I was only comparing BG3 to Deadfire in the limited sense that I think both games are genuinely better when you don't pay attention to their main plot. Deadfire is, in general, much better written, with more unique and engaging lore. (though it might be overwhelming for people unfamiliar with it.)
Honestly, I've been going back and playing old cRPGs to compare them to BG3, because I've found myself so dissatisfied with BG3 in the end. What is it about BG3 that has people so impressed with it in comparison to the others?
The original Baldur's Gates have it beat in narrative, and (imo) romances.
Poe1 has it beat in narrative, and just general ambience (making you really feel immersed in a fantasy world), lore - actually everything to do with writing in general. PoE2 has all that plus a much more thought-out combat system. (Really Deadfire is great in so many ways, it makes me really sad that it flopped.)
Planescape: Torment and Torment: Tides of Numenera have a much more interesting setting that gets into weird, epic concepts really quickly. (These are settings where an 'Archdevil just hanging out in a bar' actually feels appropriate rather than jarring.)
Hell, going back to Larian's other titles, I think DOS2 actually has outright *better combat* than BG3. Don't get me wrong, because I think the combat system in DOS2 is highly flawed. And I'm not saying that BG3 should have had the surfaces that game had (People quite reasonably wanted a DnD game, not DOS with a DnD coat of paint on top.) But I have pointed out before that BG3 is too easy, and gotten the reply that the point of BG3 combat is just to be fun. Well, if that's the case, I think DOS2 does a much better job of that than BG3 does.
So in what ways does BG3 really stand out?
First, I think, in exploration. The BG3 environments, especially in act 1, feel at times almost like an open-world game. It is genuinely fun going through all the little nooks and crannies and secret areas in the game. Unfortunately, this has limited replay value - once you know them, you know them, and the game's maps are actually, for the length of its gameplay, fairly small.
Second, in environmental interactivity. BG3 doesn't have a full physics engine, destructible environments, etc. But it certainly comes much closer to it than most other titles.
Third, in voiced dialogue. Now, I have confession to make. I don't actually like the mocap'd models of BG3 for the most part. The elves look too human, gnomes and hobbits look weird because the mocap demands their heads be bigger than they really should be I think, Tieflings too often look like humans wearing body paint. It's just not my thing. But there is a lot to be said for these models capturing people's expressions. It allows for a level of emotional reaction to what a character is saying that is much more than what you get out of simply reading a few lines of text on a screen. Helped by the fact that the VAs are generally fantastic.
Fourth, in companions. Now, I'm a little on the fence about this. I think the companions in BG3 are some of the best companions that Larian has come out with yet, but I'm not quite sure why. There are moments of their writing that make me roll my eyes, so I am not *quite* ready to give Larian credit for better character writing yet. I think that if all I knew of Gale, for example, was just a paper doll model (like many other cRPGs) and seeing his words, unvoiced, on a screen, I might just hate his guts. Instead, despite his background writing annoying the hell out of me, I actually quite like him as a character because he has a fantastic VA and comes across as a really likable guy. So what makes the companions so good in BG3 might just be the fact that you inherently like characters more when you see their mannerisms and hear their voices, rather than just experiencing them as words written on a screen.
Can anyone else think of ways in which BG3 really stands out from other cRPGs?
Because it's no use denying that cRPGs, despite once being some of the most influential titles in western games, have been relatively niche for some time - and yet here, BG3 is pulling very impressive numbers. And it's doing that despite the fact that, when I compare it to other titles...in a lot of ways it's just *not as good of a game.* So what is it about BG3 that makes it so successful? What elements of BG3, if we added them to other cRPGs, would make them more popular? Because I would love it if the genre experienced a resurgence.
I actually think a big one is the emotional reactivity that the mocap gives, along with the VA performances. Now, this is very expensive, and maybe not every studio could do it - but it really highlighted a way in which many other cRPGs are almost *absurdly* primitive. In many other cRPGs, even modern ones, a character is represented by nothing but a portrait and a paper doll. (And for the player character, very often the portrait cannot even match the paper doll, since there are a limited number of portraits to choose from.)
A portrait. A single, unchanging portrait. Maybe you can't do a full mocap, but good lord, would it REALLY be that difficult to get a few different illustrations of the same character? So you could see a change of expression in someone's face when they were speaking a happy line vs. a sad line? So many other cRPGs, upon reflection, seem to go *out of their way* to make it more difficult to emotionally connect with their characters - it is probably the single biggest thing where BG3 utterly blows all the others away.
