Larian Banner: Baldur's Gate Patch 9
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 11 1 2 3 4 10 11
Joined: Jul 2023
A
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
A
Joined: Jul 2023
I wish they prioritized appearance change over Karlach ending...

Joined: Feb 2022
Location: UK
Volunteer Moderator
Offline
Volunteer Moderator
Joined: Feb 2022
Location: UK
Hi folks, we have a couple of threads on these forums already about Karlach’s fate and the ending more generally if you want to get involved in those discussions.


"You may call it 'nonsense' if you like, but I've heard nonsense, compared with which that would be as sensible as a dictionary!"
Joined: Aug 2023
M
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
M
Joined: Aug 2023
All this is great but there are a lot of story points in the game that will only make sense with rewrites. Some of them are really bad, I would like the devs to address this at some point.

Last edited by Mouthbreathereli; 30/08/23 12:10 AM.
Joined: Aug 2023
member
Offline
member
Joined: Aug 2023
Originally Posted by Darth_Trethon
Originally Posted by Nerovar
Originally Posted by Darth_Trethon
I mean most companions do have a second romance phase towards the end of the game, so they mention reactivity but surely there's more missing there. I'd imagine some of that will be part of the fixed content.
They might. But nothing in this blog post indicates that they will.
I don't doubt they're working on that. Even if it's not all done in the next patch I think they recognize Minthara is quite popular and a lot of people are quite miffed by the missing content.
They recognized it pretty fast in Early Access. They pitched her like the reward for taking the less traveled (and very punishing in terms of what you lose) path; which given how she's kind of just been a wall flower after rescuing her for most people talking about it has been pretty grotesque. It's weird that almost none of her specific content was functional in the final release to begin with, considering she was intended to be a companion long before Halsin whose content seems as polished as any. It wasn't a good sign, and while I recognize progression blocking bugs were a higher priority, leaving her non-functional while they smooth out reactivity flow for dialogue that isn't even accessible yet has made it even more weird. The writers knocked it out of the park with her development even with what little has been working properly, and moreso with what precious little was fixed in Patch 1. So here's hoping we don't get short-changed with whatever they consider to be her intended state because she's hands-down one of the best-written characters in the game.

Likewise with Karlach, I hope her expanded epilogue includes completing her quest development with the items and options clearly intended to earn her a happy(ier?) ending that just kinda sit there doing nothing as-is, and not just one more branch of dialogue to choose. Personally I'm good with tragedies, but her quest just tapers off and doesn't let you use the stuff that's clearly meant to continue it. There are even characters that should have been able to allow her quest to progress (though perhaps more definitively in a tragic direction) if Dammon was rendered unavailable, but instead her quest just gets stuck. There are some weird gaps that need filling in the longer-term than I think the next couple patches will get around to.

More directly to Larian: I get why you guys may have been apprehensive about the ending starting to take a little too long to wrap, but you made that content for a reason, right? It's what people want from this specific genre. So I'm glad you're acknowledging people want it hooked back in and if nothing else I hope it at least makes the people who made those scenes happy that they'll actually be seen and appreciated.

Joined: Nov 2020
Location: Silverymoon
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Nov 2020
Location: Silverymoon
Originally Posted by Salo
One of the reasons why we trimmed the epilogue is because we were afraid the ending cinematics were becoming too long and would detract from the epicness of the experience.

... ... huh. I guess Larian's devs are not fans of how Peter Jackson (or JRR Tolkien) ended The Return of the King. hahaha I mean, many critics and fans also weren't happy with the finale(s), so it's not an outrageous position to take, and I can see why you'd prefer a big finish. But I liked the 20 minutes of fake-out endings and the Scouring of the Shire. Sauron's fall was just the very beginning of the end. Heck, Sauron didn't matter to me, really - everyone and everything else did. It's the same here. I'm glad this is being addressed, at least somewhat.

Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
This is why we LOVE you, Team Larian!! You're the best!!

Right on, and THANK YOU!!

Ok, time to get back to playing down, down, down by the river!

Joined: Oct 2020
M
member
Offline
member
M
Joined: Oct 2020
I don't envy you needing to post this, Salo, but this is not a great community update. It's spin and PR talk, and all of it is very carefully worded.

People are already assuming Karlach is going to get an outright happy ending. But whoever wrote this was careful to use the word "poignant" -- that is, "evoking a keen sense of sadness or regret." While I like Karlach's ending as-is, I think it is disingenuous to imply that so many people will be getting the happy ending that's been such a source of consternation. Additionally, only "some" of Minthara's reactivity will be fixed. I don't plan on playing with Minthara, but there appear to be much more issues with her than that. There was no 'cut content' but merely "content we didn't want to release." That is to say, cut content.

As someone who was a big fan of the Baldur's Gate 3 that was presented in EA, with Daisy and the moodier storytelling and the more prickly companions, and went through release realizing that all the things that were unique had been whittled down or outright cut, I'd really been hoping to see an open and fair assessment from Larian. It's clear that something substantial took place during development, perhaps very late in development, that drastically altered the narrative meat of the game. It's more than bugs or UI issues or whatever else.

Elements like Daisy weren't little tidbits that were datamined and misrepresented -- they were big elements of early access, and so prominent that the Guardian had to inherit the "dream waifu" aspect despite it over-complicating his character. The origin system is barebones. Elements like Gale's magic hunger are now downright vestigial. I understand that Larian has always been very sensitive to criticism and feedback throughout EA, but there's merit in standing by your vision instead of pivoting like a weathervane to try and please people who haven't experienced the full product yet. Elements that are now entirely absent were being added to EA merely twelve months out from release.

I don't know whether it was scope and feature creep, or an edict from Wizards of the Coast, or a genuine-but-ill-thought-out attempt to listen to feedback, but there were severe alterations made to core elements of BG3, and I wish Larian would be open enough to talk about it and what they learned from whatever happened and how this would impact their projects going forward. The alterations to BG3 were so late that they didn't even make it into the art book.

I enjoyed my time with Baldur's Gate 3, don't get me wrong. But I think Larian should be a little more forthright about what happened, and not trying to foist the responsibility onto the players. The people who paid for your product, and who much of your media hype was based around being unlike other companies. Because in the final accounting, it doesn't feel like we got anything that's much different from any big name CRPG: a game that begins well but falls apart into a slog of endless, gruelling combat and dangling narrative threads, a victim of reach exceeding grasp.

Joined: Nov 2021
K
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
K
Joined: Nov 2021
Larian,

Please stop lying to your customers. The gaslighting in this community update is not appreciated. Either tell the truth or don’t say anything at all.

Joined: Aug 2023
H
stranger
Offline
stranger
H
Joined: Aug 2023
Could not have said it better myself.

Joined: Jan 2018
A
stranger
Offline
stranger
A
Joined: Jan 2018
this pach better have the players romance dialogue with Karlach take priority over Wylls offer to take her to Avernus, the last thing I want in the epilogue screen is for the weak link to take Karlach to Avernus rather than the player who romanced her

Joined: Oct 2020
T
stranger
Offline
stranger
T
Joined: Oct 2020
Quote
the addition of a new optional ending with Karlach. It’s fiery, poignant, and gives her the ending she deserves.

Thank you!

Joined: Oct 2020
M
member
Offline
member
M
Joined: Oct 2020
Look forward to this drama rekindling when the new ending rolls around and it's still "poignant" and not "happy."

Last edited by Milkfred; 30/08/23 02:33 AM.
Joined: Oct 2021
Z
Jhe'stil Kith'rak
Offline
Jhe'stil Kith'rak
Z
Joined: Oct 2021
Would accept no epilogue if it means we are definitely getting an expansion or sequel.


Remember the human (This is a forum for a video game):
Joined: Oct 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Zerubbabel
Would accept no epilogue if it means we are definitely getting an expansion or sequel.
approvegauntlet biggrin

Joined: Feb 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Feb 2020
Originally Posted by Milkfred
I don't envy you needing to post this, Salo, but this is not a great community update. It's spin and PR talk, and all of it is very carefully worded.

People are already assuming Karlach is going to get an outright happy ending. But whoever wrote this was careful to use the word "poignant" -- that is, "evoking a keen sense of sadness or regret." While I like Karlach's ending as-is, I think it is disingenuous to imply that so many people will be getting the happy ending that's been such a source of consternation. Additionally, only "some" of Minthara's reactivity will be fixed. I don't plan on playing with Minthara, but there appear to be much more issues with her than that. There was no 'cut content' but merely "content we didn't want to release." That is to say, cut content.

As someone who was a big fan of the Baldur's Gate 3 that was presented in EA, with Daisy and the moodier storytelling and the more prickly companions, and went through release realizing that all the things that were unique had been whittled down or outright cut, I'd really been hoping to see an open and fair assessment from Larian. It's clear that something substantial took place during development, perhaps very late in development, that drastically altered the narrative meat of the game. It's more than bugs or UI issues or whatever else.

Elements like Daisy weren't little tidbits that were datamined and misrepresented -- they were big elements of early access, and so prominent that the Guardian had to inherit the "dream waifu" aspect despite it over-complicating his character. The origin system is barebones. Elements like Gale's magic hunger are now downright vestigial. I understand that Larian has always been very sensitive to criticism and feedback throughout EA, but there's merit in standing by your vision instead of pivoting like a weathervane to try and please people who haven't experienced the full product yet. Elements that are now entirely absent were being added to EA merely twelve months out from release.

I don't know whether it was scope and feature creep, or an edict from Wizards of the Coast, or a genuine-but-ill-thought-out attempt to listen to feedback, but there were severe alterations made to core elements of BG3, and I wish Larian would be open enough to talk about it and what they learned from whatever happened and how this would impact their projects going forward. The alterations to BG3 were so late that they didn't even make it into the art book.

I enjoyed my time with Baldur's Gate 3, don't get me wrong. But I think Larian should be a little more forthright about what happened, and not trying to foist the responsibility onto the players. The people who paid for your product, and who much of your media hype was based around being unlike other companies. Because in the final accounting, it doesn't feel like we got anything that's much different from any big name CRPG: a game that begins well but falls apart into a slog of endless, gruelling combat and dangling narrative threads, a victim of reach exceeding grasp.

I really appreciate you writing this. It perfectly illustrates almost every single issue I have with the game. Yes, I liked the mechanics, the combat, the interesting items that they designed, the companions, but this post speaks to me on a deeper level. After a few days of stewing on the story, and the changes from EA, little things like Gale needing specific items and if not fed he would go to Raphael to Astarion embracing the powers or wanting to, all of the more somber elements that we became familiar with in the EA were all changed, the Emperor replaced Daisy and you can see as you roll later into the game how his story comes apart due to a last minute addition. The story is...lacking, which is such a strange thing as there are only a few cRPGs I can name off hand that were truly fun but had as many plot holes, story inconsistencies, and downright immersion breaking moments due to the story. It's rare. Anyway, thanks for this write-up, it sums up how I felt perfectly.

Joined: Aug 2023
A
stranger
Offline
stranger
A
Joined: Aug 2023
Will primal strike be fixed? It doesnt work at all. Creatures with resistance to nonmagical dmg still take half damage.
And wild shapes dont get the save profiencies of their animals which is necessary for the hybrid concentration aspect.

Joined: Oct 2020
M
member
Offline
member
M
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by zanos
I really appreciate you writing this. It perfectly illustrates almost every single issue I have with the game. Yes, I liked the mechanics, the combat, the interesting items that they designed, the companions, but this post speaks to me on a deeper level. After a few days of stewing on the story, and the changes from EA, little things like Gale needing specific items and if not fed he would go to Raphael to Astarion embracing the powers or wanting to, all of the more somber elements that we became familiar with in the EA were all changed, the Emperor replaced Daisy and you can see as you roll later into the game how his story comes apart due to a last minute addition. The story is...lacking, which is such a strange thing as there are only a few cRPGs I can name off hand that were truly fun but had as many plot holes, story inconsistencies, and downright immersion breaking moments due to the story. It's rare. Anyway, thanks for this write-up, it sums up how I felt perfectly.

No problem. I sent Larian something similar shortly after I finished my first playthrough and I hope they read it in the spirit which it was intended. On the one hand, we got a great look behind the curtain as far as game development goes with BG3's Early Access period. On the other, the changes that Larian made were somewhat astounding. I understand that things get changed, some things just don't work out, feedback is taken under consideration -- but I'd really like Larian to explain the significant shift in narrative tone from a moody atmosphere with difficult choices to a more epic heroic fantasy vibe.

I've mentioned a few times on the forums that something had to lead to such sweeping changes, but I don't think we'll ever be able to determine what. I've suspected it could've been the long rest system (still basically clunky and unworkable since EA) specifically, as I could see why you'd drastically simplify the Daisy/illithid power stuff given how much of an issue it was, or it could've been a more pragmatically cynical direction to basically go, look, 97.65% of our players only go through the good guy path, so let's not waste too many resources on anything else, and let's make that heroic experience as thorough as possible. I could also buy that Wizards decided that maybe Daisy was not acceptable in a mainstream game for the DnD brand, and that left Larian scrambling to try and make something fit there.

Problem is, all the thoughts I have just lead to more questions. Everyone knew the long rest system was a problem from the early days of EA, so why didn't Larian really devote time to figuring it out? Why didn't they implement Daisy slightly outside your camp, like they did Raphael, or provide more structure to the opening segment (have you meet her before you wake up on the beach, for example.) If they pivoted hard to 'good guy epic fantasy', then why didn't they know that from the start? Why even create something darker and moodier? If Wizards made a very late call, well, same issue -- was Wizards not paying attention to anything prior? Surely Larian had given them a detailed pitch and briefing.

What bothers me, however, is perhaps the most pessimistic possibility: that Larian got spooked by loud naysayers and conducted extensive slash-and-burn edits at the drop of the hat. The original narration was a little goofy, yeah, but I know I went from someone who didn't care much about the change from varied narrators to one (Amelia Tyler) after Chubblot did a video showing off just how extensive that original narration was. And what's bothersome about this is that having the origin characters narrate their own stories seems like such a central pillar of even playing through as one of them, that I'm shocked that Larian cut it all out even though thousands and thousands of lines were already implemented. Like, what happened? Now, if you play as an origin character, you just kind of get less of them. And I dare say that, had the story really involved Daisy as the Absolute and the gradual loss of your mind and soul as you used the illithid powers, then a character narrating their own adventures would probably have powerful resonance.

And there's a lot of elements like this. The voice you hear in character generation is the voice of the Absolute, although you only learn that when you hear the Absolute speak to you later in the game. In EA, the Absolute was asking you, "Who are you? Who do you dream of at night?" It's very clear that Daisy was supposed to be connected to the Absolute. You can't just swap out a representative of the major antagonist with someone who is supposed to be an ally. Larian has claimed that they rewrote Daisy because people didn't trust them, but people still don't trust the Guardian! No one ever was going to trust the dream visitor, but it was a bit more palatable when it was a 'deal with the devil' situation. And, again, the origin system seemed to tie into this given how the origin characters had a unique Daisy who they had some connection with.

That mention of a deal with the devil is important, however, because this is why they rewrote Wyll. Wyll's original EA storyline was basically a reflection for the player's relationship with Daisy, and his relationship with Mizora. At one point, he'd outright say something like, "I took a deal without knowing who was making it. I regret it and wish I could get out of it, but these awesome powers are really useful." His whole thing was about trying to get out of the deal before he couldn't. Sound familiar? There was a very powerful, interesting theme running through all the characters: what would you do to live another day, what would you sacrifice? Would you let someone with no medical training shove a pick in your eye? Would you take a deal with Raphael?Would you wear Omeluum's ring? Or would you try to toe the line, and maybe get one over your mysterious patron? It was there in your party members, too. Gale would consume powerful magic items, or sign his soul to Raphael. Astarion literally consumes blood and the abused could become the abuser. Lae'zel risks being sacrificed to Vlaakith. Shadowheart had given up her memories. Even Karlach's ending, with her dying surrounded by her friends on her own terms, gains powerful resonance when you consider she's the most moral character in the party. When faced with the prospect of turning to dark bargains or immoral solutions, she says, no I might die, but I'll die surrounded by my friends.

And what's annoying about these two rewrites in particular is that this Community Update is not the first time Larian's played the blame game with their fanbase. Daisy was apparently rewritten because players weren't engaging with the illithid powers -- yeah, because it seemed like a bad idea, but I still had planned to do one where I spurned Daisy and one where I didn't. Larian said they rewrote Wyll because he was the least-liked party member, although it's pretty clear it's more because of his thematic relevance toward the old story. But even then, there were other factors that I'd say affected things: Wyll was the straight man of the group, the sensible guy among a crew of weirdoes, and the last guy you could get access to in EA, and, yes, a black man. Then they rewrote him drastically, and he's still almost certainly the least-liked companion, and arguably far less interesting than his EA incarnation. So what was the point?

It just seems like they had a pretty solid idea of what Baldur's Gate 3 was going to be from a narrative standpoint, and at some point, for a reason they've never explained, they threw it out. As someone who fell in love with the glimpses we got in Early Access, it was disappointing to get what, as a friend termed it, Baldur's Gate 3: Dragon Age Edition. Had Baldur's Gate 3 continued with what it seemed like was there -- party members with their own agendas, ones you had to work with to open up, who'd try and solve their own issues, etc, tadpole consequences, meaningful choices, -- then I'd genuinely say we'd have gotten the 10/10 paradigm shift that industry people were literally griping about on social media. As it is, it's a 8/10 with some great aspects (voice acting, for one) but really doesn't do much beyond the three-act 'save the world with your pals' structure that Bioware pioneered years ago, and has some of the shakiest third act/climax stuff this side of Obsidian.

This stuff was voice acted and animated and implemented. It was all there. It took more work to rerecord it and change it than just to leave it in. And that, to me, suggests that there was some big issue behind the scenes that led to a wholesale narrative readjustment. It's Larian's prerogative to make the changes they want during EA, but I really doubt that anyone in EA would've realistically predicted that they were going to gut things that were already in the game. That songs like Down by the River would have no relevance. That everything with Daisy would've been reduced to 'trust me, bro, eat the tadpoles, collect all the powers.' My understanding is that DOS2, a game I enjoyed, didn't have anything nearly as wide-ranging in changes between EA and release. And I'd just really like to know what led to BG3 going the way it did, if only to have some kind of measure as to whether I'll pay for an EA product from Larian again.

There's a whole conversation here about artistic intent and integrity versus audience reception and desires, and seeing Larian seemingly bend so sharply is less than ideal. It'd be nice to know what Larian learned from this, because there's no way that implementing varied narrations, Daisy, companion subplots, and whatever else, only to rip them out maybe twelve months out from release was ever their original plan. Knowing the lessons learned by Larian would do a lot to know what to expect from them in the future.

Last edited by The Red Queen; 30/08/23 08:16 AM. Reason: Added spoiler tags
Joined: Jun 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2020
Quote
It was always our intention for the Upper City to be an epic, cinematic epilogue bringing the story of Baldur’s Gate 3 to a close. But we didn’t talk about that in advance because it would have been a major spoiler.

This should be finale not epilogue, surely?

Joined: Jul 2023
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Jul 2023
It's good that they listen, but I am a bit disapointed that we are not getting more right now. BUT this is definitely not going to be the only HUGE patch they will be doing. It is only the first of many. The future looks bright for this game, with Larian's attitude. So I just hope they will keep listening and adding in more and more stuff and options. For me the most important issue right now (besides bugs and the extremely lacklustre ending) is customizable hirelings (that are not vessels), they are pretty essential for me if I am to start a second playthrough. So I hope they will add that option soon!

But yeh, many have said it: It feels like we are in a new state of EA, act I is the only part of the game that seems fully fleshed out by now. But again: as long as Larian keeps listening and keeps adding stuff - I can live with that.

Joined: Jul 2009
I
old hand
Offline
old hand
I
Joined: Jul 2009
I have a hard time believing Larians statement about the upper city and other content based on their previous communication, the way act 3 is structured and datamined content.

Page 2 of 11 1 2 3 4 10 11

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5