honestly, for all i am one of those people defending larian here, i doubt that.
The animations are obviously placeholder and the world design is probably getting a lot more details, but what i mean is very specific stylistic descisions that it shares with divinity.
For example the height and structure of buildings. Anyone that played OS1 or 2 will definitly recognize the height of the walls on the ruins, they look familliar, not because they are old assets, but because they are new assets created with a simmilar goal in mind.
Now, this isnt a bad thing, but it certainly makes you draw comparisons. of course the Infinity engien also did this with its prerendered backgrounds. Anyone that hastn played Icewind Dale or Baldurs Gate will certainly not be able to tell a tavern in Targos apart from one in Baldurs Gate.
Theres just some artstyle things that larian likes. Larian likes Statues, big Statues that remind you of Catholic saints and generaly christian imagery from the Renaissance. They tend to be a feature of Larian games and have been for a while. Another thing Larian likes to do is floor pattenrs, things like reliefs or mosaics on the floor, ofthen with a vagueley greco roman or renaissance art theme.
Theres some things you cant help but notice.
another thing Larian likes to do is verticality as map boundries. You dont notice it a lot in Original Sin 1 if you dont pay attention but the game world, despite beeing isometric in view, is very vertical and uses this to seperate areas, rather than using walls, small loadscreens, doors or simmilar things.
The terrain looking like a clustered fissure after an Earthquake is soemthing larian has done in the Original Sin games.
Dont get me wrogn, i think it looks quite frankly amazing. but i see why people associate it with Original Sin, sepcifically compared to Infinity engine games that feature primarily flat terrain due to the nature of the graphics.
Basically what im saying is that Larian is making itself hard for themselves and easy for their detractors. They make a game thats actually very different from ORiginal Sin. Having played both of them multiple times and several infinity engine games i can say that the deadlyness of combat certainly reminds me more of the latter than the former, aswell as the random and erratic nature of it. but the Artstyle is Larian and this makes people associate it with Original Sin (because they havent seen any other larian games, and probably havent played a lot of CRPGs outside of the classical CRPG era up untill bioware went tits up, so to them, CRPGs that look kind of like a Larian game, and dont look like a Bioware or Infinity engine game, probably is an Original Sin clone
Thats it.
Its not the color or how exactly characters look, but its the general level design. Yes, statues, mosaic, vertical level structure and those kind of ruins are typically Larian. I like this, but I can understand if some people complain it does not look like BG.
BG had painted backgrounds and you could not rotate the camera so everything had to be visible from a fixed angle. This prevented them from having some vertical structures that may have looked good but prevented the player from seeing the chars, the path, enemies and so on. So the level design depends a lot of the type of camera you have. BG3 will be a full 3D game while BG1+2 were not so it will look different, but the level design could be closer to BG1+2.
Some time ago the was a BG1 remake as module for NWN2. I did not play it. Can anybody tell if this game with 3D graphic and a different rule set ( DnD 3.5 ) did "feel like BG"?
PS: WOW, I did not expect something useful in this thread anymore. Sometimes there are positive surprizes.
Prof. Dr. Dr. Mad S. Tist
World leading expert of artificial stupidity. Because there are too many people who work on artificial intelligence already