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

Enough talk about TB/RTwP. Any posts not in the pinned topic will be deleted.

It was mentioned in service of a greater point, not as an argument of which is better or which should be in BG3. TB/RTwP is indirectly related to the topic of this thread, so it's going to need to be brought up here to some extent from time to time.

I meant to say the game can look like BG without looking outdated,my bad.

''TB vs RTwP isn't directly the point'' The poll is RTwP vs TB if I understand correctly and it's almost a 50-50, I can't see how that prove people asking for more BG on BG3 are a minority, I don't specifically want one system or the other so I can't even vote on that poll. You want accurate results? Show me this poll on PC gamer ''Does BG3 looks like it's a game of the BG series?'' then we can discuss numbers.



I never intended to bring it up because it's not what I'm discussing,I'm only giving my answer.

That isn't where the dispute lies. The dispute lies in if it should "like a BG game." Part of the problem has been trying to define what a "BG looks like." The clearest answer might be something like "it should look more like Pillars of Eternity" to at least bring it current. If that's what you mean, then sure, that's a fair point. In response I would say that PoE 2 and DOS2 came out six months apart; one flopped, one was a huge hit. Based on that, it should be clear on which model to follow. But even so, games in a franchise can change. The most recent God of War game played very different from the predecessors, but was a resounding success. Another problem with the BG2 to BG3 issue is the time difference. How many games in a franchise are more then twenty years apart?

I feel like we're running in circles here.
PoE2 didn't ''flopped'' because of how it looks AFAIK so I wouldnt say that's a fair comparison. And yes,games change,and I've said I'm fine with that,you say the new God of War plays very different to the others and again,I'm fine with that,but the question is,did you know it was a GoW game when you saw it? Because the answer everyone will give you is yes. I've only played one GoW and regardless of gameplay mechanics all the games look like part of the franchise/series to me. BG3 don't, that's where the dispute lies.

I agree with ''Another problem with the BG2 to BG3 issue is the time difference. How many games in a franchise are more then twenty years apart?'' that is true,but again,no one is saying they should use the same engine or the same outdated graphics or any craziness so at the end of the day the time lapse it's not such a huge deal.

Even the lead man behind PeE2 cannot say why it flopped. Graphics? Gameplay? Genre fatigue (doubtful because of DOS2 success)? Bottom line is, PoE2 was very BG2ish and it failed, so hardly a good example to follow.



Story and setting are enough to connect BG2 and BG3. Unlike GoW and Witcher, there isn't a character that is the symbol of BG. If the central character in BG1&2 was Drizzt and BG3 had used him as well, the games would instantly be connected in the manner you described; but there isn't something like that to connect them. Gameplay and graphics/design do not need to be similar, especially so with them being so far apart.

Then do so in the pinned topic. It has become a significant problem and it's not up for debate.

EXACTLY!!!
I completely agree!

I felt the same with Dark Souls 2 and 3. While I think both are better than the first, I played Dark Souls 1 before all of them and I had totally different emotions.

We shouldn't dwell on past. Games are supposed to evolve.

And I am a fan of Baldurs Gate games of the old. But I think turn based suits better.

But I would definitely change the visuals a bit, to look less like a DOS3.

I think when the game releases, if larian really tries to translate D&D 5 to BG3, we will see this is not DOS3.

My take on PoE2 fail is because it was a bugfest and the main story is really bad and boring,but you can take P:K instead of PoE if you want.

The story in BG3 takes place after Descent into avernus so the story doesn't connect both games,the setting does however but it's not enough,otherwise Dark Alliance and Demon Stone would have been BG3,4 and 5 for example.



The first ''Dark Soul'' wich in my mind is ''Demon's soul'' and all the other 3 DS look pretty close to each other overall,I've only played Demon's souls and DS2 tho.

''But I would definitely change the visuals a bit, to look less like a DOS3.'' That's the whole point basically.

PoE 2 was crap for the same reason PoE1 was, it looked forgettable as shit and was surrounded by controversy about the developers beeing idiots.
Everyhting about PoE looked milquetoast as fuck.

"hey were making the first Dragon Age again with worse graphics"

Any hard data on the success of P:K? Closest I could find to compare it to DOS2 are:

DOS2 https://steamdb.info/app/435150/graphs/

P:K https://steamdb.info/app/640820/graphs/



Just because the other games weren't titled BG3, BG4, etc, doesn't mean they could not have been (if setting is enough). BG3's story can be made to connect to BG2. Whether they have done so or not we just cannot know yet.

I meant P.K is closer to BG than BG3 I wasn't rating P:K or comparing it to DOS2

Even a racing game can be called BG3 if WoTC really wants to but those games weren't named like that for a reason.
They said the story of the first to games was totally closed,and that some people in FR are very long lived so we could see them in BG3. I don't think a couple cameos are a solid link to a story but yes,we don't know about that yet so everything story related are just guesses.

I think the point the other user is making is that the recent games that look and play similar to BG have not done nearly as well as DOS2 with the statistics we have.

That being said, while I think it's important to stress what people would like to see and how they think the game can improve (outside of RTwP since it won't happen), it's important for people to also realize that a lot of what's shown thus far is subject to change.

As I've outlined a few times already, from what we've seen they're currently in pre-alpha and they've even admitted to a lot of things changing (like the UI). Right now they're basically laying down a playable framework which still has a ton of placeholders and unfinished pieces. Even when the game is in early access it will be tough to judge the game by anything other than core gameplay and writing/story until the final release.

Edit: Just pointing out the last two pieces are a general to everyone rather than just you.

I know,but I highly doubt the reason why they've not done as well as DOS2 has anything to do with visuals wich was the thing I was discussing.

That being said, while I think it's important to stress what people would like to see and how they think the game can improve (outside of RTwP since it won't happen), it's important for people to also realize that a lot of what's shown thus far is subject to change.



Yes,I know it's pre-alpha and a lot of things are bound to change,but I think it's better to give feedback sooner (now that they can add,change or get rid of things easily) rather than later (incurring extra work and time wasted)
And of course we can only talk about what we've seen so far,maybe and hopefully the AMA and the EA serve to placate our worries.

I just have a feeling that more and more people on Larian "side" are getting annoyed by this thread.

Forum moderators threatening to ban me, or delete certain posts.

Larian employees supporting that as well.

I think at a certain point Larian management might also get really annoyed by this specific issue (BG3 actually being DOS3).

Why is that? Its because its simply the TRUTH, truth sometimes hurts, there is no hiding from it after we saw the demo.

When I saw the demo...I was just kinda sad and a bit mad...a bit disappointed with Larian for the first time.

I know they put a lot of effort into this game, their team is really huge, lots of money went into all of this.

This topic is a very uncomfortable issue for Larian.

I would not be surprised if they just shut down this topic all together, because it seems a bit too late to change the entire direction of the game.

This game is DOS3, and I don't see that changing, it would cost so much more money for them to start redesigning the game now.

With that, unfortunately maybe TWO IP's will be ruined irreversibly - DOS and BG.

What is Larian going to do next - do DOS3 after BG3? Dont see that coming anytime soon.

Essentially, the DOS trilogy will be finished with BG3.

Good luck Larian.

Yeah, no. They're not angry because you're 'preaching truth' and they want to 'silence the brave man'. And not to make the fans happy.
It's because you've insulted people, and make the same point again and again instead of accepting discussions and other peoples points of view.
You're not some brave crusader, seeking to shine the light of truth on the evil Larian devs, being banned because they are scared you'll reveal their deep, dark secret.

A DOS3 game would not have D&D rules and lore. So, you are incorrect.

Looks and plays more like DOS2 more than BG2? Seems so. Is that a bad thing? No.



You are continuing to give yourself and your fellow BG1&2 devotees too much credit.

Listen to him, he has the truth.
For you it's not, for me it is.

And it's funny to look on the other thread that the majority of those waiting (and hardly defending) this BG3 don't talk about BG1&2 on their top5 games

Every games using the D&D rules aren't BG, your answer is very "weak".

Sorry. I don't understand what you are trying to say.

Or pretending not to?

Just because it's D&D it doesn't mean it's baldurs gate. 4 party character, multiplayer co-op focused, looks exactly and plays like DOS2. people initial reaction genuinely thought this was DOS2 sequel.

seriously Larian why are you making baldurs gate when what you are doing really is just DOS3? People are not stupid or naive