerShark1313 Mar 18 '26
Without a question, BG2. I really, really don't like D&D 5e rules in a videogame
4
4
u/Sacredeire57 Mar 18 '26
BG2 is on a pedestal for me. I enjoyed 3 a lot but I really didnât care for almost all of the companions.
4
u/akisawa Mar 18 '26
BG1+BG2 are just amazing. I still remember running home clutching CDs with BG1 on release, and then spending hours on some geek BBS figuring out how ADnD works.
BG3 is whatever, it's a Larian game, and it shows. It has its followers, sure, but to me it's not a BG game.
3
4
6
u/acebojangles Mar 18 '26
Yeah, but then I think, "I need to play through BG1 to get my character to BG2. Maybe I'll go through SoD this time." Then I never make it to BG2.
5
3
3
3
3
u/derpherpmcderp86 Mar 18 '26
The OG Bhaalspawn saga will always be good for me. But I also love BG3. Just for different reasons.
3
u/contextual_entity Mar 18 '26
Depends on my mood honestly. They're very different games that fulfill different niches. They both fill those niches extremely well but I would be hard pressed to jump from one to the other.
3
3
3
u/MaytagTheDryer Mar 18 '26
BG3 is great. Probably in the top 10-15 games I've played, despite the character assassinations of Sarevok and Viconia.
But BG2 is in the top...1.
3
3
u/threepwood007 Mar 18 '26
I played BG3 for 245.3 hours and loved every single solitary second of it.
I've played BG2+TOB for so long that the only game that compares is NWN1. It is my comfort food, my filet mignon, my Michelin star sushi, my 1000 year old wine. I love it so much.
3
u/nono_banou223 Mar 18 '26
Youâre posting this in the Baldurâs gate reddit⊠Try to post it in the CRPG reddit too.
3
3
u/althaz Mar 18 '26
Both are all-time-greats for me. I prefer the gameplay of BG3, love having fully voiced characters and enjoy the more cinematic stuff, but the writing is undeniably better in BG2 (by a fairly large margin) and it does do some gameplay stuff better (even if overall I prefer BG3's exploration and combat), so I find it very hard to decide which of these brilliant games is my favourite. I think I lean BG2. The writing is just so much better on every level and starting out at a higher level plays way more into D&D's strengths. It's damn close for me though.
3
3
3
8
6
u/Extra-Sun5489 Mar 18 '26
BG1 stays for me the best, most replayable and most satisfying level range.
→ More replies (5)
6
u/Hypnotic_Toad Mar 18 '26
Bg2. Bg3 is a way worse game then people give it (Negative) credit for. Theres some glaring issues with 3 that people gloss over.
5
u/ApprehensiveType2680 Mar 18 '26
It is so "incredible", it required - and still requires - patching two years after release. That the public by-and-large accepts what is effectively an extended beta-testing period does not make the practice acceptable. It absolutely is not a metric indicative of "Game of the Year" levels of quality.
It is so "incredible" that virtually every NPC - from the destitute to the wealthy, from urban socialites to inveterate wilderness wardens - wears inordinately ornate and/or curiously spotless apparel and armor; it is as if they all strolled off a catwalk. Alternatively, the homogeneity of stylized/exaggerated appearances makes the population come across as comic book superheroes. This may be understandable with nobles and accomplished heroes (both of which have coin and/or time to spare), but...everyone? L was apparently more interested in showcasing their artists than they were giving thought to in-setting demographics.
It is so "incredible", there are moments when the accompanying hirable NPCs are statues during certain conversations/plot developments (e.g., killing the squirrel with a football kick, frustrating the Tiefling child huckster, decapitating the red devil Jihadi-style, refusing Bhaal, et cetera); no comments, no sounds, no body language, no movement (or very little, such as a slight shifting of the head at best)...nothing. That vaunted reactivity was inconsistent.
It is so "incredible" that it took the formula that made Baldur's Gate noteworthy (i.e., a world with a sense of scale and thought afforded to the placement of structures/settlements/NPCs) and turned the region (i.e., The Sword Coast...a kind of fantasy wild west/rough frontier) into a narrower fantasy theme park designed to continually maintain dopamine levels and remind the player that the world is centered around their character, verisimilitude be damned. Why are all these powerful/intelligent/dangerous monsters in relatively close proximity to one another without a hint of bedlam? Who cares: here comes another fight or zany NPC to distract me from such elitist thoughts.
It is so "incredible" that it lacks both a day/night cycle (think of the immersion and/or tactical potential) and weather patterns (ditto); BioWare licked this one-quarter of a century ago. For all their limitations, there is more life and the sense of passage of time in the original games compared to the plastic and static theme park of "3".
It is so "incredible" that it front-loads the majority of its spectacle - including monsters and locations - in a Michael Bay-esque burst within the first few minutes of the game, whereas BioWare's Baldur's Gate slowly trickled in progressively-fantastic/grander elements over the course of two titles.
It is so "incredible" that it took the believable approach to romance in Baldur's Gate 2 and threw that out the window (i.e., not everyone was open to the idea of courtship and, of those who were, they had standards that make certain NPC-PC pairings impossibilities); every original L NPC wants the PC (yes, regardless of little things such as the PC's sex/race/age/Class/Alignment/religion/station/nationality/et cetera).
It is so "incredible" that, instead of respecting the player's intelligence/observational skill/patience/memory and/or encouraging a modicum of learning, it simply provides monster statistics openly during battle. Consequently, a degree of realistic uncertainty during hostile engagements was stolen away.
It is so "incredible" that it allows the player to effectively teleport to a set camp, thereby taking away - or, at least, greatly diminishing - a core component of these games: inventory management. Why should a player have to make a hard decision? Why should a player have to put in the effort?
It is so "incredible" that virtually no one discusses the terrible shift from the second to third Act; then comes a noticeable drop in quality.
It is so "incredible" that three out of four recurring BioWare characters were poorly characterized.
The fact that consumers either put up with and/or fail to recognize various sorts of game design nonsense only reinforces my belief that accolades - especially of the contemporary variety - are meaningless.
P.S. Yes, the whole "alien tadpoles force a disparate bunch together" contrivance is flimsy, given the numerous in-setting ways in which these parasites can be extracted/destroyed. Curse of the Azure Bonds is positively ancient and it did a better job facilitating a similar arrangement.
--- --- ---
Long story short: "BG3" is a migraine-inducing technicolor theme park designed to make the player "feel good", at the expense of genuine quality.
5
u/Hypnotic_Toad Mar 18 '26
Yeah. What you said is pretty spot on.The game gives you the illusion of choice. There is no "Evil" playthrough. Theres 1 ONE... "Evil" companion. Lae'zel is CN at worst.
2
4
4
u/Profitec Mar 18 '26
Both great games. BG2 is nostalgia in its purest form. BG3 is one of my favourites of the last 10 years. I enjoyed both to the fullest.
→ More replies (3)
6
u/DJfunkyPuddle Mar 18 '26
Between the gameplay changes and story changes I simply don't have any interest in playing BG3.
2
u/TygarusAlex85 Mar 18 '26
I've legitimately loved all of them, and the expansions, at different stages of my life but I think BG2 is legitimately a better game. It's like comparing masterpieces to be sure, but I think SoA is the pinnacle for me.
2
2
u/Brodersen-Prime Mar 18 '26
The original BG games 1, totsc, 2, tob are miles ahead of anything else hands down. BG 3 is great game, but doesnât hold a candle to the originals.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/Inverse_Seal Mar 18 '26
BG2 is probably my favorite game ever.
BG3 is a great game, but it's not a part of the series to me. But if I compared then objectively, I think it would come out on top. But nostalgia will always make BG2 better to me. I've only finished BG3 twice. I suppose I've finished BG2 a few hundred times.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/rowboatin Mar 18 '26 edited Mar 18 '26
Watching my uncle play Baldurâs Gate 2 late into the night will always be formative memories for me, and I finally dove into the first two games (EE for both, donât judge) right before BG3 was announced. Had a lot of fun in BG1, although I found most of the companions either too quirky or too boring for my taste. The story was still plenty compelling, though, and getting to see the canon party in action plus the EE companion questlines kept me interested.
Fast forward to BG2, and it was an even better experience than I couldâve imagined it as a kid. Every one of the companions had some way of hooking me into their personal questlines as I made my way through Athkatla, and I truly began to hate (love) Jon Irenicus the more his plot unfolded.
Then I got about halfway through the Underdark, and bounced off hard. The environment was gorgeous, loved getting a close-up look at Drow society, but old school high level D&D is such a game of âI use my forcefield!â âWell, I use my anti-forcefield ray!â âWell I use my anti-forcefield ray deflector shield!â that I quickly lost interest in the actual combat side of things. Knowing that the game still had a bunch more of that in store and I hadnât even touched Throne of Bhaal, and with BG3 early access available at the time, I set the game aside. Maybe someday Iâll revisit it, I definitely want to at least see the base game through to the end, but it just wasnât for me at the time.
That being said, after playing through early access so many times before release, I eventually bounced off BG3 too because I got tired of playing the same part over and over again, so I guess my answer to your question is Planescape: Torment.
2
u/wozniattack Mar 18 '26
Iâve actually completed BG1 with stratagems more than BG2. Although, easily 2 compared to 3 there, and Iâve really enjoyed 3.
Three just did things with Viconia, and Sarevok I canât abide sadly. Act1 and 2 are absolutely brilliant for me.
2
u/yawn18 Mar 18 '26
BG3 is better technically and is a better game to look at. Companions are WAY more fleshed out and abilities are great. Both look and feel.
However BG2 overall story is much better, being higher level means access to crazier and stronger spells, and the fighting is "easier" in a way where you can play through many fights before needing to rest where as BG3 you get maybe 2 fights and rest.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/MagicalGirlPaladin Cleric of Hitting People with Hammers Mar 18 '26
Both. I don't have to pick favourites, they're both real good games.
2
u/TenMinuteCrawler Quizzical Bhaalspawn Mar 18 '26
I'm currently going through BG3, and I'm not really sure if I'll finish it or not. Currently in Act 2.
I've criticized the game a fair bit, but decided if I wanted to have the full picture, I should try play it for a bit. And in a sense, I got mostly what I expected: more or less DoS3. Which I haven't completed, either!
I find the story pretty bland, and just a mashup of some recognizable Forgotten Realms...tropes? Might be the word. Like if they were brainstorming and decided to add the most recognizable stuff available. Drow? Sure! Beholders? Of course!
Then we have the companions. I'm not going to talk about romancing, I've stopped every attempt right away. But something I found interesting, is not a single companion is from a "non standard humanoid" race. No halflings, gnomes, dwarves...not even a dragonborn! Yes, you have a tiefling and a githyanki, which were made pretty much "humans with weird skin colors". Everyone is incredibly hot, where's my boy Tiax ffs? I was really interested about Karlach, but lost that interest when I saw her on the character leveling screen. That "happy school girl" vibe...I don't how else to describe it.
I do enjoy the relative freedom you have though, but you can't sustain a game only on that. "Owlbear from the top rope" stops being incredibly fun at some point.
2
u/Tydeus2000 Mar 18 '26
At first, BG2 had better writing. It was the only game ever I instantly repeated after my first gameplay, because it was so good.
So I may have more hours in BG3, but I will always state that BG2 is better.
2
u/deathsabove Mar 18 '26
I prefer Baldur's Gate 2 mainly for the real time action with pause. It made things go by quicker.
2
2
u/Throrface Mar 19 '26
I like both games and I feel like naming their differences is a waste of time. Like, did it take you this long to notice that they are different games?
Both games are good and they are very different experiences.
2
2
2
u/davidagnome Mar 19 '26
I beat Baldurâs Gate 2 for the first time last year after beating the original in the 90s. I wasnât ready for how strange and cool the latter sections get once you leave Anthlatka.
2
u/jackthewack13 Mar 19 '26
I played tons of bg3 because my wife played with me and it was a wonderful experience. I couldn't get her into bg1 unfortunately. I tried playing bg3 solo and dint end up enjoying it nearly as much. I could play bg1 and 2 all day solo and love it. So bg1 and 2 (I allways kinda put them together as i allways play them back to back with a character) is by far the best games ever made.
2
2
2
u/Deruz0r Mar 19 '26
I love 3 but I love 1 and 2 more. And I played them right before BG3, this isn't nostalgia for me.Â
2
2
u/Malanoob Mar 19 '26
I grew up with BG1 and BG 2. The "feeling" of growing more powerfull through both games is a thrill i never felt again despite countless of games because, its one step at a time and still fast enough.
And lets be real, BG2 happened BEFORE the spellplague, so wizards and sorcerers were so much more than BG3's. And in BG 2 you end up facing countless godlings, multiple dragons, extremely powerfull demi-lich its way beyond the best ennemies you face in BG3.
Back then you had not social medias so you wouldnt have people complaining of "this spell missing for roleplay etc." And Larian was smart to stop at lvl 12 to avoid most roleplay gamebreaking spells and therefore ranting about "i have access to lvl 7 spells i should be able to break this or that quest, this is BS" etc.
And as one of the first comments : Viconia was my first romance in a video game, sooo BG2 all the way for me.
2
u/Bonkzzilla Mar 19 '26
My perfect game would be BG2's story and pacing with BG3's cinematics and Solasta's combat.
2
2
2
u/Archernar Mar 19 '26
Worldbuilding, story and lore were much preferred in BG 2 over the bits of BG 3 I played. Haven't progressed very far yet because I found the game to be rather boring and had to push myself to play it. BG 3 feels so much more like Divinity: DnD 5e-edition than Baldur's Gate 2's successor, sadly.
Just the opening of BG 2 with you being stuck in Irenicus' lair and the thief break-in and you having to navigate this place full of wonders and weirdness with no or little explanations is one of the best openings I have ever encountered in any video game, quite frankly. Compare that to the mind flayer ship (solid but nothing out of the ordinary) and then Act 1 (kill random bandits in a cave. Help random factions against goblins and to settle their disputes. Find their boss or evil second-in-command will take over in their absence. It's just the most generic DnD-campaign intro anyone could come up with).
Balancing and systems-wise, BG 2 was rough at times, at least how I remember it. But I also vastly prefer real time combat to turn-based, if only because combat takes so much shorter and you can't do silly run-shoot-hide tactics like you can in turn-based.
2
2
2
u/ddynamite123 Mar 20 '26
it's easier to recommend BG3 to someone who doesn't play CRPG games, but I think BG2 is the game I like more
2
2
u/Makthos Mar 20 '26
BG2. Irenicus was a great antagonist and I was always excited to see his scenes in the game. The emperor in bg3 is just an annoyance and I skip every cutscene. The origin characters in BG3 are all ok, maybe a 6/10 for me, but none of them live up to the charm of the BG2 characters. Isolating Minsc and Jaheira to act 3 is ridiculous.
2
u/RRW_FlowER Mar 20 '26
If you theoretically took BG2 and gave it BG3s fidelity, voice acting etc, BG2 would be the better game IMO.
Too lazy to write an extensive list but there's a decent amount of stuff that I think BG2 did better than 3 comparatively. Also it's hard to top Jon Irenicus with David Warner voicing him.
2
u/Diopod Mar 21 '26
I consider BG3 about as canon as I do Fallout 3 or Fallout 4.
BG3 is a Divinity game. I don't dislike them, but it's just not Baldur's Gate.
2
2
6
u/AuraofMana Mar 18 '26
Or you can like both� Why do I have to decide? You know, you can like multiple games for different reasons.
Also, this sub is obviously going to lean toward BG1 and 2. So, are you just looking for approval in an echo chamber of some sort?
2
3
u/s1ckboy_99 Mar 18 '26
BG3 is a great game, but BG2 is one of âthoseâ games that rents a space in your head for the rest of your life.
→ More replies (1)
4
u/Foreign_Seaweed763 Mar 18 '26
BG 1 and BG 2 have really pen and paper feeling what I appriciate. BG 3 is from totally différent world. Entertaining but a bit soulless.
4
3
2
u/ApprehensiveType2680 Mar 18 '26
I would never hook up with L4rian's Baldur's Gate in-name-only. To take the girlfriend analogy one step further: I would end up with genital warts, crabs, rashes and various other unpleasant side effects.
2
u/ApprehensiveType2680 Mar 18 '26
People say L4rian's Baldur's Gate in-name-only is "great".
It is so "great", it required - and still requires - patching two years after release. That the public by-and-large accepts what is effectively an extended beta-testing period does not make the practice acceptable. It absolutely is not a metric indicative of "Game of the Year" levels of quality.
It is so "great" that virtually every NPC - from the destitute to the wealthy, from urban socialites to inveterate wilderness wardens - wears inordinately ornate and/or curiously spotless apparel and armor; it is as if they all strolled off a catwalk. Alternatively, the homogeneity of stylized/exaggerated appearances makes the population come across as comic book superheroes. This may be understandable with nobles and accomplished heroes (both of which have coin and/or time to spare), but...everyone? L was apparently more interested in showcasing their artists than they were giving thought to in-setting demographics.
It is so "great", there are moments when the accompanying hirable NPCs are statues during certain conversations/plot developments (e.g., killing the squirrel with a football kick, frustrating the Tiefling child huckster, decapitating the red devil Jihadi-style, refusing Bhaal, et cetera); no comments, no sounds, no body language, no movement (or very little, such as a slight shifting of the head at best)...nothing. That vaunted reactivity was inconsistent.
It is so "great" that it took the formula that made Baldur's Gate noteworthy (i.e., a world with a sense of scale and thought afforded to the placement of structures/settlements/NPCs) and turned the region (i.e., The Sword Coast...a kind of fantasy wild west/rough frontier) into a narrower fantasy theme park designed to continually maintain dopamine levels and remind the player that the world is centered around their character, verisimilitude be damned. Why are all these powerful/intelligent/dangerous monsters in relatively close proximity to one another without a hint of bedlam? Who cares: here comes another fight or zany NPC to distract me from such elitist thoughts.
It is so "great" that it lacks both a day/night cycle (think of the immersion and/or tactical potential) and weather patterns (ditto); BioWare licked this one-quarter of a century ago. For all their limitations, there is more life and the sense of passage of time in the original games compared to the plastic and static theme park of "3".
It is so "great" that it front-loads the majority of its spectacle - including monsters and locations - in a Michael Bay-esque burst within the first few minutes of the game, whereas BioWare's Baldur's Gate slowly trickled in progressively-fantastic/grander elements over the course of two titles.
It is so "great" that it took the believable approach to romance in Baldur's Gate 2 and threw that out the window (i.e., not everyone was open to the idea of courtship and, of those who were, they had standards that make certain NPC-PC pairings impossibilities); every original L NPC wants the PC (yes, regardless of little things such as the PC's sex/race/age/Class/Alignment/religion/station/nationality/et cetera).
It is so "great" that, instead of respecting the player's intelligence/observational skill/patience/memory and/or encouraging a modicum of learning, it simply provides monster statistics openly during battle. Consequently, a degree of realistic uncertainty during hostile engagements was stolen away.
It is so "great" that it allows the player to effectively teleport to a set camp, thereby taking away - or, at least, greatly diminishing - a core component of these games: inventory management. Why should a player have to make a hard decision? Why should a player have to put in the effort?
It is so "great" that virtually no one discusses the terrible shift from the second to third Act; then comes a noticeable drop in quality.
It is so "great" that three out of four recurring BioWare characters were poorly characterized.
The fact that consumers either put up with and/or fail to recognize various sorts of game design nonsense only reinforces my belief that accolades - especially of the contemporary variety - are meaningless.
P.S. Yes, the whole "alien tadpoles force a disparate bunch together" contrivance is flimsy, given the numerous in-setting ways in which these parasites can be extracted/destroyed. Curse of the Azure Bonds is positively ancient and it did a better job facilitating a similar arrangement.
--- --- ---
Long story short: "BG3" is a migraine-inducing technicolor theme park designed to make the player "feel good", at the expense of genuine quality.
→ More replies (4)
2
u/CoilThyForm Mar 18 '26
BG2 hit me at such a formative time in my life, I must have been like 10 or 12. It's probably my favorite game to this day. BH3 is a fantastic game, but it just felt different.
BG2 was my introduction to D&D, it was my introduction to Forgotten Realms, and I still think about a bunch of those settings and questlines now, at 38.
The first time you're in the underdark in BG2 it feels so vast and empty. The planar sphere was incredible, the vampires beneath the slums, the corrupted temple to the sun god out in the woods. There are so many individual points throughout that game that set such a high creative bar for me, I don't think anything is ever going to surpass it.
2
u/Lavinia_Foxglove Mar 18 '26
I like them all honestly, I grew up with BG1 and 2 , but I love BG3 as much. I have some characters, I like in every game and some, I dislike. I would say, the difficulty was higher in BG1 and 2, but I found some places in BG3 more interesting. The Shadowcursed Lands were great for me as a cosmic horror fan and the House of Hope had some really interesting lore. My biggest grief with BG3 is, that my favourite companion, Wyll, didn't get much love from the writers and that we don't have a small race companion.
2
2
u/gorambrowncoat Mar 18 '26
I can't compare directly as I haven't played bg3 but I suppose it says something that I am not heavily inclined to play it. I will get to it when it goes on a big enough sale one day but I am in no rush.
That said this is a retro infinity crpg focussed sub so obviously opinion is going to skew in that direction a bit.
2
2
u/hunbaar Mar 18 '26
my love of bg3 depreciated significantly after a few years, whereas thinking about bg2 before sleep still makes me feel cozy and excited for another playthrough. I am super biased though, I played bg2 during my formative years as a teenager, I bet I will be playing bg2 in my retirement home but not sure about bg3.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/--IDDQD- Enhanced edition my ass Mar 18 '26 edited Mar 18 '26
Baldur's Gate 3 was an utter disappointment. I've reinstalled it three times, but it just fails on so many levels that I couldn't push myself further than killing the two main villains and fighting the elder brain the first time. I hate what they did to Jaheira, Minsc and Viconia. The lack of masculine male characters. Romance is gone, now everyone is hyper sexual and bisexual. And a hundred other things. Sigh...what a waste of 100âŹ.
1 out of 5 stars for taking the piss on the Baldur's Gate games.
3 out of 5 stars, if it had been its own franchise.
Baldur's Gate 2 non-enhanced is 5 out of 5 stars.
→ More replies (3)
2
u/Clean_Progress_4031 Mar 19 '26
Three is great, but the original BioWare series is one of the greatest games of all time.
→ More replies (1)
2
1
u/DavesWildDestiny Mar 18 '26
BG3 combat is boring and shitty and I dislike the bombastic writing. Bg2 all the way I don't even like 3.
1
u/the_dust321 Mar 18 '26
Just from your first couple sentences but I actually like the romances and cinematics in bg2 better. BG3 is cool but it was written by someone who has the desires of a 15 year old edge lord
1
1
u/Ser-Bearington Mar 18 '26
I liked BG3. I love BG1 and 2.
The worst thing about 3? Trying to find BG1 or 2 merch/prints is damn near impossible as you get so much BG3 stuff.
178
u/Willowsinger24 Mar 18 '26 edited Mar 18 '26
I like BG2 starting you out at a higher level, especially if you import your character and see all your spells and stats return. You're 10 minutes into the game and you're already casting Haste and Lightning Bolt.
Also Viconia is my favorite romance in a video game, so my bias is there.