Originally Posted by Gothfather
You can't make this argument about forceful dismissal of "old school fan's" with regards to Baldur's gate 3 without being a hypocrite because the exact thing you are criticizing Larian for is what Bioware and Black Isle did in BG I & II. This argument has no leg to stand on.

Fact: Baldur's gate I & II are not faithful games to their source material
Fact: Baldur's gate III is a more faithful game to it's source material.
Fact: The source material for BG III is NOT BG I & II
Fact: "Old school fans" when BG I & II were released already existed and they were players of D&D, a game over 20 years old when BG I was released. The parallels are striking.

Doesn't this make BG I & II guilty of the very thing you are accusing Larian? Doesn't this mean that fans wanting BG III to be more like BG II just be "pouty" self-entitled jerks, holding a position of Rules for thee, but not for me?

How is your argument not hypocritical?


Because sometimes you can divorce previous adoptions from their source material, and sometimes you can't. It mostly comes down to how well an individual adoption can stand on it's own legs... but aside from that, my argument isn't how "faithful" to the source material BG3 (or even BG1-2) is, that's not what this tread is about, my argument is: Larian claimed to create a faithful continuation of an existing property: the Baldur's Gate games - using their take on the D&D 5e rules as a baseline... not Divinity: Original Sin, Dungeons & Dragons... and for now, it seams like they, at least failed on the second part.