Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Does BG3 give the old "BG feeling" ?

Seriously, try playing Bg1 EE now - You may find that on a modern computer and with a lifetime of experience with modern games that you don't like it.

We old folks can get nostalgic and sentimental for stuff we did in our youth. Because we were young and hopeful instead of the jaded, bitter, wrecks we have become as we slowly circle the drain of life.

Also, the multiplayer in Bg3, *chef's kiss* - SO good!

I have played both BG1 and 2 within the last two years and I still love it. To me it's not just nostalgia. Yes it's old and outdated, but it still has the "magic". The soundtrack alone is just so good.

Works, plays fine right now? I don't see the problem. The continued recent release of stuff like the Wasteland series, Pathfinder series, Expeditions series, etc shows that the formula still works just fine.

If you want to count yourself among the "nostalgic sentimental, jaded, bitter wrecks" speak for yourself.

Works, plays fine right now? I don't see the problem. The continued recent release of stuff like the Wasteland series, Pathfinder series, Expeditions series, etc shows that the formula still works just fine.

None of those are particularly taking the world by storm. Maybe someday a studio will make a AAA BG-like, but that hasn’t happened since Dragon Age Origins, and since then each title has been moving further away from that model. The new one is apparently going to be a straight action game.

I love Infinity Engine games, but I know if I didn’t grow up with I would never bother putting up with dated mechanics and gameplay designs. Being built around D&D 2nd Edition doesn’t help. For as much as I loved it as a kid, that is a janky, convoluted mess of a rules system.

No. Which isn't to say it's a bad game, necessarily...I fully expect it to be really, really good. But playing EA has evoked certain feelings...as another poster put it 'you can't go home again'. BG III, by Larian's own admission in the newest interview *IS NOT* a sequel to BG I+II. It uses the city, and the events of the first two games sorta 'set the stage' for the setting, but it isn't really a continuation. I don't really get the feeling it wants to be a 'spiritual successor' either. Everything about the game just feels so radically different, I struggle to find a common touchstone in the game to remind me of the old game. It feels like it has more DOS2 DNA than BG if anything.

To be honest, I bounced off of 4e and 5e *hard*. As settings, as rulesystems, just WoTC's general design philosophy, to be honest. BG III reminds me *constantly* that I'm playing a Larian game, that I'm playing a 5e D&D game, and honestly I think it does a very poor job of reconciling the differences between those aspects and what came before.

For a game which basically only exists because of nostalgia and name recognition of a foundational and iconic series that concluded nearly a quarter-century ago, I'm not feeling what was great about the OG saga echoed in BGIII.

There's just too many elements, the setting, the way Larian plays extremely loose with the lore, the jank, design decisions that constantly break immersion (giant rolling dice in the middle of the screen, the 'MMO quest reward' pop-up boxes, etc), The use of spectacle, novelty and gonzo elements of the setting, the whole origins system, the main plot, etc. Even the stuff I love, there's just so much going on that feels so very counter to the original saga, it's basically impossible for me to put them in the same boat.

BG III feels to me like the 'Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance' games for the PS2: I might love them, but they feel like fundamentally different animals.

I don't recall exploding barrels in BG1&2.

Meh. I learned how to play 2nd Ed D&D when I was 8. It wasn’t hard, but it’s still a dumpster fire of a ruleset. Arbitrary race-class prohibitions, non-uniform stat progression where a 15 might be functionally identical to a 9, THAC0, a much more obnoxious spell slot system, it does not hold up. I’ve had friends who didn’t grow up playing it ask me about rules in BG and I just shrug and say “it’s 2nd Edition. It’s all jank.” As much as I love BG 1 and 2, I’d never recommend them to anybody who isn’t explicitly looking for a very retro experience, with all that entails.

There were explosive barrels in the Dark Alliance games as well.

Although I think it bears noting that of the ones mentioned, only Dark Alliance really had anything that could be labeled 'barrelmancy'

In the end, I don't think it really matters whether a BG-style game uses 2nd edition rules or 3rd edition, 5th edition, GURPS, etc. They are all just mediums for the experience of the gameplay and plot, and I don't think any of them are necessarily a barrier in the way of enjoyment in any meaningful way. Certainly I don't see how anything about how 2nd edition spells worked, for instance-ever negatively impacted my enjoyment of the game. Even going back from enjoying systems I prefer more (3rd edition springs to mind), the 'jank' of 2e mechanics really never hurt the game.

On the other hand, I 100% believe that the 2nd edition really heightened BG I+II from a setting/lore perspective, which isn't really something BGIII gets to benefit from. 2e Forgotten Realms>5e Realms no contest.

And, I've spoken to players and watch utube let's plays with 'modern' gamers who enjoy and flat out enjoy those games. So, yeah, "I've spoken to 'several' players" is not evidence.

2nd edition. The most beautiful part, is Bg series didn't even do it justice yet still does great.