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

It was good to see a measured, calm opinion in a thread that I thought it was going to be just (another) interminable battle royale between TB and RTwP. Congrats to the OP, @Adgaroth. I mean, methinks that there is a thread labelled "RTwP vs TB" already, how is that you find the same debate in all the other threads?

Thanks for the effort and I have to say I agree with most of your opinions and maybe disagree with some, but at least I definitely respect your opinion for the measured tone of your posts.

A pity the thread derailed into the "Same as always" in the middle, but at least that restored my faith in humanity for a while.

For those people who want to convince you that this isn't BG3, they are literally trying to convince you that 1 + 1 = 3. They want to change the facts because there losing an argument.
That's not constructive, it's Baldur's gate 3 because Wizards of the Coast and Larian studios came to an agreement that they will continue the DnD franchise in the Sword Coast and Baldur's gate. Also, the fact that the game will actually visit Baldur's gate at some point and continues a story line set by WOTC.

Now, if you don't like the current story line and live in the past and want to play BG1-2 all over again because of your nostalgia, go ahead. But just because story lines evolved and computer hardware has evolved and we can play games that are better designed then the baldur's gate 20-25 years ago on a computer that is out of date and visuals that doesn't even compare to BG3, that doesn't mean your right to say this isn't BG3.

Larian studios has acquired the right to call it BG3 with a combination of marketing and staying true to the franchise by it's game play. I personally love the visuals of this game because it has evolved in my opinion to a better representation of DnD races, fantasy setting etc... Oh, and nostalgia shoudn't be your only parameter to judge a game, although it is important and there still room for improvement but many of you just seem to be coming off as oh well I want to go back and playing this ..

https://www.google.com/search?q=baldur%27s+gate+2&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjptdG80vnnAhVPm-AKHW7jCHsQ_AUoAXoECCAQAw&biw=1076&bih=568#imgrc=1Sb0TyYNc2R1AM&imgdii=YhxvbXppFv1g5M

As I said I didn't like D:OS I and II much. The only game from Larian I truly enjoyed was the original Divine Divinity - and that was nearly 18 years ago.

As I didn't call every ciritc silly or childish you shouldn't call all people who don't agree with you "fanboys". Just be reasonable. I recall we already had such a discussion in the Deadfire forums.

As to why it looks a bit like D:OS2: that's fairly obvious, isn't it? What did people expect? A whole new engine after 8 months that somehow captures the nostalgic vibes of the old BGI & II but is very modern and great-looking at the same time? How?

Larian uses its own engine which they also used for D:OS2. It would be an ecnomomically stupid decision to not use the well functioning foundation they have. This saves time and resources which can be put into other stuff like story, nice quests, good characters, companion interaction and whatnot. They don't reinvent the wheel which is a smart decision - also given the success of D:OS I and II.

Besides that I don't think BG3 looks as jolly and goofy like D:OS2 does. Actually BG3 looks very nice for a 8 month old pre alpha. Also I never saw a D&D game with such good cinematic sequences. I think those helped a lot to create some Baldur's-Gate- or at least D&D-vibes.

I'm sure there will be a lot of tweaking and effect juggling until it's ready.

I like that it will go into Early Access. That way there's still plenty of time to give constructive feedback - e.g. if you still think it still looks too much like D:OS.

Because DOS was a success and their building off of that success. But don't insult my intelligence by saying this isn't the DnD 5th edition rules.

Hawke has laid it down pretty much as it is.

You cannot change anything now. The games coming out in early access this year.
No amount of complaining will make them change the name.

note, it was WOTC who specificalyl asked them to do Baldurs Gate 3.
They didnt ask em to make Waterdeep: the game, they asked them to do Baldurs Gate 3.



On the "pay respects to us"
Which implies that "You" are a Homogenous group.
A lot of you people like to act as if there is a Homogenous group of "Baldurs Gate fans", while you can bareley agree on anything.
Half of you thinks it shouldnt be 5e but 2e instead, a quarter somehow thinks baldurs gate was 3.5, and another thinks 5e is hunky dory but should be RTWP.
Then theres a large part thats fine with TB even if they are hardcore fans (which get excluded from the conversaiton real fast)

A lot of you go on about Baldurs Gate specifically beeing about the Bhaalspawn, while others argue that picking up an old plot would do a diservice to it.
tons of people say illithids have nothing to do with Baldurs Gate, then some people remember that oh yeah there was this thing with the Illithids in baldurs gate 2.



As Sven said, you cannot placate everyone. There is no homogenous block of "baldurs gate fans" versus the evil divinity fans.
the only thing you are actually united in is your dislike of this game.
And that dislike mostly comes from the fact that nothing could ever live up to your expectations.

Larian is capable of making a game that is not a Divinity clone, right?

So, we must hope because we want a Baldur's Gate game.

It's not a clone, it's DnD 5th edition rule set. And it is Baldur's gate 3 in many aspects lore wise except visually it looks like DOS. But visual and nostalgia alone is not game breaking to me, because most people when they talk about nostalgia their refering to the old baldur's gate (1-2) graphic style (out of date). Also, I love the character portraits I saw at the demo and the whole cinematic game play looks immersive to me. I don't understand how anyone can criticize the visuals of this game it looks phenomenal.

I would actually be very happy if this was the D&D 5e rules - instead, there are no real reactions apart from an automatic AoO and almost all of the bonus actions present are actually disguised actions. I was expecting some deviation from the ruleset to make it better for the videogame format but with this they better come out with an entire ruleset/handbook to the game so you at least know what you can and can't do - even if 3/4 of it is copied from the PHB, that last 1/4 being different is quite a lot.

Actually, the game is in pre-alpha and supposed to come INTO Early access this year.

It's too easy to evacuate any critic as old nostalgic sour.

Many choice of gameplay, ambience and story is a Divinity Style and not a Baldur Style:

- One map for one location to visit with a big world map and the possibility of returning from former areas. The system of ONE BIG Map for one Act in Divinity isn't BG friendly and it's an immersion breacker.

- Incantations for wizard spell!!!!!! Not just click and KABOOM FIRE EFFECT!

- Of course the UI is too close of Divinity. We want an UI with wood and stone, a little more gloomy and traditional.

- "Ahh, the Child of Bhaal has awoken."

A VERY VERY BADASS MAIN VILAIN! Sarevok and Irenicus was deep and very iconic, like Hitchcock said "A good story is a story with a good vilain". I hope Illithid Master isn't the real final boss. I have big hope with Cult of the Dead Three (a very good connexion with the Bhaal Legacy and the new context of DD5).

- A LOT of charismatic NPC Companions and not just 5 or 6 Origin Divinity' style NPC.... And please true ROMANCES and a lot of PARTY BANTERS.

- A very good and long adventure with local issues and not just ultra epic and cosmic issue, it's an other immersion breacker imo. Less epic for epicness and more coherent and realistic background. Less High Fantasy for Millenials and more MEDIEVAL fantasy with historic soul and deep conflicts.

In summary, a good glass of old-fashioned wiskhy in front of a crackling fireplace, an old library and a hunting trophy. Not a smooth and clean atmosphere like the design of the latest iphone.

- Custom portrait and real character sheet.

- A little less colorfull ambience, BG universe is more realistic and less shiny and high fantasy than Divinity.

- Less WTF moments and jokes than Divinity, BG universe is serious and deep with subtle touches of humor like Jan Jansen and Minsc quotes.

An attack of shoes is fun but it's also useless and not the spirit of the licence.

- Please, a true group of 6 adventurers ( During the demo I have seen only 4 slots of characters...).

- Of course, a lot of easter eggs with the BG series (Viconia, Sarevok, events, locations, ...).

- BG Music' style or remix! Even today the first notes of the main theme of BG1 or BG2 still very iconic.

While I may agree with about half of your points, there are certain points I FULLY disagree with:

Minsc for example was the party idiot that had so many stupid lines you can hardly consider his quotes "subtle touches of humor" but are instead full on american TV show comedy acts - something I'm not a big fan of personally but don't mind that much either... someone needs to be the clown I guess (I'm talking about Minsc, please don't see this as an attack on you). On that note, I'd actually say Divinity 2 had far less "silly and wtf moments" compared to BG 1/2

D&D (including AD&D which BG 1 & 2 is based off of) is high fantasy - saying "millenial" here is like you're looking for a fight with "dem kids". No need to antagonize anyone. I'd personally like a "serious" game more as well but I'm one of the minority so I don't really expect it.

I'd be up for wizard(sorcerer/cleric/whatever) incantations if they're willing to make a specific incantation for every single spell - I really didn't like the fact that every spell used the same incantation in BG 1/2. If they won't go the extra mile with that and instead add 3 incantitions in total like there was in the previous BG games it's better if they leave it out in my opinion.

I have a question for you though: why do you specifically want a party size of 6? why not 4 or 5 or 8? Just asking

Final thought: Try not to say "we" and say "I" instead - you're representing yourself, not everyone

Well i definitly want a party of 8
Gimme that

Huge parties are great

Let me do a buddy coop gameplay and still have each of us play 4 characters, now thatd be truly amazing


also yes.
Divinity beeing ridiculou sor a parody is basically a lie that gets repeated so ofthen people state it as fact.
the same with Baldurs Gate beeing "mature" or "Dark".

A lot of things seem mature to you when youre 12

oh man, you pick the tiniest htings and act like its this huge problem.

Oh no, minor actions, stuff that normally flat out dosnt happen!
the game balance is ruined because you can throw a bottle at someone AND stab him

Or throw a dagger at them and stab them... you know, 2 attack actions? as in standard actions? meh, lets just disagree with this and go on

Hi friend,

There is a saying that goes like this: "DON'T FIX WHAT ISN'T BROKEN"

BG1 and BG2 were not broken games.

What every fan of BG was expecting from BG3 was to take the very successful BG formula and IMPROVE on that to make BG3.

NOBODY was expecting that Larian would make a CHEAP move and just use its DOS template and call it BG.

Do you remember what happened with the Diablo franchise maybe? After legendary D1 and D2 games, a new dev team comes to "reinvent" things, and then makes D3, a complete cartoony-looking disaster. Now they are making D4 according to the "original" D1 and D2 recipe. Why, because it worked.

The same thing will happen with this "BG3" i.e. "DOS3" - they also made BG3 look like a cartoon.

What Larian has done (marketing DOS3 named as BG3) - in my book, resembles FALSE ADVERTISING.

They just hyped a lot of old BG fans up with false advertising. Larian, do you really think people are that stupid?

So what if they expanded their team and have a bigger budget? It is still a cheap move.

Larian, be honest and stop calling this game BG3!!!

I'm sorry, but this doesn't make a great deal of sense. Power says what 'Truth' is, and the power here is WOTC, who own the IP 'Baldur's Gate'.

I don't think anyone can argue that WoTC is the one that says what is what, same as if they decide to make a hello kitty game with sarevok's helmet and call it BG4 but that's not the point here.

Larian have stated that they have control to choose what their D&D RPG game is, and that they chose the TB combat system because they were afraid of taking risks after the success of D:OS2 (hence why they've basically just copy-and-pasted D:OS2 into D&D and made minor changes, while greatly over-exaggerating the significance of the minor changes and additions):

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2020-02-27-baldurs-gate-3-interview


So, Larian is really just using the "Baldur's Gate" name as a husk to fill with a D&D D:OS2 clone, exclusively for the purpose of sales (that's what the "it's a big risk" remark refers to). It's a cash-grab.

BTW, TB games have on average been performing worse than RTwP games. And Larian's D:OS2 didn't come close to the amount of sales RTwP legend Dragon Age: Origins did. So, really, there is only a single big hit TB game while RTwP games are on average performing better.

Wasteland Remastered and Torment: Numenera tanked in sales and are unpopular. More people own Pillars of Eternity on Steam than own Wasteland 2 on Steam. When PoE 2 had TB added to it, its sales didn't improve at all and its Steam user rating didn't increase by even a single percentage-point. Pathfinder: Kingmaker is currently more popular than any TB game outside of Divinity: Original Sin 2. And Dragon Age: Origins (3.2 million copies sold in 3 months) greatly outsold Divinity: Original Sin 2 (1 million copies sold in 2.5 months).

So, TB games are not particularly popular and they have a higher failure-rate than RTwP games. It is only D:OS2 which has been a big hit in the TB genre.

Larian have become superstitious slaves in the wake of the success of D:OS2 and traded their integrity for the comfort and sales of an echo chamber of D:OS2 fans. So, there is literally no justification to using the "Baldur's Gate" name, when Larian's upcoming D&D RPG has as much in common with the Baldur's Gate series as


The definition of a Hack:



Larian's "Baldur's Gate 3" has not even the faintest tiniest shred of relation to the Baldur's Gate series in character, experience, or gameplay and yet they're exploiting the name with a D:OS2 clone set in D&D for the purpose of the money doing so can make them. Larian have sold-out and literally become a hack developer for the sake of monetary gain.

So, Larian is really just using the "Baldur's Gate" name as a husk to fill with a D&D D:OS2 clone, exclusively for the purpose of sales (that's what the "it's a big risk" remark refers to). It's a cash-grab. [/quote]

Your leap of logic astounds me... because they know they're good at TB and will do that and not RTwP they're cash-grabbing and somehow betraying Baldur's Gate brand? What?!

I think there is time to make some minor tweaks that will make the game stand alone. Perhaps the early release is going to be used to help make it the direction where most fans provide constructive feedback. With that said, I have rarely seen an alpha game implement major changes from what is in play by the time they release the alpha.