Larian Banner: Baldur's Gate Patch 9
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 8 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Joined: Aug 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Aug 2020
If you're going to get technical, companion is the correct word because even though friendship is implied in its use, companions don't have to be friends, they just have to spend a lot of time together or be travelling together, which fits the bill here. Also companion doesn't imply hierarchy, it's a neutral term in that sense. And furthermore the word companion is used because it's common shorthand in RPGs for characters that form members of your party in a game.

And you're right that we don't know anything for sure, but I do think the speculation we're engaging in now is reasonable based on the information we currently have. I.E, I don't think it's unreaosnable to make the assumptions we have based on the information we have, and the information we currently have is enough to serve as a justifiable base. And by information I don't just mean that statement but also Larian's past approach to handling companions.

Joined: Jun 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2020
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost


The problem is that dynamic gets complicated in a video game. Firstly the typical video game standard is to have multiple characters you can swap in and out of a party at a time. Secondly and more importantly, the reason that that is the standard is because in a real life game the DM is able to account for party composition when it comes to what challenges are presented to the party and a video game can't do that. So arguing "that's just the way it works" fails to acconut for the strengths and limitations of each medium. When you have a choice between multiple companions with multiple classes and abilities, the ability to assemble a party that can't successfully deal with all the slings and arrows of the game world comes into play. So multiple party members that can be swapped in and out are presented to offset that.


That might be the “standard”, but it doesn’t necessarily have to be like that. It depends how the game is designed. Maybe you don’t actually need a rouge or a mage? Maybe the game is flexible enough to play with more varied party compositions?

Quote
Furthermore, in a real life game the other party members are also real people, most likely your friends, and interacting with three or four real friends will always outweigh interacting with three or four fictional characters, no matter how well written those characters are. So having more party members in a game to bounce off of makes sense in that aspect.


For people who prefer to play with friends, real people will always trump NPCs. I’m not sure how swapping out party members is supposed to help with that? Of course in BG3 your party members can also be real people, which is almost certainly why it’s being done this way. I find it funny how no one seems to acknowledge that in this thread.

Quote
So decrying people's issues with this choice because it's more like tabletop D&D is kind of missing a lot of the reasons this choice isn't standard in RPGs of this kind in the first place.


And yet maybe some of those reasons are really applicable to this game?

Joined: Mar 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2020
Originally Posted by Gray Ghost
If you're going to get technical, companion is the correct word because even though friendship is implied in its use, companions don't have to be friends, they just have to spend a lot of time together or be travelling together, which fits the bill here. Also companion doesn't imply hierarchy, it's a neutral term in that sense. And furthermore the word companion is used because it's common shorthand in RPGs for characters that form members of your party in a game.


I know what companions means, but players don't see it like that. Most players see them as followers (they lead, the rest follow), not companions. Especially not companions of circumstance that might leave them once that circumstance is resolved.

Last edited by azarhal; 06/10/20 12:41 PM.
Joined: May 2019
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: May 2019
Originally Posted by Goldberry
Well, considering how few companions there are available, you'd only be losing two, and that is if you're playing a custom character. Simple enough for me.

It's just five only in EA. Apparently there will be more companions added later. The bottom line, though, is that we stand to lose all companions not in our current active party at the end of Act 1.
Originally Posted by Dagless
I’m not sure anything will help you enjoy the game at this point going by your previous posts.

I don't at all accept that Larian should not try to bring me on board as a customer. Yeah I don't care for the D:OS games and therefore anything like what was in those games, but I am a passionate fan of both the original BG games and of the Forgotten Realms. So I should be someone to whom Larian wants to sell this game. Furthermore, I have said repeatedly that although there is very little chance I will want to play this game when it is first released, it may be something I am willing to try later on when it is at a much lower price and more importantly if mods have become available that fix some of the more glaring flaws I see in the game, such as mods to increase party size to six and to allow us to keep our inactive companions beyond Act 1.
Originally Posted by Tarorn
Having to make a choice of party members & having to stick with them through an entire adventure is a deal breaker - seriously??
I thought you were d&d fans - well a good number anyway - choose a character, join a party, go-adventuring & become godlike or die trying....that’s the way it works ain’t it?

Yeah that is how it works ... in a pnp game with a bunch of people around a table. But this is a video game and NOT a TT game. And in a PARTY-BASED video game being played single-player, a core element of the fun of such games is to be able to play around with your party composition and to have the widest possible array of interactions with your companions.
Originally Posted by Tarorn
I should even try Kanisatha’s melee only war party at some point !

Originally Posted by Warlocke
I actually have two custom “Kanisatha inspired parties” planned.

All melee and no magic is too much for me, so I’m splitting it between:

One will be almost no magic and mostly melee. Human fighter, human barbarian, high elf ranger (a tiny bit of magic there) and a halfling rogue. A simple, no frills, straight-forward group of bad ass normals.

The other party will be some magic (a cleric and a paladin) but all melee. A Drow raiding party with all 4 multiclassed into assassins and melee weapons only.

Heh. Good hunting, guys. smile

But just to note, I always do include a couple of missile-weapon types in my parties to tackle those pesky enemies that are beyond melee reach. For example, Ekun in P:Km is seriously badass at putting up huge damage numbers once he's fully fleshed-out and has an awesome longbow equipped. Also, I do include a couple of magic-users (perhaps multi-classed) in my parties for the purposes of healing and removing nasty permanent debuffs the enemy might have placed on my characters.

Joined: Mar 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2020
Whilst we might lose chapter 1 companions, has it even been mentioned about later on?
You telling me there won’t be other potential companions in other acts that you meet?

I just think there is too little information right now. Doesn’t mean one shouldn’t discuss potentials of course...

For my part I understand both sides. I like a varied cast, however one thing that always bugged me about companions at camp was what the bejeezus were they doing whilst I was getting my arse handed to me by a bunch of (insert encounter here). If anything BG1&2 had it right with your party with you at all times. So from an immersion aspect, unless there is specific story elements added to cater for it, I prefer it if there aren’t several layabouts back at camp magically levelling up whilst me and my buddies of choice do all the work.

NPC’s who Tag along for other reasons and are at a communal point come evening fine.
The idea of mercenaries filling party roles also works fine for me too. I have my core story characters and we have our adventure, share every moment and grow. If I need a third for a particular mission, I’m ok hiring one.

But that’s just me.

Joined: Mar 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Mar 2020
They will not change it, because they made all those "many dialogue choises that they are so proud about" and they cant rewrite or add more dialogues for every companion that remains alive...

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Italy
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Italy
I think I never felt so disappointed in a videogame like when I discovered half of my party was gone for good in Dos2.
I respect the choice but I hate it. It's not even for the party composition, but because I will be forced to play an entire second playtrough just to experience their unique questlines.

I would play 2 campaigns in any case, I just hate that my PC won't be able to experience all the potential.

Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
I don't like it. But I can live with it.

Page 8 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Moderated by  Dom_Larian, Freddo, vometia 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5