Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General BG3, DOS and the D&D rule-set

This seems to be a FAQ so I hope we'll get a official answer on the matter.

My two cents? Its simply easier to balance the game with less variables. But I agree with the sentiment, the larger the party size the better.

Everything we have seen screams D&D, there are been very few things ive seen that are not D&D and that mostly comes down to certain things being Bonus actions over standard actions something not in DOS2

As i said the look of its fairly divinity, im not disputing that. Im disputing that graphics, style and UI are what make a game DOS2. I think there are a lot of players who are fans of BG1/2 who expected something different but D&D fans seem pretty happy about this over all. Maybe not expect it though because they havent gotten a TB D&D game offically supported since TOEE if im correct. I can confidently say every D&D fan i know who plays video games is excited for this

Well, not sure but as far as i know WotC is only the licensors and not a sponsor. WotC gave the license to be able to use the Forgotten Realms and make corresponding specifications (e.g. implementation of the 5th edition of D&D).

My 5 cent:
It was a somewhat unfortunate decision to name this game "Baldur´s Gate III". It was totally clear what all the Baldur´s Gate Fans expect when they are reading PART 3. I think the problems are not
-using the Divine-Engine instead a similar Infinity-Engine (like in games: Pillars of Eternity, Black Geyser: Couriers of Darkness or Realms Beyond: Ashes of the Fallen)
-the similar gameplay to Divine Original Sin
-turn based fights with regard to the 5 edition of D&D
BUT the only common ground to the predecessors is the setting in the Forgotten Realms in and around the city of Baldur´s Gate. Unfortunaly nothing from the predecessors will be continued but what the title "III" implies. In reality Baldur´s Gate III is "just" a new campaign. The big outcry of many fans could have been avoided if the game had been called "Baldur´s Gate: NamedItWhateverYouLike" but not Baldur´s Gate III.

It is no accident that WotC released a new campaign for the Dungeons & Dragons tabletop game: Baldur's Gate: Descent in Avernus last year when Baldur´s Gate III was announced. It tells what's happened since Baldur's Gate II and plays 100 years after Baldur´s Gate II. The problem is that the story of the tabletop game must fit into Baldur´s Gate III. It was certainly a mandatory requirement for BG 3 from WotC.


For me personally, my character in BG3 will be the son of my character from BG1, SoD + BG2 and Jaheira.

The UI (Which let’s face it is probably the main reason people’re calling this a OS clone) is borrowing the D:OS2 skin because it’s pre alpha. The environments and lighting are also borrowed because it’s pre alpha. The combat ruleset, setting, lore, characters, story, non-combat scenarios won’t be anything like D:OS2

Pre-alpha means that the majority of assets are placeholder. Some companies even use assets from other games that they don’t even own during the pre alpha phase to serve as placeholders so they know where to put stuff later. The game will look drastically different upon release. A few lighting, UI and model tweaks and it’ll be Baldur’s Gate with combat that’s actually faithful to the source material and doesn’t suck.

Perfect comment
I always imagined BG3 similar to Obsidian games

This stuff just boggles my mind.
Why on earth would you want BG3 to be made by obsidian?

If you want RTWP then maybe go with owlcat.
but obsidian has shown qutie well that they are incapeable of making good games and they are out of touch with the CRPG audience.
Laud them as much as you want for beeing conservative in mechanics, their writing isnt winning any awards with the fan base.

and cheap? you realy think this is cheap? Do you even understand how much the larian team has expanded for this?

Why am i even typing this. This is bait.

I agree. For D:OS fans, they consider the D:OS-style graphics and artwork to be beautiful, and as such are happy to see that replicated in this game. For me, one of the main reasons I hated the D:OS games was precisely because I found their style of graphics and artwork to be horribly ugly and even amateurish. So obviously for me, I hate that they have imported that style into this game.

No it is because the game is made to be played multiplayer. That's what it has been designed for from the ground up, as a multiplayer tabletop simulator. Of course someone can play it single player if they want, but that's not what the game is designed for. All the game design choices, party size, combat system, dialog system, very little control over what characters you can play and how your companions can develop, are all clearly design choices favoring a multiplayer TT sim model for the game.

Good.
Multiplayer is a better expirience.
How is this an argument against the game?

>graphics
see, theres the part that reeks of lies.
I admit, the game looks a lot like OS2.
But youre gonna tell me the characters do? The equipment does?
That stuff looks exactly like the art from the Players Handbook and the Monster manual, especialy the goblins

But sure, Photoshop airburshed pictures of stock art models are fine art arent they?
Dont kid yourself, thats what over half of the portraits in BG1 and 2 were

I've been browsing the many reviews that have been written by the gaming news media since the reveal and they ALL say the exact same thing, that this game looks and feels like the Divinity games. Of course for these reviewers, given that they are all Larian sycophants, this is a very good thing and is how it should be. I suppose they would probably even go so far as to say every RPG that is ever made in the future should look and feel like the Divinity games. So it's not just us critics on this forum but even the so-called pro reviewers who are saying the game looks and feels exactly like the Divinity games but with a Forgotten Realms 'skin' on it.

ive been asking this in another thread too.
give me a direct screenshot comparison.

Two simmilar locations from what weve seen in BG3.
Show me the differences, show me a screenshot from BG1 or 2, or hell, dark alliance if youre that bored, and tell me where the "Baldurs gate" essenece is, and then show me where it lacks in BG3.

I genuinly want to know.
Because yeah , it looks and feels like OS2, because its the same engine and the combat certainly looks simmilar.
but from the character models?
The enemies? realy? i certainly didnt see any teleporting crocodiles..

Exactly, we all knew it was going to look like DOS but facts dont change their using 5th edition DnD rules and now it's becoming childish that some people dont even want to acknowledge that this is a DnD game because they feel their losing an argument. Also if they omit a rule.or 2 it doesn't mean it's not a DnD game either. I'm sure most of the game will be faithfull to 5th edition rules.

It's sad to see so much anger and frustration generated by the fans and antifans of the next
installment of one of my favourite games of all time (SoA)

Let me start saying: Take a second to look at this situation and realize that both sides of this coin are right in their own way (The mature people who tries to be civil and talk about things at least)

Fans of Larian and D&D are very happy,and why wouldn't they? This game is perfect for them.

Fans of BG are mad,some because of the combat system,a bit extreme in my book,but hey,they are right,changing the combat system is a big deal on a franchise.

But maybe more moderated people who has been playing all kind of games and systems through the years for hours to no end are just complaining because whenever you look at this new BG game there is NOTHING that vaguely resembles the name it carries. Is that so crazy? No. Is that something to go and insult us for being rational and expecting some BG in a BG game? No

Why don't you try to stop being childish and stop fighting for what is best or what is worst? BG2 sold almost 2 million copies only on PC on a time where players where just ''freaks'' repudiated by society most of the time. You can say whatever you want but BG has been an inspiration for more than 20 years to a lot of developers and a lot of games has been made thanks to BG's influence.

The fact is this: When you look at this game,you recognize it as an impoved version of DOS2 with 5e ruleset or at the very least another Larian game based on DOS2. You would never,in all your life think ''Hey!,is this a new Baldur's Gate?'' AND THIS is where all the problems really come from,and let me tell you one think,they where aware of that and it was a fear inside the studio,I'll look for the interview later and edit this to provide a source.

I know Swen Vincke has a VERY particular vision of how this game should be and I know he wants this game to be the closer you can get on a videogame to the paper D&D and let me tell you,that sounds fantastic but,have you hear me mention BG? No,because their concern is more about D&D than paying homage to the saga and you can argue that BG is a D&D based game so its fine BUT you're using the name of a beloved franchise,a jewel lost in time so you can at least have some amount of respect for that and try to show that this game is indeed Baldur's Gate 3.

Sven Vincke's vision of this game is TOTALLY compatible with making the game more Baldur's Gate,I'm of course not saying change the system,change the game engine,change the graphics etc, but there's A LOT of things they can do to make BG3 appealing to ''almost'' everyone. Colors,effects,assets like cursors for looting,voiced spellcasting,animations,illumination,music,etc. Granted,I know it's apha (a REAL alpha) and a lot of thing are bound to change,a lot of what we've seen could be placeholders,some other things are really easy to tweak and change,but the reality of the situation is that we can only judge what we've seen and that is why so much people is angry (some more than others)

Both sides of this coin,please,I implore you,not for me of for Larian or WotC but for the sake of the BG franchise,see reason, accept that for good or ill,games are bound to change,specially under different developers.

Larian and D&D fans,I ask of you to try to understand the pain and frustracion the original BG fans feel at this moment after 20 years of waiting for the next installment of one of the best crpg's ever made.

And you,Larian and Swen Vincke,if any of you read this someday,I know what you want to do with the game,I know you're hyped and I know you have a very specific vision for this game but please, acknowledge the fact that you can reach that goal without hurting other avid gamers in the process. The game as it is now is going to appeal to D&D and DOS2 fans alike,so please work to appeal to BG fans too and prove that you're not only using Baldur's Gate as a cheap way to get more fans and money.

I understand and respect all parts of this conflict and the only thing I want is to look and this new game while proudly thinking ''This is Baldur's Gate 3''

Thank you all for reading.

English is not my first language so if you have any doubt or something doesn't make sense feel free to let me know.

EDIT: Link to he interview but if you don't want to look for the actual phrase :

"We were afraid that people would say that it was just Divinity: Original Sin 2 with a skin on top of it. We want no one to think that when they see it,"

https://www.usgamer.net/articles/baldurs-gate-3-preview

Thanks, great post - I agree...

EDIT: To clarify, I believe this will be an amazing game, I just don't think it will be BG3 except in name alone...

Wow. They were conscious of it, and yet that's precisely what happened and everybody is saying it looks like a D:OS2 clone because it really does. Larian's "BG3" even uses the D:OS2 mouse cursors, text font, and goofyish movement animation style, so it looks and feels all the more like playing D:OS2. It really doesn't give an impression that it's a different game.

"We were afraid that people would say that it was just Divinity: Original Sin 2 with a skin on top of it. We want no one to think that when they see it,"
FAIL!

Look "Solasta: Crown of the magister" and you will see a game which is not called Baldur's Gate but which is much closer to it than Larian's Baldur's Gate 3. I would even add that the D&D spirit seems to me to be much more respected with Solasta than with BG3.

If Larian persists in this path, I fear that the name Baldur's Gate will end up turning against him and his game; when I can be convinced that if Larian had called it: DOS3, it would have been a real success.

Likewise, if players find that the name Baldur's Gate was only used to boost sales, it will clearly tarnish Larian's image.

Larian must be aware of where he is setting foot with the Baldur's Gate license.
Baldur's Gate has become the property of the players; with their nostalgia, their wonder, their epic battles, their discoveries, their stories, their pain and their thousands of hours spent. All of this went far beyond the borders of Bioware, TSR (before WotC) and Black Isles Studios.

And so, it is the players who will now decide what is and what is not Baldur's Gate.
This power has not been in the hands of a video game development studio for a long time. Nor is it in the hands of WotC.

There is a much greater chance that Larian will crash rather than succeed in this crazy bet.
A little selfishly, however, I wish them success. Because that will mean that I will have found the feeling of having returned home and reliving emotions like those that I experienced on the greatest cRPGs of all time, that are Baldur's Gate and Planescape Torment.
Fans of Baldur's Gate expect nothing less than that...

Those could be placeholders but I haven't yet seen any interview addressing this stuff so...that's what worries me,if they knew,and it happened,why didn't they explained they're just placeholders and we'll se much improvment in the future? It's not a hard thing to say to avoid all this ruckus.




Like I said,they already sold the game to Larian fans and D&D fans xD

I know Solasta Melkyor95,looks pretty good. I got the same feeling with P:K and the sequel is looking even better.
As of right now,yes I agree that the BG3 name is hurting them more than is helping them. If they would have named it Return from Avernus or whatever fits the story no one would have complained.
When they announced BG3 everyone thought the game would remind them about the other games in the franchise but alas,that's far from happening so people is obviously mad about it. I knew it was going to have a very Larian flavor but this is not flavor,it's a whole cake xD and not even the icing is BG

Simplify it even more... no one is changing anyone's mind. I have no problem as-is other than it looks like DOS, big mistake demoing that, someone out of 250 should have said, wait you can't do that! So they have this predicament, I would seriously consider renaming the game. It isn't DOS3 because it uses DnD rules. It is still DnD, they should sit down with WotC and come up with what is should be called. Perhaps it even gets delayed over this. Perhaps do two games, the second being RtwP BG3.

I think a lot of what people are seeing when they say that it looks like D:OS is precisely that. It LOOKS like D:OS. The UI specifically. This was the first time we saw it though, and I expect it will look much different by release.

I get the feeling that Swen and the team wanted to make a D&D game, and that WOTC wanted to cash in on the BG name. I'm a fan of all D&D, D:OS, and BG series. I feel bad for the die hard BG fans. But personally... I think BG3 will be iconic in it's own right. Change is always bad until you start enjoying it. If you haven't tried D:OS series, I think it is on sale pretty heavily on Steam right now. Get the vitriol out now. Enjoy the game when it comes out.

I think changing the name now is basically imposible,I highly doubt Hasbro or WoTC would allow it. And iI don't think Larian would do it either.
I really think the best way to deal with this is to make it more BG like I said at the opening, I don't think it will be too hard considering the state of the game and the time they have until they finish production.



Swen has purposedly avoided to name Baldur's Gate without the 3 on it like a plague on the interviews xD (or at least is what I feel) He really really wants to make a D&D game,previous installments are kind of inconsequential to him (again,that's what I feel after 10 or so interviews)
It was Swen himsef who aproached WoTC after the first DOS and they rejected his proposal. They called him later when he was making DOS2 and he accepted the deal.

Your first sentence is basically one the points of this post,if they change the UI and a lot of ''litlle'' things into a more BG franchise relatable vibe the only people against it will be the hardcore RTwP supporters.

Yes I've played both,thanks for the suggestion