Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback This doesn't feel like a Baldur's Gate game (or D&D)

gotcha, ill check it out.

Just adding in my $0.02

While I don't agree with some of the OP's takes I do agree that Larian has pushed the goofiness in some of the mechanics it's added or changed and make BG3 feel less grounded than traditional D&D. I have enjoyed the game so far and I'm looking forward to the final product so I'm not rabid about the changes, I just hope this game ends up as great as games like Dragon Age: Origins were/are. I guess we'll see

This is kind of interesting that we are suddenly getting this influx of new July Subscribers were many seems to have expected something more in the DNA of Black Isle's Baldur's Gate and are quite disappointed?
I totally get it.
But this is a Larian Production now, and the 3 in Baldur's gate 3 should be taken with a big grain of salt. I would of called the game...Baldur's Gate : Dark messengers.

Baldur's Gate: Tadpolemania

Baldur’s Gate: Squid Game

Black Isle didn't make BG. Bioware did. BIS, a division of interplay was the publisher. BIO was the developer.

Also, the game is called BG3. That comes with expectations. A lot of people bought and/or were interested in the game because it is literally a sequel in the series.

They did this because they know it would sell copies. If you think it's a coincedence that BG3 is gonna probably at least double the sales of DOS2, you are wrong. The combo of HBG-DND-Larian = lotsa sales.

Too many companies want the money from the fans of the original game they are remaking/continuing but don't seem to want to give them the stuff that they liked aboutt he game originally.


(This isn't bashing BG3 on its own; just a general observation of remakes/series continuation in modern times).

Yeah I mean it's bound to happen where a couple of these EA threads form lightning rods right, like if the title is provocative or whatever. Though this one is sorta gold, just cause the OP really leaned into it and made that first post funny and fun to read. If there's gotta be a thread I suppose might as well be this one haha

Maybe what they should do is make an EA forums tag that displays next to the thread like with the emojis. You can tell from the post dates, but I mean just at a glance might make the forums more useful. Now that it's released we'll start to see some constructive criticism start reframing as art criticism or general criticism which is a little different than during EA so might make sense. I'm just happy I can log onto the boards again lol. Yesterday felt like lightning striking thrice, which did feel good in a way.

Maybe the Black Isle stands out cause they had the catchy-er logo splash loadscreen in BG1? They also hired the portrait painters and did other publisher type things that gave it a vibe I'm sure, they get a few laurels. Obviously I think of the big TSR Dragon first right, then the island with the thunder bolt. Penguin and the spinning B was sorta forgettable by comparison hehe.

I find myself needing to upgrade hardware for this one now, so I'm sure I'll be scarce for a few days to hide from too many spoilers. But from what I've seen this thing's still got legs like two decades on, so fingers crossed! New rig gets here in 8-10 days which I guess is my actual launch date. I'm happpy to see it selling well and creating the buzzworthy buzz. It's going to be like 3 or 4 months before I can form a real opinion again. Meantime have a blast out there!

I think people often just mix up publisher and developer. It be like giving Atari credit for Nwn (unless you hate nwn) or LA for Kotor yet most people realize BIO made Kotor. I even have seen people who think bio was the publisher and bis developed bg. That's a funny one. Bio has made some crappy games so let's give them credit fir their good ones.

Yea I know Bioware made the game...its just that...Nowdays It feels dirty saying that Bioware made it...seen how the company went downhill with EA, and nearly no one from the old team is there anymore So just saying the Black Isle days of rpgs feels more appropriate.

I'm no fan of Electronic Arts, but some of Bioware's best work came after they were acquired by EA. You know, games like Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age: Origins.

Divinity Gate 3: Electric Squidgaloo

I am quite near the end of the game, and have found it fitting and feeling like a BG game, it has the theme and tone. Most of the major deviations are from 5e lore, not Larian. The game doesn't have the tone or vibe of D.OS (a series I didn't like.), while it's sometimes too edgy than it needs to be, it fits within the tone and style of BG2.

Baldur's Gate 1: Clearing the Fog - The Game
Baldur's Gate 2: Shadows of Amn Shadow Amn the Great Shadowness Amn Shadow of Irenicus Shadow

Baldur's Gate 3: The Adjustment Syndrome for [I play DnD 69 years ago and BG2 420 years ago] folk.

How all ye grumps feel about it after a few months to sit with the full release?

Still grumpy. And if anything, my antipathy toward the game has significantly increased since full release, not only because every concern I had before release has been confirmed and because now I know nothing will change to make those problems better, but also because so many fans of the game readily admit to all of the many, many flaws and weaknesses and problems of the game and yet insist that it is some sort of masterpiece game, something they'd never accept or say for any other game.

I think most of my favourite games are flawed masterpieces, including BG1 & BG2 (& BG3).

There's a huge difference between something having a few tiny little flaws and something being "flawed." There are several RPGs out there that I would label as games I absolutely love. And yet I would never label them as masterpieces (or any other similar label), because for me something has to be "near perfect" to be a masterpiece, and no RPG ever made qualifies as such.

Honestly the whole thing is seriously diluting the very definition of masterpiece.

I am perfectly okay loving to death a game because it's my shit, and I'm also okay with it getting a 6/10 score and would probably agree with it because it's also got huge flaws. I am also cognizant of flaws that may not bother me at all, but am empathetic enough to never dismiss it bothering others or to downplay it as 'not detracting from the experience.' For one, you haven't played it without that flaw, so how do you know it doesn't detract from the experience? It can be fun despite that flaw, but that's not the same thing as the flaw 'not counting'. It doesn't have to be 'perfect' but it also shouldn't be rife with issues, which BG3 IS and using lack of perfection as a defense is a Nirvana Fallacy.

I might be older than you and you appear to have jumped from 1st/second edition to this so I expect it to be jarrring

Tieflings and Dragonborn have been a core race since 2014. There are other races now such as Goliaths, genasi and even turtle people etc so an elf is very vanilla. Drown are also now more common and don’t have those pesky sunlight restrictions. If you were to step into a local game store group you might find a halfling etc but tieflings are much more common

It’s not a beholder but something called a spectator. Slightly weaker and meant to be a challenge for a party of 3rd level so if you found it before then you were overmatched

Larian has tweaked magic but in many ways it’s modern (last 20 years) of d&d

I’m happy to answer more questions on modern d&d. I am definitely one of those back in my day we were lucky to survive keep on the borderlands

Well, it's interesting you should say that.

Because BG1 and BG2 definitely have their huge, glaring flaws (although BG1 far more than BG2.) Vanilla BG1 was seriously lacking in character interaction (and with good reason, since the built in assumption seemed to be that a lot of your NPCs would be experiencing permadeath) and the amount you have to cheese combat, especially at lower levels, is truly absurd. Going back and replaying BG1 truly is a blast from the past, from an era where frankly the standards of gaming were much lower. Weird jank was a given.

BG2 is a massive jump in quality (at least from my perspective) and it's there that you can see some of the seeds of modern rpgs being sown. That being said, it also has its jank, from the built in 2nd edition weirdness ("Negative armor class is actually good!") to the balancing issues (At high levels casters become the best tanks because spell protections are better than any AC boost, since monsters have such low thac0 that AC essentially stops mattering) to the exploits (infinite clones anyone?)

It's actually this that makes me wonder about turn-based vs. rtwp. I think turn-based is obviously the superior choice when it comes to big, important battles. However, not every battle is a big important battle, and for that...maybe rtwp systems have some advantage after all. When you get to a point that you steamroll enemies, easy fights take up less time with the rtwp option. Hell, arguably BG2 even uses this to thematic effect: Remember the moment in Throne of Bhaal where you essentially mow down an entire army of Drow? It essentially shows you how powerful you have become (powerful as a demigod by the time of ToB) and yet if it was as slow as a turn-based battle, it probably would have been obnoxious rather than satisfying.