Stop it! There are like a dozen whining threads about this.
Balder's Gate is 20 years old. Most of the developers that worked on that game have moved on to other things.
The owners of the game liked what Larian did with Divinity. So if you want to complain, take it up with the owners. I think moderators need to start locking up this threads. I bet you didn't even get the game but want to ride the hate train.
What a surprise. The thing you already "knew" prior to investigation turned out to be "true".
I disagree with you on all points.
And intellect devourers and dragon-riding githyanki are not "fringe" lore. They go back a long, long way, and have been featured in many products, adventures, and video games.
They worked very hard, and they are still working very hard, to make a great new Baldur's Gate game for a 2020 audience. You suggesting, no, outright asserting, that they didn't try even "a little bit" is just insulting.
If they're going to take the "Baldurs Gate" name - they could have at least tried to make it feel like a Baldurs Game in some way
It does not. At all.
I'm good with turn based, new engine, all that stuff. But it's just 5e DOS2 and everyone knows it.
I'm just here to provide my feedback that I'm unhappy about that.
Metroid Prime managed to make the game feel like a Metroid game. Anyhow I'll keep playing this but it's really sad. Maybe I can ride on a red dragon named Falcor or something equally silly.
Do you even get to wander different wilderness areas, or do they just have several big giant maps like in DOS2? Probably has four areas like DOS2 too lol.
Larian should name some In-Game trolls after some of the folks posting on these boards.
Repeat after me. BG3 takes place 100 game years, 20 Real World years, and three editions of D&D later than BG1 and 2.
References to the Sword Coast and Baldurs Gate region are all over the place. A "sequel" to the events of BG1 and 2 already was written, and are cannon in the Realms Lore.
And stop with the ridiculous comparisons to DoS2 - if you get deep enough ALL RPG's are the same.
OMGawd - BG3 is just a bad version of (fill -in game name). Both have protagonists, both have a posse, both have evil nefarious plots by evil characters, both have locations you visit where you kill people trying to kill you and get phat lewt, both have a beginning, a middle and an end, both have music and animated action!!
I hated (fill -in game name) and thus I hate BG3. And since I hate it, clearly everyone hates it.
Having played a lot of DnD 5e and DOS, the game feels very close to 5e with homebrew rules and not much like DOS.
If Bioware hadn't destroyed their credibility, they could have been the ones making it in the way that you picture it, but they have let themselves go... maybe you should direct your negativity towards them?
Last point, games change. Resident evil 1 and resident evil 4 play much differently. Time allows for new ways to do things and make improvements. Why should Larian try to make a game play like a game that came out 20 years ago, when they can make a better one?
https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Githyanki Githyanki have extensive relationships with dragons according to d&d lore. Ctrl-f finds 32 instances of the word "dragon." Seems like normal lore to me! ^_^
I also really liked Baldurs Gate, and I would have liked it if the team tried to make this feel like a Baldurs Gate game. Instead they're just using the DOS2 engine and making that with a forgotten realms setting.
BG1/2 were serious games with some humor.
Originally Posted by Firesnakearies
And intellect devourers and dragon-riding githyanki are not "fringe" lore. They go back a long, long way, and have been featured in many products, adventures, and video games.
.
LMAO!!
Yeah dude everyone's first couple experiences are with brains with legs hahahaha. Give me a break dude. This is fringe Spelljammer stuff.
They could have like .... eased us into that, and started us off with some more classic gnolls and hobgoblins and stuff
But nope - straight to a bunch of red dragons (there was like 2 red dragons in baldurs gate and they had names and personalities. here they're just horses for some githyanki lmao)
Having played a lot of DnD 5e and DOS, the game feels very close to 5e with homebrew rules and not much like DOS.
If Bioware hadn't destroyed their credibility, they could have been the ones making it in the way that you picture it, but they have let themselves go... maybe you should direct your negativity towards them?
Last point, games change. Resident evil 1 and resident evil 4 play much differently. Time allows for new ways to do things and make improvements. Why should Larian try to make a game play like a game that came out 20 years ago, when they can make a better one?
It doesn't have to play the exact same way. But they didn't even try to capture the essence. It doesn't sound like BG, it doesn't look like BG - not even the UI, the writing doesn't even read like BG.
Nothing about this game is Baldurs Gate except the name.
They fall within the realm of normal, intended DM prerogative.
Most DMs would only adopt one or two optional rules, making it feel largely as intended with a slight tweak. This is a host of optional rules, combined with lots of things way outside those, and adding a ton of changes after. "DM prerogative" is being so loosely interpreted here that we could say writing an entirely new rules system would count as "DM prerogative".
Most DM's are only running a game for half dozen or less people - not the tens of thousands of potential players of BG3. Hella more people and play styles to take into consideration.
Maybe you will enjoy installing Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 again and playing them again. This sounds like it is too much change for you and you would be happier with little to no change from what you already experienced in life.
This is yet another formal request to condense all of these into one megathread where everyone can troll each other making the same tired, terrible points. Maybe they can get their own section of the forum.
I don't want to fall to bits 'cos of excess existential thought.
Yeah dude everyone's first couple experiences are with brains with legs hahahaha. Give me a break dude. This is fringe Spelljammer stuff.
Sometimes when I'm deeply ignorant of a subject, I just start laughing maniacally.
So we're in the same boat, there.
Intellect devourers came out in the very FIRST Monster Manual for D&D, way back in 1977. Long before Spelljammer was even a thing. It's a core D&D monster.
The shear mental gymnastics required to state that:
1. The forums are filled with complaints about the game feeling like DoS rather than BG but also 2. That is somehow not a problem for a game that is supposed to be the third game in a trilogy that only *exists at all* because of the 20+ years of popularity of those BG games
They fall within the realm of normal, intended DM prerogative.
Most DMs would only adopt one or two optional rules, making it feel largely as intended with a slight tweak. This is a host of optional rules, combined with lots of things way outside those, and adding a ton of changes after. "DM prerogative" is being so loosely interpreted here that we could say writing an entirely new rules system would count as "DM prerogative".
Most DM's are only running a game for half dozen or less people - not the tens of thousands of potential players of BG3. Hella more people and play styles to take into consideration.
Did we just come to the conclusion the problem isn't BG2 or BG3 but actually D&D? xD
Alt+ left click in the inventory on an item while the camp stash is opened transfers the item there. Make it a reality.
Stop it! There are like a dozen whining threads about this.
Balder's Gate is 20 years old. Most of the developers that worked on that game have moved on to other things.
The owners of the game liked what Larian did with Divinity. So if you want to complain, take it up with the owners. I think moderators need to start locking up this threads. I bet you didn't even get the game but want to ride the hate train.
Githyanki have always had red dragons and rode on red dragons for hundreds if not thousands of years and is actual normal acceptable lore
Baldur's Gate 3 takes place 100 years in lore after the second game. We go through 4th edition and 5th edition before we get Baldur's Gate 3. Between 3.0/3/5 to 5th edition that is 20 years.
While I disagree with the OP, this "20 years old" argument is silly. The latest Baldur's Gate expansion was only 3 years ago, for one. For another, it's a very popular series that defined a genre. There are going to be players who expect the legacy of the series to be carried on faithfully. Larian wanted that audience, or they wouldn't have called the game "Baldur's Gate" otherwise. It would just be Forgotten Realms and have its own unique name. If you call it Baldur's Gate 3, that carries with it a lot of expectations.
