What really bothers me about the BG3 demo is that Larian is still using a lot of DOS features like:
1) marking red field of vision when sneaking (same as DOS - proposing to change this visual),
2) using fog clouds animations (same as DOS, please remove this visual and make it a PC/NPC status),
3) overusing surfaces interactions (water, grease, blood etd - same as DOS; please enough with DOS features),
4) to much items and overly large inventories (same as DOS - BG1and2 had relatively small inventories, I would propose to somehow simplify the item gathering process or even use a mechanic like a courier similar to what they did in Torchlight - it can pick up generic items and sell them with on or two clicks)
5) making the combat not look so similar to DOS (changing/removing the attack path line visual)
6) changing the jumping animation to something a bit more realistic (i think nobody was really impressed when Swen Vicke showcased the feather spell and jumped of the building - that spell is a rip off from Morrowind etc.)
Just my two cents, what DOS gimmicks/features from DOS would you NOT like to see in BG3?
Off the top of my head, just the barrel/bush/rock thing when sneaking .. but it's already out, so that's good.
As for your points:
1) Doesn't bother me
2) Not sure what the fog cloud is
3) Agree (and I think they intend to tone it down)
4) Loot will be less
5) I don't see a problem
6) Yeah, I guess. If it is supposed to be like a Jump spell instead of a basic jump move, then I agree (and the jumping should be more for jumping down and not up).
Jump has always been silly in D&D.
'High Jump. When you make a high jump, you leap into the air a number of feet equal to 3 + your Strength modifier if you move at least 10 feet on foot immediately before the jump. When you make a standing high jump, you can jump only half that distance. Either way, each foot you clear on the jump costs a foot of movement.'.
So if I have an 18 STR (Highest STR I've ever had in D&D) that's 3+4 = 7 feet. My 18 Str Barbarian can just two whole feet higher than I am tall, IRL. He can physically hurdle me while I am standing up.
Also, the world record high jump is 8 feet. And I'd say an 18 STR is 'world record althletics' level.
'Long Jump. When you make a long jump, you cover a number of feet up to your Strength score if you move at least 10 feet on foot immediately before the jump. When you make a standing long jump, you can leap only half that distance. Either way, each foot you clear on the jump costs a foot of movement.'
Again, using my 18 STR Barbarian, he can make a running jump of 18 feet. Keep in mind, the world record IRL is 29 feet. And I'd again say a dude with 18 STR is at the 'world record athlete' level.
So, if anything, D&D is actually toned down from real life, or matches it closely.
That said, the animation will hopefully be tweaked so it looks more natural.
Glad to hear you agree with most of my suggestions.
As per point 2) you can check:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9hU6UJX_pcat 54.47 there is a black cloud that either hides or blinds characters. They already used that in DOS and I think it looks way to similar to DOS.
Yeah well 18 STR in D&D is like god-like strength so should be at world class athletics level.
Yeah well 18 STR in D&D is like god-like strength so should be at world class athletics level.
Yeah. I just pointing out that the rules mete out to RL pretty well. So the animation may just need adjusting.
So, if anything, D&D is actually toned down from real life, or matches it closely.
That said, the animation will hopefully be tweaked so it looks more natural.
I stand corrected. In that case, then, yes, the animation can (and likely will) be tweaked to look more natural (again, unless they intend for it be a spell for jump, which opens the door to animations like that). Bottom line, though, it really doesn't bother me.
Glad to hear you agree with most of my suggestions.
As per point 2) you can check:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9hU6UJX_pcat 54.47 there is a black cloud that either hides or blinds characters. They already used that in DOS and I think it looks way to similar to DOS.
Ah, I see. Well, I think cloud animations definitely have their place, especially in D&D (Stinking Cloud, Cloudkill, etc). But, it does seem silly that npcs just walk into it like they don't notice anything. But ... pre-alpha so who knows.
What really bothers me about the BG3 demo is that Larian is still using a lot of DOS features like:
1) marking red field of vision when sneaking (same as DOS - proposing to change this visual),
2) using fog clouds animations (same as DOS, please remove this visual and make it a PC/NPC status),
3) overusing surfaces interactions (water, grease, blood etd - same as DOS; please enough with DOS features),
4) to much items and overly large inventories (same as DOS - BG1and2 had relatively small inventories, I would propose to somehow simplify the item gathering process or even use a mechanic like a courier similar to what they did in Torchlight - it can pick up generic items and sell them with on or two clicks)
5) making the combat not look so similar to DOS (changing/removing the attack path line visual)
6) changing the jumping animation to something a bit more realistic (i think nobody was really impressed when Swen Vicke showcased the feather spell and jumped of the building - that spell is a rip off from Morrowind etc.)
Just my two cents, what DOS gimmicks/features from DOS would you NOT like to see in BG3?
I'm mainly bothered about things that make no sense, don't fit, or get in the way.
- environmental barrels/surfaces shouldn't be spewed everywhere
- world animations and effects should reflect the time/space constraints and be high fantasy in tone
- UI behaviour should be functional with no more "bling" than is strictly necessary
- and, of course, neither Jan Jansen, nor any of his extended family should ever be heard from again! I know it's not DOS, but even BG had hateful aspects. More directly, I would certainly prefer that wacky or goofy humor and easter eggs are hidden behind some form of toggle, as they can completely ruin the atmosphere. For example, in Fallout NV you had to select the "Wild Wasteland" trait if you wanted silliness, otherwise it was simply not there.
As for other stuff like the sneaking FOV, I don't really care if it's been seen before, as long as it makes sense.
1) marking red field of vision when sneaking (same as DOS - proposing to change this visual),
2) using fog clouds animations (same as DOS, please remove this visual and make it a PC/NPC status),
3) overusing surfaces interactions (water, grease, blood etd - same as DOS; please enough with DOS features),
4) to much items and overly large inventories (same as DOS - BG1and2 had relatively small inventories, I would propose to somehow simplify the item gathering process or even use a mechanic like a courier similar to what they did in Torchlight - it can pick up generic items and sell them with on or two clicks)
5) making the combat not look so similar to DOS (changing/removing the attack path line visual)
6) changing the jumping animation to something a bit more realistic (i think nobody was really impressed when Swen Vicke showcased the feather spell and jumped of the building - that spell is a rip off from Morrowind etc.)
I must say, I find many complaints by OP absurd. Little in terms of arguing why would BG3 benefit of those changes beside not reminding OP that the team made D:OS2 as well.
1) Why? Is there anything wrong with it? It could look nicer and smoother, but cone of vision is a great stealth feature and it is implimented clearly and intuitively.
2) What's wrong with it, beside appearing in D:OS2? I do find an idea of "zone of darkness" to be rather silly, though in the world of magic anything is possible I suppose. Gameplay wise it seems like a neat design, with multitude of uses. Overall, intrigued by advenrtised stealth features.
3) I actually haven't seen much of it. I do agree that D:OS relied a bit too much on those, but those are good features, that can help making location and encounters unique and memorable. In tabletop you can use spells and abilities to interact with stuff around you. In Pillars those can be in scripted interactions. BG3 has a potential for a very robust enviroment interactions and as long as they won't overshadow the actual DnD system, they are neat.
4) I will hold my judgement on that. I was not a fan of inventory in D:OS2, or should I say - mostly trash item design. Now, BG2 inventory wasn't that small - it's just potions, gems, scrolls and plenty of weapons were carried in their own inventories, inside the inventory - a feature that can be easily replaced by a proper filtering options. Afterall, one was never forced to leave anything valuable behind in BG2.
5) UI has a chance to change - a lot of stuff is currently reused to accelerate development and things will be finalized later in development. Still, you fail to mention what's so wrong with it, beside being similar (or same) as their previous title.
6) Yeah, I would prefer if they found a way to make jump more believable. I get that they want it to be far, for gameplay purposes, but even with enhanced abilities it just looks silly right now. A lot could be improved with a bit more fluid animations though.
Glad to hear you agree with most of my suggestions.
As per point 2) you can check:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9hU6UJX_pcat 54.47 there is a black cloud that either hides or blinds characters. They already used that in DOS and I think it looks way to similar to DOS.
If you will go back and freeze the video @54:25 You will notice that the character was using an arrow of darkness.
The 'Jump' mechanic will never not be jarring whenever my clunky dwarven cleric in full plate will be able to leap like a panther 10 feet vertically. Although I read in the reddit AMA that Jump will be strenght based so maybe that wont be the case. But I hope there will be armor check penalties in the game?
What really bothers me about the BG3 demo is that Larian is still using a lot of DOS features like:
1) marking red field of vision when sneaking (same as DOS - proposing to change this visual),
My issue with it was the field of view. Its like 45% or something? You can basically move right next to someone but since the enemies apperently have horse blinders on they wont see you.
2) using fog clouds animations (same as DOS, please remove this visual and make it a PC/NPC status),
I disagree. Why would a spell that create a cloud (or similar effect) not be visible? Too much shit on the screen? I dont know, it would be immersion breaking if you cast an Grease spell and there wouldnt be grease on the floor.
3) overusing surfaces interactions (water, grease, blood etd - same as DOS; please enough with DOS features),
I saw Sven dipping his bow in fire (and essentially set it ablaze) and while thats a cool feature it should actually just set fire to the tip of the arrow. And, if we really want to go there, you should have to set fire to a new arrow every round. But I mean, it makes sense for water, smoke, oil, ice or whatever, to have a tangible effect on the gameplay and not just fancy art in the background.
4) to much items and overly large inventories (same as DOS - BG1and2 had relatively small inventories, I would propose to somehow simplify the item gathering process or even use a mechanic like a courier similar to what they did in Torchlight - it can pick up generic items and sell them with on or two clicks)
Tempted to agree but not sure. While having loads of junk laying around it means that the world is living. It doesnt matter if the fork and spoon on the table, for all gameplay purposes, is useless. But perhaps an option to filter out "Useless" stuff? In some areas in DOS2 when you tab to highlight items, your whole screen is just words.
I saw Sven dipping his bow in fire (and essentially set it ablaze) and while thats a cool feature it should actually just set fire to the tip of the arrow. And, if we really want to go there, you should have to set fire to a new arrow every round.
This is where I am willing to excuse “realism†with convenience and clarity. Having to set every individual arrow on fire would be tedious. Having just an arrow’s tip fire wouldn’t be clearly visible.
DOS and DOS2 were masterpiece level RPGs, borrowing things from them, to me, is completely fine.
It's like you are wanting Larian to not be Larian, OP.
The animations need to be reworked from the ground up. It’s a great opportunity to distinguish the game from DOS2. They’re too jolly, goofy and not at all in line with the more grounded tone of Baldurs Gate.
Everyone is talking about the jumping animation, which is one of the more obvious ones. The shooting animation is probably in most need of a change though. It’s just so silly. The arc isn’t needed when aiming at an enemy at these distances. If there’s a big obstacle in the way, like a fortress wall, by all means use the arc, otherwise remove it. And make the animation more forceful.
Also, the running animation seem to be a copy paste from DOS2 thus far. It’s swanky and just not a quality animation. It needs to change into a more realistic animation that has weight and determination to it.
Things like this really contribute to the overall tone of the game. Right now it doesn’t have its own voice. It just screams DOS.
The animations need to be reworked from the ground up. It’s a great opportunity to distinguish the game from DOS2. They’re too jolly, goofy and not at all in line with the more grounded tone of Baldurs Gate.
Everyone is talking about the jumping animation, which is one of the more obvious ones. The shooting animation is probably in most need of a change though. It’s just so silly. The arc isn’t needed when aiming at an enemy at these distances. If there’s a big obstacle in the way, like a fortress wall, by all means use the arc, otherwise remove it. And make the animation more forceful.
Also, the running animation seem to be a copy paste from DOS2 thus far. It’s swanky and just not a quality animation. It needs to change into a more realistic animation that has weight and determination to it.
Things like this really contribute to the overall tone of the game. Right now it doesn’t have its own voice. It just screams DOS.
Yeah totally agree that animations look jolly or goofy...I personally dont like that because im into dark fantasy more...but a lot of larian fans here seem to love the jolly/goofy stuff, and Larian is like that so unfortunately IMO we will see a lot of jolly/goody stuff in the final game.
but a lot of larian fans here seem to love the jolly/goofy stuff, and Larian is like that so unfortunately IMO we will see a lot of jolly/goody stuff in the final game.
Or largely just don't really agree that the animations look goofy, etc. Going by these criticisms, you would think they used Moe, Larry, and Curly for their mocap sessions.
but a lot of larian fans here seem to love the jolly/goofy stuff, and Larian is like that so unfortunately IMO we will see a lot of jolly/goody stuff in the final game.
Or largely just don't really agree that the animations look goofy, etc. Going by these criticisms, you would think they used Moe, Larry, and Curly for their mocap sessions.
Not all animations look goofy/silly, but some of them most certainly do. Especially the ones I mentioned. Larian frequently talk about how they want BG3 to be a darker and overall more serious game. Animations need to reflect that, which I actually think they will eventually. Still it’s concerning.
Not all animations look goofy/silly, but some of them most certainly do. Especially the ones I mentioned. Larian frequently talk about how they want BG3 to be a darker and overall more serious game. Animations need to reflect that, which I actually think they will eventually. Still it’s concerning.
Okay, maybe some of the running animations (e.g. elf). The ranged beam/arc has the utility of letting you know what is or is not in your line of sight. I have no problem with it.
Not all animations look goofy/silly, but some of them most certainly do. Especially the ones I mentioned. Larian frequently talk about how they want BG3 to be a darker and overall more serious game. Animations need to reflect that, which I actually think they will eventually. Still it’s concerning.
Okay, maybe some of the running animations (e.g. elf). The ranged beam/arc has the utility of letting you know what is or is not in your line of sight. I have no problem with it.
Of course the ranged beam has utility, but it makes no sense whatsoever to casually lob an arrow at an enemy standing 10 feet away. It’s very immersion breaking and makes me not want to play an archer. They could easily telegraph if something is or isn’t a valid target without using a nonsensical goofy animation. Just make it a straight, forceful shot if there’s nothing in the way.
how is that "goofy", its just showing you a line.
Youre ust grasping for straws here.
how is that "goofy", its just showing you a line.
Youre ust grasping for straws here.
How can you not understand what I’m saying? Forget about the curved line. We’re talking about the animation of firing a bow and how the arrow travels. It’s absolutely ridiculous to lob an arrow at something standing near you. Look at some gameplay again.
It needs to change.
what?
you dont "lob" it at them.
holy shityoure one of them, youre one of them who try to appeal to the realism purtiy spiral.
You activeley want the game to look worse, not for any actual reason, but just to virtue signal about how serious you want things to be.
I don’t care about realism. I care about immersion. The path of the arrow fired is literally curved, and it looks absolutely ridiculous. Plenty of people on different forums have pointed this out.
Larian is probably aware of the silliness of having something like this in a Baldurs Gate game, but it’s still concerning.
Most animation are very bright, and each action are very bass heavy.
Each spell makes the earth move, which is okay for some skill, but when even pin down and magic missle makes that, that is a bit too much.
They should approach it very differently, more realistic, if they ever want to a dark atmosphere...
No matter, what is the music like or where the fight takes place, if everybody is shinning all the time, it will never be dark.
Edit: I was talking only about ability and spell animation during battles, jump/push.
Cut-scenes and other animations, during dialogs are good.
I don’t care about realism. I care about immersion. The path of the arrow fired is literally curved, and it looks absolutely ridiculous. Plenty of people on different forums have pointed this out.
Larian is probably aware of the silliness of having something like this in a Baldurs Gate game, but it’s still concerning.
Most animation are very bright, and each action are very bass heavy.
Each spell makes the earth move, which is okay for some skill, but when even pin down and magic missle makes that, that is a bit too much.
They should approach it very differently, more realistic, if they ever want to a dark atmosphere...
No matter, what is the music like or where is the fight takes place, if everybody is shinning all the time, it will never be dark.
Of all the objections being made, I think these animation complaints baffle me the most.
3) overusing surfaces interactions (water, grease, blood etd - same as DOS; please enough with DOS features),
I really disagree with that. The first time I heard BG3 announcement they emphasized player agency, a feeling like you are playing with competent GM. My imagination went wild - like casting fireball-ish spell into a wall and making it explode, leaving holes in the ground, freezing rivers to be able to pass them, burning trees and bushes to force enemies out from hiding etc etc. I really really like depth added by being able to exploit your environment for all kinds of advantages. Obviously I am not getting what I am imagining, but the the direction - making environment more responsive to your actions is an awesome immersive thing for me.
Of all the objections being made, I think these animation complaints baffle me the most.
And I must admit I’m genuinely confused as to how someone can like something like the shooting animation. Proper animation is often more important than graphics when it comes to immersion.
I agree with #4 and #6, as well as #3 to a limited extent.
DOS2 inventory was a complete mess of a time dump and the useless or roundabout crafting was part of it. I hate to say I'd like something streamlined, but I think that mess needs to be toned down by half at least.
The teleport and jump abuse with the puzzles was annoying in DOS2. It can still exist, but needs serious toning down as well.
As for the environmental effects and combos, those should absolutely remain, but there were situations in DOS2 where things were outright absurd. So I can understand the negative opinion towards it.
As for the rest, I wholeheartedly disagree. Those are all quality of life features that should, if anything, be improved upon, but need to remain in the game.
D&D was MADE for the element effects of DOS2.
Since I started playing D&D back in 3.5, we always encouraged lateral thinking:
He's wearing full plate armor? Shocking grasp, since metal loves conducting electricity! (DM gives a +1-2 to damage)
It's raining and the enemy is soaking wet? Frost spells bite harder! People get a penalty to Dex as their clothing freezes!
He's wearing chainmail (or plate armor again)? Heat metal!
People climbing a wall to get to you? Gust of Wind! They have to make Str (or Dex, whichever's better) checks to avoid losing their grasp and falling!
at this point im convinced that i should just filter any post that contains the words "darker athmosphere"
Weaksauce animations that feel floaty and non threatening are "dark"?
What a load of nonsense.
And on bows.
No CRPG does bow combat right and no CRPG ever will.
A party based video game will never come close to showing the effective range of an english longbow.
If you wanna go there, youd have to go full shadowrun where one of the players is essentialy not even on the battlemat.
D&D was MADE for the element effects of DOS2.
Since I started playing D&D back in 3.5, we always encouraged lateral thinking:
He's wearing full plate armor? Shocking grasp, since metal loves conducting electricity! (DM gives a +1-2 to damage)
It's raining and the enemy is soaking wet? Frost spells bite harder! People get a penalty to Dex as their clothing freezes!
He's wearing chainmail (or plate armor again)? Heat metal!
People climbing a wall to get to you? Gust of Wind! They have to make Str (or Dex, whichever's better) checks to avoid losing their grasp and falling!
All those things are good, and extra choice/depth is good.
What would be less good is constantly tripping over barrels/puddles of goo/oil which often have no reason for being there. Environmental interaction was very heavily used in D:OS, and that level might seem overuse with a different rule-set.
To be fair, I have not noticed the environment being overloaded in what we have seen of BG3 so far.
you realize that was there for the tutorial.
In the divinity games explosive barels ten dto be pretty rare outside of some areas where they make sense, unless you actually carry them around
And on bows.
No CRPG does bow combat right and no CRPG ever will.
A party based video game will never come close to showing the effective range of an english longbow.
If you wanna go there, youd have to go full shadowrun where one of the players is essentialy not even on the battlemat.
Mate, what are you arguing against? I feel like some people have taken a stance to defend the game at all cost, no matter the nature of the critique. I really see the potential in BG3 and want every aspect of it to be great. That’s all. The goal is not to belittle the game, but to show opportunities for improvement.
If the game gets higher quality, more immersive animations, that’s a good thing, no? Personally I’m a player that care about the feel of combat. How it looks, how it sounds, and of course how it plays. Why should we set the bar low because it’s a CRPG? BG3 is a very ambitious, next-gen game with realistic graphics and a third person camera. It deserves animations that fits that ambition. The current animations worked fine in DOS2, but as Larian keeps reiterating, BG3 is a very different game.
We don’t need the realism of an english longbow simulates perfectly. This isn’t about realism, it’s about how things make you feel when you experience them. Does it get me excited to be a stealthy assassin that lurks in the shadows and crits baddies from afar? Currently no it doesn’t, far from it, but I hope that will change.
Mate
how about you lurk a bit more huh?
Ive already voiced multiple concerns about the direction of the game, i just happen to disagree with you here.
I am agains tmore "Immersive" animaitons. Ive seen games like kingdom come deliverance or mordhau.
The combat in those games feels weak, floaty and embarassing.
I prefer systems that feel like dragons dogma, systems that show a grounded world but have an effectfull combat system, even if its not realisitc.
Its one that feels right rather than looks right.
I dont trust you people with understanding the difference between realism and authenticity.
I prefer authenticity (within the bounds of the universe) to realism.
But the kind of people that complain about the exact curve of an arrow, are those kind of people that do it exclusiveley to virtue signal to others about how pure their dedication is.
so no.
Realistic animations are not a net positive. To me they are a negative because they directly subtract from my expirience as it gets less satisfying
What really bothers me about the BG3 demo is that Larian is still using a lot of DOS features like:
1) marking red field of vision when sneaking (same as DOS - proposing to change this visual),
2) using fog clouds animations (same as DOS, please remove this visual and make it a PC/NPC status),
3) overusing surfaces interactions (water, grease, blood etd - same as DOS; please enough with DOS features),
4) to much items and overly large inventories (same as DOS - BG1and2 had relatively small inventories, I would propose to somehow simplify the item gathering process or even use a mechanic like a courier similar to what they did in Torchlight - it can pick up generic items and sell them with on or two clicks)
5) making the combat not look so similar to DOS (changing/removing the attack path line visual)
6) changing the jumping animation to something a bit more realistic (i think nobody was really impressed when Swen Vicke showcased the feather spell and jumped of the building - that spell is a rip off from Morrowind etc.)
Just my two cents, what DOS gimmicks/features from DOS would you NOT like to see in BG3?
Aside from MAYBE 6 and 4, I have no real issues. Some visual markers are like they are fora reason. Red is associated with danger. I don't see a recon to change thing just for the sake of trying to look different.
Speaking of 4, personally I hate how packrat/lootlord friendly many RPG games are. I'd rather not have you pick up, carry and sell everything that isn't nailed down. I don't mind enemies dropping everything they carry (everything you can see on them) as that makes sense, but you should pick what you need and move on, especially since there is a sense of urgency to the plot.
Mate
how about you lurk a bit more huh?
Ive already voiced multiple concerns about the direction of the game, i just happen to disagree with you here.
I am agains tmore "Immersive" animaitons. Ive seen games like kingdom come deliverance or mordhau.
The combat in those games feels weak, floaty and embarassing.
I prefer systems that feel like dragons dogma, systems that show a grounded world but have an effectfull combat system, even if its not realisitc.
Its one that feels right rather than looks right.
I dont trust you people with understanding the difference between realism and authenticity.
I prefer authenticity (within the bounds of the universe) to realism.
But the kind of people that complain about the exact curve of an arrow, are those kind of people that do it exclusiveley to virtue signal to others about how pure their dedication is.
so no.
Realistic animations are not a net positive. To me they are a negative because they directly subtract from my expirience as it gets less satisfying
Did you reply to the wrong person? I’m wholeheartedly confused.
at this point im convinced that i should just filter any post that contains the words "darker athmosphere"
Weaksauce animations that feel floaty and non threatening are "dark"?
What a load of nonsense.
And on bows.
No CRPG does bow combat right and no CRPG ever will.
A party based video game will never come close to showing the effective range of an english longbow.
If you wanna go there, youd have to go full shadowrun where one of the players is essentialy not even on the battlemat.
If anyone is interested in longbow effectiveness, Tod Cutler, a re-enactment enthusiast who makes weapons for a living (
https://todsworkshop.com/ ), has got together a group of modern specialists to do practical examination of medieval bow warfare. They have a couple of youtube videos so far looking at the English warbow, including one testing against Agincourt-era French plate armour.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBxdTkddHaEReading a little around this subject, it seems that although maximum effective longbow distance may be 150m or more, that would need massed archers against barn-sized unarmoured targets to make it remotely worth expending the arrows. A more practical maximum distance for a one-on-one would be flat-shooting at 50m, which is still 5 or 6 turns of movement in D&D terms.
If anyone is interested in longbow effectiveness, Tod Cutler, a re-enactment enthusiast who makes weapons for a living
Oh, yeah, he lives nearby. He demoed one of his crossbows to me (slight sense of deja vu, so please excuse me if I'm repeating myself, I have an awful memory) which was a big bugger and it took a lot of winding. Very impressive, even though he said it only had about as much impact as a .22! He
nearly let me have a go but it was unfinished. I suggested it was probably a terrible idea to hand it to me anyway! Best case I'd just drop it on my foot.
Mate
I am against more "Immersive" animaitons. Ive seen games like kingdom come deliverance or mordhau.
The combat in those games feels weak, floaty and embarassing.
I prefer systems that feel like dragons dogma, systems that show a grounded world but have an effectfull combat system, even if its not realisitc.
Its one that feels right rather than looks right.
I dont trust you people with understanding the difference between realism and authenticity.
I prefer authenticity (within the bounds of the universe) to realism.
realism is by default authentic.
I think you should work on expanding your vocabulary.
Personally, I hate flashy, fantasy combat. It looks retarded an UN-immersive to me. It FEELS wrong to me. And this is kinda the point. What feels right is what someone got used to or conditioned to. It is way too subjective as a reference. Hollywood got so many things wrong that people now expect them in movies and it feels off to them when someone does it right.
Also, note that KcD and Mordhau are 1st person with direct control over 1 character. Hence there are some limitations to movement/positioning and animations that can make some things look off, and that something like BG3 wouldn't have to deal with.
But the kind of people that complain about the exact curve of an arrow, are those kind of people that do it exclusiveley to virtue signal to others about how pure their dedication is.
so no.
Realistic animations are not a net positive. To me they are a negative because they directly subtract from my expirience as it gets less satisfying
Arrow curvature? Virtue signaling?
Methinks you had some issues in your past and are now venting/projecting here.
and authenticity isnt neccesarily realism.
Which is exactly my point.
get off your high horse.
And no, its not about limitaitons.
Compare for Honor and Mordhau and tell me you prefer Mordhaus combat presentation and feeling.
>issues
Sperg harder.
Arrow curvature? Virtue signaling?
Methinks you had some issues in your past and are now venting/projecting here.
Sordak's our Official Forum Eccentric.
You know how every pub has its old geezer? The one who's always there, who's worldly wise, cantankerous and random? And it wouldn't be the same without him.
On the topic of addressing animations or effects, I can definitely agree with this. Magical effects are great for magical characters or magical moves, but not so much for a rogue/fighter type of character.
As for the arrow flight path, I hadn't noticed this before, but now that it was brought up it's rather jarring. It appears the character shoots almost linearly at a larger distance (20+m), but when standing next to an enemy the character shoots into the air for the arrow to fall back down. It makes no sense and looks silly.
@vometia That's all well and good, but outright dismissing valid criticisms and feedback with flaming or telling them to not post is not conducive to an appropriate discussion. Just saying.
On the topic of addressing animations or effects, I can definitely agree with this. Magical effects are great for magical characters or magical moves, but not so much for a rogue/fighter type of character.
As for the arrow flight path, I hadn't noticed this before, but now that it was brought up it's rather jarring. It appears the character shoots almost linearly at a larger distance (20+m), but when standing next to an enemy the character shoots into the air for the arrow to fall back down. It makes no sense and looks silly.
@vometia That's all well and good, but outright dismissing valid criticisms and feedback with flaming or telling them to not post is not conducive to an appropriate discussion. Just saying.
Finally someone with a bit of sense
not any stylized effect is a magical effect.
When theres an impact animation or sparks for a sword strike, thats not magic.
thats just making it look not boring.
If anyone is interested in longbow effectiveness, Tod Cutler, a re-enactment enthusiast who makes weapons for a living
Oh, yeah, he lives nearby. He demoed one of his crossbows to me (slight sense of deja vu, so please excuse me if I'm repeating myself, I have an awful memory) which was a big bugger and it took a lot of winding. Very impressive, even though he said it only had about as much impact as a .22! He
nearly let me have a go but it was unfinished. I suggested it was probably a terrible idea to hand it to me anyway! Best case I'd just drop it on my foot.
Cool
Although, with some of the quarrel heads I've seen, even a .22-level impact could be pretty gruesome !
not any stylized effect is a magical effect.
When theres an impact animation or sparks for a sword strike, thats not magic.
thats just making it look not boring.
Oh for sure. Personally I want hits to feel impactful, but that can be achieved with the swing/shoot animation, a good sound effect coupled with a reaction animation, and some blood or sparks if it’s a block. If we look at the current rogue sneak attack animation in BG3, it basically looks like a spell. Actually rewatching it again I don’t know what it’s suppose to look like. It’s overly fast with a twinkling orb thingy circling around with no real sense of impact. I really don’t like it. In fact I dislike it almost as much as the bow.
It might seem foreign to some, but things like this can actually determine whether I enjoy a game or not. After all, they’re contributing to the very core feel of the game, and are repeated for hundreds of hours.
Edit: I should add that the impact of a normal dagger attack is quite satisfying. Credit where it’s due.
I agree, especially with the jumping.
The jumping is pathetic! they need to change that =/
As for the arrow flight path, I hadn't noticed this before, but now that it was brought up it's rather jarring. It appears the character shoots almost linearly at a larger distance (20+m), but when standing next to an enemy the character shoots into the air for the arrow to fall back down. It makes no sense and looks silly.
When standing next to an opponent and firing, I don't see any arrow at all. I'm trying to see it, but I can't. Is there a video that slows the attack down and shows it?
Although, with some of the quarrel heads I've seen, even a .22-level impact could be pretty gruesome !
Yeah, I don't really want to dwell too long on the sort of unpleasantness it could cause! And as much as I'm "it's
only like a .22", that is something that is absolutely capable of killing, even in relatively untrained hands and even at a distance while pretty much ignoring any mediaeval type body armour it finds on the way. No wonder these things were so feared.
What really bothers me about the BG3 demo is that Larian is still using a lot of DOS features like:
I agree that they need to tame many of the DOS features and concentrate on creating features more true to D&D.
1) marking red field of vision when sneaking (same as DOS - proposing to change this visual),
If they want to keep something like this they should use a D&D Perception check to see how well you can track and estimate what an enemy can and can't see while you are sneaking. It should not be automatic nor 100% accurate.
2) using fog clouds animations (same as DOS, please remove this visual and make it a PC/NPC status),
There are certainly many spells that create fog effects in D&D. And there could certainly be environmental fog effects. But when fog is used, it should make sense within the D&D system and not be as arbitrary and easy to create through mundane means as it is in DOS.
That said, the 1st level spell "Create and Destroy Water" has an option to "Destroy Water" which allows you to "destroy fog in a 30' cube within range." So D&D does have a low level method of dealing with fog effects. But it shouldn't be a mandatory spell to have because we can't go an hour without dealing with Fog effects.
3) overusing surfaces interactions (water, grease, blood etd - same as DOS; please enough with DOS features),
I agree. Neat in DOS. Not consistent with D&D unless the spell or environment call for it. They need to tone it, and our interactions with it, way down.
4) to much items and overly large inventories (same as DOS - BG1and2 had relatively small inventories, I would propose to somehow simplify the item gathering process or even use a mechanic like a courier similar to what they did in Torchlight - it can pick up generic items and sell them with on or two clicks)
Inventory management is always a problem in these kinds of games. But I don't think the core system in DOS is incompatible with D&D. Making it "less realistic" with some kind of auto-sell option isn't a fix.
5) making the combat not look so similar to DOS (changing/removing the attack path line visual)
The attack line visual (or something very much like it) should stay. It should just relay different information (like whether a target has half, three quarters, or total cover.) It could also be color-coded to indicate whether the attack is going to have Advantage or Disadvantage.
In this case I don't care whether it looks like DOS or not. Just that it's relaying mechanics relevant to D&D.
6) changing the jumping animation to something a bit more realistic (i think nobody was really impressed when Swen Vicke showcased the feather spell and jumped of the building - that spell is a rip off from Morrowind etc.)
Yes, the mundane Jump action was unrealistic. What we saw was probably what we should be seeing from a Jump Spell. That's fine. There is a jump spell and it looks like they should be able to support it easily. As for Feather Fall... that's an iconic D&D spell. I was happy to see it implemented and happy to see verticality be a bigger part of the game. Not sure what the problem is there.
Just my two cents, what DOS gimmicks/features from DOS would you NOT like to see in BG3?
Default abilities like "Pin Down" on bows and "Bleeding Attack" on slash weapons isn't a D&D thing. D&D has a weapon effects system. Use it, not the DOS weapon system.
I know it must kind of hurt to not use so many of the "nifty" DOS mechanics in this D&D game... but they do need to live with the fact that they *are* building a D&D game.
dnd doesnt have weapon effect systems....
dnd doesnt have weapon effect systems....
It most certainly does.
And it starts with not having weird abilities like the ability to pin and cause bleeding with mundane weapons.
Most notable and foundational parts of the 5e weapon system include:
1) Core Properties that define usability (for example): Finesse, Heavy, Light, Reach, Two-Handed, Thrown, Versatile, Special
2) Type: Slashing, Piercing, Bludgeoning
3) Material options: Wood, Steel/Iron, Silvered (Adamantine and Mithral only apply to armor in 5e)
4) Creator or intended user options (chart)
5) History details options (chart)
6) Minor properties options (chart)
7) Quirks options (chart)
8) Enhancement bonus (limited to +1, +2, or +3 in 5e)
9) And a plethora of historically "iconic" magic features that are often applied to certain types of weapons, but are (in practice) seen on other weapons in various adventures. Abilities like slaying (general), beserker, venom, dancing, defender, dragon slayer, flaming tongue, frost brand, giant slayer, lighting, thunderbolts, holy avenger, luck, disruption, smiting, terror, life stealer, speed, sharpness, vengeance, vorpal, wounding, and vicious. All of which are detailed in the Core DMG.
Further, I'd be remiss if I didn't mention two prominent *sub-systems*:
10) Sentience
11) Artifacts
Frankly, it's not a very complicated system and there is certainly enough in core for Larian to use to create a very recognizable D&D game over applying strange weapon effects/abilities/mechanics from DOS to D&D. I can be a DOS fan and still acknowledge that it's using a very different weapon system than the one that D&D uses.
you realize thats a completley different system to the one were talking about right?
that doesnt give you any more combat options at all
I am completely astonished that in a D&D game, people are actually calling for getting rid of surface interaction. That's ridiculous.
Yeah right?
this entire thread makes my head spin.
When have you ever heard of someone wanting to GET RID of features.
If someone decided to model accurate water physics into Turok 2 i definitly wouldnt bloody mind, sure theyll probably be compleltey pointless, but if Acclaim still had them lying around, why would i object to that?
Yeah right?
this entire thread makes my head spin.
When have you ever heard of someone wanting to GET RID of features.
If someone decided to model accurate water physics into Turok 2 i definitly wouldnt bloody mind, sure theyll probably be compleltey pointless, but if Acclaim still had them lying around, why would i object to that?
Well this is a thread specifically about removing DOS gimmicks/features, so if it makes your head spin I would suggest you take your leave.
Personally I don’t mind surface interactions as long as the game isn’t built too much around them. If there’re just there for people to use if they wish, it’s fine. There are more pressing concerns pointed out in this thread.
Well this is a thread specifically about removing DOS gimmicks/features
Yes, but if taken too far, it just becomes another way of saying "make it look and play more like BG2." IF someone is arguing to get rid of surface interaction (did someone?), that would be too far (it is one of the features that made Larian's games stand out). Too prevalent in DOS games? Sure. Get rid of it? No way.
Well this is a thread specifically about removing DOS gimmicks/features
Yes, but if taken too far, it just becomes another way of saying "make it look and play more like BG2." IF someone is arguing to get rid of surface interaction (did someone?), that would be too far (it is one of the features that made Larian's games stand out). Too prevalent in DOS games? Sure. Get rid of it? No way.
The whole point is to make it feel more like a BG game and less like a DOS game. They won’t be removing surface interactions altogether though so I wouldn’t worry about that.
The whole point is to make it feel more like a BG game and less like a DOS game.
Yes, that is the point of the thread. But it is a dead argument if taken too far. BG3 will most certainly, and to a large extent, look, feel, and play more like a DOS game from 2017 than a BG game from 1998.
The whole point is to make it feel more like a BG game and less like a DOS game.
Yes, that is the point of the thread. But it is a dead argument if taken too far. BG3 will most certainly, and to a large extent, look, feel, and play more like a DOS game from 2017 than a BG game from 1998.
That’s why I said more like a BG game and less like DOS game, with the start point being what’s been shown thus far. I think everyone realizes that it won’t look and play like a 1998 game.
I think everyone realizes that it won’t look and play like a 1998 game.
I think most people realize it. I don't get the impression everyone does.
That’s why I said more like a BG game and less like DOS game
There are two ways of interpreting this: (a) if the game is currently, for example, 90% DOS and 10% BG, it should be more like 80% DOS and 20%, or (b) if the game is currently 90% DOS and 10% BG, it should be more like 40% DOS and 60% BG. If the arguments being put forth are aiming for (b), then there's a problem.
The mask starts slipping doesnt it.
youd remove a feature that any DM would love to have at their disposal (so they dont have to houserule it) and that people would have praised BG1 to all high heavens if it had it back in the day, just because it isnt like the original.
Why not argue in favor of the removal of 3D graphics while youre at it.
I think everyone realizes that it won’t look and play like a 1998 game.
I think most people realize it. I don't get the impression everyone does.
That’s why I said more like a BG game and less like DOS game
There are two ways of interpreting this: (a) if the game is currently, for example, 90% DOS and 10% BG, it should be more like 80% DOS and 20%, or (b) if the game is currently 90% DOS and 10% BG, it should be more like 40% DOS and 60% BG. If the arguments being put forth are aiming for (b), then there's a problem.
Well it’s a BG game so ideally it should be 100% BG and 0% DOS, but we all know that’s not going to happen at this point. The game is simply not going to make a complete U-turn. It’s not the vision they have, and just the fact that it’s built in a tweaked DOS engine makes that pretty much impossible.
We can only hope for the end product to feel more like BG and considerably less like DOS than I does today. And even if I’m concerned, what’s been shown has potential, and there’s still very much hope given early access and all.
Well it’s a BG game so ideally it should be 100% BG and 0% DOS
That's where the disagreement lies. It can still be a BG game while being heavily a DOS+ game (meaning like DOS2 but better graphics, more features). 100% BG is BG (archaic graphics and all)
We can only hope for the end product to feel more like BG and considerably less like DOS than I does today
A few of you are hoping for that, yes. The rest of us are looking forward to an improved DOS type game with D&D lore and rules (and yes, a story and setting that connects the it with BG).
That's where the disagreement lies. It can still be a BG game while being heavily a DOS+ game (meaning like DOS2 but better graphics, more features). 100% BG is BG (archaic graphics and all)
No, if BG3 didn’t have the BG lore and a rewritten rule system it would be 100% The next DOS game. That doesn’t mean it’s not evolving some aspects like the graphics, but it would still very much be DOS. BG2 was 100% a BG game, yet it added a lot of dimensions to the franchise. A DOS2 with better graphics is not a BG game, it’s DOS3, at most.
A few of you are hoping for that, yes. The rest of us are looking forward to an improved DOS type game with D&D lore and rules (and yes, a story and setting that connects the it with BG).
It’s not a few, at all. Even on this Larian forum a lot of people seem to want a game that has its own identity. I think you’ll see in the final product that’s what the devs want as well.
you approach this discussion completley the wrong way and thats why arguing with you over this is pointless.
you know what a 100% BG game is?
BG1 or 2.
By the metrics that you apply. If a feature that is in DoS makes soemthing , percentually, more a DoS game.
Then having a "proper" Baldurs Gate game by your standards menas an Infinity engine game.
So why should anyone listen to you. What you are talking about is bloody ridiculous.
You do not allow any form of improvement.
By the metrics that you apply. If a feature that is in DoS makes soemthing , percentually, more a DoS game.
Then having a "proper" Baldurs Gate game by your standards menas an Infinity engine game.
So why should anyone listen to you. What you are talking about is bloody ridiculous.
You do not allow any form of improvement.
If you read my comment again you’ll see that I said the exact opposite. I have no desire for another game in the infinity engine. I very much want a modern game that evolves the franchise in just the right ways without loosing its roots. And I wouldn’t be here if I didn’t think there’s still a chance we’ll get that. What’s been shown has potential; it just needs some course correcting.
A DOS2 with better graphics is not a BG game, it’s DOS3, at most.
Right. But DOS2 with better graphics and more features,
and D&D lore and rules, is a BG game.
Even on this Larian forum a lot of people seem to want a game that has its own identity. I think you’ll see in the final product that’s what the devs want as well.
A game with its own identity is one thing (and what needs to be done to achieve that is another). But futilely trying to recapture the identity of a game made twenty years ago is something else (especially from a company like Larian who has had great success with a different approach).
The fact that the game is 20 years old doesn’t mean anything. No one wants it to have the same graphics. Baldurs Gate is one of the most iconic computer RPG franchises of all time. It has a strong identity that can be captured, and has nothing to do with age. BG3 belongs to that franchise.
But I mean let’s be honest, you just want DOS3 so it really does become rather meaningless to discuss.
But I mean let’s be honest, you just want DOS3
I would like DOS3, sure. I like the idea of a combination of an improved DOS2 game with D&D rules and lore even better; which is exactly what we're getting.
It has a strong identity that can be captured, and has nothing to do with age
Like a few who have come before you, I don't think you have any clear idea on what you're talking about.
rather meaningless to discuss
Probably right, but for different reasons.
3) overusing surfaces interactions (water, grease, blood etd - same as DOS; please enough with DOS features),
I agree 100%. One of the most jarring features in D:OS games is barrels everywhere (completely out of place) and nonsensical surface interactions that transform the battlefield into a vfx mess. It can be fun for 1 or 2 combat encounters, but otherwise it's just a shallow and repetitive gimmick.
As long as they stick to the depth and complexity of the D&D ruleset, it'll be fine. This, of course, includes not altering the 'to hit' probability formula, because missing attacks isn't frustrating, it's a core aspect of D&D.
The animations need to be reworked from the ground up. It’s a great opportunity to distinguish the game from DOS2. They’re too jolly, goofy and not at all in line with the more grounded tone of Baldurs Gate.
Everyone is talking about the jumping animation, which is one of the more obvious ones. The shooting animation is probably in most need of a change though. It’s just so silly. The arc isn’t needed when aiming at an enemy at these distances. If there’s a big obstacle in the way, like a fortress wall, by all means use the arc, otherwise remove it. And make the animation more forceful.
Also, the running animation seem to be a copy paste from DOS2 thus far. It’s swanky and just not a quality animation. It needs to change into a more realistic animation that has weight and determination to it.
Things like this really contribute to the overall tone of the game. Right now it doesn’t have its own voice. It just screams DOS.
I completely agree good sir.
Not saying that BG3 should copy BG2, but the tone must avoid DS2 since it is about another universe of things. I would think that different rules and stories - require different tone overall.
3) overusing surfaces interactions (water, grease, blood etd - same as DOS; please enough with DOS features),
I agree 100%. One of the most jarring features in D:OS games is barrels everywhere (completely out of place) and nonsensical surface interactions that transform the battlefield into a vfx mess. It can be fun for 1 or 2 combat encounters, but otherwise it's just a shallow and repetitive gimmick.
As long as they stick to the depth and complexity of the D&D ruleset, it'll be fine. This, of course, includes not altering the 'to hit' probability formula, because missing attacks isn't frustrating, it's a core aspect of D&D.
Getting rid of barrels would be a step in the right direction. That alone might reduce the near ubiquitousness of the surface fires and such. How to balance keeping these features (a must IMO) and not letting them be a constant factor in every fight might not be easy, though. But that's what EA is for.
The problem isn't the amount of barrels. The problem is that there seem to be to many poison, flammable and water barrels. They need to make some of the barrels be just barrels, barrels with loot in them or just plain barrel mimics.
The problem isn't the amount of barrels. The problem is that there seem to be to many poison, flammable and water barrels. They need to make some of the barrels be just barrels, barrels with loot in them or just plain barrel mimics.
Yes, that is the implication. Normal barrels? No problem.
The problem isn't the amount of barrels. The problem is that there seem to be to many poison, flammable and water barrels. They need to make some of the barrels be just barrels, barrels with loot in them or just plain barrel mimics.
A group of DnD players walk into a bar
The bartender asks, “what’re you all in for?â€
The group says “we’re hunting mimicsâ€
The bartender laughed, the group laughed, the table laughed. They killed the table.
I do want the elemental effects, but the barrels need to be plain barrels. Or water barrels. Barrels usually hold ale or water. Not poisonous gas.
the tone must avoid DS2 since it is about another universe of things. I would think that different rules and stories - require different tone overall.
"Tone" is vague and unhelpful, as are similar terms like "aesthetic," "feel," "mood," "atmosphere," etc.
If you just mean is that it shouldn't look anything like DOS2, that is not only unrealistic (because that would be wasting time, effort and money recreating a lot of resources that are still fairly fresh and ready to reused and improved upon), but also moot (because it will have a resemblance to DOS2).
But I mean let’s be honest, you just want DOS3
I would like DOS3, sure. I like the idea of a combination of an improved DOS2 game with D&D rules and lore even better; which is exactly what we're getting.
It has a strong identity that can be captured, and has nothing to do with age
Like a few who have come before you, I don't think you have any clear idea on what you're talking about.
rather meaningless to discuss
Probably right, but for different reasons.
Yes it is what we’re getting, which is what people take issue with, since it’s a Baldurs Gate game. You like it because in most regards it pretty much is DOS3, and since you’re getting what you want your mind shuts out any form of dynamic thinking and instead puts forth emotional statements presuming no one knows what their favorite franchise is about. Cmon man.
I have a crystal clear idea of what I’m talking about, just to put that to rest. Just like the countless of other people on the Internet that’ve typed up long, specific explanations of what the Baldurs Gate franchise is about and what they miss in BG3. At this point I’m truly just worn out by explaining it to Larianitos that keep failing to make any rational sense, and for mysterious reasons sees people’s opinions on a game as personal attacks on their own emotional well being.
Even if we had no clue what BG is about, it’s not our responsibility, but Larian’s, since they decided to make a direct sequel to a legendary game.
It is indeed meaningless to discuss with someone that’s already getting what they want. Or so it seems.
Having surface interaction in the game is not the same thing as going "put barrels in every scene of the game so the whole world explodes!!!!!".
Pretending like it is is a strawman argument. DOS didn't have barrels in every fight either.
your mind shuts out any form of dynamic thinking and instead puts forth emotional statements presuming no one knows what their favorite franchise is about
Haha that's awesome. Nostalgia-addled minds claiming others are emotional and "keep failing to make any rational sense." Very amusing.
I have a crystal clear idea of what I’m talking about,
Sure you do. Reconcile these statements:
"Well it’s a BG game so ideally it should be 100% BG and 0% DOS."
"I have no desire for another game in the infinity engine."
Why don't you try laying out some specifics? Different combat mechanics? Hand-drawn textures? Camera locked at an angle and a distance with no ability to rotate? What?
long, specific explanations of what the Baldurs Gate franchise is about
Yeah. The "dark" "aesthetic" or "feel" or "mood" or "atmosphere." Very specific.
It has a strong identity that can be captured, and has nothing to do with age
Like a few who have come before you, I don't think you have any clear idea on what you're talking about.
LOL.
Fun comment from one of those that always refuse to hear and admit differents opinions and feelings^^
Is is necessary to repeat all the discussions one more time because you don't agree with another one ?
You said you don't care about Baldur's Gate, his "spirit" or the name of this new game, so why are you still trying to "proove" the others are wrong ?
If you just mean is that it shouldn't look anything like DOS2, that is not only unrealistic (because that would be wasting time, effort and money recreating a lot of resources that are still fairly fresh and ready to reused and improved upon), but also moot (because it will have a resemblance to DOS2).
That’s like Blizzard saying they should just as well be using Warcraft assets for their new Diablo game because it’s available. It’s the same company making the games after all. It makes no sense buddy. Its lazy, unambitious and not worthy of a quality developer. And apparently Larian agrees since they’re already recreating all the graphics to fit the more realistic look. It’s not just higher resolution textures, it’s completely new assets. It was unfortunate that they showed off the area in the game that looks the most like DOS2 in the gameplay reveal. Looking at other released footage, it doesnt look as much like it (graphically), thankfully. Still they could tone down the color saturation a bit.
LOL.
Fun comment from one of those that always refuse to hear and admit differents opinions and feelings^^
Selective memory, man. When it's just matter of opinion (loot, 4 vs 6 party, origin characters), I call it for it what it is (ability to choose your preference). When it's a load of vacuous nonsense like "this isn't BG3", I call it for what it is.
That’s like Blizzard saying they should just as well be using Warcraft assets for their new Diablo game because it’s available.
It's not like that at all.
And apparently Larian agrees since they’re already recreating all the graphics to fit the more realistic look. It’s not just higher resolution textures, it’s completely new assets.
So why all the "less like a DOS2 game" stuff if it's completely new? The game looks great so far, but sure looks like it stems from DOS2 to me.
It was unfortunate that they showed off the area in the game that looks the most like DOS2 in the gameplay reveal. Looking at other released footage, it doesnt look as much like it at all
Which footage are you referring to?
LOL.
Fun comment from one of those that always refuse to hear and admit differents opinions and feelings^^
Selective memory, man. When it's just matter of opinion (loot, 4 vs 6 party, origin characters), I call it for it what it is (ability to choose your preference). When it's a load of vacuous nonsense like "this isn't BG3", I call it for what it is.
"It has a strong identity to capture", that was what you were answering
Please chek all the threads/titles on the forum before saying "Like a few who have come before you, I don't think you have any clear idea on what you're talking about. ".
Everyone who says "it's not a BG game" know why he saying it... Whatever your opinion about certain specific elements...
You could read this topic again to focus on their arguments => more like BG, less like DoS... This is the thread and you're one of those who deflected it.
I'll admit that I struggle to understand what a "more BG" game means except in terms of story quality, breadth, depth, variety and execution; and these we can't judge yet.
In terms of the original BG games, I can think of nothing visual I would want to copy at all; the visual ideas were good for their time, and worked well in the game, but they are long since outclassed. Even the games' creators moved on to create a better engine immediately.
In terms of the gameplay we have seen, there isn't much that really irks, perhaps because I have NOT played D:OS2, so I don't really know what it looks like; these mostly look like pretty generic landscape assets with high fantasy buildings. Sounds about right, doesn't it?
I get the point about over-use of environmental interaction, because I did play some of D:OS, and I can see that some of the UI effects are a bit over-enthusiastic, but the only place in the gameplay that really seemed to cause an issue was when selecting "dash" you had to wait several seconds for the cursor to return control to you; too many actions with a similar selection delay could definitely get annoying.
Even the games' creators moved on to create a better engine immediately.
I hope you are not referring here to NWN... it looked bad in its time, and hold up even worse. Still, that was less of a game, and more of a toolbox.
Man you people are insane.
Oh no the barrels! no please no more barrels!
none of you played any of the original sin games. OS2 bareley had any barrels.
The only fight i remember having alarge ammount of barrels s the one in the Mines where.... theres barrels of oil because its next to an oil drill.
you just make stuff up to be upset.
You want to remove features and constantly sperg about having a clear vision when you dont have one.
How abotu this, you go back to RPG codex, you formulate a vision that you have, and then you post it.
And it better be crystal clear.
Cause right now all i hear from you people is "I dont like X and Y". But you never postulate why, you never give any alternatives.
The other poster is wrong when he says you only answer with vague terms, you also answer with lies.
You constantly make shit up.
The Diablo example is the next one.
Where do they reuse assets? Theres exactly one (1) animiton that was reused, anyhting else that was reused is UI stuff. All of it.
And those reused assets obviously are not meant to be left in.
Meanwhile a more clear argument is: a blizzard game looks like a blizzard game.
If you look at the llatest diablo, yeah, looks like a Blizzard game to me. The artstyle is overall less cartoony than WoW, but yes they still enjoy their Pauldrons and they sitll enjoy their tiny heads on large bodies and they still enjoy large weapons and they enjoy voodoo aesthetic and all that.
It doesnt have anything to do with recycled assets and eveerything to do with having an artistic style. Simmilar to how Larian has a certain style in which they do enviroments.
>aurora engine
>more of a toolbox
exactly, thats why its better than the infinity engine.
NWN might not blow anyone away with its story, but people still play on those permanent worlds.
so yeah, id say its the better engine.
>aurora engine
>more of a toolbox
exactly, thats why its better than the infinity engine.
NWN might not blow anyone away with its story, but people still play on those permanent worlds.
so yeah, id say its the better engine.
Good for them. But as a base game any IE game beats NWN in terms of playability, presentability and campaign quality. It was a downgrade I struggled to push through. Never dived into use created content, as is my habit.
D:OS2 was overusing environmental effects. Too many encounters played the same. Haven’t seen anything that would suggest BG3 will do the same.
>too many encounters played the same
holy nostalgia goggles.
divinitys wncounters were all the same?
Meanwhile literaly respawning enemies in BG dont?
we just went to bizarro world i guess.
and yeah as i pointed out, NWN isnt a great game (in vanilla, the expacs are cool), but its a great engine
LOL.
Fun comment from one of those that always refuse to hear and admit differents opinions and feelings^^
Selective memory, man. When it's just matter of opinion (loot, 4 vs 6 party, origin characters), I call it for it what it is (ability to choose your preference). When it's a load of vacuous nonsense like "this isn't BG3", I call it for what it is.
"It has a strong identity to capture", that was what you were answering
Please chek all the threads/titles on the forum before saying "Like a few who have come before you, I don't think you have any clear idea on what you're talking about. ".
Everyone who says "it's not a BG game" know why he saying it... Whatever your opinion about certain specific elements...
You could read this topic again to focus on their arguments => more like BG, less like DoS... This is the thread and you're one of those who deflected it.
You made this post/thread:
http://forums.larian.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=662162&page=1If things like this are what is meant by "more like BG" then I don't think anyone will have a problem. Some of the features on that list are already in (loot), some are out (open world), and a lot of them are being talked about in separate threads (Origins, Day/Night, Romance, etc). The problem with vague terms ("feel") and phrases ("more like BG") is that they can encompass a lot of things, some ridiculous (avoiding beaches and sandy shores?!), some that just won't be in the game (2D environments and/or a strict isometric camera), and some that are feasible, but still unlikey (RTwP).
The best thing to do is stop using vague terms and phrases and not just compile a list as you did in your post, but make distinct threads on a given subject, as has been done with a number of the features on your list. It does absolutely no good to use vague terms and phrases and might even be counterproductive.
holy nostalgia goggles.
divinitys wncounters were all the same?
Meanwhile literaly respawning enemies in BG dont?
Played through BG1&2 not so long age, alongside PoEs and D:OS2, so have all those games perks and shortcomings pretty fresh in mind. D:OS2 rewards two things: high DPS to take down shields and stun locking enemies. Still, comment was regarding D:OS2 overuse of environmental effects (though it’s issues don’t revolve around it), not comparing it to BGs.
NWN isnt a great game (in vanilla, the expacs are cool), but its a great engine
Aside from clunkiness, and inability of producing distinct locations, then sure. I just don't see how generic, bland blocks are an upgrade from unique, handcrafted locations. I think it is safe to assume, we simply disagree on what we want from a game and an engine.
and baldurs gate doesnt?
Especialy 1.
Any infinity game realy heavily favors crowd controll at early levels.
Entangling people, putting em to sleep. thats your bread and butter.
and at later levels it becomes prebuffing and rocket tag
Also you can make some pretty comfy looking sutff in the NWN engine if you actually put some time into cluttering the place.
sure you saccrifice hand crafted 2d visuals, but you gain the utility of beeing able to create content on the fly.
To me thats more important.
Again, I am not comparing the two. When I talk about BG, I mean BG2. It is, overall, a more refined and tighter designed game. I have many issues with BG1&2, especially after playing PoE, which while not perfect, did improve on the formula in couple, important to me aspects.
The difference, which matters to me between BG2 and D:OS2, that if something goes wrong in BG2 I would try the encounter again and try something different. I could retry the same encounter multipletimes, with the same party composition and attempt to solve it in multitude of ways. That's also the memory I have of D:OS1. Not so much with D:OS2.
Someone else elegantly summirised my issues with the game far eloquently then I could. And while I appreciate Larian's ability to represent mechanics in visual and intuitive way (IE, Kingmaker and PoEs have a problem of gameplay happening in textbox, rather then on the actual map), I am looking forward to systemic improvements that DnD system should bring... unless it all gets spoiled by Coop-centric design again, but that we will see once the game comes out.
sure you saccrifice hand crafted 2d visuals, but you gain the utility of beeing able to create content on the fly.
To me thats more important.
And to me it isn't, as I buy a game to play a good game, not to make one. Stuff, like NWN1 or Skyrim never engaged me, and all I saw were bad/mediocare games.
In other words, there is a benefit and tradeoff to using both systems, and both can have their place and application. Aurora Engine wasn't straight up better then Infinity Engine, though it did allow for doing things which were impossible previously. IE did better what I cared about, Aurora did better what you cared about. See, we agree, we just like different things.
Man you people are insane.
Oh no the barrels! no please no more barrels!
none of you played any of the original sin games. OS2 bareley had any barrels.
The only fight i remember having alarge ammount of barrels s the one in the Mines where.... theres barrels of oil because its next to an oil drill.
The general idea of environmental interaction is great when used well ( although shipbuilders everywhere would be alarmed if their pitch barrels behave as they do in BG3 ).
In my case ( and perhaps some others ) it's more about being clear to Larian that there may be such a thing as too much environmental interaction. In the BG3 reveal it looked like it wasn't overused.
If you want an example of what I consider overuse of barrels and puddles, revisit the NE quarter of the Cyseal map in D:OS.
you just make stuff up to be upset.
You want to remove features and constantly sperg about having a clear vision when you dont have one.
How abotu this, you go back to RPG codex, you formulate a vision that you have, and then you post it.
And it better be crystal clear.
Cause right now all i hear from you people is "I dont like X and Y". But you never postulate why, you never give any alternatives.
The other poster is wrong when he says you only answer with vague terms, you also answer with lies.
LOL : Larian Forum collective programming of the BG3 engine :
while( feature !=NULL )
{
if ( feature == infinity_feature ) {
demand_add_feature( feature ) ;
} else if ( feature == larian_feature ) {
demand_remove_feature ( feature ) ;
}
feature = feature->next ;
}
As you say, this isn't particularly helpful. There are a few features of the BG1/2 experience I would prefer to the choices Larian have made, but mostly I want the game to have it's own modern voice.
You constantly make shit up.
The Diablo example is the next one.
Where do they reuse assets? Theres exactly one (1) animiton that was reused, anyhting else that was reused is UI stuff. All of it.
And those reused assets obviously are not meant to be left in.
Meanwhile a more clear argument is: a blizzard game looks like a blizzard game.
If you look at the llatest diablo, yeah, looks like a Blizzard game to me. The artstyle is overall less cartoony than WoW, but yes they still enjoy their Pauldrons and they sitll enjoy their tiny heads on large bodies and they still enjoy large weapons and they enjoy voodoo aesthetic and all that.
It doesnt have anything to do with recycled assets and eveerything to do with having an artistic style. Simmilar to how Larian has a certain style in which they do enviroments.
Reusing assets is fine anyway, if they fit the purpose. You would expect the art style will be somewhat altered for Forgotten Realms, and it already is, in my opinion, if for no other reason than the need to mesh better with the more detailed performance capture being used in BG3.
I don't think BG1/2 even had a single art style; certainly not a particularly inventive one. Much of the countryside was aiming for typical European feel, because that is the real-world equivalent of that part of Toril. Likewise, buildings often looked like medieval European buildings; castles looked like castles, dungeons looked like dungeons, and Bodhi's vampire lair looked suitably bloody and gruesome.
Some of it was pastiche, some of it was parody; certainly not uniformly dark, or indeed uniformly anything else. For example, Athkatla market was bright, eclectic, exaggerated and slightly silly, while some of the sandy beaches ( a complaint someone made about Larian style ) were so bright they were almost white.
As with the infinity engine, I think there may be a case of nostalgia spectacles with the artwork. It's perfectly valid to point out individual examples of something in BG3 that could be changed; as long as a reason why is given, and an alternative is suggested, then it may result in a better product for everyone.
>aurora engine
>more of a toolbox
exactly, thats why its better than the infinity engine.
NWN might not blow anyone away with its story, but people still play on those permanent worlds.
so yeah, id say its the better engine.
Quite. I'd take the BG story over the NWN story any day, but there isn't a single feature of the Infinity engine that is better than the Aurora engine.
i dont realy see the argument in the video you linked.
as in i dont see how you couldnt possibly approach the same encounter in multiple ways with the same party compositon.
i dargue that in OS2 due to the fact that XP is fixed, you actually have to do it that way.
most complaints seem to be about the armor system, which fine, i personally have no issue with since i dont like RNG, but thats a matter of taste. I fail to see how it relates to what you said
etonbears:
the problem with Original Sin 2s enviromental effects is actually very easy to zero in on, but most people dont make the connection.
The main problem with surfaces in OS2 is the one prevelent enemy type: voidwoken.
All voidwoken bleed corrupted blood, this means that any enviromental effects are probably going to be 1. cursed and 2. thus lasting for the entire fight.
In os1 this was far less of a problem, besides the obvious fire spam whch, lets be honest, makes sense. If everything is on fire, that shtis bad.
but putting out fires is easy.
putting out necrofire? less easy.
thats the crux of the problem in OS2
on artstyle:
I think its unfair to say BG1 and 2 didnt have an artstyle. Artstyle is distinct from subject matter. hence why i said Larians artstyle.
Larian might be depicting the sword coast, so the buildings will look relativeley high medieval european and so will the enviroments (i for one would of course argument that ti was more high fatnasy britain, since central europe tends to actually look a bit more rugged, but maybe im just used to the alps)
However, the way these things are depicted is through the artstyle of Larian, it focuses on aspects of that time period and of the lore that larian favors.
Ive brought the example before, but Larian loves Statues.
Their games are full of them, and characters will ofthen evoke Greek statues (maxos and the OCs from OS1 come to mind)
So when they do a Forgotten Realms temple, theyll include a large statue of a Godess.
They also have a certain... height to which they have buildings scale. Its subtle details but you notice them beeing there
Again, I am not comparing the two. When I talk about BG, I mean BG2. It is, overall, a more refined and tighter designed game. I have many issues with BG1&2, especially after playing PoE, which while not perfect, did improve on the formula in couple, important to me aspects.
The difference, which matters to me between BG2 and D:OS2, that if something goes wrong in BG2 I would try the encounter again and try something different. I could retry the same encounter multipletimes, with the same party composition and attempt to solve it in multitude of ways. That's also the memory I have of D:OS1. Not so much with D:OS2.
Then your memory is completely and totally wrong.
Reloading and trying something different and attempting to solve an encounter in a multitude of ways is how I played the ENTIRETY of DOS 2. It's just flat-out wrong to claim you can't do that in DOS 2, just flat out wrong. In fact, I'm going to call that a deliberate lie, and that damages your credibility.
The difference, which matters to me between BG2 and D:OS2, that if something goes wrong in BG2 I would try the encounter again and try something different. I could retry the same encounter multipletimes, with the same party composition and attempt to solve it in multitude of ways. That's also the memory I have of D:OS1. Not so much with D:OS2.
Yeah, not my experience either. I do tend to play it with one toon on Tactician, though, or currently with my friends on classic. So maybe I would feel differently with a full party all under my control (I stopped in the middle of Act 3 with a full party on Tactician because it was getting too easy ... that was not Definitive Edition, though).
on artstyle:
I think its unfair to say BG1 and 2 didnt have an artstyle. Artstyle is distinct from subject matter. hence why i said Larians artstyle.
Larian might be depicting the sword coast, so the buildings will look relativeley high medieval european and so will the enviroments (i for one would of course argument that ti was more high fatnasy britain, since central europe tends to actually look a bit more rugged, but maybe im just used to the alps)
However, the way these things are depicted is through the artstyle of Larian, it focuses on aspects of that time period and of the lore that larian favors.
Ive brought the example before, but Larian loves Statues.
Their games are full of them, and characters will ofthen evoke Greek statues (maxos and the OCs from OS1 come to mind)
So when they do a Forgotten Realms temple, theyll include a large statue of a Godess.
They also have a certain... height to which they have buildings scale. Its subtle details but you notice them beeing there
Sure, clearly there has to be some degree of artistic consistency across a project, and for smaller developers, the whole studio. When that consistency fails, the result is often not pretty.
In Larian's case, Joachim Vleminckx seems to be the link across DOS1/2 and BG3. He probably likes statues
I do too, for that matter.
There are also some aspects determined by technology. Height is one of those things particularly sensitive to the camera solutions you have, which often carry over from project to project.
There may even be some aspects sensitive to the content creation tools used, but that is probably less likely.
I obviously don't know their output as well as you, so I don't necessarily see all the similarities. But regardless, I like the BG3 environment, as much as I have seen, even if it's slightly strange to see 4000 year old Babylonian mud-brick city walls next to renaissance Italian architecture.
2 things I notice in DoS 2 while starting a new game on switch I wouldn't like to sée in a BG game :
- the totally unrealistic amount of blood each time someone is killed. This would be ridiculous in a BG game.
- the incredible numbers of totally useless "decorative" items you can pick. It slows the game for nothing.
I'd like a more immersive and realistic game but if it's usefull for the gameplay...
With only those 2 elements we can imagind Larian don't really know how to work about immersion on their game.
The first one is totally arcady, the second one is way too realist for such a game and is bad for gameplay (especially on console I guess)
Could talk about inventory management and "understanding" of items due to the second point but it's something else.
Agreed on no. 4 too many pickupable useless items in DOS. Nothing wrong with the others.
2 things I notice in DoS 2 while starting a new game on switch I wouldn't like to sée in a BG game :
- the totally unrealistic amount of blood each time someone is killed. This would be ridiculous in a BG game.
- the incredible numbers of totally useless "decorative" items you can pick. It slows the game for nothing.
I'd like a more immersive and realistic game but if it's usefull for the gameplay...
With only those 2 elements we can imagind Larian don't really know how to work about immersion on their game.
The first one is totally arcady, the second one is way too realist for such a game and is bad for gameplay (especially on console I guess)
Could talk about inventory management and "understanding" of items due to the second point but it's something else.
I did not read everything in this thread so far but:
- Total agreement about the huge amount of "decorative" items. It slows down the game a lot. I am a completeonist and I feel bad when I leave stuff behind and I think I spend more than half of my time picking up random stuff. I was one of the reasons why I never finished the game, because I was slow as hell and went to a shop very often. The fact that shops got new random items every hour made it even worse.
Item wise, BG1+2 and PoE1+2 were enough, no need to be able to pick up everything, especially when 99% of it is useless.
- The amount of blood was not my problem. It was more the fact that most enemies bleed cursed blood, fire or acid.
- The environmental effects were too much for me.
Some form of interaction is good. I liked the BG3 video were you can push enemies or throw objects. Exploding barrels, burning oil or electric water make also sense to some degree.
But D:OS2 went way too far for my taste, when the whole map was filled with crazy effects (necrofire, electric clouds, . . .) in almost every battle.
D:OS1 was still OK ( I tried to focus on stuff that hits targets, not mess up the environment too much), but D:OS2 went too far.
A normal arrow should just deal some damage, not make the enemy bleed fire which ignites half of the screen.
- I hated the inflating numbers in D:OS.
Fortuanatly they have confirmed that they use DnD items, so no levels on items and relatively small numbers.
2 things I notice in DoS 2 while starting a new game on switch I wouldn't like to sée in a BG game :
- the totally unrealistic amount of blood each time someone is killed. This would be ridiculous in a BG game.
- the incredible numbers of totally useless "decorative" items you can pick. It slows the game for nothing.
I'd like a more immersive and realistic game but if it's usefull for the gameplay...
With only those 2 elements we can imagind Larian don't really know how to work about immersion on their game.
The first one is totally arcady, the second one is way too realist for such a game and is bad for gameplay (especially on console I guess)
Could talk about inventory management and "understanding" of items due to the second point but it's something else.
I did not read everything in this thread so far but:
- Total agreement about the huge amount of "decorative" items. It slows down the game a lot. I am a completeonist and I feel bad when I leave stuff behind and I think I spend more than half of my time picking up random stuff. I was one of the reasons why I never finished the game, because I was slow as hell and went to a shop very often. The fact that shops got new random items every hour made it even worse.
Item wise, BG1+2 and PoE1+2 were enough, no need to be able to pick up everything, especially when 99% of it is useless.
- The amount of blood was not my problem. It was more the fact that most enemies bleed cursed blood, fire or acid.
- The environmental effects were too much for me.
Some form of interaction is good. I liked the BG3 video were you can push enemies or throw objects. Exploding barrels, burning oil or electric water make also sense to some degree.
But D:OS2 went way too far for my taste, when the whole map was filled with crazy effects (necrofire, electric clouds, . . .) in almost every battle.
D:OS1 was still OK ( I tried to focus on stuff that hits targets, not mess up the environment too much), but D:OS2 went too far.
A normal arrow should just deal some damage, not make the enemy bleed fire which ignites half of the screen.
- I hated the inflating numbers in D:OS.
Fortuanatly they have confirmed that they use DnD items, so no levels on items and relatively small numbers.
They have stated that there will be fewer surface interactions, but still having the environment have effects. Setting fire to a Grease or Web spell is much more reasonable than every Firebolt causing a fire surface. It remains to be seen just how reduced the surfaces are while retaining environmental interaction.
As for the number of items, I can see that as it does make the 'show items' button less useful. I don't necessarily have a problem with them being there, but would prefer a toggle to allow the decorative items (at least those with little to no value) to be hidden when looking for things.
The show items button is always usefull, even in BG1&2 where you nearly don't have any useless items.
The other problem with so much items is that you don't know what is usefull for a reason or another or useless and value means nothing.
At least what they could do if they want us to be able to pick an empty cup is just color the items name appearing when you push the "show items button"...
Grey for useless, green for craft, red for equipements,.... But this would be absolutely awfull and unreadable...
The only answer about that is not to spend their time in useless elements. That is not valuable for the game... Neither for immersion, nor for gameplay.
(Oh wait, maybe we'll be able to throw paintings, cups or shells in the head of ennemies to damage them... such as boots.......)
Well, throwing random items at enemies looks cool when you see it once in a video.
It makes no sense to do it at all under normal conditions.
Every char should is profient with at least one type of ranged weapon. Every char should also carry some kind of ranged weapon and ammo even if he is not a specialized archer, just like every char should have a melee weapon even if he is not an expert for melee combat. Chars who are not archers are usually bad at throwing things anyway.
So in 99% of all cases its better to attack with a weapon than throwing random stuff.
It can make sense to sneak above enemies and drop heavy stuff on their head, but thats something different than throwing boots or mugs.
Well, throwing random items at enemies looks cool when you see it once in a video.
It makes no sense to do it at all under normal conditions.
Every char should is profient with at least one type of ranged weapon. Every char should also carry some kind of ranged weapon and ammo even if he is not a specialized archer, just like every char should have a melee weapon even if he is not an expert for melee combat. Chars who are not archers are usually bad at throwing things anyway.
So in 99% of all cases its better to attack with a weapon than throwing random stuff.
It can make sense to sneak above enemies and drop heavy stuff on their head, but thats something different than throwing boots or mugs.
Thrown attacks are based off of Strength in 5e unless it is a Finesse weapon (then you can choose Strength of Dexterity), so generally throwing a weapon is better as a melee character.
Well, throwing random items at enemies looks cool when you see it once in a video.
It makes no sense to do it at all under normal conditions.
Every char should is profient with at least one type of ranged weapon. Every char should also carry some kind of ranged weapon and ammo even if he is not a specialized archer, just like every char should have a melee weapon even if he is not an expert for melee combat. Chars who are not archers are usually bad at throwing things anyway.
So in 99% of all cases its better to attack with a weapon than throwing random stuff.
It can make sense to sneak above enemies and drop heavy stuff on their head, but thats something different than throwing boots or mugs.
I totally agree with all that.
My last sentence was ironic, I really find ridiculous that we'll be able to throw boots (or anything that's not a weapon) from our inventory to damage ennemies
If my life now is 25 HP and if I'm dead at 0, leather boots even on my head is 0 damage.
>not wanting more items you can pick up
at some point i cant even tell if you people are beeing serious or not.
Just dont pick up the junk holy crap
also improvised weapon should be 1d4+strmod and an improvized weapon is pretty much whatever.
also id rather not get steel toed boots thrown at my head.
but youll find something to compalin about everywhere
WHAAA THIS GAME HAS TOO MANY FEATURES AND TOO MUCH CONTENT NOOOOOOOOOOO!
Thx fanboy. I'm still not sure who is complaining on nearly every topics...
How are we supposed to know what is usefull or useless ?
Google ? New game ? Cristal Ball ?
Useless items everywhere is not a "feature", it's an uninterresting waste of ressources.
About items... same feelings with crate and nearly all container you can pick in your bags... It's boring and useless 95% of the time.
Another thing playing the beginning of DoS 2 : you never know who is a usefull NPC or not... In BG1&2 you didn't talk to all villagers, because it was useless and you can directly see who has something interesting to say... (Quests related, lore,...)
In DoS you know every NPC's name, so everyone has the same "attractiveness" => you have to talk with everyone if you don't want to miss good things.
it's really boring in fort joy to talk to everyone because more than half the NPC just have nothing to say...
Not saying the BG1&2 way is the best of all time or can't be improved.
Think it's possible to find something better than what we already know to improve and better mix readability/gameplay/immersion.
Just my two cents, what DOS gimmicks/features from DOS would you NOT like to see in BG3?
1. Change for just the sake of it? The red FoV is intuitive and provides a tangible sense of the limits of stealth which makes it a mini-game onto itself.
2. Literally watched the gameplay demo to get a clue what you're on about. The only "clouds" there are environmental clouds which plays into Larian's interactive environments (ie. water + fire = steam). These likely come with tangible gameplay effects rather than pure cosmetics. So no.
3. The only overused surfaces is blood which should be tuned down somewhat. A kill with a fire-spell shouldn't make the enemy bleed. Then again...pre-alpha. The interactivity of surfaces allows for creative tactics and is a bonus.
4. BG1-2 had pretty large and messy inventories, doubly so when you include all the bags/pouches you could store gazillion items in. BG3 will have much less emphasis on magic items than did DOS2 for instance. But BG2 was a high-magic setting with an overabundance of strong magical items that defined the character as much as his abilities and class. Hoping for a bit of a tuned down version, but there is always support for crafting and therefore excessive inventories by a vocal minority. Personally I don't like the over-emphasis on looting and subsequent inventory management mini-game of most RPGs. You should not be penalized for not looting everything that isn't nailed down. It's tedious, not realistic and feels forced.
5. Don't understand your objection. If anything I want it more similar to DOS2. At least when it comes to individual initiative rather than the experimental party-based initiative in the demo.
6. You didn't really pay attention to the demo, did you? That jumping isn't a natural power; it's super-charged mind-flayer tadpole vaulting. The animations are still in flux, I personally liked. Feather Fall has been a staple spell of D&D for going on half a century. Morrowind did the rip-off, not the other way around.
Another thing playing the beginning of DoS 2 : you never know who is a usefull NPC or not... In BG1&2 you didn't talk to all villagers, because it was useless and you can directly see who has something interesting to say... (Quests related, lore,...)
In DoS you know every NPC's name, so everyone has the same "attractiveness" => you have to talk with everyone if you don't want to miss good things.
it's really boring in fort joy to talk to everyone because more than half the NPC just have nothing to say...
Not that you were saying this, but the first impression I got from this is exclamation points over the heads of useful npcs. I think that is a feature in rpgs that needs a swift death. Think of npcs with something useful to say like hidden vaults and such: useful stuff is out there, but just need to search for it.
yes talking to NPCs, lame! who needs that