ED: Yeah, the UI really changed. Seems the other one was a placeholder.


[Linked Image]



Originally Posted by Torque
Originally Posted by Dragon_Master
[quote=Maximuuus][quote=Dragon_Master]I find it odd that people say a game does or does not look like Baldur's Gate. Any game, no matter who the developer is, would be using modern graphics and technology so there won't be hand-drawn, 2-D, 8-bit Infinity Engine graphics or UI.

If it wasn't Larian, it would be Obsidion, Owlcat, or maybe none of them and we would't be getting a sequel because Wizards of the Coast would say no to each and every one of them. If it was one of them, it would still be following D&D 5E rules because that's what Wizards of the Coast want.

I honestly feel if another company was making BG3 the complaints wouldn't be "they're just remaking Divinity" but instead would be "They're trying to copy Divinity!"


I don't understand what version of D&D has to do what the game looks like. If PF:K ran 5E it would look identical except for some minor UI adjustments.

I respectfully disagree.
The Character and creature design, armour, weapon, etc and possibly the world would be different because Paizo´s pathfinder has a very (very, very, very very very) different style in the artwork than D&D, and, like in any edition, the artwork changes with every installment of the game.

The setting would determine the looks of the world. It´s not the same playing in the lush forests with the proud knights of Lastwall in PF1e than in the dark, undead infested lands of Lastwall in PF2e, the same the game look very different if we´re playing in the Sword coast, the snowy mountains of Icewind Dale or in the plane city of Sigil or the gothic-oriented lands of Ravenloft.

Also, different combat mechanics and rules need different UI.

Not counting the fundamental differences there are with the way they do things in Owlcat and Larian, something @Sordak already exposed, that also would make a D&D game made by Owlcat look distinct

[quote=Sordak]
I love Pathfinder Kingmaker, i love it for one particular reason: Low(er)poly Models with Hand drawn textures.

You know what that DOESNT look like? Baldurs Gate.

Infinity engine games are the exact opposit of that, youd know that if youd be in any way interrested in the process of how this stuff gets made.
The infinity engines sprites were pre-rendered.
that means that they could use higher fidelity 3D than any PC at that time cold render in real-time and turn it into sprites. Some of the infinity engine stuff might be Handdrawn, im looking at IWD 1 here but i might be wrong.

Either way for readabilitys sake, The infinity engine games featured "high poly" base meshes with limited colour schemes to make them easier to read. So youd have relativeley big surfaces with the same "colour" , only variations in shading that was rendered.

Pathfinder Kingmaker is the exact opposit.
it uses Low poly (by todays standards) 3D models but hand paints the shadows on it. Lots of Kingmaker models look a bit like a beautifull mess when you look at em from a zoomed out perspective, when you zoom in you see the intricacies of the textures, some realy nice colour blending going on, realy neat hand painted shadows.

Not only is the process the opposit of one another, the stylistic choices are the opposite aswell.

Baldurs Gate and infinity Engine games go through readiability but high "fidelity" before baking it into sprites. Meanwhile Kingmaker is more like expertly painted warhammer miniatures.

Larian, with its appeal to photorealism, is much closer to the original Art direction of the infinity engine.
that is high fidelity 3D with easily readable colours and photorealistic palettes that leave the colour variation to the in engine shading.



etc etc

So, If they want to make a faithful representation of the TT game the videogame is based to, the edition and the TT game would make the game look very different indeed.

Last edited by _Vic_; 11/09/20 05:56 AM.