Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Did anyone get bored playing BG2?

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
May 6, 2004 4:54:21 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.baldurs-gate (More info?)

I've already moved on to NWN because I'm excited about 3rd ed. rules
(which I prefer), and having to worry about only one character. Also, I
like how you can download separate modules and each is a different game
that you can make different characters with.

I found that I was getting somewhat bored with BG2 during chapter 5. At
this point, the the structure of the game started to seem a little to
transparent to me. What I mean is, I felt like the designers were doing
all they could just to keep me in the Underdark longer. Do this quest,
now go meet this person, wait you aren't done yet, go here now and do this.

Not to mention that I was already a little soured about losing Imoen for
so long and feeling rushed to get her back. In many ways, I think BG1 is
a better game because it is much more open for you to do anything and go
anywhere. Even if you wanted to start BG2 again, you'd have to go
through chapter 1 each time. And if you wanted Imoen, you'd have to go
through chapters 4 and 5 before returning to the mainland. I find that
annoying. What's funny is I used to be used to games that were very
structured and each level was separate from another, but after playing
games like Morrowind and BG1, I find BG2 a little restrictive, despite
the fact that it is billed as 'epic' and 'nonlinear.'

Oh well, that's just my little rant, although I'm interested in hearing
others' opinions about how they think BG1/2 compare to one another, etc.

More about : bored playing bg2

May 6, 2004 6:37:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.baldurs-gate (More info?)

The Baldurs' Gate series has always been my favourite computer game series.
I've played BG1 once (though I never got TotSC, unfortunately), and BG2 +
ToB twice. I am planning to play through the entire series (probably with
the help of Tutu) in the immediate future. The only reason I haven't started
playing it again is because I finally got my hands on a copy of Planescape,
which is quickly becoming my new favourite game.

That all being said, I can't play BG more than once every year or so,
because it gets boring otherwise. That could be, however, because of the
fact that the game core remains the same; all the mods and stuff that I've
downloaded for this runthrough ought to make for a different experience that
I'm looking forward to.

"John Salerno" <johnjsalNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:409a6dc0$0$2988$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
> I've already moved on to NWN because I'm excited about 3rd ed. rules
> (which I prefer), and having to worry about only one character. Also, I
> like how you can download separate modules and each is a different game
> that you can make different characters with.
>
> I found that I was getting somewhat bored with BG2 during chapter 5. At
> this point, the the structure of the game started to seem a little to
> transparent to me. What I mean is, I felt like the designers were doing
> all they could just to keep me in the Underdark longer. Do this quest,
> now go meet this person, wait you aren't done yet, go here now and do
this.
>
> Not to mention that I was already a little soured about losing Imoen for
> so long and feeling rushed to get her back. In many ways, I think BG1 is
> a better game because it is much more open for you to do anything and go
> anywhere. Even if you wanted to start BG2 again, you'd have to go
> through chapter 1 each time. And if you wanted Imoen, you'd have to go
> through chapters 4 and 5 before returning to the mainland. I find that
> annoying. What's funny is I used to be used to games that were very
> structured and each level was separate from another, but after playing
> games like Morrowind and BG1, I find BG2 a little restrictive, despite
> the fact that it is billed as 'epic' and 'nonlinear.'
>
> Oh well, that's just my little rant, although I'm interested in hearing
> others' opinions about how they think BG1/2 compare to one another, etc.
Anonymous
May 7, 2004 2:38:02 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.baldurs-gate (More info?)

"John Salerno" <johnjsalNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:409a6dc0$0$2988$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
> I've already moved on to NWN because I'm excited about 3rd ed. rules
> (which I prefer), and having to worry about only one character. Also, I
> like how you can download separate modules and each is a different game
> that you can make different characters with.
>
> I found that I was getting somewhat bored with BG2 during chapter 5. At
> this point, the the structure of the game started to seem a little to
> transparent to me. What I mean is, I felt like the designers were doing
> all they could just to keep me in the Underdark longer. Do this quest,
> now go meet this person, wait you aren't done yet, go here now and do
this.
>
> Not to mention that I was already a little soured about losing Imoen for
> so long and feeling rushed to get her back. In many ways, I think BG1 is
> a better game because it is much more open for you to do anything and go
> anywhere. Even if you wanted to start BG2 again, you'd have to go
> through chapter 1 each time. And if you wanted Imoen, you'd have to go
> through chapters 4 and 5 before returning to the mainland. I find that
> annoying. What's funny is I used to be used to games that were very
> structured and each level was separate from another, but after playing
> games like Morrowind and BG1, I find BG2 a little restrictive, despite
> the fact that it is billed as 'epic' and 'nonlinear.'

RCV: I have to disagree totally. BG 1 is no different, in general
terms, from BG 2. You have to do the chapters in order, you have to do the
mines before you can get the info about the bandit camp, you have to do the
bandit camp before you do the second mines, etc, etc.
In addition, there are a LOT more "real" sub-quests in BG 2 than in BG
1, where so many of the sub-quests are tiny, go there, get this, come
back-type. But since one doesn't "have" to do any of the sub-quests in
either, its the player's choice if they end up feeling that they have been
"led by the hand".

In BG 2, they have tried to increase the intensity of the game by having
the Imoen situation make the player feel like they have a time constraint,
in a manner other than simply placing a time limit on the quest. After all,
you can choose to do all the pre-chapter 6 surface quests BEFORE you get
Imoen back if you want, or you can try to rush off as quickly as possible to
rescue her. I find this very effective since it is something like
role-playing, RATHER than a game mandated time limit, that is the motivator
for what you choose to do.

Its the same thing in the Underdark really - you do a few mandated
quests [as with any area] and you choose how much to get out of the area.
Since you have Imoen back with you, its a very good opportunity to advance
her a few levels since there is so much XP and treasure to get down there.
Between the temple in the Sahuagin City and the shops in the Underdark, she
should find enough scrolls alone to raise a level.... Besides, you DO want
all those components for the big items, and the bag of holding, etc, as
quickly as possible, right?

In the final analysis, both games are basically linear - they have to be
really IF you want a story to go along with the spell casting and monster
sluaghtering. Something has to move you from point A to point B and if the
game was less linear, then people would be complaining about how much
treasure and game play they missed out on by not going to point C, cause
they didn't *have* to go to point C..... BUT, that being said, neither game
leads you by the nose t get things done and certainly the progression of
events is logical and straightforward. You are either going to Brynnlaw to
find Imoen, or to seek out Irenicus, but one way or another you have to go
there for the story to proceed. But the game is very non-linear in the
wealth of choices you have concerning when and how you do about 90% of the
game.....

Everyone is different I guess, but I can't imagine getting bored with BG
2 - I have been playing it since the day it came out and haven't gotten
bored with it yet. I've even finished it once or twice... lafffs.... but I
don't see finishing it as really being a very important part of the
experience. Considering that one can do so many different things, in so
many different ways or at different times, and in different orders, with
different PCs and different mixes of NPCs, I find the re-play value to be
very solid and boredom during play to be non-existent - for me anyway. And
all that without putting on any great number of mods. I had such trouble
with a few mods that I was soured on mods in general, but the game, never.

Rich
Related resources
Anonymous
May 7, 2004 2:38:03 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.baldurs-gate (More info?)

Rich C. Velay wrote:

> RCV: I have to disagree totally. BG 1 is no different, in general
> terms, from BG 2. You have to do the chapters in order, you have to do the
> mines before you can get the info about the bandit camp, you have to do the
> bandit camp before you do the second mines, etc, etc.

Basically, what I mean is, once you leave Candlekeep, you are free to do
what you want wherever you want. The same is the case in BG2, but
without Imoen. But once you are in chapters 4 and 5, there is no way to
go anywhere else or do anything else until you are done there. There was
never a place in BG1 that was like that, that I can remember. You were
free to make up your own role-playing ideas at any time and just go do
something strange.
Anonymous
May 7, 2004 4:10:05 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.baldurs-gate (More info?)

"John Salerno" <johnjsalNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:409ac199$0$2991$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
> Rich C. Velay wrote:
>
> > RCV: I have to disagree totally. BG 1 is no different, in
general
> > terms, from BG 2. You have to do the chapters in order, you have
to do the
> > mines before you can get the info about the bandit camp, you have
to do the
> > bandit camp before you do the second mines, etc, etc.
>
> Basically, what I mean is, once you leave Candlekeep, you are free
to do
> what you want wherever you want. The same is the case in BG2, but
> without Imoen. But once you are in chapters 4 and 5, there is no way
to
> go anywhere else or do anything else until you are done there. There
was
> never a place in BG1 that was like that, that I can remember.

Return To Candlekeep, chapter 6?
Werewolf Island (in Tales of the Sword Coast)?
Ice Island (ditto)?

In these three situations you're practically *forced* to reload
if a character dies. And you can get royally skrewed by finding
yourself on the werewolf island without the capability to beat the
monsters there (although this is not possible till chapter 5 since you
cannot get there until you have been to BG city because of the first
mini-subquest that opens the area up) or indeed the ice island (which
you CAN reach before visiting BG city.) Any other place, you can pull
out, head to a temple and pay for a Raise Dead (remember, no character
in BG1 can get high enough to cast the spell.)
BG2 never at least puts you into THAT situation, since at least
two Rods of Resurrection are findable in chapter 2 (and one of them
doesn't even have to be paid for), and even then you only have to use
them if the person that dies is your cleric with the Raise Dead spell.

> You were
> free to make up your own role-playing ideas at any time and just go
do
> something strange.

And you're just as free in BG2 - as long as you decide you don't want
Imoen back as a party-joinable (although rescuing her is part of the
plot, you can do this while she remains a non-party character.) For
those purposes, there's always Nalia - another thief/mage dual-class,
a few levels inferior to Imoen as a thief, but exactly equal to her as
a mage, and the loss in thieving ability can be rectified by use of
potions. Or there's Jan Jansen, who is by far the better thief but
does not advance so fast as a mage. Evil parties, of course, have
Edwin.

The only real thing in BG2 that I considered a real bummer is the fate
of Yoshimo, and the consequently enforced loss of the game's only
single-classed thief (and thus, the only person who was actually
advancing at greater than half-pace as a thief, unless the player was
himself a single-classed thief.) But then, since Imoen is all the
thief you actually NEED, even that doesn't matter for gameplay
purposes - unless you're evil and were not only using Yoshimo as your
ONLY thief but don't want Imoen back because she's Good, in which case
you are practically forced to keep Imoen through chapters 4 and 5
anyway and swap her out for Jan Jansen, the only remaining non-good
thief, in chapter 6.

Jonathan.
Anonymous
May 7, 2004 4:10:06 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.baldurs-gate (More info?)

Jonathan Ellis wrote:

> Werewolf Island (in Tales of the Sword Coast)?
> Ice Island (ditto)?

Those aren't a part of BG, they are part of TotSC. But still, that
doesn't change my opinion, because I wasn't too happy with those
'levels' either. I had a hell of a time with werewolf island, and no
recourse to help.
Anonymous
May 7, 2004 5:10:51 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.baldurs-gate (More info?)

"John Salerno" <johnjsalNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:409ac199$0$2991$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
> Rich C. Velay wrote:
>
> > RCV: I have to disagree totally. BG 1 is no different, in general
> > terms, from BG 2. You have to do the chapters in order, you have to do
the
> > mines before you can get the info about the bandit camp, you have to do
the
> > bandit camp before you do the second mines, etc, etc.
>
> Basically, what I mean is, once you leave Candlekeep, you are free to do
> what you want wherever you want. The same is the case in BG2, but
> without Imoen. But once you are in chapters 4 and 5, there is no way to
> go anywhere else or do anything else until you are done there. There was
> never a place in BG1 that was like that, that I can remember. You were
> free to make up your own role-playing ideas at any time and just go do
> something strange.

RCV: I'm really not sure I follow you here. In BG1, once you satrt the
Cloakwood Mine, you are pretty much stuck with it until you finish, much
like the dungeons under CandleKeep. Sure, there is a portion of the BG 2
game where you are locked into a quest, but I don't see that as being very
much different from BG 1 really.

And in BG 2, when you are locked into a path, at least you have the Bag
of Holding, scroll cases and gem pouches to insure you don;t have to miss
out on anything good along the way, to say nothing of the various shops you
hit along the way.

I've done the game by getting Imoen as quickly as possible, and getting
her after I had done everything possible before doing so - its a choice. I
guess I just don;t see being "trapped" in the Underdark as a pain, nor for
that matter, as any sort of an unwarranted gameplay element from either a
thematic or role playing point of view.
To each their own I guess.

Rich
Anonymous
May 7, 2004 6:17:07 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.baldurs-gate (More info?)

John Salerno <johnjsalNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<409a6dc0$0$2988$61fed72c@news.rcn.com>...
<snip>
> Oh well, that's just my little rant, although I'm interested in hearing
> others' opinions about how they think BG1/2 compare to one another, etc.

I'm still re-playing BG2, so I guess I never got bored with it. I do
agree with you in part, though. Initially I thought BG2 was too
restrictive, compared to the "open" feel of BG1, but when I went back
and re-played BG1 I changed my mind.

The character interactions and extended dialogues make BG2 feel
"richer" even if you have less freedom of choice at some times.

But Ch2 and Ch3 are great - you can do what you like, when you like.
It's only when you get back to the plot that I feel more constrained.

I've played NWN, Morrowind and (god help me) Divine Divinity, always
looking for something as much fun as BG2, and always been
disappointed.

Look at it this way - even if you got bored in the end, you had a lot
of fun on the way, didn't you? :) 

Mike
Anonymous
May 7, 2004 3:22:10 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.baldurs-gate (More info?)

"Rich C. Velay" <RCVelay@remove.this.shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:e7zmc.368046$Pk3.290653@pd7tw1no...
>
> RCV: I have to disagree totally. BG 1 is no different, in general
> terms, from BG 2. You have to do the chapters in order, you have to do
the
> mines before you can get the info about the bandit camp, you have to do
the
> bandit camp before you do the second mines, etc, etc.
> In addition, there are a LOT more "real" sub-quests in BG 2 than in BG
> 1, where so many of the sub-quests are tiny, go there, get this, come
> back-type. But since one doesn't "have" to do any of the sub-quests in
> either, its the player's choice if they end up feeling that they have been
> "led by the hand".

This doesn't exactly follow from what you're saying, but I'll
just tack it on here -

That's true, but the BG2 story always - always - gives the group an
overarching quest that should prevent the group from ever doing the
side quests. I find it best to ignore the story for much of the game which
is a shame because i consider the story to be pretty good in most respects.

I think I'd prefer BG2 if it was more linear.
It's the character interactions that prevent boredom for me.

snip

(interesting reading though)
Anonymous
May 7, 2004 5:27:54 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.baldurs-gate (More info?)

Mike Horner wrote:

> Look at it this way - even if you got bored in the end, you had a lot
> of fun on the way, didn't you? :) 

Well, I'd like to keep going with it, but I just don't feel like it. I
stopped in Chapter 5, and now I'm playing NWN, which I'm enjoying so
far. Hopefully this 'boredom' thing isn't something I'll start
experiencing with all similar RPGs of this type, since they can be
repetitive a lot of the time. I think another reason I stopped with BG2
for now is that I kind of got tired *looking* at it. I guess after
playing BG1 not so long ago, BG2 just seemed like more of the same. NWN
is a nice change for now. That's a lame reason, I know, but it's
definitely not the only reason, at least.

Morrowind, on the other hand, I was simply enveloped by the entire time.
I couldn't believe how great that game was, and how much fun I had
playing it.
Anonymous
May 7, 2004 5:27:55 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.baldurs-gate (More info?)

"John Salerno" <johnjsalNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:409bc71d$0$2999$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
> Mike Horner wrote:
>
> > Look at it this way - even if you got bored in the end, you had a lot
> > of fun on the way, didn't you? :) 
>
> Well, I'd like to keep going with it, but I just don't feel like it. I
> stopped in Chapter 5, and now I'm playing NWN, which I'm enjoying so
> far. Hopefully this 'boredom' thing isn't something I'll start
> experiencing with all similar RPGs of this type, since they can be
> repetitive a lot of the time.

Nope - I think you're showing a remarkable amount of self-awarness. You're
bored with BG2. Nothing wrong with that. That's precisely how I felt about
NWN after the first couple of chapters. Yet I somehow felt some compulsion
to slog-on the end.

> I think another reason I stopped with BG2
> for now is that I kind of got tired *looking* at it. I guess after
> playing BG1 not so long ago, BG2 just seemed like more of the same. NWN
> is a nice change for now. That's a lame reason, I know, but it's
> definitely not the only reason, at least.

I finished NWN for the first and only time last month. By the end of the
run I simply wanted it done and could hardly bear to keep playing it. But I
was so close to the freakin' conclusion... which was lame and TOTALLY
unsatisfying. Hard to imagine a game ending worse than what NWN delivered.
But now it's un-installed to make room for Planescape Torment and perhaps
BGtutu. Once I get my current heavily-modded run of BG2 finished, of
course. I've got the Rynn Lanthorn and I'm off to the elven city!

NWN has NO NPC interaction or backstory to speak-of. You occasionally get
an interjection or some "fetch" quest that yields an item. But nothing at
all like the convoluted conflicts and rich personalities of BG2 NPCs.

I do miss some of NWN graphical improvements. When I first went back to BG2
after finishing NWN I kept sweeping the mouse or hitting the arrow keys,
trying to switch around the camera angles on the 2D maps. LOL!

>
> Morrowind, on the other hand, I was simply enveloped by the entire time.
> I couldn't believe how great that game was, and how much fun I had
> playing it.

It's cool. But I get bored with 'solo' games. Reminds me I'm sitting alone
in the dark with just my computer, I suppose.

<grin>

--
MJB

Mr. Tin's Painting Workshop:
http://web.newsguy.com/Mrtinsworkshop/
Anonymous
May 8, 2004 1:58:09 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.baldurs-gate (More info?)

"John Salerno" <johnjsalNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:409a6dc0$0$2988$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
[snip]
> I found that I was getting somewhat bored with BG2 during chapter 5. At
> this point, the structure of the game started to seem a little to
> transparent to me. What I mean is, I felt like the designers were doing
> all they could just to keep me in the Underdark longer. Do this quest,
> now go meet this person, wait you aren't done yet, go here now and do
this.

You don't *have* to do all the quests in the Underdark. The Matron Mother,
as I recall, requires the blood (or whatever) of only *one* of the elder
races. So you don't have to do the beholder Lair *and* the Mind Flayer area
*and* the Kuo Toa stronghold. The only quest you need to do is the dragon
egg thing. The balrog--excuse me, I mean Balor, the missing gnome, the mage
visiting other planes, the slaves, you don't have to do any of that.

> Not to mention that I was already a little soured about losing Imoen for
> so long and feeling rushed to get her back.

Imoen is the only character in BG2 that you can't get almost right away. In
BG1, you can't get Coran, Eldoth, Faldorn, or Yeslick until you've been to
Cloakwood, and you of course can't go there until Chapter 4. You can't get
Quayle, Tiax, Alora, or Skie until you get to Baldur's Gate city. I'd call
that linear.

>In many ways, I think BG1 is
> a better game because it is much more open for you to do anything and go
> anywhere. Even if you wanted to start BG2 again, you'd have to go
> through chapter 1 each time.

You need Dungeon-Be-Gone, my friend! A nifty mod that allows a guide to
lead you painlessly through Chateau Irenicus. In two minutes, you're outta
there.
http://www.pocketplane.net

Cyn
May 8, 2004 3:47:56 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.baldurs-gate (More info?)

"John Salerno" <johnjsalNOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:409bc71d$0$2999$61fed72c@news.rcn.com...
> Mike Horner wrote:
>
> > Look at it this way - even if you got bored in the end, you had a lot
> > of fun on the way, didn't you? :) 
>
> Well, I'd like to keep going with it, but I just don't feel like it.

As good as reason as any - but I for one count BG2 as one of my favourite
games. I am surprised you didn't enjoy it as much as BG1, but NWN is a good
game also. For me, even though it was so big, BG2 extended on BG1 in all the
right ways.

> I
> stopped in Chapter 5, and now I'm playing NWN, which I'm enjoying so
> far. Hopefully this 'boredom' thing isn't something I'll start
> experiencing with all similar RPGs of this type, since they can be
> repetitive a lot of the time. I think another reason I stopped with BG2
> for now is that I kind of got tired *looking* at it. I guess after
> playing BG1 not so long ago, BG2 just seemed like more of the same. NWN
> is a nice change for now. That's a lame reason, I know, but it's
> definitely not the only reason, at least.
>
> Morrowind, on the other hand, I was simply enveloped by the entire time.
> I couldn't believe how great that game was, and how much fun I had
> playing it.

Morrowind is an absolutely stunningly good game. I think it will stand as a
testament to what can be achieved within a free-roaming 3d game for a long
time to come.

PM
Anonymous
May 8, 2004 3:47:57 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.baldurs-gate (More info?)

PM wrote:

>>Well, I'd like to keep going with it, but I just don't feel like it.
>
>
> As good as reason as any - but I for one count BG2 as one of my favourite
> games. I am surprised you didn't enjoy it as much as BG1, but NWN is a good
> game also. For me, even though it was so big, BG2 extended on BG1 in all the
> right ways.

I don't disagree. I do see BG2 as being deeper and longer and more epic
as BG1, I just hate that I stopped playing it. Maybe I'll pick it up
again someday soon.
Anonymous
May 8, 2004 3:56:25 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.baldurs-gate (More info?)

> > Morrowind, on the other hand, I was simply enveloped by the entire time.
> > I couldn't believe how great that game was, and how much fun I had
> > playing it.
>
> Morrowind is an absolutely stunningly good game. I think it will stand as
a
> testament to what can be achieved within a free-roaming 3d game for a long
> time to come.

Morrowind didn't like my sound card, so I took it back to the shop. It was
a great shame; I've seen it on a friend's PC and he was very keen on it.
May 8, 2004 5:04:10 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.baldurs-gate (More info?)

"Henry Lockwood" <hnl22@NOSPAM.cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:c7h3tt$pq$1@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk...

> Morrowind didn't like my sound card, so I took it back to the shop. It
was
> a great shame; I've seen it on a friend's PC and he was very keen on it.

Morrowind (and a lot of other games) strongly disliked my Soundblaster
Audigy card - after about ten minutes playing a game, I got something
sounding like modem data, full volume through the speakers! I decided I had
to upgrade the drivers, a leap of faith after having to reinstall my last
computer after doing the same on a Live! card. After updating, it's not a
problem anymore.

PM
Anonymous
May 10, 2004 5:56:14 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.baldurs-gate (More info?)

John Salerno ate my hamster! The excuse given to
alt.games.baldurs-gate was:

>Oh well, that's just my little rant, although I'm interested in hearing
>others' opinions about how they think BG1/2 compare to one another, etc.

I got BG when it first came out, noticed it randomly on the shelf and
it reminded me of the fun I had with Pool of Radiance... :) 

Played it loads, but got bored some time in Baldur's Gate - though I
think I made it to the catacombs in the end. Never got further. I had
TOTSC too.

Then came BG2. Single most fantastic game I have ever played. Nothing
has drawn me in to it so completely as BG2 did. There was just so much
to do in it, lots of side quests, but the overall storyline was simply
amazing - especially the Bohdi parts. Kept me up til 3am each night
during first year uni, that did. :) 

And then ToB finished it off nicely. Not brilliant but it was more BG
so I was happy anyway.

After ToB I moved on, played Morrowind - which also drew me in
completely, almost to the level of BG2 - and NWN. I got incredibly
bored of the official campaign of NWN in chapter 3, but thankfully the
editor and the many, many modules and expansions made it a worthwhile
purchase. Oh, and after that, KotOR which I thoroughly enjoyed.

Now I've decided to replay the BG series since I heard about tutu.
Hopefully I'll be able to complete the first game this time round!
With tutu, BG doesn't feel dated at all! (Well, maybe a little). Also
looking forward to playing BG2 with all the new mods and tweaks
available.

Last of all, with regards to the tutu mod, anyone found a high
resolution (1280x960) messes up the graphics a lot? I dropped it back
to 1024 and it's all spinky now.
!