Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Story & Character Discussion Opinions on the main plot writing?

But I also think that there is enough romance and sometimes the desires are strange and repeat themselves.
Fixing the bugs and maybe a new adventure in the form of DLC would be great... and the wish I expressed would be even nicer.

I would argue that the plot holes in the game would require pretty intensive, all hands on deck work to amend. To really excise the plot holes would require them to go through and changee every part of the story, tweak pacing and quests, remove stuff, add stuff, probably make a whole new opening sequence, it would be a lot of work that's honestly probably not worth it when it seems that the unanimous opinion of players is that there's nothing wrong with the story, and Larian does indeed seem to be happy with the story that they created. They really shouldn't be, but when they're sweeping awards left and right, I can't really blame them for thinking they've done a good job.

I brought up Dragon Age as an example of dating sims gone wrong. If anyone remembers when DA2 came out and it was being criticized non-stop the Bioware forums were simply the thirst lords shielding Bioware from any sort of criticism or constructive feedback. IMO, it's one of the big reasons that Bioware went downhill over time. You simply cannot cater towards them because every time you do you end up with a worse product. Just look at Halsin.

Also,, lot of the companion stuff is locked behind the romances making the friendship route feel meh. I really dislike is how this game doesn't have the "RPG Bro". The Eder, Iorveth/Roche, Garrus, Alistair...etc type of friendship is simply missing in this game.


Yeah, compare it to Skyrim/Oblivion mods for every sex mod there is like ten combat overhaul, quest, spell, and town mods.


Here's where we disagree though. Owlcat games are just bloat and the writing is awful in every sense, from dialogue to companions. Did you reach act 3? The decision a certain character makes is so unbelievably stupid it makes no sense in the 40k lore. Also, whoever wrote that Linzi stuff in Kingmaker should be fired.

So I didn't want to weigh in on the "dating sim" argument because I think it's dumb, but I just have to speak up about it now. I think you're wrong, I think you are entirely wrong on this topic. I see the argument you're making but I think conflating this game with being a dating sim is entirely off base and I honestly think that the argument in general, not just yours, is overblown. Who exactly is this "dating sim crowd" that people are talking about? Furthermore, whatever problems DA2 had, romance was not one of them. I think those characters are absolutely brilliant, and as a whole they're one of the best realized party's in any game I've played.

I agree that the relationship writing in BG3 can get clumsy and the friendship routes aren't as well-realised as they could be, but it's not pandering to some imaginery thirst crowd that's just sitting waiting to corrupt rpgs. And finally, I entirely disagree with you about Owlcat games. Their writing is leagues better than what we have in BG3 certainly. They're not perfect, but they're pretty damn solid, and their overall story and plotting is good. I haven't played rogue trader yet since I'm not a fan of 40K, so maybe there's a problem there, but I'd take their games over BG3 any day.

Yes, I think to improve the story so that it actually makes sense would require an extensive rewrite. Personally, unless they make the emperor cutscenes optional (as it was in the EA with the dream person), it's not a story that will interest me anyway. I'd therefore rather they focus on improving (or in case of Minthara fixing) companion questlines, because their content is at least more engaging.

Though I would not mind a dunegon crawl dlc, like the original BG games had.

Not sure what you mean by 'bloat' in this context but I was referring to Owlcat providing games which are focused on the more 'traditional' aspects of RPGs such as combat, exploration and, dare I say it, puzzles. I disagree with you about Owlcats writing which i find to be of more than average quality - certainly streets ahead of Larian's.

So-called romances have been in cRPGs for decades and I have been ignoring them for decades.
I'm still in Chapter 2 of RT so I don't know the character decision you refer to. I'm not a big fan of 'lore', I just play the game in front of me and don't buy into the whole lore, community, world of thing.



See all the threads on this forum about relationships - from technical issues regarding lips being out of synch during kissing scenes to better 'and they all lived happily ever after' endings. The current mod scene on Nexus has already been mentioned. Try doing a search for a companion and see how many 'how to romance x' hits you get. This last applies to every RPG, even Rogue Trader, thus supporting the proposition that this nonsense is growing.

I think there's a lot of strawmanning here. No one claimed this game is just a dating simulator. We said it attracts the crowd > The crowd demands certain stuff > certain stuff is usually unnecessary. It was more of a concern for the future honestly.
To make it clear I don't think the romance is the worst part about the game in general. I think it's the direction change from the original vision that we saw glimpse of in the EA.


They're not a monolithic entity but see fylimar's point about what people are most vocal about.


Again, I didn't speak about the romance itself but rather the actions of those mostly interested in the romance.


Halsin is the biggest example of pandering to a thirst crowd.

It's not like the crowd deliberately want the game to be worse. It's that they're so interested in one trivial thing more than anything else that it matters little if the game has issues as long as that one trivial thing is good.

Here's a hypothetical example, let's assume the Witcher 4 is a buggy unplayable mess but somehow ended up with a great Gwent minigame that somehow attracts the Hearthstone players. Player A wants to finish the game and thinks it's a mess but the Hearthstone player is very loud and vocal about how great the game is and is against any criticism to the game because they enjoying playing the Gwent minigame 9 hours a day. Now if the Witcher 4 devs see that most of the feedback is positive because of the Gwent players chances are they'd think they've done a great job on the game.


I don't see how Linzi stealing from the treasury and forcing a Lawful Evil character to forgive her is good writing or that Darzen stuff. But I don't want to turn this into a Larian vs Owlcat thing.

Overall, this game feels like the best DnD game I've played gameplay wise with top tier voice acting and music. It's just that the whole time I was playing I was thinking: "I wish the plot was like DA:O, PoE1 or MoTB".

This thread is starting to turn into some weird blame discussion. Just because someone enjoys the romance part and is vocal about it, doesn't mean they're automatically diminishing the game in any way and want to make it worse or overlook other issues. Some might, true, but I see a lot of generalisations here.
Although I started posting here in the romance threads first, I bought and played DOS and DOS2 and decided to eventually buy BG3 during EA without even knowing there was romance content. I never played any dating sim and probably never will. I like romances when they're weaved into a story and make it more personal and realistic, and are not the story itself.

I have issues with the main plot but because it's such a complex thing to change I doubt we'll actually get it. What I would like to see the most is Upper City cut content, destroy Vlaakith DLC, go to Avernus DLC, hag coven quests, etc., altered post final battle scenes, the ability to be rid of the Emperor earlier. And ofc the annoying mind flayer railroad to be removed. I think we have a better chance to get what we want when asking for small additions and fixes.

The more praise BG3 gets, the less incentive Larian has to change anything.
And when "romance" hype drowns out all criticisms, that is what Larian will focus on in the future.
After all BG3 has shown that you do not need a good story, balance, fluid mechanics, a working 3rd act or endings to sell copies and get showered with awards as long as you can satisfy the thirsters with nudity, kisses, waifus and cringeworthy sex scenes.

Perhaps. But the game can be as dark as it wants to be, so long as my player character is a bright shining light in that darkness.

True, but I think at this point it's already a done deal with 2 GOTY rewards and so many 10/10 reviews. They made it clear in that ign interview that they're happy with their decisions about the MF railroad and lacking content in the evil path. I would love it if they listened to the criticism and focused on fixing the story but after reading that article, I'm not feeling optimistic about it.

I am not too familiar with the DU questline - I haven't gotten far yet and generally have more fun with the other Origins - but I have a hard time imagining how to get the "dark" out of there.

I think that's the point. Kanisatha has made it quite clear since its reveal that he is very against the dark urge on principle and finds the idea of playing as it completely unappealing. And while I don't take as hard a stance as him, I'm on his side on that front. Although personally my thinking is still that Durge and Tav being the same was either never a thing and people are taking one or two scenes and extrapolating way too much, or if they were ever one and the same, then the original version of Durge was very different in practice. I would guess that if it were the case, Larian knew that going as hard with Durge as they currently have would be a turn-off for a lot of players. But when they separated Tav and Durge, they took that as an opportunity to do what they do, i.e, go way over the top to a stupid degree.

I think we who are criticl of this game need to accept something; there was never going to be a better versio nof this game. I fully believe that Larian put their all into this. They put their heart and soul into it, they pushed themselve as far as they felt they could, and this is the result. Which is to say, this is the best Larian can do. If they can devote so much time and effort and resources into a project and produce this fractured, spotty mess, then this is the best they're currently capable of, and we should give up hoping for better.

Thank you for explaining, Gray!

The first two Baldur's Gate games may have a (more cohesive) Tolkien-y vibe rather than a Marvel vibe (which IMO BG3 has in spades), but if you look past vibes and look at the actual storytelling, the originals are far superior in terms of narrative storytelling.

For example, a very basic thing: act structure. BG1 and BG2 both follow a very solid act structure that is tried and true for a reason. 1. Introduce main protagonist, introduce threatening main antagonist. 2. Protagonist gains power. 3. Protagonist suffers a personal setback at the hands of the villain. 4. Protagonist claws their way back to being able to threaten villain. 5. Protagonist defeats villain. This applies to BG1 and BG2 both, even if the details differ.

In BG3, the act structure is a mess. 1. We have the protagonist (who can have no narrative connection to the story at all) and one potential villain (maybe ally!!! Or maybe it isn't even the Emperor who tadpoles us, who knows!!!) introduced. 2. We have some more potential villains who could also be allies introduced (Raphael). 3. Protagonist gains power and ends up in the shadowlands. The threat introduced at the beginning is neutralized and the focus of the story totally shifts to more of Larian's own characters who are much more interesting than Tav.

(I enjoyed Act 2 the first time I played it, but it does not fit with the rest of the game at all. It feels like a drawn out sidequest where SH/Aylin/Isobel are suddenly the main characters.)

4. More villains are introduced. Protagonist suffers absolutely no setback. 5. Protagonist goes and defeats whichever villains aren't allies. The end.

Durge at least gives the protagonist more narrative relevance other than being the player's self-insert, but the plotholes surrounding Durge are terrible. Durge is also, IMO, a pale shadow of Charname from BG1/BG2, a character who had actual narrative weight, development, and agency through two games + expansions rather than being one seventh of a protagonist.

So yeah, tl;dr, if we are talking narrative storytelling, BG3 is not nearly on the same level as the originals. BG3 has great companions; it has great player engagement elements that have nothing to do with the story. It's more of a sandbox game than a story game, which is great for a lot of people, but not to my personal taste.

It's about the romance stuff diminishing the RPG genre. The romance content gets larger and more involved while the core elements of RPGs, e.g. the combat gets dumbed-down. Look at character creation players used to agonise for days over stat allocation now it's agonising for days about hair styles and tats.



And let's not forget about the hype, the hype and the more hype or the lies, bullshit and promises about what you the lucky gamer will get 'tomorrow'. Meanwhile Hotfix #15 just dropped. Is that the third or fourth since Patch 5?

I actually think the RT act 3 spoiler companion decision makes perfect sense from a character standpoint. Yes, it's an incredibly stupid decision, but the character is naive, desperate, miserable, and gets played by someone who is experienced at manipulation. Owlcat isn't afraid to write flawed characters who don't cater to the player's power fantasy all the time, for which I am grateful. If Larian had say SH or Lae'zel do something like this, they'd be "fixing" her asap for not being the perfect dream waifu according to reddit.

If feel the latter is a reflection of people recreating their P&P characters or characters like they would P&P characters. Hairstyles, clothing, the tattoo nobody will ever see and tons of backstory you can make up while picking the right eye colour to reflect it. I prefer Origin characters but I can understand the appeal of agonising over making your character look just right for what you have in mind for them. RPG is more than romance but it is also more than combat and spending hours in character creation most not be shallow vanity, it is literally creating the character you'll spend 100+ hours with.

As I've posted, I've not got to that companion incident yet but already (end of Ch. 1 or beginning of Ch. 2) I made a (iconoclast) decision to save as many people as possible from some planet or asteroid before it was overrun by the enemy. My other choices included nuking the planet or just me and my entourage getting off and leaving the planet and its people to their fate. I was later criticised for my choice to not destroy the place. Ooh, that Dark Urge is so baddass he murdered a person (singular).

My biggest annoyance with RT is that 'iconoclast' is being used incorrectly. They should have gone with 'pragmatist'.

Because it becomes a Daemon world. You comment earlier about it 'going against 40k lore' regarding a companion's betrayal is also wildly inaccurate. I think if you have reached the point where 'I don't like this' or 1 incidence of writing that's a bit clunky means the studio is worse at writing than a game where the main narrative is filled with so many plot holes to be nearly nonsensical, it's time to step away from the PC.