Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Latest News Official Community Update #4:Combat&Stealth

Yes this is exactly the interview I myself have been referencing in various threads here. If all of this ends up being how the game works, and keeping in mind this interview is from way back in February, then it can be okay for someone like me. I can use skills checks to avoid many combat encounters, even reloading the game to win the check as necessary, and for those encounters I can't avoid I can lower the difficulty to Story Mode (which is also implied in the interview as something the game will have). But it still means the game is not a great game if I have to do all this to avoid a big chunk of the game.

That's a very unlike BG design, but a one I approve of (I think).

Sounds exactly what you want from a RPG, plenty of choice. I'm glad to see Larian are evolving and improving their games; not everyone is.

The ability to a diplomatic play through sounds great. And yeah, not very BG2 like but the inability to avoid violence was an important part of the BG 1&2 plot . Try as you might you couldn't avoid leaving a trail of bodies behind you . . . Violence doesn't seem as integral to the BG3 plot . . .

And I think being able to go through without being murder-hobos is a great thing for an RPG, and something I missed in BG1/2.

yup, I have always seen it as a clever way of marrying gameplay loop (a lot of murder and rapid raise in power) with themes and story of the game. Honestly, while Bioware weren’t the most Roleplaying RPG makers, that is something they were really good at - be it BG, KOTOR or Jade Empire. In all those gameplay loops are tied to our character arc.

That’s something that didn’t work in PoEs - the story and tone they were telling were at odds with powerfantasy of the gameplay.

Will be interesting how they are going to balance xp that way. Also slightly hopes that BG3 won't be as strictly level-gated as DOS is. Also, playing a rogue may for once be super awesome.

Outside of combat-heavy dungeon crawls and the like, I've oft been annoyed that NPCs would just aggro on you the moment they set sight on you. That makes sense depending on the NPC (party is caught traveling by a bunch of crazies or is attacked by wild beast), but else it's oft wasted potential.

Casually replaying BG2 on and off for a couple weeks already, and I've only now realized how much of a dungeon crawl/combat heavy game this was in general, in particular the middle section. Throne Of Bhaal I didn't rate very highly back then (and I like Icewind Dale).

This may be very un-BG-like, but sounds all the more advanced for it.

I hope it's a milestone based xp, as that would make it balanced for lots of different approaches. Also I think the significantly slower leveling will help with the level-gating. At least I hope, cause that was pretty annoying.

I mean if this is the case, what are still hoping to do?
Just see the Story, because you could watch YouTube playthrough for that.

If you think a game is poor, surely the best thing to do is not buy it. You’ve consistently stated your dissatisfaction at the design of this game as is being presented to you, and that’s fine. I’m just curious why anyone would still pay for it?

Im still very much looking forward to it (not that I don’t have different personal reservations) and I guess we will hopefully both see more on the 18th.

Depends on the game.

I like Total War games for the campaign play, and have bought them all. I almost never play the actual RT battles because they are not interesting for me; I might play one or two in a campaign when getting a good outcome is particularly important.

That game gives you a way to auto-resolve every battle, at the cost of not getting as good an outcome. Of course you can also use negotiation and diplomacy, stealth and assassination etc to avoid the battles occuring in the first place.

Similarly, I like many RPGs, so long as there is enough in them to allow me to choose what to do and what not to do. BG1/2 were particularly combat heavy, which I'm less interested in, but their combat didn't really need much attention or time, so I was OK with that.

If BG3 allows one to choose a path through doing more interesting things than combat ( at least, most of the time - I'm not expecting every combat to be avoidable ), then the game otherwise looks very promising.

The fact that we air these views means that at least Larian get to hear them, and choose whether they want to react to them. If you have personal reservations for the game, perhaps you should also discuss them, rather than leave it to chance?

Apologies, realized I had forgotten to actually quote who my post was replying to.

I actually have aired my views on the development of this game.
Some of those minor quibbles of mine have even already been addressed, hence why I’m actually pretty positive about this game and am looking forward to it.

Other nitpicks, or thoughts I have are things like over the top animations on Jump or Shove, the look of the UI (in relation to previous BG games) and whether or not I will enjoy TB combat (I do in xcom and it looks ok here too).

With regards to stealth, I’ve never been one for rogues usually because in previous games it usually just made sense to me at least, to have fighter-esque characters mixed with healer and dps wizard and blast everything and everyone. Usually because stealth is fiddly and when playing solo in RT it’s easy to mess up and rarely worth the hassle.

Here in BG3 it looks interesting and the TB aspect has the ability in my view to enhance this, especially if playing solo.

In the end the best thing is choice. Choice to play situations how you want to and that should be at the core of any RPG, especially a D&D game.

What I was questioning was the odd member here who are more actively against the design decisions and who will likely want to skip as much as possible if anything to do with the mechanics just to what, say the played it? Because it’s part of the BG franchise so sod they’ll suck it up? Again free to do as one chooses, just curious.

Sometimes arguments can become a little self-perpetuating and emotive, particularly when there are really no objective truths to call upon

Although I prefer RT control in videogames, I'm happy with any other mechanism if designed well, particularly if there is good reason for it. As you say, the XCOM games worked surprisingly well; D:OS, not so much, so I still have reservations about BG3 combat, some of which may be addressed.

It's interesting to hear your opinions on stealth and player choice, as those very much mirror my views. I usually end up with a rogue just for their unique skills with traps/locks ( and as an archer ), since in most games their stealth is not really of much value. It feels like stealth may actually be useful in BG3, and also seem that Larian are considering player choice in a way that was not very evident in Original Sin.

I am optimistic that BG3 will be a game worth playing, so long as Larian keep the SP videogame audience in mind as well as their loyal MP following.

Yes I am very active here even though I don't like the game in its current form, and in my case the odds are more likely that in the end I will NOT play this game, because it is this specific game: BG3. There are many of us who have long wanted to play a new RPG that is D&D and/or Forgotten Realms and/or part of the old BG franchise (depending on which of these is the most important for that person). So unhappiness and disappointment and even anger are very reasonable and understandable emotions for some people to have. I don't have a single post in this forum ever criticizing the D:OS games, because I simply did not care about those games. But this game is different, and uniquely so, precisely because it carries the title BG3. The situation would also be very different if D&D/FR-based games were being constantly made right and left. Then, one game not being to one's liking would be no big deal. But WotC has been extremely stingy with giving out the license for D&D games to be made, so this game could literally be the ONLY D&D/FR RPG we get for the next twenty years.

¿You do not have a single post in this forum criticizing the D:OS games?

Please, tell me more, I´m eager to see what´s next


http://forums.larian.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=655061#Post655061

But that was in this BG3 subforum, in response to people saying they wanted BG3 to be just like D:OS. My point was that when the D:OS games were being made, I did not go to the D:OS subforums and post criticisms of those games.

Kanisatha, would you have liked what they a doing with BG3, or at least given it a chance if it was called, say, Forgotten Realms instead?

Well first of all, I'm still keeping my mind open to eventually liking this game. So that path is not closed off my any means at this point. But to your question, yes I would've been a whole lot less critical of various game design choices that I disagree with if this were a completely new IP. Still D&D 5e, still set in the FR, but not part of any already-existing game franchise. It's why even though SCL was not a particularly well-made game, I still ended up at least okay with, and bought it and played it, because it was its own game and not a part of some other franchise that I loved.

Not even close to what was discussed in the "Ragin debate: RtwP vs TB" thread in previous posts. They were discussing Tabletop games and game mechanics of the endless debate until you post one of your "colourful" posts. Link´s there. You can check.

So yes. In the BG3 subforum in a discussion about liking/disliking BG3.

I was hoping you had just misunderstood my (current) post. But clearly it is your intent here to be disingenuous and to misrepresent me. It's unfortunate you've chosen to take it there.

Clearly you do not need me for that.