DOS2 > BG3. Combat in DOS2 Is so much more immersive. Everything you do can impact the entire tide of the battle. BG3s battle system seemed geared toward not thinking as much. In DOS, you needed to get up high for spells and bows. Doesn’t really matter in BG3. In DOS2, you needed to plan elemental attacks whereas it wasn’t as important in BG3.
The weird thing for me is they are both masterpieces in their own rights. Ill be in the mood for DOS2 or BG3 sometimes. Larian has struck gold in this genre. I cant wait to see what comes after BG3
@@sirownzalotgaming3025 If following their original plans, BG3 is the last to be run on the current engine. DOS3 is tentatively next on a brand new engine.
divinity story and characters are better to me, plus a couple of things here and there on the combat side, but bg3 have better setting, map, character performance and the fight system i think its more enjoyable.
@@Quakez0rI greatly disagree. Video games are still a visual medium you can’t just say the “video” part doesn’t matter. Going from all text to cinematic mo-cap cutscenes is a huge leap especially for crpgs
I cannot wait for DOS III to implement all they've learned from BG3. I personally love the tone of both DOS games as I find RPGs are just much better when they don't take themselves too seriously. But Divinity is so great and I love actions points in combat, you can really do some creative things with them.
I find it hard to care about anything in RPGs that don’t take themselves seriously though even though I appreciate humor. I didn’t care about anything in DS1 really, DS2 more so but I hope they lean more into the serious side and keep humor secondary.
@@skeletonwar4445 W opinion. Most CRPGs are just fun games which shouldnt take itself way too seriously. I mean you have character creation in the beginning, you cannot have your own custom character in a deep compelling story, it has to be pre written to work well with other characters.
The next Larian game is what i am looking forward to. This is the first time, that it is about the developer itself. I really love the games Larian delivers.
@@joeykyle492 well I'm sorry if I sounded bitter but this so-called D&D rules made their game more complicated than it should be!! I don't hate the tabletop game itself but I hate when it gets implemented to video games!!!!
@@strahnbrad3979 personally I think it’s just a matter of getting used to it. Since I’ve played a bit of dnd, I think the games system is very easy to understand.
@@halfknots They are moving away from DnD and aren't going to make any content for baldurs gate 3. They are not moving away from cRPG's. DOS is not a part of DnD.
Whew! Glad to hear that. Honestly I'd love to see what they do with another rpg system. Or if they use their engine from these two bangers in a new way.
divinity original sin 2 is amazing :d baldur for me is 9,5 divinity original sin 2 for me is 9 both are very good. divinity original sin 1 have much worse graphic and is smaller so ur choice xd but 2 is masterpiece
As someone in the same boat as you, I can only recommend it. I felt like BG3 kind of limited itself by shackling itself to the DnD systems, which made DOS2 more fun for me personally.
DOS2 is like KOTOR. If you like DnD, you have to play DOS2, just like if you like Star Wars, you have to play KOTOR (free on prime for the holiday, btw).
Wizards of the Coast doesn't want a DM mode in BG3 because it would be too much of a competitor for their new virtual table top for DnD that they are currently developing, at least in my opinion.
One big point in BG3's favor that you didn't really touch on are the roleplaying and exploration aspects of it. D:OS2's combat is more fun, IMHO, but outside of combat, I have way more fun in BG3. Many conversations are almost as engaging as combat in BG3, and I rarely felt that way in D:OS2
the reaper coast ( dos:2 second act ) is a very big open area i'd say, it's probably as big as bg3 3rd act in terms of map size is really amazing to explore with tons and tons of mini dungeons , animal npcs, dead npc spirits and secret areas
nah the story, exploration and actions-depth in divinity overshadows EVERY other game. i mean, where would you find a game where you can go out of your way to make a pact with an ancient god, a demon and/or sell your literal soul for gold? this game makes exploration SO immersive its undescribably perfect
I think you broke down the key differences and strong points of both games really well here, they're both spectacular games but they do things differently enough to incentivise playing both for different reasons
My crew of 4 had more fun playing through DOS II than we did BG3 but that isn't to say we didn't have fun with BG3. Both are amazing games in their own right and I had more fun doing a solo playthrough of BG3 than I did DOS II. I think the pace of battle lends DOS II to being a better multiplayer game. Time between turns in BG3 can be pretty long due to the methodical nature of combat.
@@smoke9047it's because BG3 is much more story and dialogue heavy than DOS2. Half the game IS just talking. Friends doing dumb stuff, talking to people without you, and all that stuff can ruin the game a bit. Divinity you can just rush your way through haphazardly doing cool shit and have a blast
@@sparkyspinz9897Yeah, this was very noticeable for me and my friends. A lot of BG3's upsides compared to DOS2 have to do with the story of the companions. Stories that you're gonna kind of have to ignore or at least pay less attention to, if you're doing multiplayer.
I think BG3 is a game so focused in decisions and narratives, that playing co-op might be detrimental of that aspect of player agency and decision making. After all, you'll have to agree with your partner how you'll both play. DOS seems like less dependable of story moments and more combat and exploration bound, so I might be more fun to play with friends.
I agree, ..A DOS3 or what ever Larian Game with basically the combat system and character building system + the not mentioned crafting options/opportunities of DOS2 (maybe all a bit more advanced due to technology development since 2017) + the storytelling quality and cinematics of BG3 would be my personal all time RPG heaven.
I utterly loved both, my two favorite games since Skyrim, but I would give the edge to DOS2 due to its more engaging combat mechanics. In BG3, sheer damage output trumps everything, whereas in DOS2 crowd control is pivotal which gives combat a more strategic and challenging appeal. Lets just say that I used MANY more resurrection scrolls in DOS2 than in BG3 hehehe. That being said, the script writing and cinematic production of BG3 is in a different level altogether.
Hmm idk. In DOS2 damage is all that matters. Once you break an enemy's armor (with damage) all you need to do is CC them for one turn and they're dead.
That was one of the things I notice - DOS2 combat has less RNG, is more about positioning and types of armour affect target priority. These things make it more tactical and interesting than in BG3.
Agree. DOS2 was my first turn based RPG and I loved the combat once I put some time in. It had its problems (constitution being useless for example) but felt much more engaging. BG3 definitely feels more dumbed down combat wise and feels a lot easier but that's okay. It's a wonderful game and I love it!
For real, Divinity 2 feels like it's less RNG and damage dependant. You really have to think on your positions and the enemy's so you can create damage points through environmental hazards or AOE attacks. Even the fact that you have to break armor gives options to which type you use and how much power you put into certain enemies.
@@antonytomas1 Yeah, right. Try playing Blind Honour mode and see if you still think "DOS2 damage is all that matters". You must have played like story mode.
I like DOS 2 over BG3 because I am not limited to how many time I can cast my spells. In BG3 I can cast them 2 times then short rest which has a limit. I like basic mana systems, cast spells -> uses mana. Low on mana -> drink potion. I hate being limited to hoarding my spells in case a bigger fight is ahead.
its the d&d restrictions for balance and lore. mages become extremely over powered in d&d. To keep players from starting off over powered, mages have spell usage limits. In lore, originally, d&d tried to be "realistic" in a sense. You adventure for a bit, get tired, rest, then continue ur adventure. Kinda like going for a hike then fighting a bear and wanting to rest after. Combat engagements were spread out far enough that realistically, ur character should and realistically would take a break inbetween confrontations. p.s. i know you didnt ask. But just wanted to share for context
Spell slots are an interesting idea, but they just didnt work. In a tabletop setting the DM can use them to control the pace of a session, in game you can pretty much long-rest unrestricted. I found myself not using spells, more because I couldnt be bothered to long rest, than because I actually needed to reserve my resources.
@@sonic-bbThey made it also important in BG3 in the way that many events and storylines and dialogues are happening during the long rests. People just don‘t get along with it which I don‘t understand. You are supposed to only have a limited amount of fights and the long rests aren‘t a unnecessary in between mechanic, but a way for you to experience a lot of character and story progression
DoS2 is a special game for me. I discovered it while going through a rough couple of months and being able to look forward to and escape while playing through the game made a huge difference for me personally. I do also love BG3 and thankfully times ended up getting better by the time it came around, but I'll always have DoS2 on a slightly higher pedestal because of how it provided some respite during those darker times.
Both 2 are of my all time favs, stories are different but how the story is told and gameplay isn't much different, both are amazing. BG3 takes the spot for me though, it's just so beautiful. Larian is what Bioware now lacks.
I think one of the main things is if you played DoS2 first you may well have fallen in love with the game like no other. No one had ever done what that game did before. I don't think you can get that same feeling again, even iif BG3 does many things better. DoS2 had my going "oh my god I cannot believe they did this" so many times. BG3 was just a higher budget and more refined extension of that. It didn't have the same novelty. Of course if you play BG3 first you'll probably have a very different perspective. DoS2 wowed me with it's cleverness, it's freedom, and made me laugh and cry many times. And often laugh and cry at the same time. And I'll never forget the Loshe ending. It's also a shame that DoS2 starts so lowkey and silly, I know a lot of people didn't get far enough to see how great it becomes.
its true what you say. i played baldurs gate 1 &2 and icewind dale first. Neverwinter nights as well. and they basically feal like what divinity original sin 2 felt like (outside of combat). So for me, divinity didnt do anything first. The most unique thing was being able to interact with the environment. But elder scrolls games already had that 😅 still loved divinity tho
I love both games. DOS2 for its cheeky tone (which, let's admit, was already way toned down when compared to DOS1), the combat, customisation, basically all the things you mention in the video. BG3 is shinier and feels more personal, and the sheer amount of RP choices with the world's reactivity is really something. I am very much looking forward to DOS3, as I'm positive Larian will combine the best of both games (climbing on boxes!).
As someone who only recently played their first run of DOS1 after multiple runs of DOS2, I am glad they toned it down a bit. I absolutely love the tone of DOS2, but DOS1 was just too goofy at times. The skeleton designs were dorky, and that one enemy that kept screaming rhymes like "tweedledee tweedledoo" mid battle is an incredibly vivid memory for the wrong reasons lol.
Totally agree with this. My absolute favourite thing in DOS2 was levelling up, making those tough decisions about what to put points into, making a fun build for combat etc. In BG3 I was always so disappointed when levelling up, it wasn't fun at all. I'm definitely more of a combat/character customisation player than a story player.
More a story player here, never managed to finish a single larian game cause their stories or better said their general world feel somehow annoyed me. I knew they made great games, but their storytelling somehow annoyed me. Originally i was scared for BG3 cause of this. I finished bg2 over 8 times afterall unlike larian games. Glad to say the forgotten realms setting offset the weird way larian usually manages to put me off.
Welcome to the inherent flaw in most D20 systems - limited opportunity for character customisation as you level up. Your chosen class dictates largely what you gain at each level and when with limited choice. It’s why I avoid d20 rpgs like the plague.
It’s kind of like the last record a band puts out on an indie label vs their major label debut. For many bands, those two records end up being the best of their careers. I wonder if these two games will end up being the best that Larian ever put out.
I told people that I preferred DOS 2 because of the combat being better, (and I played both on release on PlayStation)as the BG3 combat felt restrictive, and some friends couldn't understand why. And i think this video has a point that i didn't think about, the customization. I could be a dual wielding swordsman with lightening magic in DOS 2, and that just makes for such a better experience for me, including being able to make choices that even out my party members, and make them a more cohesive team. (also just think the DOS 2 spells looked and were cooler compared to the BG3 spells). Also I'm not the biggest fan of the D&D long/short rest mechanic. I appreciate the motion capture in BG3, but that doesn't make a game for me. I must admit, seeing and performing certain dice rolls, is fun, but the action point system is also better than the D&D action per turn system as well. It's like I'd rather play DOS 2 any day, and it's not even close. But i like BG3.
Long rest is especially egregious, they tried to add some story there to make it more palatable but i still wouldn't miss the system if they've done away with it
@@pneumonoultramicroscopicsi4065I think the worst part is that it doesn't even actually limit anything, since a good 98% of the game is completely unaffected by how much you rest. All it does it create the illusion of limitation and delay the more fun parts of the game.
DOS2 is the greatest game ever made 🙌. Had way more fun than im having now playing BG3. Id also disagree on the whimsical comments. The music score for DOS2 made it such a more immersive experience with plenty of serious moments inbetween. Also the narrator is fantastic. Characters and combat are superior in DOS2.
Dos2 overall better story, better "world" and most importantly the combat is more fun: I find D&D combat abilities to be quite boring honestly. My Lae'Zel spent 200 hours fending with a greatsword with no special moves whatsoever. Effective but boring.
@@FreeFlow__ BG3 has obviously an overall better storytelling and richer dubbing thanks to its cinematic approach and higher budget, but in the end it’s the usual same old boring Forgotten Realms story I’ve been experiencing for more than 20 years. DOS2 was a breeze of fresh air in this sense.
My favorite thing about BG3 is how insane it promises DOS3 will be. If DOS3 has the storytelling and depth of BG3 story, it will be the single best game to ever be made
You don't want to set your expectations that high, or you'll just inevitably be disappointed. I expect DOS3 to be like DOS2 and BG3: a really good game that will improve some elements from previous games while also losing some elements that I will miss. Games never just linearily improve, that's just the reality of all creative work.
If we had a game with DOS combat and BG3 cinematics/writing/acting you'd have my perfect game. Loved both, but really missed DOS combat. I think Larian leaned too hard onto replicating DnD and could have amended some things to translate it better from tabletop.
I think alot of it has to do with it not being their IP. Wizards of the Coast were most likely making alot of the decisions on what they could and could not add. In the DOS series they can do whatever they want, since it's their own baby. Hopefully DOS3 will have exactly what you mentioned.
On balance probably prefer BG3, love the story and the characters but I probably do prefer the combat in DOS2. DOS3 with the production values and scope of BG3 would be incredible. But to be honest anything Larian do will be a day 1 purchase for me.
A good comparison =) I love `em both ofc, but if I had to choose Id take DoS2. Lohse might be my favorite charracter of gaming. (Close one with Sephiroth) +like Fex said, the combat! In BG3 I wanted the combat to be over with so can see the story. In DoS2 I was looking forward to any combat. ..it may be that I have been a tabletop roleplayer for over 30 years and newer cared of D20-base systems.
@@GMOTP5738 @rushpatriot2866 you guys fully missed the point of this comment. Way to go fostering a toxic community by downing on this guy instead of adding constructive criticism or challenging the argument.
@@harper3579"oh my science i cant roleplay having friends and having sex so this GAME is better because it allows me to do that regardless of quality of gameplay or anything else"
I like the actual fighting and "classes" better in Divinity but everything else is better in BG3. BG3 is held back a bit by using the DnD system but its still great.
I have been wondering about this ever since I started playing BG3. And my conclusion is that each game has something going for it and in the end I just love them both equally for what they are. Here are some of my personal highlights: Divinity: combat system, music Baldur's Gate: graphics, storytelling (cutscenes, camp interactions) both equally: companions, story
I am a big fan of both, at this point, I will vote for DoS2, I still can't forget how shocked I was when I played through DoS2 the first time, sadly I don't think I feel the same when I played through BG3
I never finished DOS2, I had about 45 hours in before dropping it due to life and work circumstances at the time. I've since finished BG3 and now I'm itching to start Divinity 2 fresh all over again just for the experience, and I know Larian already put the good work into it already anyway.
For my what made me enjoy bg3 more than dos2 was the level of interaction with the outcomes of the game/characters, and what kind of dialogue and choice is represented. In dos2 it was fairly defined outcomes of the story and the discussions. dos2 character builds definitely better. I think combat I love everything better about dos2 OTHER THAN the way they split defenses. Usually ends up more awkward than fun.
@@GMOTP5738ummm, not always? The essentials of the ending may be all of us defeating the Nether Brain, yes, but the aftermath, no. The illithid in the end can be your character, can be any companion, can even be the Comet Prince. Not to mention, each different illithid will trigger different outcomes, let say the Comet Prince become the illithid, Laezel can choose to kill him or not. And that’s just some example, there are many that I can’t say because its just…. Too many, like if Gale sacrifice himself by exploding we got different ending too
@@Rodzario those aren’t really all individual endings. Just flavours of the same ‘Netherbrain Dies’ ending. The differences aren’t enough. BTW Larian advertised 17k endings even before the epilogue was released, at said point there being only 2 endings.
After many hours of coop Baldur's Gate 3 my mates and I are still of the opinion that the combat system and character customization in Divinity Original Sin 2 is more appealing. What they've done with story in Baldur's Gate 3 is simply outstanding. But alot of the things we liked most about DOS2 just aren't in BG3.
@PaulRGauthier i was thinking like upgrading some of those early weapons to like +2 or +3 variants. But since we cant find very many +2 / +3 weapons, maybe we craft them.
BG3 has Lore I’m familiar with as well as rules. I found DOS1 too much “figure it out yourself” and the fact that they mixed the quest and general info log together made it hard to decipher what I was supposed to be doing. Sounds like this was fixed in DOS2, but I haven’t played that yet. Regardless, I guess because I’ve played D&D since a youngster, especially the BG series, that’s where my heart is too. Again it’s familiarity with the whole D&D systems. I want to try DOS2 though as I did like some aspects of DOS1.
More of Divinity!!! Original Sin or the Dragon series. Honestly, WoC is holding back BG3 and Larian. I hope Larian focuses more on their IPs because they don't lose out on other DnD IPs. Especially now that they have gained a huge following and fame, they can introduce into the mainstream spotlight those Divinity gems
@@ezeess7239 idk if they will make orginal sin 3. The story seemed finished to me. But def something in the divinity world. They have books and other games in universe.
Ya, because of that crap my first character I made was just a fighter so I didn’t have to deal with that on my main character. Clerics feel totally gimped because of the spell rest system.
@@medalgearsalad1419 I actually got used to it in BG3. I highly recommend you give it another go, maybe focus on melee a little more, at least in the beginning. The game is amazing. Just different from Divinity.
So i recently got into crpgs again. For the price of bg3, i was able to get dos1 and 2 with pathfinder king maker and wrath of the righteous. I eventually am going to buy bg3, after ive beat all these four games. My point is enjoying these older titles will let me understand bg3 better.
Get pillars of eternity 1 and 2 next. 2 is better than 1 though. You can even import your character into the sequel. Mass effect style. Oh and wrath of the righteous is reallyyyyyyy long but good.
Personally I prefer the more familiar MMORPG-style stats system behind DOS2 (For example, questions of armor, evasion, and accuracy are far more intuitive). However, BG3 is infinitely more approachable to a wider audience. The first act is streamlined and cinematic, and more fun to do as a group. DOS2's first act was a little overcooked in early access and dumped too many mechanics on players up front.
100% agree with you here. I can accept a game's mid-level story if the gameplay is awesome, but I can't accept or play a game if the gameplay is shit. I still haven't finished BG3 even though people love it and tout how great it is, because in my opinion I keep thinking about how much better DOS2 gameplay and character progression is. I just get bored playing the game, to the point where I don't care about the story. That doesn't mean BG3 isn't a good game, but it's based on DnD 5th edition, which is so bad, that it drove me to write my own game which is now nearly complete. The character customization and progression is just as important as the story if not more-so, and if that is lacking, then that takes a lot of excitement away from the actual playing of the game itself.
The major thing i like more about DoS is that it is the studios ip letting them do what ever they want with the material where as BG3 is D&D ip and limited to that lore and game mechanics. Both good. I dont like whimisical. I greatly prefer darker stories. I also dont like feeling like i should play a premade character for story vs making my own. Both games do this. DoS synergies in combat with elements and environments is way more interesting imo. I cant wait for a DOS3. Wizards of the Coast is a shit company and Larian doesnt need their IP to sale games.
@@skeletonwar4445 it actually doesnt emulate d&d close enough. Things about the combat are limited or changed. And the character creation is heavily limited. Solasta is more faithful recreation of d&d 5th rules than baldurs gate 3
My one and only gripe with DOS:2 was that since you xp for ALL combat meant that solutions other than combat left you noticeably weaker for longer. In fact I more or less found I had to murder EVERYONE in the first zone because it made a significant difference in how fast I leveled. Still though one of my favorite turn based combat rpgs ever.
I have spent a lot of time playing DOS2. I played the original Baldur's Gate many, many years ago, but haven't looked at BG3. That being said, what I like in a game is a good story with a sense of immersion. My problem with Baldur's Gate is that it has to constantly remind you that you're playing a D&D game, and, to me, this breaks that sense of immersion. I don't need a graphic telling me I'm rolling a D20.
My main wish for DOS3 would be removal of the memory and source point systems. Out of the two I'm more ok with dealing with the source point system, but my group just agreed to use mods to remove the memory system completely. As for the source points, I just tend to dislike how limited they "can" feel. There was a spot in Act II with an infinite source that we could use which was nice. But I always found myself holding onto the points for some encounter that felt "worth" using them up for, but almost never using them. I wouldn't mind a once per entire combat type skill or something along those lines though.
Yeah, this was also my personal worst thing about bg3. Spell slots and rest cooldowns felt as if *every single* ability and spell were on the same, annoying limit as Source skills. Especially since, just like Source Points, you can just infinitely replenish charges and slots out of combat with zero downside. Just annoying, not difficult.
Source points have the exact same problem as spell slots, in that they are easy to replenish, but its just annoying to have to keep doing so. Memory slots though... I feel like they are quite important to the way the combat works. Maybe it could be tied to levels (and gear, feats) instead.
I think Solasta needs to be mentioned alongside BG3 as a modern definitive dnd experience. It’s far from perfect but Id say it’s almost closer to dnd than BG3 was and has far more of the more modern dnd customization choices for race and class
I was really disappointed when Larian didn't end up going with a vertical movement mechanic for fly like Solasta. There are definitely some things Solasta did mechanics wise better than BG3 which is interesting. I'm hoping they start a new IP that uses everything they have learned.
I like random items a little bit more (surprise), but I like the effects on stuff more in BG3. I like the div2 characters a decent amount more but like how there is more content in bg3. I like the dialogues and choices more in BG3. I like the elemental focus and action point system more for combat, but like the BG3 combat improvements such as alll party members can move at the same time. I like the leveling in dos2 more also. Difficulty is better in dos2 i find. The thing that carries BG3 is cinematics and open-world exploration and size. The amount of content is dope, and the polish is nice.
I really love the whimsy of dos2, and I'm also a fan of the dragon age games and dragon age origins especially had a much darker, serious (sometimes even horror) tone that I also really love. I think both tones have their place and both are extremely enjoyable depending on the mood you're in. My main complaint with both dos2 and bg3 is the lack of a codex. dos2 has a sort of minimal codex in the quest journal section, but there is no real thorough codex like you can find in the dragon age games. I know I'm probably in the minority, but I will read every codex entry in a game (except some of the combat ones that I already know), and I think a well-written codex (see: dragon age) can do so much to flesh out a world and make the world and the lore feel truly alive.
My opinion is the exact same as yours. I like Divinity world (not restricted), characters, armors, and combat more. If DOS3 gets cut-scene dialogues, third person view, story (darker), and all the QOL improvement as Baldur's Gate, it would be the ideal CRPG for me.
The story of Lohse was beautiful and touching! I really loved it.. Dos 2 was/is a amazing game! Bg3 was fun but I did not like the end boss a big brain 🧠 haha come on, it was fun but yeah idk I liked the storyline in dos 2 better tbh! Dos2 better for me!
You nailed it with how good the elemental interactions are in dos 2. Playing as an elemental wizard in that game had to be my favorite build of any rpg I’ve played
My favourite party build in DOS2 is water+air wizard and shadowblade lone wolfs. Enemies rarely even get a chance to make a move, as they are constantly stunned, frozen, knocked down or transformed into a chicken :D
Personally I don't know why everyone says that dos 2 combat is better then bg3 combat. Alot of the encounters are poorly designed, and the armor system nukes half the builds in the game depending on what type you're doing. Leveling up is essentially just putting 1 more point into warfare for 5% more damage and that's it. Once you finish Warfare you start putting them into either ranger or scoundrel for more crit/high ground damage. I mean yeah you could spam your points everywhere for all the cool abilities, but they will do absolutely no damage. And as for the elemental effects, there is only one. Cursed fire. everywhere. Also the loot system is bad. You level up once or twice and everything you have is obsolete.
I would say it is because the action points system gives way more freedom and works very well compared to the (attack/bonus attack/movement) that BG3 is using, like movement is included in those AP, some moves cost more than others, it balances itself out pretty well. Of course, there's way to exploit this (just like in BG3 I guess) but it gives a better experience. I really like BG3, I think the art is splendid but DoS2 does a better job in combat in my mind, I've seen this opinion around usually by people who don't know DnD that well too.
@@ArtyMcMuffin True, the AP system is really good, and the flow of combat with different abilities can be awesome. It's just that the specific encounter designs and the gear do way too much damage to the core of combat.
Only two things I felt about DoS2 which were superior was build diversity with BG3 limiting itself in the mid and lategame due to not making adjustments to the 5e rules and some of the companion questlines where we don't even really have some for quite a few of the BG3 characters.
As far as combat is concerned, DOS2 is better for sure. The homebrew Larian combat fits far better. There's far less restrictions, spells combo with each other very nicely, and the environment takes far more importance. The story on both start off very interesting on the first Arc, and slowly fall off until they they both get an abrupt, rushed and unsatisfying ending. I'd argue that DOS2 is also far more replayable, as I finished it about 4 times, while after completing BG3 once I was more than done with it. BG3 shines with it's characters and dialogue, which is possible due to both the higher budget for voice acting and the fact that the conversations have a Dragon Age Origins/Bioware-like system, rather than remaining at the top down level that doesn't include any facial expressions for you to see.
After BG3 I purchased DOS 2 yesterday, what a great genre I was missing all these years (25 years playing). Without bg3 I wouldnt have entered this amazing dnd world
My wife and I have played/playing both now and already we're wishing this was more like DOS2 TBH. That game absolutely consumed us and was a blast all the way until the end where their awful coop main mission left us not wanting to finish. BG3 feels pretty lethargic and we're baffled why it even won GOTY over so many excellent games. DOS2 was all we played for nights on end, but BG3 we've only put maybe 15 hours into since hitting Xbox and aren't jumping to play after work at all. I would say DOS2 was absolutely the better game and balanced sweaty mechanics with ARPG streamlining incredibly well.
It's a very helpful comparison video. I'm thinking of getting the Divinity Original Sin 1 + 2 bundle now becuase it's on sale for 82% off. I'm comfortable with holding off on BG3 for now, waiting for a bigger discount and bug fixing.
I prefer DOS 2 tbh, something about the origin characters from Divinity 2 are more unique than the ones in BG3 and that's a big selling point for me. Yeah, you have way more companions in BG3, but it does kinda feel the same to each other with some minor differences. I love both games, but for me DOS2 is better of the two.
The Divinity setting is just giving Larian a much more freedom to create a fun gameplay system. I think many people sleeps on the biggest fun factor of the entire divinity series. Divinity games are generally very immersive because how they build their world up, being open/semi-open world where you can interact the gameworld in a lot deeper level than in most rpg's, quest design also has this freedom by having a more figuring out approach, rather than the classic "mmo like" quest hubs with very linear quests. It has a much better and rewarding exploration gameplay because of these. Having a classless approach is also supports this heavily, by letting the player play howewer they like. And these things are basically there in every divinity game from Divine Divinity to DOS2. It's one of the charm of divinity along with it's music.
As someone who cares a lot how a story ends, BG3 is leagues better than DOS2. DOS2's ending was so poorly told it still actively sours my mood on the game when I focus on it. Even playing DOS2 through with Fane the story completely fell apart for me by the boring island act and never recovered (I played the definitive edition). I also disagree combat was better in DOS2, if you like their armor system then I could see having that opinion but I thought enemies got too spongy by the end. That's not to say it was too hard, you could ramp up some of your abilities to match. But, it had the downside of making anything you didn't focus on look pretty worthless. Overall I liked what Larian did with the game, enough I happily jumped in on the BG3 early access and loved the experience! But, that doesn't change how lopsided my enjoyment was of DOS2.
I don't know which one of these games is the better one, but i do know that i like DOS 2 OST more. It simply manages to give me the chills even after years i've done my first playthrough.
Honestly, I think these clickbait titles detract from the channel. Your content can be interesting, but the titles are misleading, and it leads to an incoherent, clickbait-like experience.
I agree. Why do you need one to be better than the other? So many games go through the cycle of not being the best due to similar videos. I enjoyed Divinity, and BG3 is also enjoyable.
They are at the mercy of the RUclips algorithm. You pretty much have to have a click bait title + thumb nail to get traction. Sucks but I would rather the channel grow. I will watch all Fextra videos whether they are click bait or not.
I'd say BG3 is alot more beginner friendly. It's much more streamlined in the way combat plays out and the way you progress when leveling. Like you said, there are very few decisions when you level. In DOS2, you can create your own class more or less. There are alot more choices when you level aswell.
The biggest flaw of DOS2 in my opinion is worldbuilding, or lack of it. There is very little in DOS2 that exists indpendently of the story. Every bit of lore is about the main story and its chracters. Every setting, every character and every ecounter are pretty much there to service the story. It feels like a game setting, not a world.
Agreed 100%. I got DOS2 on sale a couple weeks ago entirely because of BG3. I know this genre, I like this genre, I'm used non-cinematic, isometric, turn-based, etc. etc. so that's not an issue. I appreciate DOS2's mechanics but I haven't found the worldbuilding compelling and I haven't been able to stick with it.
TL;DR DOS2's handling of items, combat, leveling, and more I couldn't get over, BG3 solved for me. I'll probably give DOS2 another change after I finish this run of BG3. The biggest thing that has me addicted to BG3, but unable to finish a single run of DOS2 is the skills. I do not like having to go to a shop to learn new abilities. It makes sense for a Wizard, but my fighter shouldn't need to read a book to learn new skills when he has been fighting and exploring to level up, but is just as knowledgeable as his level 1 self. I already worked to get the XP, I shouldn't then have to spend gold on a skill book AND travel to the right merchant with the skill books I need. I shouldn't need a wiki to level/build properly. I feel the same about the loot. I think static loot is better as we can plan builds and questlines for future playthroughs. If i find a cool item for a Wizard, I can get inspired to build a Wizard next playthrough to use it. In DOS2, I may not even see that item ever again. Then combat wise, I hate the Physical/Magical armor system. It bleeds into party composition as the ideal stack is all the same damage type.
I think, that BG3 does appeal to a wider audience than D:OS2, because of the dialog cutscenes which do provide more feeling of real interaction and also humorous situations. That is also IMHO the reason why so much more BG3 videos are on RUclips than for D:OS2. It is just more interesting for people and catches the interest of people which are not so much in the tactical gaming aspects. I would also prefer the D:OS2 combat mechanics, because it was very good. The mechanics of D&D is not bad, but it is very visibly optimized for playing on a table with real dice. That is for example the reason that armor does not subtract from damage, but decreases the likelihood of damage. You get a "miss" because of armor, which is a little bit weird when you think about it. But that is in D&D most likely because they wanted to reduce the number of dice rolls you need and also reduce the math operations the players have to make. In a video game, where the computer can make all this nasty bookkeeping, it is a little bit misplaced. That said, I like BG3 because of its better presented story. For me the story has at least the same weight as the game mechanics and the fighting system. So for me currently BG3 is the best game I ever played -- but a similar made D:OS3 could replace it. I have played D:OS2 only partially yet, but I think I will continue when I make a pause at BG3. I really would hope for a D:OS3 like you said with the same quality of cutscenes but the D:O2 combat mechanics.
It's not about "tactical game aspects", BG3 is simply more marketable because it has bigger scope, better cutscenes, you can actually see character faces... DOS2 was niche exactly because it lacked those elements, most people can't get a feel of gameplay on a youtube video, but graphics and story are easy to appreciate on video.
Also D&D and Baldurs Gate are widely known and big franchises while Divinity was a small euro jank title with a niche following like Gothic or Sacred and so on. Like many people refers to DOS2 as Divinity 2 while there is an actual Divinity 2 game out there.@@pneumonoultramicroscopicsi4065
Yeah, the story and dialogue presentation is ultimately the breaking point for which you prefer. I didn't really care for the story or characters in either game, so I didn't value it remotely as much as the actual gameplay, so DOS2 ends up being my favorite. If I was deeply engaged in the story of BG3, it might be different.
My least favorite part of DOS2 was the combat. Chaotic, everything is always on fire, and random people joining almost every fight wasnt enjoyable. BG3 was soooooo much more fun. Then again I play D&D so it was much more familiar and easy to get into.
For me yes the combat system was way better and fun compared to dice system in baldur's gate 3 i didn't like it to be honest also the soundtrack in divinity original sin 2 is top notch
I kept saying exactly that to all my friends who had known DOS2 and not BG3 right around launch. "BG3 is a better rpg experience than dos2, but DOS2 is a better game(play experience) than bg3." But of course its subjective, some went for bg3 and agreed, others thought Bg3 is just objectively better.
For me I enjoy the combat of BG3 more for three main reasons: - Separation of movement from the rest of the action economy in BG3 makes movement feel less punishing for melee characters. I hated losing 1/2 potential attacks in DOS2 to just having to move around the battle field - I hated the magic D/physical D system in DOS2. Especially on bosses where it felt like half the party's damage just ended up being wasted. Of course this makes certain choices strategically more important. But it can be very punishing if you have a heavy magical or heavy physical character in the party where they often run out of meaningful choices in battle. In multiplayer modes it made a cooperative game feel competitive as you and friends often feel like they're working against each other. - DOS2 just disables your characters too much. My "favorite" thing was stepping over a pixel of electrified water and losing my whole turn. I get that's the point of the elemental system. But enemies often could perfectly avoid terrain. In BG3 they both added a readable warning to the movement line when you're going to pass though something dangerous, and made these interactions less punishing. The movement warning when you're about to move though potentially haphazard terrain is something that really should be backported into DOS2.
Bg3 does have random loot. The loot that spawns in containers isn’t always the same. I think most of the loot is static, but there are some chests and containers that have random loot from what I’ve experienced.
It certainly isn't much if it does have occasional random loot. I've noticed the same rotten eggs being in a barrel in act I in all 4 of my playthroughs. I'd say upwards of 90% is static.
While playing DOS 2 back when it came out, I would just sit and listen to the music pretty often. It really blew me away, and the touch of letting you change the soundtracks main instrument. I always went with the cello, it was just too haunting and beautiful.
I think BG3 wins in terms of graphics (and conversation cutscenes) as well as benefitting from the DnD ruleset when it comes to things like character creation and variety of classes, spells etc. But Divinity 2 was on a much smaller budget and development time period so it's hard to compare the two.
Bg3 chaining itself to the DnD systems brought it down so much imo. A lot of the time while playing, it feels like it could've been a better game if they just did their Larian things instead of having to do DnD things...
I'd like to recommend another 5e game, Solasta. It has a feature that I love and you can't barely see anywhere, and that is playing as a party rather than a character. There is no MC, no hero destined to save everyone, no chosen of the prophecy. You create your 4 characters and play with them, they are random adventurers doing random adventures.
Notice how he plays D:OS2 with only two characters? Yeah, the encounters are only designed with 2 characters in mind; it's a holdover from D:OS1. The encounters are way too small otherwise. So many mods try to fix this with 6 PCs and more enemies, but then combat drags to a slow crawl. The Fast Forward mod tried to fix this too but it's a bit unstable and enemies take a similar amount of time to make decisions. Each map in this game is composed of a series of small battle arenas in which 3-5 enemies fight 2 PC's. Yes, it's that limited.
DOS2 is significantly more fun than BG3, in my opinion. The D&D systems are awful. Progression, combat, etc. If BG3 had the DOS2 progression and combat, BG3 would be the better, more fun game.
Surface propagation in D:OS2 is insane, especially how the bleeding of so many enemies contaminates the entirety of the surface they stand on. In the second half, nearly every combat encounter devolves into necrofire; it's absurd. In so many fights I can't even see what's going on.
Per Wizard of the Coast's conversation with Larian Studios: Their rights to produce BG3 would depend on Larian Studios' success with OS l and ll. There would be no BG3 (at least not the version developed by Larian Studios) without the existence of OS l and ll.
I've been telling my friends who played only BG3, that DOS2 combat system is like Baldurs Gate Unleashed. You get more freedom and flexibility in how you spend your turn, all thanks to the AP system is just muah
Next time larian, fuck wizard of the coast, fuck dnd, and just do with this new talent and tech build upon your own tabletop experience. Don`t make deals with the devil.
DOS was better in every aspect. BG3 is grate, but DOS 2 was better. And I feel a bit sorry how underrated DOS is compared to the current success of BG3. It's a bit like with John Wick, when a relatively small handful of enthusiasts were excited about the first part, which the mainstream considered to be a decent movie at best, but with a lot of criticism and mixed opinions, and now the 4th part, which is worse in every respect, is praised as some incredibly good film and a great masterpiece. No, DOS was better, and we were there from the beginning when none of you were listening, and most of you still didnt play that game. And I'm a little worried about the future, because I count on more DOS in the future, and now Larian basically has no choice but to make another BG3... Ehhhh, first world problems ;)
Read more: fextralife.com/
Live on Twitch: twitch.tv/fextralife
💖 Become a Fextralife VIP fextralife.com/Be-a-vip/
We are blessed to have both :)
And yes, I can list different things that make each of them is better than the other.
DOS2 > BG3. Combat in DOS2 Is so much more immersive. Everything you do can impact the entire tide of the battle. BG3s battle system seemed geared toward not thinking as much. In DOS, you needed to get up high for spells and bows. Doesn’t really matter in BG3. In DOS2, you needed to plan elemental attacks whereas it wasn’t as important in BG3.
Of course it is better , way more better
The weird thing for me is they are both masterpieces in their own rights. Ill be in the mood for DOS2 or BG3 sometimes. Larian has struck gold in this genre. I cant wait to see what comes after BG3
Divinity Original Sin 3
If I had to Guess BG4. It was probably DOS3 but they probably said screw it turn this into bg4 make more money.
perhaps a “Zariel’s gate” is a possibility 😂
@@sirownzalotgaming3025 If following their original plans, BG3 is the last to be run on the current engine. DOS3 is tentatively next on a brand new engine.
DoS 3 of course
The cutscenes with bg3 are what carry it to be the better game. It cannot be understated how powerful they are for telling the story
But that's just that... Cutscenes. I don't think cutscenes are enough to make a GAME better.
@@Quakez0rExactly!
divinity story and characters are better to me, plus a couple of things here and there on the combat side, but bg3 have better setting, map, character performance and the fight system i think its more enjoyable.
I have been playing divinity 2 again and this is 100% the most noticeable difference
@@Quakez0rI greatly disagree. Video games are still a visual medium you can’t just say the “video” part doesn’t matter. Going from all text to cinematic mo-cap cutscenes is a huge leap especially for crpgs
I cannot wait for DOS III to implement all they've learned from BG3. I personally love the tone of both DOS games as I find RPGs are just much better when they don't take themselves too seriously. But Divinity is so great and I love actions points in combat, you can really do some creative things with them.
Troll toll! Troll toll!
I find it hard to care about anything in RPGs that don’t take themselves seriously though even though I appreciate humor. I didn’t care about anything in DS1 really, DS2 more so but I hope they lean more into the serious side and keep humor secondary.
@@dundalis weakest points for me... the dumb humor for no reason and the story. story wasnt good.
@@dundalisSerious stories only work if they're actually compelling, which most CRPG stories aren't.
@@skeletonwar4445 W opinion. Most CRPGs are just fun games which shouldnt take itself way too seriously. I mean you have character creation in the beginning, you cannot have your own custom character in a deep compelling story, it has to be pre written to work well with other characters.
The next Larian game is what i am looking forward to. This is the first time, that it is about the developer itself. I really love the games Larian delivers.
I hope, and PRAY (even as an atheist), that Larian gets their shit together and NOT implement D&D rules on their next game!!!
@@strahnbrad3979you make it sound like that’s all they’ve done? Of course the D&D game they just released has D&D rules?
@@joeykyle492 well I'm sorry if I sounded bitter but this so-called D&D rules made their game more complicated than it should be!! I don't hate the tabletop game itself but I hate when it gets implemented to video games!!!!
@@strahnbrad3979 personally I think it’s just a matter of getting used to it. Since I’ve played a bit of dnd, I think the games system is very easy to understand.
@@strahnbrad3979bruh how was it hard? 😂
I think we are all in agreement that DOS 3 is gonna be amazing.
Imagine DOS with BG3 cinematic dialogues
I just heard Larin is moving away from cRPGs
where did you hear that.
@@halfknots They are moving away from DnD and aren't going to make any content for baldurs gate 3. They are not moving away from cRPG's. DOS is not a part of DnD.
Whew! Glad to hear that. Honestly I'd love to see what they do with another rpg system. Or if they use their engine from these two bangers in a new way.
Divinity Original Sin 2 will always be my personal Number 1
Jesus wept….again
Absolutely in the same boat. Divinity will always have a special place in my heart
As someone who had never played D&D but loved BG3, I’m very interested in checking out DOS as well. This video was really informative for me. Thanks!
divinity original sin 2 is amazing :d baldur for me is 9,5 divinity original sin 2 for me is 9
both are very good.
divinity original sin 1 have much worse graphic and is smaller so ur choice xd but 2 is masterpiece
As someone in the same boat as you, I can only recommend it.
I felt like BG3 kind of limited itself by shackling itself to the DnD systems, which made DOS2 more fun for me personally.
DOS2 is like KOTOR. If you like DnD, you have to play DOS2, just like if you like Star Wars, you have to play KOTOR (free on prime for the holiday, btw).
@@skeletonwar4445same with me. I liked DOS2 better also.
@@rasmasyeanKOTOR is unplayable in 2024 unfortunately. At least for me. It’s a 20 year old game and way too outdated
Wizards of the Coast doesn't want a DM mode in BG3 because it would be too much of a competitor for their new virtual table top for DnD that they are currently developing, at least in my opinion.
Not just that but they were after the almighty dollar for a while. Didn't they go all copyright crazy and take back their open game license?
I like DOS 2 more, but BG3 is still great.
Me too
One big point in BG3's favor that you didn't really touch on are the roleplaying and exploration aspects of it. D:OS2's combat is more fun, IMHO, but outside of combat, I have way more fun in BG3. Many conversations are almost as engaging as combat in BG3, and I rarely felt that way in D:OS2
the reaper coast ( dos:2 second act ) is a very big open area i'd say, it's probably as big as bg3 3rd act in terms of map size is really amazing to explore with tons and tons of mini dungeons , animal npcs, dead npc spirits and secret areas
@@chocolatine1690I don't mean the size of the map, I mean the depth of the gameplay while exploring and having conversations.
100% agree. And for that reason, to me DOS1 is better than 2, i prefer the combat in 1, the armor system in 2 limited the combat, the spells
oh man i found outside of combat very tedious, having to always go back to camp to refresh spells and stuff.
nah the story, exploration and actions-depth in divinity overshadows EVERY other game. i mean, where would you find a game where you can go out of your way to make a pact with an ancient god, a demon and/or sell your literal soul for gold? this game makes exploration SO immersive its undescribably perfect
I think you broke down the key differences and strong points of both games really well here, they're both spectacular games but they do things differently enough to incentivise playing both for different reasons
My crew of 4 had more fun playing through DOS II than we did BG3 but that isn't to say we didn't have fun with BG3. Both are amazing games in their own right and I had more fun doing a solo playthrough of BG3 than I did DOS II. I think the pace of battle lends DOS II to being a better multiplayer game. Time between turns in BG3 can be pretty long due to the methodical nature of combat.
Same! Playing BG3 with my friends is kind of annoying. I was hoping it would be more like SWTOR, but when I play BG3 solo it is so much more fun IMO.
Agree!
@@smoke9047it's because BG3 is much more story and dialogue heavy than DOS2. Half the game IS just talking. Friends doing dumb stuff, talking to people without you, and all that stuff can ruin the game a bit. Divinity you can just rush your way through haphazardly doing cool shit and have a blast
@@sparkyspinz9897Yeah, this was very noticeable for me and my friends. A lot of BG3's upsides compared to DOS2 have to do with the story of the companions.
Stories that you're gonna kind of have to ignore or at least pay less attention to, if you're doing multiplayer.
I think BG3 is a game so focused in decisions and narratives, that playing co-op might be detrimental of that aspect of player agency and decision making. After all, you'll have to agree with your partner how you'll both play. DOS seems like less dependable of story moments and more combat and exploration bound, so I might be more fun to play with friends.
I agree, ..A DOS3 or what ever Larian Game with basically the combat system and character building system + the not mentioned crafting options/opportunities of DOS2 (maybe all a bit more advanced due to technology development since 2017) + the storytelling quality and cinematics of BG3 would be my personal all time RPG heaven.
I have not played either of the divinity games. But you just convinced me to buy it tonight.
I utterly loved both, my two favorite games since Skyrim, but I would give the edge to DOS2 due to its more engaging combat mechanics. In BG3, sheer damage output trumps everything, whereas in DOS2 crowd control is pivotal which gives combat a more strategic and challenging appeal. Lets just say that I used MANY more resurrection scrolls in DOS2 than in BG3 hehehe. That being said, the script writing and cinematic production of BG3 is in a different level altogether.
Hmm idk. In DOS2 damage is all that matters. Once you break an enemy's armor (with damage) all you need to do is CC them for one turn and they're dead.
That was one of the things I notice - DOS2 combat has less RNG, is more about positioning and types of armour affect target priority. These things make it more tactical and interesting than in BG3.
Agree. DOS2 was my first turn based RPG and I loved the combat once I put some time in. It had its problems (constitution being useless for example) but felt much more engaging.
BG3 definitely feels more dumbed down combat wise and feels a lot easier but that's okay. It's a wonderful game and I love it!
For real, Divinity 2 feels like it's less RNG and damage dependant. You really have to think on your positions and the enemy's so you can create damage points through environmental hazards or AOE attacks. Even the fact that you have to break armor gives options to which type you use and how much power you put into certain enemies.
@@antonytomas1 Yeah, right. Try playing Blind Honour mode and see if you still think "DOS2 damage is all that matters". You must have played like story mode.
I like DOS 2 over BG3 because I am not limited to how many time I can cast my spells. In BG3 I can cast them 2 times then short rest which has a limit.
I like basic mana systems, cast spells -> uses mana. Low on mana -> drink potion. I hate being limited to hoarding my spells in case a bigger fight is ahead.
DnD restrictions.
its the d&d restrictions for balance and lore. mages become extremely over powered in d&d. To keep players from starting off over powered, mages have spell usage limits.
In lore, originally, d&d tried to be "realistic" in a sense. You adventure for a bit, get tired, rest, then continue ur adventure. Kinda like going for a hike then fighting a bear and wanting to rest after. Combat engagements were spread out far enough that realistically, ur character should and realistically would take a break inbetween confrontations.
p.s. i know you didnt ask. But just wanted to share for context
Spell slots are an interesting idea, but they just didnt work. In a tabletop setting the DM can use them to control the pace of a session, in game you can pretty much long-rest unrestricted. I found myself not using spells, more because I couldnt be bothered to long rest, than because I actually needed to reserve my resources.
@@sonic-bbThey made it also important in BG3 in the way that many events and storylines and dialogues are happening during the long rests. People just don‘t get along with it which I don‘t understand. You are supposed to only have a limited amount of fights and the long rests aren‘t a unnecessary in between mechanic, but a way for you to experience a lot of character and story progression
DoS2 is a special game for me. I discovered it while going through a rough couple of months and being able to look forward to and escape while playing through the game made a huge difference for me personally. I do also love BG3 and thankfully times ended up getting better by the time it came around, but I'll always have DoS2 on a slightly higher pedestal because of how it provided some respite during those darker times.
Both 2 are of my all time favs, stories are different but how the story is told and gameplay isn't much different, both are amazing. BG3 takes the spot for me though, it's just so beautiful. Larian is what Bioware now lacks.
Imagine bioware and Larian making a star wars game together lol :o
I think one of the main things is if you played DoS2 first you may well have fallen in love with the game like no other. No one had ever done what that game did before. I don't think you can get that same feeling again, even iif BG3 does many things better. DoS2 had my going "oh my god I cannot believe they did this" so many times. BG3 was just a higher budget and more refined extension of that. It didn't have the same novelty. Of course if you play BG3 first you'll probably have a very different perspective.
DoS2 wowed me with it's cleverness, it's freedom, and made me laugh and cry many times. And often laugh and cry at the same time. And I'll never forget the Loshe ending.
It's also a shame that DoS2 starts so lowkey and silly, I know a lot of people didn't get far enough to see how great it becomes.
its true what you say. i played baldurs gate 1 &2 and icewind dale first. Neverwinter nights as well. and they basically feal like what divinity original sin 2 felt like (outside of combat). So for me, divinity didnt do anything first. The most unique thing was being able to interact with the environment. But elder scrolls games already had that 😅
still loved divinity tho
I love both games. DOS2 for its cheeky tone (which, let's admit, was already way toned down when compared to DOS1), the combat, customisation, basically all the things you mention in the video. BG3 is shinier and feels more personal, and the sheer amount of RP choices with the world's reactivity is really something.
I am very much looking forward to DOS3, as I'm positive Larian will combine the best of both games (climbing on boxes!).
As someone who only recently played their first run of DOS1 after multiple runs of DOS2, I am glad they toned it down a bit.
I absolutely love the tone of DOS2, but DOS1 was just too goofy at times. The skeleton designs were dorky, and that one enemy that kept screaming rhymes like "tweedledee tweedledoo" mid battle is an incredibly vivid memory for the wrong reasons lol.
Totally agree with this. My absolute favourite thing in DOS2 was levelling up, making those tough decisions about what to put points into, making a fun build for combat etc. In BG3 I was always so disappointed when levelling up, it wasn't fun at all. I'm definitely more of a combat/character customisation player than a story player.
More a story player here, never managed to finish a single larian game cause their stories or better said their general world feel somehow annoyed me. I knew they made great games, but their storytelling somehow annoyed me.
Originally i was scared for BG3 cause of this. I finished bg2 over 8 times afterall unlike larian games. Glad to say the forgotten realms setting offset the weird way larian usually manages to put me off.
Welcome to the inherent flaw in most D20 systems - limited opportunity for character customisation as you level up. Your chosen class dictates largely what you gain at each level and when with limited choice. It’s why I avoid d20 rpgs like the plague.
@@cornwelj i mean they also simplified it for BG3. Pretty sure you definitely get more options in 5th edition table top
It’s kind of like the last record a band puts out on an indie label vs their major label debut. For many bands, those two records end up being the best of their careers. I wonder if these two games will end up being the best that Larian ever put out.
I told people that I preferred DOS 2 because of the combat being better, (and I played both on release on PlayStation)as the BG3 combat felt restrictive, and some friends couldn't understand why. And i think this video has a point that i didn't think about, the customization. I could be a dual wielding swordsman with lightening magic in DOS 2, and that just makes for such a better experience for me, including being able to make choices that even out my party members, and make them a more cohesive team. (also just think the DOS 2 spells looked and were cooler compared to the BG3 spells).
Also I'm not the biggest fan of the D&D long/short rest mechanic.
I appreciate the motion capture in BG3, but that doesn't make a game for me. I must admit, seeing and performing certain dice rolls, is fun, but the action point system is also better than the D&D action per turn system as well.
It's like I'd rather play DOS 2 any day, and it's not even close. But i like BG3.
Long rest is especially egregious, they tried to add some story there to make it more palatable but i still wouldn't miss the system if they've done away with it
@@pneumonoultramicroscopicsi4065I think the worst part is that it doesn't even actually limit anything, since a good 98% of the game is completely unaffected by how much you rest.
All it does it create the illusion of limitation and delay the more fun parts of the game.
DOS2 is the greatest game ever made 🙌. Had way more fun than im having now playing BG3. Id also disagree on the whimsical comments. The music score for DOS2 made it such a more immersive experience with plenty of serious moments inbetween. Also the narrator is fantastic. Characters and combat are superior in DOS2.
Dos2 overall better story, better "world" and most importantly the combat is more fun: I find D&D combat abilities to be quite boring honestly. My Lae'Zel spent 200 hours fending with a greatsword with no special moves whatsoever. Effective but boring.
better story? what?
@@FreeFlow__ BG3 has obviously an overall better storytelling and richer dubbing thanks to its cinematic approach and higher budget, but in the end it’s the usual same old boring Forgotten Realms story I’ve been experiencing for more than 20 years.
DOS2 was a breeze of fresh air in this sense.
My favorite thing about BG3 is how insane it promises DOS3 will be. If DOS3 has the storytelling and depth of BG3 story, it will be the single best game to ever be made
You don't want to set your expectations that high, or you'll just inevitably be disappointed.
I expect DOS3 to be like DOS2 and BG3: a really good game that will improve some elements from previous games while also losing some elements that I will miss.
Games never just linearily improve, that's just the reality of all creative work.
If we had a game with DOS combat and BG3 cinematics/writing/acting you'd have my perfect game. Loved both, but really missed DOS combat. I think Larian leaned too hard onto replicating DnD and could have amended some things to translate it better from tabletop.
I think alot of it has to do with it not being their IP. Wizards of the Coast were most likely making alot of the decisions on what they could and could not add. In the DOS series they can do whatever they want, since it's their own baby. Hopefully DOS3 will have exactly what you mentioned.
On balance probably prefer BG3, love the story and the characters but I probably do prefer the combat in DOS2.
DOS3 with the production values and scope of BG3 would be incredible. But to be honest anything Larian do will be a day 1 purchase for me.
A good comparison =) I love `em both ofc, but if I had to choose Id take DoS2. Lohse might be my favorite charracter of gaming. (Close one with Sephiroth) +like Fex said, the combat! In BG3 I wanted the combat to be over with so can see the story. In DoS2 I was looking forward to any combat. ..it may be that I have been a tabletop roleplayer for over 30 years and newer cared of D20-base systems.
Companions are pretty good in DOS2. However, the fact that they completely ignore each other is inexcusable.
oh boo hoo 🙄
@@GMOTP5738You're right boo hoo bg3 is better
@@GMOTP5738 @rushpatriot2866 you guys fully missed the point of this comment. Way to go fostering a toxic community by downing on this guy instead of adding constructive criticism or challenging the argument.
Red Prince and Sebille: you wut?
But yeah I get what you mean
@@harper3579"oh my science i cant roleplay having friends and having sex so this GAME is better because it allows me to do that regardless of quality of gameplay or anything else"
Couldn't agree more. For all the things BG3 excelled at, the turn-based combat of DOS2 is unrivaled. So good you were actually craving combat.
I like the actual fighting and "classes" better in Divinity but everything else is better in BG3. BG3 is held back a bit by using the DnD system but its still great.
I have been wondering about this ever since I started playing BG3. And my conclusion is that each game has something going for it and in the end I just love them both equally for what they are.
Here are some of my personal highlights:
Divinity: combat system, music
Baldur's Gate: graphics, storytelling (cutscenes, camp interactions)
both equally: companions, story
I am a big fan of both, at this point, I will vote for DoS2, I still can't forget how shocked I was when I played through DoS2 the first time, sadly I don't think I feel the same when I played through BG3
I never finished DOS2, I had about 45 hours in before dropping it due to life and work circumstances at the time. I've since finished BG3 and now I'm itching to start Divinity 2 fresh all over again just for the experience, and I know Larian already put the good work into it already anyway.
For my what made me enjoy bg3 more than dos2 was the level of interaction with the outcomes of the game/characters, and what kind of dialogue and choice is represented. In dos2 it was fairly defined outcomes of the story and the discussions.
dos2 character builds definitely better. I think combat I love everything better about dos2 OTHER THAN the way they split defenses. Usually ends up more awkward than fun.
Yeah but bg3 always has the same endings regardless of what "choice" you make lol
@@GMOTP5738ummm, not always? The essentials of the ending may be all of us defeating the Nether Brain, yes, but the aftermath, no. The illithid in the end can be your character, can be any companion, can even be the Comet Prince. Not to mention, each different illithid will trigger different outcomes, let say the Comet Prince become the illithid, Laezel can choose to kill him or not. And that’s just some example, there are many that I can’t say because its just…. Too many, like if Gale sacrifice himself by exploding we got different ending too
@@Rodzario those aren’t really all individual endings. Just flavours of the same ‘Netherbrain Dies’ ending. The differences aren’t enough. BTW Larian advertised 17k endings even before the epilogue was released, at said point there being only 2 endings.
After many hours of coop Baldur's Gate 3 my mates and I are still of the opinion that the combat system and character customization in Divinity Original Sin 2 is more appealing. What they've done with story in Baldur's Gate 3 is simply outstanding. But alot of the things we liked most about DOS2 just aren't in BG3.
I think BG3 has weak loot. They could have done more with that. Maybe a smithing / upgrading system to make stuff better as you progress.
Agreed. And there are just too many powerful magic items.
But upgrades? Nah. An actual crafting system? Hell yes.
@PaulRGauthier i was thinking like upgrading some of those early weapons to like +2 or +3 variants. But since we cant find very many +2 / +3 weapons, maybe we craft them.
BG3 has Lore I’m familiar with as well as rules. I found DOS1 too much “figure it out yourself” and the fact that they mixed the quest and general info log together made it hard to decipher what I was supposed to be doing. Sounds like this was fixed in DOS2, but I haven’t played that yet. Regardless, I guess because I’ve played D&D since a youngster, especially the BG series, that’s where my heart is too. Again it’s familiarity with the whole D&D systems. I want to try DOS2 though as I did like some aspects of DOS1.
More of Divinity!!! Original Sin or the Dragon series.
Honestly, WoC is holding back BG3 and Larian. I hope Larian focuses more on their IPs because they don't lose out on other DnD IPs. Especially now that they have gained a huge following and fame, they can introduce into the mainstream spotlight those Divinity gems
pf2e would of been a way better system. 5e Is just meh, but I am shocked they made it as entertaining as they did with 5e rule set.
divinity original sin 3 is going to be huge now that larian is well known
@@ezeess7239 idk if they will make orginal sin 3. The story seemed finished to me. But def something in the divinity world. They have books and other games in universe.
Wdym Dragon? Dragon Age?
in their update notes on steam, they said they wont be working on another d&d game and will stay an independent game company
I enjoyed DOII more. The spell rest system really annoyed me in BG3.
Yeah, everything being on rest-based charges made combat an annoying chore rather than a fun playground.
Ya, because of that crap my first character I made was just a fighter so I didn’t have to deal with that on my main character. Clerics feel totally gimped because of the spell rest system.
@@empirednw6624 Yeah. It feels fine later on but the early levels are a huge pain in the ass.
This is why I stopped playing after 10 hours. If mods dont fix this, then I'm never coming back to this game.
@@medalgearsalad1419 I actually got used to it in BG3. I highly recommend you give it another go, maybe focus on melee a little more, at least in the beginning. The game is amazing. Just different from Divinity.
So i recently got into crpgs again. For the price of bg3, i was able to get dos1 and 2 with pathfinder king maker and wrath of the righteous. I eventually am going to buy bg3, after ive beat all these four games. My point is enjoying these older titles will let me understand bg3 better.
Get pillars of eternity 1 and 2 next. 2 is better than 1 though. You can even import your character into the sequel. Mass effect style. Oh and wrath of the righteous is reallyyyyyyy long but good.
Personally I prefer the more familiar MMORPG-style stats system behind DOS2 (For example, questions of armor, evasion, and accuracy are far more intuitive).
However, BG3 is infinitely more approachable to a wider audience. The first act is streamlined and cinematic, and more fun to do as a group.
DOS2's first act was a little overcooked in early access and dumped too many mechanics on players up front.
I have to agree with everything in this video, all the points you made are spot on with what I think. Even the decision. Fantastic video.
100% agree with you here. I can accept a game's mid-level story if the gameplay is awesome, but I can't accept or play a game if the gameplay is shit. I still haven't finished BG3 even though people love it and tout how great it is, because in my opinion I keep thinking about how much better DOS2 gameplay and character progression is. I just get bored playing the game, to the point where I don't care about the story. That doesn't mean BG3 isn't a good game, but it's based on DnD 5th edition, which is so bad, that it drove me to write my own game which is now nearly complete. The character customization and progression is just as important as the story if not more-so, and if that is lacking, then that takes a lot of excitement away from the actual playing of the game itself.
The major thing i like more about DoS is that it is the studios ip letting them do what ever they want with the material where as BG3 is D&D ip and limited to that lore and game mechanics. Both good. I dont like whimisical. I greatly prefer darker stories. I also dont like feeling like i should play a premade character for story vs making my own. Both games do this. DoS synergies in combat with elements and environments is way more interesting imo. I cant wait for a DOS3. Wizards of the Coast is a shit company and Larian doesnt need their IP to sale games.
DOS2 has much better combat mechanics
If you really think about that's more on WotC than on Larian
@@J.R.Swish1Correct.
BG3 emulates DnD very closely.
The problem with this is that DnD combat sucks ass in a videogame format.
@@skeletonwar4445 also sucks ass in actual tabletop 😊
@@robulusmaximus it definitely does not suck ass in 5e. You talk like it is 4e
@@skeletonwar4445 it actually doesnt emulate d&d close enough. Things about the combat are limited or changed. And the character creation is heavily limited. Solasta is more faithful recreation of d&d 5th rules than baldurs gate 3
My one and only gripe with DOS:2 was that since you xp for ALL combat meant that solutions other than combat left you noticeably weaker for longer. In fact I more or less found I had to murder EVERYONE in the first zone because it made a significant difference in how fast I leveled. Still though one of my favorite turn based combat rpgs ever.
Yeah, unfortunately. You can either sneak out of Fort Joy at level 4 or murder everyone inside and leave at level 6 😅
I have spent a lot of time playing DOS2. I played the original Baldur's Gate many, many years ago, but haven't looked at BG3. That being said, what I like in a game is a good story with a sense of immersion. My problem with Baldur's Gate is that it has to constantly remind you that you're playing a D&D game, and, to me, this breaks that sense of immersion. I don't need a graphic telling me I'm rolling a D20.
My main wish for DOS3 would be removal of the memory and source point systems. Out of the two I'm more ok with dealing with the source point system, but my group just agreed to use mods to remove the memory system completely. As for the source points, I just tend to dislike how limited they "can" feel.
There was a spot in Act II with an infinite source that we could use which was nice. But I always found myself holding onto the points for some encounter that felt "worth" using them up for, but almost never using them. I wouldn't mind a once per entire combat type skill or something along those lines though.
Yeah, this was also my personal worst thing about bg3.
Spell slots and rest cooldowns felt as if *every single* ability and spell were on the same, annoying limit as Source skills.
Especially since, just like Source Points, you can just infinitely replenish charges and slots out of combat with zero downside.
Just annoying, not difficult.
Source points have the exact same problem as spell slots, in that they are easy to replenish, but its just annoying to have to keep doing so.
Memory slots though... I feel like they are quite important to the way the combat works. Maybe it could be tied to levels (and gear, feats) instead.
I think Solasta needs to be mentioned alongside BG3 as a modern definitive dnd experience. It’s far from perfect but Id say it’s almost closer to dnd than BG3 was and has far more of the more modern dnd customization choices for race and class
I was really disappointed when Larian didn't end up going with a vertical movement mechanic for fly like Solasta. There are definitely some things Solasta did mechanics wise better than BG3 which is interesting. I'm hoping they start a new IP that uses everything they have learned.
For me, yeah. DOS2 combat is just pure fun.
I like random items a little bit more (surprise), but I like the effects on stuff more in BG3. I like the div2 characters a decent amount more but like how there is more content in bg3. I like the dialogues and choices more in BG3. I like the elemental focus and action point system more for combat, but like the BG3 combat improvements such as alll party members can move at the same time. I like the leveling in dos2 more also. Difficulty is better in dos2 i find.
The thing that carries BG3 is cinematics and open-world exploration and size. The amount of content is dope, and the polish is nice.
I really love the whimsy of dos2, and I'm also a fan of the dragon age games and dragon age origins especially had a much darker, serious (sometimes even horror) tone that I also really love. I think both tones have their place and both are extremely enjoyable depending on the mood you're in. My main complaint with both dos2 and bg3 is the lack of a codex. dos2 has a sort of minimal codex in the quest journal section, but there is no real thorough codex like you can find in the dragon age games. I know I'm probably in the minority, but I will read every codex entry in a game (except some of the combat ones that I already know), and I think a well-written codex (see: dragon age) can do so much to flesh out a world and make the world and the lore feel truly alive.
I think it is, at least in every way that matters to me the most... game play, combat and character builds/progression is vastly superior in DoS 2.
My opinion is the exact same as yours. I like Divinity world (not restricted), characters, armors, and combat more. If DOS3 gets cut-scene dialogues, third person view, story (darker), and all the QOL improvement as Baldur's Gate, it would be the ideal CRPG for me.
The story of Lohse was beautiful and touching! I really loved it.. Dos 2 was/is a amazing game! Bg3 was fun but I did not like the end boss a big brain 🧠 haha come on, it was fun but yeah idk I liked the storyline in dos 2 better tbh! Dos2 better for me!
You nailed it with how good the elemental interactions are in dos 2. Playing as an elemental wizard in that game had to be my favorite build of any rpg I’ve played
My favourite party build in DOS2 is water+air wizard and shadowblade lone wolfs. Enemies rarely even get a chance to make a move, as they are constantly stunned, frozen, knocked down or transformed into a chicken :D
Personally I don't know why everyone says that dos 2 combat is better then bg3 combat. Alot of the encounters are poorly designed, and the armor system nukes half the builds in the game depending on what type you're doing. Leveling up is essentially just putting 1 more point into warfare for 5% more damage and that's it. Once you finish Warfare you start putting them into either ranger or scoundrel for more crit/high ground damage. I mean yeah you could spam your points everywhere for all the cool abilities, but they will do absolutely no damage. And as for the elemental effects, there is only one. Cursed fire. everywhere. Also the loot system is bad. You level up once or twice and everything you have is obsolete.
I would say it is because the action points system gives way more freedom and works very well compared to the (attack/bonus attack/movement) that BG3 is using, like movement is included in those AP, some moves cost more than others, it balances itself out pretty well. Of course, there's way to exploit this (just like in BG3 I guess) but it gives a better experience.
I really like BG3, I think the art is splendid but DoS2 does a better job in combat in my mind, I've seen this opinion around usually by people who don't know DnD that well too.
@@ArtyMcMuffin True, the AP system is really good, and the flow of combat with different abilities can be awesome. It's just that the specific encounter designs and the gear do way too much damage to the core of combat.
Only two things I felt about DoS2 which were superior was build diversity with BG3 limiting itself in the mid and lategame due to not making adjustments to the 5e rules and some of the companion questlines where we don't even really have some for quite a few of the BG3 characters.
As far as combat is concerned, DOS2 is better for sure.
The homebrew Larian combat fits far better. There's far less restrictions, spells combo with each other very nicely, and the environment takes far more importance.
The story on both start off very interesting on the first Arc, and slowly fall off until they they both get an abrupt, rushed and unsatisfying ending.
I'd argue that DOS2 is also far more replayable, as I finished it about 4 times, while after completing BG3 once I was more than done with it.
BG3 shines with it's characters and dialogue, which is possible due to both the higher budget for voice acting and the fact that the conversations have a Dragon Age Origins/Bioware-like system, rather than remaining at the top down level that doesn't include any facial expressions for you to see.
After BG3 I purchased DOS 2 yesterday, what a great genre I was missing all these years (25 years playing). Without bg3 I wouldnt have entered this amazing dnd world
My wife and I have played/playing both now and already we're wishing this was more like DOS2 TBH. That game absolutely consumed us and was a blast all the way until the end where their awful coop main mission left us not wanting to finish. BG3 feels pretty lethargic and we're baffled why it even won GOTY over so many excellent games. DOS2 was all we played for nights on end, but BG3 we've only put maybe 15 hours into since hitting Xbox and aren't jumping to play after work at all.
I would say DOS2 was absolutely the better game and balanced sweaty mechanics with ARPG streamlining incredibly well.
It's a very helpful comparison video.
I'm thinking of getting the Divinity Original Sin 1 + 2 bundle now becuase it's on sale for 82% off.
I'm comfortable with holding off on BG3 for now, waiting for a bigger discount and bug fixing.
Hot take, I like the combat in DOS 2 a lot more than in BG3. In BG3 it feels a lot more complex than it needs to be.
I felt the opposite. I like bg3 has separate movement and actions where in dos2 it's the same. It makes me reluctant to move my characters lol
It's because of the short/long rest systems. They were created to work in a ttrpg game and are just dogwater for a videogame with a static DM.
Absolutely agree
I say yes, mainly due to forced long/short rest necessity. That drastically slows down the fun of the game. Cooldown are a billions times better.
I prefer DOS 2 tbh, something about the origin characters from Divinity 2 are more unique than the ones in BG3 and that's a big selling point for me. Yeah, you have way more companions in BG3, but it does kinda feel the same to each other with some minor differences.
I love both games, but for me DOS2 is better of the two.
The Divinity setting is just giving Larian a much more freedom to create a fun gameplay system. I think many people sleeps on the biggest fun factor of the entire divinity series. Divinity games are generally very immersive because how they build their world up, being open/semi-open world where you can interact the gameworld in a lot deeper level than in most rpg's, quest design also has this freedom by having a more figuring out approach, rather than the classic "mmo like" quest hubs with very linear quests. It has a much better and rewarding exploration gameplay because of these.
Having a classless approach is also supports this heavily, by letting the player play howewer they like. And these things are basically there in every divinity game from Divine Divinity to DOS2. It's one of the charm of divinity along with it's music.
As someone who cares a lot how a story ends, BG3 is leagues better than DOS2. DOS2's ending was so poorly told it still actively sours my mood on the game when I focus on it. Even playing DOS2 through with Fane the story completely fell apart for me by the boring island act and never recovered (I played the definitive edition).
I also disagree combat was better in DOS2, if you like their armor system then I could see having that opinion but I thought enemies got too spongy by the end. That's not to say it was too hard, you could ramp up some of your abilities to match. But, it had the downside of making anything you didn't focus on look pretty worthless.
Overall I liked what Larian did with the game, enough I happily jumped in on the BG3 early access and loved the experience! But, that doesn't change how lopsided my enjoyment was of DOS2.
I don't know which one of these games is the better one, but i do know that i like DOS 2 OST more. It simply manages to give me the chills even after years i've done my first playthrough.
Honestly, I think these clickbait titles detract from the channel. Your content can be interesting, but the titles are misleading, and it leads to an incoherent, clickbait-like experience.
To be honest this is something I've become numb to as a whole with RUclips. If it significantly helps him game the algorithm then I don't really care
ong
@@Weatherman4Evafeel sorry for u
I agree. Why do you need one to be better than the other? So many games go through the cycle of not being the best due to similar videos. I enjoyed Divinity, and BG3 is also enjoyable.
They are at the mercy of the RUclips algorithm. You pretty much have to have a click bait title + thumb nail to get traction. Sucks but I would rather the channel grow. I will watch all Fextra videos whether they are click bait or not.
I'd say BG3 is alot more beginner friendly. It's much more streamlined in the way combat plays out and the way you progress when leveling. Like you said, there are very few decisions when you level. In DOS2, you can create your own class more or less. There are alot more choices when you level aswell.
DOS 2 >BG3
Great video! I'm thinking about summoning for Khamet too. The nerf to Boreas is noticable and I'm really not ok with it.
The biggest flaw of DOS2 in my opinion is worldbuilding, or lack of it. There is very little in DOS2 that exists indpendently of the story. Every bit of lore is about the main story and its chracters. Every setting, every character and every ecounter are pretty much there to service the story. It feels like a game setting, not a world.
Agreed 100%.
I got DOS2 on sale a couple weeks ago entirely because of BG3. I know this genre, I like this genre, I'm used non-cinematic, isometric, turn-based, etc. etc. so that's not an issue.
I appreciate DOS2's mechanics but I haven't found the worldbuilding compelling and I haven't been able to stick with it.
That's true but i like dos2 story nonetheless, not everything needs to have great world building
TL;DR DOS2's handling of items, combat, leveling, and more I couldn't get over, BG3 solved for me. I'll probably give DOS2 another change after I finish this run of BG3.
The biggest thing that has me addicted to BG3, but unable to finish a single run of DOS2 is the skills. I do not like having to go to a shop to learn new abilities. It makes sense for a Wizard, but my fighter shouldn't need to read a book to learn new skills when he has been fighting and exploring to level up, but is just as knowledgeable as his level 1 self. I already worked to get the XP, I shouldn't then have to spend gold on a skill book AND travel to the right merchant with the skill books I need. I shouldn't need a wiki to level/build properly. I feel the same about the loot. I think static loot is better as we can plan builds and questlines for future playthroughs. If i find a cool item for a Wizard, I can get inspired to build a Wizard next playthrough to use it. In DOS2, I may not even see that item ever again. Then combat wise, I hate the Physical/Magical armor system. It bleeds into party composition as the ideal stack is all the same damage type.
I think, that BG3 does appeal to a wider audience than D:OS2, because of the dialog cutscenes which do provide more feeling of real interaction and also humorous situations. That is also IMHO the reason why so much more BG3 videos are on RUclips than for D:OS2. It is just more interesting for people and catches the interest of people which are not so much in the tactical gaming aspects.
I would also prefer the D:OS2 combat mechanics, because it was very good. The mechanics of D&D is not bad, but it is very visibly optimized for playing on a table with real dice.
That is for example the reason that armor does not subtract from damage, but decreases the likelihood of damage. You get a "miss" because of armor, which is a little bit weird when you think about it. But that is in D&D most likely because they wanted to reduce the number of dice rolls you need and also reduce the math operations the players have to make. In a video game, where the computer can make all this nasty bookkeeping, it is a little bit misplaced.
That said, I like BG3 because of its better presented story. For me the story has at least the same weight as the game mechanics and the fighting system. So for me currently BG3 is the best game I ever played -- but a similar made D:OS3 could replace it.
I have played D:OS2 only partially yet, but I think I will continue when I make a pause at BG3. I really would hope for a D:OS3 like you said with the same quality of cutscenes but the D:O2 combat mechanics.
It's not about "tactical game aspects", BG3 is simply more marketable because it has bigger scope, better cutscenes, you can actually see character faces... DOS2 was niche exactly because it lacked those elements, most people can't get a feel of gameplay on a youtube video, but graphics and story are easy to appreciate on video.
@@pneumonoultramicroscopicsi4065 Sorry, I see no discrepancy to what I wrote. What is your point?
Also D&D and Baldurs Gate are widely known and big franchises while Divinity was a small euro jank title with a niche following like Gothic or Sacred and so on. Like many people refers to DOS2 as Divinity 2 while there is an actual Divinity 2 game out there.@@pneumonoultramicroscopicsi4065
Yeah, the story and dialogue presentation is ultimately the breaking point for which you prefer.
I didn't really care for the story or characters in either game, so I didn't value it remotely as much as the actual gameplay, so DOS2 ends up being my favorite.
If I was deeply engaged in the story of BG3, it might be different.
My least favorite part of DOS2 was the combat. Chaotic, everything is always on fire, and random people joining almost every fight wasnt enjoyable. BG3 was soooooo much more fun. Then again I play D&D so it was much more familiar and easy to get into.
For me yes the combat system was way better and fun compared to dice system in baldur's gate 3 i didn't like it to be honest also the soundtrack in divinity original sin 2 is top notch
I kept saying exactly that to all my friends who had known DOS2 and not BG3 right around launch. "BG3 is a better rpg experience than dos2, but DOS2 is a better game(play experience) than bg3."
But of course its subjective, some went for bg3 and agreed, others thought Bg3 is just objectively better.
To me, yes. Bg3 has way too many Dnd elements. Not a huge DnD fan like that. Dos2 was definitely, to me, a better game.
For me I enjoy the combat of BG3 more for three main reasons:
- Separation of movement from the rest of the action economy in BG3 makes movement feel less punishing for melee characters. I hated losing 1/2 potential attacks in DOS2 to just having to move around the battle field
- I hated the magic D/physical D system in DOS2. Especially on bosses where it felt like half the party's damage just ended up being wasted. Of course this makes certain choices strategically more important. But it can be very punishing if you have a heavy magical or heavy physical character in the party where they often run out of meaningful choices in battle. In multiplayer modes it made a cooperative game feel competitive as you and friends often feel like they're working against each other.
- DOS2 just disables your characters too much. My "favorite" thing was stepping over a pixel of electrified water and losing my whole turn. I get that's the point of the elemental system. But enemies often could perfectly avoid terrain. In BG3 they both added a readable warning to the movement line when you're going to pass though something dangerous, and made these interactions less punishing. The movement warning when you're about to move though potentially haphazard terrain is something that really should be backported into DOS2.
Dont choose, get both! Then love both!
With combat overhauls become even more phenomenal. Dos2 gameplay is incredible
Bg3 does have random loot. The loot that spawns in containers isn’t always the same. I think most of the loot is static, but there are some chests and containers that have random loot from what I’ve experienced.
It certainly isn't much if it does have occasional random loot.
I've noticed the same rotten eggs being in a barrel in act I in all 4 of my playthroughs. I'd say upwards of 90% is static.
@@SuperCatacata I have found scrolls and even a teleportation arrow once in a chest I know for a fact doesn't normally have them.
While playing DOS 2 back when it came out, I would just sit and listen to the music pretty often. It really blew me away, and the touch of letting you change the soundtracks main instrument. I always went with the cello, it was just too haunting and beautiful.
I think BG3 wins in terms of graphics (and conversation cutscenes) as well as benefitting from the DnD ruleset when it comes to things like character creation and variety of classes, spells etc. But Divinity 2 was on a much smaller budget and development time period so it's hard to compare the two.
Bg3 chaining itself to the DnD systems brought it down so much imo.
A lot of the time while playing, it feels like it could've been a better game if they just did their Larian things instead of having to do DnD things...
I'd like to recommend another 5e game, Solasta. It has a feature that I love and you can't barely see anywhere, and that is playing as a party rather than a character. There is no MC, no hero destined to save everyone, no chosen of the prophecy. You create your 4 characters and play with them, they are random adventurers doing random adventures.
The Strict adherence to 5e Rules is the only thing holding back Baldur's Gate 3.
Notice how he plays D:OS2 with only two characters? Yeah, the encounters are only designed with 2 characters in mind; it's a holdover from D:OS1. The encounters are way too small otherwise. So many mods try to fix this with 6 PCs and more enemies, but then combat drags to a slow crawl. The Fast Forward mod tried to fix this too but it's a bit unstable and enemies take a similar amount of time to make decisions. Each map in this game is composed of a series of small battle arenas in which 3-5 enemies fight 2 PC's. Yes, it's that limited.
DOS2 is significantly more fun than BG3, in my opinion. The D&D systems are awful. Progression, combat, etc. If BG3 had the DOS2 progression and combat, BG3 would be the better, more fun game.
i’m new to the series should i play divinity before balders ?
Surface propagation in D:OS2 is insane, especially how the bleeding of so many enemies contaminates the entirety of the surface they stand on. In the second half, nearly every combat encounter devolves into necrofire; it's absurd. In so many fights I can't even see what's going on.
DOS2 is probably the best game of the last 15 years.
Red Dead 2. Witcher 3. Last of Us 1. Last of Us 2.
@@Tcrror Cool list of names. Got nothing to do with what they wrote tho.
Per Wizard of the Coast's conversation with Larian Studios: Their rights to produce BG3 would depend on Larian Studios' success with OS l and ll. There would be no BG3 (at least not the version developed by Larian Studios) without the existence of OS l and ll.
I've been telling my friends who played only BG3, that DOS2 combat system is like Baldurs Gate Unleashed. You get more freedom and flexibility in how you spend your turn, all thanks to the AP system is just muah
Yeah, but I think most people are not into min-maxing.
@@redknight4805Don't then? It's not needed to beat the game lol.
Next time larian, fuck wizard of the coast, fuck dnd, and just do with this new talent and tech build upon your own tabletop experience. Don`t make deals with the devil.
DOS was better in every aspect. BG3 is grate, but DOS 2 was better. And I feel a bit sorry how underrated DOS is compared to the current success of BG3. It's a bit like with John Wick, when a relatively small handful of enthusiasts were excited about the first part, which the mainstream considered to be a decent movie at best, but with a lot of criticism and mixed opinions, and now the 4th part, which is worse in every respect, is praised as some incredibly good film and a great masterpiece. No, DOS was better, and we were there from the beginning when none of you were listening, and most of you still didnt play that game. And I'm a little worried about the future, because I count on more DOS in the future, and now Larian basically has no choice but to make another BG3... Ehhhh, first world problems ;)
Replaying D:OS2 right now. About 1/2 way through the Nameless Isle. I still like it, but, man, I think BG3 is just better on every conceivable metric.
However when DOS 2 music started I almost cry it's been six years and what a six years