Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback So is Larian actually listening to feedback here?

But they’ve already stated they’re reviewing the forums and reddit etc...

The last two updates have been pretty "minor" in terms of actual content or changes and I would expect that to be addressed at some point. I could be wrong of course, and I would certainly prefer if Larian were more open with discussing roadmaps, plans, etc... but that’s the kind of stuff I expect after a month or so of gathering and internalising, rather than a rash "yes we’ll fix everything" comment. I know that’s not what you are after Tuco either, but some on these boards are at least coming across as rather quite pissed off after what has been merely a couple of weeks since release In a still tricky work environment.

Sometimes no news is good news. No they haven’t stated what they intend to fix, they also haven’t stated they won’t fix some of the larger topics in here either. Think for now we should accept the updates as what they are, upgrades whilst they work on the big stuff and see what happens a little later down the line.

But hey that’s just me.

yeap if they have no clear timeline on when they will address a problem, makes no difference at all to mention it at this point, wait at least 2 months before complaining of not being heard, be reasonable

I guess we'll see either way. I want to bring up the quote again"74.85% of you stood with the Tieflings, and 25.15% of you sided with Minthara. Good outweighs evil, it seems." this quote can mean one of two things, both are kinda bad:
1. Larian is giving us the finger - they know we know we didn't like the evil route because no one (including me) can shut up about it, and want to show us they don't care
2. They have no idea - no higher-up of Larian ever laid eyes on any forum that discusses this game. Even Reddit, that is the most pro bg3 online right now, has posts criticizing the evil route that doesn't get downvoted as much as other criticism against the game. If Larian really has no idea we think so poorly about this story bit, it makes sense they will draw the wrong conclusions if they rely only on game statistics. And if that's the case, it just shows how limited this approach is in trying to figure out how to move forward.

the only other option I can think of which is much more optimistic is that Larian is simply focusing on bug fixes polishing the current experience. But if that's true, what about the rest of the game? does Larian plan to move forward and continue writing the next bits of the story without making sure that what they have now works? by the by, why asking the players to try the evil route in the first place if you are not interested in making any changes?

to summarize I'm just really confused.

I just assumed all of the cutesy stats and fun facts they threw into the updates where jokes. I don't think we're supposed to be taking them super seriously or reading into them too much. Maybe I'm just an optimist.

I totally understand why some people (aka most people in this thread) find it frustrating tho.

I totally think it’s fine to highlight that the stats are likely skewed because “reason ABC”. I still read that as a little harmless fun insights, similar to the generic character creation one.

I don’t expect these little updates to come out and say: “oh people obviously aren’t being evil because we totally made being evil super hard to figure out and unrewarding”.

1 - Because even if you do most people jump on you anyway for not realizing prior to release / and usually want to know what you’re going to do about it!!

2 - Not everyone got the “hey try and be evil memo”. I have several friends who just bought the EA thinking it was further along and that the companions were not evil just grumpy or weird and go on with being their usual good guy selves. It’s what the majority feel comfortable with and given none of the companions really push you or get too bothered if you play it safe and nice, there’s little real obvious incentive to play “evil”.

Which is totally valid criticism of course!!

I hope that they will draw the right conclusions, because I really want to play on the path of evil, and so that it is deeper and more thoughtful. And I want other players to try it too.

Unfortunately, in any relationship, the things that make people endearing becomes the things you don't like when you're upset with them. Their jokes becomes mocking statements of disregard that ignore the real issues, their goofy CEO becomes an idiot because dancing around in armor and making something you don't like must mean you are a buffoon, statistics become a measure of how tone deaf they are to the real problems. It ignores the underlying issue which is primarily one of feeling connected to the process that the paying members of EA enthusiastically participating in. If those posts didnt change at all, but devs came in here and commented on a thread "thats a great idea, we've had some discussions on how to implement it and it is still ongoing. Love the chat, hope this is something we can do keep it coming!", then people wouldn't care.

Right now though, its what makes people quit companies. The C-Level Executives and upper management's plans and strategies are beknownst only to them, each director has only their relevant peek into it, and at the end of the day anyone below upper management doesn't know why they are doing anything, if it matters, and half the time it looks like the companies moves past any reasonable input because you don't understand their decision making process. So you stop caring because they aren't listening and you go into "pulling a paycheck" mode where bare minimum to keep your stuff functioning starts and the thing that makes companies stay in business - innovation - dies. What they are doing is killing innovation because people stop giving ideas.

Rolling 1d20 intelligence to agree with you. Target 2. Ah..Failed... you're wrong , after all you're a forum dweller(Quick Load).

But on a more serious note I have to agree. Most of the issues here really have nothing to do with being a purist of d&d rules. ^^ And in the largest threads people tend to give not only a problem but a reasonable solution attached with it. Hence the reactions about romance updates lol.

Well Orbax if you feel that way, I’m not here to tell you you’re wrong. I mean my understanding of EA was to help out financially, get a shot at playing early and provide some feedback.

I don’t remember being promised anything in particular, but Larian did say multiple times they would gather and listen. The fact that no big announcement on issues has been made either way simply suggests to me they aren’t ready to discuss those items with us yet.

We’ve had some bug fixes, nothing else... Larian haven’t even added OR DISCUSSED the changes and additions we know will come (classes etc...), should we question those now too because they weren’t in either update?

Let’s not get our knickers in a twist eh?! I’ve worked in software development, I’ve seen nothing to make me concerned in any of their commutations “so far”.

Yep. and I will keep being one for a while, given that my government just decided to shut down my gym for at least a month (because three and half in the first half of the year weren't enough to bankrupt me, apparently), which makes me temporarily unemployed.

Want to preface the following comment with a lot dev studios are terrible with communication related to their games in development. So not unique to Larian.

Forbes has a few articles related to the importance of feedback economy especially to consumers utilizing feedback sources (like forums). Its highly recommended if not considered critical to respond directly to feedback, even if you don't have an answer, often. Letting the consumer know they have been heard regularly makes a huge difference in the quality of the feedback going forward.

Side note: will see if I can find and link them, been a little bit since I originally found them (months). Only cause they had some interesting statistics about it.

I'm a Technical Solutions Architect that for almost two decades has done nothing but develop, deploy, and support enterprise applications for companies in the billions for annual rev. I do a heck of a lot better than these guys walking people through this stuff. Its a simple tactic - communicate a bunch so people don't ask you questions and repeat known issues. If users know what is up, the channel quiets down to new issues and everyone has more time to find and focus on the high priority issues. The level of effort is so low - that is what is blowing my mind. Can anyone say what this will look like in 2 weeks? 1? Thats crazy. Im at 250 hours into this right now, so it isn't like im flipping them the bird, but my submission rate has dropped to a tenth of the previous rate. If they care they can ask about something. The throw sht against the wall and see what sticks attitude isn't that much fun, ill just play the game and hope their in-game engine is giving them something useful as that is the only thing they are really acknowledging right now.

Yep exactly. And this is EXACTLY why the whole "early access" argument does not work. Too many posters here keep nonsensically defending Larian, for some odd reason, stating that all of the problems are justified because it's "early access."

Thousands of feedback threads have been made, and not once has Larian acknowledged any of it. This game is definitely going down the typical "early access" route that we see time and time again, in which the "EA" release is 99% similar to the final release. It sure seems that's what's happening here.


No quality of life updates or core aspects of the game have been improved since release. such as:


1) Perks / abilities / passives / etc DO NOT appear in the character sheet. For example, at level 2 for warlock I chose "Agonizing Blast" and "Devil's Sight" as additional passives. However, NOWHERE in the character sheet (or entire game) does it display that I now have these for my warlock. I would only know I have them because I remember picking them. It is a serious oversight to not have ALL of the character progressions and advancements display in the character sheet.

2) Unclear status effects on spells, lack of a compendium. Many spells that cause status effects are unclear in what they actually do. For example, "Blind." The tooltip on this spell states it causes "Blindness" that can be shaken off with a saving throw, but it does not state what the actual effects of Blindness are. Does Blindness mean that attacks can't be made? Or does it mean they just have less of a chance to hit? The tooltip on the spell is incomplete in this sense, and the lack of a compendium means that I cannot look it up anywhere in the game. Another example is "Silence," which creates a sphere in which all creatures are "Silenced." What does Silenced mean? Does it mean they are literally silent, or does it mean they cannot cast abilities? Again, the spell tooltip is unclear. This is true for MANY spells. Either expand the tooltips, or create a compendium where the player can read about status effects and what they do.

3) Hidden details on spells / abilities that are not listed in the tooltip. One example here being "Hex." If the concentration of Hex is ever broken, Hex can be recast on another target without the use of a spell slot. This is not mentioned on the tooltip. Another example is "Shatter," which is an AoE spell, but nowhere on the tooltip is it actually listed as AoE. It makes me wonder how many other spells have hidden effects that I am unaware of.

4) Inconsistent rules. The example here being if I cast "Darkness," why is it that my warlock with Devil's Sight cannot see or attack in the zone of Darkness? If the rules are supposed to follow D&D, then my warlock SHOULD BE ABLE to see and attack in the Darkness spell effect. In this game, that is not the case, and it is unclear why. Furthermore, how does this make "Darkness" any different from "Fog?" Perhaps this is a simple oversight in game design and programming.

5) Lack of a rulebook. If the entire game is based on the rules of D&D and even plays exactly like D&D with dice rolls, why not include an in-game rulebook? It's easy enough to google all sorts of rules, but at least including the basics would make sense. This of course would simply be a quality of life change, and an optional compendium that exists for players that want it.

+1 regular feedback from the developer increases the quality of feedback you receive.

Totally, though with more communication and acknowledgement comes more consumer expectation, but that in general is fine.

I do think there are valid points being made, like uncertainty over whether remarks by Larian regarding stats are serious or what not and Larian could possibly help themselves by adding “oh characters look like this because [insert amusing answer] OR because the community feel there is a lack of choice currently? Comment below ->”

You know open up a debate on these issues with a dash of humor and self critique.

Same here with the evil stat, had it been phrased “oh are you all goody two shoes or did we not entice you enough to the dark side?” People mich have reacted less feverishly.

But I‘lol bow out of this for now and see how it goes. I certainly respect people’s right to critique, I just am against hyperbole at this early stage.

It’s crazy in your or even my world, but in the game’s industry it’s pretty much par for the course. I don’t know a single game, even when I was doing Alpha on Elite Dangerous and opening thread after thread, or closely following Cyberpunk 2077 that gave a weekly level of communication on what was coming. Anyone know how Diablo4 is shaping up?

If you take these forums, steam, Reddit and any others and glance at all the threads... that’s a metric ton of stuff to wade through. Bugs first, they’re happening, that feedback is being addressed. The rest? I think we can wait a little longer to see how Larian responds, no?

And no I’m not a Larian fanboy, I couldn’t get into DoS2 (though I might have preferred it on pc vs ps4).

I could probably spend less than a day and capture and summarize the top 20 issues across all three. I've been following reddit and here, Steams a mess but I paid attention for like a week on and off. Their biggest issue was expectation setting. If they had said "We have in game metrics running, just play the game, we'll patch ad hoc as we need to, and keep on chugging, we'd appreciate it!" then it wouldn't be an issue. It was the "we are listening so hard, we take all your feedback in so much!" and then doing nothing to meet that expectation. Under-promise, over-deliver. that and "honor your commitments" are kind of the golden rules of business. They oversold it, simple enough.

Orbax I vehemently agree. I'm in tech in Silicon Valley. Treating customers to near silence about their concerns after your go live gets your company killed.

It's more common in games, probably even more common after an established studio takes in ~ $45M in EA sales, but you don't have to look too far to find other games that did a better job managing EA comms (Hades, Darkest Dungeon).

While the game industry has set the bar low for comms, you didn't pay full price for a buggy EA for those other examples.

Expectation setting was a fail.

The first few weeks have dominantly been about working to make sure that blockers are fixed first (crashes, saves corrupting or being unable to load, bugs that severely cripples some players' ability to play the game).

I suppose it's also important to point out that while Larian is a big group of people now, not all of them are working on Early Access. One portion works on maintenance, polish and implementing content to EA, while the rest works on actually finishing up the game. And not all of them are involved in writing community updates. In fact you'd count that on less than a hand. Then there's the nuance of corporation and communications, further complicated by Covid and different people working from home, all over the world.

So while processing feedback is fairly easy, I've collected about 80 pages from Discord and the feedback form from the game launcher has seen pages upon pages of feedback as well - Processing that, forwarding it and going through internal discussions, decisions, and then starting to map out what you may start talking about, is not something that's done in a week.

There's a lot more nuance to it than that, but I've tried my best to simplify the gist of it down to a few lines.

What I can tell you though, is that -so much feedback- have gone through the gates, that not only will just reading through it take time, but discussing it would take significantly longer. And only then can you start deciding on additions/changes - At least of what is based on player feedback.

Hopefully my ramblings are found worthwhile at least to some 🙈