Larian Studios Forums Divinity - Original Sin Divinity - Original Sin - General The RPG to dwarf them all? A comparison to BG 2

Loremaster is bugged right now and doesn't display information the way it should.

Sure, the game could certainly give more feedback on what was absorbed by resistances.




Yes, this is essentially what I was trying to say.




I think we're going to have to disagree on this point.

While more spells and skills for all classes would be nice, I do not really agree that mages have nothing to do most turns. A mid-level two-school mage should have acquired enough spellbooks to have a lot of things they can cast, enough to never need to use Staff of Magus - and if not, then there are scrolls they can pick up too.

It seems to me that you may not have bought all the skillbooks you could have. There's pretty much always something you can do, even if it's just better positioning for the next turn.




I wasn't talking about Traits. Most of the dialogue which gives Traits seems to fit the tone, without being too extreme to one end or another. Only two choices also works in those situations. Mechanics-wise, it can't really be done another way because Larian has decided Traits come in pairs.

It's the Affection dialogue which could use more tweaking and where multiple options may make more sense.

As you said elsewhere, I think, this is indeed an irreconcilable disagreement. I'm primarily a P&P player and I basically enjoy crpgs as a good and less time-consuming alternative to p&p rpgs. I (would) enjoy the most the crpgs that are able to emulate the best a p&p experience -- though there aren't really any crpgs that fits this definition.

In this regard, I never really understood how people can "feel" like they "play a role" or can be "immersed" in a world that doesn't react or answer their actions. If, as a GM, I didn't properly answer my player actions, they would be pissed off... For example, when I see people "roleplaying" in, say, Skyrim, pretending that they're resting or hunting to feed their character when the game (without mods) doesn't take those parameters into account at all, it boggles my mind. They claim that, this way, they're more "immersed" in the experience, but, to be honest, if find that absolutely ridiculous, because it doesn't make sense to me, it just seems pointless. The idea of "playing a role for yourself" is indeed very weird to me. Why play a role when there's no audience (or, rather, no other participants) ?

To me, "immersion" has nothing to do with pretending or roleplaying or anything. Just being absorbed in a convincing game world, which thus needs good reactivity and enticing gameplay.

On the other hand, the alternative you propose is not that bad : in terms of choices & consequences, I can live with a little more flavor text for the people who need more "roleplaying" variety, as long as the actual different outcomes are there for the significant choices. This way, we get the best of both worlds, right ?




I have nothing against more dialogue options with more traits variation, etc. (They might be a little "cheap", but they're good enough for me ) The problem I have is with cosmetic choices and decisions -- whether they come in the form of dialogues (most often) or other ways.

I assumed you would have known that LC ;-) I merely thought it would be good to mention it in the thread; to clarify for general information and also to bring some perspective into where D:OS is at and where Larian might be going. Actually, most of my post wasn't so much a direct response to you as it was my trying to contribute something to the discussion. I didn't really find any major points to dispute with you so this was the best I could do. Perhaps after I've played it we could have something to argue about

I think such constructive criticism is timely and I really appreciate you giving Swen and Larian a little reminder that, while basking in the glow of so much positive feedback and fan adulation for D:OS, there are definitely some key things that it lacks, some things we fans would really like from their RPGs. And considering Larian's declaration to one day make 'The Very Big RPG That Will Dwarf Them All', what those things are or what they should be suddenly seems... well crucial to that mission statement really.

Making a public declaration about the intention to make 'TVBRPGTWDTA' actually strikes me as a pretty amazing thing to do. Swen must be aware of how invested and engaged the RPG fandom is, and considering the level of complexity and contestation of RPG features... all I can say is that Swen must be pretty comfortable about doing his own thing.

Personally speaking, I don't really anticipate such a game from them, so to speak. It's more like a candle on the windowsill for me; an ideal, a light in the darkness of videogame commercialism. Something to hope for and dream about; to stir the hearts and minds of RPG lovers everywhere.

Ultimately it is simply an aspiration, but I'd be lying if I didn't admit that as a lover of cRPGs such a publicly stated aspiration causes me to feel much more engaged with and invested in the company doing the aspiring. I doubt I am alone. So yeah, Swen takes on an interesting responsibility by making such a statement. In a way the kickstarter process of a more direct relationship between fans and developer especially suits Larian as they have already undertaken such responsibility by doing this.


Re: system design and scope;

I'd suggest that another 'advantage' of implementing an existing system is that it is a less political process. Less arguing about features and how they should work, what should be attempted and what should be cut. Less time and energy spent not only in creation but also in the decision-making process, or so I would imagine. Yet hopefully the arduous process of creating a system from scratch will give the Larian team some much needed experience towards their aforementioned endeavour to scale the mountain of RPG greatness. Creating a rich combat system for a party-based cRPG is no mean feat. The creativity of that process can only be beneficial in the long run and it will be very interesting to see how their successive RPGs progress, assuming the company's continuing success and all going well.

... It may seem unlikely but I do truly believe that it is possible that the scope and richness of BG2, or any other game for that matter, can be exceeded given enough funding in time and resources, if people are passionate about doing so. Let us not say it is impossible. Let's dare to dream.



Yes, please Larian.



It is true that we can't change what is there, though that doesn't stop people from trying ;-) I mean people will perceive things/reality differently for a whole host of reasons. I think this further illustrates how differently people experience and play games. Even in a 3D game I still use my imagination to colour my perception of cities and such. Whether it is to look past irregularities of scale or the number of citizens living in a town or the absence of toilets... both 2D and 3D games require my willing suspension of disbelief if I want to actively immerse myself in the fantasy of that world - The Imperial City in Oblivion is greater in my mind than it is in the game itself... The use of imagination is indeed a strength of 2D, and one of the primary reasons for that 'magical feel' the Infinity Engine style games have, however I would argue there is always room for imagination. I'd even go so far as to say it's a necessary and fundamental part of not only 3D games but life itself.

But yes, this is where 2D shines and where its magic happens. Again I don't really disagree with the gist of what you say.

I think it's about imagination (or that may be a good way to look at it) - an extension of that basic ability we have especially as children to engage in fantasy and play. There is no need for an audience or anyone else at all when you have the power of imagination. And some people just like to use it to enhance their cRPG game, their play in it. The game may be displayed on your screen but it is actually taking place inside your head after all.

Whether one likes to control the character as a puppet or to imagine themselves AS the character (either as one you create with a backstory & everything or just a form of self-projection)... these all seem like perfectly fine ways to play an RPG to me.

I do appreciate it when a game takes this second style of role-play into account by providing diverse dialogue options to facilitate character expression and the illusion of choice where mechanical choice cannot be budgeted for. I suppose most people would prefer mechanical reactivity wherever possible, but obviously a video game can only be programmed to do so much. So it is nice when a game is conducive to, and stimulative of, one's imagination through dialogue options and a rich world.

Personally I 'roleplay' in the first way when playing a game like Dark Souls, but prefer to play in the second way when playing a game like Baldur's Gate that provides a reactive enough world to support the creation of (believably imaginable?) characters whose adventures I can experience through the synergy of a computer and my mind. In Dark Souls there doesn't seem to be much point, in Baldur's Gate there definitely is for me.

I think a good indication of the depth of an RPG (in terms of its, you know, RPGness ;-) is how much it supports this second type of roleplay, whether the game is played like that or not... because this also provides an indication of the complexity and cohesion of the gameworld, and the characters who dwell within it.

Great post!

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Interesting opening post Lord Crash. Good points made.

By coincidence, I'm currently replaying BG2 and the excellence of it shines through as well as it ever did. The story is engaging, or should I say the almost endless array of possible stories are engaging. I care about the characters, who all have distinct personalities. I don't feel that I just have a certain number of tanks, spell-casters, healers etc in my party but a group of individuals with different hopes, fears, character quirks, backstories etc. I'm perfectly happy to include a less than perfect combatant in the party and do what might look like 'wasting time' protecting them if it suits the role playing mood. Whatever the 'magic ingredient' is that makes me want to replay a game (sometimes multiple times) is there in abundance with BG2.

It's harder than it might seem for me to pin down exactly what that 'magic ingredient' is though. Some seemingly unpromising games totally hooked me in, and yet some big titles unexpectedly got old and were abandoned before I'd even completed a single run through. Mostly, the Larian games I've played were engaging enough for me to play more than once (although Beyond Divinity struck me as a crock, alas, so the quality of DOS isn't an automatic sure bet).


I played an early Apha build of DOS back in February and it was certainly interesting to do, but painfully obvious that the writing was still mostly generic stereotype "place-holder" lines which were presumably not intended to be in the final work. To be honest, most of it was embarrassingly bad. In fact it was so far off the mark that it was quite a relief to get to the end of the limited area that was available at the time. The characters were so flat that I can't recall the names of any of them, including the two that you play. I found it impossible to give even the smallest of damns about whatever the hell was supposed to be going on - or who was copping it or dishing it out. I've definitely not missed replaying it since.

But that's probably pretty much what you should expect from an Alpha build I suppose, something pretty rough. So I shall remain "guardedly optimistic" about the final build in June

Since then I've downloaded the upgrades, in the hope of avoiding having to get a really massive chunk at the finish, but not played any of it. By the time it's ready for release it should be a very different game than the one I played - at least I hope so. I have my fingers crossed that the trials of developing an engine that they've always wanted to build haven't distracted Larian from putting some really compelling writing in there too. Something with style, atmosphere and engagement and not just more generic drivel with the usual cast of orcs, skeletons, zombies, idiotic aristocrats, greedy traders, cardboard copy townspeople, evil wizards, etc etc (are there any original characters or enemies in DOS yet, or is it all still a cast of what's now become rather tired stereotyped cliches?).

What do others think about the progress of the writing to date? Are they getting there yet?

Alternatively, if you don't really care about the story provided you get.. oh, maybe plenty of exciting action, or a good variety of customisable characters to play, or whatever you enjoy... then can you describe what it is that floats your boat, and say whether DOS looks like doing the job or not?

I'd really like to believe that on June 20th Larian will serve up something really classy and not just an attempt that was diminished by being overambitious and then running out of time and money to do the job properly. Based on what you've seen to date can I remain optimistic?

Sorry to say that OP, but even after a big content patch for Beta you still have same place-holder lines in dialogues that I hate with my guts and after I played through I can't remember any other story line but the main about the murder of Jake that I couldn't complete due to messy journal and impossible to find/get clues on how to proceed. The only thing I could do is gradually progress across the map and kill everything I could find whenever I was strong neigh and explore every corner of the map, because questing was completely broken at least for me and journal was completely useless.

To be honest I still don't understand how does jakes murder is related to me being some kind of a unique being in this world that everything ties to because I have to find certain things that make my "homestead" bigger and open portals that don't lead anywhere at the moment since we only have one map.

I also want to believe that final game is 4 times bigger as someone mentioned, otherwise it will end up being 10 hours long journey. I have to say though all the complaints aside the Beta that I played through captured my interest and kept me hooked until there was no enemy left on the beta map even though I couldn't complete 75% of the quests and wanted to burn my backpacks because of the mess of inventory that it currently is.

There are some promised fixes/adjustments though that bring some hope like voice overs and auto-sort button for inventory and some other things will be fixed most likely. So I am not fretting just yet and have big hopes that next time I play the game it will be one of the unforgettable experiences that BG series was. That's why I'll patiently wait and not gonna touch the game until maybe pre-release Beta if there will be such thing.