Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General How does BG3 compare to BG2?

This! The immediate comparison in my mind was: In BG1 when I was stuck at these levels, it was incredibly boring and shallow and just did not feel fun for more most classes. Also found the wilderness incredibly boring and 'secrets' to find incredibly lacking, compared to BG2. BG3 has none of this. Just the way the system work--from the many ways to tackle the story, from the verticality of the battle space, how elements combine similar to D:OS, to having actual actions vs bonus action abilities to use--just makes BG3 superior to BG1 in every way. Also having incantations to use makes spellcasters infinitely more interesting to play.

Though, the comparison was about BG2. I don't think it's fair to compare this early. I disagree with the statement that BG3 doesn't feel like a Baldur's Gate game. I don't know if it's because a lot more was added to EA since this thread started, or if people weren't looking, but I see many nods to the previous Baldur's Gate games. I'm already confident BG3 will surpass my expectations and top BG1 and BG2 for me. BG2 was a beautiful, but flawed game. With player mods having to correct glaring issues, or make fights better. The summary of all the exploits above highlights in detail many reasons why, though I enjoyed BG2 a lot, I'm not holding it up on this amazing pedestal of mastery. That and the characters were pretty shallow as well. It's like I'm remembering a different game than some people.

I was a teen when I played BG2 and I still remember clearly my first reaction to BG2 all these years later. I didn't know the system that well and it was my first RTWP game. I died a lot in that first dungeon. Save scummed. Was hating just how bad it felt at times, but stubbornly changing up abilities and way I approached fights until I made it through. Which subsequently made me fall in love with the game, and get better at the game. And in a lot of ways shaped how I enjoy games and having to figure out that initial approach to how my character, abilities and companions all work together to tackle an encounter.

But what REALLY stuck with me over the years with BG2 wasn't thinking it was superb character or story writing, though the story I enjoyed well enough. It was things like being a Rogue and taking over the thieves guild, or a Druid and getting the Grove, etc. IT was how I could make some dark decision, and trying to become a vampire though that didn't work out. It was to exploration and discovery of areas and cool unique items that could work for my build. And I also agree with an earlier post that stated there were many ways to tackle story points that didn't feel linear to me at all in BG3. And if we were going to compare Act 1 BG3 with BG2, I'm pretty sure it would be more like all the stuff prior to branching off to discover the different class story arcs. Not much different IMO. I felt like I had just as much--if not more--agency to get lost, going around looking for secrets and actually finding to my delight that it would turn something up in BG3. The side quests are comparable. Though being in a city for BG2 was much more saturated with mini quests. But BG2 and BG3 are very similar in that at the start you are trying to solve 1 problem, and slowly learning that there is a much bigger story going on that you're getting yourself caught up in. In BG2 it was Imoen being taken and wanting to get her back, in BG3 it's not wanting to become a mindflayer and realizing there's actually a lot more going on with the tadpole and trying to get it removed. I'd even argue BG3 is more about you than BG2 was at the start of the game, but in neither case do you really have any idea of what's going on.

And as far as companions--thus far--goes. There's really no comparison. The voice acting is really good and having your companions actually be a living avatar moving around, reacting, and having facial expression is far superior to just voice alone, which to me wasn't that stellar in BG2. I hated Imoen. I didn't care about her. I didn't think the way she acted was compelling. Her reason for getting captured after the dungeon felt forced. But I remember thinking, oh good, I don't have to deal with her which naturally led to me puttig off the rescue as long as possible, discovering all the major quest arcs you can do prior. Minsc was a half-wit, without much going for him. Would he even stand out as much without Boo? Opinion of him was even worse in BG1. Jaheira was ok. I love Druids so I cared to be cool with her; even though she was always so judgemental. In contrast, even though some of the companions I started out with disliking in BG3, they felt more real and like breathing characters with their own issues. Esp when the game started hinting at deeper sides to them. If you know about Githyanki, you know why Lae'zel is the way she is. You start to see the facade for her own insecurities. LIke you literally get to experience her starting to change towards your character. All the others except for Shadowheart are pretty jovial to you from the start, but their layers peel back in other ways. I'm not going to sit here and do a psychoanalysis on all the companions. But there's an earlier comment I disagree with that said something along the lines of making them obnoxious doesn't give them depth. I kind feel like some of the nuances are kind of being missed. Is it perfection? No. But every single companion had something about them, that despite my first reaction to them, made me want to get to know them more. Story reveal and things they let slip, made me want to know the 'why' of it all.

Needless to say, I'm thoroughly enjoying BG3 early access. Was initially not going to touch it til full release but got bored waiting for a MMO to launch. And now I absolutely love the game, can't wait to see full release, which will add sooo much more to game. And not just ACt 2 and 3, but a lot of stuff withheld in from Act 1 apparently.