Hi,

I need to tell it. I read the forum for few days and I feel the need to post caus there is a big misunderstanding.

We have, here a game "BG3" which proclaimed himself as the successor of BG1 and 2.

So let's take a minute and let's see what defined BG1 and 2 and what BG3 does. Let's try at least

And just to be clear, it's not about "whine whine, I want a game like this" it's all about "you said you are the successor of BG, so let's see if it's the case".

What was BG1 and 2 about the Lore :
it's D&D, faerun, drizzt, baldur's gate, illithid, etc etc.
What is BG3 :
I'm not an expert ( I read some forgotten realms, playde some games though) but I think we can agree it's ok.

What was BG1 and 2 about the story telling :
beginning as an orphan, looking for help (jaheira and viconia), helping some people here and there. having bad dreams, following leads until we discovered our story was linked to the political trouble in place (the 1). Then kidnapped, tortured, soul-extracted, escaped then cahsing for our soul, etc etc (2), Then Tob a good end for the sons of Bhaal.
What is BG3 (for what we know) :
a bunch of guys infected by tadpole but not transforming, looking for a cure (but we feel like we have time). What is this tadpole ? Why ? Who ? ho and a talkative skeletton staying in our camp.
Won't judge so far. Can't say I'm surprised or really exciting by the story but maybe I'm just to old to be easily surprised. So, I won't judge, I'll wait to be surprised.
Personnaly (as a fictive dev) I would have respect more the "you're the one" but it's incompatible with the "origin character" so it's really about a dev choice. Even if I'm not strongly against the origin character, it's a fact it didn't respect the BG'story concept. But it's not dramatic. I just appreciate the sensation to feel truly unique (at first so)

What BG1 and 2 was about the companion :
People you met during your adventure, one by one, in a lot of different places, some of them really (too) late in the game.
They was cool, some was pretty casual, some was pretty insane or funny in their way.
There was a lot and there was 5 of them accompanying you.
What as BG3 :
for now a lot (5) of mates in the first minutes of the game. All with more or less crazy story.
I think I can understand people who asked for less "amazing background" people. It's not unacceptable but it's important to listen to the players and so, yeah I get it. Could appreciate to have just a guy/girl adventurous and lost in the story.
That said, I think we shouldn't met them so fast. It feels too much the "here is your mates for the beginning".
Taht said, I would criticise the interaction with the companion, even if it's pretty good in general there are really disturbing facts.
Like when I was talking with shadowheart about Shar. I choose to speak about the persecution they suffer, you know, in a compassionate way. Well no, she disapproved and end the discussion ! Can't get why. There was nothing negative in the sentence, it was mroe like a "let's talk about it" but no.
Or like she said we should hurry up instead of helping the tieffelins and I said "well we could help them", she disapproved... So I reload, I try the "yes you're so right, let's them all die" and she approves... I found it stupid cause I'm going to help them anyway and shadowheart will help me and wont say a word about it ! xD
It' s perfect exemple of a stupid "approves/disapproved" talk. There is too much disapproved/approves everywhere and sometimes for stupid things (just a sentence).
It would have been smarter to have a disapproved AFTER we actually helped the tieffelin. It woule make sens...
Finally, the worst is the "romance". I still don't understand why all the men propose me to have sex...
As I still don't understand why they are all bisexual and multiracially open. I doesn't make sens. It makes them shallow.

What was BG1 and 2 about NPCs :
There was a lot of interaction and dialogues. There was a lot of stories, etc etc. Wont talk ad vitam aeternam about it.

What is BG3 :
I wont judge the interactions here, even if sometimes, yeah it feels frustrating like this little tieffelin I saved from death and who didn't car at all, who's insolent and who's I can't punish properly. I just had to accept she bad-talked to me...

But here, I would pay particular attention to one thing. The glorious "let's go close to the NPC to see their faces even if I don't care at all".
Before, it was text, some 3D-iso moving characters and our imagination.
With BG3, it's the "zoom on all the faces". And yeah, it's cool sometimes. many time even.
But I'll give two exemple who perfectly illustrate the "sometimes what is better is the ennemy of what is good"
First, the merchant. I don't really care about their faces...
Second, the party at the camp. There was this tieffelin who talk to you and say "come, let's dance" after what you see him wlak, do a discutable movement with his arms and say "ok it's good enough, the party was cool, let's talk about something else".
And I was like... Dude... Just let the camera in the sky and let me imagine the party instead of showing me this 3 seconds "dance", it's pityful.
So, this is exactly when "what is better is the ennemy of what is good" !

What was BG1 and 2 about fights :
the fights in BG1 and 2 was epic. It was RTwP. We could make it turn-based, but it was RTwP and so it was epic, nervous. You had to pause and pause and pause again. You listen to the warcry, the arrows and spells, you made your wizard run away, your warriors charged or retreat. It was intense.
Will ever remember lots of fights against sarevok, against, the five brothers, against the dragon, against the vampires, against so many people (against Drizzt hehe)
To win, you had to used the good spells. Mayb it was not THE strategic game of the centuries but damn, you had to make a good used of buff, debuff, control and defense-suppressor to win the big fights.
We feel strong, we feel challenged, we feel satisfied and sometimes epic.

What is BG3 :
It's turn-based and only turn-based and it's a mistake. No, more, it's a fault.
As good as turn-based game can be, there are not as epic as the RTwP are.
It's sometimes to long and unepic, absolutely unepic.
as much as the turn-based battles are appropriate for important fights, it's a true pain in the "back" when it's about trashy fights. I will never forget this 20-30 minutes fights against the goblins. It was as long as boring and the reason why the game would need of an RTwP option so we could "skip" this pointless fights and even feel pleasure in it, pleasure in mercilessly and fastly ravaging this camp.

Larian said turn-based was "more strategic". Well... I can understand why they said it even if it's, from my point of viem, a little pretentious.
More, here, it didn't feel correct.
More strategic then BG1 and 2 ? I don't have this feeling. I was closer to feel like a "try and die" game than a "more strategic RPG" and here is why.
When the "strategic elements" of Larian you have to used to win become the only elements to win, it's no more strategie, it's a pattern. Because once you get barrels and reliefs are "strategic", well... it's not really strategic, it become a rigid pattern. Every fights are "go as high as possible" and if it's too hard ? So "reunite barrels", etc etc. I don't think it's one big of a strategy when there is finally few strategies and some unavoidable tricks...

More, having to use the environment to win cause you're to weak otherwhise, it's not really epic. It may be fun, but not "dat" epic.
Make me feel more like a duplicitous than a hero.

Look at the minotaur. Where was the fun ? They cross half of the map in one turn, focus the wizard and killed them in one or two shot.
After a lot of try to "fair" fights and a lot of deaths, what did I do ? I put 3 barrels in order to make them explode and one shot the guys. What a strategy... What a fight... So epic... Wouhou... :-|

What was BG1 and 2 about loots :
There was some chess to open, some was empty, some was full, some was really good. The really good one appeared at the end of dungeon or in secret places.
What is BG3 :
Chess everywhere ! 95% of them are useless, if you're not carefull you will fill your inventory with spoons ! Some chess are called "marvellous", "golden", "put-random-cool-adjectives" but still give crap !
It just disgust you to open containers anymore (and yet I played DOS1 and 2. And in all the games I open all the containers, I'm kind of a squirrel, I take, I take, I take and I keep everything until the end. I even ended Red Dead Redemption nightmares without having used 80% of the stuff I had in my inventory not cause I am some kind of "hardcore gamer" just cause I'm like "keep it for later, who knows what could happen...").



After having played for more than 80 hours, after having read some threads here and after having think about it, I had this feeling and this need to share this one with you.
For now, PoE 2 and Pathfinder feels more like BG than BG3 himself.

So, here's my conclusion. Larian can keep doing as they want, people can keep saying everything is fine (especially the all turn-based mod), I don't really care.
But, in fact, as it is right now, BG3 won't feel as BG as PoE or Pathfinder feel.
And it's a bit sad.

Just to be clear, it's not about "whine whine, I want a game like this" it's all about "you said you are the successor of BG, here is why you don't feel like it".