Anyone interested in a thread on recent console games that aren't dopey and juvenile?

I've been playing the daylights out of Twisted Metal: Black. I love it and it really does up the Playstation 2 real nice. But, man, does it move! It's just too damn fast for me. It's even more twitch-reflexes/combo-skillz than Crazy Taxi, but less forgiving. I'm getting to old for this shit...

I love the hidden touches (nobody spoil nothin', you hear?), the menus, and the level design. But do any of you have any tips on how to stay alive long enough to kill more than two opponents? Yeah, yeah, I know: use the repair stations, memorize where the heal power-ups respawn, yadda, yadda, yadda. Anything else?

Also has anyone played a Dreamcast game called Illbleed? I love horror games and I don't know if I can hold out long enough for Silent Hill 2. Must...play...console...horror...game. Should I bother with Illbleed? I prefer horror games that aren't just stupid zombie shooting adventures(Resident Evil) with stories about parameciums taking over the world (Parasite Eve). Does anyone know if Illbleed is an exception? It looks intriguing, kind of like an old Playstation game where you had to lay traps to catch people in a haunted house. What was that thing called...?

Anyone pick up Sonic 2? Should I bother? Or should I just be content playing through the last third of Rayman 2?

-Tom and his 34-year-old reflexes and powers of discrimination

Yeah, I'm still looking for an attachment that will allow me to stick my PS2 connector on my walker...

Tom... I've played Illbleed for a bit, but I don't really like it. IGN actually did a decent job on the review (surprisingly):
http://dreamcast.ign.com/reviews/14418.html

Here's a bit:
"I can appreciate the effort that went into the unique gameplay mechanics of Illbleed, but the clumsy controls and frustrating camera angles, make this game pretty difficult to play. One warning to players that decide to buy this game, it may take you a few tries before you finally grasp what to do in this gam; it doesn't help that you actually have to find certain items that are essential (i.e. Horror Monitor) before continuing on in the game. And when you're constantly worrying about these problems, it's really hard to have fun getting scared with Illbleed."

Okay, aside from the fact that there are a half-dozen spelling and grammatical mistakes in there, he's basically bang-on. I'd stay away from it.

If you haven't finished Rayman 2, by all means DO IT! The ending is fabulous! The game just gets better and better. My three year old and I were enchanted, stunned, overjoyed... it was great fun.

Illbleed is by the team that made Blue Stinger. Apparently from what I've read, it has a lot of the same problems. Cameras and controls ruin what's there. Alone in the Dark is only a week or two away isn't it? It's sold extremely well overseas apparently. Hold out for it.

Sonic will still be there when you're ready for him. I should have SA2 within the next 10 days. I'll let you know...the demo that comes with Phantasy Star Online blew me away though. Sonic Team just doesn't disappoint either. 10th Birthday/Anniversary of Sonic. I doubt you could go wrong...

--Dave

>Anyone pick up Sonic 2? Should I bother? Or should I just be content playing through the last third of Rayman 2?

Waitaminit...what consitutes "dopey and juvenile" here then? Those are both pretty juvenile (though not entirely dopey. Well, SA is actually pretty dopey).

Anyway, I've been playing Sonic Adventure 2. The english voices SUCK. You can change it to Japanese with English subtitles, and the Japenese voices are 10 times better. What the hell is up with translations on console games? Jeesus! Other than that, it's really pretty good. The Knuckles levels are boring the hell outta me (I never did like their style of play), but they certainly one-upped the first SA game with the Sonic/Shadow levels.

I agree with Dave on Rayman 2. A totally underappreciated game. It's fabulous.

Jason,

I don't find Rayman 2 juvenile! The gameplay is surprisingly sophisticated and the game world is strangely haunting.

Rayman 2 is much better than a lot of the platform games I've seen, not just in terms of how it plays, but also how it tells a story. I've actually laughed out loud at some of the gags with the Tinies.

The 'dopey and juvenile' remark was a reference to the fact that I pretty quickly feel alienated from a lot of console games. I just felt silly playing Banjo Kazooie, for instance.

I guess the litmus test is whether I'd be embarassed if a non-gamer, say my girlfriend, walked in the room while I was playing. :)

-Tom

SSX, but you've probably already played it to death. My wife and I love it. We finally got gold medals on everything with every rider, except for that $&#^@% Pipedream track.

I can't say enough good things about Rayman 2. I own both the PC and the Dreamcast version now. PC is fun because you can crank up the resolution and turn on FSAA and get this beautiful living cartoon. The Dreamcast version is a bit easier to play thanks to the DC gamepad and it contains a lot of extra junk not found in the PC version including a multiplayer mini-game that's a ton of fun with four players.

If you didn't catch the comment in another thread, there's even flight-sim stylings in there. Great, great stuff.

I had heard a sequel was in development...Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

--Dave

Well, "Rayman M" is supposedly coming. Not sure what it is.

>>Well, "Rayman M" is supposedly coming. Not sure what it is.

It's a mature edition, with graphic violence and full-frontal nudity.

"It's a mature edition, with graphic violence and full-frontal nudity."

Wow, if Rayman's G-rated appendages are just hanging in space, I hate to think what this will look like.

More seriously, I looked up Rayman M. It's a multiplayer version of Rayman 2. You race against other players and can choose any of the game's characters. It said in one article, it uses a lot of the levels straight out of Rayman 2. So unfortunately, it isn't a true sequel...

PS2, Xbox and PC.

--Dave

Oooh... a thread for the over thirty console gaming crowd. Count me in.

I've also been playing a lot of Twisted Metal Black. Fantastic game, but you're right. This puppy is tough. My only advice is to try to lure one car away from the pack and take him on alone. It also helps to learn some of the special moves like freeze or invisibility. Initially, they are tough to pull off, but a little practice goes a long way. Oh, and three simple words: turbo, turbo, turbo. It's a testament to the game that somthing so infuriatingly difficult keeps you coming back for more.

On to other things... Ok, so everyone basically agrees that Rayman 2 is excellent, but geeze Tom, did you have to bag on Banjo-Kazooie? Some great gameplay in those games. I've been on a bit on an N64 kick lately and decided to give Body Harvest another go. There a good game in there somewhere. You just have to get past the sluggish controls.

On the PS2, the new BIG title from EA Sports (some basketball thing) is getting a lot of buzz at the office. Stay away from Dark Cloud... boring and inane.

That's all for now. Off to play more Startopia.

-Greg

NBA Street is the game you're referring to. It looked great at E3. It's kind of like NBA Jam, but with better gameplay and more players per side.

Well, I'm not allowed to post in here anyway, since I'm just a immature 27-yr old who likes juvenile games.

Tom - so if you're trying to avoid games in which you'd be embarassed when someone walks in, I see what you mean. You don't mean "juvenile" as in "kid-friendly games" but stuff like "it's juvenile how this heroine has 48-DD tits and this game uses every opportunity to let us see them bounce." Is that it?

I honestly don't know why running around as a Bear or Bird in Banjo Kazooie would be more embarrasing than running around as a blue hedgehog or two-tailed fox or whatever the hell an echidna is in Sonic Adventure.

Anyway, people are saying that Twisted Metal: Black is far and away the best vehicular combat game ever made for any platform. It's getting rave reviews. I can't afford to pick it up just now...anyone play it?

Greg,

Banjo-Kazooie is very kiddie-styled in a way that Rayman 2 isn't. Yes, it's certainly got solid gameplay, from what I've seen, but I'm not terribly interested in the little happy world they've set up.

And as for the crack about 'juvenile', Jason's right on the money. There's a big difference between 'kid-oriented' and 'juvenile'. There are a lot of juvenile games out there with 'M' ratings.

As for Twisted Metal Black, I heartily recommend it, Jason. That and SSX are the only games that have made me really glad to own a PS2.

Greg: good call on the combos. I've been practicing them and they help a lot. I'm also figuring out that audio cues are important, particularly as a signal that you need to fire up a shield. And, yes, I love that turbo. Next to health power-ups, the turbo is the first one I look for on a level.

-Tom

Being caught playing any console game would probably embarrass me, like when my advisor's 7-year-old son insisted on having me play that Star Wars Racer game on his Dreamcast at one 4th-of-July party at my advisor's house because his dad told him that "Bruce loves to play video games."

I used to play a lot of arcade games when I was (much) younger, but the thing I've found is that I'm no longer willing or able to invest the time to get over the initial learning curve for a typical console game. I tried some games like Tony Hawk 2, Jet Grind Radio, and Virtua Tennis at the suggestion of Tom and a few other people last winter, but the sheer frustration of not being able to press the required button combos pissed me off after about five minutes. Jet Grind Radio was just bewildering, and while Tony Hawk was much more straightforward, it seemed a bit too aimless. I do love Virtua Tennis, but only against another human player (or doubles vs. computer). I played a little SSX at E3, and had the same problem. I recall how much fun (and how stress-relieving) getting into a console zone can be (where you're fairly proficient with the game and are trying to beat previous high scores) but I somehow can't get over the hump anymore. I've seen others post about how console games are becoming "too damn hard." Is that really the case? I have the strange feeling that it's just a case of not being able to overcome the frustration factor anymore. When you're a kid it's one thing, but now, after 15 minutes of smashing incompetently into things, I start thinking of all the other things I need to get done.

On a completely different note, what the heck is up with these console RPG's? I kept reading stuff on Usenet about how computer gamers had no idea how deep these turn-based console games were in terms of tactics, so I picked up Skies of Arcadia which everyone said was so great. The tactical part consists of figuring out which of your two attack abilities you are going to use that turn. Am I missing something? Or was Usenet full of it, as usual?

Not really the best game to get an accurate reprensentation of combat systems in console rpg's. I use to play them constantly It would help to know what consoles you have some of the oldschool stuff was best but heres a few titles most should be really affordable bye now.
ff7 ff9 (thats final fantasy) xenogears, (probably the best rpg released for playstation) Grandia, chrono cross, and legend of dragoon had a strange twitch dependant combat system but I dont recall much in the way of real tactics. Thats all for playstation I'd go with xenogears and ff7 first and foremost for your tactical pleasure.

I am with Bruce, I used to love arcade games when I was younger. But I think it has to do with the types of games that were in arcades at the time. Things like Donkey Kong and Missle Command and Asteroids. None of them required convoluted button combos to do basic things. It was joystick to move Mario in directions and a jump button.

Now you walk into an arcade and it is all fighting games (I am not a big fan, see the button combo issue), racing games (they are ok but a buck for most of them to play a game? I will go play NFS5 or MSR if I need a racing fix), and shooters (stupid if you ask me, having to shoot things fast, without being able to move, brilliant! ;). Then there are things like Crazy Taxi which require you to make fighting game like moves to do simple things like slide turns. Count me out.

Console games are a mixed bag if it has straight forward controls and good gameplay, sure I like them ok. VT, MSR, even Soul Caliber (I know, it is the only fighting game I like and I never have even tried to pull off one of those 15 button combos. I would get trashed head to head against someone who knew what they were doing). Skies of Arcadia was fun for a while as well (not deep but fun).

Still for my money the PC is far and away the best experience around. The multiplayer capabilites alone make me choose it over the console 99 times out of 100. Not to mention the graphics and depth of the games.

-- Xaroc

One thing that certain console games do have going for them in the graphic department is cinamatics. Not that they matter all that much but if any of you have seen the cutscenes from pretty much any of squaresoft's games in the past four years? Have you also seen any pc games who come any where close in that department?

Skies of Arcadia has nothing on PC games when it comes to tactics. There are some involved--especially later in the game when you have your own ship to upgrade and some ship-to-ship (or ship to monster boss) combat to play out. But it's not like a tactical warfare game on the PC.

Skies is a fanastic game, though. Easilly as good as any console RPG out there, including the best from the Final Fantasy series. It's just got good characters and a nice plot development that, damn it all, you really start to care about as you keep playing through it. It's too bad the random encounters are too frequent, or it could really be perfect. Something about the way the characters emote is really appealing, though. It's one of my favorite games of the last couple years.

I'm finding that a lot of the recent console games aren't necessarily hard once you "get" them. It's just that the mechanics of the game are secondary to success--sure, you have the master the mechanics, but you have to learn the levels and powerups and stuff like that to succeed. They have more depth than they at first appear to, and that's the rub--if you don't give them enough time to discover and master that depth, you're not as likely to enjoy the game.

Tony Hawk 2 is a great example. It's easy to actually PLAY. To do well, though, you have to learn the layout of each level and really figure out how to string together trick runs with manuals. That's not immediately obvious, and it's not necessarily easy to master.

As for graphics--I think for most people console games have it all over PC games right now. It's a matter of configuration. How many PC gamers have a machine that lets them increase the detail? How many people actually go and change things from the defaults? How much better does a game look at low resolution on a 29-36" TV than on a 17" monitor? I have a feeling that, while most PC games are capable of better graphics than console games, most general consumers get a better visual experience of their Playstation 2 or whatever.

I think it all comes down to your skill set. If you spend most of your time in a turn-based game or playing an RTS, you simply won't adapt quickly to a different set of skills. It might be the gamepad that bothers you, or it might be the fact that your hand-eye coordination isn't tuned.

When I first picked up console games eons ago, I sucked too. You play a lot of them and you start to have this "feel". It's hard to explain, but goddamit, it's there. People always ask me how I can pick up a game I never played before and be good right out of the box. Well, when it's skill-based and you've seen that skill set elsewhere before, you pick it up quick. It really comes down to what you play and how often you play it.

Oh, and you guys bagging on Skies? You're nuts. It's not the greatest RPG combat system in the world, but the game has oodles of presentation value that most PC games just can't touch. The story unfolds in fantastic fashion and when you go to a different island, it really looks like a completely different place! Variety is the spice of life and Skies has that in spades. If you want more strategic combat, pick up Grandia II. Just don't expect the level of storytelling and character in Skies.

--Dave

"People always ask me how I can pick up a game I never played before and be good right out of the box."

One of my old roommates nicknamed me "The Video Ninja" for my ability to do this. I'm sure I'm off from my peak (mostly due to work-induced lack of play), but I still make a decent showing of myself off the bat in most console games.

Skies of Arcadia is an overlooked console RPG... I liked it better than FFIX, Chrono Cross and even FFVIII. There's something about flying the skies with a pirate ship (no wings attached) that is pretty cool. Plus the graphics in SoA are pretty darn good! SoA was the game that brought me to the DC and back to consoles ... sorta.

And the only thing I didn't like about Grandia 2 was that, for me, it was a less than a week of gameplay (bout 25 - 35 hours)...for an rpg thats a tad short. SoA I'd estimate i played about 60 - 80 hours (3 weeks gameplay)... though in SoA the battle screen takes twice as long to come up...

also, one game i picked up at best buy for 20 bux was Record Of Lodoss ...its a nice Diablo ripoff, and when played on a VGA adapter looks even BETTER than alot of the pc style rpgs in the same vein ... Darkstone, Diablo, Nox... havent finsihed it yet.

I'm debating whether to pick up Sonic Adventure 2... the first one has awesome platform parts, but the adventure mode was kinda annoying. I'm all for platform games done well... the only one after SA2 im looking forward to is Floigan Brothers.

THPS2 is fun, but in a mindless way... my cousins friggin love the game. Everytime I visit them we end up playing it. That or Virtua Tennis! (I sold them on the DC a few months ago).

I still haven't tried Jet Grind Radio... keep hearing how good it is, and better than THPS2

And when Gran Turismo 3 is out, I might get a PS2. Though 300 bux still is a bit too high, and coupled with the fact that every friggin ps2 game is almost 50 bux (at least the good ones). Not that many great bargain titles for the PS2 (yet). And then gamecube and XboX....whatever.

BTW, where the heck's Wumpus? did he really split? hmm.

etc

"but I'm not terribly interested in the little happy world they've set up"

Tom, what do you expect from a game called Banjo-Kazooie?!?

I don't mind happy world games, Rayman 2 seems a bit happy, though it is twisted in a way... I love Rayman's rain calling friend Booblox or somesuch name... hilarious.

BTW, where is Rayman 3 going to?

etc

Globox! He's cool...also very fertile. That's quite a litter you have to save. ;) I love Clark, especially when he breaks through the walls to get Rayman through part of a level. My favorite scene in Rayman 2 though? Has to be the plant... heh heh.

Rayman M is a multiplayer version of Rayman 2 for the Xbox, PC and PS2. No word on a Rayman 3 that I can find yet.

BTW, I noticed today that the PS2 games are all $49.99. How is this possible? Price fixing? This makes no sense. You can't tell me that Army Men game is still selling at $49.99 or some of those horrible release duds... I really think something's up. I'll have to ask at the EB.

I'm listening to the Sonic soundtrack CD in the 10th Anniversary pack right now. I'll be playing the game later with my son. Sonic Adventure 2 is $39.99 with this really cool 10th Anniversary freebie this week at Best Buy. Make sure you ask for the free thingy too. They had to retrieve mine out of the depths of stock room hell.

--Dave

There have been some good comments on console RPGs here. You know, it's funny. For the longest time I considered PC RPGs generally better than their console counterparts, but recently I've had a bit of a change of heart. Part of the reason was Skies of Arcadia. That game just oozes joy. It feels like a good old fashioned age of discovery adventure. It's pick up and play simple, yet combat (which is indeed too frequent in the game) ramps up in difficulty and complexity as the game progresses. They don't throw everything at you from the get go, allowing you to get used to the conventions of the game.

Enter Baldur's Gate II, a game I've been meaning to play for a while. So I get a number of hours in and I'm struck by just how frustrating the combat is. I don't think I suck at these games, but it's almost like I die in every other encounter. Reload. Die. Reload. Die. This is supposed to be fun?

>I liked it better than FFIX, Chrono Cross and even FFVIII.

Me too. I liked it better than any console RPG since Final Fantasy 6 (3 here in the US) for the SNES.

>That game just oozes joy.

YES! That sums it up PERFECTLY. Ben "loser" Sones still has my SoA disc I lent him because he will TOTALLY love it once he gives it a shot. But it's been months and he never gets around to it.

Sega just has this knack for making characters that, well...maybe they're not the most sophisticated in the world, but no man or woman can resist feeling for them. When one of my little Chaos got sad and started bawling his eyes out today in Sonic Adventure 2, it was heartbreaking! I felt worse than when my Black & White creature looked sincerely dejected about me beating him for tossing poo into the food storage.

It's a generalization, but most PC RPGs have sophisticated stories but characters without emotion. They're empty. Even the good ones (though they're good for other reasons). Console RPGs are the polar opposite. They're shorter on freedom, but longer on character and story.

There are more great "scenes" in console RPGs. An example from Skies--the part where you're on the train and you're cornered, and your buddies come and blow the train car in half to split the bad guys away from you. When that happens, you can't help but cheer for your little guys. =)

Oh yeah, and I remember reading that there IS a Rayman 3 underway. No details about it, but it's presumed to be released for all major platforms (PS2, Xbox, Gamecube, and probably PC).

---

Quote:

Enter Baldur's Gate II, a game I've been meaning to play for a while. So I get a number of hours in and I'm struck by just how frustrating the combat is. I don't think I suck at these games, but it's almost like I die in every other encounter. Reload. Die. Reload. Die. This is supposed to be fun?

---

I did some digging on a Rayman 3 and 4. I found a story on IGN (link not handy) that they had separated into two teams to work on the next two games. What's unclear is that Rayman M seems to have become what Rayman 3 was going to be. The producer/creator of Rayman, Michel Ancel was on the SECOND Rayman team which was working on Rayman 4 already. So it's very possible that Rayman 3 is what he's actually making now and that won't be out until NEXT year at the earliest. Rayman M is due this Fall on the above listed platforms.

--Dave

"Interesting. I've had the opposite experience. I have had some trouble finding battles that were truly challenging. There have been some, in fact, there have been enough, but it seems far less frustrating that the original BG. Sure, there
have been a lot of tough battles, but I've died surprisingly fewer times than I expected, and far fewer times than I did in BG. Hmm."

My experience also. I thought BG was a more difficult game overall. Also, in BGII, most battles in Chapter 2 or 3 that you find difficult, you can put off until later when your party is more powerful. In fact, you can put off any Chapter 2 or 3 sidequest until Chapter 6, by which time you can squash most of those enemies like bugs.

Yeah, but what's the fun in that? I really enjoyed fighting the Beholder in Chapter 3, where it belongs...That's by far the toughest battle I've had up 'til now, and even it wasn't too bad.

I feel like I really got a head start by finishing the expansion to BG, and coming in at 161,000 exp. points, as opposed to coming in straight from BG, or creating a new character in BGII, at 89,000. I'm curious to see how big a difference that might make.

"I feel like I really got a head start by finishing the expansion to BG, and coming in at 161,000 exp. points, as opposed to coming in straight from BG, or creating a new character in BGII, at 89,000. I'm curious to see how big a difference that might make."

It provides a nice head start. By the time you're done with Chapter 3, it doesn't make that much difference. The Beholders, eh? Have you gotten your hands on the Holy Avenger yet?

No, not yet. I've got my eyes open, though. I feel like there are a lot of people I haven't talked to. I'm ready to head off to Spellhold, as soon as I tie up some loose ends from chpaters 2 and 3. Too many unfinished quests...(I really like the way the journal is set up, now.)

Yeah, the Unseeing Eye quest was fun. The first time through, I just picked a fight without retrieving the rod, and had to fight the beholder without its aid. I won, but then decided that probably wasn't the best way to do it. It was worth more experience going the long way, and the rod made the fight MUCH easier...

Yes, the journal is much improved over the first game. Assuming you have a paladin in your party, I'd really try to get that Holy Avenger before heading off to Spellhold...

Actually, I don't have a paladin with me right now, but I know where I can get one. I probably will pick him up, too, once I get some of the other characters' quests finished and get rid of them. I've got a couple of people who are "expendable" given the right circumstances.

I've got a lot to do before I actually will leave for Spellhold, even though I know that I could go anytime. I've just got too much unfinished business here, and I don't really know how long I'll be gone.

Well, since that particular paladin is the only npc paladin in the game, and, therefore, the only npc who can use the Holy Avenger, there's not much sense in getting it without him.

As for the structure of the game, just be aware that Chapters 4 and 5 are much more "on rails" than Chapters 2 and 3. The open structure returns in Chapter 6 (and there reallly are a couple of things that you can TRY in Chaps. 2 and 3, but that I would strongly advise leaving until Chap. 6).

Yeah, I had a feeling that might be the case, which is why I was trying to finish up the quests I have now before going on to Spellhold.

Dunno about the paladin. I'm not yet convinced that I can't live without him, but if I find the Holy Avenger, that could tip the scales.

There are just too many NPCs to choose from in this game. I just want them all!

"Dunno about the paladin. I'm not yet convinced that I can't live without him, but if I find the Holy Avenger, that could tip the scales."

As many players as you ask about the ideal party combination will probably be the same as the number of different answers you'd get. That's one reason it's such a good design. You can win with whatever kind of party you like.

Yeah, it's pretty cool that way. I love it that characters acknowledge my race and class, as well, and that Aerie and Jaheira are fighting over me...Very cool stuff.

My best friend and I are playing through at the same time, so it's interesting to see just how different two games can be. I'm jealous, though, because his character is trying to decide whether he wants the fighter's keep or the thieves' guild. Meanwhile, my poor ranger gets this shanty little cabin in the middle of nowhere...

"...his character is trying to decide whether he wants the fighter's keep or the thieves' guild."

I went with the thieves' guild. My chaotic good character has a slight problem with the thieves' guild but the keep seems relatively worthless. I have already been given two stronghold quests.

Now, I have a question that Michael could not answer. I have a golden torso and a tunic made from human flesh. Do I need to keep this stuff?

Jason_Cross: I picked up SoA a while ago and I did get a pretty far way into it before getting annoyed by the characters and bored of the combats. See, here's my problem, they weren't 'my guys' blowing that train in half. They were 'the writer's guys'.

I agree that console RPGs spend more time on the so-obvious-you-can't-help-but-miss the personalities aspect of their games. However, I really don't need winking and thumbs ups cutsieness. ("What we need after killing that horde of badguys is the perfect cheer!") I don't need steamed animae characters making faces about a lover's triangle that's so freakin' silly in the first place I'm embarrased to be paying it any attention.

I can't get past how irritatingly silly console RPGs are. Even if I could, as a roleplayer, I eventually get bored of repetative combats in pursuit of a goal I can see from a thousand miles away in the first place. I need freedom of choice. I need exploration. I need narrative control. I need to be able to invent reasons for my own characters to adventure so that they are 'my guys'. (Daggerfall) If I can't have that I at least need alot of freedom in how I'm to go about accomplishing the preordained tasks and enough sidequests that I can deceive myself there is a measure of freedom in the game. (Fallout 2 or Torment).

The fact is that if this roleplayer wants a really good story, he's going to read a book or watch a movie without goofy characters. If he wants to roleplay he'll find a face-to-face group, play a MUSH or in a tight spot maybe play one of the more tolerable CRPGs.

I have a Paladin main character in BG2 and have the Holy Avenger (email me if you want to know where I got it). The Holy Avenger is an incredible sword, it makes fighting demons and liches sooooo much easier. The dispell magic upon hit wipes out the protections then it is slice and dice time. I am sure there are other good combinations I am just happy I brought over my Paladin from BG and got the HA.

-- Xaroc