Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General What about day/night system?

I don't think day/night were particularly robust, but there more then cosmetic - I am pretty sure at night you were more likely to encounter enemy mobs, and in BG2 at night you would see stuff like vampires battling thief guild. Some quests in both games were time of day specific. Similar, to how Witcher 3 works, I suppose.

This is not about sandbox or different outcomes... And absolutely not about returning for rewards in the same area...
This is all about the feeling you're part of a real world that isn't player-centric.
This is about RP.

BG had N/D and you have to sleep... I don't understand why you're talking about Fallout 4. This is not a reference to me.

No point in "returning" ? I'll answer, but maybe you should add "staying"...
What about quests, main or side you come to give back to someone ?
What about the cities of Baldur's Gate and Atkhatla you explore for hours ?

Without D/N you only see the environment at 11AM, everytime, whatever you're doing.
Maybe you don't care, that's ok but please, don't tell me it's not immersion breaking... And don't tell me Larian's worlds are consistant when time is something that doesn't exist (exept through illusions to use your own word -> DrunkPunk just give another exemple of illusion down... the "7" days)

Don't get me wrong, I like Larian's games but here we're not talking about DoS... We're talking about the legendary Baldur's Gate.

EDIT : I could add that their stealth mecanics looks a little bit ridiculous atm... Stay in the shadow of a tree at 11AM and you're not half-stealthy but that's another (immersion breaking) point.

I don't really see the need to jump into "this game isn't for you" territory. That's dismissive and honestly a little rude. Just because you don't see it, doesn't mean there isn't value to the mechanics.

I suspect it's largely a result of their engine and not having implemented it previously. It would likely take some serious work to bring the engine in line with such a system. And that's fine. I don't think the reaction is overblown, it's really just feedback that displays the disappointment with the decision.

it's also a little dishonest to say it was only cosmetic in BG1/2. In BG1 the cycle absolutely had consequences, ranging from losing companions if you spent too much time exploring/resting to how time of day would impact the frequency of fights or ambushes. These things mean the day/night cycle has actual consequence on the game, which I love and adds to the immersion. And this game could have consequences as a result, too, especially in a game where we're under threat of a tadpole taking us over in 7 days. The fact there is no cycle really diminishes that threat in favor of a narrative, which in itself isn't bad, but still disappointing.

It alway amazes me how the trolls in this forum think all Larian does is perfect and there is no room for feedback/improvement/complaints.

The rest camp shown so far is the total opposite of immersion, where it shows a huge camp out of nowhere. It needs a lot of improvement to even be believable.

The D/N cycle in BG2 was not perfect but it was nice and had some consequences on gameplay as well.

He can't; the nostalgia goggles are too obstructive.

Just speculating, but I don't think he was referring to visual fidelity.

Exactly, just decided to ignore the trolls.

BG was player-centric to an EXTREME level. You alone among your companions were unique; you were destined to literally become a *god*. So that's neither here no there. The long rest nighttime camping is likewise RP as it simulates the passage of time in a roundabout more controlled manner. The many areas in darkness can indirectly hide the lack of nighttime during play outside; you get a balanced diet of light and dark conditions. Different perspectives I guess.


You didn't *have* to sleep. Nothing compelled you to do so. You did it to regain spells and because the passage of time really didn't matter in almost all cases beyond vaguely remembering some quests being time sensitive.


Hence my use of "almost any area", Baldur's Gate city being an obvious exception and a hub where you returned repeatedly. I really hate such hubs with a vengeance; as they towards way too much talk (filling up the quest log with so many quests that each individual quest is diminished by the sheer amount) and too little action. Baldur's Gate city was pretty well balanced though.


I actually would prefer d/n cycles too. Our disagreement is on the importance of a visual implementation, and I also see some nuance and issues with it that you seem to be in the dark about. See what I did there? Hurr hurr.

1. As previously mentioned, spellcasters in D&D are somewhat balanced by limited spell slots, but nevertheless universally seen as OP. A d/n cycle would forgo of this balancing mechanic. How long real-time to emulate a cycle? 30 min? Your party could be topped up on health and spells at all times. This is admittedly counteracted by increased combat-focus of cRPGs. But again, Larian is already buffing the most powerful spellcaster, the Wizard, to have two full fillings of spell slots through Arcane Recovery.
2. A free d/n cycle mechanic would almost certainly work against any story driven time constraints. Like most pressing issue; the tadpoles being a ticking bomb in your party's heads. Normal ceremorphosis (the time it takes the tadpoles to devour the host's brain) time is one week. The video with Raphael, the devil, hints at the player becoming so desperate as to return begging to do a deal with the devil. The assumption is passage of time, cause you can refrain to use your tadpole powers throughout the game like I refrained from using my slayer-form in the original series.
3. A game with *proper* d/n cycle would force Larian to delve into Bethesda sandboxy style of world-building (games that are not story-driven). It would be immersion breaking for creatures to stay in one place and never rest for instance. Not implementing the typical d/n can be seen as *helpful* immersion here as real-time now equals game-time in a way it never is or can be with d/n cycles, thus forgoing the need for complex AI behaviour.


You're from Belgium. You *have* to like their games or they would throw french, pardon, *belgian* frittes with mayo at you on the street lol. I have high expectations for BG3 too. But with BG3 I quickly realized many people have such unrealistic expectations they are setting the game up for failure in their own minds. BG was the game that revived a dying RPG-genre and I loved it dearly at the time. Playing through the Enhanced Edition helped to keep things better in perspective; no doubt it was great for it's time, but most of the emotion it invokes to this day is centered around rose-tinted nostalgia derived from *who* we as gamer's were when we first played the series. Younger, less jaded and certainly less entitled. Perhaps more so than *what* the game was, how good it was.


Environmental conditions, including the ones the player creates (like putting out torches or casting darkness spell), and enemy line-of-sight will have an effect on sneaking. Darkvision plays also is accounted for and you can enter turn-based mode for precision movement. But yeah, where as I didn't notice the "ridiculous mechanics" you allude to, I appreciate BG3 is in pre-alpha still. Besides, I don't expect perfection in a *team-based* game not-centered around such mechanics. Again, different perspectives each just as valid - but mine will allow me to appreciate the upcoming game for what it is, not for what I expect it to be.

I wasn't talking about visual fidelity either
I simply find it funny how you whine about people thinking a game is perfect, yet at the mere implication that BG2 isn't a perfect game you classify people as trolls.
It makes you look like someone who's jaded from twenty years of nostalgia, something you've seen swamp every site of discussion since the game's initial announcement - 'Trolls' (as you'd call them if they disagreed with you) who crawl out of their two decade old cave to demand that twenty years of development and improvements should be forsaken in favour of making an exact copy of a game that's ancient by video game standards.
The exclusion of a day/night cycle is regrettable (assuming it actually gets excluded) but it won't be a dealbreaker. If that is what will cause you to be disinterested in the game I must question if you ever were interested to begin with.

But if 1 rest is 1 day you have like 7 long rest. A world clock would have added a real time constraint. not just a fake one, which is called story driven time constraint.

You can probably get a time extension at the very beginning of the game, if they were serious about, that 1 week, I do not think, that it will be so limited....

The story of BG was obviously player-centric... Not the entire world.
If the player is the only one that decide when night has come or not... the world is inconsistent and everything in it only turn arround what the players decide to do.
Maybe you're only waiting a great gameplay and maybe I'm looking for a more RP experience.

Please, play (again?) BG1/2... You HAVE to sleep.
Exceptions ? What about Nashkel or Beregost you cross more than once for quests and every locations you stay in for hours because you HAVE to sleep ?
What about every other places you visit back to talk again with someone ?

Sorry, but I can't understand you're right with people always staying at the same place if there isn't D/N that suddenly become a problem if there's one...
The only "problem" I see is in towns, villages or camp where there are many people because these are nearly the only places you should visit way more than once
(and where it could be dissapointing to see everyone at the exact same place during the day AND the night).

The tadpole thing... In many games, the situation is catastrophic, you have to do things FAST because the world is going to fall into darkness if you don't...
... but you can play for 100 hours doing anything you want without any consequences.
No one really know atm for BG3 but is that something you want for a BG game ? I don't because this is another ridiculous and immersion breaking illusion.
I don't think timer is good for player's experience, but there are many ways to create a sense of urgency without a timer that doesn't really exist (or that only exist when you click for a specific number of time on an icon)

Unrealistic expectations or nostalgia is bullshit.
What we're talking about (here or in other topics) is not "unrealistic".

Of course they have to choose and choices can't pleased everyone... I can deal with it but having something that looks more like a real BG experience and not only like a another usual "Larian experience" is not unrealistic.
=> Here we're only talking about N/D cycle... Whatever it is important for me and not for you, no one would be dissapointed if this is something they include in the game.

The worst D/N cycle is just cosmetic... the best gives a game many opportunities to become way more interresting, consistent and enjoyable for everyone.

No one is a troll just for disagreeing with you, or for defending Larian’s decisions. Feedback and suggestions are good. Complaints can be useful too, but some complaints are just over the top. Such as this:



Clearly Larian are putting a huge amount of detail in the game that wasn’t part of the originals. According to the interview posted earlier, they found that some of their systems didn’t work with a day/night cycle. Or at least they couldn’t find a way to make them work.

One of those is co op multiplayer, which you or I may not personally care about, but it’s really big deal for many people.

The other is how the game reacts to the choices you make, which is something I do care about. Despite the huge increase in computing power since the 90s, RPGs haven’t really improved on what I think should be a fundamental part of the game. Some would argue they’ve generally gone backwards, with choices making little real difference or only changing the ending. Now we have 2 big RPGs coming where the developers say they are trying to make your choices really matter throughout the game- BG3 and Cyberpunk 2077. How well they manage that remains to be seen, but I think certain fans of the old games should at least give them a chance before writing it off for being different.

I’d have also liked there to be a day/night cycle, NPC schedules, etc, but not if it would mean throwing out other things they are trying to do. It’s not going to happen anyway, so it’s probably better to concentrate on feasible changes to what is in the game, such as the camp system.

I agree that the camp as presented so far seems weird. I suspect there’s scope for improving it during early access.

The closest example I know of is Dragon Age Origins. That doesn’t have a day/night cycle either and the camp seems similar as you can talk to your companions and a couple of other characters (the dwarfs) show up. It doesn’t seem weird though, as it’s only accessible from the world map.

In D&D however resting replenishes spell slots, and in BG 1&2 you can rest anywhere outside of towns. What seems odd in the gameplay demos is that you appear to set up camp wherever you hit the rest button, but the environment doesn’t currently reflect that. I see 2 options that might improve it-

1. Change the camp environment according to where you are. The downside to that is your camp will grow will various follows, and they could seem to appear out of nowhere as you said. Also making the camp environment work for wherever you are could be hard to program.
2. Have a more permanent camp, perhaps on the edge of each map and make it so a long rest really means returning to your camp (maybe fast traveling you back). There should probably still be different camp environments, but they’d only need to design one per map.

I think the second makes most sense from what I’ve seen so far. It would be similar to Dragon Age Origins which works pretty well IMO, and it’s probably the simplest change. Although I’d have to actually try it to give proper feedback.

I also hope we’ll also be able to stay in taverns and that will have have some advantage. Maybe eventually get a house in the city or something?

Sure, but they’ve said that a proper day/night cycle messes up other things they are doing. Things that should be interesting and enjoyable for everyone. Maybe more so than a day/night cycle?

A cosmetic day/night cycle might be OK just to change the environments, but that could conflict with the whole resting thing. In which case, maybe a weather system would basically do the same job?

Most games’ lighting at night is more perpetual twilight anyway, or a very bright full moon at best. I could make a case that exploring anywhere without artificial lighting in the middle of the night totally breaks my immersions, unless my character has the ability to see in the dark. But that would be nitpicking.

A more precise term would then be "story-driven" and not "player-centric". Your choice of words reveals a mindset so mired in negativity that you can't bring yourself to use a more precise word that indicates Larian's choice of not implementing a proper d/n cycle is in fact a decision with pros and cons rather than a wholly negative game-breaking deficiency. A wise man once said that there are no utopian solutions, just trade-offs. Only the totalitarian mind believes in absolutes.

BG3 is set to be more story-driven than the original series which placed its story-driven content in dungeons/separate instances for the most parts: Only random/simple encounters, and scripted encounters played out in the open world. BG3 is much more "open world" in this regard thus being more of an obstacle to the implementation of a proper d/n cycle for the reasons given previously.

Oh, and I'm fully expecting a GREAT role-playing experience on top of top-notch gameplay. I just don't allow myself the entitlement of getting lost in the minutia of pre-conceived and specific notions of what constitutes immersive or not. My sense of RP isn't as much derived from what I see as largely cosmetic features; it's centered around the story it self, around the character growth and interaction with NPCs. The long rest encampment mechanic is sufficient for me to simulate the passage of time, and the very diverse areas with dynamic variety of light and dark conditions will be sufficient to provide both cosmetic and tactical variety.


I don't remember it that way. You were certainly *incentivized* to rest for the reasons I mentioned as well as a fatigue system (for practical purposes much more triggered by the OP Haste spell than through actual passage of time), but again, nothing really stopped you from going weeks without sleep/rest AFAIK. You could even game the system by kicking companions from the party and re-invite them refreshed. Not having a d/n cycle does not automatically preclude possible nighttime conditions even outside in a story driven context. And I do hope Larian will implement such added variety. Unlike you, I just don't *require* the automation of such a mechanic due to the plethora of reasons given.


Again. If you simulate the passage of time through the implementation of d/n cycles, you also open for the natural expectation of NPCs being more than mere statues frozen in time and place. You expect them to act appropriately. Thus a proper system would would require a large amount of additional resources (like complex NPC behaviour AI) not be counter-immersive to the immersion gained by d/n cycles. Making the feature a "wash" (both immersive and unimmersive). On the other hand, NOT having d/n cycles makes in-game time more in line/correspond with real-time, thus not making the lack of said cycles and lack of realistic NPC behaviour, in some ways just as realistic as not properly implemented d/n cycles. Understand?

As mentioned, the original series kind of hid "immersion-breaking" lack of realistic behaviour in separate instances or through scripted encounters (like meeting Bodhi). Nothing precludes Larian from doing the same. I would prefer the apparent "open world" feel of BG3 than the rather cosmetic/shallow d/n cycles of the original series. Especially if enough such scripted encounters during nighttime occurs outside of the camp mechanic.


Again, I trust in the vision of Larian. If this is indeed implemented (again I have no pre-conceived notions), then I expect them to give the player a sense of pressure/time constraint which increases overall drama - without forcing a "bad" ending for instance. At least not without giving ample of warning (like the usage of tadpole powers is). How is time sensitive "ridiculous and immersion breaking illusion" while your simplistic d/n cycles are not? How is the most complex stealth system of any isometric cRPG I know ridiculous and immersion breaking? The very nature of RP is about the illusion you create.


No. It's very much to the point. A great deal of people here have a great deal of expectations based on almost pure nostalgia and/or based upon requiring BG3 not to resemble D:OS2. What constitutes unrealistic is not the individual expectations, but the sum of a great many of these expectations, some considered small, some game-ruining. D&D 5e is already an INCREDIBLY complex system requiring a lot of resources to properly implement and given resources are not infinite; Larian has to prioritize features. I have explained why n/d cycle is not entirely a net benefit. Trying to please everyone would likely end up not really pleasing anyone, and I trust Larian's vision INFINITELY more than I do yours and the handful of consistent naysayers on these forums.

I think the day-night cycle sounds nice and good and first, but in my experience with games with day-night cycle it ends up being annoying when you have +50h ingame.

I remember in Elder scrolls games or Arcanum to come back to the city to sell something and find all the shops closed. So you have to wait till morning
You want to deliver a fetch-and-carry trophy to your questgiver and you have to track him/her because he/she went to sleep or back to their shop, so you have to wait until morning
You talk in the daytime with your fencer that wants you to "borrow" some trinket from someone in the city and of course, you have to wait till nighttime so they´re sleeping or till later so no one is at home.
Since day and night passes every 30mins-1h sometimes passes entire days without you sleeping or eating, and that is more unrealistic and immersion-breaking than go to sleep to your camp at nighttime.

All is fine at first, but when you are doing it for the umpteenth time it is not really that fun.
And that happens in SP mode if we are talking about MP mode things got much more complicated.

In previous versions of D&D, the day/night cycle was more important: clerics and druids regain spells at morning (or dusk for undead evil priests), some spells like summon shadow you cannot cast in daylight, etc... and I will be more interested in a day-night cycle if it has some kind of effect ingame, not merely a cosmetic change.



If that´s the reason they do not make a day-night cycle I can live with it.

The only reason you gave is that "you'll expect all NPCs acting like real human" with D/N cycle, which is totally useless to me.
No one will follow "random" NPCs or creatures and stay in game hours next to them exept those that want to say "hey, it's not a proper D/N cycle".

You're right in a way, it's about consistent illusions.
Just imagine this is another one because you'll only see what's on your screen...
A night appearing only when I click a button whatever I played for 1 or 10 hours is NOT consistent to me.

I didn't saw any gameplay sequences in which what you call "unproper" D/N cycle should be a problem.
As I said, I think it could only be one in places you'll go a lot of time AND where there are many NPCs.... You and I can't say if there are many places like this in the game.

Sorry if my words are not the best, I really try to do my best but your story-driven things has nothing to do with D/N cycle until proven otherwise.
Won't we be able to spend hours doing something else than the main quest ? Won't we be able to have more than 7 long rest during the whole game ?
Can't characters talk together (and/or move history forward) in the same camp eventually at daytime ?

You're free to trust Larian's vision and I'm free to fear it especially for a game I really hope we'll all still talk about in 2 decades... because that's what BG is.

PS : I really think you don't remember a lot about BG1/2 so I don't answer everything but you can't really fight anymore if you're party is exhaussted and you have penalties on your rolls.
This happen with haste but also while time is running.
I never said BG1/2 are absolutely perfect on every points, especially for a new 2020 game.

I believe the other reasons were the reasons the dev gave in the interview.



Isn’t this literally what happens in most RPGs with a day/night cycle? To prevent the player having to go and do something else for half an hour and time their return, they give a button to wait or meditate for x hours until whatever time they need it to be.

Nobody is a troll for disagreeing, but for stating other people's opinion is over the top or nostalgic goggles.

Larian is focusing in branching decisions which is understandably a top priority. But this is the main point so far (and yet to be proven) that is a clear improvement over a game that is 20 years old.

And since it was mentioned, Cyberpunk 2077, on the other hand, really seems to be bringing RPGs to the next level (and completely different level of attention to detail and immersion).

As designed, but it would still be cool to adventure at night, there are reasons to adventure at night. For those that love playing as rogues, the night is essential as all the interaction for vision be it natural like darkvision or torches etc. We do have that when inside, but night adventuring also introduces monster encounters not typical for daytime.

You must have a long list of things that makes you NOT wanting to buy the game. Infact, why are you even here?
You do nothing but complain, whine and moan.