Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Senior Combat Designer Hasn't Even Played BG1 or 2

This is correct.
But the OP is unfortunately NOT.

The Lead Designer HAS played BG2, but admits at the time of it's release he was more of a Final Fantasy player.

He admits he prefers Turn Based over RTwP, because RTwP is messy AND IT IS, whether you like it or not, it IS messy.

Could Larian have put effort into refining a RTwP model, sure. We could argue that. That would be fair. Larian decided not to go that route but rather refince their TB system for which they were known, allowing the, to pour more time and effort into other things. Time will tell if that suffices or if the RTwp vs TB remains for many a deal breaker.

But let us not descend into making false claims against employees of Larian!! This is an unnecesary thread. The article could have been pasted into the existing debate on the two combat systems.

Considering that you people and Firaxis are hailed for bringing back "turn-based gameplay" I think it was extremely unwise of anyone to not expect BG3 to be TB.

To be fair, I'd rather they do away with multi-player in its entirety and pour their resources into single-player instead. Now we might get sub-par and buggy single-player and multi-player modes.

ooh no, I have to politely disagree with you here.

I am very much looking forward to playing this with my wife (another BG / NWN fan) and the arguments it will cause!!

"I said talk to the guy, not blow him up, now I'M ON FIRE!!!"

Did multiplayer detract from Baldurs Gate 2or Icewind dale? Cause they had that.

What about that combat being "messy" is a good thing? For me, combat is completely fake and non-immersive and yes even non-tactical (in the true sense of that word) if it is isn't messy.
Messy combat is the only way combat can be good in a game.

The ONLY way?

I quite like it, but it is not the only way, it’s a preference for you clearly and that’s ok, but I think people should phrase it that way and not declare absolutes.

Ahh yes...the mythical greater audience.
Mistake No1 that is the root of most bad development decisions.

The idea that RTwP is too "messy" or "confusing" is hillarious, when people regularly have to deal with far more messy and confusing things in RL.
Basically, they want a simple system to "expand the audience".

TB isn't "simpler" IMO, it's more thorough. "Expand to a greater audience" can be construed as simplifying things, but it can also mean nothing their they believe more people are turned off by RTwP than they are by TB.

TB/RTwP discussion is here. Please use it, I have asked many times.

As for the subject of simplification, there are various takes on it. I've seen too many examples of stuff where "streamlining" hasn't so much smoothed things out as shaved off pretty much all of the characteristics that made it worthwhile; but I've also seen as many examples of stuff that ended up being an exercise in complexity for its own sake and just ended up feeling awkward and inconsistent. Not just games but other stuff too. It is possible to simplify stuff without destroying it in the process and there are innumerable examples of stuff that really need it, as much as the idea may make people uncomfortable (and those people often include me).

But I hope this isn't going to turn into a "dumbing down for casuals" assertion as nothing good ever came of that. Indeed it's rather self-fulfilling when it comes to productive discourse.

The OP isn't about Swen, it is about the SENIOR COMBAT DESIGNER who hasn't played BG1, who barely remembers BG 2, and who prefers Final Fantasy.

The SENIOR COMBAT DESIGNER.

What this means is that he is all too happy to reject RTwP because it is too much work for him to try something that is challenging.

I find the statement " because people understand TB, your turn, my turn" to be a huge insult to the intelligence and capabilities of the gaming audience at large.

That is why I choose now to boycott Larian. Because they do not care about players, they care about money. They are no better than Bethesda, et al.

You do not have to agree with me, but there are no lies in the OP.

Didn't my post start with "For me ..."? Maybe you should spend a bit more time policing certain people on the other side from me who've been routinely presenting their personal opinions as facts.

If RTwP is "messy" it is literally the job of the senior combat designer to "clean up the mess" ...

in this case he went full "Karen", and got a manager to change the rules so he didn't have to clean up the mess.

And RTwP is messy? Ever play an RTS? Sorry, but rejecting RTwP also rejects the entire expanded fanbase that BG made with cRPG to begin with: computer gamers who don't think real-time is "messy".

Such a lazy and rude way to dismiss an entire demographic. Horrible marketing and PR. That is why boycott. They are just a corporate tool now for Wizards.

I guess that´s the main reason Larian Studios is making "Baldurs Gate 3" and not "Dungeons&Dragons: New Adventures in Baldur´s Gate Vol.1"
It was a strategic sales decision just to bring the D:OS identity to Baldur's Gate as a franchise because Swen think Baldur's Gate 3 will reach more people (greater audience) than Divinity will have done. Like he mentioned in this interview at 3:30:

"so, the chance to do that, and to bring what basically is our RPG identity to Baldur's Gate as a franchise was an opportunity too good to resist. And so, what it will do for us... uh, what we think it will do for us is it's going to show a larger segment of people, because I think Baldur's Gate 3 will reach more people than Divinity will have done... it will show a larger segment of the population what our RPGs feel like and hopefully bring them to play our other games also."

Of course Wizards of the Coast also had his hands in there to push their new campaign "Baldur's Gate: Descent in Avernus" which just happened to coincide with the announcement of Baldur´s Gate III.

As David Walgrave mentioned in this interview:
"I don’t know how we keep old-school fans happy [laughs]. They’re hard to please. We noticed a lot of our player-base is people in their teens and 20s"

Larian Studios primarily wants to make their player base happy (save sales) and don´t care much about the old, hard to please, old-school fans but hope that a few them will also buy their game because of the name. Togehter you have a greater audience.

At least you can print on every following game cover: From the Creators of Baldur´s Gate III and reach (maybe) a greater audience.




*Edit* In principle, of course, there is nothing objectionable about it. Every company wants to make a profit and appeal to the largest possible audience. But you should be aware that you have deliberately chosen a Baldur's Gate 3 and this - according to Statement Larian Studios itself - strongly linked to its predecessors. Most of the young players *the new audience* were not even born when Baldur's Gate appeared and the title is more likely to appeal to older generations. The young players or Divinity players are not interested in the title anyway.

Old school didn't start in 1998. I'm in the old school group (AD&D 1st and 2nd editions) and I'm all in.

i'm pretty sure it means old base bg fans, not ad&d. and that started in 1998.

In fact, BG was a project to bring D&D to PC gamers who were playing Dune, Starcraft, and Half Life at the time.



(Trent Oster is one of my idols).

They also make it very clear that BG was never a "pure D&D by the numbers game" which is why I get so frustrated with the "but D&D is TB!" argument, because it is a moot point.



https://www.theringer.com/2018/12/21/18150363/baldurs-gate-bioware-1998-video-games

Ugh, still this "old fans want this....", "fans of Larian games want this..." going on.
There is no evidence of either of those group existing as a group that wants something as a whole.

There is instead a lot of evidence of the opposite; that there are no such coherent groups at all. Still some people continue to push it as something that is true.

BG1 and BG2 were based on the 2nd edition rules and would technically be old school by your definition.

I already played in 1998 since 15 years, so i would call myself also an old school gamer. But Baldur´s Gate started in 1998 and it was total different from any other D&D game (gold box series).
Like i already said i am open to new features and also open to TB gameplay. Yes, i am also looking forward to the the development of this game but i would like to see that Baldur´s Gate 3 is more then just a cash-grab.