Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General What's you biggest fear about the final BG3 release?

Whatever some people may claim, Larian's statement during original Q&A strongly indicated that we will have too chose a more permanent party.

I don't think they will turn into mindflayers - while that's the original set up, it just doesn't seem to be what those modified tadpoles are designed to do. Getting mindcontrolled by Absolute, however, seems like a very real possibility - it would happen to PCs party already in EA if not for Gith McGuffin (McGithin? - you are welcome Larian narrative team). My bet is that at some point those not in the party (and therefore not under Weapons protection) will succumb to the influence and only present party will remain themselves. Unless, Larian took notice of the negative feedback and will walk back on that decision.

Edit: To me, personally, it is not a biggy - I generally tended to create one party in BG1&2 and stick to it, so after having whole act to decide whom I want to take, I am fine will letting the rest go. I found D:OS2 approach refreshing, even if narratively they didn't manage to get much milage out of it - it was done very abruptly and arbitrarily, and with unsatisfying payoff.

My biggest fear is that enough people will think this attempt is at all representative of The Forgotten Realms...Michael Bay-esque spectacle and all.

What will happen to the companions doesn't really bother me either. I generally only play with a custom party. But that would have to mean that in my case all previous companions would no longer be available, which is a great relief for me when reading dialogues (translations), bcs that can simply omitted. Still, it makes me a little curious as to what exactly is going to happen to Gale (bcs of his background)?

In no particular order:
- That the story may be mediocre;
- That the reaction system is not going to be fixed;
- That the UI is going to stay the same (I know they said now it's perfect but I still think is terrible);
- That all the immersion-breaking features are not going to be tweaked to fit better into the experience (e.g. fast travel);
- That the short/long rest stays like it is now, making players miss on core parts of the storyline and the interactions between characters;
- That all the homebrew is going to make the game too easy and/or make some classes useless because their core features are now meaningless or completely overpowered.

Crossposting from another thread (because I wrote it in another context and I immediately realized that it's very pertinent even here):
__________________

I just recently realized that my past assumption that we "obviously will spend a lot of time in BG" is not exactly a given and I'm mildly terrorized by it.
To be clear, I'm sure we'll get there... But at some point I remembered that you can find posters/letters talking about how the city would be currently quarantined or something like that.

What I'm starting to question is if it will be a city we explore and interact with extensively or if Larian will "pull an Arx" and give us a semi-abandoned city, that is basically a sieged warzone and where only few sparse oasis (or battle arenas) will be accessible to the player.
Not that I would expect the ENTIRE city to be there and reproduced 1:1, anyway, but the scenario describe above would be a fair bummer, compared to, say, having few selected quartiers of the city that you can explore in detail.

__________________

That aside, I share a lot of the other points that have been listed so far.
In fact, I could say that another "one thing" I fear about BG3 in its final state is how MOST of the concerns mentioned here don't sound exactly far-fetched.

I also see this as a major concern.

I think I stated this earlier... but I would much rather have the path to the city itself be quick and have the city fully fleshed out and alive than have the journey to the city take a significant amount of time and for the city itself to be something like you are describing. The only way I would see what you are describing as a positive is if we get to the city and it is somewhat 'normal', but later in the plot it is under siege and a lot of people leave or something like that.

The initial teaser/trailer for the game where the guy transforms into a mindflayer does concern me though - given that you see tons of mindflayers in the sky and the city as a total war zone that is having a meltdown. That could be cool if it is near the end of the game and you got to interact with the city in a 'normal' way before it happens. But if you arrive and that is already going on? I think that would be pretty lame. But I could see this happening given that rather than starting in a relatively 'normal' fashion like you did in a game like D:OS2... you start on a mindflayer ship that is under attack, in flames and flying through the sky like some kind of Transformer movie. I think if you translated the BG3 start to D:OS2 it would be like... you are on the ship with the magisters, but the ship is being attacked by the voidwoken when you wake up and the Seekers are also coming to rescue you at the same time... and it is on fire... and a giant tentacle monster is attacking you... and level 12 void monsters from Act 2 are on the ship... and you can kill them with the help of a level 15 Seeker guy who is fending them off... and you aren't in the ocean, you are in the void... but then you get teleported out of the void back to Fort Joy at the very end... and you start on the beach.

Or something like that.

On the other hand the things that are somewhat assuring about this to me are...

1. If Larian has listened to feedback they know a lot of players were disappointed with Arx in D:OS2.
2. I think they understand Baldur's Gate will be a huge deal to the player base and if done poorly the game reviews/reception will reflect it. It is an iconic place that the game itself is named after.
3. A lot of NPCs we have already met have indicated we will meet them in the city at a later time at various locations.
4. The game has been in development for a long time already (seems like 5 to 6 years by the time it actually releases) - I believe way longer than they initially anticipated given that Early Access is going to have been out for 2-3 years by the time it releases. I imagine they have spent a ton of that time adding a plethora of content to the game given that they just now seem to be starting on the 'polishing' of things like cut scenes and the overall UI.

This has been a great thread so far. I definitely share almost all of the concerns you all have raised here.

lol, so true, I'm afraid that most of these "fears" are very much things i wouldn't be surprised if they happened.

As for not spending a lot of time in a proper Baldur's Gate. woo boy. I just don't see how Larian, with how they design smallish almost themepark style environments that are interconnected,is going to make something of BG's scale. I don't think that's a fear, it's a certainty.

These are/were my fears (in no particular order):

- No party of six
- Lack of day/night
- Theme park environments
- Clunky party controls
- "Because tadpole"
- Larian house rules
- DOS'isms
- Poor enemy AI

My biggest fear. I've decided:

That I'll no longer care about the game by the time of Full Release.

Every topic has been beaten to death so badly... And it doesn't look like I'm getting much of anything that I really wanted added... Will I even care?

I probably will, but sometimes I wonder. A whole year still?

You have to be well practiced in managing your expectations during a long engagement like this

I also fear for the story.
All party members are super special and are connected to gods, demon lords and who knows what, but they are still lv1 chars.

I think it's a problem when every party member is the champion of a deity and fights goblins and bandits(well, that's what low level chars do). The game desperately tries to throw epic stuff at you.

Maybe it would be better to start a bit less epic and make the chars a bit less special so you have room for improvement later.
Come on, you start the game on a space ship in hell. How can you top this and still have a story that makes sense.

BG1 was great regarding the "You have a nice tutorial area and then you are lost in the wilderness" feeling. Then you slowly stumble into an epic story.

I am now beginning to realize thanks to your post that in all of the Larian games I've played, the largest cities in each game were ALL under some kind of siege.

- Divinity 2: The city of Aleroth, which I think is possibly the largest city Larian had designed thus far, to the point where the game's expansion took place solely within it. I remember the expansion being my favorite part of the game. But it was 100% under siege and you were looking for ways to defend the city and break the siege throughout said expansion. You weren't allowed into the city proper before the expansion began, even though you could visit it rather early on in the base game.

- DOS1: The city of Cyseal at the beginning of the game, of which you arrive while the city is under siege from goblins and undead. You do break said siege rather quickly though.

- DOS2: Arx. I'm sure I don't need to describe this. I feel like the game's narrative would have been A LOT stronger if you were able to visit Arx before heading off to the Nameless Isles. There would be major impact in returning to find the city transformed under the siege.

Really hoping BG3 bucks that trend, to be honest. Or they could pull a surprise and have us visit multiple cities, but that's a pretty tall order and shouldn't be expected for obvious development resources reasons.

If BG doesn't deliver I'll be supremely disappointed. I think most people thinking of Baldur's Gate, either think of exploring the wilderness in the first game and exploring Athkatla in the the second. Considering all the leads in the EA that seemingly lead to BG, if the city doesn't measure up to that it'll be a huge let down.

I think there might be a refugee crisis if the tieflings make it there, and the forces of the Absolute will be probably be a part of the backdrop as we go along, but having it all come to a head that early with some kind of siege is a waste of potential.

No. Please...no.

Not only is this game likely to underdeliver, but it will age poorly to boot?

Oh man! I'm growing more concerned about the game. If all they do is have Baldur's Gate besieged...

Finish strong! PLEASE finish strong. Give us twists and turns and surprises that make us go "Holy Crap! I did NOT see that coming."

Like KOTOR...

I think the only turn will involve your stomach.

I think "under siege BG" is pretty much a given. As well as "level 12 City guards" type enemies. Larian are who they are and some things just never change. The funny thing is the "theme park" style map that is a Larian hallmark would actually be a lot less annoying if used to create sections of a large city. They could have based the entire game in BG whilst creating a large and immersive environment.

The subreddit concurs with all the major points. Interesting consistency of concerns:
-City of Baldur's Gate's size, scale, and scope.
-Number and depth of companions.
-Later Acts diminishing in momentum and quality.
-Party locking and killing of unchosen companions.
-Every possible concern for expressing evil in the Evil route.

I'm growing more and more afraid that I will not like this game by the time it is fully released. You guys are really bringing my expectations down considerably.

And I'm playing DOS 2 right now as well. I'm not feeling the love and thus not super excited anymore to finish either. Back to Pathfinder Kingmaker and WotR maybe. And maybe I'll play more of the Solasta DLC Lost Valley.