|
|
|
journeyman
|
journeyman
Joined: Jan 2020
|
I mean, 2nd Edition AD&D was the core of Baldur's Gate 1 and 2. Twenty years later, it makes sense for Baldur's Gate 3 to be based on the current version of D&D (5th Edition). Technology has come a long way in two decades, and it is now possible to make a D&D game that is closer to it's table top counterpart than ever before. They are focusing on D&D fans because it's D&D that provides the core mechanics and it's Wizards of the Coast that allowed them to make the game in the first place.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2019
|
I mean, 2nd Edition AD&D was the core of Baldur's Gate 1 and 2. Twenty years later, it makes sense for Baldur's Gate 3 to be based on the current version of D&D (5th Edition). Technology has come a long way in two decades, and it is now possible to make a D&D game that is closer to it's table top counterpart than ever before. They are focusing on D&D fans because it's D&D that provides the core mechanics and it's Wizards of the Coast that allowed them to make the game in the first place. Hang on a second, why were BG1 and 2 not turn-based as well if holding true to tabletop mechanics has always been their preference? I thought this was about making a great role-playing game first and foremost. WoTC can promote their products without restricting creative freedom to such a degree in my view. Just my two cents.
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Feb 2020
|
I mean, 2nd Edition AD&D was the core of Baldur's Gate 1 and 2. Twenty years later, it makes sense for Baldur's Gate 3 to be based on the current version of D&D (5th Edition). Technology has come a long way in two decades, and it is now possible to make a D&D game that is closer to it's table top counterpart than ever before. They are focusing on D&D fans because it's D&D that provides the core mechanics and it's Wizards of the Coast that allowed them to make the game in the first place. Hang on a second, why were BG1 and 2 not turn-based as well if holding true to tabletop mechanics has always been their preference? I thought this was about making a great role-playing game first and foremost. WoTC can promote their products without restricting creative freedom to such a degree in my view. Just my two cents. BG was always turn-based.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2019
|
Do you mean round-based or is that a riff on Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia? Unless my memory is totally faulty 1 & 2 are RTwP through and through.
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Jan 2020
|
I mean, 2nd Edition AD&D was the core of Baldur's Gate 1 and 2. Twenty years later, it makes sense for Baldur's Gate 3 to be based on the current version of D&D (5th Edition). Technology has come a long way in two decades, and it is now possible to make a D&D game that is closer to it's table top counterpart than ever before. They are focusing on D&D fans because it's D&D that provides the core mechanics and it's Wizards of the Coast that allowed them to make the game in the first place. Hang on a second, why were BG1 and 2 not turn-based as well if holding true to tabletop mechanics has always been their preference? I thought this was about making a great role-playing game first and foremost. WoTC can promote their products without restricting creative freedom to such a degree in my view. Just my two cents. BG1 and BG2 were both turn based, it's just a question of how to display it. Everything in BG1/2 appeared to be happening in real time on the surface, but all abilities and attacks were separated by rounds/turns. That's why, when you chugged a potion, it would be awhile before your character could chug another. Or if you cast a spell, you couldn't immediately cast another one. Melee fighters had a certain number of "attacks per round" as well. Now, whether you believe BG3 should have the DOS style of turn based is a matter of opinion. I, personally, see Larian's way as superior, especially considering the affect it has on multiplayer games. The major drawback to the original games was the need to pause to micromanage your team. This isn't a big deal in single player, but playing with friends? Yeah, pausing is hectic to say the least.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2019
|
If that's the case, letting fans of RTwP experience the game with their preferred combat mode should be only a matter of making everything seem like it's happening in real time. I like the way you think. :P
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Mar 2013
|
Cyberlank is pretty much right.
If they give you this (which they shoulndt) then they seem weak
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Jan 2020
|
If that's the case, letting fans of RTwP experience the game with their preferred combat mode should be only a matter of making everything seem like it's happening in real time. I like the way you think. :P At that point, it becomes a question of how you display D&D 5e combat in that way? How do you make the Action, Bonus Action, Movement, and Reaction system work in a game that appears to be real time? Sophisticated enough AI might be able to do it. Personally, I like Larian's method, but I respect those that prefer the RTwP of the originals. BG2 is my favorite game of all time, so I can hardly discourage those that are so passionate about it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2019
|
If that's the case, letting fans of RTwP experience the game with their preferred combat mode should be only a matter of making everything seem like it's happening in real time. I like the way you think. :P At that point, it becomes a question of how you display D&D 5e combat in that way? How do you make the Action, Bonus Action, Movement, and Reaction system work in a game that appears to be real time? Sophisticated enough AI might be able to do it. Personally, I like Larian's method, but I respect those that prefer the RTwP of the originals. BG2 is my favorite game of all time, so I can hardly discourage those that are so passionate about it. Technology, my friend. It's come a long way since the '90s. I'm sure they could think of something.
Last edited by korotama; 03/03/20 05:07 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Mar 2020
|
Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 were not true turn based because the engine was originally built for an RTS game. They kind of just slapped the D&D on top of a real time engine and added pause to give you some tactical control.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
|
BG turn based... What can we read here...
Rules are rules. Having reference to turn and round in a game doesn't mean it's a turned base game...
Please just read or learn what is a turned base game since the beginning of video games.
This is just not the same gaming experience.
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Jan 2020
|
BG turn based... What can we read here...
Rules are rules. Having reference to turn and round in a game doesn't mean it's a turned base game...
Please just read or learn what is a turned base game since the beginning of video games.
This is just not the same gaming experience.
Perhaps I need to rephrase. BG1/2 were not "traditional turn based" games. They were RTwP that had turn based mechanics beneath the surface. Attacks per round, only casting one spell per round, or using one potion per round are all examples of how the original games took a turn based system and made it look real time. Even if you only had one attack per round the game made it look like you were attacking more often to give it a real time feel. Now, maybe you prefer this method. Like I've said several times, BG2 is my favorite game of all time, so I obviously enjoy the combat. But my enjoyment of BG3 is not hindered by a change in style of combat. The most important things to me are Lore, Forgotten Realms locations, D&D races/classes/monsters, and some references to the original games from time to time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
stranger
Joined: Mar 2020
|
Besides the RTWP system which I prefer because I find it more immersive and because it allows epic battles with countless monsters (good luck doing that in TB), my other concern with Larian is that the DOS games do not have a great story nor writing in general. Unless they recently hired some amazing writers, I do not see how they could come even close to the legendary BG story, dialogues with NPC, etc...
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Mar 2019
|
Unless they recently hired some amazing writers, I do not see how they could come even close to the legendary BG story, dialogues with NPC, etc... While, I can't quite agree with your assessment of BG's writing being "legendary," I do think DOS writing could use an improvement. Despite the similar crashed-ship beginning, I think the premise of the story looks promising enough. Hopefully it doesn't get devolve into a hackneyed "you are the one" scenario.
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Jan 2020
|
Besides the RTWP system which I prefer because I find it more immersive and because it allows epic battles with countless monsters (good luck doing that in TB), my other concern with Larian is that the DOS games do not have a great story nor writing in general. Unless they recently hired some amazing writers, I do not see how they could come even close to the legendary BG story, dialogues with NPC, etc... I might be mistaken, but I want to say that someone from Wizards of the Coast that worked on Descent into Avernus was working with the BG3 team. I'm trying to find the quote, but could be wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Jul 2019
|
Im not to familiar with how Larian usually interacts with their community, but I feel like some clarification on their part may put alot of these discussions to bed (hopefully). The only responses I have seen are from interviews or tweets which either deflect the questions or just make things more confusing by just creating more contentious questions. Not to mention that if their are answers out there they are spread out across many mediums meaning people are discussing bg3 without all the released information in mind.
I know the game is still in early development and alot of the questions may not be answerable at this stage. But it seems, to me at least, that their are some questions Larian can answer. Even if its just a reassurance to alleviate the tensions between community members. I feel like the longer we have to wait for these answers the more divided people will become and in the long run all it is doing is hurting the community and in turn perhaps even BG3 itself.
Thank you for any responses. i don't think it's earlier in development. if not mistaken it's 2017 they have started on this project. if you ask my opinion, larian now seems very stubborn only thanking everyone who congratulate them while totally ignoring that there are legitimate complaints. the community is pretty much divided now by 50/50. the DOS fans and possibly D&D fans giving larian a free pass whether it looks like Baldur's Gate or not doesn't matter. they saw Turn-Based and they start chanting "We've won! Yes!". seriously it seems more like personal agenda or like a cult war. i just want the game to look like baldur's gate. right now it's not for me (and i believe many others as well). i hope larian don't continue ignoring the legitimate complaints. it's not going to do them any good. OMFG, was I really chanting "We've Won! Yes" that loudly that you could hear it from where you are? I mean I was chanting it loud enough to make the walls shake sure, but loud enough that you heard, now that is truely impressive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
stranger
Joined: Feb 2020
|
Yes, of course, it was. In the Blizzard way. Here is the tweet of Swen Vincke:
"Flying back home after a very intensive 3 week reveal trip. Tired but super motivated by the fantastic reception and words of encouragement. Thank you everyone who reached out to us - we’re very lucky to have such a positive community. It’s very inspiring".
So, basically, "we did everything fine and perfect. I know forums, comments on reddit, facebook and twitter are basically a fight due the huge wave of dissapointment but they are wrong, cuase they dont think like me and my supporters. There is no need to communicate anything to those people, cause they are wrrong, and I am right". Man this really bums me out, I hope it's just some PR /marketing spin. I appreciate that a lot of people like what they saw, but I think a significant number didn't. Don't take up a seriously loved franchise & then just ignore a large chunk of the fan base, specially from a studio that places such importance on listening and responding the fans. One thing they have 100% achieved so far is polarising the community across the board. There's not a single group or forum I am in where people aren't tearing chunks from one another over this (..maybe I'm in the groups/fora..).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Support
|
|
Support
Joined: Mar 2003
|
Hang on a second, why were BG1 and 2 not turn-based as well if holding true to tabletop mechanics has always been their preference? Different groups of people have different opinions on what the core essence of the tabletop experience is, and individual preferences will influence the design choices made. I thought this was about making a great role-playing game first and foremost. It is. Some people don't agree on what makes a great RPG, though.
|
|
|
|
|
