Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General EA reviews are not a bad thing

They take into consideration that a game is in EA and judge it on that merit, just like the 20k+ user reviews on steam, or reviews on this forum even so where's the problem? Really, what's your problem? It was Larian's choice to put this incomplete game for sale, and at full price. They didn't have to. If anything though, they get a chance for a do-over between now and the game's release so it's better for them business wise.

Besdies, what about those weird sycophants who get too personally invested in a game and/or a studio? Obsessing over sales figures and press coverage and the like, and going around policing opinions. Do they get any blame for potentially ruining a game? Take Outer Worlds for example. Massive hype -post release even- as a response from a rabid, vindictive fanbase that felt personally slighted because another game studio did not live up to their expectations (Bethesda/Fallout Online). Meanwhile Outer Worlds was always painfully mediocre and it is all but forgotten now. Maybe some critisism could have helped the developers steer the development in a different way? Or even the recent first expansion, which is somehow worse that the base game?

Here's the kicker; it was ultimately the studio's choice to do what they wanted with the game, and we'll never really know how much feedback weighs into their decisions, but shutting down critisim couldn't possibly help, could it?

Don Quixote complex? Tilt at windmills much?

I liked Outer Worlds quite a lot - it was all that was promised, a medium budget RPG with shortish campaign, and more focus. It was fine! Very much like Tyranny, a jolly good run, but without depth of let’s say Pillars of Eternity or Fallout: New Vegas.

As to BG3. EA reviews are rather irrelevant. It seems a large amount of people bought into it anyway. And for the rest of us - 1.0 reviews will be far more important then what someone thought of a year old preview build.

I think EA's reviews are legitimate after all. It was a huge premiere, so many years after its predecessor. They had to cover it.

I liked Outer Worlds a lot. It was pretty much exactly the game I was expecting.

Not really. Just go in the comments under any negative EA review and see for yourself how frequently the point that EA reviews are bad and inappropriate is brought up. Or on reddit. Or in this forum.

Like this recent goofy thread about the game's "reputation" and all the hilariously defensive replies to it. You replied to it actually, but do look at some of the other replies.

https://forums.larian.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=727153

After my derogatory response, you could have ignored me or been a douche back and that probably would have been fair. Since you didn't choose either route, I feel I owe you a complete response.

My initial response was that I felt that your post was kind of out in the middle of nowhere.
"Really, what's your problem?" Who are you talking about?
"Besdies, what about those weird sycophants who get too personally invested in a game and/or a studio?" At 410 hours played, am I a sycophant?
"shutting down critisim couldn't possibly help" Who is trying to shut it down?
So without referencing any people, posts, or reviews - your post seemed to me like you were lashing out at some invisible enemy, and rather than ask you to explain, I took the dick route of comparing you to Don Quixote tilting at windmills.

Now that you have given me an example. You are right I did participate in the thread early on and haven't since because the thread is irrelevant to me.
1) Larian chose the EA route. As such it's fair game for anyone to review their product.
2) These "bad reviews" seem more neutral to me with good and bad points in them.
3) If the reviewers can't even put 30 minutes of research, more than maybe an hour of play in a game, or understand EA before they review it as evidenced by the errors in their review, why would I give any weight to their opinion?
4) I notice none of the more positive reviews are mentioned because they aren't polarizing enough to the "This game is shit" crowd, or the "I love this game" crowd.
5) You can't please everyone, but the individuals in this f'd up society think that if something isn't perfect for them it's bad with no concept of the fact that it may be for lots of other people so maybe it isn't bad.

Bottom line: Sorry for being a dick. Hope this explains things more. Still think its irrelevant BS.