If it is any consolation, you are by far and wide not the only person who feels this way or similar. Many who played through the Ea and many since, have generated a great amount of thoughts and opinions along similar lines. It is a small consolation, I imagine, since the commercial success of the game likely means that any such concerns will continue to fall largely on deaf ears. I would like to post something positive and supportive, or hopeful, but honestly, what would I say? I have traditionally encouraged everyone who voices an opinion of this nature to make sure they send it to Larian directly through their formal feedback form (
Here) - because every voice matters. I say it again now; do send them your feelings and experiences, because even if the ship is long sailed, maybe it will help make a difference next time.
Heck, this is supportive and, in a way, positive. At the very least, it's a confirmation of me being not alone in these thoughts. Even if "they are many, we are few", it's good to be a part of a group. Thank you!
And I'll probably send it to them. I never knew they have been had that feedback form. Then again, I never had an account on this forum.
---
Life goes on. RPG gaming goes on. BG3 is a beautifully made game for the newer gaming generation.
Having played through BG1 and BG2 as a teen, It is incredibly annoying that this game was named BG3, but what can you do?? Thats how things work now with old IPs. The name is just salad dressing.
BG3 will come and go. BG2 I believe we still be played LONG after the BG3 hype is over. You can MOD in so much more content than the cinematic heavy/locked BG3.
Testament on how timeless that game was. Too bad Larian could not give it more respect... but they did their best for a 2023 "older style" RPG game.
And I completely agree that I hope Larian do their own thing for the next game. I hate the way they treated the IP. The best description I could give is the game feels its DOS2 cosplaying AS the Baldur's Gate world in a D&D theme park. It feels way off and weird. Most people loved it.
But I blame that on over a decade on SHIT rpg games (with notable exceptions...) and the shift to Action Rpg.
Oh, that's true about BG3 being a game made for the newer generation. I've no objections to this concept. In fact, I'm not sure I would, hypothetically, play a really old-school game these days. I kinda got used to the QoL improvements in games' UI/UX. Time goes on indeed, and there's nothing wrong with it. My point here is mostly about the narrative stuff. You know... "Han shot first" kind, just more obvious.
Not sure what to add, as I agree with the latter points.
---
Just in case you missed it, there is an existing thread that's pushed back a bit where people discuss this:
This doesn't feel like a Baldur's Gate game (or D&D). The Story & Character discussion board also has some topics covering the handling of characters from the original games, I believe.
Also, I understand that what you copied was long and you didn't want to retype it but you may [Act 3 Spoilers]:
want to edit the language used to describe the Emperor's identity. I know that sort of colorful description is seen as fine on Steam but I'm not so sure it'll fly here.
Though, I don't disagree - it's one of my major gripes with the character and something I hope that is undone, but I'm not exactly counting on it.
In general, I think what Count Turnipsome said really sums it up well - "BG3 is a beautifully made game for the newer gaming generation." The era that BG3 was released in is quite different from that of BG1/2, and I think that a lot of the differences between the games is moreso a reflection of that than anything else. Not just cRPGs or gaming, but what's popular in general really seems to have shifted. I totally get not liking it and wanting to air grievances, and maybe even laying it at Larian's feet that they didn't "stay true to the originals" and opted to chase popular appeal.
I guess I've maybe just made peace with the fact that my preferences appear to have fallen into a minority - BG3 is very popular and complaints like these not so much. For example, as part of that shift in what's popular - super heroes and larger than life personalities and stories are very "in", which I think you can easily see within BG3. Personally, I love an RPG that isn't quite so fantastic, though I didn't exactly have any expectations that BG3 would be closer to such a preference given that it starts level 1 characters off on a spelljammer.
I'll also add to the sentiment that I'm a little confused why Larian seems to have gunned so hard to make *the* next Baldur's Gate game. I believe that if you look up past statements by Swen, it seems to maybe have been a goal of his, perhaps since the founding of Larian?, to one day be able to have the privilege of being the studio to stand on the shoulders of giants. But, it ultimately feels as though it was moreso chasing after the name than anything else. Having to work within the confines of an established IP appears to me to have limited Larian from what they wanted to do more than anything else, so I hope they take the money earned from BG3's popularity and have the room to "be themselves".
Oh. Yes, I did miss the threat you're talking about. I'm not entirely sure I could make any more valid input, though. At least, for now. I'm feeling kinda emptied after posting it here.
I see your point on that Act 3 thing and my "description" of it. Let's agree on that I'll make it a bit more softer a bit later.
As for the falling into a minority... Seems you're wiser than me, as I really, really want to be heard. At least to the extent of a reply or two. I realize it's a dumb wish, as who is Swen now and who am I, even if we belong to the same industry. But I still want to. Because there has to be a better explanation for this lore weirdness than "I felt this would be better". At least I hope there is.
Goals-wise... heck, you're probably right. But something went wrong. I mean, if you chase the license, the name, and the privilege of being the developer behind a sequel of a pillar of the genre, wouldn't you want to keep your new game close to the original(s) at least in its narrative parts? It's not like I'm saying they should have used Infinity Engine and made a real-time with pause RPG just like BG2 was. A certain company did almost that, and I have no doubts they would have made BG3 better if they had an opportunity. They hadn't. Should I have had a massive budget and was a famous game director, I would have done a better job. No, I'm not crazy, I'm about 20 years in game development, just in a position(s) that don't let one decide which games to make. But I still have a dream...
---
I think, to some extent people are getting to hung up on this. When a DM creates a Forgotten Realms campaign, because he does not follow the exact formula Ed Greenwood uses, does that mean it is not a Forgotten Realms campaign? If a DM uses the Underdark source material for the basis of his campaign but does not directly follow it, does that mean the campaign is really not in the Underdark?
BG3 is a new DM with a new version of DnD. While it does not feel like the original games, these two factors can actual explain that.
At some point, that hypothetical campaign stops being an FR one. There are limits to which assumptions and adjustments can be made. For instance, would it be a FR campaign if I, as a DM, introduced cyberpunk reality into the world? Or space opera ones? There are limits. It is a new DM's right to create a campaign in a world loosely based on Forgotten Realms, add some WW2 elements like tech and heroes there, and season it with some Plague Inc. features. But it won't be a Forgotten Realms campaign. So let's not call it like that, let's call it John's Universe or whatever.
---
When a DM creates a Forgotten Realms campaign, because he does not follow the exact formula Ed Greenwood uses, does that mean it is not a Forgotten Realms campaign? If a DM uses the Underdark source material for the basis of his campaign but does not directly follow it, does that mean the campaign is really not in the Underdark?
If that DM is being entrusted with the generational flagship representation in video game media of an entire franchise, to be that which conveys it to a global audience, and yet which shows such an extreme disregard, lack of respect for, and even overt disdain and mockery of the strongly established lore of the material they are being asked to represent, YES.
It's nice when simple questions have simple answers.
But I like this reply even better than my own.
