Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General So, how's the game?

I wonder what you consider to be a legendary game then.

Judging by your question, I'm gonna guess that you're not going to agree with him no matter what he says. You're also not about to let yourself be convinced anytime soon either. You either understand his sentiment, or you don't. And if you don't, chances are you never will.

When he says legendary game he is probably referring to the original BG trilogy. If so, I do agree that current BG3 does not hold up to it.

Well, the funny thing is that I would understand if he compared BG 3 to Witcher 3 for example. But BG 1 and 2 are grossly overestimated due to nostalgia. Especially BG 1 which was good in 1998, but is a very mediocre game today. BG 2 was nice, but saying that BG 3 doesn't hold up to it is nonsense. The world feels much more alive, there is more variety in social interactions, story is much more interesting, graphics are obviously better, etc.

Actually both the Witcher 3 and the BG series would qualify in my eyes as "legendary". I'm sure this topic is very subjective, but I think time will tell. You can think whatever you want about the BG series, but you can't deny the fact that many people still consider these games to be a big highlight for them and still play them to this day.

Just modding it for another playthrough.

I'm satisfied with it. I don't mind the turn based-it's closer to the tabletop it's adapting, and while there are some clear rule breaks and it's different, Baldur's Gate was my first exposure to dnd so it still feels 'different' to me anyway, if that makes sense. Besides, Baldur's Gate too a lot of liberties with how accurate it was with regards to it's source material (such as having real time combat in the first place!)
The writing is good, the attention to details are good (tell astarian not to eat anything you can have a conversation with as a druid with 'talk to animals' active, for example!) and the only thing that's got me nervous is how the previously standoffish Shadowheart seems quite a bit more friendly and the communications blackout that seems to be in effect; logically, I know they're busy actually working instead of chatting with the forum/community but the total silence isn't reassuring.

It's too early to tell but I'm hoping the game doesn't drag in Baldur's Gate I and II any more than it has to-there's a trend in media to do a sequel to something beloved just so they can rip the old thing down, and thankfully Larian is seemingly avoiding that beyond a book going "Yes, Baldur's Gate I and 2 happened". The game is apparently shaping up to be a sequel in tone/theme of "How much will you give up for power" that the previous series had, which is what I would vastly prefer. There is levity and silliness in some bits of the game, however Baldur's Gate had it's fair share of silly moments too so I'm really bothered by that, I think the balance is good.

Dragon Age: Origins
Witcher 3
Fallout 1 & 2
Baldur's Gate 1 & 2
Fallout New Vegas
Disco Elysium
Planescape Torrent
Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic 1 & 2

Yes, many of these are ancient but for their time, completely amazing and defined excellence for their era.

Honestly, BG3 is making me think of another overhyped game, Cyberpunk 2077, which also is not living up to what people were hoping to get.

With all the criticism I may have toward BG3 I'm fairly confident I will end up liking it more than Dragon Age Origins.
But that's because I never thought that highly of DAO to begin with.

I would certainly add:
- Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines
- Mass Effect 1, 2, 3
- Metal Gear Solid
- Metal Gear Solid: Phantom Pain

I honestly wonder why?

Because it wasn't that good?
- The "videogame-friendly" ruleset they came up with was incredibly dull and approximative. We are talking stuff that makes D&D 5th edition appear complex and nuanced in comparison.
- The variety of enemies was more nominal than practical, given that no matter how many different models they had in the game, the same exact combinations of abilities worked on EVERYONE of them without much of an issue.
- if people complain about "HP bloat" in BG3 they would have cried their eyes out realizing what HP sponges some enemies were in DAO, especially at the hardest difficulty settings.
- Entire stretches of the game were a complete slog to go through (the Fade and the Deep Roads are almost infamous for that).

I played it, I finished it, I somewhat liked it, it was also a dark age where "party-based CRPGs" seemed pretty much on their way to complete extinction, so I appreciated that it was a thing at all... But I never particularly loved it and I don't think it compares too favorably to most f the others listed.

That is what i wanted to know.
Thank you for answering.

... I must ask - and please do not take this the wrong way but...

Why are people so very fond of DA:O, but PoE is hardly ever mentioned as the absolutely amazing game that at least I thought it was? :x PoE made it to my favorite game of *all time* - I simply adored pretty much everything; from combat, to (most of the) story, to characters, to setting to... Everything(?) About it and I don't even have any nostalgia tied to it as I played it during winter 2020-2021. :'D PoE2 was pretty good too, but not as good imo.


I am just genuinely curious, what about PoE makes it not quite reach games like DA:O amongst the community?

When I first played POE, I found that it has a bad habit of dumping TONS of exposition on you at various points of the game, instead of the 'show, don't tell' approach that DAO utilizes in comparison. The party members are nowhere near as charismatic as DAO's companions too, which is probably a huge but rarely talked about factor in DAO's popularity.

The pacing is also kinda weird. The game really kicks your ass at the start and doesn't really explain its systems very well. I actually almost missed Eder by the tree too, the start became a lot easier once I had him around to tank things. I liked the game for what it was, but it was pretty easy for me to see why it left people rather disappointed.

I like POE 2 more than POE 1, actually.
Once again, more on the mechanical side than in terms of story and characters because in that sense... I just didn't care that much for either of the two.

In its time there was no game with that much scope and complexity as BG. It was revolutionary, and I can see that having played it only after the CRPG revival during the 2010s, since I was a small kid in the late 90s from a non-english speaking country, so there was no way I'd understand how it worked. Therefore I speak with no nostalgia lenses whatsoever.

BG3 however is not revolutionary in the slightest, just a mishmash of DOS2 with some D&D and most work being put into graphics. Its trendy, and I actually think the comparison with Witcher 3 valid, both games invested heavily in spectacle leaving gameplay as an afterthought. For this same reason I don't like Witcher 3 as much as other RPGs because of its horrendous gameplay, in my opinion the worst thing a 100 hour game can have.

Simply because PoE is not an AAA game. But it was a hit considering its budget and sold well over 1 million copies.

Hear hear!

I am a big PoEs fan, and they are my personal favourite of the recent RPG resurgance, but personally I find both games too flawed to be put together with best of the best. I actually, rate both games on more or less the same level - but they succeeed and fail in different aspects.

I really enjoyed PoE up until the "big reveal" that wasn't that big of a reveal, then i just stopped caring. Then the second game doubled down on the God nonsense and I really stopped caring. The mechanics/gameplay were very enjoyable. DA:O was special for it's time, sort of a fantasy version of Mass Effect. Having a massive company backing you automatically gives you more popularity.

I'm not shy about it either.
If you have any question feel free to ask.