Gromnir

and you is an expert on how to do intelligently? expound. other than as a gold sink, components does little, and in a crpg you greatly increase the potential for frustration. missed the one guy who sells gauss rifle ammo/diamond dust? too bad. is stoopid... and if is balanced then such nonsense is unnecessary. am also not certain who you see claiming that high level mages were particular balanced in the bg series... not that such would change the imbalance o' da mages one bit. d&d high-level mages is overpowered. bioware creates their own rules from scratch and manages to achieve same flaw. congrats to the bioware developers. "as for SoC I was told how to do it by a friend" yeah, is what we thought. you not stumble into storm. HA! Good Fun!

yeah, it pretty much is... and is also a gold sink. cost 1 gold sovereign o' diamond dust to cast 4th tier spells. makes no less sense than 6 sovereigns for 10 backpack slots. d&d got wrong. fact that arch-magi were rare did not change fact that they were too powerful. why bioware replicated same mistakes is puzzling. most obvious problem: too many spells. the more spells you got, the tougher it is to balance. that should be obvious, but ain't. is not the majority o' spells that make d&d arch magi ultra-powerful, but is instead a small % of all such spells. and even if a spell initially seems balanced, is no way to predict how players will use in combination with the other thousand or so available spells in the d&d catalog. balance becomes functional impossible as you increase the number o' spells. also, the more spells you gots, the more likely the mage will be able to do... everything. high level d&d mages is combat typhoons who gots functional prescience through divination, can create or summon their own ultra-powerful defenders and can, if things get genuine tough, can heal self or transport to safety. fighters, on the other hand, can hack stuff to pieces. bio shoulda' reduced da spells or considerable reduced player access to spells from various schools... and shoulda' been smarter 'bout how they created and organized schools. dumb elemental crap is traditional, but is replicating same old mistakes as past. should look at spells as similar to any other combat power if you is wanting to keep balanced. HA! Good Fun!

is yet another example of how Gromnir were saying that the tactics o' da were overrated somewhat 'cause o' lack o' familiarity with rules. how many folk stumbled into storm o' the century their first time through game? need spell might, which gots two o' the most useless prerequisite spells in the game: mana drain and mana cleanse. spell might itself is largely a waste unless you use in combination with animate dead or blizzard + tempest. mana clash, on the other hand, is a very effective mage killer, but for most players it is a hard sell considering the largely ineffectual prereqs. am also recalling a whole bunch o' battles where the storm kinda spells were largely ineffectual-- flemmeth being the one boss battle exception. dunno if we would voluntarily build a mage as does boo, particularly playing nightmare, but we doubt most first-time players genuine pick the right spells for storm simply by reading in-game descriptions. as with the ie games, a large part of difficulty or ease is simply knowing which spells, equipment combinations, and character builds is the most efficacious. line between strategy and tactics is always a blurry one (and sometimes pointless) but for Gromnir at least, a second playthrough o' da were made easy not 'cause we knew what challenges lay ahead, but rather 'cause the mechanics o' da were less obscure with the benefit o' +50 hours o' trial and error. Gromnir's da guide: how to breeze through da on nightmare without even trying step 1) download the respec mod am not certain why the developers likes to build terrible joinable npcs, but wynne's 8-9 levels o' crap is easily fixable with the respec mod. a pc 2h warrior is an effective glass cannon, but npcs don't have the stats or abilities to be effective as such til late in game. with the benefits of respec, sten is a very effective sword and board or dual wielding warrior. wanna make the french chick or the poncey elf useful as rogues? respec. step 2) play as a mage mages is wacky overpowered, particular at high levels. the power imbalance becomes particularly noticeable to anybody who has played da more than once, as spell choices is less 'bout kewl and more 'bout power. according to feedback we got from biowarians, the toughest parties is 3 mages + 1 tank. you thinks that maybe that shoulda' clued the developers into the recognition of relative power o' mages compared to other classes? step 3) read any one o' the dozen or so faqs available that explain what builds is good, and which is bad. +50 hours o' trial and error is not the most time effective method for learning the intricacies of a rule system that is numbers dependent... but where the numbers is hidden from the player. figure out da weapon damage, attack frequency and likelihood o' hitting foe? for chrissakes, we have seen less complicated algorithms used to predict satellite trajectories on trips to one of saturn's moons than the numbers we has seen to explain da mechanics. d&d, for all it's faults, did not hide numbers from the player. before our ie sorcerer chose a fireball spell at level-up, we were knowing the range, damage potential, casting time and area effect o' a d&d fireball spell. no real mystery. da is different than da. petrify is more likely to "freeze" a foe than is cone of cold... and duration o' the petrification seems longer. force field works on even boss critters better than 50% o' time, even on nightmare, but crushing prison gets resisted far more frequent. ok, why? don't try and figure out da. save self time and read a faq that has high recommendations... mage faq being most important as mages have most choices available, and they will be your heavy-hitters. da system is strange. yeah, particularly if you rely on rogues and warriors, da requires considerable tactical sophistication to be successful... 'course you could have three mages and shale, all spamming area effect spells 'gainst foes you sees before they can sees you. HA! Good Fun!

am gonna apologize to Di and anybody else that we spoiled with our posts... am forgetting that many people have not played and our commentary is frequent spoilerish in nature. am genuine regretful that we has not been more careful.

Who are we to question? we has questioned many o' chrisA's choices and characters... why not this one? me2 would be an ideal place to do such a thing. a sequel is essentially guaranteed and your following is established. do at end of kotor2? perhaps not... especially in retrospect. without no kotor3 you would have eternal wails o' anguish. nevertheless, is there anybody that were honest satisfied with chrisA's kotor2 ending? horrible. maybe branding irons woulda' helped inspire something better than what we eventual got. HA! Good Fun! ps it is worth noting that chrisA's Winner ending didn't seem to help the franchise. no kotor3 in spite of somewhat silly ending.

Bingo. Seriously, it's what Bioware always has done. The fans just couldn't handle a depressing and devastating end. I know I couldn't. I don't play games to fail and die at the end. I'll leave that to real life. I play games to "do" things that matter in my little game universe, things that make me feel exhilarated, needed, valiant... and heroic. I don't want a game to mirror life; I want a game to give me an adventure I could never otherwise have, and I want the satisfaction of accomplishment when it's over. I'm glad BioWare doesn't do "emo" games. I'm well past the age where I want to wear black lipstick and get a skeleton tatooed on my ass. bio makes heroic stories for their games, and they is unapologetic 'bout it. they is also believing that the vast majority o' their customers want happily ever after. fine. even so, we thinks that bio missed a great opportunity with game 2. not only does we have less heroic sacrifice than in game 1, but there is no genuine cliff-hanger to build up anticipation for game 3. shepard always wins. virtual every hero story worth mentioning has the hero lose at some point, but not shepard... or any other crpg protagonist. is a flaw. end o' game 2 woulda' been the ideal spot to inject a little heroic failure into the mass effect epic, but bio predictably passed on such an option. *shrug* not need emo, but heroic ain't particular heroic if there ain't without obstacles and sacrifice. if the hero always wins the obstacles will seems small... and without sacrifice a hero is a bit cartoony, no? getting spaced and dying at the start o' the me2 story is a nice enough way to start, but the player ain't genuine part o' that, is he/she... is all happening remote and the emotional impact is relative small. have an empire strikes back ending for me2? why the heck not? the fans who not like such an ending would hardly boycott me3, and am betting you would get overwhelming positive critical feedback for breaking the typical crpg mold. in any event, is terrible that we see less sacrifice in me2 than we saw in me1... bio backsliding when they had an ideal opportunity to go to next step and possibly incorporate personal sacrifice. oh well. not need emo to be heroic... but heroic without loss and sacrifice? lame. HA! Good Fun! ps when we says "personal sacrifice" we ain't asking for player death. death is actual kinda easy. a minor but genuine personal disability v. permanent loss o' crew member? am betting that such a choice would makes more than a few folks stare blank at screen for a minute or two as they ponder the ramifications.

Yeah, I'm not saying all games should have those types of choices. I'm simply saying they're actually sensible things to invest resources into and for players to ask for - asking for the ability to forego the reason to play the main course isn't. agreed. as long as the initial motivation is plausible we not see a reason to quibble. honest, the jailbreak (for friendship or revenge) scenario for bg2 were more than a little wacky, but so what? da initial motivations did not include "I am moving to Kanada," but including would effective end the game. is reason why we don't get boo. to actual suggest that somehow bg2 is winning superiority points 'cause o' the initial motivation provided player seems... silly. HA! Good Fun!

we saw the image that supposed shows the illusive man on the collector base at end of game. *chuckle* utter nonsense. HA! Good Fun!

2 simple changes woulda' made me2 story much better. 1) you lose at the end of me2 imagine if after the fight with the hybrid thingie, you lose... "winning" simply gets you out of the collector base with your own arse, and most o' your team, intact. the reapers is on the way, and the collectors (or a reaper) manage to save the hybrid before you destroy it. am thinking that you would have created far more anticipation 'bout me3, and woulda' been a surprise ending for me2 such that people would talk 'bout for a Long time. 2) optimum success still requires sacrifice dunno. in me1 you gotta sacrifice kaiden or ashley, but the suicide mission v. collectors is ultimately w/o cost? what if choice were more significant in me2... 'least from a game pov? make shepard sacrifice self or crew member. to get his crew out of collector base shep chooses some minor, but real, permanent disability (health point loss or powhaz penalty or somesuch) that will carry over into me3, OR choose sacrifice o' crew member. would be very interested to see how many folks choose personal sacrifice over loss of teammate. regardless, add the aforementioned factors to end of me2 would go a long way towards increasing impact, no? HA! Good Fun!

"Arcanum allowed you to defy your own prophecy and join the bad guys. Fallout, too, allowed you to join the Master or defeat him." both o' the aforementioned games has strengths... story/writing weren't particular strong in either. you want story-driven And maximize player freedom/choice? okie dokie, but please keep in mind that play fantasy games and make fantasy games is different... unlike in games, there is no magic wands for developers/writers to achieve impossible results. "The BG games dont fall prey as much to pampering the PC, something (ab)used by Bio later. Yes you're special - but so are all your siblings." you is genuine making it difficult to take you serious. child o' a god... child o' DESTINY. sorry, am not even gonna go down that road with you. regardless, whether you likes silly bg2 motivation or not, am having a hard time seeing how you could argue that bg2 somehow gets points for the imoen jailbreak motivation when compared to da. am thinking that "personal" maybe ain't actually the word you is looking for, but in any event, da gives you a more adult and difficult starting point than does stock fantasy o' bg2. save the girl from the evil wizard? really? HA! Good Fun!

Jory did draw his sword first and lunges first. Greedo shot first! pre-edit, or after? when Gromnir were eight years o' age we were given some good advice by our grandfather regarding fights. some o' the white kids in town would give us a hard time... beat us up if adults weren't around. grandpa told us that waiting for some other kid to take the first swing didn't make us honorable... made us stoopid. "Hit them before they can hit you, and keep hitting until somebody forces you to stop. The guy who lands the first blow in a fist fight typically wins, but even if you do not land the first blow make sure you hurt the other guy as much as you can. Winning isn't as important as making sure that they never want to fight you again. Hurt the other guy a little and chances are he will leave you alone in the future, regardless of whether you won or lost the fight." have found that grandpa's advice is appropriate for more than just pre-teens getting into scrapes behind the A&P. HA! Good Fun!

am not having a problem with vinnie's review save that he is a bit of an idiot at times. he complains 'bout industry conventions, but he follows the review conventions 'don't he? *shrug* as with recent bioware games, da focuses a great deal o' developer and writer effort on character development. jnpc banter and stories and side-quests... critical path story in a bio crpg is frequent incidental. nevertheless, right or wrong, discuss characters not fit into one o' vinnie's pre-defined categories, so is hardly discussed. is scary that he don't seem to recognize that Plot does not equal Story... makes us a little wary o' his personal future efforts. am wondering if he played ps:t or motb... or any recent obsidian or bioware game. "And Oghren. Oghren?" haven't read the faq, but as much as we Loathe ohgren, we were hopeful to see him as a named returning jnpc for sequel or expansion. dwarf portions o' game were highlights, and have ohgren back is at least giving us hope for kal sharok or some other dwarven enclave. only thing better would be to have sten back, but the expansion does not seem like appropriate fodder for quinari. "Amen brother." see our response to wrath... works equal well. as mc notes, design o' bg2 were a bit o' a mess... and there were no way in hell we were gonna get bg2 scope for da. so, would you rather have had da force you down a single critical path sequence as did bg2? critical path were actual more linear than da... and we knows how you like to stay focused on critical path aspects. Gromnir is personally unimpressed with the non-sequential plot point approach, but compared to bg2 is an improvement. the difference is that bg2 had far more tangential and non-essential sub-quests for the player to "explore." however, if you do not such resources available... so, kotor replicates nwn design (kotor were hardly original) and many bio, obsidian and indie developers has likewise adopted the habit o' making plot points non-sequential so as to increase illusion o' freedom. 'course, if you has an alternative that don't include bg2 scope we is happy to listen. HA! Good Fun!

your blatant hypocrisy is... disturbing. HA! Good Fun!

*chuckle* depending on how much you choose to do before brynlaw, that is potential over 1/2 of the game. raison d'

am sorry, but anybody that thinks that the initial raison d'

"Why would you care about some vague Blight..." you did play through ostegar, right? is our recollection that you is pretty much compelled to complete ostegar... sees an ocean o' darkspawn overwhelm fellow grey wardens? learn immediately afterward that darkspawn can sense you. am knowing that folks confronted by a horrible reality can become willful obtuse, but your question pushes bounds o' plausibility. is nothing vague 'bought blight... not for the pc and allister. "Imoen is your closest friend. " says who? she were some annoying little brat that kept calling us buffleheaded right up until moment she were savagely killed by enormous spiders, gibberlings, wyverns, or a poorly aimed fireball... can't recall specifics other than that no matter how many times we played bg, imoen mysterious seemed to die immediately before we encountered quayle, coran, or alora. go figure. HA! Good Fun!

ammo powhaz didn't bother Gromnir. two more potential powers woulda' given purkake a chance to ignore ammo powers altogether if he wished, no? ... the thing is, without specific weapon skills am betting it was difficult to create six powers for the soldier. probable coulda' been a universal heal skill to improve unity... but instead they used upgrades to do so. fortification maybe? it appears to be a skill that would be appropriate for a soldier... although we would never choose after having played me2. "Sorry, but the RPG-ness of a game isn't determined by the combat system. " perhaps not, but we think it contributes. why is madden football not a rpg, in spite of fact that you functional choose stats and teams 'n such? is maybe due to fact that success or failure is ultimately determined by player skill rather than avatar skills. not matter how great tom brady's numbers is if the guy holding the gamepad has the manual dexterity o' a MS victim. crpg is usually the opposite, no? doesn't matter if the guy with the mouse /gamepad is complete weak and uncoordinated 'cause success or failure in combat is determined by his avatar's dexterity, strength and skills. HA! Good Fun!

uh huh. you see this as a strength of bg2? okie dokie. It boils down to this. I always role play an egoistical character that cares more about himself (and his immediate companions) than abstract notions such as saving the world. I can't identify with that sort of thing or any idea larger than the character I'm playing as. The character is always good towards others, but those that are "there and then". Vague concepts of common good don't interest him. BGII allows me to do that. I find it superior because of it. Torment allows me to do that as well. When I role play I want it to revolve around me . Petty? Perhaps, but everyone is entitled to his own role playing style. I think its much harder (and riskier) to pull off a personal plot. Torment did and look at how it ended up. Regardless if done well it scores major points with me. That's all there is to it. another common complaint of ps:t... people didn't want to play tno. is a crpg, and many peoples wanted/expected to play their own character. you not like tno or his story? tough. ps:t story worked in part 'cause it were having a relatively defined protagonist, but having a more concrete protagonist also alienated some folks. ... is a valid complaint. no recent major crpg has gone to extreme degree as did ps:t regarding protagonist definition, but mass effect and kotor are clearly games that is having a more fixed main character... in kotor you is revan, like it or not... and in me you is shephard. simple addition o' allowing gender and appearance choices seemed enough to placate the majority o' people who found the ps:t scheme unpalatable. of course the problem with creating such a story is that as a writer you is expected to develop a single story that works for a a very diverse and ambiguous protagonist. give player options to be kind or selfish, generous and greedy, and yet you gotta all makes work for a single story. tell any novelist that he gotta write a story wherein the protagonist is ambiguous and ill-defined and he will probable think you is kidding. 'course that is exact what crpg writers tries to do, 'cause that is what boo asks 'em to do. is far easier to do such if you distance story from the protagonist... make protagonist less essential. nevertheless, folks like boo keeps asking for antagonistic qualities: player choice and personal involvement. is an unavoidable dead end. is no wonder that folks is never genuine satisfied. personally, we thinks the personal involvement aspect is overrated. would rather have a good story wherein the players character is less focal, but give us greater choice to make personal and world changes. should be obvious that a writer can makes a much more compelling story if they has complete control over the important characters, if they is able to define the character. am willing to sacrifice some of the me, Me, ME if it results in a superior story and more player freedom. HA! Good Fun!

uh huh. you see this as a strength of bg2? okie dokie. and again, Gromnir were one o' the folks that liked ps:t, but we ain't foolish enough to ignore sales and feedback. can get good writing and w/o planescape wackiness. set planescape in a more familiar setting with elves and dwarves and it sudden would have been bad? make ravel a more traditional babba-yagga witch and lady of pain an enigmatic angel/demon, but keep all the nameless one angst and navel-gazing. has you really lost ps:t essence in so doing? *shrug* HA! Good Fun!

actually, we has heard numbers for ps:t in excess of 600k... but that not matter. sales during first two quarters following release is what publishers care 'bout, and ps:t sales during first two quarters following release were not what interplay had hoped to see from a major release. sell a million copies once you package with soul calibur and price at less than $10 per unit? *snort* expansions and sequels is virtual free money. if you don't do it is likely 'cause sales did not merit. as for plot... fantasy and sci-fi plot is almost invariably silly. is more than a few people who can criticize the highlander-esque bhaalspawn plots o' the bg games. biowarians beat on macbeth parallels in bg2 likes a drum, but virtual nobody got anyway... evil wizard goes mad with power and must be stopped 'lest unimaginable terribleness ensues. star wars became most popular movie franchise 'cause o' original plot? HA! is oldest story ever told... repackaged and put in space. heck, anime does reverse... lame recycled characters combined with wacky attempts at original plot = epic lame. oh, and da gets points for the andraste stuff. dump the traditional fantasy gods and instead adopt a faith-based religion is a step in right direction. once we hear folks talk of crpg plot we cannot help but begin to chuckle. plot is far less important than character. tolkien and guy kay and... nobody. "I'm not saying its Shakespeare but helping a friend or desiring personal power is a much more belivable motivation. Its also much more down to earth." more believable? am not sure on that score... seems similar. in da you got taint and darkspawn can sense you. a blight is coming... which means many darkspawn is coming and you and allister is now prime targets. am thinking Gromnir is probable pretty motivated to either fight or flee. no flee option... just as bg2 not give us an ignore option. in bg2 we can track down an uber-powerful wizard who is s'posed locked away in alcatraz. again, why exactly would we do so? he kicked our arse and the kiesters of a half dozen powerful wizards the last time we met. he is sharing a cell with imoen maybe? fine, hire a lawyer if you want to get her out... writ o' habeas corpus or somesuch, but we sure as heck ain't gonna break Into a wizards prison. as for our heritage? so what? we knows we is a child o' bhaal and eventually we is gonna have to higlander our way to demi/quasi godhood... or death. whoopie-ding on the big revelations from irenicus. HA! Good Fun!

am pretty sure that vol is one o' the only folks that thinks me2 utilizes a dumbed down version o' me1 combat. that being said, peek-a-boo combat does make many o' the me2 powers somewhat pointless. being out of cover gets you dead in 3 seconds or less... having shields, barriers or fortification get you an extra 1.5 seconds? also, while we personally thought the rock-paper-scissors shtick were a step forward for me2, we can sees how some folks were bothered. me2 were pushing the franchise increasingly towards the shooter end o' the rpg-shooter continuum we saw birthed in me1. am personally not a fan o' shooters, so we can understand the complaints 'bout me2 combat. the character generation and development options, while hardly dumb, is limited. only genuine important choices is class and bonus power... and class choice happens at level 1. no matter how many times we play an me2 infiltrator our character will has largely the same powhaz and will play exact the same. some rpg rules systems does make choice o' class the most important decision, but rare does they make class choice the only important choice... 29 subsequent levels o' illusory or pointless choices. is bad design... for an rpg. story... me1 were space opera. me2 were magnificent seven/seven samurai.... with additional loyalty quests and n7 missions. honestly, we likes westerns as 'posed to space opera, but bio didn't build me2 the way we would expect from a western. bioware didn't thinks they needed a compelling villain in me2. the collectors were enigmatic puppets o' the even more remote and enigmatic reapers. were maybe 'sposed to be spooky, kinda likes system shock 2? dunno. didn't ever feels genuine scary. regardless, is tough to feels emotional build-up if you ain't gotta a target for the fear or anger or anxiety or... whatever. me2 climax were anti-climax, due in large part to the absence o' a compelling villain. also, if the magnificent 7 characters were as angsty and broken as the normandy crew, we woulda' been rooting for the bandits to win. me2 went too hard for Pathos. also, am thinking that story were focused too much on recruitment and loyalty, and not enough critical path. collectors felt almost like an afterthought. perhaps the me2 writers coulda' worked in some collector aspect into many/most/all of the loyalty missions... woulda' made the link to collectors stronger and woulda' strengthened story as a whole as seemingly unrelated story aspects woulda' been shown to have connections. me2 story weren't bad, but a western (kurosawa modeled seven samurai on american westerns) needs intriguing villains and compelling heroes. me2 were missing the villains, and the heroes were more like a collection o' guests for dr. phil than seven samurai. more weapons. more armour. lack o' customization o' character were exacerbated by lack o' ability to customize gear. not need wacky extreme o' me1 with a bazillion varieties o' ammo and armour upgrades, but we were genuine disappointed by lack o' customization options for gear. again, our infiltrator shepard will probable look much the same as enoch's or numbers... though not vol's... 'cause vol is nutty. me2 got rid of mako (huzzah!) and replaced with planet scan (damn!) planet scan... sucks. takes approx five minutes to do a single planet scan on xbox. takes 5-10 minutes to do a typical n7 mission. spent more time doing planet scans than optional planet side missions? that is so wrong. is a fun game that we will play again... probable a few times. HA! Good Fun!

Which fans? What's wrong with Torment's setting? I'd think the lack of elves and dwarves an advantage. *chuckle* you is kidding, right? ps:t sales sucked. frequent complaint on ps:t boards were regarding lack o' familiar d&d races and disappointment with alien setting. fact that boo and Gromnir liked ps:t setting mean nothing if ps:t sales were bad. takes genuine dumb developer to ignore mistakes of past. if you honest believes that lack of elves and dwarves is a good thing, and you wanna criticize bio for using such stuff, then you is clearly arguing from a position o' ignorance. ps:t is Gromnir's favorite game... am not thinking it is the best crpg we ever played, but it is our favorite. even so, there is reasons it not get no sequel or expansion. "I hope you don't presume me so clueless that after having played so many RPG's I can't formulate my own opinion. " if you says so... am simply observing that the complaints you shared before playing is complaints you share now. would be silly to complete ignore the mirroring. HA! Good Fun!

go after irenicus 'cause he tortured you? is even less convincing. let him rot in spellhold, and if he ever gets out... well, we can always move to kanada. as for bg2 openness... depends on what you mean. is some games, such as fallout3, that got a big map with near infinite encounters. bg2, on the other hand, had actual stuff worth doing. argue if you will, but scope is as yet unparalleled. as for da ogres and orcs/darkspawn... the argument is not that they is d&d rip-offs, but rather that they is lotr rip-offs. is a valid arguemtn, but so what? da also has elves and dwarves. da setting were not trying for genuine original. heck, Gromnir cautioned 'em 'gainst complete original. biowarians saw fan reaction to ps:t setting. too alien... too unfamiliar... no dawrves or elves. fact that da uses lotr ogres and orcs ain't bad... save that the biowarians not realize that they gave their darkspawn a similar genesis as tolkien orcs. gaider honest thought he were adding a new twist... which is kinda funny. and yeah, codexians, as a whole, is far more willing to criticize toee now than they were when it original were released. HA! Good Fun!

you ain't scoring points with that observation. is not difficult to show that character build o' a combat character in bg2 were largely irrelevant. how you equipped character were far more important in determining efficacy in combat. that is Not a good thing. the fact that da distanced itself from such nonsense is a good thing. HA! Good Fun!

am gonna disagree 'bout the fun and options. YOU is the guy telling us that simply have six as opposed to four members in party is more fun 'cause of increased tactical options. *chuckle* well guess what? your da rogue has triple the options o' the bg2 rogue... regardless o' kits. as we already admitted, da has fewer critters. is first game and has Many monsters, but compared to bg2, a game that used models from bg1, totsc, and iwd, da did not have the vast array o' critters and we concede that compared to bg2 this might increase feel o' grindy. as already discussed, da also had Loads more spells. have more spells does increase options... but also leads to many o' the bg2 balance issues. we already noted that hand-painted tile sets is more varied in bg2. fine. is 2010. we trade handpainted backgrounds for the advantages o' 3d. at this point does anybody genuine wish to go back to 2d? yeah, when nwn were first released we agreed that 2d were superior to what nwn achieved with 3d... but now, in 2010? *snort* bad story? dunno. we thinks story were just fine... up to landsmeet. bg2 were schizophrenic. we thinks biowarians did a pretty good job, but they never seemed to be able to figure out if bhaalspawn or irenicus were focus o' the bg2 story, and as the bhaalspawn were necessarily a lame focus (as it had to be vague enough for a wide range of player styles) the main bg2 story suffered. bg2 story were still pretty good... even though the entire initial premise is weak: save imoen from clutches o' an evil wizard, why? da, on the other hand, is a story 'bout characters... which is a good thing. bio figured out, after some years, that what makes game story memorable is the characters... best villain and favorite character lists is ubiquitous for a reason. bg2 had some excellent characters (not limiting self to jnpcs). for the most part, the characters were better in da. problem we had were with the wtf moments and the lack o' a compelling villain for da. even so, if da felt grindy 'cause you didn't buy into the story then we can't really argue... is 100% opinion. as for gaps between grind... sure, as noted already, bg2 were unique in its openness (non-linearity is a fallacious descriptor as the critical path, as is all story-driven crpgs, very linear) is unparalleled and unlikely to be replicated anytime soon. was there non-combat stuff to do in da? yeah, loads o' such stuff were available. am recalling that mc mentioned his frequent use o' the brothel, and Gromnir spent considerable time chatting up fellow party mates in camp; although we Loathe the gift aspect that were added to da. on the positive side, da didn't have as much o' the fluffy fed-ex nonsense that always manages to find its way into crpgs. find Dinglewert's lost dagger or Wilmaneras's necklace? who decided that such stuff makes a crpg better? am not gonna convince boo. am noticing that his complaints is largely same as the ones he had Before he played da... based on feedback from others we s'pose. makes seem likes he went in with preconceptions and confirmed those preconceptions. *chuckle* am recalling when toee were first released and the codexians near universal applauded cain's efforts... 'cause they felt they had to? years later we gets a more honest assessment, but we has learned to never underestimate the impact o' preconceptions and initial bias. HA! Good Fun!