Should I start with the first game? I've read the 2nd game is better. But,I want to do it right. Do I need to start with BG1 to get into the game and story right? i have the EE installed I want to get BG3 but figured I needed to play the first 2. Is this correct?

Thanks for any info.

BG3 has nothing to do with BG1/2 apparently

For BG2 I'd rather play BG1 first

Like @osm says, BG3 is NOT a continuation of the original series. It has some nice references to the previous games but that's it. You don't really know them to enjoy the game (from what I've seen so far)

And BG1 vs BG2... oh boy. That must be the oldest disputes in gaming history :)

BG1 and BG2 are ONE BIG GAME. You start where you left off in the 1st game and level (experience points). So, for me, playing BG2 without playing BG1 is like watching "Lord of the Rings - Return of the king" without watching Fellowship of the ring and the 2 towers. You will definitely enjoy it, but you will miss a lot of references.

Also, BG1 introduces to the game mechanics, make you understand it. If you are not familiar with D&D 2.5 rules, you'll probably quickly overwhelmed while playing BG2. You may figure it out along the way but you will probably keep dying... a lot. The same will happen with BG1 but you will have a chance to learn to use tactics quickly.

OK BG1 it is then. Thanks foe the replies.

While I find much of what was said above rather debatable, getting your feet wet with BG1 before moving on to BG2 would be reasonable.

The main diff between the two is due to the fact that BG1 was in production while the Infinity engine itself was still under heavy development, so the game may feel a bit empty and shallow today. Most of the areas (sans the eponymous city itself) are like 70-90% just empty wilderness with some surprise dwarf tucked somewhere under a tree who'll give you some trivial fed-ex quest.

While the second one is much more 'meaty'. Maybe too much so..

Story-wise it's not strictly necessary, but there are quite a few references indeed. The main plot arches are orthogonal - while nominally both concern the same protagonist(s), they are really really different adventures.

First... Well, BG1 and BG2 are HUGE games. Takes a lot of them to go through them.

Second, the Bhaalspawn saga (the main story arc of Baldur's Gate I + II) has ended with Throne of Bhaal, the BG2 expansion. BG1 and BG2 had the same protagonist and, as it was already pointed in this thread, can be considered a single big game.

Third... BG3 uses a new set of rules, the 5th edition of the Dungeons & Dragons rules. BG1 and 2 used 2nd edition (aka AD&D). If you're not into D&D much, then you're going to have some difficulties. First, you'll have to learn 2nd edition. And they're rather abstract. For example, in AD&D, an Armor Class of 3 is better than an Armor Class of 5. Also, those numbers can go negative, which is better than positive. THAC0 (which stands for To Hit Armor Class 0) and saving throws work in a similar fashion. And after all that fuss, you'll have to learn another system, which is different, the one BG3 uses.

Forth... all this effort and hundreds of hours (well) spent would be so you can understand a reference that usually doesn't have much impact. I didn't get very far into BG3, but I only encountered 2 references to previous Baldur's Gate games so far: an NPC, Volo, which you meet in your adventures. From a role playing point of view it's ok if you don't know about him, because your character didn't meet him before. Another reference is the picture attached to this post. I bet it made all BG1/2 players smile. But that was it.

So, yeah... if you really want to have the big picture about the game world... yes, it would be nice. But it's certainly not required and BG3 can be enjoyed as a separate game.

I;ve been reading up and you are right on. It seems BG3 is a hybrid creature in the bunch. It seems I can jump into it without the first 2. That said i think I will still start with them. It will be awhile before BG3 is finished.

It's perfectly fine. I'm replaying those again too. :D But for me it's just the nostalgia factor.

Mainly, it's 20 years more modern, made by a different (though skilled) company on a different and more modern engine (and designed to be played on more modern PCs and Monitors).

I'm actually doing the same. I never finished BG1, and don't recall even starting BG2, so ... :)