Larian Banner: Baldur's Gate Patch 9
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Joined: Nov 2023
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
Joined: Nov 2023
Hi guys.

I know this kind of thread usually being seen as some urban madmen's rant, and I always avoid writing anything on developers' forums/social media. But in this case, I feel so sad, partially shattered, and even double-crossed that I can't remain silent. And I hope some kind of an answer from the dev team can be expected. At least to make a fan better understand why it was done in the way it was. Because some decisions about BG3 I just can't understand and/or accept. Even being who I am, a game developer with about 20 years of experience.

Emotional as it may be, I'll copy my post from the Steam forum because re-writing all this would take quite some time, and wouldn't change anything functionally important I want to say or ask.

Thank you for reading.
---


I sincerely hope Larian's community managers check out this board from time to time, as I'd really like to be heard. Maybe even replied to and allowed a reply to a reply. - the only correction made to the original text, 'cause they can't but do it.

I have been a fan of both the Baldur's Gate series and Larian Studios' works since both their introductions. Baldur's Gate 1? Been there, done that. Baldur's Gate 2? Been there a few times. Throne of Bhaal? But of course. Divine Divinity? Yep, naturally, even though diabloids are mostly not my things. Beyond Divinity? Sure, but just once. Ego Draconis? Absolutely, although I never completed the addon. Dragon Commander? Terrible strategic mode, but what great characters it has! Original Sin 1 and 2? By all means, a few times.

Seemed like Baldur's Gate 3 would be a perfect game for me.

Well...
Let me put it this way: BG3 is a sensational game in general (heck, Larian Studios at their best), but as an attempt to be a part of the glorious Baldur's Gate series it's abhorrent. Or rather it's not Baldur's Gate at all, despite the Wizards' license and the official name.

After completing it and seeing most of the "good" campaign, having spent 291 hours on one playthrough, and "vacuum-cleaning" all the locations and quests I could find, I made a sad but honest conclusion and a vow to myself: I will not buy nor even get for free any future games developed by Larian based on any other company's IP or anything created by any other entity. Divinity and Larian's other own universes - sure, give me a few any day. But not anyone else’s.
Bear with me, I'll try to explain such a reaction. Or don't bear with me, as massive spoilers will be featured in the further text.


First, foremost, and in broad-brush terms: Larian's narrative designers are known for their love for creating unexpected plot and lore twists in their games. Which is fine and cool when you're working on your own universe. But when the subject is a decades-old world with its lore basically set in stone, you can't have and use such creative freedom as they did in BG3, ruining, twisting, and turning Forgotten Realms' lore inside out. Such humongous changes and presumptions done to/over the events of BG1 and BG2 and the basic FR canon are... well, heretical. In my eyes, as well as those of my friends who are no less fans of BG1 and 2 as I am, from a certain point the game stops being an official product supported by Wizards and becomes a fanfic. And from an even further point in the game's plot, it becomes not just a fanfic but something like Repercussions of Evil, if you can remember this masterpiece.

Now, to the details.
Mind you, I'm typing all this without any notes made during my playthrough, so some points and things may escape this text. But I'll try to remember the main parts of what made my mind explode.

- No respect for the events of Baldur's Gate 2 and Throne of Bhaal at all. It's like they never happened.
- Sarevok... level 12 evil dude sitting somewhere under the city? The Sarevok who basically helped the Bhaalspawn aka Gorion's Ward to conquer the Throne of Bhaal? The epic demi-god of level 40, give or take, who could have turned to the good alignment (although this is not necessarily true)? What happened? Who is that fck in the Undercity? Is it a cosplayer wanting to recreate the favorite villain or an evil-evil twin? WTF has happened??!!?
- The Helm of Balduran lying under the city in the secret dragon's lair where no one has been for like centuries? What kind of time paradox happened to it? I clearly remember my Bhallspawn wearing it in BG1 and BG2. Heck, one of the best helmets in the original duology. So, was my 'Spawn wearing a cheap Chinese fake of it?
- The Flail of Ages... Oh, you can't imagine the degree of profanity of the words I said when I saw what kind of piece of shit you turned the best flail and one of the best weapons in BG2 into. I cried, and tears were running on my face. How could you??!!!! THE Flail of Ages, THE weapon of victory, THE best flail in all of D&D. What next, I wonder? A Jedi sword made of rusty metal doing 1d4-2 damage?
- The characters of previous games. Volo is fine, sure, he's comic relief and so on. Okay. But what did you do to...
- ...Jaheira and Minsc? Why do they bear no resemblance to themselves? And I don't mean their appearance, although that also sucks and I wouldn't recognize them should their names not have been written on them. But what happened to their characters? What happened to the strong-minded fighter-druid who endured the loss of her husband and hardened her character while remaining humane? Where's the always-yelling Rashemen dude whose weapon of choice was Lilarcor? Minsc and Lilarcor, best pair ever! Why is he so... OMG, NOT MINSC? And was it that hard to add Boo's iconic "Squeak!" sound into the game?!
- ...Viconia. Oh, don't get me started. If Minsc and Jaheira are just written by someone(s) who couldn't see what or who the original characters are, Viconia's character was so mercilessly destroyed and turned inside out that the game almost lost me at the moment of her reveal. She. Never. Was. That. Cheap. Brainless. Uncompromising. Puny. Sadist. That. You. Depicted. Her. As. And Shar never was her mistress whom Viconia obeyed thoughtlessly. Whoever wrote her narrative part missed everything about the character except for "Oh, she's a drow Shar-worshipper and she's evil". Fck this kind of approach to the characters we have known for more than two decades! I have real friends whom I have known for less time. Eat Viconia's, Jaheira's, and Minsc's narrative parts. Cut them from the game. It's a clear F- for the character recreation attempt. Boo hates you!
- Also, the same question as about Sarevok. So these guys who stood shoulder to shoulder with the Bhaalspawn at the Throne of Bhaal, the level 40-ish demigod EPIC heroes, they are now what - level 8 to 12 nobodies? WTF?????
- Specifically that "Yes, we were friends for some time, but then foes again!" phrase... Just burn that napkin where it was written.
- Robocops walking the streets of Baldur's Gate... oooookay, I guess. Maybe. On the very verge of something allowable. Like, okay, a gondian genius, one per century, could have invented those. But to produce them industrially in such quantities? Like, we're having an industrial revolution on Toril? Seriously?
- The underwater base. That's beyond wild. It basically breaks the whole world. If we have this kind of tech, as well as those Steel Watchers, why are we still waging wars with swords and spears? Explain, please.
- The Emperor is Balduran? Fck me. No. No. No. No. No. You can't just take Ed Greenwood's or anyone else's work and pervert it to such degrees. Never ever was anything like that said in the Forgotten Realms lore. Which your narrative designers have basically raped rectally with a mop turned sideways. At the moment of this "reveal" I decided that I'd finish the game only because I'd already spent almost three hundred hours in it.
My point being? Respect the lore and the events of the games before the one you make. You don't make the game for yourself, you make it for us, the players. And some of us happen to know the series pretty well.

But that's just the part about the lore and the previous games' plots. There are also some things that make BG3 a Divinity game, not a Baldur's Gate one. Check this out:
- Quantity of companions. Technically, there's ten of them. De facto, you can't have more than nine in a single playthrough because Minthara either won't join you or will force you to lose a few other companions. So let's agree on nine at max. And that's the game's maximum, with only six being accessible from the beginning and through more than a half of the game. That's opposed to twenty five (or twenty three, as I'm not sure how to count Xzar and Montaron) in original Baldur's Gate 1 and seventeen in original Baldur's Gate 2. Depending on how you count, BG3 offers two to four times fewer companions than the first two games. And every companion is a character, a personal quest or three, a set of emotions formed towards them, a way of making your next playthrough even more different than the previous ones. Lots of possible companions, some of which you could simply not meet in one playthrough, was a series trademark of a sort. And let me add, lots of non-empty companions but people with character, motivation, attitude, relationships towards each other and so on. Maybe not so much in BG1, but definitely in BG2.
- Fat dudes! There's no fat dudes in BG3, and fat dudes were in both previous games... Damn, fat dudes were almost a trademark as well, like the innkeepers' phrase about an elven arse... which is not in BG3 either. Some elven arses indeed are, but not the trademark voice line. Seriously?
- The main character's importance. As in, who the fck are they? They're a nobody, that's who! While even at the very start of Baldur's Gate 1, basically since that cutscene where Sarevok kills Gorion, a player can feel that there is something important about them. And that feeling of importance grows and grows until not so long later when you learn that you in fact are a Bhaalspawn and have a destiny. You are a majorly important figure. And also you have a lot of enemies. And it all clicks into place. So... who are you in BG3? Nobody. Just a dude/chick with a worm in their eye. Which definitely sucks, but hardly a motivation for saving or ruining the world. Maybe for running to a good eye surgeon, but that's kinda it. And it continues throughout the whole game! The main character is a nobody who's just drifting with the stream. Epic fantasy, you say? Baldur's Gate, you say? Yeah, epic my ass.
- The main character's motivation. See above, looks like none or so unimportant that it's nowhere near BG1 and BG2. At the very least, at the very beginning of BG1, you already had an enemy. A real enemy with a face and so at fault before you that there's no questions to be asked about why are you trying to find him. In BG3? Like, no. Even the so-called main villains are so not of the same caliber AND so not guilty enough before you like Sarevok or Irenicus that they feel like victims more than nemeses. Except maybe for Orin because she's plainly evil.


And then there's some general things that probably could have been changed but it feels like no one thought they should be. Like, why bother if it's fine like it is? Or is it?
- The general graphic design. Why do I feel like I'm playing Divinity: Original Sin: Next or something like that? Seriously, it just screams "Divinity! I am Divinity!"
- The soundtrack. Like the game itself, it's a great soundtrack. But as a soundtrack for a part of Baldur's Gate series it sucks. Because it feels like it was made for DOS2. Heck, there are a few tracks that literally made me think, feel, and realize that I'm playing DOS2 again. I had to forcefully bring my mind back and convince myself that it's Faerun, it's Forgotten Realms, it's Baldur's Gate. Which in fact it's not, but I tried to persuade myself.


Apologies for being a little over the top at the time of writing the original post, which I wrote immediately after I finished the game.

A point about seemingly half-done epilogue scenes probably should have been added, but it seems a lot of people already have complained about them.

Of course, the income generated by a game is a good way of estimating if a game is good or not. And from this perspective, BG3 is a fabulous one. Besides, as a game in general, as just a game, it is. Don't get me wrong, I liked it. Except for those things listed above, except for its degree of respect towards its legacy. And this saddens me very much because, unlike DOS2 and DOS1, BG3 is hardly a game I'll return to once or a few times more. To BG1 and 2, I will.

Joined: Jun 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jun 2020
If it is any consolation, you are by far and wide not the only person who feels this way or similar. Many who played through the Ea and many since, have generated a great amount of thoughts and opinions along similar lines. It is a small consolation, I imagine, since the commercial success of the game likely means that any such concerns will continue to fall largely on deaf ears. I would like to post something positive and supportive, or hopeful, but honestly, what would I say? I have traditionally encouraged everyone who voices an opinion of this nature to make sure they send it to Larian directly through their formal feedback form (Here) - because every voice matters. I say it again now; do send them your feelings and experiences, because even if the ship is long sailed, maybe it will help make a difference next time.

Joined: Sep 2022
Location: Athkatla
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Sep 2022
Location: Athkatla
Life goes on. RPG gaming goes on. BG3 is a beautifully made game for the newer gaming generation.

Having played through BG1 and BG2 as a teen, It is incredibly annoying that this game was named BG3, but what can you do?? Thats how things work now with old IPs. The name is just salad dressing.

BG3 will come and go. BG2 I believe we still be played LONG after the BG3 hype is over. You can MOD in so much more content than the cinematic heavy/locked BG3.
Testament on how timeless that game was. Too bad Larian could not give it more respect... but they did their best for a 2023 "older style" RPG game.

And I completely agree that I hope Larian do their own thing for the next game. I hate the way they treated the IP. The best description I could give is the game feels its DOS2 cosplaying AS the Baldur's Gate world in a D&D theme park. It feels way off and weird. Most people loved it. think But I blame that on over a decade on SHIT rpg games (with notable exceptions...) and the shift to Action Rpg.

Last edited by Count Turnipsome; 05/11/23 09:25 AM.

It just reminded me of the bowl of goat's milk that old Winthrop used to put outside his door every evening for the dust demons. He said the dust demons could never resist goat's milk, and that they would always drink themselves into a stupor and then be too tired to enter his room..
Joined: Oct 2023
V
stranger
Offline
stranger
V
Joined: Oct 2023
Just in case you missed it, there is an existing thread that's pushed back a bit where people discuss this: This doesn't feel like a Baldur's Gate game (or D&D). The Story & Character discussion board also has some topics covering the handling of characters from the original games, I believe.

Also, I understand that what you copied was long and you didn't want to retype it but you may [Act 3 Spoilers]:
want to edit the language used to describe the Emperor's identity. I know that sort of colorful description is seen as fine on Steam but I'm not so sure it'll fly here.

Though, I don't disagree - it's one of my major gripes with the character and something I hope that is undone, but I'm not exactly counting on it.

In general, I think what Count Turnipsome said really sums it up well - "BG3 is a beautifully made game for the newer gaming generation." The era that BG3 was released in is quite different from that of BG1/2, and I think that a lot of the differences between the games is moreso a reflection of that than anything else. Not just cRPGs or gaming, but what's popular in general really seems to have shifted. I totally get not liking it and wanting to air grievances, and maybe even laying it at Larian's feet that they didn't "stay true to the originals" and opted to chase popular appeal.

I guess I've maybe just made peace with the fact that my preferences appear to have fallen into a minority - BG3 is very popular and complaints like these not so much. For example, as part of that shift in what's popular - super heroes and larger than life personalities and stories are very "in", which I think you can easily see within BG3. Personally, I love an RPG that isn't quite so fantastic, though I didn't exactly have any expectations that BG3 would be closer to such a preference given that it starts level 1 characters off on a spelljammer.

I'll also add to the sentiment that I'm a little confused why Larian seems to have gunned so hard to make *the* next Baldur's Gate game. I believe that if you look up past statements by Swen, it seems to maybe have been a goal of his, perhaps since the founding of Larian?, to one day be able to have the privilege of being the studio to stand on the shoulders of giants. But, it ultimately feels as though it was moreso chasing after the name than anything else. Having to work within the confines of an established IP appears to me to have limited Larian from what they wanted to do more than anything else, so I hope they take the money earned from BG3's popularity and have the room to "be themselves".

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Cormyr
Bard of Suzail
Offline
Bard of Suzail
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Cormyr
I think, to some extent people are getting to hung up on this. When a DM creates a Forgotten Realms campaign, because he does not follow the exact formula Ed Greenwood uses, does that mean it is not a Forgotten Realms campaign? If a DM uses the Underdark source material for the basis of his campaign but does not directly follow it, does that mean the campaign is really not in the Underdark?

BG3 is a new DM with a new version of DnD. While it does not feel like the original games, these two factors can actual explain that.

Joined: Jun 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jun 2020
Originally Posted by Zentu
When a DM creates a Forgotten Realms campaign, because he does not follow the exact formula Ed Greenwood uses, does that mean it is not a Forgotten Realms campaign? If a DM uses the Underdark source material for the basis of his campaign but does not directly follow it, does that mean the campaign is really not in the Underdark?

If that DM is being entrusted with the generational flagship representation in video game media of an entire franchise, to be that which conveys it to a global audience, and yet which shows such an extreme disregard, lack of respect for, and even overt disdain and mockery of the strongly established lore of the material they are being asked to represent, YES.

It's nice when simple questions have simple answers.

Joined: Nov 2023
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
Joined: Nov 2023
Originally Posted by Niara
If it is any consolation, you are by far and wide not the only person who feels this way or similar. Many who played through the Ea and many since, have generated a great amount of thoughts and opinions along similar lines. It is a small consolation, I imagine, since the commercial success of the game likely means that any such concerns will continue to fall largely on deaf ears. I would like to post something positive and supportive, or hopeful, but honestly, what would I say? I have traditionally encouraged everyone who voices an opinion of this nature to make sure they send it to Larian directly through their formal feedback form (Here) - because every voice matters. I say it again now; do send them your feelings and experiences, because even if the ship is long sailed, maybe it will help make a difference next time.

Heck, this is supportive and, in a way, positive. At the very least, it's a confirmation of me being not alone in these thoughts. Even if "they are many, we are few", it's good to be a part of a group. Thank you!
And I'll probably send it to them. I never knew they have been had that feedback form. Then again, I never had an account on this forum.

---
Originally Posted by Count Turnipsome
Life goes on. RPG gaming goes on. BG3 is a beautifully made game for the newer gaming generation.

Having played through BG1 and BG2 as a teen, It is incredibly annoying that this game was named BG3, but what can you do?? Thats how things work now with old IPs. The name is just salad dressing.

BG3 will come and go. BG2 I believe we still be played LONG after the BG3 hype is over. You can MOD in so much more content than the cinematic heavy/locked BG3.
Testament on how timeless that game was. Too bad Larian could not give it more respect... but they did their best for a 2023 "older style" RPG game.

And I completely agree that I hope Larian do their own thing for the next game. I hate the way they treated the IP. The best description I could give is the game feels its DOS2 cosplaying AS the Baldur's Gate world in a D&D theme park. It feels way off and weird. Most people loved it. think But I blame that on over a decade on SHIT rpg games (with notable exceptions...) and the shift to Action Rpg.

Oh, that's true about BG3 being a game made for the newer generation. I've no objections to this concept. In fact, I'm not sure I would, hypothetically, play a really old-school game these days. I kinda got used to the QoL improvements in games' UI/UX. Time goes on indeed, and there's nothing wrong with it. My point here is mostly about the narrative stuff. You know... "Han shot first" kind, just more obvious.
Not sure what to add, as I agree with the latter points.

---
Originally Posted by Vystria
Just in case you missed it, there is an existing thread that's pushed back a bit where people discuss this: This doesn't feel like a Baldur's Gate game (or D&D). The Story & Character discussion board also has some topics covering the handling of characters from the original games, I believe.

Also, I understand that what you copied was long and you didn't want to retype it but you may [Act 3 Spoilers]:
want to edit the language used to describe the Emperor's identity. I know that sort of colorful description is seen as fine on Steam but I'm not so sure it'll fly here.

Though, I don't disagree - it's one of my major gripes with the character and something I hope that is undone, but I'm not exactly counting on it.

In general, I think what Count Turnipsome said really sums it up well - "BG3 is a beautifully made game for the newer gaming generation." The era that BG3 was released in is quite different from that of BG1/2, and I think that a lot of the differences between the games is moreso a reflection of that than anything else. Not just cRPGs or gaming, but what's popular in general really seems to have shifted. I totally get not liking it and wanting to air grievances, and maybe even laying it at Larian's feet that they didn't "stay true to the originals" and opted to chase popular appeal.

I guess I've maybe just made peace with the fact that my preferences appear to have fallen into a minority - BG3 is very popular and complaints like these not so much. For example, as part of that shift in what's popular - super heroes and larger than life personalities and stories are very "in", which I think you can easily see within BG3. Personally, I love an RPG that isn't quite so fantastic, though I didn't exactly have any expectations that BG3 would be closer to such a preference given that it starts level 1 characters off on a spelljammer.

I'll also add to the sentiment that I'm a little confused why Larian seems to have gunned so hard to make *the* next Baldur's Gate game. I believe that if you look up past statements by Swen, it seems to maybe have been a goal of his, perhaps since the founding of Larian?, to one day be able to have the privilege of being the studio to stand on the shoulders of giants. But, it ultimately feels as though it was moreso chasing after the name than anything else. Having to work within the confines of an established IP appears to me to have limited Larian from what they wanted to do more than anything else, so I hope they take the money earned from BG3's popularity and have the room to "be themselves".

Oh. Yes, I did miss the threat you're talking about. I'm not entirely sure I could make any more valid input, though. At least, for now. I'm feeling kinda emptied after posting it here.

I see your point on that Act 3 thing and my "description" of it. Let's agree on that I'll make it a bit more softer a bit later.
As for the falling into a minority... Seems you're wiser than me, as I really, really want to be heard. At least to the extent of a reply or two. I realize it's a dumb wish, as who is Swen now and who am I, even if we belong to the same industry. But I still want to. Because there has to be a better explanation for this lore weirdness than "I felt this would be better". At least I hope there is.

Goals-wise... heck, you're probably right. But something went wrong. I mean, if you chase the license, the name, and the privilege of being the developer behind a sequel of a pillar of the genre, wouldn't you want to keep your new game close to the original(s) at least in its narrative parts? It's not like I'm saying they should have used Infinity Engine and made a real-time with pause RPG just like BG2 was. A certain company did almost that, and I have no doubts they would have made BG3 better if they had an opportunity. They hadn't. Should I have had a massive budget and was a famous game director, I would have done a better job. No, I'm not crazy, I'm about 20 years in game development, just in a position(s) that don't let one decide which games to make. But I still have a dream...

---
Originally Posted by Zentu
I think, to some extent people are getting to hung up on this. When a DM creates a Forgotten Realms campaign, because he does not follow the exact formula Ed Greenwood uses, does that mean it is not a Forgotten Realms campaign? If a DM uses the Underdark source material for the basis of his campaign but does not directly follow it, does that mean the campaign is really not in the Underdark?

BG3 is a new DM with a new version of DnD. While it does not feel like the original games, these two factors can actual explain that.

At some point, that hypothetical campaign stops being an FR one. There are limits to which assumptions and adjustments can be made. For instance, would it be a FR campaign if I, as a DM, introduced cyberpunk reality into the world? Or space opera ones? There are limits. It is a new DM's right to create a campaign in a world loosely based on Forgotten Realms, add some WW2 elements like tech and heroes there, and season it with some Plague Inc. features. But it won't be a Forgotten Realms campaign. So let's not call it like that, let's call it John's Universe or whatever.

---
Originally Posted by Niara
Originally Posted by Zentu
When a DM creates a Forgotten Realms campaign, because he does not follow the exact formula Ed Greenwood uses, does that mean it is not a Forgotten Realms campaign? If a DM uses the Underdark source material for the basis of his campaign but does not directly follow it, does that mean the campaign is really not in the Underdark?

If that DM is being entrusted with the generational flagship representation in video game media of an entire franchise, to be that which conveys it to a global audience, and yet which shows such an extreme disregard, lack of respect for, and even overt disdain and mockery of the strongly established lore of the material they are being asked to represent, YES.

It's nice when simple questions have simple answers.

But I like this reply even better than my own.

Joined: Dec 2019
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Dec 2019
It’s called artistic license.

I think this is the case and I eventually accepted it. As in, I accepted BG3 is a FR adventure in which you extend an arm and happen to bump into a Chosen of a deity and where previous BG heroes are just late cameos.

But that in a modern game with unprecedented depiction of many things D&D. First meeting with a band of gnolls? Brilliant. Githyanki vs. Mind Flayers? Sold! Also, unprecedented agency for players, let’s not forget where the focus has always been in development.

For reference, I avert my eyes when I see Dragonborns in FR. First thing first, this should have been an adventure set in the PAST.

Last edited by Wizbane; 06/11/23 05:04 AM.
Joined: Dec 2022
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Dec 2022
Philosophical question: What does it mean to be "Baldur's Gate"?


Councellor Florrick's favorite Warlock.

Back Black Geyser's DLC: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/grapeocean/black-geyser-dlc-tales-of-the-moon-cult (RTwP Isometric cRPG inspired by BG1).
Joined: Feb 2022
Location: UK
Volunteer Moderator
Offline
Volunteer Moderator
Joined: Feb 2022
Location: UK
Originally Posted by Dext. Paladin
Philosophical question: What does it mean to be "Baldur's Gate"?

I imagine it means different things to different people, which is one reason why people have such different opinions on this topic. Which is fine as long as they respect others’ rights to hold and express their own views, and don’t start dismissing those who disagree with them.

For the record (again, given this topic has come up so many times before), for me personally BG3 is totally a Baldur’s Gate game, and I’m speaking as someone who played and loved the originals when they first came out and many times since.


"You may call it 'nonsense' if you like, but I've heard nonsense, compared with which that would be as sensible as a dictionary!"
Joined: Dec 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Dec 2020
I had a long response written out and then I accidentally closed the window and all was gone.
So a bit shorter: I agree with Red Queen, it feels like a BG game for me.
I get your points and agree especially with the companions numbers and diversity. I like them well enough, but we basically have only elves/ humans, with two exceptions. I want my dwarven fighter, my halfling bard ( RIP Helia), my gnome artificer ( seriously, that class is so important for the story and Barcus should have been a companion, since the Iron Hand/Gondian plot is do important).
I don't have a problem with the underwater prison tbh, I think 5 e changed quite a bit about magical infused technology. I'm playing a gnome artificer in our current campaign and am surprised, what she can do at level 4.

I personally like Jaheira and Minsc in the game and think, they are well done. I don't have a strong opinion about the other two, since I didn't use them enough in the old games, but since there is a big thread in the Story & Character section of this forum about the handling of those two, there seem to be a lot of people agreeing with you. I would sayitbis strange that
Sarevok
isn't more powerful. And I would have liked an explanation, of what happened to him.
Has Bhaal forced him into service again? In that case, we should be able to help him, especially as good, resisting Durge. Has he changed his mind? What caused it?

Same with Viconia. She was mostly evil in my playthroughs, because I didn't use her a lot, but if she became neutral, what happened? If she was forced by Shar, which I wouldn't find implausible, why can't we help her, like we help Shadowheart?

The music, I really love, I'm a bit low-key obsessed with it. Yes, it is different from the old games, but I find it very fitting.

Edit: I do agree with you about the Emperor being
Balduran
and generally about a lot, how the Emperor was handled, like
why does he hit on us, especially,if we distrust him? Why can't we at least try to convince him to work with Orpheus instead of using him? And why can't Omeluum be the mindflayer we need, if we go down the Orpheus route?
I wasn't too happy about Ansur either. It was a sad story, but it kind of was pointless? It's as if the devs thought, they need more story for Wyll and put in the undead dragon.

Last edited by fylimar; 06/11/23 10:09 AM.

"We are all stories in the end. Just make it a good one."

Doctor Who
Joined: Sep 2023
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Sep 2023
I haven't played the previous games, but this one to me seems to lack any kind of identity. It's really fun, but it's trying to be so many things that it ends up being nothing in the end. But maybe it's just Act 3 exhaustion talking.

I'm torn about Barcus because it's very fun to keep running into him, but running around with him would be hilarious.

Joined: Dec 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by Niara
If it is any consolation, you are by far and wide not the only person who feels this way or similar. Many who played through the Ea and many since, have generated a great amount of thoughts and opinions along similar lines. It is a small consolation, I imagine, since the commercial success of the game likely means that any such concerns will continue to fall largely on deaf ears. I would like to post something positive and supportive, or hopeful, but honestly, what would I say? I have traditionally encouraged everyone who voices an opinion of this nature to make sure they send it to Larian directly through their formal feedback form (Here) - because every voice matters. I say it again now; do send them your feelings and experiences, because even if the ship is long sailed, maybe it will help make a difference next time.
Thanks for the link Niara. It reminded me, that I wanted to send a feedback ( especially regarding the small races and some of the stuff I mentioned here and in different parts of the forum).
While I like the game, I agree, that there are things, that need improvement and as long, as there are still patches coming out, I'll throw in my voice.


"We are all stories in the end. Just make it a good one."

Doctor Who
Joined: Aug 2023
M
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
M
Joined: Aug 2023
Some of this rant is legit, some not so much.
I kinda agree about how they handled the old characters, but I don't care about equipment, hell there was equipment that changed location and stats from bg 1 to 2 so it's not unheard of. And if you seriously had tears over the flail of ages.... go outside and see the sun it's just not a big deal at all and no adult should act like that.


Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5