Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Baldur's Gate 4

I think there is a way they can have two releases a year from a single studio. They need to embrace the adventure pack approach. Instead of making a new game, with new mechanics and features. Create a new adventure. Imagine as you start BG you see a screen that lets you pick which storyline you want to play. A single game engine could do MANY adventure packs. This would lower cost, speed up development and give players more of what they want.

They could then use other studios to take a different direction for other games. Such as a Skyrim style action adventure approach, or a strategy game approach.

The adventure pack to me is what would be the bread and butter. Use the base CRPG engine and then create a whole new adventure, maybe one set in Waterdeep, Neverwinter or even Athkatla. You could move off the Sword Coast and do something Cormyr, the Dalelands, Anauroch or any of the other places within the Realms. Even leave the realms and use other DnD based game worlds.

This. DnD, like all RPGs, falls apart at higher levels as the protagonists are half gods by then. I loved BG1, barely got through BG2, and dropped the BG2 expansions for this reason.

Larian has shown that they hate D&D and all its restrictions and only made BG3 for name recognition.
So why would they make another D&D game and why should we want them to?

Why do games fall apart just by PCs being high level?

THE BEST DnD RPGs were high level adventures - BG2, NWN:Hordes of the Underdark, and ofc the flawless NWN2: Mask of the Betrayer.

If anything, i think Larian went way overboard with what we’re dealing with as level 10-12 - gods, their chosen, Giga nether brains, interplanar war, githyanki rebellion, high level devils, undead dragons etc. Should have saved some of those themes for high level expansion.

Larian went all out, chances are we won’t be seeing any continuation for BG3, definitive edition is our best bet.

But i do hope Larian learned their lessons with DnD and will indeed continue making DnD RPGs.

You are right, as it is Larian didn't really manage balance in this game as much as I would have liked. You have 5th level characters killing a CR 26 Adamantine Golem out of the gate, and while it relies somewhat on a gimmick it also heavily nerfs the capabilities of that creature, like its ability to basically punt you into the Lava or useing it's stomp ability do 4d10 damage to everyone around it. They also nerf it's AC, make it vulnerable to bludgeoning weapons, take away it's immunity to non-adamantine and non magical weapons.


They do the same with Adult Red Dragons - they are CR 17 creatures - they can fly and attack us from the air - not in Bg3. Here they are nerfed to shit.

I would honestly love a proper difficulty setting with core rules and creatures with abilities RAW.

You could argue that's what's happened back then with the (A)D&DGold Box games (SSI) to a degree. The engine itself and tools were barely ever much changed. That allowed them to churn out new adventures fairly quickly... never before nor after had there ever been so many D&D games released. There's still user made content being released to this day via the Unlimited Adventures toolset sold back then. http://frua.rosedragon.org/

The flipside to this approach is that... I mean, it's really story DLC isn't it if you break it down to modern terms? Even if you don't market it as such, say by selling each campaign as standalones at a lower price, that's how it would likely be perceived. So typically without a major update/new release, interest eventually declines. See also currently Solasta, which has had two fairly beefy story DLC (including features and art assets not at all in the base game), both of which not near as popular as the main release. So it's usually really just players who want more of the same experience coming back. Personally, I like the idea. If you're invested in a game, you want more. Still eventually, it's not commercially sustainable anymore to further support.

Tell me about it.

On my second try I just twin casted haste on my Monk (no tavern brawler cheese even, straight up dex shadow monk) and Warlock(lol) who had blunt weapons, put up faerie fire on the golem, and proceeded to kill it in 2 rounds right in front of that shaft it crawled out of. Swords bard with defensive flourish and mirror image tanked that 1 hit in between the two rounds. Monk even managed to trip it with reverberation build up. Yeah, my party was lvl 7, but still (tactician, i imagine it's a complete joke on balanced)

Yeah, the enemies are "cool n shit" but make no sense from canon dnd perspective. Act 2 caliber of threats should have been the maximum we are dealing with, and "apostle of myrkul" type of boss should've been the "endgame boss". You're right, if Larian used "raw" rules, we would never finish Act 1 even, the party would've been wrecked, game over.

I don't feel this strongly about it, though I do think it's obvious they aren't the biggest fans of 5e (at least) and prefer working with their own settings, rather than established ones like the Forgotten Realms.

Either way, I admittedly don't want Larian to make any more D&D games. Between DOS2 and now BG3, it's obvious they struggle with telling a fully consistent story at the best of times, and especially flop hard in Act 3 both writing-wise and performance-wise. Gameplay can sometimes be fun, but even then, there are a ton of rather irritating "Larianisms" which end up becoming death by a thousand cuts for me. Individually annoying but ignorable, yet they build up so much and are so often that it all becomes just a mess for me by the end.

I'd rather BG4 be given to a company that, while not perfect nor tend to release non-buggy games from the offset, seem to actually draw from and respect cRPG roots enough to make some of the most old-school feeling modernized cRPGs I've played to date: Owlcat Studios.

Obsidian-- or whatever they call themselves now, essentially the Pillars of Eternity team --would also be a good choice.

Larian does what they do relatively well, but they seem to (mostly) work best when on their own IP. I'd prefer if WotC gave D&D rights to other companies, if they want to make cRPGs. If they want more NWN2-style "visual" cRPGs, maybe hit up the Solasta devs. Solasta's rough around the edges, but they clearly also love ttrpgs and I think could really make a stand-out game if given enough time and funds for it.

I think the discussion who should do a BG4 next is just for fun .. in particular if studios are involved that don't have anywhere close to Larian's budgets and team sizes. Which means, almost all of them. Smaller scale D&D games by other studios? Yes. BG4? No. I can't see Wizards scaling back after this now that they've seen that their IP can support AAA teams and production values (and benefit of it by attracting crowds that otherwise had never touched a party-based tactical combat experience based on a tabletop ruleset).


And yet:


If Tactical Adventures were given the budget to expand their writing team: Between Olwcat and Tactical Adventures (Solasta), I'd personally prefer Tactical Adventures. The amount of pure trash and filler combat in Owlcat games is insane (they even doubled down on this with Wrath, as the RPGCodex review also rightfully points out.)

Meanwhile, Solasta has dedicated dungeon areas that sometimes have but a fistful of fights. And that despite the game being sold on its tactical combat system primarily. Now I like the Pathfinder games (even though I still haven't finished WOTR in spite of owning it since its release over two years ago). But even compared to more combat centered Infinity Engine games (like IWD), their amount of combat is excessive. If they would collect long-term stats, like PoE does (number of enemies slain, etc.) I'm confident it would be through the roof by the end of each game. It's not purely the amount of course. But the paste&copy repetitive nature of it (in spite of unique scenarios sprinkled in here and there). Granted, the Pathfinder ruleset and its implementation with "buff orgies" prior to fights add to that repetitiveness (D&D5e doesn't have this, as buffs require "concentration"). Owlcat's approach to design seems to be quanitity over quality in general. Just so long as they can advertise their games as the longest CRPGs ever created, they're game.

To be fair, the original Baldur's Gates were more combat centric than BG3 is. Whenever somebody brings up BG2 again, they mainly think the beginning of the game, where you're relatively free to chose between a buquet of quests. But the entire middle section is one linear dungeon crawl full of combat likewise (which IWD1 did better). And neither Baldur's Gate had as many options around direct confrontation as Larian's rendition. Heck, on top of the interactive environment providing added options, even a low int Barbarian is given opportunity to just intimidate foes out of combat fairly regularly.

But still...

I usually adjust the difficulty settings for minimum amount of mobs, and/or have godmode on when I play. I'm looking at things purely from a writing, character, and design perspective rather than entirely gameplay or encounter design - as these are primarily what I play cRPGs for, rather than their combat systems (though I do prefer when they're well-done or balanced properly, obviously!)

Though to be fair to Wrath of the Righteous, I feel it's the type of story where a ton of combat encounters makes the most sense! You're at the Worldwound, demons are pouring out all over the place, and it just gets worse the closer you draw to it. If we only had a handful of fights or encounters with them, it'd feel a bit dissonant from the story being told, imo.

Regardless, I definitely agree that Solasta devs deserve a lot more attention and praise than they get for what they managed with a Kickstarter. Give them more time and more money? I think they could deliver some genuine gold for the cRPG/ttrpg game genre. My friends and I have genuinely adored Solasta, despite its own issues here and there - and the story caught us off guard with how enjoyable it is, beneath all the roughness and the [Aliens guy with "sorraks".png] memery.

There are just a lot of better companies to pick from when it comes to cRPGs, imo, and I'd prefer if WotC focused on them over Larian. Let Larian do its own thing, they seem to prefer that.

I agree (and sorry for the brief OT), but: it's still excessive. I mean there's barely a settlement in this game without combat, even. A besieged Drezen full of demons makes sense and you would definitely want that in such a scenario. However, it seems "more combat!" is all Owlcat can think of when they think "more content". Well, that and puzzles (their puzzle design seems fairly controversial, to say the least though). I think I'll do the same as you if I get back to WOTR... at least adjusting the setting that adjusts enemy numbers. The final chapter of Kingmaker was just one massive slog I pulled through on higher ("normal") settings regardless. The maps were basically filled with the exact same super mob you needed the same buffs for before fighting them. That wasn't as much of a challenge but busywork.

My favourite Kingmaker chapter by far is the one where you got to do a little research and detective work, as a disease was spreading and you had to track down its source by traveling and enquiring folk. In retrospective, it's no wonder why. It broke all the monotonous combat and mixed things up a bit -- if only for a chapter.

I'm just here to say I'd love a BG4. I've never played any of the other Larian games, but I've thoroughly enjoyed how there are so many decisions to make that can make for a dramatically different game each time. Personally, I'd either like the decisions from BG3 to be a part of a BG4 or at the very least, see some expansions for BG3 and then let BG4 stand alone. I think any technical things I would like to see would be simply cosmetic in terms of character creation, whether that be more hairstyles or piercing options. Also, to be able to end a romantic relationship with one companion and be able to start up a new relationship with another companion.

My drink almost went outa my nose.

owlcat has got to be the most toxic, scammy developer there is. They have Superbad rep among russian-speaking community for extremely toxic backlashes against youtubers/bloggers who dare to criticise their “games” and point out countless bugs and failures. Their games are actually alpha versions on release and after years of patches they achieved “current” bg3-level of stability. Both kingmaker and wotr had 50% of items and 25% of rules/abilities/mechanics straight up not working as intended. Console versions of both are literally unplayable until now. Among Russian community there’s a joke that owlcat does not have bug testing team, only bug development team.

They’re hiring mostly talented voice actors and their music is nice, but that’s it. After years of patches, the actual pathfinder system is playable, but what about story, writing, needles tedious bugged flak like “kingdom management” etc? Only a hardcore dnd fan can stomach a playthrough of their pathfinder games.

owlcat needs to go.


Let’s just wait for their latest bugfest that is coming in december and compare to BG3 on release

IIRC, didn't Larian have to buy the Baldur's Gate License? I guess the plan was (or is, I guess) to recreate a real life DnD campaign using BG3 as name recognition and then replace/ignore mechanics/lore they don't care about or like.
I mean, they seemingly like the concept of DnD from DOS2's GM mode + Act 1 and it is probably the reason why the game is so popular, so it worked out in the end.

Atleast the 3 other devs actually like the setting and mechanics of the games they make.
Out of them tho, Tactical Adventures seem to be the only ones that care about DnD, and they have the engine/infrastucture avaliable to make more DnD games. All they'd "need" is some writers, the official* stamp from WOTC and then either make fully original DnD games or, like what Owlcat did, use Adventure modules as a base.

*On that note, I find it strange that WOTC is so unsupportive/restrictive of official games and Solasta seems to be the game to show off DnD 5e's mechanics (At least from someone who hasn't touched DnD)
Whereas BG3, I've heard from some, seems to have pushed people to play Pf2e instead because they find it much more similar.

I have to agree, I really like Tactical Adventures and hope they keep going.

I agree about Tactical Adventures. Solasta is amazing in what it does, a mini studio like Tactical Adventures should be proud and also noticed by big money. Thoroughly enjoyed it on PC, I regret not having it on PS5.

WOTC needs to give them license and pump some writer, designer and artworks talent in that studio and they will have a top notch DnD RPG dev.

Exactly. High level adventures are more exciting.

Well i wish they Just Finish the Game First Before Thinking on the Next One..XD

Just for the record, I hated Mask of the Betrayer with a passion and have no idea what would be good about that module.

I already have a stressful job, I dont need a stressful game as well.

Well, you just missed one of the best RPGs out there which is superior to BG3 in many areas because someone told you that it has strict time pressure (which it has only in the evil path).

Alone the fact that it has a convincing story that is not "good-evil save the world" one makes it much better than most RPGs, including BG3.

At least when you compare their last game to BG3 it has superior story, writing, companions, ect.
Which is imo much more important for RPGs than animations and bear sex.