Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General The real reason to call this game Baldur's Gate 3?

I really think people feel it's not BG3 much more than they think it's not BG3

Yeah, for sure. And that's the problem. Feelings might seem to make sense to the person feeling them, but to others, they're not helpful without articulation. Otherwise, it's just a guessing game.

Saying that Larian can't make anything except D:OS like games is just idiotic. If you did the bare minimum research into games Larian has made, you'd see large variation of different styles of gameplay they've put out.

The one thing that both Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson actually agreed on when they were developing D&D is that "D&D is not chess, it is a collaborative story telling game."

It was Gygax who was the "rules lawyer" of the two, and Arneson was all about the adventure.

DOs2 is a great adventure.

I really never liked the DOS games. I found them boring with generic plastic wrap textures and lighting.

I really never liked the DOS games. I found them boring with generic plastic wrap textures and lighting.

that is generally how preferences work, yes.

Ah, the old "tastes great/less filling" debate. At the very least, I would say it's 50/50 in general. Even so, what do you mean by roleplaying? Does that mean good story telling, actually trying to act/verbalize your characters, or both? If we limit roleplaying to story only, I would put it 70/30 combat to roleplay (if I really want a story, I read a novel). If by roleplay you mean acting and such ... man, I will try to be nice. 100/0

edit. And yes, exploration is vital (perhaps a sub category of story, if it's done well)

Seems very clear it's all about the combat for you.

For me, I have never played a PnP session of D&D where combat was any more than 25% of the game. That's what D&D means to me, up to and including having ways to avoid even that little bit of combat in the game.

It's also important to know that BG was meant to bring the D&D type of game to computer gamers who were already playing Diablo, C&C, Half Life, and other ostensibly RealTime type games.

Now, regarding this:


I think it's pretty clear what happened. Larian said they approached WotC and that it took a lot of convincing to get a license to make a Baldur's Gate game. So, they went out of their way to use the Baldur's Gate title.

Larian have said that their decisions regarding their D&D DOS formula game have been made by themselves, including the type of combat it has - and that they chose to do DOS combat in their "BG3" because they don't want to take any risks (so why take on a different series?). So, they would be able to make a game that resembles the Baldur's Gate series but they have chosen by themselves to not do that.

Swen has said that they are using the Baldur's Gate name to promote their DOS formula and hopefully get more people playing their DOS games. That is a clear statement of motivation for Larian to call their D&D game "BG3".

Larian helped write Descent Into Avernus to make it a prequel to their D&D DOS formula game.

There is plenty of information from Larian confirming that Larian are not bystanders and victims in the decision to make a non Baldur's Gate series game but co-opt the series name to exploit the series' fans and promote Larian's Divinity brand. Larian have said their choices regarding "BG3" are theirs and that they want to do what they're doing for the reasons stated above.

TB games made by SSI yes, that were generally only played by proponents of D&D to begin with. The point being that BG expanded that audience to people who never played D&D.

You might be right about that (source?). But why would that be important?