- Why does Minthara feel like she was put together by a single developer without any QA testing only a few days before the game released. She's got barely anything to do once she joins your party (just one example of how the so-called "evil path" was seemingly abandoned and left in the dust) and the things she does do never work properly, with a huge chunk of her dialogue having been bugged for a whole year since the game released. That's ridiculous. Even Mr. Halsin, who is only there because bear sex is a funny joke, has things to talk about, and has a fully functional romance arc in the third act.
I don't this is a stretch to assume that Larian greatly scaled down their original plans for the amount of companions available. When EA was released the pitch was "we are releasing few, mostly evil and neutral cause they don't get used much, companions, and we will add more, good aligned, later". That never happened, and the only main companion we got was Karlach. In return Larian added 4 joinable NPCs, and until after launch it was either Minthara or Halsin so it is not surprising she got the short end of the stick. I lean toward believing that Minthara and Halsin received status as joinable NPCs to pad out companion roster - so no wonder they are lacking content. If Larian had time for content they might as well create more companions . And I am pretty sure people in EA did ask for NPC to join even if they won't become fully fledged companions - Deadfire's sidekicks being brought as examples. BG2 was also very uneven as far as content per companion was concerned.
Originally Posted by HenryDoughnut
- Why is pretty much every "evil" choice you can make in the game just a slight variation of the good path but with blatantly less content. You want to raid the grove and infiltrate the cult of the Absolute instead of playing the part of the heroic defender who stands up for refugees in need? Congratulations, you're going to go to the same place and do the same things as the good guys, but you miss out on several recurring npcs and lose multiple members of your party. Larian really liked to talk about how evil the game lets you be before it came out, but it seems like most of the uniquely evil content ended up on the cutting room floor as they realized their vision for the game was too big and needed to be narrowed down.
Yeah, you answered it yourself near the end. There is only one game that goes for big branching paths approach and doesn't crash and burn (Witcher2, though act 3 of that game crashed and burned). As compelling of a pitch as "your choices will result in a completely different playthrough!" is it tends to be a pipe dream. No surprise for me here - act1 did seem to me like a lot of promises that couldn't ever be delivered on. It also doesn't help that majority of players won't do evil playthrough - so this content will always have lower priority if developer has too choose.
Personally, I am a bigger fan of variables, than big branching paths. Just seems more feasable to do, and in the long run more satisfying.
Originally Posted by HenryDoughnut
- Branching off of this, why was the very interesting and fully written storyline of the dream visitor just thrown in the trash can before the game's release and replaced with the messy story of the Dream Guardian and a tadpole skill tree instead of the complex system of gaining illithid powers that was present in Early Access. Back then, you were able to really roleplay being evil and being seduced by the lure of power that the tadpole offered you, which would organically steer you towards the evil ending we currently have in the game of dominating the brain and becoming the absolute. This whole story was just replaced with the dream guardian showing up regardless of what you do and just saying "Please trust me and eat the tadpoles. They'll make you stronger and have no consequences to them at all." That of course also just leads into the silly reveal of the emperor, who is a character that doesn't make any sense. There's really no possible way that he could feasibly be Balduraan based on established lore, and that important part of his story is never even going to be seen if you're playing an evil character (the ones who are more likely to join his side) because for some reason the reveal of his identity happens as part of Wyll's personal quest.
Was it fully written? Or did Larian create dream visitor for Early Access years ago, and changed their mind as they develop the rest of the game? That Guardian wasn't patched into Early Access doesn't mean that he didn't interanally replace Dream Visitor much, much earlier. I don't disagree with your dislike of Emperor, but that's how the finished story goes. I don't know why would you assume that Larian is sitting on something better, or that they will be rewriting big parts of the game after the production has wrapped up. #releasetheSnydercutofBG3
Originally Posted by HenryDoughnut
- Finally, there are just so many issues with reactivity in Act 3, showing how little time it had to bake in the oven after the developers spent years adjusting every detail of Act 1. The companions go from having something new to say every ten steps at the start of the game, to suddenly being completely indifferent to the world around them and having no reactions to anything unless you're actively engaging in their personal questline.
Well, I thought that happened as soon as one left Early Access area. Larian set for themselver some unattainable goals with Early Access. I don't think the problem is the amount of content they produced - it is well and beyond the compeition - but it is not smartly utilised. A game can be effective with a fraction of stuff Larian did if utilised properly. If companions keep responding to every little tidbit early on, and become silent later that's a self made problem. Something they should keep in mind for their next game, but it seems not something they can or are willing to address in BG3.
A game being frontloaded isn't uncommon. First of all, a lot of players won't get far into the game, and first impressions matter. I don't think Larian handled the transition gracefully, but the drop off isn't surprising in any way. The problem I think, that BG3 rather than delivering a kickass opening, is focused on promising the rest of the game, that it than can't quite deliver. It is a J. J. Abrams of videogames.
. And I am pretty sure people in EA did ask for NPC to join even if they won't become fully fledged companions - Deadfire's sidekicks being brought as examples. BG2 was also very uneven as far as content per companion was concerned. 