Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Poll: Are you playing BG3 the way you wish it could be played?

Thats exactly what i mean ...

Larian made decision, and we can presume they wont be rewerting it back and forth in order to find out wich suits them better ...
We can certainly debate about reasons for this change ... either they listened to the feedback, or they just hit the point where one part of their system caused problems with another, so they were forced to adjust it ...

Specificaly, unless i remember it corectly, high ground advantage was remowed just few weeks before Sorcerer with his Advantage feature was presented.
Coincidence?

This is really the great crime of Larian's approach to this EA. It's created a situation where I'm certain that people who otherwise wouldn't harp on issues so much feel that they have to. We've seen that issues which were complained about, such as backstab and height advantage and surfaces, were removed, with no other explanation given for their removal. So now we have a situation where if there's a dispute about a feature, people could very well feel obligated to speak up about it, because they're aware that if it seems one side of the argument is more popular, then that's the side Larian will listen to. I'm certain that if Larian came out and said they weren't going to change backstab, then a large chunk of the complaining will ultimately fail, save for a couple diehards who are committed to railing against it. But instead they've essentially fostered a trial by combat environment, where if people want something to change, there's only negatives to keeping quiet about it. It's not a healthy way to foster a community.

A kind of person who would be willing to pay a full price for a buggy, unfinished build of a game, and spend hours playing early heavily flawed build of the game, spoiling as the result their experience when the game is finished, just in hope to help the next installement in their favourite series be as good as it can be. There are some many cheaper, finished great games one can play, while waiting for BG3 to be finished. Obviously, a chunk of players in BG3 EA are unhealthily invested in the title.

I find it crazy that some of the most active members of this community have so far only talked about why they dislike parts of this game. I guess this is inherent to this game category where hardcore fans have a very narrow view of what a CRPG should always be like.

Part of the point-basically all of it one might argue-of early access is to provide feedback to improve the game. So yes, most people here will talk about what they dislike because they want it to change. Pretty much everyone here has at some point acknowledged stuff they like about the game, but the most active members are also the ones who most care about the ultimate quality of the game, so they're going to take pains to point out flaws they feel need to be addressed. Should we talk more about stuff we actually like in the game? Maybe. I think that in general people should acknowledge stuff they like more often, but we basically paid for the privilege of doing work for Larian, so yeah, negativitiy and criticism is to be expected. If you disagree with their criticism, that's perfectly valid. And if the criticism continues to be this heavy post-release, then that's a problem and out of the ordinary I think. But at this point? Of course the negatives are going to be front and center in discussion. Baldurs' Gate 3 is not a perfect game, there are plenty of flaws to address, and frankly I find it more unusual that there are people who are perfectly happy with a half-finished game and wouldn't want there to be changes by the time of full release.

And I HAVE provided plenty of "I love this game" feedback. But I don't need to constantly say that stuff because I don't need to say all the things I don't want them to change to make the game better. I just need to tell them what I feel doesn't work well.

God's! I'd go on forever about all the things I love about the game. Won't make it better, but I could.

It's almost like arguing fervently about things that are perfectly fine and you like a lot about the game wouldn't really serve much of a practical purpose when it comes to advocating for improvements?

Well, a mix of that AND selective reading on your part, since praises to some good aspects of the game have been made in spades.

And while some may be incredibly content in settling for mediocrity, some of us still have ambitions to see this live up to its full potential of modern classic.

Exactly. I love the game, but I see SO much room for improvement to make it a truly great game.

Well, this seems rather one sided. Why, if you're going to publicly shame someone for their posting style, are you not publicly shaming both sides of the conversation? If this were a one-off kind of thing, I'd tend to ignore it, but it's really not. It seems to me that, if you agree with someone's stated position, you're ok with however they go about presenting it, or, at the very least, you don't publicly call them out. In so far as I'm concerned, this could all be done privately, instead of trying to publicly humiliate someone that may be saying something you disagree with. Whether this is your intent or not, this is the perception, and the reason that some posters feel absolutely free to continue to "go on the attack", because nothing they say has any consequence.

The irony being, of course, that they were informed that this is exactly what they were going to get, bought it anyway, and then complained about getting what they were told they were going to get. We can't leave that out, as it's a very important detail to keep in mind when you see posters using "arguments" like "clueless" about other players, and moderators publicly shaming anyone that has the audacity to disagree.

+1 to all of this.

Wow!! If this is happening as a regular thing, yeah it's ridiculously crazy.

I never understanded this kind of attitude ...
I wonder how exactly the is encouraging "cheesy tactics" ... since as far as i know, i never feld any encouraging at all. O_o

But it feels sometimes like some people feel compelled to use every single option the game provides, just bcs they are there ... i pitty such people, if that is the phylosophy they follow in their lives, tho ... elevators in really tall buildings have to be inventions from hell to them. O_o
Even tho i know some kinds find it funny when it stops in every single floor.

Oh no, we can and we will, because it's a laughably ridiculous reading of the circumstances.

Imagine being guilt-tripped for being vocal to any degree about specific aspects of the current state of the game that you may not be very fond of.
Apparently the only legitimate course of action after you join an Early Access should be a sheepishly attitude. Consume, nod agreeably and cheer.

I'm not even surprised anymore about your outstandingly consistent incapability to understand context.

And the attempt to imply that The Composer would have a particularly favorable or tolerant attitude in my regards is a bit a comedic angle on its own. You may have missed a couple of past chapters.
Give it a rest.

You don't "understand" because you don't really try.
Being able to sit comfortably in stealth and join the combat at discretion is a mechanic that encourages and rewards cheese.
Being able to use shove as a "bonus action-fueled human catapult" is a mechanic that encourages and rewards cheese, AND through the AI behavior forces it on you even when you aren't the one using it.
And so on.

And the reliability and solidity of any game system should NEVER rely on the player exercising self-restrain on the options available to him, anyway.
Ideally it should be the task of system and encounter designers to find all the ways to poke holes in the gameplay and fix them.

We were not informed EXACTLY what we were going to get. We were given broad strokes - Early Access, limited classes and acts, updates, a game based on D&D 5e ("implemented originally as faithfully as possible and then changed what doesn't work in a video game"), Larian will have a "a healthy relationship with those who take the time to provide feedback," etc.

Obviously there have been disagreements on what the above things mean, but that's exactly my point. We were not given precise information about the EA process and game mechanics that we're now complaining about experiencing. We were not told how Larian plans to communicate with us, just that it would be "healthy." We were not given a timeline for EA, just that there will be updates. We were not told that Larian planned on doing zero communication with us outside of responding to bugs and their Panels from Hell. Even things that have been updated mid EA haven't been precise: e.g., Larian told us that there would be a reaction system overhaul. Was this the incredibly slight changes made over the past 2 patches, or are we still waiting? Who knows?!

So yes, as people who bought EA to BG3 specifically to provide feedback, of course we have the right to complain. We were not told exactly about every single aspect of the game and EA process before buying it, but we *were* explicitly told instead that our feedback (of which, criticism is a big part) is important to Larian's development process. And with Larian's silence about our much of our feedback, of course we feel the need to keep critiquing the game in the hopes that enough feedback will get Larian to change their minds.

What else would one post about? If I had no complains I would spend more time playing the game, and post a positive review instead. I am not here to make friends, share fan art or screenshots of my character. Larian released EA for feedback so I give it to them. They can take it or leave. You as a fellow feedbackers can agree or not.


What’s your point is exactly? That one can’t criticise homebrew’s negative impact on game’s balance because by buying a game players must like everything Larian is doing?

There were some outliers but most criticisms I see tend to refer to the game that we got, and issues it has.

Yes, certainly, when the game encourages those ridiculous cheesy tactics and options for playing the game I don't have to use them. And I don't and never will. The problem, though, is that the game is built to get players to do those things, and as such the rewards system is structured to benefit and advantage those players who do use them, which by definition also means that players who don't use them get screwed in one or more ways: loot, XPs, story/quest options and outcomes, more aggravating combat, etc.

Yes, because there is no disclaimer on the EA's storefronts stating that if you're expecting a polished experience, you should skip the EA... Thanks, I guess, for proving my point? I read the storefront before I made my purchase, and I expected to walk into a hot mess. I did it anyway, and, I got what I paid for, with the bonus of, once it's ironed out, to whatever extent it's going to be, I'll get the finished product too. Once I have that, if it's not what I expected, or wanted, from the finished product, I'll be loud and proud about it. Until then, I'm going to treat it exactly as it was presented, an Early Access title that's going to lack tons of polish.


I agree, and I have provided mine, both in game and here. We were promised that it would be lacking polish, and that's very definitely what we got. There are disagreements about how things should be implemented, and if someone disagrees with the "accepted narrative", whatever that may be, they are fair game. It's not lost on me that only the dissenting opinions are "called out" by the moderator publicly, so that whoever hit the Report Post button can see that that poster has been "dealt with". I suspect, but cannot verify, that my post has been reported. Taking bets right now about whether or not I'll be called out publicly by the mod, instead of getting a private message about how something isn't allowed.

When I read "if you're expecting a polished experience, you should skip the EA" I expected to find the game was a hot mess. It was slightly better than that, but I didn't need a 20 page breakdown to know what "lacking polish" meant. However, anyone that disagrees with the stated "it should be this way" position doesn't have to be clueless. Classic examples are LR abuse, and Shove. I abuse neither, and have, on multiple occasions, laid out how not abusing LR has caused me to miss out on content. Ironically, some of the most vociferous posters about LR abuse claimed "you're not supposed to get all the content in one playthrough"... I never asked for that, nor implied it, but I'm supposed to believe that I'm just clueless? I don't even use shove, let alone abuse it, but I'm the one that's clueless?

The richer irony is when you post something that agrees with a position, and still get attacked for 3 pages. I've had that happen more than once, it's like they see my username, and just go on the offensive. It's even funnier when it winds up as some kind of dogpile, until someone that was dragged into it realizes what I was saying was exactly in line with the topic. A good example would be the all classes using class specific skills(? I think it was), where I was like "Yeah, if there's not a narrative reason for it, it definitely needs to be fixed", and I was set upon by the ire of the 5e purists, because I didn't just say "Yeah"... Or, "we need more 5e, unless it's phase spiders spitting venom and teleporting around". I actually had to look up how phase spiders are implemented in 5e, because I quit with 4e. Once I had that, I said "yeah, that venom spitting has to go, but if one cannot see into the Astral Plane, a phase spider, phase walking, will look like teleporting around", and again, received the ire of the purists.

Which would be a great rebuttal if "a polished experience" is what people were actually complaining about.
Do you even listen to yourself?

P.S. This is going to turn into another round of "You should only talk of the things you don't like after the game is finished" , isn't it?

Maybe he's a part of the "giving feedback/suggestion is useless because Larian is going to adress everything" crowd.