Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Swen On Fan Expectations For Baldur's Gate 3

Everything is relative. Yes the RPG gamer community is a niche group, but relative to the size of that group yes there would've been a lot of anger. Look at the reaction to something in Beamdog's BG1 expansion that some people got angry about. Their raw numbers were not that much, but from a sales perspective the fit that they threw was enough to damage the game's reception.

I'm surprised to hear that. It's pretty widely accepted that the contingent with forceful opinions often encountered on forums and social media is not just small in number but frequently unrepresentative and not influential. Yes, developers should listen to what they say, but that opinion also needs to be given the appropriate weight. Paying no need at all is potentially reckless but presuming too much importance even more so.

That is indubitably true. Neither kanisatha nor I claim to be speaking on behalf of millions of people but there are quite a few people lurking on these boards. I've actually done what Swen has asked of us which is to "spread the words" and got a few friends interested in BG3 (they are not series veterans, mind you). I think you will agree word of mouth is powerful stuff and can help make up for a limited advertising budget. However, making cryptic statements that portray fans in a negative light and then refusing to be more forthcoming about their meaning is a very perplexing decision from an ethical viewpoint. I've worked in businesses where calling the customer crazy for asking questions and withholding information from them out of spite is by far the worst offense that can be committed. Larian can do whatever they like with the game for all I care but perhaps they should refrain from calling upon the franchise fandom to help them promote it in that case. No one likes being used after all, am I right?

I was quite surprised too when it happened, and initially was sure the effort to damage the game would fail. But they were quite successful in review-bombing the game.

Obviously that's not what I am advocating here with BG3, but at the same time I very strongly believe it is just not right to reboot a franchise (in any media - movies, TV shows, videogames) by telling the fans of the previous entries in that franchise that you don't care about them or their views about what made those previous entries so special to them.

The statements were not cryptic.
Are you seriously trying to imply that there are no fans with unreasonable expectations? Or with finite resources, all expectations can be met?
If you are not disputing the factual accuracy of the statement, what exactly is your problem with it?


Saying we can not do everything that everyone has suggested in no way portrays fans in a negative light.
Larian, as part of our design philosophy, has always started off with unrestricted designs/ideas, and after consideration, prototyping and/or work has been started, some things get scaled back to something more reasonable (and sometimes extra things get added).
Having unreasonable suggestions or expectations is not inherently negative, and obviously someone not familiar with the current design would only have finite resources as a constraint to have a very rough idea of what was reasonable in this case.


So all the other people posting in forums and asking questions without a lot of information currently being released is fine, but if the head of the company doesn't immediately react to your question in a forum he isn't actively participating in, that is somehow a personal affront and breach of ethics?


That is an extremely uncharitable interpretation of events, and a bizarre assumption of motive, to the point I'm questioning if you are just trolling.




This is also an extremely uncharitable interpretation of what was said, and completely ignores the rest of the quote, even after that was pointed out.

If Swen reads this topic, do you think he is likely to reply, or would any reasonable person conclude that with such apparently deliberate miss-characterisations of what he said, that no response would be sufficiency?

Raze, I have no grudge against Mr. Vincke. The man does not interest me in the least. I just want someone who is officially affiliated with the developer to dispel the ambiguity for me. If the statement weren't cryptic, would I have made this thread in the first place? By the way, I see many of you may have missed one detail in particular: the interviewer asked Swen how he was going to meet the expectations that fans of the franchise had laid out for him. This isn't about my expectations or those of a vocal minority on this board! Instead of arguing semantics or trying to smear me as a troll, how hard would it be to follow up on the statement with a quick explanation? Could you please define unreasonable for me? Do you believe that word means anything at all without sufficient context?

Raze is officially affiliated with Larian. The statement isn't cryptic. Swen answered how he was going to meet 'the expectations', and the simple fact is that you can never meet all expectations universally for anything in any field, genre or medium at the same time. Ever.



This entire thread is based upon arguing semantics. There's a dozen ways to interpret "expectations are soaring through the roof". I'd say it's a simple, basic, common sense of a fact that it's just commenting on that there's a lot of hype for such a beloved franchise getting a sequel, and that there's no way every expectation in the world can be met a 100%. All they can do is their best, and thus they can't reasonably aim to meet every expectation that exists in a total sum.

It really is that simple.

I work for Larian. There is a small Larian employee forum badge under my name (though it's not really obvious that is what it is). EDIT: Forum mods and administrators' names are in different coloured text, as well (originally when the default template was updated that wasn't maintained, but that was fixed).

What ambiguity? As I originally replied:




Hence my questioning whether you could be trolling (to be fair, miscommunication seemed more likely, other than the mischaracterisation of what was said and that presumption of motive for not answering your question).
You even replied that you "would not claim no expectations are unreasonable", yet conceding the factual accuracy of Swen's reply didn't make it any less 'cryptic'.



Again, the question was about the highest expectations. It is obviously not impossible to live up to some or many expectations, or partly live up to a lot of the expectations, or pretty much completely live up to the basic expectations.



Define cryptic. Just about everyone else understood the reply, and I would bet most would consider it reasonable.



Yes. There is a standard definition of the word that should be sufficient in the vast majority of cases.

An example, then: 500+ hours of content for the game. This was mentioned in the Steam forum, based on 100+ hours for D:OS 2, and mention somewhere of early design ideas to have separate regions for each of the races, which you would visit as part of the origin stories.
Even without knowing about the BG3 design (how the number of ways to solve quests, or dialog reactivity based on background or race, etc, compares to D:OS 2) would you consider 5X the amount of content, and 5X the time to do a full playthrough when testing patches, to be reasonable or unreasonable? Or do you need more context for what reasonable means?

It is rather easy to miss. Maybe I should make it bigger.

And feature more cheese.

My idea of cryptic after going through that interview is addressing the entire fanbase with general statements such as "Sometimes the weather is very good and other times it's very inclement" or "Dogs are man's best friend but some dogs I like better". If part of the interview deals with a game that is in development, I do not see how saying such things helps you promote your game as fans cannot draw any conclusions about it. For what it's worth, the "journalist" conducting the interview dropped the ball because they should have asked their interlocutor to expand upon those thoughts, although I suppose they were just going off a script so there wasn't much journalism involved. Also, to reiterate vometia's thoughts, I find that badge of yours cryptic as well since I could not tell it was the Larian logo until I zoomed way in. Why grayscale of all things?




That's not a real quote of course. That is simply what I would have said if I had been the one addressing each and every fan of the series.

This boils down to subjectiveness. If that had been the real statement, you could just as well have another forum user argue that it sounds like he's hanging some fans out for dry, making fun of how ridiculous some user's expectations are. They could argue it would have been less of a professional handling of the question.




Those aren't cryptic. Those are general statements of status or subjective opinion. For example, I am a man, I don't like dogs, they're not considered my best friends by a long shot. Doesn't change the statement, as it's a commonly known saying; Recognizing that dogs are generally a very loveable household companion. My opinion doesn't change the truth of the statement, because it's a saying, not a fact.

How interviews go really isn't up for you to judge. Sure, it's ok to want "more details", but here's the thing: You have company procedure. Larian is generally reluctant to release very many details about their projects outside of official statements/releases of media that comes directly from them at their time and leisure. The extreme opposite of this, would be Murray's handling of interviews prior to No Man's Sky's launch, giving answers of features left and right that were within the ambition, but turning out to not be available at launch. Cue backlash.

This sounds like you simply want interviews to provide more "meat to the bone" for us as a player to learn more details about the game. That is possible to some extent to happen in an interview, within reason. If anything, the interview was lacking preparation or insight in asking the right questions, that would allow Swen to give more interesting answers. Which is a skill an experienced games journalist might develop over time, knowing how to ask questions in such a way to ask specifics without 'really' asking specifics. Then again, Baldur's Gate 3 is only in an announced status, there's no rule or reason to expect concrete details or more information yet. You may want it. I certainly want it. You may think, or argue it's been x-months since we heard something last and they should give us something more by now. That's fair. I feel impatient some mornings too, checking Google Alerts if there's anything new yet. It's also only a subjective opinion.

Interviews aren't beholden to any explicit rules to abide in order to meet whatever ambiguous expectations a player/reader might have to get out from it. They're simply a company/freelance journalist inquiring a subject of interest with what they believe might be interesting questions that may lead to interesting answers in order to get an interesting article to draw clicks and readers. That's basically every interview in existence.

We may judge an interview individually and decide whether or not it was a good interview. Ultimately, that will inevitably also be another personal opinion.

I think it is rather disgraceful that a Larian employee would go so far as to attack posters on this forum with whose views they disagree and even go to the extent of accusing them of trolling. A Larian employee especially should be open to and receptive of alternative points of view and criticism and make every effort to engage those posters in a constructive and positive way.

Would you say that you're open to and receptive of alternative points of view and criticism, and are you making every effort to engage with those posts in a constructive and positive way? Or are you unfairly disclaiming someone/thing as disgraceful and deem something to be an attack (when it's obviously not)?

Edit: Also, I still await your response to previous questions specifically directed for you, Kanisatha. Is it not disgraceful to accuse someone of doing something considered to be rude, but avoid giving constructive clarification when the accuracy of your accusation is challenged?

I didn't attack anyone. Questioning if someone is trolling is not an accusation of trolling, nor is it an attack. I notice you completely skip the part where I said miscommunication was more likely, and the specific comment that that was in response to.

Are you going to claim the statement in question was accurate and an entirely reasonable assumption of motive? Even korotama did not try defending that statement.
Before getting offended on someone else's behalf, try justifying the statement in question, that it is unreasonable to possibly think maybe it was intended to provoke, and not an accurate statement of belief.



You mean like engaging in a topic, trying to give explanations, asking questions (even if they are mostly ignored, as The Composer pointed out), etc?

The word trolling should never even come from an employee of the organization. So yes, I don't care how you try to spin it, but I consider it highly offensive, something I have never seen on the forum of any other game studio. But furthermore, again as someone from the inside, it is not your place to question what one person said in favor of what some other person said. You should be maintaining neutrality, and if anything only trying to find common ground among the different posters. And if you can't do that, then best to not insinuate yourself into the discussion at all. You were not engaging me or asking for explanations or anything of the sort. You were outright attacking me and impuning me because you didn't like what I had to say. Heck even this post of yous is just a series of passive-aggressive attacks.

And yes, I do stand by all of what I've said. I do question Larian's motives with respect to BG3 and do conider them to be throwing fans of the original BG games like me under the bus. I have every right to see things this way and to express those feelings as a result. The level of Larian fanboyism in this forum is unbelievable. Yes there is some of this in every studio forum, but nowhere have I experienced it being this pervasive and aggressive. Anyone who says even the slightest of negative things about Larian is immediately put upon by some sort of pro-Larian mob.

As for The Composer, I already posted that because they called me a troll they crossed a line for me and I won't be responding to them ever again.

So you can't actually address the point, then?


What is the common ground between someone who inaccurately paraphrases a statement and someone who points out the rest of the actual quote proves the paraphrase is inaccurate?
Have you done anything to find common ground?


Are you really that fragile that you consider disagreement or questions an attack?


So you claim rights for yourself that no one else deserves. Questioning your motives gets people shunned, but you can make far more serious implications and anyone who doesn't agree with you is fanboy. If I called that hypocrisy, would that be an attack, as well?

Why should the word trolling not come from an employee.

i mean, you did say that accusation of trolling is against the ruels (apernetly), so who else would be able to make that call than an admin?

Asking if someone is trolling (or even flat out calling them a troll) isn't any written rule. It's preferred and encouraged to keep a good spirit and positive attitude and treat others in a decent manner. Unfortunately, not everyone handles debate and being disagreed with particularly well.



This is how the world works:
If you accuse someone of something, it is your job to provide those accusations with undeniable proof or at the very minimum convincing arguments that takes the whole source accuration's context into account.

If someone provides you with factual, objectively undeniable proof and clarification as to why your accusation is false or holds thin ground, then there's no one else's but your problem if you refuse to evaluate those and be willing to reconsider your accusations. You don't get to start calling names, falsely trying to claim straw man claims or just flat out refuse to reply because your feelings are hurt.



And that's just childish, as well as uncharitably inaccurate, which is undeniable proof that you're simply unwilling to reason, debate or reconsider any opinion of your own after reviewing arguments and quotes that disproves all of the accusations and complaints stated by OP and yourself throughout this thread.


This thread needs to be closed.

Im aware of that.
I was referencing a post of his where he said that, which annoyed me because it can be used to shield oneself from criticism

Kanisatha, nobody objects to you having concerns about the BG3 design; there is little information available currently.
Try making an effort to debate in good faith, and that would eliminate most of the replies you claim are attacks. For example:


Either the accusation was just hyperbolic (in which case, concede that and state your case reasonably, as if trying to find common ground) or you actually believed it to be accurate (in which case address the rest of the quote or reconsider your accusation).