Arcanum vs Baldur's Gate 2 (including ToB)?

I am not going to read all 8 pages of this discussion, so i might be repeating what someone else said, but...

BG2 is a better game because of storyline, complete control of 6 characters, the adapted turn-based or real-time combat, with optional pauses, and the many character types available.

The fact that it is linear doesn't bother me cuz just about all games are, if they have a worthwhile plot, and even Arcanum is linear.

The problems with BG2 are that it doesn't have quite as many changes and options besides initial character arbitration and few options in level ups, however, it is based on a different rule-system than Arcanum and i like it better with organized classes, rather than a guess-work free-for-all character arbitration, like in Arcanum.

The best part about BG2 i think is how it doesn't run really slow on my computer, and how i think everything looks better than in Arcanum.

Also, equipping was much much easier, and not having to deal with repair makes it less realistic, but more fun, since repairing in Arcanum takes a half-hour for 5 characters.

 

Why can't you just let this thread die!?!

 

Have you even finished/played arcanum at all?

 

i haven't... and i've had it for almost two months... stupid bugs/mistakes/bad character path choices/corrupted savegame files...

 

That number of people being in a party is base on the leader charasm is one rele that I and alots of other DM 's are guiety of breaking. I than running than party of six people as there are 6 people in the group we run cross than fighter being held prinos than we free him he join our party on than temp basely. We run across more prionser than we free them and they join our party on than temp basely. We free 20 of then than the rule said base on charasen our leader can have only 5 follower. Which is dunber the rules of the DM 's who ran the game.
Part of the art of being than DM's or computer gamer designer is when you
need to break dumb rules that make no sense at the time.

 

There seems to be a lot of gravedigging recently...

 

I enjoyed BG2 immensely, but I am quite impressed with Arcanum so far. I have just started the game, and I really like the the setting where technology and magic at precarious odds. BG2 has better graphics and less slowdowns plus it is almost without any bugs. It is a very polished game, to be sure, but I did not like its storyline much.

I have to say that I prefer Arcanum a bit more than BG2, but both are very good games. Since I started playing PC RPGs since Fallout 1 and 2, I am excited to see that SPECIAL system being used again to good use.

But the best RPG that I played so far is Planescape: Torment. That game really had one heck of a story.

 

Arcanum doesn't use the SPECIAL system...unless, you're talking about Lionheart, in which case, make your point clearer.

Also, does CharlesBHoff exist solely to graverob the oldest, most pointless threads he can find just to post the most pointless, irrelevant information he can find? If people want BG information, they can visit a BG site for fuck's sake! The fact that his posts are also useless and unreadable just add's to the fruitlessness of it all. The threads have existed for so long that people either have moved on or already found the information they need.

Jinxed, why don't you give him a graverobber avatar?

 

Who is Fuck and why is his (or her) well-being so important?


*runs for cover*

 

To take than penciel and paper roleplaying game than bring it sucressful to compuer role playing game might mean some rules for the games might have to be change. BG2 didnot follow the rule in P&P game that than Elf maximum level as than frighter if strengh less than 16 or 16 was 5th level if 17 stenght 6th level if strenght 18 or more 7th level. Many DM disnot follow that rule. When SSI have to make their AD&D games their have to follow that
rule blindly. When Bioware and Black Isle make their AD&D game they drop that rule to make their game better. When Wizard of Coast remake AD&D into D&D 4th edition there was than D&D 1st edition way before 1st edition AD&D their drop that rule as it service no useful reason.

 

4th Edition? As far as I'm aware, the latest edition is 3rd, but that could just be for computer game licenses.

 

Just no respond to this thread. Just let it die nice and slowly. As for that necromancer charles don't care about him.

 

I was playing 1st edition D&D since 1977 so I know what I an talking about. It was the game that Gary Gygax want so badly to disown . The note to the
DN on how to be than DN was only two or three page long at most. The rules where very loose than the DN and the players where able to have house rules than has more freendom in style of play. Gary Gygax was worry that one univ there where three D&D playing group that didnot talk to each other
as their play three different stlyles of playing. So he went about trying to control the game and DM by makeing strickly rule that make no realy sence at all. The co-creature of the D&D 1st edition said Gary Gygax you worry too muck about the three player groups at that univ not talking to each other .