Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Impressed so far

Hello guys sorry for my bad english.
I admit I never played D&D in my life but watching BG3 gameplay, trailer and open cinematic, it makes me want to try it.
I played BG1 and BG2 (never finished BG2) and many other similar RPG like DIvinity 1 and 2, Pillars of Eternity 1 and 2, Tyranny, Wasteland 2 and many others, but this game is one of the few in my life that impressed me so much that I cannot stop reading info and watching videos about it when I have some free time, also because of it sometimes I watch some videos about D&D lore, and before this game I didnt even care at all about D&D lore.
Combat system seems really interesting, and the turn mode that you can use to organize ambushes, stealth attacks and similar things is brilliant.
I admit that for me, real time with pause was the weakest aspect in BG 1 and BG 2, so having turn based combat was the thing that definitely sold me and I cant wait to try the Early Access.
Also the dialogue cutscenes that are really similar to Dragon Age look really amazing, I think it is a smart thing to try to take inspirations from some good features from other (good) games and make them even better like I've seen from the latest gameplay.
Among tons of positive aspects, there are few elements which didn't convince me, like the use of past tense in dialogues (I find it really weird to be honest, but I could understand it if it is for narrative purpose), and the seemingly lacking of day-night cycle (again I think it isnt a big deal form me, I remember in BG1 and 2 that feature was almost irrelevant).
Anyway for me you are doing a great job, looking forward to early access and keep working hard so this game will become one of the greatest rpg of all time!

Greetings,

I also think most of the gameplay reveal and even more so the cinematics looked promising. I started CRPGs with Pool of Radiance in 1988 and later I played BG and BG2 numerous times when they came out. Divine Divinity as well - but I trumped the gaming hours significantly with PoE and Deadfire. So: RTwP is totally fine with me, but I also like well made Turn Based games a lot (like Blackguards, Druidstone etc. - currently still playing Battle Brothers and it's awesome) - so I'm ok with BG3 being turn based. I didn't like D:OS I and II too much because of their general tone and presentation though.

What I don't like that much about the BG3 reveal is the group initiative thing (not a deal breaker but I would have prefered individual initiative/turn order).
Reduced party size is also not cool, but I totally get why so I'll swallow that as well.

What I don't particularly like is full VO. Not that it annoys me or something - but It's unneccessary for me and it's so freakingly expensive that I would rather see that money and time invested elsewhere. Fairly unpopular opinion I guess.

I'm also not a strong believer in open world shenanigans. Makes the work of storytelling a lot harder.

Hi there!
I actually LOVE full voice acting, if it's done properly it increases the immersion of the game by a lot in my opinion. Also I really dont mind initiative and "faction" turn based, like it was for Xcom, it can be a good thing because it adds some variety in the gameplay, I mean sometime you start moving before your opponent, but also sometime you have to wait and see what your enemy is doing, I think it is cool because approach and strategy for every battle change a lot, depending who is moving first

As far as the dialogue, some folks think it's a story element for that part of the game, and not necessarily how dialogue will work in BG 3. But, in the end, we don't know. I admit I'd prefer to simply click on what dialogue option I wanted to say.

Hello there,


That is a different thing indeed, we'll probably have to actually get our hands on the game to find out how it really feels.
A propos 'how that feels', I think this is where 'creative risk' kicks in... The dialogue options contain more then a verbal part of the answer, and that wouldn't play out with only the spoken word as options.
The past tense is what it gives it this oddness on first glance.
You can watch a dialogue from the presentation again and try to imagine the answers as they are, but in present tense or future or whatever - in my opinion that wouldn't be better, by a 'feeling of the situation' point of view.
And than again, a 'feeling of the situation' - and thus a corresponding reaction, is what 'the spoken word only' lacks in good parts.

That would certainly make a good discussion.

I am very impressed so far, specially because they decided to go the turn based route, which is the expertise of Larian Studios.

I just want they change the visuals a bit, so it looks less like DOS3

Unfortunately, group initiative is default in 5e.

Of course, that's to make table-top playing simpler... but that's not really a factor in a video game so they *could* very easily allow individual initiative as an option.

Even better, I'd love it if they had individual init re-rolls every round to hearken back to earlier D&D editions. Rolling init every round creates a more accurate representation of the chaotic ebb and flow of real combat. People just don't politely take turns in combat!

Regarding initiative, the 'side initiative' that Larian is using is actually an alternate rule in the DMG, and the alternate rule is specifically called out being 'unbalanced'. Normally, all the participants roll and everyone goes in the order of highest to lowest. I do remember re-rolling every round back in AD&D, it definitely added an interesting component to the combat.

I do like what I have seen so far but I will make my judgement when Baldur's Gate 3 comes out I have seen too many games that looked good but ended up being a bad game

Team initiative is the only thing that redeems the gameplay reveal for me. And party size reduction *is* an issue, and a big one at that, for me. I hope at least optionally we can increase party size back up to six. I don't care for VO at all, but the game having it is not something I care about one way or another.

while i appreciate a party size of 6.. the reason behind possibly it's a multiplayer-coop first game in design more than it being a single player game. even in DOS2 the game mechanics, the level design, the dialogues were designed for co-op experience. they are possibly building bg3 based on the reusing all the assets that present in dos2 even the encounters. increasing more party characters basically will flung off the encounter balance and a lot of efforts required.

they just want to stick with turn-based and party of 4 as well as many similar stuff from DOS2.

Team initiative, while not standard 5e, will do a lot to speed up combat. One of the downsides of DOS:2 multiplayer was waiting for your teammates to go, then the enemy, then you...etc. All players being able to move and act at the same time will help the pacing imo.

Though I was also skeptical first about Team/side initiative, after reflecting on it, I also see the bonus of speeding up things. After thinking about it, it is not even immersion breaking. Heck most movie battle scenes work with team initiative. You could still balance it by adding additional rules like, players who roll lower initiative like the mob do have to skip the first turn. Setting up a combat surely should help you having all PCs acting first. And although it might be unfair for poor monsters to mostly act second, i guess that's mostly the case when some fellowship approaches "guarding monsters". You spot them, you setup up the fight to have the advantage to surprise them. Certainly there should be some ambushes the other way around, where our clumsy group of adventurers find themselves trapped and have to watch these nasty creatures to act first....

Well, usually with full V.O. you usually have less options in dialogue and shorter and fewer dialogues, because it´s expensive and also it´s a hell to mod story content in the game, because most think it´s a little lame if the rest of the game is dubbed. It was ok in games like KOTOR because most aliens talked in alien gibberish so you can use that voice to whatever you write, but it´s the exception.
That said, studios with deep pockets like bethesda or obsidian made a great job at dubbing (In FO4 they even dubbed the dialogues of the robot butler with a hundred names, like jack or Maria so he speaks to you with your characters´ name) but usually is not the norm.
Generally speaking, I prefer the games not fully dubbed, not because of the dubbing, but because of the consequences in the dialogue.


Well, in a game of D&D you also have to wait for your turn, so it´s not a big deal to me. I think it would be more chaotic if all the players move at the same time, like casting a fireball at the same time you are charging the enemies, some party members got hurt due to reacions or environmental effects and the cleric/bard already casted this turn so he/she cannot heal, etc... The trick would be to play with discord , teamspeak or mumble to talk to the others while playing so we can plan the moves, I supposse. If you do not have experience as a group or some teamwork expertise in the end the turns could be even larger than in the standard initiative mode.

Oh - I didn't actually play the 5th edition yet - so didn't know it has group initiative as a default (it used to be an optional rule iirc). I guess that's okay then.