Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General I always knew they listened to us really :)

Show me evidence of this please.

More like truth.

When a game developer consistently makes great games and has that one outstanding game that puts them on the map, they gain a reputation. This reputation makes fans and even those who are not yet fans interested in their other projects due to consistency, even if they are not familiar with the IP itself. Divinity Original Sin 2 put Larian on the map, which is now seeping over to their next game.

They gained so much attention and praise for it from all kinds of gamers, that no matter what their next game was gonna be it was going to gain a lot of interest. Their Divinity Original Sin Fallen Heroes was highly anticipated, but then put on hiatus. Many were hoping that DOS3 was coming, but instead it was BG3. So no matter what game was coming up next, it was going to gain a lot of interest no matter what, because it is Larian and people love Larian RPGs and want more great experiences.

So feel free saying that the game is successful mostly because of its name, but it's actually a dead franchise brought back to life after so many years and riding on Larian's reputation, not the other way around. I don't think any other studio would garner the same amount of interest.

Otherwise if it was as influential as you claim it to be, then the official Baldur's Gate - Siege Of Dragonspear Expansion would have gained more traction than it did in its six and a half years of existence. Compare those 766 reviews of the "actual Baldur's Gate intended experience" to 49396 reviews for Baldur's Gate 3 in its unfinished Early Access state or 132552 reviews for Divinity Original Sin 2. The numbers are so astronomically far apart it's not even funny comparing the two.

So it has very little to do with the name. BG3 is a high quality modern RPG with many impressive aspects and modern gameplay, which is why it's successful. Could have been any name, it would be just the same as it's the next modern Larian RPG.

From SteamDB :

It isn't 100% accurate but should be very close to reality. This is just Steam too, not accounting for other stores and console releases.

Sorry I can't agree with your suggestion that more people were playing CRPGS back then; from your list the majority are D&D games and they were by their nature and especially at that time incredibly niche. D&D was not mainstream back then and other genres of video game were far more, and continue to be, more popular.

Diablo was an action RPG so I don't think it can truly be put in the same bracket as BG et al. I suspect the reason it was so successful was because it appealed to people who wouldn't normally touch a more traditional CRPG as they were considered too complex/slow/too much dialogue, etc etc.

Also games like Skyrim (and The Witcher for a more action RPG take) had mass appeal so again I think they provide a counter point to your argument that only recently people regained an interest in CRPGs.

One can't deny the sales of DoS but I think you have to take into account things like increase in population and accessibility to/interest in video gaming compared to 20 years ago. The statistic on its own stands for relatively little.

As you said, I consider Skyrim and TW3 as fully action-rpg. Both series have deviated too much from their complex game roots and have lost the C in CRPG. I do recognize their immense importance in reigniting the general interest for RPGs though.

Sorry, wait, is DOSII not widely considered to be one of the games most responsible for the modern crpg resurgence?

Like, don't get me wrong, I have loads of criticisms about how Larian is handling BG3, but I think it's undeniable that they are one of the, if not the, most popular crpg devs right now.

The resurgence started before, but it is the most succesful of the bunch. I am pretty sure it outsells competition by a wide margin and D:OS2 has been topping best cRPGs of all time lists. Pathfinder games seem to be a favourite among more cRPG/table-top centric crowds.

Over devs have been paying attetion to D:OS2 - it had influence an influence on Pillars of Eternity: Deadfire, and I think one can spot some similarities in Wasteland3 as well.

But you yourself admitted that you hardly even gave a glance on DoS 1 and 2(because of tb) until BG3 so what made BG3 catch your eye? Since you knew that BG3 would also be turnbased? The name recognition of Baldur's Gate, or of Larian?

Personally, it was Baldur's Gate. I had never even heard of Larian before. I do remember glancing through a review of DoS 2 sometime but didn't even bother checking the developer back then. Which is also something I rarely do. Great games can come from any studio. Just as really bad ones. So many studios that has been hailed to the skies before to now being seen with disdain and mistrust because of recent releases.

I'd personally played Divine Divinity before, many, many years ago... and written it off as a fairly trashy generic iso rpg that was full of bugs, broken quests and ridiculously bad balance that make it amusing to play, but not memorable (apart from the demon-driven coercive rape of a servant by a possessed minor... classy).... just another example of a game which had dozens of other similar game just like it at the time.

Beyond that, I had no real presence from them on my radars, until BG3.

The resurgence of popularity and interest in crpgs is not the 'result' or 'thanks to' any particular game - these things rarely ever are. There are many other factor outside of the games themselves which control this and influence it.

The main driving factors, from my personal perspective, that have influenced the returning interest in crpgs has been the massively growing and expanding audience interest and visibility across many platforms and mediums, of D&D and TTRPGs in general surrounding that, over the past decade. There was absolutely going to be a BG3 game, with or without Larian, because that is where the market interest is right now, and it's not there as a result of Larian's games, successful as they are ( and I'm not denying that they are hugely successful).

Neither actually. I knew absolutely zero about Baldur's Gate other than that it was a decades old RPG from the days of Diablo 1. And I did not recognize the studio until after I took a look at their other projects. It was a simple leap of faith on my part because the game looked really impressive

BG3 looked like an RPG that had all the RPG elements that I love and I never saw a top-down RPG with such a high quality production. Once I saw the scene with Lae'zel on the Nautiloid, at that very moment I was so captivated by everything that I had to see what the game is all about, despite it being turn-based which I extremely disliked at the time. Thanks Lae'zel! So it was pretty much; "This game looks awesome, Imma try it out".

So after playing it for a very short time (only up to the crypt) and to my surprise tremendously enjoying it, I went to check the studio's other games and that's when it dawned on me that this is the same studio that made Divinity Original Sin 2, as I knew about DOS2 and its reputation of being an amazing turn-based RPG. So I got the game to somewhat satisfy my itch for BG3, even though I was afraid I won't enjoy it, but instead it ended up being a completely different itch all of its own and one of my favorite games of all time. Loved it so much I got DOS1 too.

At that point it became clear to me why DOS2 was so loved and that Larian simply makes great games. It's no small feat to convert a turn-based hater to a turn-based lover. So I am not even remotely surprised that BG3 is such a success even now during its Early Access state, as Larian's track record is consistently good.

I gotta say, Crimsom, Lae'zel was the hook that got me too. I have really liked her from the beginning. She and the opening sequence really won me over. I was very worried about buying the game, for I am rather hesitant about mature games, especially ones that advertise sex as one of their main hooks. I don't care for games with lots of in your face sex and vulgarity, and I feared BG3 would be just that.

But so far, it's not. I hope it stays that way. PLEASE stay that way. You can have your naughty bits as options for those who want them, but please not in my face. As it is, the Duergar are a bit too much for me. I'm not keen on their chatter. It fits, mind you, with their characters, but I don't really care for it.

Anyway, it was mostly Lae'zel and those opening scenes that persuaded me. I was super interested in her story, wanting to know more about this Gith Zena warrior princess who was infected by a mind flayer tadpole. Who is she REALLY? How did she get on that ship? So many questions.

I disagree re BG3 not being that easy to follow in terms of the rules - I think you can learn any game you want these days even if you are new to the genre. There’s so much info online from wiki to streamers to fan made guides etc.
So many people have played some form of rpg and let’s face it d&d rules are probably the influence to begin with in most of them so picking up the concepts in BG3 shouldn’t prove so difficult.

BG3 UI & tooltips have come a long way since EA first started - always room for improvement but getting there.

On another point I think we are very lucky to have Larian doing this game - D&D is a tough gig & every game that falls well short of the mark just lessens the chance of other developers giving it a shot.

To that point, I think that if players have to turn to outside sources to follow the rules of a game then that's a failing on the game. The ui and tooltips have definitely improved, but there's still an obtuseness there that hasn't been addressed. Like those weird momentum items that don't seem to explain what momentum is. At least, they don't explain in a particularly clear manner. I'm willing to still be a bit forgiving since tutorials are usually the last thing done in a game, but it's still something I'm keeping a wary eye on.

I don't argue BG3 will be impossible to figure out (5e is approachable to begin with) but refering to online guides is very much what I would see as an issue. Even on D:OS1 Sven said that playerbase didn't understand resistances - therefore binary and awful armor system was born. I assume that aim of making the game approachable is the reason why Larian cheese is so prevelant - so players can use simple, easy to figure out solutions to their problems, instead of heaving to understand underlying systems.

That oddly is enough somewhat faithful to BG1&2, where the game was easy enough so one could power through most of the game without understanding basic stuff like how armour or attack works (I had a friend who progressed a decent way through BG2 without armour and resting and he thought armors make you more likely to be hit and that you can rest in the inns only. He still had a good time).

Still there is also a little problem of BG3 not being a faithful adaptation, so finding info on how BG3 works can be frustrating. BG1&2 had manuals - I doubt BG3 will have something of that sort, or if it would be a good solution for a modern audience.

I think most people who are drawn to BG3 will have likely enough experience with rpgs to figure out how the systems & mechanics work - guides etc are for those maybe who are wanting to min/max or maybe learn more about d&d plus 5E from the computer game version Larian presents rather than 5E tabletop itself.

Neither of us has data on it so it's will be a bit of an empty argument. I disagree, obviously. I don't think that cRPG lovers are Larian's core audience, not with the amount of players they had attracted. PoE and Pathfinder appealed to people familiar with cRPGs. I think that D:OS2 success is far bigger because it appealed to people who wouldn't normally play an RPG, just like Dragon Age did.

Only time will tell I suppose - whichever way it goes I just hope this game is a massive success & keeps computer based D&D games firmly in the limelight

Naturally they could slightly improve the tooltips within the game to make things more clear, but it honestly all depends on the player and their level of interest. Some will have no issues getting into it, others might need some guidance, while some will require a dusty old 3000 long page tome explaining every single thing down to the letter. And some will simply be hopeless in getting into it no matter how much the game holds their hand.

I personally never played a turn-based RPG prior to BG3 and had absolutely no issue getting into it nor understanding it. Nor DOS2 for that matter, because these games held my interest and I wanted to get to know them, so was able to figure out everything inside of the game just by playing or by reading a tooltip when something was of interest to me. But that's just me.

I see Larian RPGs as accessible games where one does not need prior experience in order to get into them or even enjoy them. And there are definitely some RPGs out there that require you to read a bible of rules in order to even try to get into them

I wrote a longer post that discussed this in more detail and with more examples, but got to the end of it, refreshed, and saw just,... more of these oddly sycophantic posts who have come out of the woodwork in the past month or so to bang the drum of this game being the bee's knees in every way.... completely ignorant or outright ignoring of the long years (at this point) of fairly thoughtful discussion that is the exact counter to their empty assertions, and I didn't find myself having the motivation to actually post it, when I know it's been said before, explained before, discussed before, and gone into solid critical detail about before.... and knowing that these individuals, and those that will come after them next month, when they get bored and drift on, will continue as they are, ignoring and denying.

The number of times I've written responses to these posts... then sat reading them, vetting my language, reading them again, and thinking about what odds they have of actually having any kind of impact on anyone.... and then ultimately just shut the browser window unsent.... is really quite a sadly high number at this point. I do find myself wondering if my exhaustion on this is not adding to the problem in itself as well... thanks for continuing to speak up Grey ^.^ I'll see if I can't try again...

==

If a video game requires or even strongly wants for players to look outside of itself - to player-made guides, youtube videos, discussion threads or fan faqs, just to understand its core systems, what they mean, and how they work, then the game has Failed to convey itself properly. Yes, people will figure it out, generally speaking... but it's still a failure of game design and a substantial black mark against any title.

BG3 is in this exact position right now; no it doesn't need 'a little improvement' - it's a mess. The game is positively Rife with instances of "Why didn't that apply?", "Why won't it let me use that?", "Where did that damage come from?", "Why did that effect end?", and worse "That shouldn't have ended then...", "It said I get a save for that...", "What does that condition even mean/do/affect?", "What does that tooltip even mean?" and so on... It's improved a little bit, but it's still an absolute shambles in that regard. It's definitely far, far, below anything even approaching acceptable for a game of the calibre that it is making itself out be.

An accessible game means a game that is Clear; BG3 is NOT clear about a huge proportion of its mechanics, fails to explain them, and has misleading, incorrect or confusingly written descriptions all over the shop.
An accessible game means a game that is Consistent; Bg3 is NOT consistent in its mechanics or its functions; it is rife with floating damage, unattributed rolls, inconsistent notation, incorrect or misleading descriptions, as well as conflicting and sometimes directly contradicting functions with nothing to clarify how they interact or why.

D&D is Not a difficult gig; it's the opposite, in fact. 5e translates Excellently into a video-game format, needing only a small amount moderate QoL adaptations and adjustment to create a smooth and clean translation of the ruleset; this should have been the easiest part of the whole process for Larian, because it's all done for them already, and it translates beautifully - it was designed with that in mind, in fact. Not to the extent of 4e being designed specifically for video games, but deliberately with ease of translation into digital media in mind. They don't need to worry about clarity or communication, or descriptions in tooltips, because all of that has already been done for them and made available to them, in its entirety, by the license they have - it's all there, and has been designed for accessibility, approachability, clarity and ease of ability to pick up by new players, right down to the clear and consistent notation and the short descriptions that can in most cases easily fit on a pop out tooltip without losing any information. It was all prepared and ready for them to use, by professionals who have been doing this for nigh on fifty years. This was the ultimate softball for them - it should have been the element of least consideration that they needed to spend the least amount of time on managing, so that they could spend more of their time and resources focusing on making everything else that's needed for the creation of a timeless and enduringly excellent video game. But somehow, they have managed to make an inconsistent, disjointed, unclear mess of the whole thing, full of incomplete, conflicting and sometimes even flat out incorrect information... and it still is, and they're still trying to scramble out of the mess they've made.

The idea that there are crpgs out there that require reading voluminous bricks of manuals to even get by in is a ludicrous strawman - it's simply not true. Any half decent video-game will let you 'get by' in it without understanding the underlying ruleset fully; that's not a selling point or an excuse for Larian's troubles here - unnecessary troubles of their own making as they are. Larian's audience have traditionally been people who are afraid of words and who hate reading - or at least Larian seems to think that's their audience; they write their descriptions and tooltips as though they're terrified of using more than ten words, try to cover the information needed in as few words as possible, and frequently succeed only in creating a confusing, unclear, misleading or opaque tip that clarifies very little. I've never played any video game that failed to convey its mechanics to an acceptable level related to the complexity of the mechanics and the game, as poorly as a Larian title, and BG3 does not appear to be diverting from this habit yet - though there are signs, at least, that they are trying to.

At this point, I have to ask if this cRPG resurgence actually did happen, or if it was really just a handful of games in the genre getting noticeable budgets.

Larian is the most popular cRPG dev right now because they’re really the only one left other than Owlcat. All the other big players left the genre. Not much of a resurgence there, is it?