Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback My thoughts on people's thoughts so far

tl;dr:
Larian, please take feedback with a grain of salt and follow your guts (as I'm sure you do anyway). I don't have anything especially constructive to add, just that I've seen a lot of negativity, and it sometimes seems directed towards the wrong things.

I'm about 18 hours into the game so far. There are some issues obviously but overall I'm loving it. It's scratching an itch for me that hasn't been scratched since DA:O (I'm a big DOSII fan but love it in a different way somehow).
I know this is all coming from a place of passion, but based on the feedback from EA players I've seen so far, I'm a bit worried the game may be negatively effected by the following:

-OG Baldur's Gate nostalgia-boys
-5e purists
-People who are finding it too difficult and blame various game mechanics (there will presumably be easier difficulties they can play on)
-People who think the current companions are going to be the only ones (and don't know they're the more evil leaning characters)

For instance, there's a lot of rage going on about surfaces. I'm not saying they shouldn't be changed at all, but I think the main problems people are having with them are a) companions walking through them out of combat (but this is just a pathfinding issue. DOSII companions never walk on surfaces and it's not a problem) and b) some people are finding combat too hard because of them.
Personally I like surfaces (again I'm not against tweaks and changes to make them work better). I think one of the best things about tabletop RPGs is the creativity you can use, based on the 'computer' being human. You obviously can't do that with a video game, so I think you need systems like surfaces, movable objects, shoving etc to give the players something to be creative with. Otherwise it's just click on enemy to hurt.

In terms of difficulty, I obviously don't have a problem with people having trouble. I do think, though, that people are blaming the game a bit much (a pretty large number of the negative Steam reviews seem to mention in some roundabout way that they were dying too much). I don't consider myself especially good at this kind of game but even trying out a bunch of fairly unoptimal party comps (ie two wizards, a rogue, and a ranger) I so far haven't had much trouble with the combats (I've had my squad wiped maybe once or twice?).

Also when the first trailers came out, everyone was complaining it wasn't dark enough and now people are mad that the companions are too evil?

Don't even get me started about the guy on the Steam forums telling people not to buy the game because it's too 'SJW' lol.

Honestly I think a lot of these complaints do stem from actual issues, but some people aren't sure what the problem is and blame it on something they expected not to like before they started playing.
It's also possible that I've misinterpreted what a lot of those people are trying to say and in reality it is I who is the fool.

Keep up the good work, Larian. I love DOSII and I'm so excited about BGIII and your efforts to bring quality RPGs back to the world.

I agree that it is going to be a struggle to please either/both of Baldur's Gate hardcore fans; my bestie played it, but his opinion is that it's been so long that he is not wedded to the need to have tons of direct continuity.

On the other hand, I just went online and listened to a nicely detailed youtube video of the story of BG1 & 2, and at least from what I've seen there isn't much direct continuity, which if I were a stalwart BG fan, I would miss.

It's tough following a good game...for that matter I'm a die-hard TESIII fan (Morrowind), my husband is a Skyrim (TES IV) fan, and we both started ESO looking for "TES with friends". To some extent it was a bit of a disappointment, but partly that's due to the inherent limitations of following a single player (not even co-op) with a MMORPG.

For my own thoughts:

-Need more options in character creation (and especially the male faces - my word)
-The "moving background" in the beginning of the game is somewhat nauseating to look at
-the background music of character creation gets really shrill and annoying after a while
-a "hide helmet" option is needed
-more in game tutorials are needed (the "map" is really annoying and how do I keep "north" on the map facing 'up') - jeez.
-Love the variety of races
-Glad that I can unlock eye color to give my drow red eyes, which SHOULD be a standard option

Its just people giving suggestions as this game is in its Early Access and much can still be changed. While I have complained about a few things, all the critics that are speaking up are trying to help improve the game for when full release comes out. Right now I honestly think they have another game of the Year candidate once bugs are worked out and they get the create your own content going thing.

I mean the dnd community is huge and I can only imagine all of the great campaigns that will come out if that feature is launched. Its what made Neverwinter so great.

Most people havent been coming on the forums, just people that want to help and trolls. Avoid the trolls like your a level 2 with no fire or acid and youll enjoy the forums and the comments more!

You do realize that Larian hasn't said anything one way or the other about there being other companions, right? At least, not as far as I can find. And considering in their last game (DOS2) the only companions were the Origin characters, it's pretty safe to assume that it's the same here, especially since Larian has said that after Act 1 we're stuck with whatever companions we chose, just like in DOS2. Any other people I come across that happen to have an option to ask them to join my party (a certain tiefling ranger I helped) refuse to do so, not because my party is full but simply because they don't want to.

I agree that some of the reviews and complaints, especially on the steam discussions, can be just plain stupid. But those people are typically just trolls, anyone shouting about the SJW political agenda in BG3 is pretty obviously either a troll, or needs some heavy medication. As for the 5e purists, I think it's less about making it exactly like 5e, and more about not messing with what already works. For instance, one of my biggest gripes so far is the way they messed with the cantrips. Firebolt in 5e does 1d10 damage, which is pretty decent damage for a cantrip you can use all you like without worry of spell slots. But for some weird reason Larian decided to drop that to 1d6 damage and have it apply burn, which would be fine [i][if/i] the burn mechanics in this didn't apply burn right away, then apply it again at the start of the burned characters turn. Plus, it also creates a fire surface which causes more damage when they move from it.

So basically, they made firebolt OP for no reason. It also applies burn to enemies even when the attack misses them. The big problem with all the surfaces in BG3 though is that, while they worked out great in DOS2, the way D&D 5E works doesn't allow for nearly as many surfaces as the game creates. In DOS2 if there were tons of fire surfaces, it was no problem cause you could just use a spell like Rain or whatever to put it out, then you just waited for a small cooldown period and did it again as many times as needed. But in BG3, you can't do that because of spell slots. So when there is a massive area of fire and you don't have enough spell slots to use Create Water or whatever, you're just stuck with tons of fire on the ground.

This game is certainly fun, and even a good game, but it is not a good D&D game. It's a great Divinity game, but that's not what I was lead to believe I would be buying. I was marketed a D&D game, and ended up with another Divinity game. Taking some liberties with the rules is fine and all, but when you mess around with so many of them it's suddenly not D&D 5E anymore, and it's just compounded by the fact that lots of the tweaks they made either made things OP, useless, or just plain frustrating. Such as enemies, they didn't bother using the enemy stat blocks from the Monster Manual, which would be okay if they were at least well balanced. But gnolls get 3 attacks per turn, which is insane and also causes enough damage to down most of my characters in one turn.

As some people have said, BG3 currently feels like it's being run by the a DM who [i][wants/i] us to fail the game. Making 3 or 4 rolls in a row on dialogue is redundant and frustrating, because if you roll a success and are then expected to do it 2 more times it feels malicious. If the RNG decides to abandon you partway through your rolling, you fail. It should be a single roll, you either succeed or you don't, none of this "well I see you succeeded on your first roll...so do it again. In fact, do it two more times." BS. If you were playing a game of D&D and your DM made you roll the same thing 3 times in a row to get one outcome, and if you didn't roll high enough for a single one of them then you failed, a fight would happen because it's pretty obvious the DM is not there to make a fun, enjoyable game for you but instead to just frustrate and annoy you.

TL;DR tweaking the rules a bit is fine, but rewriting most of them (and badly at that) and then trying to sell it as a D&D game is not.

This is my message as well, after 30-40 hours including a full playthrough and a lot of shorter test runs.

I do wish Larian didn't deviate from 5E rules without a good reason. For example, I'm fine with some amount of elemental/surface effects as it brings variety to combat. I still want the cantrips to follow pen&paper rules more closely. If you throw an oil bottle and then shoot at the puddle with Fire Bolt, sure, it should ignite and create a flaming surface. But a cantrip making stone floors burn for a couple of rounds, nope to that. Just from a pure balancing point of view, since that makes cantrips equal to level 1-2 spells (maybe smaller in area, but endlessly spammable and comarable in damage).

Okay, that was the one thing I wanted to point out. But in general, I've really liked what I've seen in this early access. It's very promising that after completing Chapter 1, I started another character(s) and kept discovering new secrets, new places, new enemies, new ways to approach and solve things.

I had heard that each writer was going to be writing a character, and that there were 12 or 13 writers in total? I don't remember where I first saw that but I've seen it referenced by various people online. I could be wrong though but I hope it's the case.

I would love if that's the case, cause if we got a character for every class I would be freaking ecstatic! I'm not a huge fan of some of the current companions (Lae'zel mainly lol) and don't want to take Wyll because my PC is a Warlock so we'd have no real tank, so finding a Paladin character down the road would be fantastic.

I'm a wizard but I've got Gale with me anyway cause I like him lol.

Yeah, Gale is pretty much the only companion I actually like, he's a hard guy to dislike cause he's just a happy go lucky wizard who likes to talk. Plus, since him and Wyll are the only ones who seem to actually be rather nice to you so far, it's pretty hard to turn him away. Literally the only reason I don't have Wyll is because I have Gale, and I keep Shadowheart around since she's at least somewhat better than Lae'zel plus I need her prayer or healing sometimes lol.

As I said in the other post (joking) Larian should just change the name of the game so people will stop complaining that "it is not like Baldurs Gate".
Yeah it is not like it, so what? Get over it, the game is good. I will go futher and say that it is a better implementation of the D&D ruleset compared to the old RtwP BG saga.

Quick disclosure: I don't care if the game is faithful to 5e or not, all I care about is that the adaptation makes for a fun computer game. Fun is of course subjective, I care more about tactical combat than roleplaying for example, so they are never going to be able to please everyone.

I personally like surfaces, they add an additional tactical layer to combat, with 1 caveat. A surface must be as easy (or easier) to remove than it is to apply. The problem in DOS: 2 with necrofire etc, was that it was very easy for enemies to apply surfaces (in the case of oozes, they did it passively as a "free action" just by moving around), but it took at minimum 2 spells to remove many of them. That meant that it was not economical to remove them and you were better off just "living with them being there" then actually trying to get rid of them.

I have a feeling Shadowheart can be persuaded away from her worship of Shar at some point, a lot of what she offers sounds like dogmatic propaganda. Its not just in her name, but also in some of the things she responds to with approval. I think her struggle is between the shadow of Shar and her own very human heart. So I keep her around as well. And Wyll, and Lez, who in spite of what else can be said about her is absolutely straight forward about everything she thinks. I can deal with anyone so long as they are honest. And she isn't half bad with a heavy cross bow, since 90% of my combat encounters have involved raining death from unassailable heights.

I hadn't thought of this but I think you're right. Like there was a room full of poison which I wanted to get past. I did what I'd do in Divinity, which is blast it with fire to get rid of it, but that had no effect. I assume they got rid of reactions like that because it would be too extreme for the more subtle nature of these rules, but in a way by being half way in between it actually makes it less manageable.

Be at ease. The one thing that Larian excels in is early access and handling feedback. I have faith in that they will deliver.

That's good to hear! I didn't find out about DOSII until after it was released so I didn't experience the EA back then. I do know they're professionals though and good at what they do so I'm sure you're right and we're in good hands!

While I agree in general, I have a bit of problem with this...

...yea, well, when you call a game Buldur's Gate 3, that's the people you'll get too, and honestly, I would also listen to them, and not slapping a vaguely negative label on them and dismissing their imput. That's exactly the behavior people on the Steam forums are also fond of.

+1

I agree. It's going to be an amazing game and they are adapting the 5e rules very good. The old BG games also had to change things to make it work as a video game. Saying all that, this game has nothing to do with Baldur's Gate as a series, at list it shouldn't be called BG3, maybe BG and a title or something like that, Baldur's Gate: Darkness of the Absolute, or some such, like the old Dark Alliance games, but it is surely not the third chapter of the series.

You can't make a Batman movie, call it Superman 3, and then say, "yeah it is not like it, so what? Get over it, the movie is good". The fact that it's good (and it truly is), doesn't make it a Baldur's Gate game. It just make it a good game.

I don't have any problem with the original fans. I'm just sick of seeing a thousand things a day about how they hate anything that's changed from the originals (obviously a minority). I only played a bit of BG1 back in the day. I think I was a bit young. I played a bunch of Neverwinter Nights (mostly the level editor lol). Personally I think you couldn't make a modern game like the original BGs and have it be as good but that's just personal (For instance Pillars of Eternity didn't really do it for me, which I think is a spiritual successor). I agree that maybe the problem is just the '3'. It's actually essentially a soft reboot, which (again personally) I think is a good thing.

Frankly, I don't see that... yes, I am critical of what the game is right now, and I never really liked the Divinity games that much, but I DO see some Baldur's Gate ideas in there already. I think the name could very well fit the game in few months time, if Larian can get over themselves and tone their particular brand of crazy a bit down, ground the game a bit more in the world and IP, and bring the presentation closer to what the BG games had.

A new Bladur's Gate game doesn't have to be an infinity engine 2.0 affair like the POE series was, or a clunky Pathfinder slog like Kingmaker... it can be more snappy and modern, while still keeping the BG look, feel and heart.