Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Why Larian CAN justify calling Baldur's Gate 3... Baldur's Gate 3

Don't know what to tell you either. I can't think of a single companion that is like Sebille, the Red Prince, Fane, Ifan, Lohse, or Beast. As far as gameplay goes, DOS 2 didn't require that you manage spell slots or bonus actions, didn't have cinematic conversations, and every battle turned into the apocalypse. As far as atmosphere goes, this game feels significantly less silly than DOS 2. This game to me, has more in common with Dragon Age: Origins, as far as cinematic storytelling, companions, and atmosphere goes. The UI is similar but not exactly the same, and the game is turn based like DOS 2.

6 pages, best decision they ever made? All old timers know the series, that should help.

I would agree here. BG3 is a mix of D:OS2 and Dragon Age: Origins (ufff talk about two acclaimed RPG, which I unfortunately didn't find enjoyable). Tone wise, though. Nah. DA was grounded the the fault, talking it world building so seriously, as if they built an interesting world or something. BG3 is still ridiculous, more concerned about "fun" encounters then coherent world building or storytelling. Presentation is very DA-like, though.

Eh, denying that BG3 has D:OS2 DNA is like denying that Fallout3 has Oblivion DNA. They are not the same, obviously but if someone (like myself) fundamentally doest like Bethesda design, fallout3 won't change that, even though I loved Fallout1&2.

I dont know about those two ...
(Since i never played Fallout 3 in my great shame.)

But Fallout 4 and Skyrim are basicaly just reskin for each other.

I think BG2 should have been named something else since it never took place in BG.

Lol. You so smart.

Baldur’s Gate wasn’t good title to begin with, but BG2 is a direct sequel to BG (story and mechanic wise) so it’s on point.

Obviously the game has DOS2 DNA, why say that like it's a bad thing though? This is the same thing as a book series being continued by another author after the original author has gone and died.

What people need to get in their heads is that it isn't Bioware making this game. That old Bioware which made BG1 / BG2 is dead and buried, it wouldn't ever be possible for them to be ressurected and make a sequel.

There will be connections to the first two games story wise and like Harbs Narbs says in his video that's more than enough to call it BG3 and try to deal with the high standards that the game will be held to.

Other than that, even though it has DOS2 DNA, the way the game expresses it is already vastly different.

Because, in my personal opinion, D:OS2 isn't very good, and more importantly, I didn't enjoy playing it. So as a Baldur's Gate fan, and Baldur's Gate legacy fan (later bioware games, Obsidian etc) I don't want to see that stuff in BG3. Just as I don't like Bethesda Fallouts, while being a Fallout fan (1&2&New Vegas).

I can understand as to why you're disappointed with the choice of developer then but:
1) That ship has sailed
2) It has nothing to do with the sequel name being justified or not

Larian has their style, obviously not everyone will like that style. You can't ask a dev to throw their identity out of the window though.

I agree entirely, and also agree that this game is not truly a Baldur's Gate game. I wouldn't go so far as to claim it is D:OS3, but it is more D:OS than it is BG. The "BG" in the game title is undeserved (thus far).

Minor quibble, but I'd say it's the "3" part that is currently undeserved. It's the "3" that implies it's a direct sequel to BG1&2 since those games were a ~continued story, but currently BG3 seems to stand on it's own with only easter egg references to BG1&2.

If Larian had named the game "Baldur's Gate: [Insert Good Subtitle Here]" (similar to the tabletop module BG: Descent into Avernus), then there would be much less of a problem. The story does take place near and heavily involves Baldur's Gate after all.

I think you're on to something here... The "3" specifically in the title comes with much more responsibility and expectations than just naming it "Baldur's Gate: The Power of Wine Supplies."

Yeah, unless there is some direct reference we are yet to find out about, this is where I was going, too. Or something like "xxx, a Baldur's Gate adventure".

Unless Neera makes an accidental appearance while she was trying to cast some other spell.

Joe

I'm glad there are people that have same thoughts as myself. I was being attacked in and out for having such opinions and thoughts that i'm not allowed to voice out else i'll be branded as troll.

I am actually not disappointed. Personally, I didn’t want BG3 to happen at all - the story is finished, and is very much a product of its time. Making a sequel that I would fully embrace isn’t impossible, but would require a very fine direction, to be both fresh and faithful to the originals.

Hearing that Larian will be doing BG3 I thought to be a good idea, as what I felt what D:OS2 was lacking was better systems and better tone. I underestimated, however, how little D&D the game will feel. They get served a straight up better system to use for their titles, and they look for ways to break many aspects of it.

Yes you are absolutely correct. It's what I was intending to say myself, but ended up writing it out wrong.