[PS2] BG: Dark Alliance II stinks, Norrath better?

[Rolf N]

Everyone agrees I'm a hopeless Sony fanperson. So it comes as no surprise that I recently bought my second and third PS2 games, after FF X, and those were Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance II and God Of War. Nothing needs to be said about God Of War, besides: bliss.

But the same is not so true for BGDA2 unfortunately. I'm not going to finish it, it's just not my taste. I never do multiplayer things btw, so it won't help if "that's what I should do" to appreciate the game more. It's going the way of EBay (<= make sure it rhymes when you say that).

I bought it because I'm a weathered RPG veteran and also have a dark side which loves Diablo 2 to death for its sheer gameplay merits. I was hoping BGDA would satisfy at least one of these sides, in fact I remember it being mentioned in a generic "recommend me some RPGs" thread, but the problem is: I know Norrath was mentioned as well. I just can't remember which one was supposed to be better.

IOW if I mislike BGDA2, find it bland, generic, uninspired and irrelevant (as a singleplayer game, don't forget) ... is there any hope that I could enjoy Champions of Norrath?

For reference I shoul probably mention that I enjoyed the Neverwinter Nights base singleplayer campaign enough to finish it, but not much more. Didn't care to finish the first Baldur's Gate for PC. Did finish Planescape: Torment and thought it was outstanding. If that tells you anything.

Of course if there are more quality western RPGs for PS2, I'm all ears.

 

[Bobbler]

The EQ games are rather fun, I can't say I'm a huge fan, but they are solid Diablo clones for consoles. You may find the CoN games sort of boring though, as it seemed to me it was more about farming shit and lvl'ing up than having a compelling story (although I'd say Diablo was the same way, as much as I loved those games).

You only have 3 games? There's a whole slew of other games you're missing before you should worry about finding a compelling Diablo clone, if you ask me!

 

[Rolf N]

The EQ games are rather fun, I can't say I'm a huge fan, but they are solid Diablo clones for consoles. You may find the CoN games sort of boring though, as it seemed to me it was more about farming shit and lvl'ing up than having a compelling story (although I'd say Diablo was the same way, as much as I loved those games).

Thanks, will search. I just found two entries on Metacritics, one was an online game and the other is Champions of Norrath: Realms of Everquest. Confused me a bit

You only have 3 games? There's a whole slew of other games you're missing before you should worry about finding a compelling Diablo clone, if you ask me!

I'm a little tied up atm and I have other systems to play on. I don't really need many more games, but I try to keep myself informed of what I have missed. I actually have a written list

I just wanted to cover the Diablo clone now because something like that is very useful for "bursty" gameplay sessions. That's what I do usually.

In fact I have a strictly single-player lvl 84 Paladin in Act 3 on "hell" difficulty and still play the guy, it's just that I'm really starting to feel silly playing Diablo 2. Not because it's not fun but because it's so old and I've seen it all a million times.

 

[Arwin]

Norrath is the true successor to the original Dark Alliance 'hack 'n slash' on the PS2. Norrath is huge, and beautiful. I enjoyed the game purely for its graphical bliss. The way that tens of arrows can be shot into a big bear-like creature and then stick there in full 3D is something in that game I will never forget. Like God of War, I could hardly believe that the PS2 could squeeze this out ...

But it is true, both BGDA and Norrath benefit strongly from multiplayer (multi-tap primarily, for online play Norrath 2 is probably better than 1). Even in the original BGDA it was just a lot more fun to combine the dwarf with a shield, with a fire-boosting sorceress.

Still, Norrath keeps impressing even if by virtue of the near-unlimited wardrobe and armory alone ...

 

[3dcgi]

I bought CoN a while back and never finished it. I don't know if the game wasn't good or if I just got tired of that type of game. IMO BGDA 1 > BGDA 2 > CoN 1

Is there a reason you bought BGDA 2 and not 1?

 

[Rolf N]

I bought CoN a while back and never finished it. I don't know if the game wasn't good or if I just got tired of that type of game. IMO BGDA 1 > BGDA 2 > CoN 1

Is there a reason you bought BGDA 2 and not 1?

I was shopping and it just sat there, for a price that seemed reasonable (20€). I thought I had read somewhere that it was worth playing and picked it up.
I wasn't well enough informed to know that I should have looked for the first part instead.

 

[Serenity Painted Death]

CoN and its sequel RTA (Champions: Return to Arms) are the best hack-n-slash out there for consoles.

I'm in the minority and actually like RTA more... it has better level design, better level progression, cooler enemies, more levels/items/whatever...

However, it does feel like more of just an expansion pack to CoN, which is fine by me.

Some words of advice:

You can't exploit RTA nearly as badly as CoN.

Experience gains are out of whack in RTA. You get insane amounts. especially from the last boss who is farmable. It takes an hour or less to get to level 80 killing him on Champion (which you have to beat to Unlock Legendary which you have to beat to unlock Epic... no way should he be giving a fourth of a level or so at level 75+)

DO NOT PLAY A BARBARIAN. They are walking gods of destruction with certain skills and a halfway decent weapon (skill that boost damage 3x, skill that virtually guarantees you critical hit, which means another 2.5-3x damage... skill that boosts damage 2x again... all active at once). I can one-shot the final bosses of the game on the most extreme difficulty. This isn't fun or novel. It isn't even hard to achieve this level of insanity. Play something else (but not a Wizard, they're terrible, especially in single player).

Some of the abilities, like the critical hit, are toned down in RTA, but not really. The percentage is lower, but you still crit almost every hit (especially with a crit enchantment on your weapon)... and the timers are like fourthed on two of the abilities (one of them is an active weapon attack). But you're still a complete god. It is simply disgraceful how much better the Barbarian class is than all the others. They're worthless in comparison.

I do find myself kind of tired of the genre though... its all the same really, but if you're just getting into it or looking to sink some time into something, the Norrath games are certainly a good way to do it.

(though I really liked BG: DA... but I have really low standards when it comes to games like this... I also played it on Xbox... necromancer is too fun)

And before I forget... I'd also like to plug the graphics for the Norrath games. WOW!

Hopefully they'll do a game on PS3 (and tone down Barbarians... and give us interchangeable race/class combos... and more classes... and... and...)

 

[Ty]

Hopefully they'll do a game on PS3 (and tone down Barbarians... and give us interchangeable race/class combos... and more classes... and... and...)

The PS3 UL is VERY different than previous incarnations. Gone is mindless button mashing. Now you have to pay close attention to your attacks/combos and what the enemy can do in terms of fighting back.

 

[Serenity Painted Death]

I haven't played the PSP Untold Legends game, but I am a sucker for Hack-N-Slash (though it is getting a bit old perhaps)...

Even though UL looks, well, uninspiring, at least compared to most other games, I'm still excited for a "next-gen" dungeon crawler. Hopefully it will at least be a fun game.

 

[Guden Oden]

I found champs of norrath to be repetitive and boring, drops to be a joke and difficulty out of whack for some classes. On the easiest setting, pretty much everything that drops is complete shite even at the end of the game. On the next harder setting, some player classes crumple into a heap after a mere two or three enemy hits. On the second god damn level of the game!

Multiplayer is also screwed up, all experience seems to go exclusively to the player that killed the monster, causing an ever-widening level gap (and hence frustration) for the other player who isn't leveling as fast, an thus isn't gaining new skills, and thus doing even less damage and kills meaning less experience gained leading to even greater level gap and so on in a vicious circle without end.

 

[Moonblade]

For reference I shoul probably mention that I enjoyed the Neverwinter Nights base singleplayer campaign enough to finish it, but not much more. Didn't care to finish the first Baldur's Gate for PC. Did finish Planescape: Torment and thought it was outstanding. If that tells you anything.

Of course if there are more quality western RPGs for PS2, I'm all ears.

Hmm you're a difficult gamer.

From what I understand, you don't really like basic hack&slash gameplay unless it's diablo 2. But you didn't like ol' hardcore baldur's gate (PC) either.
So my guess is you need something lineair with a nice story.

You can try champions of norrath but I can't garantee you'll like it. Still, I think it's the best option on PS2.

Imo Champions of Norrath > BGDA > BGDA2

 

[Rolf N]

Hmm you're a difficult gamer.

From what I understand, you don't really like basic hack&slash gameplay unless it's diablo 2. But you didn't like ol' hardcore baldur's gate (PC) either.

BG just didn't pull me in in any way. Plus the strict AD&D system has never been the best of ideas IMO, especially in the spellcasting department which you can't feasibly avoid in BG. Honestly I don't understand what's so hardcore about BG. It doesn't have that hardcore appeal to me (like, say, Wizardry 7).

Diablo 2 just has the gameplay mechanics nailed to the spot. Progression is there even for very high-level chars, controls are perfect, it actually takes skill to go anywhere and survive, and it's a great challenge. Rules of encounter change frequently so it never lets a routine settle in totally. It simply never feels "Duh! I click them all dead!", and if it does it is because you backtracked a looong way and fight stuff you really shouldn't be fighting.

It's a really good game.
*shrugs*

So my guess is you need something lineair with a nice story.

Yep.

You can try champions of norrath but I can't garantee you'll like it. Still, I think it's the best option on PS2.

Imo Champions of Norrath > BGDA > BGDA2

Ooookay. Thanks
I figure I should probably rent it first to check it out.

 

[cthellis42]

I don't really count things like BGDA or CoN or any Diablo-style games as "RPG" in general, really, western or not. They're there for fun and action and funky active comboing and quick levelling/skilling and not really giving a rat's patoot about levelling.

The CoN's were fun enough, but did have some issues between them and the BGDA's. They tend to be multiplayer faults, though, so you may not care. One is lacking of a gold "pool" to play with instead of having to "pick up gold" easily and pass cash around later to let people purchase good things for them when you get to them. Another was the relative uselessness of a healer class trying to heal OTHERS for a good portion of the game (a good 9-10 levels) and even after that trying to actually use it tactically. (They turn into short-radius heals, rather than distance-targetted ones.) It just really messes up the ability to properly coordinate and combo, and reinforces the potion-dependency I DON'T like about these style of games.

But the story is fun, the environments are divergent, and the enemies are different enough and can be pretty challenging, so it's worth giving it a go. They're also damn pretty, and give you more customization than you might be used to.

If you're only playing it by yourself, I give it two thumbs up. If not, I give it one with a shakey "you may get tired of the issues before the end."

One thing these games NEVER EVER do well is multiplayer balance, which sucks because I really consider them co-op titles first and foremost. There are few-enough co-op titles out there as it is, let alone well-built ones. These keep tricking me into THINKING they're built for it.

<sigh>

 

[Shifty Geezer]

CON is a hack n slash. It's like Gauntlet, not Diablo, and involves lots of mindless button mashing. It's more a case of kill things, get experience, level up, find loot, adventure, and the getting new things is key to whether you'll enjoy it or not. Some people find it terribly dull, while some people love it. It's a genre taste thing. If you don't like hack-n-slash, there's no point buying any of these games!

If you do want a hack-n-slash, if you haven't bought and played CON, the sequel RTA would perhaps be a better choice. It fixes some of the problems of CON and adds a couple of classes. As I played CON through far too many times, RTA was too much of the same thing for me to appreciate.

Graphically CON is fantastic. Everytime I've booted it up, there's been moments I've just that to myself 'dang, this game looks good!' In terms of quality, it excels on everything. There are a few issues with loading though, as the original uses a dual layer DVD. That's why RTA might be a better choice. It's also good for playing with friends/spouses/partners. A lot of couples and families have found romping around mashing monsters to be a way they can share the game. There's precious few games that allow such playing together on a single console.

I'll say that I've played BGDA 1, 2 CON and RTA, and BGDA2 I felt bland and uninteresting. It had a very different character in the necromancer but he was stupidly overpowered. The graphics and ambience in that game was just weak. CON has a much richer feel.

If you like the arcade action, RTA would be my recommendation. If you like the more RPGness, this genre probably isn't for you. I don't know that anyone has created an action based ADnD effectively yet. I don't class mouse-control in that. I want games with shoot and hit and magic buttons that respond in realtime, but with the depth of characters like full on ADnD and proper stories to boot. At the moment you either have mouse based RPGs on PC, fantasy bashers like CON or Dungeon Seige, or turn based RPGs.

I'll add that the action element can be improved greatly in CON by refusing to just quaff health potions to stay alive (I kept no more than 5 in my inventory and very rarely used them) and also, after completing the game once and opening up the harder levels (an annoying way to add longevity to the game - have the player spend 20 hours just unlocking the harder levels!), start a level 1 character on the hardest setting. You have to play a lot more tactically, using block and retreat for starters. It may take an hour and a half to kill your first goblin, but you level very quickly. Makes the game much more of a challenge and thus more fun.

 

[Serenity Painted Death]

Ysuran is perfect! I'll not hear one bad thing said about him.

Overpowered? Psshaw!

He single-handedly saved that game.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

He was wonderfully original, and I agree he saved that game. But you could take a Level 1 Ysuran into the hardest mode, kill one Goblin, buy a pet, and the rest of the game was a doddle! The dwarf was also a little more interesting than most action game characters, but the Ransack dictated your play style. It was always the way that you'd rush in and bash monsters to get loot, thereby mitigating any point to ranged attacks. BGDA2 had some nice ideas, but it was a drop in quality from BGDA1 and didn't have the upgrades of CON. I'd like these sorts of games with more variety though. You NEVER get an illusionist in such games. I guess the AI has never been there to manipulate mobs with such magic

 

[Serenity Painted Death]

Well, more classes/variety is always nice, and it is something that developers need to work on in the future (as well as actually making them play DISTINCTLY different, something that some of the classes in the Norrath games kind of have trouble with). I'm sad to see that UL will only have three classes... they can do better than that. Though if they're well balanced and play really really differently, then I suppose I can live with it.

 

[Synergy34]

Wasn't The Bards Tale the same type of gameplay as CoN etc...? Anyone play that?

 

[Serenity Painted Death]

Wasn't The Bards Tale the same type of gameplay as CoN etc...? Anyone play that?

More of a traditional WRPG I believe...

I've been meaning to play it, but I can only ever find it on PS2... I'd much prefer the Xbox version if I'm going to play it.

(supposed to be hilarious too, which is the main point of the game)

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Wasn't The Bards Tale the same type of gameplay as CoN etc...? Anyone play that?

It's actually the same SnowBlind engine. You only play the one character, and it's centered on Summons. Looks very nice, plays a little differently with a lot more humour (very absent in modern games), but it had some problems. I actually started it twice as half-way through there's an area you could get to, only if you miss your chance, it's lost to you. BUT the game was such that I missed getting there on the second attempt too, and couldn't be bothered to try again! BT also lacks the replayability of the others, only having one character and being strong on story and characters, which means play it once and you get the full experience, the second play is just a rerun. If you don't mind that, and prefer story and humour over monster mashing, it's a recommendation.

I'll also add that AFAIK there's no difference between the console versions. Both come with supersampling antialiasing and run at a stable high framerate (30fps I think). I don't know of any advantages of teh XB version.