Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Mega-threads and Guides The Turn-Based/Real Time with Pause topic

Then tell me what was baldurs gate on what you saw. What besides the name?

A dark story set on the Sword Coast around Baldur's Gate that I know will revolve around an Illithid invasion. Even more so there were mentions of the hells even early in the game and I am sure that our travels will take us there again.
A perfect evolution of gameplay mechanics to capture the DnD rules.
Volo
Harpers

And this is with only the very little information that has been released so far.

So an idea is for you already baldurs gate enough? You dont mention anything about the gameplay.

Volo was such an iconic character...

Capturing the dnd rules with Level 1 rangers making firearrows on their own and especially one entire group first, than the other? Thats not at all D&D. Its their marketing that it is, but what makes it D&D? That theyre using dices or the name of spells?

Yes, I say that the gameplay seems to be a perfect evolution. To me it looked much more like a DnD computer game than BG1 & 2 ever did (I replay them every 2-3 years becuase they are great games in many ways, but not all, and I am a huge fan).
Volo is an iconic character, in my opinion and in others. I mean he is up there with Elminster.

That your opinion is that it is nothing Baldur's Gate have nothing to do with my opinion. My best friend that have loved BG1&2 as long as I have, we played them a lot when they were released, are also of the opinion that this is BG3. So, you are clearly voicing your opinion and not some fact that all BG fans agrees with.

Maybe it is or isn't more BG. But DOS was more D&D than BG ever was, even without things like "magic missile" and "Vorpal swords" or whatever, Combining the unparalleled D&D type game of DOS with actual D&D rules is only sweeter.

Saying D:OS was more D&D than BG is just plain silly and only serves to hurt your credibility. Heck even Swen himself would never try to make such a preposterous claim.

Ok, I'm just concerned if the old engine will be ok. DOS2 had some issues, in particular save file corruption, I hope that will be fixed.

When I said "resembles DOS" I didn't mean art assets. I meant gameplay. Sure you now have your 1 action and 1 bonus action, but in general it felt and played just like DOS2.

Saves bit was just odd to me - I thought it'd be a priority to have it working for demo.

Creativity wise - yes and no. I wouldn't mind seeing something completely new from Larian. And I don't agree that sticking to RPG but trying something new instead of TB for gameplay is not creative. Making yet another TB RPG that follows pretty much same formula (TB, interactive environment for combat purposes, surface effect like oil, etc.) though is definitely not creative. What's worse it sets a trend for Larian of making everything they do since DOS into this template.

Yes, DOS, DOS2, and everything before. It doesn't really counter my point, only proves it. Larian gameplay always lacked polish and balance, as if their design dpt doesn't care or just is not capable of it.

Well, tbh I thrown in misses just for a good measure. Misses are fine in RPGs.

BG1 & 2 had the races, the items, the spells, etc,of D&D. So, obviously, it's more in line with D&D that way. But RTwP? Sorry. That's not D&D. Unable to act outside the box (e.g push someone off a cliff)? That's not D&D. DOS2 replicates the table top system better than any game has before it. I think I recall from another thread that you stated you started playing RPGs in the 90s; if so, it makes perfect sense. BG is your baseline if you were born roughly 1984 to 1990. For those of us who grew up on table top D&D, using the BG games as a baseline for D&D is ridiculous.

So, Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 aren't D&D? Of course they are. They calculate rounds in the background while providing a more immersive real-time experience.

A PC video game isn't a table-top game. And it isn't being played with a human DM. It's an adapted experience and isn't beholden exclusively to table-top format because it literally isn't a table-top format.

And "Baldur's Gate 3" is a statement that a game is the third entry in specifically the Baldur's Gate series, and not just general D&D. The Baldur's Gate series is a specific presentation of D&D-based gameplay. There are responsibilities to live up to the Baldur's Gate series name, and Larian aren't showing that they're living up to those responsibilities.

Never said that.



Of course it isn't. But, being turn based and having the ability to use your environment makes it more D&D-like than can a game with RTwP and little to no environmental interaction.



Which responsibilities? Be specific.

To deliver on the expectations carried by the Baldur's Gate series name with an experience that is relateable to the series, and which resembles it rather than DOS2.

To be faithful to the brand and not use it as a cash-grab to promote the Divinity games, as Swen said he hopes "BG3" will do.


If Black Isle didn't think it right to call their cancelled 'Baldur's Gate 3' game Baldur's Gate 3 due to the differences it had with BG1 and BG2, despite that it would have still carried on the gameplay of BG1 and BG2, it's all the much more not right for Larian to call their D&D DOS formula game that bears no similarities with the Baldur's Gate series a "Baldur's Gate 3".

https://twitter.com/jesawyer/status/1234228179906134016

Well, see there you have it. When I hear "Baldur's Gate", I think D&D (because that is what it is/was supposed to be based on). And to me, what Larian has done with DOS2 is more true to D&D than BG, even without the trappings of races, classes, items, etc. in D&D. Yes, maybe they could have called it "Faerun Adventures" or some such. But, I don't think the Baldur's Gate name evokes in everyone what you think it does. For some people, it is that specific game; for others, it just says D&D.

As an aside, I wonder if the FF7 crowd is in an uproar over SquareEnix's decision to go RTwP with a classis game that was TB in the original.

Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 aren't just supposed to be based on D&D - they are based on D&D and calculate rounds in the background of the real-time experience.

It is evident that the Baldur's Gate series name evokes the expectation of something different than a DOS game in plenty enough of the series' fans.

People for whom it merely evokes the idea of D&D obviously do not care much about the Baldur's Gate series and so their opinion on the matter isn't that important, since they don't care either way and aren't big fans of the Baldur's Gate series.


That's not a game I've been following but I'm sure there has been some uproar over it. When I heard about it I thought that it's an unfortunate change, myself. I still do.

But the theme of Final Fantasy games is that each one is a self-contained story in its own world. When a FF is a sequel to another specific game in the series, it uses a different titling, like Final Fantasy X-2. The FFVII remake isn't replacing the original game and isn't claiming to be its sequel. It is a re-imagining of it.

Silly stuff.
And btw, I've been playing tabletop D&D for 35 years.

We're of similar age then and experience then. What makes DOS2 so un-D&D-like, aside from the obvious lack of the lore, classes, etc. Or is that it? Does TB and more freedom to improvise and be creative not matter?

I know that in certain obvious ways BG1 & 2 are more D&D, as I have stated; but that despite that, DOS2 plays more like a D&D session than BG ever could (understandably, with it being a 20 year old game).

That's because your mind is focused on the game being very similar to a tabletop D&D session. My mind, however, is looking at these games NOT in any way as a D&D tabletop session but as a D&D video game. That's the key point. I don't want a tabletop simulator. I don't want the game to be anything like tabletop. If I want to play tabletop, I can go do that. In BG3, just as with BG1&2, want a VIDEO game. A single player video game. No table. No other players. Just me, playing a video game.

Fair enough. That's you and that's some others. That's not me and it's not some others. D&D is at the heart of all RPGs. While there are likely some developers who did not want their video game to be a faithful version of the table top experience, Larian does not seem to be one of them. And I would expect WotC isn't either. Were the creators of the original BG trying to get away from the table top experience? I highly doubt it. They just did the best rendition of it to date that they could.

and BG is at the heart of all computer RPGs.

Then what are you doing wasting your time here? This game is going to be as close as we can get to tabletop gaming. You will be able to play it by yourself or with friends.

Oh how mistaken you are. RPG video games didn't start 1998 you know? Nor did it reach a climax then either.