Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Why i won't be buying the next Larian title on release.

You are not alone at all! I found Act 2 to be my favorite because it feels like the act where, despite the setting issues, you have the clearest direction and it's where gameplay and story feels the most in tune rather than fighting against each other like in acts 1 and 3, but the story of it is in fact as all over the place as every other part of the game. The setting of act 2 gets even worse when you consider that apparently there's always been a mindflayer hive under there and nobody noticed. I think that the main plot of the game is just a mess from beginning to end, held together by string where it's held together at all.

I also cannot tell you how gratifying it is to hear someone else bring up those mini-bosses. I think you're underselling how strange their presence is, even. Because they aren't just mini-bosses, they're all specifically Kethric's family. Be they children (one of them definitely is) or more distant relations, their presence makes Kethric's whole deal and the themes there weaker. Family is supposed to be everything driving this guy, yet we can kill his three surviving family members and nothing gets said about it at all. The game doesn't even ever ask you to go to them either. No quest directs you to meet them for any reason, you can just avoid them and it's fine. It's like they were leftovers from an earlier draft of the game that were written out, but Larian thought they were cool enough fights to not actually remove them completely. It's bizarre.

I think you are on the money here. They, much like that raven guy who asks you to bring him dead lady's journal, feel like bigger part of the story that was cut - too much unique presentation and flavor to disappear into nothing. If they cut this content, they could just make them random sharran guys, tbh, it'd be a bit less awkward than keeping name "Torm" attached to them.

Same!

If the next game has the things I love about BG3 (cinematic dialogue, party-based, narrative-focused, not 1st person, fun quests and maps, lots of QoL stuff), I’ll definitely get it! I like both fantasy and sci fi, so either is fine with me!

Larian specifically doesn't care about the feelings of fans, unless of course it's an economically significant majority like SH fans who demand a new stool for her and get this. For me, this game was the biggest disappointment, primarily because it was great at first. The first act is great, the second act is good too, the third act is a bit empty and there's already some extremely idiotic dialog in places, but overall it was playable. But to get an unexpected spit in the face in the form of another patch, with the complete destruction of the story and the impossibility of further play...

No, there's no way I'll buy a new Larian game, at best, maybe I'll look at it and other players' reviews only when it's fully ready, has gone through all the patches, definitely there won't be any changes already, as a 100% finished product, in which it's guaranteed there can't be any unexpected meanness. But to be honest, I'm more interested in which studio will take on BG4, whether any other studios will take on the development of BG3 characters, since the rights to them remain with Wizard.

BG3 was a very good game, even too good a game, if it wasn't, it would have been much easier to just spit and forget about it. It was. It isn't.

In the modern day, purchasing ANY game on release seems like more of a gamble than it's worth. So many botch releases, half-finished games and glorified early access "Full releases"...

It's the same idea about why pre-ordering has been dumb since the switch to digital distribution (At least back in the days of physical retail, pre-ordering meant you reserved a copy to ensure you got one before it sold out. With digital distribution there's lliterally infinite copies available)

Even for particularly well regarded games it's still often worth waiting a while for bugs to be patched out and any extra content to be added post-release (Something that Elden Ring did as well as BG3).

Larian specifically, have a history of making Definitive Editions for their games. So there might be a possibility for a DE of BG3 down the road, which would be the ideal time to pick the game up (Though it's not a guarantee that BG3 will have a DE) as the DE has typically been the game with the most polish and extra content.

As for "Early Access", it's one of those things that you need to consider before buying into. EA isn't just "Play the game early" but rather "Play the game mid-development" meaning that you should expect things to change over time and for the final release to be somewhat different.

I personally avoid EA titles because it's not for me. I don't like playing half finished products, nor do I like spending money to be a beta tester (I'll beta test for free, to help find bugs and give feedback on stuff, but paying money to do that? Nah fam).

These days, the only game I'll preorder is an FFXIV expansion. And that's an MMO, so it's never expected to be "finished". Still, I know that there will be bugs, but I also know that the story will be hugely fulfilling and will be playable.

Larian has a tendency to not make direct continuations of their games. Sure DOS1 and DOS2 are related but only in name. They changed a lot of the world and lore from what was established before, and not just small stuff but foundationally lore, and DOS2 contained little to no references to DOS1. When Larian starts a new game they tend to ignore what was done before. Same with BG3. It not really a sequel to BG1 or 2 but its own thing. The only thing each game carries on is the gameplay. So, I feel if they made a BG4 they would do the same that they did with DOS1. Time skip a hundred years and use new characters and new plots. The only reason people didn't complain about that in DOS2 is because DOS1 was very niche.

The most frustrating thing is when a game gets changed (not even changed, but specifically ruined) six months after release.
I can understand that EA is a game in the middle of development, and by playing EA you just want to make some small contribution and help the developers, yes, it's voluntary beta testing. But the official release is the finished game. It can have bugs that will be fixed later, they can introduce additional content, improve something... Improve, not ruin the story by turning a familiar and beloved game world into outright crap. "Changes" that insult players, common sense, and basic concepts of scenario logic - this speaks volumes, including the lack of any quality control by management. Swen said he wanted to make games that he himself would enjoy playing, when I read this I really wanted to offer him to play in my shoes after patch 6 and ask him how he liked it, did he like it a lot? Unless of course he is referring to an audience of only his own gender and making the choices he himself would make.

I don't think I'll ever buy any Larian games at all again, whether they're completed or not, especially when I found out Stephen Rooney left Larian.
I'm waiting for Avowed from Obsidian, especially after their promise that there will be no morality in their game. And there won't be romances either. I never thought I'd be happy that there would be no romances in the game, I thought they were an important part of the story, giving realism to what was going on and making the main character a living and feeling person. But after Larian perversions, when they try to shove bear/Illithidian or whatever fuck at every corner, and when I just ignore it and treat my favorite character sincerely, then it turns out that "I like to degrade myself" and get a concrete spit in the face, obviously for too serious and realistic approach to this cheap brothel, I'll be directly happy to buy a game where exactly and guaranteed there won't be THIS.

I would buy a new Larian game, providing the setting and 'the hook' intrigue me enough.
It would have to be something spectacular or unusual for me to be attracted to a Sci Fi game though, generally I am not overfond of those (exception being Fallout 4 but that's post apocalypse and not really all that sci fi in most aspects of it - more 1950's than futuristic).

Irrespective of what type of game it is I think its likely I will wait 6 months or so, and monitor patches before purchase.
Somewhat annoyed at how the game I was playing at release changed so much after patch 6 and that some of the original writers were moved to other projects when BG3 was still being worked on (as in some fundamental story beat changes, not talking about qol changes and bug fixes).
Obviously Stephen Rooney leaving has affected that as well. His writing was a cut above the usual and he will be missed in Larians future projects but I wish him well in whatever he chooses to do in the future.

I wish Larian well also.
I hope any new game, whether I buy it or not will have the excellent voice acting and cinematics that this one did and will be a success for them. Conversely I hope to not see leaving the final part of any new game underpolished and unfinished until several patches after release. There will be much more attention on any future project and it's unlikely to get a free pass from the critics in the future. Here's hoping

This, I think, is the main mistake Larian makes in regards to the game's story. Only the original author truly understands the concept of his character, his behavior and reactions, another person will start to change the character, it is good if it will be a talented person who wants to preserve and add to the story, who does not seek to shove at any cost some of their own desires as to how events should develop. Even so, the original author must control the process and have the final say. Otherwise, as in the case of BG3, we have a mess of a high-class script and a third-rate novel. If a game is a AAA game, it should have not only graphics and gameplay of the appropriate level, but also a story.

Ehh... I'll hold my reservations for now.

The Outer Worlds did the whole "Look ma, no romances!" thing and I felt that the companions ended feeling flat and boring because there was much less interaction with them besides their story mission...

That said, isn't Avowed supposed to be the "Skyrim-alike" set in the Pillars universe? Romances were never a big part of Skyrim (Nor was its companions, besides that vampire gal in the DLC) so perhaps the lack of romances won't be as jarring as in TOW where it felt much more like your typical Bioware style "Collect-the-companions" game.

I guess we'll have to see.

Personally I'm on the side of hoping more games do romances so that people can work on making them better as opposed to avoiding them completely so they never evolve past DA:O's terrible "Get approval > Awful and cringy sex scene" system. I want to see more dynamic systems, with better interactivity with partners, more realistic friendships, rivalries and autonomy (Less, "Collect all the companions and they stay with you forever no matter what, even if you leave them in camp 24/7")

Avowed promised two levels of friendship - friendship and "deep friendship", that is, some kind of spiritual closeness with companions will be, and different levels of disclosure of companions for the player. That's curious, too. And they promised companion interaction between the companions themselves and the relationships between them. That seems curious and really worth a look.


Yeah, that would be perfect. I'd really like realistic and deep relationships in the game, with emotions and dialogues, without the sex frenzy like in BG3. BG3 somehow a priori assumes that the player will want to have a relationship with two companions in the first chapter, it's impossible to even announce to the other companions that Tav is already in a relationship.

I wasn't a huge fan of act 2; while it had some very interesting stuff in it with the different Thorm siblings etc., I found it lacking in variety; I enjoyed it the first time around but found it felt like more of a depressing chore the second time. Acts 1 and 3 are much better in terms of variety, and as maxyd says the more you think about it the weirder it feels within the setting.

According to the loading screen/concept art the shadow cursed lands lie between the Emerald Grove and Baldur's Gate, but that puts them north of the river on the main road to Elturel; the lore says the lands have been cursed for something like 50+ years, there's no way the leaders of Baldur's Gate and Elturel would have allowed such a major trade route (and the river itself) to be threatened for so long without mobilising in force to clear it.

But for me the bigger problem is that it's act 2; while I enjoyed it well enough the first time I played, it felt like more of a chore on a second run because I knew I had to get through it before I could do the parts I really wanted to do. Acts 1 and 3 have a lot more variety and freedom (though not narratively, as they're both constantly telling you to do the main quest right now at every opportunity).

I'd much prefer the game had got us to the city sooner (it's called Baldur's Gate 3 after all) and then been structured with more individual quests. For example, if the Dead Three avatars had met at the goblin camp, with a requirement for us to be there no matter what (either having defeated them, or successfully attacked the Emerald Grove) where we learn of their existence and the elder brain. We could have then arrived at the city knowing we need to find out who these three are and how to defeat them, but without quite so much of an imperative (save Gortash's inauguration, the Absolute army and the earthquakes for after we've started moving against the Dead Three avatars), leaving us free to do side quests in the city, only venturing out to the shadow cursed lands when we're ready to deal with Thorm. I'd also have maybe transplanted some of the Thorm siblings into the city to make the shadow cursed lands smaller, made the whole Thaniel thing a side quest that lets you go back later if you want to etc. rather than lumping so much together into act 2 with the hard cut (can't go back) into act 3.

There's definitely ways they could have structured BG3 differently to make it a lot easier to replay; I hope they learn from the experience and try to create more of a hub structure in future games, as I much prefer to gain freedom to roam and complete side quests in any order as soon as possible. While it makes sense for a main quest to push you at times, it shouldn't escalate too quickly or it starts to make you feel like you're wasting time doing anything else.


In terms of when is best to buy the next game; I actually had the smoothest experience with BG3 playing from day one. I encountered no major bugs, the worst thing that happened to me was during one of the finale fights I had three harper allies trapped in a test area rolled into initiative (which made the fight super slow switching to them and back), but nothing that really caused a problem. By contrast my later playthroughs have been very unstable, especially the one I've been doing co-op – I understand multiplayer is challenging, but after so many patches it still feels like the game is hanging together by a thread at times).

I understand how you feel OP, like yourself, I'm very disappointed they decided to pack it in and move on.

That said, WOTC are not easy to work with, they have a reputation for being douchebags and it's one they've earned, there's no doubt in my mind that they were being pushy towards Larian regardless of what Swen has said, they almost certainly wanted to capitalize on the success in the same way EA did with Dragon Age Origins, which resulted in a rushed out game in DA2. I feel that Larian couldn't be bothered with poking and proding and just called it a day on Baldurs Gate.

And I'm sorry to hear about the difficult time in your life, I truly hope it does improve for you, but for me BG3 wasn't a good game because it was DND, it was a good game because Larian made it, try giving Divinity Original Sin 2 a try. As long as their next game isn't something like fallen heroes which sounds basically like XCOM meets Divinity then I'll be buying their next game.

Larian games have their annoying quirks, I doubt their next game will be any different :

-An amazing chapter 1 followed by a steady crash down hill for the next game chapters.
-No main hero, its all about the companions.
-No time, no day/night, no weather, no urgency this leads to a lack in immersion and atmosphere in all their games. TOTAL opposite to Obsidian games.
-Disney fun with sex and blood everywhere aesthetics.
-Very weird UI party controls. Floaty cartoony movement.
-Glowing eyes. They love glowing eyes. Heroes, villains, spells, critters...
-Boat load of overpowered easily obtainable items that overrides every gameplay systems/classes.
-Particularly easy to cheese.

I am really burned out of their style of doing things.

I say this as someone who has had literal breakdowns where something about this game was the straw that broke the camel's back: The idea they should burn themselves out and work with a company they don't agree with morally to make fans happy is honestly incredibly self-centered. They should work with a company that don't agree with on a moral level so people can play more of a game they like? They should not only burn themselves out, but do so without ever even mentioning it publicly?

Do you seriously think that artists and creators shouldn't ever acknowledge the burnout that comes from working on the same project for so long? Or how they don't like the restrictions that were put on them? Or talk about being excited to work on something new? Or express how they're hoping to outdo themselves on their next project? How is that tone deaf? And how does any of that actually affect you more than it affects the actual devs?

Like seriously, I get how very literally something like this can be a lifeline. But the developers are real people with real feelings and real lives. It's ridiculous to expecti them to not only burn themselves out to continue making a game you like, but to also get upset that they don't take your feelings into consideration when talking about their experiences.

Imagine you worked at Walmart and were treated like crap, and decided to get a job at target that comes with a nice raise instead. Would you seriously pretend you weren't excited when telling a customer you see daily you won't be working there anymore? How would you feel if they then got insulted and complained to your manager because they don't want to go to Target to see you? Would you feel like it was tone deaf?

Who here has advocated for any of this?

Also SV said their decision had nothing to do with WOTC.

People are disappointed and expressing that. It’s a discussion forum so some discussions will be critical in nature.

I am sad that the people who worked on these characters are burnt out on working on them. The characters don't feel finished in-game due to act 3 so why are people burnt out when it's not finished? Did act 1 take up most of their time so they ran out of time in act 3? It is so weird how I'm excited for a playthrough in act 1 but then when I get to act 3 it just feels like a chore and I'm disappointed at how quiet or unreactive the companions are to major things that happen in act 3, especially for Dark Urge.

Dark Urge in act 3 feels unfinished when it comes to companion reactions... and we might not get to see it finished because of burn out. Feels bad man.

Burn out doesn't require completion of task to occur.

The game was in development for 6 years, then after release they spent even more time working on it with the patches.

Working on the same game for 6+ years can become tiring, especially if you as a team keep having to overcome hurdles due to working around the D&D ruleset which is more restrictive than your own IP's you've previously worked on.


Pretty much.

Act 1 was developed along with Early Access. Meaning 3+ years out of the total 6 was spent on Act 1.

Then they remembered there's 2 more Acts in the game...

It's a recurring theme for Larian's development. Work excessively on Act 1 with help of Early Access feedback... Then remember the rest of the game exists and crank out whatever they can in the remaining development time.

Honestly, it's probably a factor in their burn out too. When you hyper fixate on Act 1, spending lots of time and resources meticulously crafting it... Then you look at Act 2 and Act 3 and think "Aww hell naw, I'm not doing all that work 2 more times..."

Why I won't be buying the next Larian game in a nutshell: Their project management is horrifically bad.