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

Feels like people forgot temple of elemental evil... This was turn based and D&D and so much worse than BG especially because of the fighting system

haha, bullseye!

Hah, this game looks exactly how BG3 should have looked. LOL

That actually looks horrible. Everything is so brown it's hard to even make out the player models.

"but it's pre-alpha!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5a1rPHaQ5fQ

And the music <33

I love it.

It's BG3 because they were given the BG IP to use.
And it takes place in the BG universe.
And it takes place in the BG timeline.
And the events of BG 1 & 2 are canon to the events in BG3.

Huh. Seems like BG3 to me. You know, because the game-engine & mechanics have little..actually, have NOTHING to do with game sequels and in-universe lore.

Fallout 3 was not the same as 1 & 2.
World of Warcraft was not an RTS.
Kid Icarus was a side scroller. KI: Uprising was an amazing on-rails shooter plus 3D shooter for the ground battles.
Castle Wolfenstein was, again, a side-scroller before becoming a 3D FPS.
Duke Nukem, AGAIN, was a side scroller, then an FPS.

This is the same thread as the Steam forums; people angry that BG3 is not real-time w/ pause, because they can't take off their nostalgia goggles and accept something new.

We get it; you're angry that BG3 is not going to be a carbon copy of a 20 year old game who's combat was the worst part of it.
You're angry that Larian did not know to psychically contact you to let YOU decide how they should spend their millions of dollars to create the game.
And you're angry that other people are going to like something you hate.

As I've said on the Steam forums; no one cares. Go back to Pathfinder: Kingmaker and let the fans enjoy a perfectly good, perfectly enjoyable turn-based D&D game.
Kingmaker, for me not liking RTwP, is a perfectly fine D&D game.

Go away and let us fans enjoy what will be another perfectly fine D&D game with a combat system we can enjoy.

And on the steam forum:

WE DO CARE !

So pls let others do not like something, you like.

You hatespeech us bec. we do not like something you do, but critisize us for the same? Funny guy/girl.

Everyone has the right to critisize something. If you cannot stand that, do not come to a forum and read.

And it has nothing to do with nostalgia goggles.

The fighting-system in bg was far superior than most of modern RPG's, even if YOU did not like it. Just accept it, thank you.

And if i make a game named baldurs gate 3....OFC the old fans will have some hopes and thoughts bout the product of that.
They should haved named it DOS 3 or something like that. Then the rumours and heavy feelings would not have happend here at all. But i guess you cannot understand that.

I agree, there is no need to behave like the toxic steam forums where everyone is just angry sperges. We are above that. I read those forums and weep for what people must think gamers are

You're really going to say I don't understand, when I just told you literally every reason why it's a legitimate sequel? You're argument for why it's NOT a Baldur's gate sequel is basically 'The mechanics changed'.
And argument I already shot down. But I don't understand?

Uh-huh. Sure, buddy. It's pretty clear YOU don't understand, and ignored half of my post that took apart your complaints, just so you could continue complaining.

And you're allowed to not like something..somewhere else.
The forums should be for the fans to have a place to enjoy something without harassment and negative posts.

You don't see me going onto Pathfinder: Kingmaker's forums and complaining that it should have been turn-based from the start. Why? Because they have a right to enjoy their game and community without negativity.
Plus, it would be stupid for me to demand a developer change their game to appease me, who would be in the minority at that point.

So once again:
t's BG3 because they were given the BG IP to use.
And it takes place in the BG universe.
And it takes place in the BG timeline.
And the events of BG 1 & 2 are canon to the events in BG3.

Game mechanics are the WORST way to ask for a sequel. Game mechanics change was technology grows and improves. I also already listed a number of games that changed full GENRES, not just MECHANICS, and succeeded.

So stop and let us enjoy the hyper for a good game.
A good game, regardless of how RTwP people feel.
A good game that will be turn-based no matter how hard people complain otherwise.
A good game that is, regardless of inane complaints, a Baldur's Gate sequel.

sorry, Eguzky, but people with opinions different from yours is not "harassment", but telling people they are not allowed to express opinions is.

Both of these things. Everyone be nice. Or else.

Oh yeah, Forgotten Realms + ""timeline""/event + D&D rules... Okay I now understand...

Baldur's Gate (and video games) is a set of many elements. Universe and rules are just a part of it.
That's not only what define the experience.

Diablo 3 would never be named Diablo 3 if it wasn't H&S.
World of Warcraft is not named Warcraft 4...
DoS3 is not gonna be a RTS game.
TES6 won't be on a other world as Nirn/Tamriel.

This is just part of the experiences but this is important these things are presents for players to find the spirit of previous games.
No one said BG3 should run on IE. Part of an experience doesn't mean take the exact same things.

arent you very smart.

Then technically Baldurs Gate 3 is literaly a game in which you turn into a dragon and jetpack around the place.
Also Dragon Ball FighterZ is a first person shooter.

You absolute Genius

Yeah. There is no trend in gaming indicating that TB is preferred to RTwP. There has only been big TB hit, and that's DOS2. 1 game isn't a trend.

There are been more recent TB games that tanked than there are ones that did great. Torment: Numenera and Wasteland Remastered were both flops and both had TB. And the TB combat was one of the things that were criticized about Torment: Numenera - because Planescape: Torment had RTwP and people didn't like the title switching to TB.

There are more owners of Pillars of Eternity, which is RTwP, on Steam than Wasteland 2, which is TB.

Pillars of Eternity 2 had TB added to it, but it didn't improve its sales or raise its Steam user score by even a single percentage point in the months that followed the TB patch.

And Pathfinder: Kingmaker is more popular right now than any TB game other than DOS2.

And while DOS2's sales have been great, they still haven't topped Dragon Age: Origins': DA:O sold 3.2 million copies in just over 3 months. DOS2 sold 1 million copies in 2.5 months.


So, there is no trend anywhere that TB is more favoured than RTwP. But some fans of DOS2 have let their appreciation of the game blind them to the point they've crafted a mythology about TB games and their popularity.


Here's Larian's "BG3" senior designer and main combat designer, Edouard Imbert on RTwP vs TB:

https://jv.jeuxonline.info/actualit...rt-senior-designer-combats-baldur-gate-3

That is somebody who should not ever be allowed to develop a Baldur's Gate game. They are prejudiced against Baldur's Gate from the outset and have no interest in making a Baldur's Gate game. There isn't a problem with RTwP, there's a problem with their perception of and skill with RTwP. They require a very dumbed-down experience that is ultra-simple and clarified in order to be able to follow what is happening. They aren't the average gamer, though.

This further underscores that Larian are not even thinking about making a Baldur's Gate game and couldn't care less about the Baldur's Gate series other than the potential for its name to boost their own Divinity brand's popularity, as Swen said is what he hopes to do:

https://youtu.be/kGnGOnzlC4s?t=214

And as Walgrave revealed when he said Larian are sticking to the DOS formula (which disingenuously saying that D&D is a turn-based game while omitting to acknowledge that Baldur's Gate isn't just D&D and is a RTwP series):

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

It's no wonder Walgrave couldn't think of a single aspect of their D&D RPG that justifies calling their "BG3" a successor to the Baldur's Gate series:

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

So, Larian's "BG3" is a sequel because it's a party-based RPG with colourful character and with combat in it - and the combat uses a D&D ruleset. He didn't even dare add that Baldur's Gate has specifically RTwP combat - because, of course, Larian's "BG3" doesn't. Walgrave's claim is the equivalent of saying that any first-person game where you play as a single character and use a variety of weapons to shoot at lots of things is a DOOM series game or a Half-Life series game.

There are loads of games that fit Walgrave's description that aren't called Baldur's Gate series games, and there are thousands that fit the description if not counting the D&D ruleset qualifier. What Walgrave is saying is that there is no similarity between Larian's D&D game and the Baldur's Gate series and so he couldn't think of something that actually justifies calling Larian's "BG3" a Baldur's Gate series game.

Black Isle themselves, the creators of the Baldur's Gate series, wasn't willing to call their game "BG3" despite that their cancelled game had a lot more in common with the BG series: https://twitter.com/jesawyer/status/1234228179906134016

So, if they judged it not right that their own follow-up game not be titled Baldur's Gate 3, then it's clear that they would not approve of Larian's game bearing the Baldur's Gate name.


Larian talk like snakes in interviews when trying to rationalize why they're calling their game "BG3". But it's abundantly clear that the only actual reason why they are calling it "BG3" is for a cash-grab, to promote their own DOS formula and brand. And co-opting another series and disregarding its important legacy and its fans for such a self-serving goal is selling-out. If they weren't interesting in making an actual Baldur's Gate game, and it's clear they have never been, then they should have left the title alone.

BTW, in a recent interview Swen said that their studio all loved the BG series (except for everything about it, it seems). But in an older interview from when the license was being announced, I'm pretty sure he said that the people in their studio didn't even know what the Baldur's Gate series was when the idea was raised.

TB/RTwP discussion here please. Thank you.

World of Warcraft WAS Warcraft 4. They changed the name when they switched genres, but it was a continuation of the same story in the same world (IE: The events of Warcraft 1-3 are canon to WoW) with the same people.
Baldur's Gate 3 is not even switching genres; it's still an isometric RPG based on D&D. It's also using the same world, and the events of BG 1 & 2 are canon to BG3.

DoS3 could be an RTS, and as long as it takes place in the same world as DoS2, it's a sequel. I would not buy it, because I don't like RTSs, but it would still be a sequel.

Mechaniics change as technology changes. And developers make what they are comfortable making. I'd rather have a TB game from Larian, who have shown they are very good hands at making TB games, then an RTS.

If you don't like turn-based games; fine. I don't like RTwP. It would be silly of me or you or anyone to buy a game they are going to hate.
But if you don't mind turn-based games, then don't let something as silly as a mechanics shift chase you away from what looks like a very good game so far.

And no matter how much you, me, or anyone tries to claim otherwise, a sequel is determined by a games STORY, not it's mechanics.

Sequel:
a published, broadcast, or recorded work that continues the story or develops the theme of an earlier one.

You will note in that definition, it covers the story. Not the mechanics.

Right on. I have every right to be angry, to complain, and to describe this game as a bad game. And I will continue to do so.

Based on a single tech demo. It's what, pre-alpha? Hilarious.

One could argue that the upcoming Diablo 4 is moving to a more open world hub style game more,with MMORPG elements. They will still call it Diablo 4 and not World of Diablo.

I really do think though that too much is being made of the BG3 title. WoTC wanted a BG3 game, they specifically chose Larian due to how D:OS was as a game and all that that entails. Life is too bloody short to care about this to this extent and I say that as someone for whom BG2 defined everything when it came to RPG games going forward. I took ages to warm to NWN purely for this very reason, because although it wasn't called BG(x) it was the next BioWare RPG game that I played (I missed Icewind Dale, though I did play a fair amount of Planescape Torment) and it didn't have a PARTY.

We all have things that are personal to us when it comes to beloved franchises or music or whatever. For me like I said, it's 6 people party composition in a D&D setting with epic story and awesome interactions. Anyting else is just a game mechanic.

For others its the painted landscapes, for others the combat system, or a combination. Either way, I feel we need to move away from "this isn't BG3!!" Because it is, because WoTC have said it is and because Larian are making it as such.

Is it my BG3? Your BG3? Yes, no, perhaps or variants of. It's healthy to state what we like or dislike, but arguing over the title should really stop and instead we should focus on providing constructive feedback as to what we would like to see from Larian going forward.

I think they've seen what a passionate corwd we can be, but let's be passionate and support and where appropriate critique, not act like spoilt brats who didn't get a red BMX but a black mountain bike for their birthday.