That`s like saying basketball is just about putting a ball into the other net. You are intentionally leaving out critical steps. You need to gain allies, equipment, spells, and experience. And you do that by exploring.

IWD is a railroad, but it's *nice* railroad. Like looking out of the train on a Friday afternoon after work; while watching a stunning sunset. Sometimes when I'm on the train I see screenshots of Icewind Dale in place of people's faces.

Given some of the creatures in IWD, that sounds like a very dangerous train ride :o

Harping on IWD for it's lackluster story is like harping on BG1 for it's lack of kewl lootz and low level cap. It's not the focus of those games.

In IWD, the focus is on the combat, IWD is all about the combat, building powerful characters with high level gear and smashing the living (or undead) shit out of anything that crosses your (linear) path. IWD didn't pretend to be anything else. The story is just there to tie the combat together. Complaining about the lack of story in a combat oriented game that uses the same engine as a story oriented game is just plain stupid.

BG1 is about exploration and story telling in a low level campaign. It's not about building high level characters with souped up gear yet I could easily whine about BG1 being boring because of this. Coming to think it, some people who did play BG2 first did have this complaint.

Just because IWD is an IE game doesn't mean it should copy other IE games anymore than an FPS should have the exact same weapons as any other FPS. If you don't like IWD, fine, you still have BG and P:ST, but thinking the game is the way it isn't because the core team didn't copy BG1 or PST.................yeah.

Now excuse me while I go to the BG forum and complain the game sucks because it isn't an FPS with sniper rifles.

I was glad that IWD didn't have so much emphasis on story.

Less story, more gameplay :)) I have books to read if I want to :)

Faulty logic.

Probably it didn't sound right, but i think you understand what I mean :)

No.
You have to go down the same path and do the same things in every playthrough in order to complete the game. You can wander off all you like but must always return to the same path each time.
Didn't say restrictive in exploration. Exploring optional side areas does not alter the path through the game, you still have to walk the same path each time. Same destination same path. You can wander off the path but must return to the path to continue. Your path does not differ.

Says the only person on the planet who thinks IWD and BG are equally linear. Wrong. There are near infinite routes to the main quest objectives in BG; there is only one route in IWD. 'Path' does not equate to 'objective'. Again, you are confusing 'objectives' with 'path'. They are two completely different things.

By definition this makes the path different. It's not (or shouldn't be) a difficult concept to grasp.

No it doesn't, the same path is always walked, you can put off walking that path, but that path must always be walked.


Near infinite? No.

Optional side areas do not alter the path through the game.

To progress through the game you must always walk the same path every time.

Nothing has been posted so far to counter this.

Doesn't look like you want to understand this, and according to the profile location you are from the UK, so this shouldn't be too hard.

If you don't like the game that is fine, I'm sure there are many that don't, but at least criticise it on valid ground and not some made up nonsense.

You misunderstand, I'm not saying it isn't a great game, it is a great game.

If you truly believe what you are writing, then you are simply a fool... an idiot. There can be no other conclusion.

Nothing to counter what I posted yet again just personal attacks, how original.