Larian Banner: Baldur's Gate Patch 9
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 7 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Joined: Sep 2023
R
member
Offline
member
R
Joined: Sep 2023
Originally Posted by DonkeyKong
Fair points, but I rather liked the writing. It contained key emotional impact on several characters, more than any game I can recall. It is a game after all, not a film or novel, so it must anticipate multiple iterations. Examples: I had major characters walk out on me, and it was more than “don’t approve” now gone. Also even the minor villains were very memorable.

Now is there room to improve? Certainly. I had to take a break due to some major bugs here and there. But Larian fixed them. They also added the epilogue and tweaked endings for several characters. They are listening and improving.

Was it released too soon? Maybe, but this is a business and money must be made. It was not like they had Microsoft or Sony bankrolling them. Hell, Microsoft thought this would not be successful.

I adored the writing. There were twists and turns that most games would never approach. It made you make choices. But, again, it is a game. I really enjoyed it, and for those that were let down by aspects of it, I totally respect those opinions. Of course they could improve or change parts, but they cannot take forever doing so. This is not The Winds of Winter…
Yeah no, if you think Microsoft thought it wouldn't be successful that tells me you pay more attention to click bait titles and what you WANT to hear rather than what's actually said. The exact quote is 'second run' which means it's coming to Xbox far later than other platforms. That's it. It's funny how people will shit on the IGN reviewer for having weird takes and seemingly not knowing the game very well (like saying they almost missed Karlach or stating the wrong companion is met first), but turn around and parrot the 'AAA devs concerned about BG3' take that IGN made up with no self-awareness.

There is an almost direct correlation between those that are prone to 'substituting' what they want the game to be or what they think the game is trying to get at but didn't and those that think the writing is fine, I am observing.

Last edited by Rahaya; 22/12/23 09:46 PM.
Joined: Sep 2023
R
member
Offline
member
R
Joined: Sep 2023
Originally Posted by Milkfred
Another indication that Larian's writing stuff didn't really know what they were doing, and were just making things harder on themselves than they had to, is Shadowheart's artifact. There was even a Youtube video about the amount of work they had to do to account for all the different ways to get "the box" into the player's hands and/or their general awareness to ensure the plot functions. When I read that article, I was sitting there thinking, wow, there must be a really specific reason why Larian is doing all this work. Any decent editor would've looked at their over-complexity and told them to KISS it.

There's a bit of a tip in writing where if you're having big trouble with Chapter 4, then you probably made a mistake in Chapter 1 or 2. A similar idea is that if you have to drop in a lot of exposition to explain something suddenly, you haven't set it up as neatly as you could've. The mysterious artifact is one of the most obvious cases of that I can remember seeing these issues in a big name release. Like a lot of the other Act 1 components, it sounds great as an isolated idea: the grouchy elf cleric has a mysterious artifact that, gasp, is protecting the player from the big bad! Seems simple enough, right?

Well, what if Shadowheart dies? What if the player doesn't pick up the artifact? What if Shadowheart leaves the party? What if the player simply lets her keep the box and never asks about it? The video talks about all the work they had to do to make the artifact work and how it basically broke BG3's plotting. And all the while, the general idea was to take all these extra steps just to... put the box into the player's hands a few hours later, via some really complicated scripting.

The thing is, there's a way to fix this: just put the box in the player's hands earlier! When they wash up on the beach, the box is just there. Did it end up there by chance, or is there another reason? Who knows, but there's an initial mystery. The player picks it up or, if they don't, it zooms into their pack as they walk away. Weird! Then Shadowheart is like, hey, that was mine, but I guess you can keep it because it wants to go with you. Which is pretty much how the game wants it to go anyway. You've got a mistake in Chapter 4 where you need the protagonist to have the item all of a sudden, so go back to Chapter 1 and give it to them when it's natural and where the audience is expecting obvious setup.

As it is, even if you take great pains to never take the artifact from Shadowheart, never have her die, etc. the game just decides that you got the artifact some point and everyone knows about it.

Otherwise, how can you begin to structure a plot when you don't know who is holding the McGuffin, or if it's even in the group? Even Disco Elysium, which has way more reactivity, very quickly establishes: you're a detective, your partner is Kim, you are supposed to be investigating a hanged man. It's like BG3 wanted this early twist that the party member's mysterious artifact was actually an important mysterious artifact... but why?

I feel like a lot of newbie video game writers are prone to going like, wouldn't it be cool if you didn't have to recruit everyone, wouldn't it be cool if the characters can die, wouldn't it be cool if your party member had the McGuffin, without really thinking about whether that helps the actual story. Because most of the time, it doesn't! It just creates more work. Someone should've stepped in when they were pulling their hair out about getting the artifact to the player at Hour 4 or whatever and gone, hey, don't waste time on this knot, just cut through it and make it work at the earliest possible moment.
How I would have done it, is have you start the game mind controlled. The tutorial giving basic instructions like everything is fine, but your character is on auto pilot for a minute until they get too close to SH's pod where she is struggling to free herself and the artifact can light up or something and boom, you are in control. First line of the intro quest being to free SH to get a better look at what saved you. You then get a face full of early SH grump, but the reason why you want to stick by her is crystal clear. Intro argument/dialog cut short by the ship exploding a bit because it's under attack, you join forces since she's the last of her strike team and beggars can't be choosers.

It's less 'too many permutations' I feel, but rather just how they went about it is just...convoluted for no good reason. It's like they wrote for Rule of Cool and shoved everything else to fit around it rather than designing a good narrative that explains itself coherently from the start.

Joined: Nov 2023
N
stranger
Offline
stranger
N
Joined: Nov 2023
You are so on point.

The interviewer asking if the Emperor was always a squid was so stupid. We know he was always a mindflayer from the MtG card. However, the MtG card shows him tadpoling someone, "Your mind belongs to the Emperor now". The interviewer should've asked if he was the guy who originally tadpoled you.

Wasn't there also a datamined dialogue about how terrifying a mindflayer emperor is (where do I find all the leaks again)?

I believe that his name originally signified that he's supposed to be the restorer of the mindflayer empire. His backstory cutscenes about his adventuring days and why he was called the Emperor aren't even properly animated that they were most likely a very late addition to explain his peculiar name. Seems to me that originally there was a three way mind battle between the tadpole (Emperor), prism guardian (Orpheus) and whatever the original dark urge was.

The act stuff also goes back to celestielf's comment on the structure of the game. I'm not sure if it's just me but I kind of feel that I have no direction without a proper villain to chase, especially considering how great some CRPG villains were. Taking a look at DA:O where you have to get to Loghain before you get to the Archdemon. In this case, Ketheric, the only good villain in this game, is Loghain and the Netherbrain is the Archdemon. But wait, once you kill Ketheric you gotta fight more super duper bad guys for almost every origin. Yet if everyone is super duper special then no one really is. Add in the fact there is probably a lot of cut content involving these villains. God damn, the origin system is so bad.

Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Well there is this... I don't know how to call it, a non-linear, pathway after Ketheric is dead and you have his stone. Orin would like you to kill Gortash, and if you agree, she will not attack you while you're (pretending) to go on this mission. When you get Gortash' stone, the pact ends and you're enemies again and she will try to kill you. But this part of the pact, she tells you this will be the deal.

Gortash suggests a pact for you to kill Orin and will also leave you in peace until you do, but you can then join him to replace Orin and Ketheric as the absolute.

So it's not just search and destroy the evil ones. You can plot and plan, make alliances and betray them. The 3 chosen hate eachother, but can't kill eachother because of a "contract" but once you have Ketheric's stone, they see you as a workaround to eliminate the remaining bothersome partner.

Same goes for Raphael also. He wants to use you, but you can use him at the same time.

Last edited by ldo58; 22/12/23 11:19 PM.
Joined: Oct 2023
D
stranger
Offline
stranger
D
Joined: Oct 2023
[/quote]
Yeah no, if you think Microsoft thought it wouldn't be successful that tells me you pay more attention to click bait titles and what you WANT to hear rather than what's actually said. The exact quote is 'second run' which means it's coming to Xbox far later than other platforms. That's it. It's funny how people will shit on the IGN reviewer for having weird takes and seemingly not knowing the game very well (like saying they almost missed Karlach or stating the wrong companion is met first), but turn around and parrot the 'AAA devs concerned about BG3' take that IGN made up with no self-awareness.

There is an almost direct correlation between those that are prone to 'substituting' what they want the game to be or what they think the game is trying to get at but didn't and those that think the writing is fine, I am observing.[/quote]

Don’t really know what you are talking about with IGN. I know there was a discussion about game pass and other things, and it was not running well on the platform, which I find interesting since it runs so well on a steam deck. And my Series X seems to be quite the powerful beast.

I also do not and did not play multiplayer, and some of the issues were with that from the extreme minimal amount of information I gathered (and retained).

I know the thread is on ‘opinions on the writing.’ I liked the writing. I know many other that agree. Others don’t have to agree and that is fine. I hope Larian takes all the comments and improves. Again, I had a wonderful time with it and most definitely got my money’s worth. I even bought it on two platforms, something I rarely ever do. Maybe the studio head can use some of that cash to buy more armor or something.

Joined: Sep 2023
R
member
Offline
member
R
Joined: Sep 2023
Originally Posted by DonkeyKong
Don’t really know what you are talking about with IGN. I know there was a discussion about game pass and other things, and it was not running well on the platform, which I find interesting since it runs so well on a steam deck. And my Series X seems to be quite the powerful beast.

I also do not and did not play multiplayer, and some of the issues were with that from the extreme minimal amount of information I gathered (and retained).

I know the thread is on ‘opinions on the writing.’ I liked the writing. I know many other that agree. Others don’t have to agree and that is fine. I hope Larian takes all the comments and improves. Again, I had a wonderful time with it and most definitely got my money’s worth. I even bought it on two platforms, something I rarely ever do. Maybe the studio head can use some of that cash to buy more armor or something.
https://www.ign.com/articles/xbox-s...e-3-but-larian-says-so-did-everyone-else

Sorry, I have been extremely annoyed by how blatantly gaming "news" sites make up false narratives to feed into various confirmation biases just to pander to a crowd. Your statement that Microsoft thought BG3 would not be successful is a lie. There have been several lies about BG3 that have been swallowed hook line and sinker.

The writing is 'popcorn tier' I would say. Popcorn is tasty and enjoyable to go along with the ride. It's not something you would go to for substance or nutrition. You can get your money's worth out of the movie and like the popcorn. However, I doubt you bought the game a second time just to experience the main narrative again.

Joined: Jul 2023
S
member
Offline
member
S
Joined: Jul 2023
Originally Posted by Rahaya
The writing is 'popcorn tier' I would say. Popcorn is tasty and enjoyable [...]

To me the problem of the main story isn't that it isn't good or that it's cheesy / shallow / just fun, the problem is it's broken, not working and obviously unfinished. Unenjoyable like popcorn with way too much salt. Luckily you've got enough tasty nachos on the side (origin quests and stories), but at the end of the game someone forces you to still eat all that popcorn.

The main story ending, or rather the lack of it, actively contradicts the choices and consequences principle BG3 is claiming to follow. And all the effort and success in bringing the characters to live (motion capture, cinematics, top notch actors) just to let them find themselves in a nonsensical story, what was that about? Spoil the finest organic corn cobs and the craft of highly skilled popcorn chefs just to sell more soda (that is, to promote the tadpole mechanics that is so much fun)?

It could be as easy as
- hey, you put way too much salt into that popcorn. - ok, sorry, I'll bring you some new till the end of the game.
Instead they're like
- I tastes so "powerful", exactly as we planned it to be, something's clearly wrong with your sense of flavor.

What ever the reason was for the mess of a main story, they seem to be unwilling to fix it at this point. At least that's the message they are sending with that ign interview. In retrospect the trust I put into the company by buying the game 3 years before release seems somewhat misplaced (which is ironic, because the very value the stories in the game are created around is the question of who do you trust.)

Last edited by Staunton; 23/12/23 06:06 PM.

- You are one of us now. - Yes, I suppose I am.
Joined: Oct 2023
D
stranger
Offline
stranger
D
Joined: Oct 2023
Originally Posted by Rahaya
[quote=DonkeyKong]
I doubt you bought the game a second time just to experience the main narrative again.

I sure did.

Joined: Aug 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Aug 2020
So continuing my playthrough of Pathfinder: Kingmaker and thus far going into chapter 3, the narrative of the game truly holds up so much better. Knowing how the game ends and what the workings behind the scenes are, I can constantly see thematic hints to what's going on and what the real story behind the game is. Kingmaker is a game that's just as much about exploration as BG3 is, but it has a story that suits it far better. It's also clear and was obviously written by people who had a full view and understanding of what was going on with the story, allowing them to actually weave things together and make them connect in a way that is understandable and natural.

Joined: May 2019
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: May 2019
Originally Posted by fylimar
Originally Posted by saeran
Originally Posted by fylimar
It is possible - with Durges background it is clear (and please only read this, if you don't care about spoilers),
that they are Bhaals essence and basically his puppet until the tadpole gave them free will - similar to Astarion and Cazador actually. Withers/Jergal will tell you so, when you resist in act 3 and he has to step in to save you. He tells you, that you now will be able to live free from your fathers/master clutches and can finally do, what you want. And if you play Durge as a good character, then that is, what your character would have been without Bhaals influence over you.
This doesn't change much for me, tbh, considering a certain event happens only after they get tadpoled. And well, DU gets away with it, because none of the companions care, not even the good ones. Also, I'd have to metagme and reload some other events, which are optional, but I have not managed always to avoid them.

That certain event is because a certain father figure still has a bit of control over you - your story is to break free or embrace it
This exchange between the two of you has been extremely helpful to me. Thank you the both of you.

That said, I do feel I would end up coming down on the side of how @saeran sees things. I do get the point you make, @fylimar, about daddy's control. Intellectually I get it. But emotionally, I just can't abide playing a character that has all that horrible backstory baggage, regardless of control. It would crush me emotionally to be representing such a character, even though it is just a game.

Joined: Jan 2023
S
old hand
Offline
old hand
S
Joined: Jan 2023
My criticism:
- I'm not sure what the og bad ending outline for the tadpole situation was, but from what I've seen it was *much* more interesting. Eternally trapped "down by the river", in your mind... Hello? Yes, please.
- The Big Three Bad Guys and especially Raphael seem to be, well, a little dumb. Okay, "a lot dumb" in the case of Raphael.
- The choices for endings are uninspired and dry. Thanks to the added epilogue, companion endings now give each playthrough unique flavour. The main story, however, remains pretty much just divided into a) the completely evil ending, b) the "good" ending, only differentiated by who makes the sacrifice.

Joined: Sep 2023
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Sep 2023
Originally Posted by Silver/
- The choices for endings are uninspired and dry. Thanks to the added epilogue, companion endings now give each playthrough unique flavour. The main story, however, remains pretty much just divided into a) the completely evil ending, b) the "good" ending, only differianted by who makes the sacrifice.

I still hope to one day be able to share control of the brain with my select companions.

Or for the narrator to acknowledge if the city was saved by a murderhobo.

Joined: Sep 2023
R
member
Offline
member
R
Joined: Sep 2023
Originally Posted by DonkeyKong
Originally Posted by Rahaya
[quote=DonkeyKong]
I doubt you bought the game a second time just to experience the main narrative again.

I sure did.
Which is why your first reply didn't address the topic at all and your subsequent replies has remarked on what exactly about the story that was so good you bought the game for it again exactly 0 times.

Try to lie better next time.

Last edited by Rahaya; 24/12/23 10:28 PM.
Page 7 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5