Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Pathfinder Wrath of the Righteous vs BG3

I think you and I have similar tastes. I really wanted to like PoE2, and there are some thing I like, but they don’t make up for all of the ways that game disappointed me. I cared nothing for the characters, the story was pitifully non-engaging, and worst of all, the game was just boring. All of the combats were either- my party just kills everything without me needing to really do anything, or- I need to rapidly pause and unpause to micromanage brining down an enemy with stupid dumb amounts of HP and it’s not hard but just annoying. Either way I’m not having fun.

I started the game 3 times before finally conceding that I just don’t like PoE2 and won’t ever finish it.

Edit: this is a minor gripe, but something that really hurt my ability to enjoy both PoE games. When you click somewhere for your party to move they all begin walking and stepping in unison. Most games know to avoid this because it looks terrible. Like a bunch of little robots.

Yea, thats what I was going to mention too. Especially with Act 3 and the ending, the amazing "REACTIVITY" everyone talks about goes down the drain. Realllly bad apparently. Not to mention all the cut EA content that is really affecting that third act.
In hopes that instead of any kind of DLC, Larian fixes the game's 3rd act and ending. Then we can talk about this game being a 9.5 or 10/10

The Reactvity starts to go down the drain in arguably Act 2 to be honest. Act 1 was insane for it and it gave you such high hopes, then it just seems to get worse and worse the more you play.

I feel quite vindicated that pretty much every single criticism I've made of the game over the past three years has proven to be correct, based entirely on what even the fans of the game have been saying here and elsewhere. What is surprising, however, is the extent to which people are still willing to insist it is "the greatest game ever" or even simply that it is "an awesome game." And here I'm not even speaking of fans of the game in this forum. That most of the people here would be die-hard fans of all things Larian is not in the least bit surprising or unexpected. I'm speaking of all the pro reviewers and gaming journalists, who are supposed to be objective and honest and fair in what they write about games, and not gushing cheerleaders.

Have you considered the possibility, that people ... well ... really like the game? YOu have your opinion, others have different ones. Shocking, I know.
But seriously, maybe give it a try and you see, why people like it. Wasn#T there someone here saying, that you can test a game out on GOG for 20 hours or so and then refund it, if you don't like it? Not everyone here is a Larian fanboy/girl. I never heard of Larian before BG3 was announced and I approached it with quite a lot of sceptizism, but I honestly like the game. There are things, I would have liked differently (like the halfling bard companion, that was datamined instead of Halsin/Minthara, who both seem to be letdowns for their fans), but I enjoy the game immensly. ANd it is the same with others. YOu read in a lot of threads critizising stuff, that people love the game but would liek to see one or two aspects changed.
And tbh. I'm critisizing BG1 and 2 quite a bit, despite liking them - I don't put them on poedestals, because there is a lot tehre, I don't actually don't enjoy as much. I even critisize my favorite game of all times, Vampire the Masquerade Bloodlines - you always want the games you care about to bebetter. So take, what people write with a grain of salt.

As Boblawblah says: This is not an attack. You've been around here for a while and I enjoy talking to you, but the world isn't black or white.

Yea, I have to agree with fylimar here. I think you're focusing a bit much on being vindicated about your dislike of what the game is over everything else. You don't have to like the game, and true enough, there are many things about the game I personally don't like, but it seems lately all of your posts have shifted from wanting to know 'x' and 'y' about certain systems, and if people think you would enjoy something, to just straight up negative comments that are summed up as "Ha, i knew it." and "Finally people are agreeing with me on hating this game". I've supported your criticisms of the game Kanisatha, you know that, but I think maybe you're letting your frustrations take over a bit much here.

There isn't some conspiracy to like the game by "pro reviewers and gaming journalists". I can confirm that because I DO enjoy the game overall. It held my attention for over 100 hours within a week or so, which is extremely rare for me. No, it's not remotely perfect, but it was a great experience overall.

I don't say this to attack you, I like you, I've enjoyed your comments that keep discussion balanced, they've helped me to remember to have a balanced view of things, and not get caught up in the hype too much.

On topic with the thread, I actually reinstalled wotr yesterday and I'm going to start a new playthrough of it, I'm curious to see how it stands up after I've recently played BG3. One thing I know for certain, the music in wotr is so much more stand out to me. The mythic path themes in particular are just so good. On the negative side though, there are a few essential mods, such as the buff mod and the toybox mod to make the crusade manangement trivial, Those are really the two glaring flaws of wotr imo.

Like you I dislike when people just repeat PR talking points or get caught up in waves of hype. But BG3 is a strange creature. Or, as I like to think of it, it's like a good junk shop. The main plot is a shambles but the good parts are really, really good.

So, strangely, both are true - the game is a shambles and it's really good.

You know that I just posted an angry request for changes to the end game so let me balance that some by mentioning some good bits for humans who like Forgotten Realms lore.

Major plot spoilers follow. Click and be spoiled!

The Selune / Shar representations were perfect. You really got the sense of just how evil Shar is and what her vision of eternal night would look like.

The things you and I were worried about with Shadowheart were represented well:


To be a bit repetitive - BG3 is a strange. Some parts are the best I've ever seen in a game and some bits are complete trash. Unfortunately the end game falls into the latter category . . .

That's also the case for WotR - I know Arushale has many fans but imo she's written as a generic aime waifu fantasy. The final WotR dungeon was trash but the conversation with Vorlesh was fantastic . . . WotR combat is better but let's not forget how ridiculously, unacceptably buggy WotR was on release - in this BG3 is miles better.

Which do I prefer? Right now I think WotR is the better game with the better main story. In WotR players have agency but BG3 has better writing.

Both offer hundreds of hours of gameplay and that should become the new cRPG standard.

Killer Rabbit is mostly on point. The game has really high highs and really low lows.

The systems are excellent. The combat is engaging. The companions are fun. The area design is intriguing. The quests are unique. The lore is (mostly) wonderful.

The script is awful. The reactivity after Act 1 is a farce. The character development stops abruptly. The latter half of the game is lacking in content. The exploration is limited. The romances and character relationships have had greater depth in most other RPGs of this scope.

+1. This is basically my opinion. If I could somehow transplant WotR's main storyline (and combat system) into BG3, the latter might have a chance at 10/10 status. As it is, I like this game, I'm sure I'll replay it off and on over the years, but (like PoE2) I just don't enjoy the main plot, which is a fatal flaw for me.

Very interested in your thoughts on the main plot. I felt it had a lot of holes, unearned moments, and tone issues.

Edit: plot of BG3

I definitely have a lot of thoughts. This isn't really the place to go into them, so let me sum up. Some of my problems are just personal taste - I've never been particularly interested in illithids and their lore, and their gory aesthetic is not appealing to me. Also, Larian's design decisions surrounding multiplayer and Origin characters seem to make it nearly impossible for them to create a compelling narrative centered on a "Tav", which is all I ever play. But beyond those things... well, yes, there are plot holes, lore failures, nonsensical moments, etc., but if I'm really caught up in a story, those are things I can forgive or ignore. Unfortunately, as I started Act III, I found myself gradually losing interest. The very climax of Act II may have been the turning point, it just... didn't feel as epic as I was anticipating.

WotR, on the other hand, was so much fun the whole way through. I was 100% invested in my character, in the story, in an awesome, epic adventure across the planes, touching the very realms of the gods, with an intensely personal thread woven through it all. That game really felt like a sequel to the BG trilogy at times, despite being entirely unrelated.

I certainly had more "feels" when storming Drezen compared to storming Moonrise Tower. Even though ot was off to a good start with the Nightsong cinematic.

I agree with a lot of the points made here about the story, I just finished my first run last night so I’m still processing it all, but the problem I was afraid of for the story back during the EA happened. BG3’s world feels more like a mega-dungeon than a independent setting. Everything going on in the world has to do with the Absolute so rarely is anything really allowed to rest or occupy a different tone. But that’s a natural consequence of a world ending doomsday plot, nothing sucks the oxygen out of a story like giant nearly inconceivable stakes, add to this the confluence of two or three doomsday cults and you’re not really dealing with compelling antagonists either. Sarevoks end game was causing war, Irenicus wanted revenge for being exiled, neither of which really come into play overtly until late into the game. I wouldn’t really say the story in WotR did it much better but it had a slightly more interesting twist. I think this is a trend with big RPG stories, the main plots are often the least interesting partof them, with a lot of the stakes and motivations coming from your, and your companions personal stories.

Baldur’s Gate itself is wonderful though, I don’t want to sound like an ingrate because I loved the city but I would have liked to have more, and without the Absolute plotline’s overriding influence on it.

I can’t comment on the reactivity after Act I, I encountered a gratifying amount of it and in some places I feel like there’s more going on but won’t really know until a second playthrough where these things are really apparent.

I like a genre mashup but I get the feeling Larian had a great idea: Mind-Flayers meet Bhaalist but couldn’t quite work backwards from there to a coherent scheme.
Still loving the game, I’ll probably get back in soon, or maybe after the first patch, I had a few bugged quests and possibly bugged moments
Maybe my thoughts will be a little more organized after a second run.

@fylimar, @Boblawblah, I feel you guys are being a bit too harsh in your reactions to my post, where I very clearly separated people in this forum from what I said. My frustrations are almost entirely directed at pro reviewers, who I believe are doing a grave disservice to cRPG fans by not giving them a more balanced and fair assessment of the game.

But I do acknowledge and very much appreciate that you guys, along with others like @KillerRabbit and @Zerubbabel, have always been not only fair but outright nice towards me on this forum where generally I've not had much of that. So if my post caused any kind of unhappiness in *you* guys (I don't really care about the people who've hated on me), then I offer my sincerest apologies to you for that.

On @KillerRabbit's and @Zerubbabel's observations, well, that does go far in explaining my antipathy towards BG3 (and yes it is dislike of the game, but not hate, and expect that someday when I can pick it up cheap I will end up playing it). The main story and main characters in a cRPG constitute the most important determining factor in whether I end up liking the game or not. All through EA I simply did not like the story much at all, especially the whole tadpole thing. But I still held out hope that the full game would be better. It now appears, though, that the full game is, if anything, much worse. And also, I'm sorry but I continue to find pretty much all of our companions to at best be lame and in most cases utterly unlikeable. The main antagonists and other key NPCs in the game also seem (from my watching several Youtube streams) at best rather forgettable. The second most important factor in a cRPG for me is having choices that actually impact the game and get reflected in subsequent parts of the game. If the choices presented don't do any of this, then I'd rather just not be given many choices at all than be given choices that don't matter. A completely linear game is better and preferable to the illusion of choice. And BG3 seems to be very heavy on choices that don't matter, most damningly the choice about whether or not to use the tadpole powers. So, even if some of the mechanics and systems of the game are good, even great, I can't get past the earlier points I've made here.

I think, I did understand you correctly, but how can you say, that those 'pro-reviewers' not just like the game? There is a lot to like aout the game, that is, why I suggested, that you might try it out with teh option to return it.
I don't get hating on people, we can be of different opinions and that is totally ok.

One of my major gripe with BG3 is the constant hornyness...

It's kinda hard NOT to get hit on by most characters... Even the Emperor made a move on my halfling ranger and I was like... bruh.

Why do you think it is doing a disservice to crpg fans? Sorry for being blunt, but this doesn't make any sense. Did it occur to you that those reviewers were genuinely excited playing this game? That the score really describes what they think about the game? Do you really think all 55 reviewers were wrong? Yes, Eurogamer gave 80%, but I'm pretty sure they would give 4.5/5 (so, 90%) if they still use half point scores.

And for the record, I don't hate you, I simply don't agree with you about the quality of BG3.