Originally Posted by Noraver
Originally Posted by ZubDub

Entertainingly enough, I know you didn't bother to read what was stated, as I very explicitly clarified a comparison to the previous Baldur's Gate PC games. So, before you look to criticize the points being made, actually read them before, you know, criticizing them. That said, it's irrelevant to me who elected to name this game as part of the Baldur's Gate franchise, because that was not a point of my argument. My point in comparison was that this game plays nothing like, reads nothing like, and behaves nothing like the previous Baldur's Gate PC games, which is a point I generally dislike. At the very least, I would expect scripting and storyline capabilities to be alike in this respect.

But, again, I would encourage you to actually read what you're addressing before you try to address it.


Entertainingly enough, I did read your post. Just because I quoted a single small part, doesn't mean I didn't read the entire thing. I'm addressing a specific point within it. Kind of like what quoting is for.

However either way, you again fail to address the Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance games. "I'm only talking about the PC Baldur's Gate games, not the other Baldur's Gate games!" is literally ignoring all evidence against your (already invalid) point because you don't feel like discussing it, or say it doesn't apply.

Evidently, it doesn't fit your narrative and support your arguments, so you won't bring it up or acknowledge it "Not being/playing like a Baldur's Gate game", despite it being directly part of the Baldur's Gate franchise.
Dark Alliance didn't play like the PC games, but nobody held it against it or the originals, because it's a different kind of game.

If games stayed the exact same throughout their franchise cycle and never evolved, we would all be playing D&D-themed Tetris right now.


Not addressing Dark Alliance is not "Failing" at anything when it is irrelevant to the current topic. It was a console based game that had to act within the confines associated to being a console game. I have no expectations of a console game behaving like a PC game, thus the lack of a comparison between the two here. Comparing PC games to console games has always been a false equivalence. You injecting it here is little more than whataboutism in an effort to establish some needless "Aha" with response to my issue that, as a PC game, Baldur's Gate III lacks the gameplay style, storyline, scripting, and essentially every other facet of similarity to the previous Baldur's Gate PC games. I find that disappointing. If you don't, then that's fine, but it does not discredit or otherwise soundly counter my points thus far. You are a different sort of consumer, with a different expectation for the game. I would expect that a game, which titles itself as "Baldur's Gate IIII", would be comparable in some fashion to Baldur's Gate I and Baldur's Gate II (plus all associated expansions) because, again, the naming convention implies it is directly associated to the previous two. That's not something Dark Alliance had, hence it being named "Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance".

That said, since you seem fixated on Dark Alliance? I also disliked the console games for everything from gameplay to story. What now?



Originally Posted by Uncle Lester
1. Regardless of who named it that, it is reasonable to expect a Baldur's Gate game to feel like it's a Baldur's Gate game. A modern rendition, yes, not a copy-paste of an IE game, but still a main Baldur's Gate installment.
2. Yeah, and they are right (on one thing anyway). There's a difference between a main entry (number 3) and a spin-off. Spin-offs can be a whole different genre or medium and a different feel. Sequels are a promise of a worthy successor (not just quality-wise), even if it's not the same saga and 20 years later (and a hundred in the story).

And while the OP is very critical and I disagree with him on several points, the only aggressive person here is you.



And I appreciate honest discourse. I have no issues with people disagreeing or having their own perspectives on the game. If somebody enjoys the game? I hope they do so in full. As I mentioned above, the point of this board is to provide suggestions and feedback. Nobody, developers included, have to actually act on my feedback, nor do I demand that they do. Would I, as the individual consumer, like it if my concerns wind up being addressed? Most definitely, because I think that would result in a game I found most enjoyable. We're a world of unique persons, I don't expect the world to conform to me. At the end of the day, it's entirely the developers' decisions as to the what, where, why, and how of the game. I just hope the direction takes it somewhere that I can enjoy to the fullest.