This or DIvinity Original Sin 2?

[Sansidar]

Now that the Steam summer sale is going strong, which of these two games would you recommend more? Or both for that matter? What are the biggest differences between the two?

Been a long time since I played games like this.

[Moo]

Both are excellent choices. WoTR has more replay value.

[.//slayer]

I have played both extensively, and WotR is an infinitely more complex game from a mechanical standpoint. It's based on D&D, so it's an immediate winner in my eyes, but even if you are not familiar with the mechanics from other similar games, there's just so much more to explore and experiment with than DOS2.

WotR is also more challenging on higher difficulties, while DOS2's difficulty falls off rapidly after the first act.

There is also more content in WotR, even if you don't consider the replay value.

[Gracey Face]

DOS2 is better in every way except that this has a more complex ruleset and a greater variety of potential builds for your character.

The people above saying this has more replay value I don't really know. This has one story that plays out roughly the same just with different colours of minion enemies you eventually recruit whereas DOS2 has multiple characters who each have their own stories in addition to some generic characters. It seems like it's about the same in both cases.

[ragvald88]

This.
Better characters, more variations and versatility in both builds and handling yourself, infinitelly better ending(s), more epicness, greater challenges. The mythic paths alone is a standout. If you`re unfamiliar, it`s a story thing that slowly transforms you over the course of a game into an angel, demon, dragon or what have you, depending on your aligment, and it`s affecting your entire crusade, really great.
The only thing DOS2 does better is environment interaction. Unless you enjoy turning every single battlefield into a fiery hellhole, that gets annoying way faster then you`d expect, and DOS1 did it better anyway.
Just be wary of difficulty, unless you`re pathfinder pro, keep it at normal or lower, or otherwise you`re going to have a bad time. This game is hard. I`m pretty sure nightmare mode of, say, Dragon`s Age: Origins is basically normal difficulty here.

[Moo]

I would say DOS2 has better looking graphics, the combat is more fun, the game is voice acted, the story is more intriguing, but definitely has less replay value. While the game starts off making you believe there are lots of characters to choose from with very different back stories, you end up playing the game the same way, as you end up with the same people in the party. The game looks open, but it's really not, as you are forced into doing things in a particular order due to how the level progression is set up. Each level is like 50% stronger than the previous level, so it's very difficult to fight enemies above your level. Sure there are different ways to approach and solve each mini area, but it doesn't lead to different outcomes. I had a lot of fun playing DOS2, but much less fun the 2nd go around.

[Gracey Face]

Originally posted by jeem1972:

While the game starts off making you believe there are lots of characters to choose from with very different back stories, you end up playing the game the same way, as you end up with the same people in the party. The game looks open, but it's really not, as you are forced into doing things in a particular order due to how the level progression is set up.

The same is true here though. The mythic paths are just flavor text differences and one or two optional or different bosses vs other mythic paths, same as with the different characters in DOS2, and naturally you do the same things in the same order due to how the story is structured.

They have the same level of replayability as far as is apparent. I can see no reason for claiming that this has more, beyond the greater variety of character builds that you might want to try.

[Zara]

I'd say they are both great games, and worth playing. My first DOS2 playthrough clocked in over 100 hrs, and my first (and only so far) Wrath playthrough was about 150 hrs (though because of the Mythic path I chose, the final Act was probably shorter by at least 20 hrs). I don't really have anything to add that others haven't mentioned already.

[Moo]

Originally posted by Gracey Face:

The same is true here though. The mythic paths are just flavor text differences and one or two optional or different bosses vs other mythic paths, same as with the different characters in DOS2, and naturally you do the same things in the same order due to how the story is structured.

They have the same level of replayability as far as is apparent. I can see no reason for claiming that this has more, beyond the greater variety of character builds that you might want to try.

If one game has 5 or 6 different things to try out, and the other has 100, I would say the game that has more things to try out has more replay value.

[Gracey Face]

Originally posted by jeem1972:

Originally posted by Gracey Face:

The same is true here though. The mythic paths are just flavor text differences and one or two optional or different bosses vs other mythic paths, same as with the different characters in DOS2, and naturally you do the same things in the same order due to how the story is structured.

They have the same level of replayability as far as is apparent. I can see no reason for claiming that this has more, beyond the greater variety of character builds that you might want to try.

If one game has 5 or 6 different things to try out, and the other has 100, I would say the game that has more things to try out has more replay value.

DOS has, what, 6 "origin characters" or whatever they're called and one generic character. WotR has 9 10 mythic paths, 4 of which are end game so functionally only ~half of a path.

No idea why you're trying to characterise it as 5 or 6 vs 100.

[.//slayer]

No idea why you're trying to characterise it as 5 or 6 vs 100.

As you said, the build variety is quite a bit greater in WotR, so I assume it falls under the "100" category. It's also much more important than mythic paths, as it defines an entire playthrough.

[Moo]

Originally posted by Gracey Face:

Originally posted by jeem1972:

If one game has 5 or 6 different things to try out, and the other has 100, I would say the game that has more things to try out has more replay value.

DOS has, what, 6 "origin characters" or whatever they're called and one generic character. WotR has 9 10 mythic paths, 4 of which are end game so functionally only ~half of a path.

No idea why you're trying to characterise it as 5 or 6 vs 100.

I was responding to your comment regarding character builds. I would think character builds encompass more than just the mythic paths. Maybe they mean the same thing to you? Anyway, 100 is a very conservative number for character builds in WoTR.

[Gracey Face]

Originally posted by jeem1972:

Originally posted by Gracey Face:

DOS has, what, 6 "origin characters" or whatever they're called and one generic character. WotR has 9 10 mythic paths, 4 of which are end game so functionally only ~half of a path.

No idea why you're trying to characterise it as 5 or 6 vs 100.

I was responding to your comment regarding character builds. I would think character builds encompass more than just the mythic paths. Maybe they mean the same thing to you? Anyway, 100 is a very conservative number for character builds in WoTR.

Considering that you can respec I didn't take character builds into account. You can try multiple over the single playthrough. It makes more sense though yes.

[azaris]

Both. They're very different games but both hook you in from different angles. WotR has the power-gaming, build planning and plot variation hooks, while DOS2 has the exploration, tactical combat and open environment hooks. Everything else in the genre is a level or more below.

[swordfish]

Originally posted by jeem1972:

Both are excellent choices. WoTR has more replay value.

Agree

[Roknar]

I played both for over 600 hours so you'll get your money's worth either way, but if I had to choose between the two?

Divinity, it's not even a contest.
That's not even considering divinity has multiplayer, or mods.

- Story is about equally good I would say, neither is great though. Both feel kind of forced on you. In either case you are not replaying it for the story but for the builds.

- NPC/dialogues/choices are vastly superior in dinvity. Wotr npcs interactions are just soo one dimensional. And the more I play the game the more it rubs me the wrong way. I especially dislike the main villain in Wotr.

- Build variety is similar too. Wotr appears to have more choices but honestly not really. There is lot of deadweight and skills shared between classes. In any case both are good.

-Combat is superior too, it is more engaging and interactive due to how various spells and the world interact with each other.
- The world itself is infinitely more interactable....which isn't a high bar to cross mind you.

- Companions are not even comparable. Better story, more control over their builds. The one dimensionless of Wotr affects companions too.

- Both have mods, but so far I have found that divinity has superior class mods. There is some really cool stuff there.

- both support any size of screen

- essentially free respeccing


I can't really think of anything wotr does better?