Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Mega-threads and Guides BG3 Party Movement Mechanic

Logitech G600. There is also a ring finger button

The chain is still pretty dreadful though I gotta say. My main issue now is that when the main character is unchained to scout then trying to rechain them just causes the selected character's portrait to disappear. Once all 4 characters were unchained, the portraits just switched places without showing the chain animation regardless of which direction I'd peal away or back into a neighboring portrait. Had to reload a couple times. I'd rather just have a click to select, and click to group without having to do like a magic magnet chain swipe maneuver with the cursor lol. I don't like the click and drag wherever it shows up right now, which is mainly with the portraits, hotbar and then in the inventory. I wish it could be more click and stick than click and hold to drag if that makes sense.

I like that the chain animation feels less pronounced now, and the highlight felt better, but then it fritzed out and I had to focus on it again.

Another thing I run into constantly with the drive style camera view, is accidentally left clicking the head of another party member and initiating a talk instead targeting of the ground.

At max zoom-in the companions will jog into frame when I'm trying to keep up the pace, or a head will pop up at the last second and snag the click intended for the floor. I'd be better if they would hang back at a further remove so that can't happen when in a driving angle. Even if it gave us like 20 or 30 degrees of pitch on the Z Axis for the camera it would hold up much better for surveying and get rid of the visor view feeling it has right now. If we could swing up along the same arch that we can swing back when zooming out it would probably feel more fluid for me. I really wish I could just control the camera in 360 though and lock it to the MC. I'd probably play that way the entire time outside of combat

at least give me a hotkey to automatically unchain/chain the whole group. This mobile game nonsense is frustrating.

For the life of me, I'll never understand why Larian so adamantly refuse to even acknowledge this issue. Is it because of some kind of hurt pride?
At this point I've learned that Larian is probably one of the worst EA developers when it comes to meaningful communication with the EA testers, and the community in general. But they must at least be able to say something?? (And not just about this issue)

Are you aware that a large portion of the testers very much dislike the current lacklustre movement and party control mechanics? Yes or no?
If aware/now that you are aware, is this something you are going to look in to? Yes or no?

I'm not asking for a roadmap that goes in to full detail when and exactly how you are going to address this issue. Just a simple yes or no answer. Can't be that hard can it?


And again, I must say that i'm not a fan of the title change the mods did to this thread. The current title feels very disingenuous for what this thread is trying to convey.

I completely agree with the OP here. I am a bit baffled because party selection and movements have been pretty damn good for decades now, and in BG3 it's subpar and clunky. o_o

"- it's a mess that turns into a comedic skit with idiots running randomly anywhere in any situation where you need to give everyone QUICK instructions on where to position."

That line says it perfectly.

So, there's been this conversation (by email) between a user and a Larian employee circulating, but despise the fact both the participating parts gave their agreement to make it public, one mod keeps deleting it (without a single warning, too, which felt more than a little disrespectful on the work I put to comment it... But hey).

Still, since I can't quote it directly, in this second attempt I'm going to comment on the gist of it.

In chronological order of mention, what we learned from that conversation is the following:

- They never promised RTS-style controls and they shown the current control scheme before the EA started, so the fact that people may like them the most over the Larian solution is irrelevant. We knew what we were buying.
- Just because some people prefer RTS-like controls, it doesn't mean that everyone does. In fact a lot of people "probably" like the current system more and both system have advantages and disadvantages. Except, no evidence for the existence of this "lot of people" was ever shown, nor we ever got our chance to read what the advantages of the current system are supposed to be.
- ...In fact, when this lack of evidence was pointed in a subsequent reply, the rebuttal was that since no claim that the number was "significant" was ever made, evidence to back said claim was not required. I'm a bit at loss about the consistency here.
- Still, the game was tested by a bunch of random guys at PAX and no formal complaint about the controls was moved there, which seems like conclusive evidence that everything is fine. Not to mention DOS 2 won a lot of awards, which apparently strongly suggests its design was flawless from top to end and Larian can do no wrong. The fact that this control scheme was heavily criticized on DOS 2 as well is pointed, but completely glossed over.
- The "uniform agreement" on this forum about the system being bad is briefly acknowledged, but we are a vocal minority. And so are probably all the people on reddit, Steam, Youtube videos and comments and on any other gaming boards that share our opinion.
- Also, none of us gave our feedback after playing at PAX for fifteen minutes while being rushed by the next guy standing in queue, so what the hell do we know, really? We "don't represent the players in general". Whatever that means.

Basically, Larian never cared about what we thought of this aspect of the game, so no feedback about it was ever required or welcomed.
If we don't like it, too bad, we need to suck it down. They have no interest in making it better because they think it's perfectly fine as it is.

We never stood a chance, really.

That's both disappointing and completely unsurprising.

I have worked with game designers in various capacities, though the most frequent is as a playtester/sounding board. You can usually tell which games are going to come out well pretty quickly based on what sorts of questions the designer is asking, the fidelity of the prototype relative to the design stage, and how they respond to feedback/criticism.

Larian isn't asking any questions. The fidelity of their prototype is way too high in light of numerous fundamental issues with underlying systems that really ought to be addressed first. And they seem to ignore most feedback and criticism (despite asking for it). They're showing all of the signs of a designer that is super-attached to their baby and took it way too far before stopping to check if the bones were any good. Those games rarely see the light of day and when they do, they generally don't turn out well.

Well, to be fair RTS controls are not the end-all-be-all of videogame control schemes. It's fair to say that party movement can be improved, but I don't understand why would we ask Larian to overhaul the control scheme for the game.

In my opinion, the control scheme has never been the issue.

How well dangerous terrain, traps, etc. are communicated on screen, party members walking through fire when it wasn't clicked on, and the camera bouncing around were issues. Those issues would still be there with an RTS control scheme.

Well, what can I say? I disagree pretty much on all fronts.
Saying that "RTS controls aren't the end-all-be-all" sounds a bit dismissive without offering a valid alternative.
It ignores the crux of the issue: if you can come up with something better feel free to describe it, but so far they are the pinnacle of the genre and for a good reason: they are the control scheme born and refined precisely in the genre that makes MANDATORY to control of multiple units as quickly, simply and intuitively as possible. How good they are at it? Good enough to be the standard in their own competitive genre.

Why would we ask Larian to overhaul the control shceme? Who else are we supposed to ask to, for god's sake? They are the ones developing it.

And something situational as "dangerous terrain and traps" feel incredibly marginal compared to an issue that will be front and center of the experience for the entirety of a gameplay session.

If anything, I'd agree that with revamped controls a tweaked camera would be also welcomed, but that pretty much comes with the territory. In particular I would gladly do without the inane degree of deformation that comes between things at different levels of elevation and/or distance from the lens.

It's not dismissive, lots of games have control schemes. For Baldur's Gate 3, I don't see any criteria that makes one control scheme more valid than the other. We're not harvesting minerals and vespene gas to build a barracks in Baldur's Gate 3. Innately Baldur's Gate 3 is not a micro-intensive game, the issue is that the characters get stuck on objects or surfaces which was an issue in D:OS2. (The difference with D:OS2 is that the party members had larger HP pools than D&D/BG3 so the player could laugh about it in that game. Baldur's Gate 3 it's a nuisance. And all derivatives of jump didn't have fall damage in D:OS2.)

Essentially small issues with controls in D:OS2 are in our face in Baldur's Gate 3.

The game isn't fast-paced so you don't need to move the party at a fast pace.
The AI should be smart enough to move safely out of combat. Not jump off a cliff and fall prone, or walk through fire, or get stuck when told to jump over fire.

I'm just saying an overhaul isn't needed, but refinement. It's okay to point out issues with party movement, but I don't see the value in telling Larian to go a specific route. It's okay to point out the problem and let Larian address it internally.

I'm hoping for the best for the employees who have to improve camera movement. The camera has issues with so many sections of the map.

The issue is the execution of the control scheme. RTS controls would give more opportunities to micro-manage the team, but that still wouldn't fix the issues.

Do we really want to have to micro each character around a hazardous surface, jumping obstacle, etc?
Or should the AI be smart enough to avoid issues out of combat?

The questions above are the point I'm trying to make. (For example, I'd only be asking for standard RTS controls if BG3 was real-time PvP like Warcraft 3 or Dota 2)

There are some out-of-the-box solutions:
F1-4 already lets us select characters. It would be nice if pressing F did the action group all/ungroup all.
The game doesn't need a scheme as complex as Starcraft 2.

Your attempts to repost the email conversation were removed by Larian and the moderation team because, whilst Larian have a considerable tolerance for negative criticism of both themselves and the game, this does not extend to vexatious and malicious misrepresentation of private email conversations. In any case, Larian holds the absolute right to determine what is published on their forums. I mentioned the issue of Copyright following a previous attempt to post the conversation and I will restate it here; a email author holds the right of control of his or her work (within the usual legal limits), and publishing private correspondence is unlawful without permission. Given the wild and deliberate misinterpretations contained therein, the publishing of the conversation is not constructive criticism in any way, shape or form, and serves only to cause division and discontent.

Tuco; you have been warned several times now about your abrasive posting style and yet you appear determined to ignore all warnings and continue as though forum rules and guidelines do not apply to you. I am here to tell you that not only do they apply in full, but that you may consider yourself on a final warning.

Hmmm I think you're right pointing at that issues and as you said, devs would be able to deal with it.

It doesn,'t change the fact that it's tedious to select one or two characters.
They are also always moving in unexpected ways.
Who never see a characters climbing a ladder, then you select another one, the previopus characters go down the ladder,...
Combats end near an AoE spells, characters regroup, they die in the AoE because they "have to move" all the time...
You have to drag portait multiple times to group/ungroup...
Sometimes encounters begin because a character move a bit too close while you were falling back with the selected one...
You can never choose the leader (ok, thinking that the leader should always be on the left is something personnal^^)

Anyway there are many many situations where it makes no sense and there are many situations where it's very hard to control your characters fluently.
A group/disband button would probably solve a few of them but it would only be a bandage on a bad system.

Again, just look at the survey that were done. It's pretty clear that no one really LIKE this scheme (even if some are "fine" with it).

I already said it on this topic but to compare, everyone should try to play DoS2 and BG2 (or any other EE) on console.
Obviously it's harder for both systems on console but it becomes really really hard for DoS2.

It shouldn't have to be so complicated and I don't really see any positive points to this scheme.
I know that "the majority" didn't report it as a problem but I also never read anything saying that it was good.

I'd be glad to have an answer from Larian's game designer about it.
Not to argue but just to ask questions and try to understand why they think it's fine because both in MP and in SP, I can't really see the value compared to what was done i.e in the old I.E games.

I hate this system but obviously, I won't leave a bad review because of it.

An example of what would hugely improve the current system without overhauling it would be stopping the rumba scene every time you change selected character.

I wonder when people will eventualy realize that Larian doesnt care for community.........
They wanted to boost sales on their new RPG. There is no better way to set it in a beloved franchise and give it a Name that makes people throw their wallets at them.

Be serious.... if anyone of you would have the chance to swim in money just for giving your product a good name. EVERYONE would have done this.
They never wanted to make a Baldurs Gate sequel that honors its predecessors. They wanted to boost THEIR Rpg. That reality and no matter what anyone says... thats how business is made!

If you realy dissatisfied then just never ever buy a game from Larian again.

This and so many little things that would improve things. Like thinking I've clicked ahead and all of a suddne may party turns around to try to climb a tree or some other scenery I didn't even know was there.

Joe

Baldurs-Gate-Fan: you are another poster who seems to be going out of his way to be objectionable and edgy. Keep your posts constructive and lay off the mindless 'trash talking'.

I have no idea how a direct quote would even begin to qualify as "malicious misrepresentation",
Not to mention the person that initially posted the entire conversation already confirmed that both parts agreed to make said conversation public.

<quote removed by moderator>

If Larian's going to be that dismissive and flippant about criticism I'm note sure why they even bothered to release this game in Early Access to start with. A little bit depressing i must say.

And yeah, how in the nine hells can a direct quote qualify as "malicious misrepresentation" ?? Especially if both parts gave their consent.
Now, your summary above on the other hand may be considered misrepresentation if they think that things have been taken out of context. But since you're not allowed to post what was actually being said, down to the letter... Yeah... Not sure what they are going on about here.

I think the ruling on the email conversation was pretty clear. Any more discussion on the subject will be removed. Persistent offenders may be disciplined.