Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General The importance of this game.

First I thought, that okay it is TB, it is not the end of the world, it looks great and at many places it looks way better than expected, but from what I have seen from first gameplay video, that they ignored the original BG1/2 games, when they made BG3.

It will be a great dnd game.

Not only simplified UI.

When a game is first made to PC then ported to consoles, it is not generally dumbed down. Even BG1/2 got a console port (
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79ZsntRx8GE ). However, when the game is designed with consoles in mind, not only controllers are a HUGE limitation but also the general console mindset who isn't used to complex old school games limits the depth of your game. Having over 300 spells on PC that can be easily putted in a shortcut is one thing. On consoles, the player is navigating from many menus and submenus to cast a single spell. BS like dialog wheels only exists thanks to consoles. Ultima VII had a SNES port and had to be streamlined and had a far worse story with far more censorship. And it is not restricted to RPG's. Look to shooters for eg. PCs has highly competitive shooters like CSGO, highly realistic shooters like ArmA 3, historical games like red orchestra 2 and consoles? Spray and pray with SMG in ultra close quarters maps where learning the respawns matters far more than aiming and tactics like CoD(Children's Online Daycare).



But they aren't the first ones to do that. Neverwinter Nights AOL - 1991 was turn based. Neverwinter Nights 1/2 are RtWP. Nobody criticiized...

I have been messing around with the Beamdog ports of BG, IWD etc on Xbox. A bit clunky at times but manageable. Looking forward to the Xbox version of BG3 as my PC is showing its age.

Yeah, when developing for console one has to adjust UI. Vice-versa if you go another way.

“Dumb-down” for consoles is a stupid argument. It doesn’t mean anything, and is used to dismiss any changes one doesn’t like no matter of game is indeed to be released in consoles or not. It stopped being relevant arguments years ago, as consoles started to get more compelled and demanding games and PC fell back in favour as a valid platform to release or even focus on.

Obviously, designing a game to be played with a pad does put limitations on developers. So does developing for keyboard only.

Streamlining a game doesn’t have to happen because of platform it is released on. Having 300 spells will rarely be considered a good idea. Depth vs complexity and such other silly design principles.

That depends on the game we are talking to. If we are talking about assassins creed, its ok if it´s simple.
If we are talking about Civilization, total war or a D&D or Pathfinder simulator, of course you need 100 spells and lots of features you cannot simplify.

You are assuming that changes are for good. And that HW was the unique limitation on consoles. Now they are more powerful, but the controllers and mindset of most console gamers are still the same. RPG, FPS and RTS games got dumbed down a lot when they started to focus on console market. PC market was always more mature and interesting game. Just look to most popular old school PC RPG's, like BG2/1, VtMB, Arcanum... And the most popular console old RPG's? Final Fantasy and cia, a game about androgynous teenagers with oversized swords saving the world. "But ultima 7 got a snes port", massively censored and dumbed down. BS like dialog wheels, press A for awesome gameplay, quick time event, etc; only exists thanks to consoles. Even lootboxes, only got that big thanks to consoles and mobile market. Console gamers purchase the same FIFA game every year and spend tons of money on P2W mechanics which PC players rarely accept even on F2P games.

And the best modern game developers are from eastern europe(CD projekt red, OwlCat games, 4A games), exactly because consoles barely exist there, so the general mindset is a PC mindset.



Why? It gives a amazing variety and depth to any game. Each level up as a mage on BG1/2 is extremely impactfull.

Games got dumbed down when started appealing to as wide of a demographic as possible aka. non-gamers. Focus of visual flare, rather then engaging imputs. Things looking badass, while giving players only minimal imput. And recently, using game mechanics for monatisation rather then gameplay. As it happens consoles are cheaper to buy and easier to manage, so this is where publishers focused their efforts on. RPG, RTS and such didn't get dumbed down because of consoles (though of course importing Mouse&keyboard design to pad would be a big hurdle, just as importing pad design to m&k is), but because they were molded to appeal to "casual" audience.

"Dumbed down" for consoles doesn't hold water, because there are great console games. Dark Souls are best RPGs made in years. Platinum games have more depth then most of your "mature PC games". If AAA wanted to release actual games they could do so, no matter if they make PC or console their target platform.

Perhaps I over-interpreted the console-jab, or maybe I am overly sensitive, after dealing with "dumbed for consoles!" backlash to every change Deadfire had, even though it wasn't developed for consoles in the first place. Perhaps, "dumbed down" for consoles is a shortcut of tailoring your game to appeal to people not really interested in games. If so, it's still a silly and uninformative label.


Actually, consoles in Poland seem to be getting more and more popular. But yeah, those devs (like myself) mostly grew up in console-less enviroment. Not as easy to pirate games on console, eh? (good, old times with little to no copyright laws).

This seems like a very personal, and unobjective, list. There are other great independent developers I would mention, though they tend to make smaller projects. I would question, whenever it is "PC mindset" that makes those companies great, or being located in a place where work force is cheaper. I mean, Witcher3 isn't far from your usual open-world action game depth wise - it's just CD project red actually created interesting content for it, rather then filling world with repetivitive activities only. Also, didn't Witchers get "dumbed down" for consoles anyway? Didn't quite get into Metro series though. Modern military shooter style was never my thing, even if Metros are more interesting then your usual MMS. Didn't play M3 yet.

Still, my original rebuke, I think, was to 2012-XCOM. Fun fact, XCOM2 was designed for PC. Another fun fact: design hasn't changed much. Because, the game was designed to appeal to people who weren't interested in Turn-based games in the first place, rather then just hardcore fans. Just, as if, making it multiplatform release was a side effect rather then a cause! If having oversized font were it's biggest sin, I would keep it installed to this day. If, patching new UI to a Bethesda game (which is a must) would make them good, I would play more then 10h of them. So let's talk about individual design decisions, and why they make game less interesting, rather then slapping labels like "dumbed down for consoles", which at best are meaningless, and at worst applicable.

Completely not truth. PC's are far less expensive, hence the domination of his use on "developing world", people who say that consoles are less expensive generally don't count the fee to play online, and expensive games. BTW, Steam has regional pricing. and for a guy in Ukraine or Argentina, purchasing paying in local currency is far less expensive than paying any console game.

Other detail about PC is that on PCs, i can run anything, from 80s games to games made this year. So i have the old school game to comparate with modern games far easier. I can play Divine divinity(best Larian game IMO) but a console player, can't.



Even Dark Souls would be better if was made with PC's in mind. Seriously. Imagine being able to put items and spells into hotkeys and have manual skill focused aiming for ranged weaponry. DS would probably be great like Gothic 1/2/3.



Deadfire changes over PoE1 was good. Over BG2, was bad. Simple.



Actually, TW3 sold far more on PC. The notion that piracy is rampant on PC holds no truth. In fact, piracy was extremely common during PS2 era...



You can say that TW3/2 is far more dumbed down than TW1 BUT there are a huge difference between TW becoming more action focused than games becoming more action focsued AND losing all spell and weapon variety. Look to BioWare games. BG2 with over 300 spells. DA:O with over 90 and inquisition with about 20. TW3 has a far more simplistic combat system, but still maintained the depth on dialogs, alchemy and etc.

But one thing is actually far worse than consoles, which is the excessive focus on balance and accessibility. When i mean accessibility, i don't mean allowing disabled people to play your game. I mean appealing to the lowest common denominator. And the excessive focus on balance kinda makes the RPG less about being immersed in a living breathing world and more about just a game. Balance is completely opposite to variety, depth and immersion in most cases.



Why? Having a lot of options to chose from is bad? If instead of choosing between Skull trap or fireball, you had only fireball, it would make BG2 better? How?

Completely truth. Most if not all gaming PC components are not produced locally in developing countries, and we have to pay in dollars for all of them. A good GTX video card can cost upwards of US$ 700, just imagine how much this is in Brazil. You can buy 2 PS4 for that component alone.
And granted that PC games are cheaper, but the cost difference is way smaller than the hardware's, and nowadays consoles have sales on a weekly basis. I rarely pay more than US$10~15 for a AAA game, even if I need to wait a few months for it to go on sale. Also, you have exclusives.
The cost difference only ends up dilluted if you buy tons of cheaper games on PC.

Brazil currency is suffering a lot of devaluation.And guess what, steam/GoG prices din't raised anything near the dollar rate. Also, you don't need a the best GPU to play games.

Here is Battlefield 1 on a GPU 450 which is far bellow the minimum requirement https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wj3Ov1FNEg


PS : PC has exclusives too. They are just not your third person action adventure with stealth elements Nº64685165651. can you play Icewind Dale 2 on a console? ArmA 3? Gothic 2 with returning mod? Baldur's Gate 3 is not confirmed on consoles.
And my guess is that it will come at least 2 years after PC. The best RPG games are on PC. Mainly because P$4 can't run P$3 games but i can run 90s games easily on PC.

And you don't need a gaming PC to play classic games or CRPGS, that's why my laptop which is mostly for work is more than enough to run those, and those are pretty much the only games I play on it.
Now, state of the art graphics heavy AAA games will always come out for consoles, and it is way cheaper this way. Just imagine the PC you'll need to play Cyberpunk 2077 on mid specs, probably costs more than US$ 1000.

You are 100% right. But if you have a desktop which can be used to work, how much cost to UPGRADE the PC not to run cyperpunk on medium, but to run on lowest settings? My PC is a mid range PC on everything except GPU and i plan to upgrade only for BG3 and Cyberpunk 2077.

As for the price of a GTX 1050( i believe that is the minimum requirement - not sure), is R$1.449 or US$272.68 with today currency( 6 - july - 2020). I an not sure if is used or not on the site that i saw but is not that expensive.

Believe or not, i have the same desktop since my childhood. I only an constant purchasing parts and upgrating. At moment, i can't run all new launches, but an happy with my PC. The best games are old games. Including Larian games. Divine Divinity is Diablo meets Ultima 7, DOS1/2 i din't liked much... On consoles, i just can't run those games.

Bah, you cought it before I erased that bit.

I mean it's not terribly exciting, is it? I can't tell you what the difference those had. Different type of damage, one scaled up with levels better I think? Overall, there isn't enough differenciation between two to really justify their existance I think. It doesn't help that the difference happens outside gamespace - it will happen in under-the-hood calculation which game does it's best to hide from you - never played table-top, maybe it's more engaging when you calculate stuff yourself.

I don't mind flavours, though I think it would be better or organize them better, then just throw all of them into one bin. One thing I really didn't like though were hard counters - like petrifying look of Basilisk or level draining of Vampires (oh god, or semi permanent damage to attributes in Pathfinder, or mindcontrol in PoE1). That's just annoying - it doesn't have an interesting impact on gameplay, you just need to google what you need out of heap of spells and potions available to you to get rid of it. If there is an ability that is so powerful, that you need another ability to counter it, in which case ability1 becomes irrelevant - you can just cut both of them out. No indepth interaction, just a lot of googling. Ah, pathfinder, spend 2 hours on the game and do nothing interesting, impactful or rewarding.

The differences are fast among the two main tier 3 offensive AoE spells.

• Damage type and is not a useless differentiation, fire resistance is far more common, so skulltrap will be more effective against more creatures BUT the same applies to party members, meaning that is easier to protect your party members from the fireball
• The skull trap can be used as a trap and placed before combat
• Fireball has a much wide area
• Different saves
• Necromancer specialized mages can memorize more of skull trap and enemies has a penalty on their saves
• They scale to different level caps
• (...)

You are completely wrong saying taht they are annoying and not impact on the gameplay.

A petrified enemy is a enemy removed from the encounter.

Level drain reduce a lot of variables and is expensive to heal.

And on kingmaker, cloudkill is one of the best mid tier spells exactly due the attribute damage. It can damage d4 / round CON on enemy. 4 points of CON damage(maximized) means that all spells which target FORTITUDE saves has +10% chance of success per round, and it also reduces 2 points of maximum HP per level of the target creature. How it not impact in the gameplay? Hell, animate dead + maximized cloudkill can end the life of a lot of really powerful creatures in few rounds.

Do you know a nasty enemy cleric? if summoned soul eater deals a lot of WIS damage on him, he no longer can cast higher level cleric spells and the lower level will have reduced DC.

A maximized/empowered cloudkill which is possible to cast on kingmaker with rods, can deal 6 pts of CON damage per round or 3 if he makes the save. A lot of troublesome foes like the Jabberwock only got destroyed on my hard run thanks to cloudkill comboed with other spells like sirroco.

And you don't need to "google the solution", on BG2, there are a story mode and on kingmaker, you can make this effects end with a rest.

And mindcontroling, did you played PoE1 which for you is better than old rpgs? Cipher is one of the best classes because be able to mind control a enemy can make a outnumbered/outgeared/outleveled battle become in favor of your party. Taking control over enemies is far more deadly than just killing then.

*shrug* If I don’t care playing the game, then I don’t play it. It’s not like Kingmaker has a story worth experiencing. I will eventually beat it, but I am just not nearly interested enough to stick with it for long periods of time. I actually didn’t have much trouble with it outside first spider cave so far, but successfully swinging through endless samey mobs isn’t terribly exciting when it is in your favour either. Wasn’t in BG1, wasn’t in PoE1 and it is not in Kingmaker.

I suppose my issues with direct PnP adaptations, is that they revolve around builds and calculations rather then player inputs. Spells and skills don’t become tools to use, just different ways for the little box to calculate damage for you :-( oh well, perhaps wanting a good tactics game and RPG in one package, is a bit too much to hope for. Though, Dark Souls did manage to be a satisfying action game and a solid RPG system. I want that, but with tactics.

I suppose it´s a matter of different tastes. I myself don´t care much about games where you have a hp bar, a stamina bar and a magic bar (In contraposition with having some stats that define your character), you don´t have different skills you can choose to explore and converse, an arrow is pointing you where to go at any time like in kindergarten ( Big arrow pointing the handle of the door and big letters saying "Open the door" Thanks devs, I could never have this figure out without those key context clues) and you can beat any encounter with any character at any level.

I prefer a more strategic approach, where you have to find the right tool for the job and some planning and selection of spells and skills are the keys to win difficult battles.


You sure we are talking about the same game? because I remember killing myriads of goblins and hobgoblins, the same 6 slavists over and over again in the Streets of Athkathla and the mythic 5 skeletons in the door of High Edge every time I go to buy or sell something.

I am confused... is that a jab at Dark Souls? I don’t think that that kind of game, you should try it


I criticised BG1 and PoE1 for repetitive mobs, didn’t I? As to BG2 - I cant say I experienced anything like it. There were some areas, but they were an exception rather then a rule. I think you are referencing random encounters. Maybe it got changed at some point, but I don’t recall having many of those. 3 or 4 encounters in 60h of play isn’t much. I didn’t backtrack much in BG2 though. I am an item-hoarder, I would rarely use potions and never scrolls.

Repetitive mobs I think are a result of first game biting more then they can chew with not enough time left for encounter design. Still, the Old Sycamore was a chore. It’s like a miniature Endless Path but no Adra Dragon at the end as the reward for slogging through.

It´s about what I like in a game, this is a forum where we share opinions and Dark souls is a great game. You do not really have to be on the defensive all the time, man...

Most of the things you dislike I love, most of the things you find "bad design" (aka I do not like it so it´s bad design) I find "at last a game that stands over other 100 titles that do the same". We seek very different things in a game so discussing with you about what I prefer and what you like would be pointless anyway.

;-) No worries. I just wasn't sure what you meant, as you described things I usually don't enjoy myself either.

Kingmaker doesn't have a good story? Are you joking? a story involving the Feyworld, something mostly neglected on CRPG's, involving ancient curses, Demigods like Lantern King, where each companion has a story arc, some got sold by his own family into slavery, other failed to become a paladin, other hate Trolls and wanna kill then all in revenge and so on.

And fighting the same mob? There are a lot of different mobs on kingmaker, and even when they repeat the same mob, they invent something new. Eg, the undead cyclops, fighting then on open field is completely different than fighting then in a dungeon with nasty traps that cast cloudkill which can damage the living but then are immune. On RPG codex, kingmaker is the 13th top rated rpg of all time ( https://rpgcodex.net/article.php?id=11193 )

Honestly, Baldur's Gate 1/2 had a better story IMO, but is not as if the games lacks story. And i don't even think that BG3 will have the same good story of the previous BG game. I really wanna know if for eg, Bhaalspawn descendants will play a big role.



Like any NON APRG?

DOS2 for eg, i din't played much. But i had a lot of troubles on a encounter. Just upgraded my gear and steamrolled the same encounter. And is not as if the player doesn't need to think on combat in this games.