I wrote this as a review on steam as not recommended. I figured I should post it here. Not sure where larian studios prefers to get its feed back from.

This game is meh... Not bad, but not great either.

Pros:

• The title!!! I mean it is a baldur's gate game. And 1 and 2 were great child hood memories.
• Pretty close to D&D rules. (Could be better. Some minor & major disappointments here and there. Like added rules that some spells can’t be cast in combat. Also, some divinity stuff in there for better or worse.)
• Combat. Max level in the early release is lvl 4. I am pretty sure some areas the combat is made for much higher. Like the 2 minitours will kill you. I had to use cheese strategies to kill them. Like sending a guy to die. Just to get a little dmg in. Then teleport to camp to rez the dead guy. Rinse and repeat. But most fights are more strategy based. And getting surprise attacks in is the name of the game.
• Feats. I love that they are there. Was really looking forward to them at lvl 4. Was a bit disappointed with the amount of them. And I am hoping more get added before the release. The lack of selection here made me just go with abilities points. But hey they are there.

Cons:

• The default controls are just bad. (Like walking around and rotating the camera is just really bad.)
• Space bar for everything. You can't use ESC to skip stuff but space bar works. You can't use enter to accept the current dialog option, but space bar works. They need to be different buttons for sure. Like really? So you want to enter turn base mode... You got it space bar. Want to end a turn... Guess what space bar. To bad it doesn't also end turn base mode. Shouldn't starting turn base and ending turn base be the same key? I am sure there are more things this one key does. That I am not remember off the top of my head. When in doubt what key it is... Try space bar in this game it will probable be right 90% of the time.
• Item management is horrible. Took forever to realize I could sell stuff by double clicking an item. Double clicking in inventory will use the item. But at a vendor it sells it. Like why double click? Single click does nothing. I wish there was a faster and better way to manage items for sure. Sending stuff to camp requires a right click and then a left click on a menu. Drag and drop is buggy and often doesn’t move the item. So it is much easier to right click it and send it off to a different party member. Than to just drag it to that empty square in the next bag. They could at least make it so if I click this party member, And I double click that other party member item. It would just move it. The system is cumbersome as hell. (But this is early access so that is subject to change. And I can't image it staying that way. And OMG it should. Almost anything would be better than it's current system.)
  
  Also the sort function is also kind of hidden. A very small icon at the top of the screen. Off to the right center if you can't find it. Took me a while to find it anyways.
• Combat. I know I listed this a pro. And some parts are great. Other things are bad. Elevation is king. Being lower down in a battle is quite literally and figuratively fighting an up-hill battle. Having an elevated location can make or break some fights. I killed the entire goblin camp without a challenge. Just by having a higher elevation. While being on the same elevation that same fight was impossible. While I think it can be fun. It was just too OP for what it is. If it doesn't get balanced better I would rather have it removed. Also NPCs need to learn how to jump. Or ledges will just get abused.
  
  Other missing things such as cover from D&D rules would go a long way. Currently cover just messes up your casting/range. Oh, you shot that arrow into that railing your leaning against. Hmm guess you better stand on top of it instead?!?!
  
  This is where divinity ideals win over D&D 5e. It is all about ground effects. And grease bottles and whatnot are better than spells. Hell they could have at lease used D&D ball barrings instead. Ground effects seem to always hit the target. And are unavoidable so you have to deal with them. By change them to something else for example.
  
  Added spell rules such as X spell can't be cast in battle are also very disapointing. And are not D&D.
  
  On a side note I am really hoping that your passive perception also increases the range at which you can see monsters from. (In the future at some point.)
• The game allows you to save. Normally I love to save a game and go back to point X. But I found myself loading my saves over and over. Just to see what that passive check I failed on was. While rolling on that stuff is awesome. I found that I just kept trying that check over and over until I succeeded. Some things should just be that what’s you get. And I lack the self-discipline to self impose it. It should maybe at least cost you character something to go back in time. Current save system is not D&D at all.
• Dice rolls. While I love it. I dislike how 20 doesn’t mean you succeed and a 1 doesn’t mean you failed. Some difference from D&D rules for the worse. 20 is still a crit in combat, but that’s about it. I also wished you rolled death rolls like you do for disarming a trap. Instead it is treated more like a background passive roll.
• Scripted characters. I think they missed the mark on personalities. By more than a mile. First time I saw Minsc in the other baldur gate games... Instant love for that character. And I liked many others. First time I saw the 5 playable character in this game... Was like really? I have to put up with this? Maybe I can handle Gale, and Wyll. But didn't want Wyll because I picked a warlock to play as. Party comp and all. Can I have a guy in my party I don't have to force myself to like? Or maybe a gnome I actually liked saving?
  
  Almost all the party members here seem to hate people in general. And the huge F'Off stamped on their forehead gets tiring very fast. Like really! I went to camp once and Lae'zel told me off by talking about her body?!?!. And that we are more like enemies. And I was like WTF? First off I was playing a female char. And second why even bring up sex? I guess I picked to many dialog options she didn't like. While talking to other NPCs!!! The companions in this game are just awful. I don't play the game to pretend to have sex with every female character. Like holy hell.
  
  If I ever play again I will make 4 custom chars. And just kill all the in game companions. Maybe the game won't annoy me as much that way.
• Story... Well the graphics and cinematics are great. And the voice acting is spot on. However; that doesn't save it at all. Over arcing story of act one sucks. (All you can currently play.) You are meant to find a healer... And spoiler
  You don't need one?!?!?! But go find one in the next act anyways.
  Was extremely lame, and very poorly executed. Most content just seemed like hostile text towards your character. Because all the NPCs currently hate their own life or something. And are taking it out on you.

Conclusion:
Some small changes could make the game play go from ok to great. Sadly, there are a lot of small changes needed. Also maybe a rework on all the optional companions personalities would be nice. As I don't even want to hang out with those jerks. They are not likable at all. I know what changes I would make to the game. But I don’t know if the studio would see it the same way. Overall, I would say it is a mixed bag. Some things you suffer threw while other things you want more of. If you are not sure about this game. Don't get the early access. Wait until they fix the inventory system at least. Also I fail to see any reason why this is called baldurs gate. I see nothing where the story from the first two games interact with this one. All characters are new. And I don't even know if you will ever even make it to the city of baldurs gate. The game doesn't appear to have any relationship other than the title.

Seems the concept of "Early Access" is lost on you. We all have opinions though...

Did you even understand the game being in "early access"?

I think it's rather fair not to recommend the game at this stage, and really surprised it did so great. I wouldn't recommend this game to anyone who is not a hardcore Larian and Crpg fan right now. that is not to say I think it's bad, I would just recommend most people to wait for the full game

While everyone is entiteld to their opinion all your complaints can be summed up with 'the game is in early acces'.

I appreciate letting people know how you feel about the game, thats what revieuws are for after all. But imo acknowledge it in the revieuw.

Do you plan to check back with the game after updates? You sound like you are done with the game while you only got to play act 1, and in an incomplete state at that

+1

I get what you are saying (I would still recommend it to my friends) Don't let other tell you, "you don't seems to understand EA" or any of that shenanigan, this is your thought and review. I hope you come back to the game when it's more polished or at release.

Some valid points, some subjective points. One thing, however: natural 1 and 20 are not supposed to be special in 5th edition tabletop either. If your DM treats natural 20 as a magic power that lets you succeed at anything, that’s a houserule. By rules as written, critical hits and misses in combat ARE the only special result on natural 1/20.

The OP's username is literally "Angry fan" please don't respond to this bait topic.

Could be he made his forum account after he posted his Steam revieuw and figured hed share it here as well?

Tbh its a suggestion and feedback forum. Seems the proper place to post this if you ask me.

Despite the name, and the full lack of understanding of what Early Access means in the post, there are some valid points. I wouldn't recommend most of my friends pick this up in EA, for example. However, I do know people that built modules in NWN, and I would recommend they look at it, because they'll be looking for what needs to be worked on while they play, and would appreciate "getting in on the ground floor" as it were. One of those actually convinced me to look at it.

A buddy of mine asked me if I recommended it and I told him to wait for full release if he wants a complete game. He gave it a shot and seems to like it but yeah, acknmowledges that it really isent finished yet.

But would I recommend it for everyone? No, exact opposite. Game isent complete. Avoid if you want a full game. If you dont mind a sneak peak and/or helping with development pick it up imo.

Sorry, I don't think EA means you can not criticize the game and just except what's here. If people don't make posts like this, how will Larian improve BG3?

As a note, RAW in D&D since 3rd edition is a Nat 20 is only auto success in attacking and the same with Nat 1.

The idea of Nat 20 and Nat 1 being auto success/failure in skill rolls is a frequent house rule, but it has never been RAW.

That said, the general rule of GM etiquette is "if 1 can't fail or 20 can't succeed....don't make them roll."

While I'd love to have cover, a lot of the stuff you list as cons for combat I consider pros and are things I've implemented in tabletop games for literal decades. Because active environments are fun. Surface effects for the most part are not auto hit, the exception being burning which...makes sense really...you don't walk through fire without getting burnt. I do sort of wish my fire resistant tiefling would have less trouble, but eh, it's minor.

In RAW D&D grease bottles and such have always had the same effect as spells but with lower save DCs and usually smaller AoEs. Having played a lot of NWN and NWN2 I can say that the effect of grenades in this game are roughly on par with the effects of grenades in that game. And I can also say, having played characters that do the Alchemy skill thing to churn out thunderstones, tanglewebs, and such, that are comparable with the effects you get in tabletop.

Spells start outpacing grenades at around 5th to 6th level, and we don't get there yet.

The characters in this version are a lot better designed than the characters of past CRPGs for the most part. (notable exception for Neeshka of NWN2 who is one of my long-time favorites).

Inventory management is a mess, yet, and I have yet to see a CRPG where it is not a mess. But, to be fair, the inventory management here is better than it was in Baldur's Gates 1&2, Icewind Dale, Gold Box games, NWN, NWN2, or Sword Coast Legends.

The story is a cheap novel story, but again, that's expected. There's a lot going on in the development of a video game and even the "good" storylines rarely impress me too much. There's one or two video game storylines that really understand how to tell a story in the medium, but for the most part it's a Saturday matinee where you push buttons. This storyline is on the side of competent and enjoyable so far and the one spoiler you mentioned is predictable because to do otherwise would be a poor gameplay decision and this is, first and foremost, a game.

Very true. That said, sometimes players insist to do something even if you advise them against it

Or dont catch on to the fact that they shouldnt be trying to stab the dragon that is actively trying to save their life.

Or attack the avatar of a god when you expressively told them it is the avatar of a god.

Yeah...some of my players are idiots xD

To your snarky comments another: Do you even understand what the Suggestions & Feedback forum is?

The game is in a dire state right now I agree... Fundamentally flawed from the ground up.

+1

Negative Steam reviews are to be expected.

I don't even understand why we should be allowed to review up/down an incomplete game in development ; that is the review system should be turned on when the game is declared released (that is a Steam issue though that Larian cannot change).
On the other hand, folks are paying 60 USD to playtest it.

Any tiny measure of 'research' beforehand would have told it is not really a BG continuation.

You wrote "Don't get the early access". Larian also told you not to buy it in 9 paragraphs at the top of the Steam store.

More concretely : yes some things are annoying as hell (party and character movement/following) and are disappointing (seemingly improvised design for 5e rules implementation). As for relations and story, that is subjective. I like that it is different from other RPGs I have played. I do not need to play exactly the same feel and companions as Pillars of Eternity 1-2, Kingmaker: Pathfinder, etc. etc. etc. I have played CRPG since the 90s and there are many more classical like Solasta at the moment. So I am fine with BG3 taking risks and there is a whole year of changes ahead.

Revieuws are opinion and thus subjective.

Theyre also tied to a moment in time. I expect that people who are looking at revieuws understand that an EA revieuw is possibly subject to change.

I feel its an ok game. Allowing us to import/export our characters from one game to another is going to be the deal breaker to a lot of people. Who wants to create a new character or play as an NPC every single time they want to play with a friend? I agree with this review, there is a lot of work to still be done and I hope they really listen to the fan base.

A lot of the complaints are things that go back to DOS even, so I hope several are addressed it just means this game and whatever is next will benefit from it. They never really nailed Inventory Management well. Now one thing to consider is they need to make it Gamepad accessible as well, that said it doesn't mean one cannot invest in two systems if that is needed to make each feel right.

I certainly do. If I were looking at buying this on Steam, for EA, and read this review after reading what Larian provided on the Steam storefront for the game, my reaction wouldn't be "Well, that's certainly insightful, I'm glad I read it.", it would be "did the poster read the message posted by Larian before they made their purchase?". It's not telling me anything that I couldn't have gleaned from reading the official statement, so it would just be a few minutes of my life I couldn't get back while I read it. I say this even though, as I posted earlier, despite their chosen name, which would, btw, also play a big part in how seriously I took their comments, I wouldn't recommend this game to everyone I know, although I do have friends that I would recommend it to, because they worked on NWN modules, and understand what getting a game in Early Access really means.

D&D player hand book page 194 for rolling 20 or 1 in combat...
D&D player hand book page 197 for rolling a 20 or 1 for death saves
While most checks do not have a specific rules for 1's and 20's many items in D&D state a roll of 20 will do etc... And most campaign guides also state the DC rules and exceptions if a 1 or 20 is rolled. Especially at earlier levels. And in my opinion a simpler and better way of doing this is just to have 1 always fail, and 20 always succeed. Instead of making or not making a new rule for each interaction. As it is just too much work. The official rule is that the DM decides the difficulty of any check. So it is not a house rule to make 1s fail and 20s succeed. It just isn't written in stone. A big difference. And most players who read the rules without a degree in D&D will assume 1s are always bad and 20s are always good. Unless explained and shown in greater detail. Even players in the show critical roll don't seem to understand that. When matt (the DM) doesn't fail them for a 1 on a check, they seem completely confused. So why not just make it so? It isn't really a house rule. It is more or less a miss understand of sometimes this scenario 1s and 20s have these rules, but not always.


Ok. And you expect every player to be an alchemist with loads of bottles from level 1? Also they way out perform all melee in the game. And I don't see that changing at any level.

Look I didn't like NWN. I liked BG 1 & 2. There is a reason NWN didn't do as good as BG. And isn't considered as good as a game when looking back. Well by most people anyways. Despite both having high ratings. And I could care less how they did it in that game. This is suppose to be an extension of the other BG games by name.



This statement is all opinion. And your opinion. I disagree with it pretty much. I didn't find my inventory annoying in BG 1 or 2. Hell even dropping stuff on the ground was easier in those games. And was absolutely great for the time/age it was created in. BG3 inventory seems a few steps back compared to the original. And technologies and examples of other systems are out there.

I am not going to bother comparing the game to games out side the Baldur's gate name. Might as well compare it to anything at point.

And at least the characters in BG 1 & 2 didn't try to kill me on site. Oh you just held a knife to my neck. Yay why don't you come stay at my camp? That won't end poorly. Like really? The story is crap. Like really crap. That is my opinion. But to each their own. At least your comment suggested you actually read and considered my post for what it is. Most people here aren't even worth responding too. So you do deserve some praise for at least standing by your objections. And I would like to say your are more than welcome to your opinion. And if more people are like you. Than by all means let the developer see it. Isn't that the whole point of EA. To get early feedback. To most of the rest of you F-off. Your not worth my time or effort.

Good post OP. Unfortunately, you came to the wrong forum. This is a place where all of the fanboys and smooth-brained pepegas hang out to ensure that only positive comments are made about the game. It's quite nauseating. God forbid anyone have actual criticisms to help improve BG3.

It's astonishing how many ignorant posters keep saying "It's early access." Oh our apologies, I guess this "early access" label means that we instantly excuse everything that's wrong with the game.
My question for these people is...are you really that incompetent? You keep defending the game by throwing "early access" out there. Do you pepegas not understand that the point of early access is to accumulate as much feedback as possible and potentially improve the game? So it's OK that there's a myriad of problems with the game because it's "early access," but it's not OK to critique any of them? The real shame is that most of the valid criticism will go ignored because they become drowned in a sea of nonsense.




Here is my objective feedback after 30 hours of gameplay:

1) Perks / abilities / passives / etc DO NOT appear in the character sheet. For example, at level 2 for warlock I chose "Agonizing Blast" and "Devil's Sight" as additional passives. However, NOWHERE in the character sheet (or entire game) does it display that I now have these for my warlock. I would only know I have them because I remember picking them. It is a serious oversight to not have ALL of the character progressions and advancements display in the character sheet.

2) Unclear status effects on spells, lack of a compendium. Many spells that cause status effects are unclear in what they actually do. For example, "Blind." The tooltip on this spell states it causes "Blindness" that can be shaken off with a saving throw, but it does not state what the actual effects of Blindness are. Does Blindness mean that attacks can't be made? Or does it mean they just have less of a chance to hit? The tooltip on the spell is incomplete in this sense, and the lack of a compendium means that I cannot look it up anywhere in the game. Another example is "Silence," which creates a sphere in which all creatures are "Silenced." What does Silenced mean? Does it mean they are literally silent, or does it mean they cannot cast abilities? Again, the spell tooltip is unclear. This is true for MANY spells. Either expand the tooltips, or create a compendium where the player can read about status effects and what they do.

3) Hidden details on spells / abilities that are not listed in the tooltip. One example here being "Hex." If the concentration of Hex is ever broken, Hex can be recast on another target without the use of a spell slot. This is not mentioned on the tooltip. Another example is "Shatter," which is an AoE spell, but nowhere on the tooltip is it actually listed as AoE. It makes me wonder how many other spells have hidden effects that I am unaware of.

4) Inconsistent rules. The example here being if I cast "Darkness," why is it that my warlock with Devil's Sight cannot see or attack in the zone of Darkness? If the rules are supposed to follow D&D, then my warlock SHOULD BE ABLE to see and attack in the Darkness spell effect. In this game, that is not the case, and it is unclear why. Furthermore, how does this make "Darkness" any different from "Fog?" Perhaps this is a simple oversight in game design and programming.

5) Lack of a rulebook. If the entire game is based on the rules of D&D and even plays exactly like D&D with dice rolls, why not include an in-game rulebook? It's easy enough to google all sorts of rules, but at least including the basics would make sense. This of course would simply be a quality of life change, and an optional compendium that exists for players that want it.

I agree, the game is in early access. That said, Larian charged $60 bucks for this, and in that regard I wouldn't recommend it to anyone in its current state having played it myself, to anyone at that price. Its still too little for that price, both in content and quality at this point. I hope it improves, but having played through it a couple of times now, I am pretty done with it until there is more to it than there is now, and improvements are made.

Be nice. We do actually read and scoop up good criticism. Behaving poorly may leave a bad first-impression though and make it less likely for someone to want to read what you've actually got to say. Fortunately, I do.
But do behave. No need to lash on others or get rude.

Legitimate question, why throw around the insults? Do you honestly think that people will suddenly see your point of vieuw if you just insult them or something?? Oh man I dident see your point before but now you call me a smooth brain I totally see your point!

People excuse things for EA because when you start a game thats in EA you KNOW that certain parts are buggy, unfinished, not yet included, etc. We arent excusing the bugs themselves, we often acknowledge them. But noting a bug/missing feature and throwing a tantrum over it isent helping either. So many people sound fucking upset that they find bugs or whatnot and the game isent outright PERFECT and thats why people say 'its EA, calm down'. People sound entitled or even offended that the game isent finished. Its EA. We knew that upfront. Mention the bugs, missing feature, oversights or whatever and move on with your life. Will be better for your blood pressure and might give Larian a chance to implement it.

Your feedback points for example are valid. #1 is correct, its currently very unclear or impossible to find what perks and features you have. #2 as well. I KNOW what blindness does in pnp for example but unless you or a creature is effected by it you cant look at the status effect in the game. Thats a bad thing and mentioning that allows them to adress it. Same applies to #3. Should be listed in the spell, they should adress that. #4 shouldnt be a thing either but is probably an oversight. Devil's sight should totally see through that. #5 I agree with as well. Even if you play dnd pnp every day the game should be as clear to you as to someone who has never played tabletop. Ingame encyclopedia or 'rulebook' if they want to call it that should help with that.

I agree.

However, it's only EA...