Just wanted to say that I agree almost entirely with this assessment, and I preferred BG1 over BG2 for many of the reasons outlined above by the OP. I consider BG1 ToSC the stronger game overall, even if BG2 seems to get most of the plaudits.
I also found NWN 2002 to be largely a disappointment, despite enjoying the toolset and the DM client, and participating in a number of persistent worlds. I liked 3rd edition well enough, I just didn't like the NWN gameplay (with its focus on the Single Character and henchmen), and I found each of the official modules pretty lackluster. Even Mask of the Betrayer, which everyone seemed to like. Still not that great in my estimation, though maybe that's my preference for lower level campaigns talking.
NWN 2002 seemed to be responding directly to the popularity of Everquest, and basically copied Everquest's FPS solo-style approach to a driving cam 3D RPG, rather than continuing in the BG/IWD Infinity full party iso tradition. They marketed it like a continuation, even suggesting that we'd be able to export/import our BG characters to NWN, but obviously that never materialized. In the end the gameplay and the whole approach to module design just departed way too markedly from its predecessors to be considered a continuation. That was unfortunate because Baldur's Gate with a 3d style toolset to build environments and create modules for endless interconnected adventures would have been fantastic.
Last edited by Black_Elk; 02/08/21 06:29 AM.
