|
|
|
stranger
|
stranger
Joined: Feb 2020
|
By the way guys... Baldurs Gate was always turnbased in its core -> but not super slow!
Please explain me why the hell pausable realtime (with turn mechanics like bg always was!!!) is bad ad all?
For a turnbased player there is no difference if you first press space on your own or the game does it for you automatically It's not just a matter of pressing space. RTwP is technically still turn based (under the hood), just turns are processed continuously and simultaneously, which obviously results in it being real time. TB on the other hand staggers out this process to be a single turn at a time, making it much more drawn out and imo somewhat of a snoozefest. Bottom line: RTwP is just much more engaging due to fluidity and the core idea that you only slow down the games tempo when you need to, while TB doesn't give you that choice and simply sets it to a fixed slow speed (you can still do your turns quicker, but waiting for AI turns and the fact that they are not done in paralel makes it inherently slower). TB does deliver on this puzzle-like engagement that it's acolytes love, but frankly I just don't see what's there is to love about TB. Well done RTwP can be played in TB mode if the player really wants to, but without all the drawbacks of being exclusively TB. Also RTwP can be just as difficult and satisfying as TB, but without all the frustrations and time wasting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
stranger
Joined: Feb 2020
|
To be honest, looking at the reveal and their past statements it sounds like Larian are having serious game design issues. Any game studio relies on a set of keys disciplines such as: Tech, Art, Design, UR/UX. There are ofc subdivisions and etc (like level design), but generally these 4 are the ones you can't make a good game without.
With emphasis we've been seeing on CGI trailers and "dialogues like dragon age" I think it's safe to say that they are spending a good chunk of provided budget on Art department (which imo is not bad by itself, but should have never been the first priority).
Tech department seems to be doing not so good - they are after all reusing old engine (and this is probably one of the reasons why they went with TB and why the demo resembles DOS so much) and they do have technical issues like non-functional saves (whic I'm guessing they broke while trying to cram in the dnd ruleset).
Larian's UR/UX doesn't worry me as much, since they didn't put out any abhorrent UI jobs as of yet, and seem to be generally doing well.
But design seems to be in big trouble. Larian is known to try things in past, but what people forget to mention is that while they try new things and some of them really work, they always seem to lack any polish. And since DOS it seems even that creativity is gone and all they do now is TB, but even sticking to 1 type of gameplay is not helping - both DOS and DOS2 had balance issues, numerous design loopholes, inept crafting systems, questionably fun combat. Was it fun because it was well polished or because it was just new and unique (for a time) due to the use of environment and interactions with surfaces and substances? For me this novelty worn of by DOS2 to be honest, and combat felt stale and boring. But even then, they do have some of the good ideas crop up here and there (like source, which is fun in theory), they just never really polish them. I was expecting to see significant improvement in DOS2 to the combat and crafting, but they pulled a pretty typical Larian thing - got sidetracked adding origin characters, tags, source, while neglecting core combat gameplay. What's worse to me DOS2 combat felt somehow even more stale and boring than DOS - probably due to AP changes (but maybe more).
I'd be seriously concerned for their systems design - it seems like it suffers from ADHD and can't really finish and polish anything, instead just chaotically leaps from one thought to another, barely seeing it through. At least they are allegedly using DnD 5e, so at least they won't have to be really creative this time around - but then again, they did say that they want to do "their take on it" so I'm worried it will be again barely finished and without any polish whatsoever.
I'm also concerned with writing - while it clearly evolved since early Larian days, and I quite love it, it does have a very specific flavor to it. And they did talk about "telling a story with their twist on it", so I'm concerned it will just be DOS3 but in Forgotten Realms. BG had much darker tone than Larian is accustomed to and not nearly as much humor (which was also quite darker).
I find it worrying that "cinematic" dialogues and upgraded graphics are taking the spotlight in most of the promotion and a lot of other media. This is not what BG was about. It was never, in fact, about mass effect/dragon age esque cinematic experience, it was first and foremost about Gorion's Ward and their party. I also disagree with their opinion that BG was always about, well, the city of Baldur's Gate. In fact you didn't even spend all that much time in the city. Sure, some chapters happened in there, but you traveled far and wide. It was always about Gorion's Ward, Minsc, Boo, Dynaheir, Kzar, Monterion, and many other companions, about Baal and his legacy and other adjacent things. Them saying "it was always about the city" just rings false to me and sounds more like an attempted to justify whatever we will find in the story. It worries me that they are already setting up justifications for BG3 being anything but.
Also they like to harp on missing attacks in RPGs and how bad it is, but it's really fake news:missing an attack only blows in TB, because with it's snail pace every attack feels much more important. RTwP has no such issue, as well as any other non TB rpg gameplay - misses are inconsequential most of the time and just serve as one of the knobs to tune dps/fight duration, and some more advanced things. Failed rolls and missed attack have never been a "problem", except when you make your bed with TB and now suddenly mundane miss chances become frustrating. And then when you absolutely want to hit that 1 important attack there is always stuff like true strike, etc. to make sure you do.
Last edited by Nyxery; 02/03/20 10:43 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
|
Don't seek, they just use a name (with the 3) waited for about 20 years to create a new DoS like with other rules in the Forgotten Realms.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Mar 2013
|
im only realy replying here out of princle.
Im getting bored of the tired old nonsense u im afraid this echo chamber will grow even worse if theres not one or two people telling you youre full of shit.
They are not "reusing" the engine, they are updating t. Theyve been using this engine since Dragon Commander, maybe even Divinity 2 (which is not OS2 for the newcommers here)
Original sin was Verison 2, OS2 was verison 3 and this is version 4.
>on the technical side
idk. They appear to have built a very good network of interconnected systems, something very few RPG developers bother to make so if ail to see the problem here.
>UI
is placeholder. You dont start with Ui development when your feature set isnt set in stone do you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Support
|
|
Support
Joined: Mar 2003
|
Tech department seems to be doing not so good - they are after all reusing old engine The game engine has been, and is being, significantly updated (moreso than from Dragon Commander to D:OS or D:OS to D:OS 2). and why the demo resembles DOS so much The graphics for the character models, environment, etc, are all improved, the camera system has been updated (some of which is in progress). technical issues like non-functional saves (whic I'm guessing they broke while trying to cram in the dnd ruleset) With significant overhauls of the engine, things like the save system have to be redone, as well. It isn't just the in-game mechanics that changed. The same was the case with the previous games, though it was mostly functional in the prototype builds when D:OS and D:OS 2 were first shown, in or leading into the respective Kickstarters. And since DOS it seems even that creativity is gone and all they do now is TB Since D:OS all we've done is RPGs, as well. If that's an argument for RTwP, it's an argument to be creative with the genre, as well. both DOS and DOS2 had balance issues And Divine Divinity's end game... Also they like to harp on missing attacks in RPGs and how bad it is The only people I've seen harping on that are those who think any concern over missing too much means the enviable destruction of the entire system. A single miss is slower in turn based, but real time combat can be slow, tedious and/or annoying with too much missing, as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Jul 2014
|
and why the demo resembles DOS so much The graphics for the character models, environment, etc, are all improved, the camera system has been updated (some of which is in progress). Right now, it just looks like DOS2. And if "BG3" hadn't been announced and you showed it to someone who'd played DOS2, they'd immediately think it's DOS2. The goofy movement and action animations, the mouse cursors, the text font, are all directly unmodified DOS2's. And the UI kept DOS2's style and just moved things around a bit. Either all of this is placeholder, or Larian is making a specific very strong effort to make everything about "BG3" make people think of DOS2, in order to make people buy it based on thinking of it as more DOS2 content, or to get people who buy "BG3" to possibly buy DOS2 because it looks the same. Either way, "BG3" does not look like its own game, it visually looks very much like DOS2. And I don't find that to be a positive thing because it emphasizes that "BG3" is DOS2 in D&D and a cash-grab exploiting the name while not delivering on what it represents (which is supposed to be itself and not DOS).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Support
|
|
Support
Joined: Mar 2003
|
And if "BG3" hadn't been announced and you showed it to someone who'd played DOS2, they'd immediately think it's DOS2. Um... show representative screenshots of D:OS 2 and BG3 to any of your non-gaming friends, and see if they fail to identify the differences in graphics and dialogue system. or Larian is making a specific very strong effort to make everything about "BG3" make people think of DOS2, in order to make people buy it based on thinking of it as more DOS2 content, or to get people who buy "BG3" to possibly buy DOS2 because it looks the same. At least a couple people have already bought D:OS 1 and 2 after seeing the presentation for BG3, entirely aware that the games are different. Using similar UI design elements would not trick anyone into buying BG3 for more of D:OS 2, and even if it could work it would be counter productive. There were lots of differences shown during the presentation, and more will become apparent leading up to Early Access and release. while not delivering on what it represents You mean not making some of the design decisions that you want.
|
|
|
|
|
|
apprentice
|
|
apprentice
Joined: Jun 2019
|
Oh, I wasn't talking about that kind of censorship. I just meant how majority will use all means available (ordinarily - downwotes, in some cases as far as reports for stuff like instigation, trolling, etc., and almost always social pressure of vocal faction on the media of choice).
Case study: try going on Reddit and posting an unpopular opinion. It will get buried under a pile of dislikes and will never see the light of day. Your karma will take hit too. You may even get reported, depending on how bad is your study subreddit is.
People really don't like opinions that contradict the "accepted" opinion of their platform. And the "accepted" opinion is usually determined rather early on in the life cycle of that platform/community, and from that point begins the process of selection: people with "correct" opinions are welcomed, accepted and encouraged to stay and participate in "positive discussion", while people with "incorrect" opinions are made feel unwelcome, marginalized (unsurprisingly, since any "wrong" opinions are not allowed to gather any significant following in said community/resource) and ultimately leave and don't come back. Now, if we move to a platform that's not about just 1 thing, it gets more complex - there may be more topics that require you to have a "correct" opinion. And that's where we get to the censorship. While what I am about to describe may not be an explicit form of censorship, it nevertheless is limiting how freely people can express what they think. Say, your opinion aligns with what's established as "correct", but a topic comes up where you don't agree to the popular opinion. Most of the people will just either stay quiet, or reluctantly agreed with the majority because now there is a good amount of social pressure on them. On platforms like Twitter such social pressure might go beyond the internet and spill over into personal life - for example it may get you fired (which I am using purely as an example of it going too far, it's unlikely to happen over an opinion about some video game, or is it?).
Of course the degree of severity of what I described varies, and often you will find some people still going against the majority, but these results will always be biased in favor of platforms dominant faction. It's somewhat of a vicious cycle - these communities do their best to attract people who agree and chase off people who don't, therefore there is always majority that agrees and because there is always a majority that agrees it's hard for unpopular opinions to gain any friction, therefore people with unpopular opinions stay quiet or leave, etc.
While this is not explicit censorship, it achieves the same goal: keeps some of the people quiet either through social pressure or via technical means such as downvoting, reporting, feed display algorithms that hide controversial topics, etc..
Also as you could have noticed I didn't mention the actual owners of said platforms. They may or may not have some indirect influence via search algorithms and feed personalization, but all of it is the work of people who use the platform as users, sometimes user appointed moderators and such.
Point is: social platforms tend to degrade into echo chambers where any "incorrect" opinions are not welcome. So "most people on Twitter" is a poor indication of anything - asking Twitter or similar echo chambers about anything is just that - yelling your questions into an echo chamber. I think the way the negative or criticism-y opinions are presented is the most important thing. If you walk inside a positive forum about BG3 and start whining about how 'Larian ruined BG' or how 'they became sell-outs', it's quite possible that you're going to be marginalized and kicked out. There's constructive criticism and there's drama that borders on trolling. When I hear how BG3 is not BG because of the UI or the portrait position in the screen, I can't help but shake my head in disbelief. Like, really? THIS is what made Baldur's Gate for you guys? The whole point of BG3 *for you guys* is a nostalgia trip? You want to see the old UI to think that this is the game you remember playing? You want the portraits from top to bottom to remember the game you used to play? I mean, were the BG fans ever D&D fans at all? I simply cannot see how people prefer it over the turn-based combat system. Because RTwP is fun. RTwP is faster paced. I mean, if you're playing on some low difficulty setting where you don't need to micro-manage everyone for any 0.3s period you can steamroll any combat encounter in turn based as well, it won't take long because you don't need to think about anything, I promise you that. Personally I didn't mind my characters running into fireball as much as I did mind them not doing anything without 10000 hours of AI setting up (without the AI setting up they'd just waste spell slots casting magic missles at basic 1 hp rats) And let's not forget those amazing moments in the old games … Oh yes, it was f&%king awesome when an enemy mage would start the battle by casting mass confusion on my party and everyone would start running around, while the only PC who could cast dispel magic on ONE of the PCs was almost guaranteed to fail, BECAUSE THE F&%KING SPELL WOULD TARGET THE PLACE THE PC WAS STANDING AT THE TIME YOU CAST IT - meaning that by the time the spell is on its way to hit the character, the confused character has ran to the other side of the screen, making dispel magic utterly useless. What fun! What amazing times! What amazing battle system! How jolly it was when I reloaded the battle 20 times until I would get a chance to save vs this spell! F&%k the real-time-pause RTUEIORUJADP battle system. F*$k it to hell, burn it to the ground, and I hope to God I don't ever see it in a D&D game ever again. Baldur's Gate never became a cult hit because of the real-time pause system. People loved the lore, the setting, the characters, the music, the customization, the (back then) AAA production values and the cheating b&*%shit they would pull in order to spare themselves of difficult encounters (i.e. dying from a boss battle, then loading the game and casting fireball in the under-fog-of-war-area the boss character is in order to kill most of his underlings and damage him before the battle actually starts in order to have an edge when it does - yeah, we all did that). BG3 is the most D&D video game I've ever seen since Temple of Elemental Evil and I don't care what the BG1-2 purists say. They wear their nostalgia goggles proudly, forgetting the silliness the original games had and accusing Larian Studios of making BG3 is light-hearted adventure (which is another HUH!? complaint - was I the ONLY ONE who saw the intro video or the teaser almost a year back ?). Oh, I wasn't talking about that kind of censorship. I just meant how majority will use all means available (ordinarily - downwotes, in some cases as far as reports for stuff like instigation, trolling, etc., and almost always social pressure of vocal faction on the media of choice).
Case study: try going on Reddit and posting an unpopular opinion. It will get buried under a pile of dislikes and will never see the light of day. Your karma will take hit too. You may even get reported, depending on how bad is your study subreddit is.
People really don't like opinions that contradict the "accepted" opinion of their platform. And the "accepted" opinion is usually determined rather early on in the life cycle of that platform/community, and from that point begins the process of selection: people with "correct" opinions are welcomed, accepted and encouraged to stay and participate in "positive discussion", while people with "incorrect" opinions are made feel unwelcome, marginalized (unsurprisingly, since any "wrong" opinions are not allowed to gather any significant following in said community/resource) and ultimately leave and don't come back. Now, if we move to a platform that's not about just 1 thing, it gets more complex - there may be more topics that require you to have a "correct" opinion. And that's where we get to the censorship. While what I am about to describe may not be an explicit form of censorship, it nevertheless is limiting how freely people can express what they think. Say, your opinion aligns with what's established as "correct", but a topic comes up where you don't agree to the popular opinion. Most of the people will just either stay quiet, or reluctantly agreed with the majority because now there is a good amount of social pressure on them. On platforms like Twitter such social pressure might go beyond the internet and spill over into personal life - for example it may get you fired (which I am using purely as an example of it going too far, it's unlikely to happen over an opinion about some video game, or is it?).
Of course the degree of severity of what I described varies, and often you will find some people still going against the majority, but these results will always be biased in favor of platforms dominant faction. It's somewhat of a vicious cycle - these communities do their best to attract people who agree and chase off people who don't, therefore there is always majority that agrees and because there is always a majority that agrees it's hard for unpopular opinions to gain any friction, therefore people with unpopular opinions stay quiet or leave, etc.
While this is not explicit censorship, it achieves the same goal: keeps some of the people quiet either through social pressure or via technical means such as downvoting, reporting, feed display algorithms that hide controversial topics, etc..
Also as you could have noticed I didn't mention the actual owners of said platforms. They may or may not have some indirect influence via search algorithms and feed personalization, but all of it is the work of people who use the platform as users, sometimes user appointed moderators and such.
Point is: social platforms tend to degrade into echo chambers where any "incorrect" opinions are not welcome. So "most people on Twitter" is a poor indication of anything - asking Twitter or similar echo chambers about anything is just that - yelling your questions into an echo chamber. I think the way the negative or criticism-y opinions are presented is the most important thing. If you walk inside a positive forum about BG3 and start whining about how 'Larian ruined BG' or how 'they became sell-outs', it's quite possible that you're going to be marginalized and kicked out. There's constructive criticism and there's drama that borders on trolling. When I hear how BG3 is not BG because of the UI or the portrait position in the screen, I can't help but shake my head in disbelief. Like, really? THIS is what made Baldur's Gate for you guys? The whole point of BG3 *for you guys* is a nostalgia trip? You want to see the old UI to think that this is the game you remember playing? You want the portraits from top to bottom to remember the game you used to play? I mean, were the BG fans ever D&D fans at all? I simply cannot see how people prefer it over the turn-based combat system. Because RTwP is fun. RTwP is faster paced. I mean, if you're playing on some low difficulty setting where you don't need to micro-manage everyone for any 0.3s period you can steamroll any combat encounter in turn based as well, it won't take long because you don't need to think about anything, I promise you that. Personally I didn't mind my characters running into fireball as much as I did mind them not doing anything without 10000 hours of AI setting up (without the AI setting up they'd just waste spell slots casting magic missles at basic 1 hp rats) And let's not forget those amazing moments in the old games … Oh yes, it was f&%king awesome when an enemy mage would start the battle by casting mass confusion on my party and everyone would start running around, while the only PC who could cast dispel magic on ONE of the PCs was almost guaranteed to fail, BECAUSE THE F&%KING SPELL WOULD TARGET THE PLACE THE PC WAS STANDING AT THE TIME YOU CAST IT - meaning that by the time the spell is on its way to hit the character, the confused character has ran to the other side of the screen, making dispel magic utterly useless. What fun! What amazing times! What amazing battle system! How jolly it was when I reloaded the battle 20 times until I would get a chance to save vs this spell! F&%k the real-time-pause RTUEIORUJADP battle system. F*$k it to hell, burn it to the ground, and I hope to God I don't ever see it in a D&D game ever again. Baldur's Gate never became a cult hit because of the real-time pause system. People loved the lore, the setting, the characters, the music, the customization, the (back then) AAA production values and the cheating b&*%shit they would pull in order to spare themselves of difficult encounters (i.e. dying from a boss battle, then loading the game and casting fireball in the under-fog-of-war-area the boss character is in order to kill most of his underlings and damage him before the battle actually starts in order to have an edge when it does - yeah, we all did that). BG3 is the most D&D video game I've ever seen since Temple of Elemental Evil and I don't care what the BG1-2 purists say. They wear their nostalgia goggles proudly, forgetting the silliness the original games had and accusing Larian Studios of making BG3 is light-hearted adventure (which is another HUH!? complaint - was I the ONLY ONE who saw the intro video or the teaser almost a year back ?). LOL are you serious? You realise there are protection spells against everything in this game right? Instead ogf reloading 20 times you could have done a bit of research and thats it. I get this a lot everytime people downtalk BGs combat they simply dont understand the divine and arcane spellbook which is ok arcane magic in BG is rather complex to be fair.
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Jul 2014
|
[quote=Delicieuxz]while not delivering on what it represents
You mean not making some of the design decisions that you want. No, I meant that Larian are using the Baldur's Gate original PC series' title while not delivering on what the Baldur's Gate series represents. The Baldur's Gate series, like every series, has an identity. And there is no similarity with that identity, in style, gameplay, tone, environment, in Larian's shown "BG3". Larian's "BG3" is entirely a different thing, just taking place in Forgotten Realms BG area and using a D&D ruleset. There's Baldur's Gate, the city, and then there's Baldur's Gate, the specific original PC series. Larian can make any kind of game they like involving the city Baldur's Gate and that's fine - but if it isn't faithful to the original PC Baldur's Gate series then it has no right and business being called "Baldur's Gate 3", which is a claim that it is a part of that original PC Baldur's Gate series (which Larian's "BG3" isn't).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Support
|
|
Support
Joined: Mar 2003
|
And there is no similarity with that identity, in style, gameplay, tone, environment, in Larian's shown "BG3". Other BG1+2 fans disagree with your opinion on that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Feb 2020
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: May 2019
|
and why the demo resembles DOS so much The graphics for the character models, environment, etc, are all improved, the camera system has been updated (some of which is in progress). Improved does not equal different. Our question is why is Larian using artwork of any kind from the D:OS games at all? In interviews Larian devs themselves have said very clearly that they're aware that the game should not look like a D:OS game with a D&D skin, so why reuse ANY artwork from the D:OS games? If this is truly a separate game from the D:OS games, then ALL art assets for character models, environment, etc. should be brand new and made specifically to look like the Forgotten Realms and NOT anything like Rivellon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: May 2019
|
And if "BG3" hadn't been announced and you showed it to someone who'd played DOS2, they'd immediately think it's DOS2. Um... show representative screenshots of D:OS 2 and BG3 to any of your non-gaming friends, and see if they fail to identify the differences in graphics and dialogue system. One would have to be blind to not see them as being very much the same, other than being a little more "imporved" like one would expect going from D:OS2 to a D:OS3.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Support
|
|
Support
Joined: Mar 2003
|
If this is truly a separate game from the D:OS games, then ALL art assets for character models, environment, etc. should be brand new and made specifically to look like the Forgotten Realms and NOT anything like Rivellon. Yes... the game is currently in an alpha state, and the save system was not implemented yet in the build used for the presentation. All artwork and assets have not been created yet. D:OS 2 had stub text descriptions for some items, or missing inventory icons, at the start of Early Access, which took a took a couple of updates to finish updating/adding. One would have to be blind to not see them as being very much the same, other than being a little more "imporved" like one would expect going from D:OS2 to a D:OS3. By that standard, one could list pages of games it is identical to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
|
Last edited by Maximuuus; 03/03/20 04:37 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: May 2019
|
If this is truly a separate game from the D:OS games, then ALL art assets for character models, environment, etc. should be brand new and made specifically to look like the Forgotten Realms and NOT anything like Rivellon. Yes... the game is currently in an alpha state, and the save system was not implemented yet in the build used for the presentation. All artwork and assets have not been created yet. D:OS 2 had stub text descriptions for some items, or missing inventory icons, at the start of Early Access, which took a took a couple of updates to finish updating/adding. Ok fine. I accept your word on this, because if this is how it will work out then my concern here would be allayed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
stranger
Joined: Jun 2019
|
From https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrIxrFqSbHQ 13:12 Sven "So combat is turn based because D&D is turn based system..." BG1 & BG2 were also D&D games, this did not prevented them from going RTwP. I would have been happy to hear that instead: Sven (version 2.0) "So combat is RTwP because BG has always been RTwP...". Gameplay trailer is boring I almost felt asleep (even though I could not wait for it), It does not feel at all like a BG game (and I will not even include my hate of the UI , and other aspects of the game). Please bring back good old RTwP + AI scripts. BG1 and BG2 feels more sophisticated than this.
Last edited by greg700; 03/03/20 05:52 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Feb 2020
|
[quote=Delicieuxz]while not delivering on what it represents
You mean not making some of the design decisions that you want. That's simply not true. Noone can say that there was ANYTHING that reminded them on baldurs gate. Iam open for new ways, and a modern interpretation. But you should still be able to recognize where this game comes from. Show it to someone without the title, never ever would anyone say "oh that reminds me on BG", never ever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
journeyman
|
|
journeyman
Joined: Feb 2020
|
And there is no similarity with that identity, in style, gameplay, tone, environment, in Larian's shown "BG3". Other BG1+2 fans disagree with your opinion on that. But with what argument? Yes Larian is good, BG3 is possibly a super fun game BUT not a single BG fan can say that this was Baldurs Gate. You have to devide it. People who like the gameplay anyways (which is fine) and people who wants more baldurs gate. Saying that this was baldurs gate style, atmosphere or whatever is an utter lie. If larian would say "Calm down people, this was just a demo out of dos2 assets to show you the direction we're going" fine. But don't tell people that this is a baldurs gate game.
Last edited by ThreeL; 03/03/20 07:00 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
apprentice
|
|
apprentice
Joined: Nov 2019
|
Hello! BG fan here. I am here to tell you that what I saw was a Baldur's Gate game.
I have wanted more Baldur's Gate since 2001 and I am very happy that I will at last be able to get that.
|
|
|
|
|
