Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Which one of BG3, PoE, PK the worthy successor ?

If I'm going to be going by mechanics, Icewind Dale? Exact same engine, after all. I didn't come away from PK feeling like, "Yes, the Baldur's Gate game I've been waiting for". In fact, I never finished it, the story just couldn't keep me interested enough to progress. I don't have enough experience with PoE for the same reason. As another frame of reference, I have no idea what's going to happen later, or who's going to be introduced to us later to tie this game to BG. I have the DnD feel. For the dizzying array of "this isn't DnD" posts floating around these forums, there's a lot of complaints about the DnD based mechanics, like dialog rolls etc. All based on what amounts to playing through the Nashkell mines in BG.

Being fair, some of the critiques I'm solidly behind, like the lack of active rolls where they would make sense, Perception/Investigation checks, for example, or hotkeys for chaining/unchaining the party. Others come down to "but the dialog didn't go the way I wanted, and it's not fair not DnD", or "but some players are just going to keep reloading saves to get what they want". I've bad news for that latter crowd there: People have been doing that for as long as save games have been a thing. If you find yourself in a MP game where it's happening, leave the group. For what's happening in SP, it just doesn't matter. It's kind of funny, because BG is where we all learned "Save early, save often, save before and save after". Now it seems like the argument is "but Player Y is going to be able to beat this encounter because they reload saves until they do, and it breaks my immersion".

Sorry, tangent. I haven't played enough of this game to claim "worthy successor", because there isn't enough of this game available right now to make that determination. I can't look at Let's Plays on YouTube to find out how the game ends, just what happens at the end of Act I, and so I'm judging an incomplete project vs a project that I spent thousands of hours in, and that's not a fair comparison, by any metric. So I am not ready to proclaim this "the next big thing", and I'm not ready to throw it under the bus either. I'm taking it for what it is, a chance to get in on the ground floor of the development of a game that's part of a franchise that took up a big chunk of my life, in a good way, as far as I'm concerned. I want it to succeed, but I'm going to be just as critical of it if it doesn't as I am ambivalent about it now. The only difference I see is that I'm willing to give it a chance to at least get out of development first.

I love BG1 & 2 but I don't need BG3 to be a modern clone of it.

I want a great game!

BG3 does seems to be nailing lore and story, still needs more polish as work.

I love that it turn based, I hate RTwP and was so happy when Pathfinder Kingmaker added turnbase mode. I think POE2 did that also?

I not too happy about the mechanics of BG3 and hope that they can be address before final release.

Now, that I really want is a modern version of Planescape Torrent! ( The one from InXile just sucked )

Pathfinder Kingmaker is Eurojank.
Pillars of Eternity 1 has an absolutely awful start, with PoE2 being better but I'd imagine many folk didn't give it a chance after how bad PoE1. Myself included till my friend gifted it to me.

As I spoke before about these games: They are incredibly flawed. Pathfinder Kingmaker is a buggy, frustrating mess with broken quests that can easily break if you do them in the "wrong" order or leave you absolutely confused because the quest text tells you to do thing A but it actually wants you to do a completely unrelated thing F. Because it has a script trigger to move the story forward even if it makes no logical or fantastical sense as to why.

It also over did the Alignment choices to the point that they are either incredibly silly or nonsensical. Like saying things moves your alignment instead of doing things. So you can act like a goody two shoes and game goes "Yes you are actually a good person for saying these things".

Don't get me wrong Pathfinder Kingmaker is a fun game if you are hardcore enough to look past its many, many flaws. And I can say I enjoyed parts of it to the point of wanting to see how the devs improve with WotR. It will be great to see and I'm looking forward to it. But it's way too flawed and many people seem to look past that because its a cRPG.

I'm not entirely sure what is the point of even finding a "worthy successor" from the games mentioned. I personally just want a good cRPG that does what it set out to do. At the moment BG3 fails in what it set out to do which was being a faithful 5e game set in FR and a sequel to BG2. Will this change? Maybe. It's Early Access so it might.

Thx you all for your participation,
I did my best to answer to all of you.

Kanisatha
As someone else said, DAO could be consider as one worthy to compete too.
But yeah, pathfinder is the closer to the BG feeling for me.

Argonaut,
I appreciate some interaction with my companion ni deadfire and kingmaker as some quests. I wouldn't be so harsh. ^^

Abits, yep it's really cool to have all this games and I try to appreciate all of them for their qualities. This is why my post is not about which one is the best but which one is the closest to the BG spirit.
I'm waiting a lot from Pahtfinder 2 just like you !

vel,
I'm sorry, I'm french and I can't imagine all the mistakes I did when I wrote.
But to be honest it's already hard and long to write so much I don't have the energy to read and correct myself again. So, excuse my bad grammar, syntax and.... typo laden. I did and I'll do my best and will try to improve.
I just want to share my opinion in the language the dev can "easily" read (despite my mistakes).

Leuenherz,
Yep, I agree. Pathfinder have this same feeling. The wild world, the companions interesting and diversified.
There is ever some way to improve but I think the game was really good which is fun cause it was too a pretty hard game from my point of view.
The biggest fail for me was the management of the realm, really attractive but so hard I had to put the difficult at the lowest after tragically failing.

biomag, I get it but I think you're way to harsh why the game. BG was and is ever pleasnt to play for me. It could be better but it wasn't bad to the point you are saying. For example, saying "the squishiness of the mages" seems a little strange. It was part of the gameplay ! I mean, wow... you would have tank magician ? Ok, why not, but it wont fit in BG1 or 2.
But ok, you didn't like replaying it. I like replaying it so I don't know what to answer to your all-out criticism.
I mean the dialog wasn't THAT bad. Edwin and minsc would have not became memorable if their was this bad. It's a nonsense.
To conclude, you say you don't care which one is "worthy successor", etc.
First, I don't ask for a BG-clone.
Second, I wouldn't care here if the game wasn't called BG3 and proclaimed as a successor.
If Larian said "guys ? We are going to do a game in the forgotten realm and it's gonna be turn-based." I would have said "ok cool ! I'm waiting for it !"
but they didn't say that, they said "we are going BG3 and it's gonna be legend.... wait for it... dary."
So the question "Is BG3 a worthy successor of BG1 and 2 (and ToB) ?" is a legitimate question and more a central question.
No one forced them to do BG3. Absolutely no one.
They decided it and they proclaimed it. They didn't say "it's a game in Faerun.", they didn't say "it's gonna be close to the city of baldur's gate", they said "it's gonna be BG3".
So yeah, "caring to know if it's a worhty successor is what matters here. cause if ti doesn't matter it means it's just about getting a licence, to get the hype and money.


rodeolifant, I was thinking about a fight in BG1 but yeah ID was cool even if it lacks of a strong story.

Orbax
i really did my best to read and understand everything you read but to be honest it's late and I'm french so... sry ! xD
But I think I get it and it was itneresting. Maybe you're right about not talking about the other games but I would try to make people realize BG3 was missing a point.

About the NPCs...
I wouldn't begin a big argue for many reasons : the efforts I have to put to write in english, the difficulty to compare a game to an EA, et caetera ( ;p ).
More I save my opinion for later even if I already point some things I don't appreciate in BG3.
But I would like to talk about it, later, for fun and to exchange our poitn of view. But, in french, it would be much more easy for me ! xD
(But I would say I ever think the romance in BG2 was pretty good, without talking about the NPC mods which came later)

About the ankheg you rushed in a hard zone for a beginner ! It's normal to have been raped by it. xD
Personnaly, the first time I enter the Nashkell's mine I have been killed by kobolds I was traumatized. I did all the other map, thinking Nashkell was the ultimate goal ! I even kill basilics ! Imagine my level when I go back to the mines... ^^

Horrorscope
I have no problem with 3D and cinematics ? è_ê
Maybe I miss the point here, my bad so. ^^" (tired french guy)

Dulany67,
Same here and this is why I hope Larian will think twice reading the forum...
I don't say it's all wrong, I say they're missing something.

Haha, I figured there was a language barrier a bit there, but your english is better than my japanese so you win!

It wasn't so much that you shouldn't talk about other games, it was more that you skimmed over the BG1/2 parts with a general "they were more fun and I liked them" statement and then dived into what you didn't like in BG3, but what wasn't covered were the things you liked to the level of detail you did about things you didn't like on BG3. A list of lists like

Things I liked about personalities of
- Boo and Minsc
- My babe Imoen!
- Jaheira
- Xzar

Things I didn't like about personalities of
- Boo and Minsc
- My babe Imoen!
- Jaheira
- Xzar


Things I liked about story of
- Boo and Minsc
- My babe Imoen!
- Jaheira
- Xzar

Things I didn't like about story of
- Boo and Minsc
- My babe Imoen!
- Jaheira
- Xzar

Because if Imoen was, and she WAS, adorable and awesome and fun because the voice acting was enthusiastic, her personality of highly engaging and excited, and also not being that great in battle and dying a lot too made a loveable, squishy, ridiculous character that brought energy to the party. Everyone in the BG3 party currently drains the energy. They are there to deflate you and one of the things in pnp D&D is to make a character who loves adventure! Its an adventure! game. Having people that are worried about blowing up at any second.... it still is nice having someone who is a Steve Irwin, Crocodile Hunter or Minsc who you will never be able to put down and brings that smile to your face. That is missing in BG3 - Gale is not Steve Irwin and definitely not a Minsc!

Stuff like that is nice to hear about because theres a lot to dislike about certain things right now, but being able to point to what mechanic worked in the other ones would be very interesting to see your perspective on, I can tell youre passionate about it!

I'm not critizing the game for its time. Back then it was a standout game. But as time passed people build on its successes and flaws and improved the games. By today's standards it would be just a niche game, nowhere near the top. Honestly even PoE writting is not worse than BG, its just people remembering it more fondly. Edwin and Minsc were entertaining characters, but look just up what people write about Jaheira or others. And while the story was very dark, the characters were more on the comdey side of things - again the main protagonist in BG1 had some of the worst dialog options I've seen, purely making fun of whatever archetype you were playing. Back then we all enjoyed it. These days we expect top notch story telling and immersion, the demands from player side are much, much higher - and rightfully so. We've learned from previous games, books, movies, series,... and we creators also want to apply this knowledge to achieve something that will move the needle to the next level. You see the same evolution in movies and seires - compare a 'good' action sequence in a movie from the 80/90s with what is critically acclaimed now.

Even the system BG was based on - D&D 2e - didn't survive the test of time and was changed before BG2 was out. Why? Because it needed improvement. It was not a system made for video games and it made the whole combat chunky and people not coming from D&D couldn't relate to the spell system at all. I don't know anybody outside of D&D-fans who thinks that its magic system has any merit or logic that was easy to grasp. 5e is the evolution of these mechanics and you see that it has higher appeal and bigger reach than 3.5e ever had. 5e addresses issues with the extremely limited amount of spells for casters that made a mage utterly useless and just an arrow magnets in BG1 (also being potential 1-shot-kills). It also adds abilities with limited usages for melee and ranged low level classes to not be so monotone to use. Still shoehorning it into a video game and making it a RTwP is once again forcing a cube through a circle-shaped opening. How would bonus actions even work in a real time with pause? Why are we even bothering with using D&D 5e at all if we want a real-time game? Why not develop a system that is made for real time like Dragon Age Origins did? Just becuase of the story background? So we sacrifice gameplay to keep names?


Larian said they would make a new BG3 based on D&D5e with turn-based combat. So they took the original games rule-system at its current incarnation (same that was done for BG2 switching to 3.5 and later BG1 EE with adapting it to 3.5, Icewind Dale 2 using 4e,...), which seems also to be a license requirement, and put it into the BG setting a 100 years later. Regarding the story we can't judge if it will fit BG1 & 2 because we don't know enough yet.

A lot of the stuff that gets thrown here around being it a successor seems to me purely subjective.

I don't know how the game will feel in the end. For me personally, BG as Icewind Dale and Neverwinter Nights are primarly D&D games. Not just backgroundwise, but also based on their rules and the oddities that result from that. If the game doesn't try to get the best D&D feeling of that timeperiod in there, they are not successors. RtWP was an adpation that might have made sense with the 2e and 3.5e rules, even 4e - though none of those games felt to me like a Pen&Paper experience. They just felt like video games very clunky combat systems with very annoying mechanics that were neither fluid nor particulary deep beyond spells (I don't consider 'stressful' to be a thing in RTwP - you can pause and give orders, what's more difficult about that than real turn-base? you can even move simultaniously to avoid being reached - i never could run in circles around my party in a turn based game to avoid be reached by the ai chasing a mage for example, while that is an exploit you could do in BG). All those games were to me inferior to DAO when it came to fighting. Also PoE2 with turnbase was far more engaging to me. Would I want the Total War series to turn turn-based in battle? Nope. Would I want X-Com to switch to real time? Nope. The difference being that some games excel in character micro management and thus work better in turn-based systems, while others are just mainly macromanaget and can remain fluid in RtWP.


Sorry for the long-winded answer here.

The launch version was broken, but the patched version available today is mostly Ok. I beat it twice and noticed no bugs.



PoE2 has no story. There is no antagonist, no player agency, no twists or reveals (Pathfinder Kingmaker has a secret ending that is not easy to unlock, just as an example), no narrative structure (unless the whole main plot is seen as a prologue or maybe as a first act). This applies to the main quest, which is a series of talks with zero consequences and zero surprises, and the semi-open world. You sail somewhere, kill everything, get the McGuffin. Nothing more there. PoE throws walls and walls of text at you with world building exposition. Then the successor is published and: Nope. Nothing. Then extensions and DLCs are published, and again: Nothing to talk about. One DLC is even just a combat arena, literally. This is kinda relevant for a story driven game in a story driven genre.

Then fights in PoE2 are not really interesting, meaning diverse or challenging. Of course the vanilla game on default difficulty can be beaten on auto-mode, but even on the highest difficulty all fights can be handled by the same sequence of actions and abilities. One aspect of Pathfinder Kingmaker that reminded me of BG:2 was that I had to choose the right spells, positioning and focus on enemies for each type of encounter. And boy does Pathfinder Kingmaker have difficult fights. And boy is the highest difficulty actually difficult. (And unlike PoE2, in Pathfinder it makes a huge difference if you excel in a fight or barely survive, because of how resource management is handled.) Until you have figured out how to power play, and this again reminded me of BG:2, and Westley Weimer's Tactics mod.

And so PoE2 falls flat in the story section, in the combat section and in the exploration section, and that's IMHO the reason PoE2 was not a success (relative to the expectations of the publisher), and Pathfinder Kingmaker was one, despite the awful state it was published in.

Something I put in the Survey thread:

Something you should also look at as you cite other games for their mastery of the craft is copies sold.


Dragon Age - 3.2 million
BG 2 - 2 million
Pathfinder Kingmaker - 1.2 million
DOS2 - 1 million (as of november 2017)
Icewind Dale - 1 million
POE 2 - 700,000
Pillars of eternity 1 - 500,000
Baldurs gate 1 - 500,000
Planescape: Torment - 400,000
Torment: Tides of Numenera - 250,000
Wasteland - 250,000
Icewind Dale - 150,000

Yes I forgot about Dragon Age. That's definitely a worthy successor game too.

And I also agree Owlcat learned a lot from making their first game They were super-good about taking feedback to heart and not letting their ego get in the way of learning those hard lessons. So I also have high expectations for their second game (which I backed as well).

D:OS2 is over 2 million. And latest numbers I have seen for P:Km is 1.4 M, and for PoE1 close to 1 M. BG1 with the EE is also @ 1 M.

Yeah, I just googled [Game Name] number of copies sold and google put up a number. Almost all of them are from within the first year or their release so its a bit wonky. The main point was that Larian punching in the heavyweights of this genre and isn't tuin at the robes of the greats saying "Notice me, Senpai!". They kind of are because of the 5e focus, but it was more that as we talk about the games it isn't a Pater Jackson going from zombie slasher films to LOTR director miracle story hope. Its a good studio and it isn't some slackass group whos CEO is the son of Mearls or something.

There are no Goblins in BG1.

I remember the day I got the call from some guy who wanted to give me a copy of BG1 after I had sent in the survey I got from buying Fallout 1. I'm glad that the guy on the phone (Interplay? BioWare? I don't remember) was able to convince my mom that it wasn't a scam. When the game finally came it was glorious. PC games back in the day used to have great packaging and BG1's packaging was stellar. It was colorful, came with a great big manual, a map, and nine million CDs.

Other than watching a few episodes of the D&D cartoon, I don't think I had much exposure to D&D other than occasionally seeing a painting on a magazine or book or whatever and thinking that it looked really cool (shout outs to Larry Elmore). I don't think I knew about the tabletop game at all, but BG1 let me in to that world. I started learning more about the Forgotten Realms through the manual and all of the fantastic lore that was in the game. Even the equipment had stories to tell! And it looked great with that aged medieval scroll look with those cool illuminated initials (the fancy looking first letters) and your character model would change with your equipment (something not too common back then: Diablo 1 only had light, medium, and heavy armor avatars for its characters). The characters were interesting and the plot had me intrigued. I was hooked. And to this day I'm still astonished how BioWare managed to make such a great time the first time around. There's a good GDC talk with the BioWare doctors on YouTube that talks about how a bunch of people that made BG1 had never made a game before -- some hadn't even used computers before! Isn't that wild?

At any rate, the games that have succeeded best at giving me the feeling of the classic Infinity Engine games (BG1, BG2, IWD1, IWD2, PST) have been Pillars of Eternity 2 and Pathfinder: Kingmaker. I love Dragon Age, but they felt to me like a different kind of RPG.

While I enjoyed the first PoE, it felt a tad... bland? Basic? PoE 2 feels fresher, more colorful, more expansive, and more developed as far getting a feeling for the world. It also has some good characters who I find interesting. Amazingly it features both RTwP and TB combat and the console versions have controller support, but I don't think that's been ported to the PC version yet. Anyway, solid game. Really good. I love Obsidian's games.

Kingmaker I think succeeds more at bringing me into the world of Golarian than either PoE does with their setting. I've never played Pathfinder tabletop and had no idea about the lore, but Kingmaker has made me a fan and now I'm reading the Inner Sea World Guide as well as the original Adventure Path. Creating characters in Kingmaker is a lot of fun, gives you a ton of options, and it gives you a peak of your potential down the line. The game also has a bunch of great options built-in that probably would have been mods back in the day. The difficulty has a bunch of customization options and so does the dialogue. If you don't want to see the tags in dialogue for what alignment a dialogue choice is associated with or what skill check will be rolled, you can change that. This game also gives you the choice between RTwP and TB combat and it features controller support for the PC version. I'm about 5/6ths of the way through the game and I have thoroughly enjoyed it -- although I have installed mods to help me deal with anxiety inducing timed events and quests. The Kingdom management stuff is something new that I don't mind (kinda sorta reminds me of the De'arnise Keep stronghold quests in BG2) and that has difficulty options and mods as well. Several of the characters are going to stick with me in my memory and it's been cool to compare the story against the original Adventure Path. I'm very hopeful for Wrath of the Righteous as well.

BG3? Feels totally different as far as mechanics, presentation, attitude... I won't bitch about the controls and camera any more than I already have, but we all know Larian has a lot of work ahead of them. I don't mind the move to a closer camera in dialogue but the animations I'm sure aren't finished as people are constantly teleporting and twitching about... It just looks odd right now -- especially the creepy silent protagonist. The UI in general is lacking charm, general utility, and a look that says "fantasy RPG" to me. I have not made my mind up on the story and characters yet.

In general, BG3 is the future RPG I feel least optimistic about right now compared to Cyberpunk or Pathfinder WotR or Obsidian's next RPG Avowed (which is just a CG trailer at this point). Larian potentially made a mistake when they stuck that 3 on the end of Baldur's Gate. If it had a different subtitle, I wouldn't have quite so many expectations (many of which I think can be realistically met). I have put maybe 70 hours total into the entire Divinity franchise and to me they're just okay, so my experience with Larian hasn't exactly been stellar after all these years. I certainly don't want Larian to fail and I don't want there to be a "bad" Baldur's Gate game. Hopefully there is tremendous progress made during Early Access and one day I'll actually enjoy playing BG3 and I'll feel like a fool for ever having any doubts.

Well I wasn't trying to put Larian on a pedestal or put them down. Just only updating some of the numbers without any commentary one way or the other.

My personal take always is that if a game turns a reasonable amount of profit for its developer then that is sufficient from a business standpoint. Not all games can or should be sales bonanzas, and there should be space for games that satisfy even small niche audiences so that everyone gets to have that game they love playing. Put another way, all cRPGs should not be D:OS2. There are many gamers out there who didn't like D:OS2, and they too should get games to enjoy just like anyone else.

Pathfinder has the most content and deepest customization but it's not based on the same rulesets as the old games. If you ask which one is the best, then it's gonna be Pathfinder. Anyone that found it too slow or boring obviously doesn't like "True Crpgs" in the first place and could care even less about D&D.

Oh, for sure, I wasn't trying to imply you were doing that, the correction was welcome

Theyre in an interesting spot with 5 locations and 300 employees now. To give you an idea of that Redbox, a 2.2 billion dollar a year company, has 2 locations and 200ish people? They need copies out the door. So you have to ask WHO they are targeting. There are, by their guestimate, 40 million D&D players worldwide. The cross section that games and knows larian and is aware of something like this is questionable. But if they target the 2.5 million DOS2 purchasers and its "Different enough" - youre right, that is pure business. I know they probably have it in their heart somewhere to be good to D&D, but I don't think its a passion of theirs and if it falls by the wayside as they target THEIR group and then see how many D&D folks they can hook...I just haven't seen the flame for D&D. They have a neat story and have an audience, but if the option is decrease sales and bear the D&D torch or make a boatload of money...I haven't seen a company yet choose not money.

These aren't the small groups of dude like Carmack writing the book on rounded architecture and specular lighting as they put out shareware. Regardless of opinion, John Roberts of Star Citizen is PASSIONATE about it, and dude has chops - helped write directx codecs, personally helped take the CryEngine from 32 to 64 bit and then migrated to Amazon Lumberyard. Those are the nerds you want when youre going for cult classics and rabid (and you ignore size) fanbases because you had a friggin vision and could personally do it. Larian seems fun, and their studio can obviously produce good content. I think the question is going to be whether or not they WANT to be a successor. I threw up the numbers mainly to say they COULD and they are technically in the genre with DOS2 and drew a crowd. I also wanted to point out that some of these games didn't "do well" even though the people on this forum are probably the hard core fans and loved them. I cant play some anymore, some from 1998 like torment I still get a kick out of. Numenera was straight up OG, it was the same developers and they wanted to make another one.

The other recent games had their charms, I liked being a pirate in PoE2 more than I liked playing the game - unless Im a ranger, go straight to Nekataka, go southwest and get the bow that bounces between all enemies close to each other and is a game breaker. spiritual successors? I havent seen one other than Numenera and it succeeded itself but was a short ass game, as much as I loved it. I just feel like we are ultimately getting a tradeoff here for scope and story for mechanics and soul. Im currently at 233 hours in EA so its not like I hate it, but ive seen a few false prophets in the last 5 years, and Im not seeing this as the messiah yet.

But, like I said, I think its good to take of the rose tinted glasses when referencing some of these other games that were when we were young, when there was a game drought, and when there was a severe genre drought for this and we were dying in the desert and found water which was now the most amazing thing EVER. I can wax eloquent on the pros and lots of cons of these recent games and, other than graphics, its hard to remember anything bad about the old games. In context, they were perfect. Objectively, I think its more helpful to verbalize specifics about the old games because otherwise its just kind of masturbatical and going down memory lane saying "Man, that game made me feel good and I liked it and this doesnt".

No true Scotsman, or appeal to purity, is an informal fallacy in which one attempts to protect a universal generalization from counterexamples by changing the definition in an ad hoc fashion to exclude the counterexample. Rather than denying the counterexample or rejecting the original claim, this fallacy modifies the subject of the assertion to exclude the specific case or others like it by rhetoric, without reference to any specific objective rule: "no Scotsman would do such a thing" followed by "Well I am a Scotsman and I did that" leads to "Well, no TRUE Scotsman would do such a thing"; i.e., those who perform that action are not part of our group and thus criticism of that action is not criticism of the group.

Sorry, I like bustin your balls for some reason. Pathfinder is slow relative to similar games. The fire rate for rangers, the hit/miss and difficult encounters you can get ambushed with. Its a slow crawl, it just is. Its a game you sit down and play for at least 2 hours otherwise you don't get a lot done. It works though, because its immersive and the slow rate is balanced by the number of things youre managing both micro to the party and the land management, as well as your broader decisions on what to pursue next. It picks up speed later as you level. I can hop in Ghost of Tsushima for 30 minutes and take over a fort. With Pathfinder, 30 minutes is enough to pick what building to make next, survive a road encounter, and MAYBE clear a larger fight in one of the zones. Patience isn't something you normally tell gamers to have and it stuck to its guns and said "well...this is how it works so you know, deal with it." If you beat the ame, and restart you just writhe with impatience again because ughhhhh its so sloowwwww. You just have to go in with a certain mindset and take it for what it is, and it isn't bad, just...not what youre used to.

Planescape : Torment didn't have much success when it was first released but it's gradually gained a legendary status over the years, to the point many players consider it the best rpg ever . I think it's wrong to consider that BG2 would be below Dragon age because of copies sold. When DA got released, it was ten years later than baldur's gate and the number of players and money invested in marketing has increased. As a player that did and appreciated all these games, except Wasteland I would not rank them the way they are ranked by copies sold.

I forgot to mention, because I said it in another thread, COD as of 2016 had 250 million copies sold so I said take it with a grain of salt when considering people's tastes as a barometer. This was more encapsulating it in a narrow genre with few contenders and just pointing out that they weren't some tiny group punching way above their weight and some of the other ames werent quite as popular as people make them to be.

Sorry to burst your bubble sonny but you have never made me raise an eyebrow in here. Being an exception to the rule doesn't necessarily make you special if that's what you're thinking. Most people never liked D&D because of how slow and complex it was and most casual players are just like that, it's not just about not having enough time. They were always like that. Then WOTC went and tried dumbing it down to make it more appealing to a bigger audience ( which is the very same people i am referring to ) and only makes sense from a business standpoint. It was always a niche but now they are trying to mainstream it which also points to Larian's Goofiness and Explosion Gratification Abuse. Michael Bay sells, always. So if you have a game that can be beaten by my blindfolded dog because of how exploitable or easy it is and has a constant over the top coating of goofiness and exagerated gimmicks, instead of a well thought out balanced system ( Doesn't necessarily have to be a D&D ruleset copypasta )....WELL. The only way i see it not selling is if the graphics were really ugly and the gameplay too slow for ADD zoomer kids ( Most of the complaints ). So my intuition points to Larian making it exactly like a D:OS 3 if all they want is sells.