Originally Posted by SgtSilock
You can please some people, some of the time.

Humans are strange little creatures, and that�s our greatest flaw.

Isn�t that right @rahaya
Perhaps.
Originally Posted by Zentu
Gonna refer back to the start of this thread. BG3 has created an interest and discussion around CRPGs and this is ALWAYS good for the genre. The specifics of how good or bad you think BG3 is much less relevant than the fact the mainstream world of gaming has a lot more interest in the CRPG worlds.
I would argue against it being always good for the genre.

A hobby, topic or franchise going 'mainstream' does not usually mean an increase in depth or complexity. Quite the opposite. There is also the consideration of what is considered 'necessary' in bringing this niche thing up to 'par' with modern audiences which is often reflected in current modern adaptions or sequels where something being true to the originals is noteworthy.

There is also the simple fact of the matter is that BG3 is a Larian game. They have their own way of doing things that doesn't necessarily mean there is a crossover. If someone likes the Pathfinder games, I can be reasonably sure they have at least tried the Pillars games, Icewind Dale, BG 1 and 2, etc. If someone liked Divinity Original Sin 2, I am much less certain and would have a harder time recommending another game that isn't Divinity Original Sin 1.

An audience that has its attention turned to CRPGs by BG3, sure, some of them might go on to enjoy other CRPGs and get into that genre. Many won't. Because there is too much reading. Because the systems are too complex or obscure. Because the studios already in the sphere don't have the budget for cinematic gameplay. Full voice acting for Pillars of Eternity: Deadfire was directly cited as a detriment to the game by it's makers. There is no space for pure dungeon crawlers like Solasta. I keep seeing 'scope' or 'ambition' in relation to this, but it either never comes with any specifics in support of the position or it actually means 'budget for presentation of normal CRPG things.' Saying Larian had the ambition that Obsidian didn't, or made a game with more scope that Owlcat didn't, is honestly frustrating. Neither is true. It's just money. That's it. There is still going to be a large chasm of funds between those currently in the CRPG space and those that want to make a game for this new audience.

And to make sure they make back the investment, it's going to appeal to as broad an audience as possible. Is there a reason why a new CPRG being pitched to a publisher in the post BG3 space isn't going to be pressured into maximum returns in order to get the deal?

BG3's success is not a win for 'CRPGs.' It's like saying Starcraft 2 was a win for RTS or WoW for MMOs. It's a win for Larian, for sure. That doesn't automatically translate into a good thing for the genre.