Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General What makes bg3 so popular? What gave bg3 this mass appeal?

This is a fairly bold prediction! I'll make a totally different one.... If Larian makes another DnD game it will (again) break sales records before it is even released.

Basically, I do not buy the market saturation argument at all. Like it or not, Larian's game was extremely popular, and I wager that if a sequel were announced that it would be met with great popular acclaim.

Larian's decision to move away from BG for their next title probably has more to do with Vinke's quirkiness than anything else, but it may also relate to issues of dealing with Hasbro.

On your first point, sorry but no, those are not D&D games, at least as seen by the vast majority of casual D&D fans. They are D&D-related, but to be true D&D the game must use an official D&D rules edition and an official D&D setting.

On the second point, again I think this sentiment is seen with older D&D gamers who may be present in forums such as this one, but who do not represent (anymore) those millions of casual 5e D&D players out there. The data are undeniable that 5e is by far the most popular D&D edition of all. 5e is what has made D&D mainstream.

I am not making a market saturation argument. I am making a novelty argument. It is about finally getting that good D&D videogame after waiting for it for so long. The first guy who does it (in this case Larian) gets all the benefit from being first. But for the second guy who does it, or the third or fourth, it will be a case of "been there, seen that. I already have BG3 for this. I don't need its clone, or even second cousin."

Furthermore, nowhere am I saying another D&D game, especially one made by the same people who made BG3, would bomb comercially. Not at all. I'm only saying it won't be BG3 big. But it could very well be "normal" big.

Then by those stipulations, BG3 isn't a D&D game. Because it uses Larian's homebrew.

Kingmaker and Wrath of the Righteous are both made based on Pathfinder. Which is more official than anything Larian made up.

While Solatsa is based on 5e (So if it was simply 5e that made BG3 successful... Why not Solasta?)

Heck, even many of the actual things that Larian hasn't made up, they've not implemented correctly according to actual 5e rules.

Hence why I'd argue that the aforementioned games are better D&D games than BG3. BG3 is so loosely based on any D&D rules due to Larian's perversion of them and excessive homebrew. While those other games are far more accurate at representing the rulesets they use.


But the sentiment exists. Thus, it's not as easy to say that all 15 million 5e players are going to be jumping at the chance to play 5e inspired games. There will be plenty of people who are simply playing 5e because their playgroups use it rather than because they actually like it.

Also, I'm not sure that D&D has gone mainstream quite yet. It's still more of a niche hobby in the grand scheme of things (Though Hasbro have been trying to push more generic uses of the IP with things like that recent movie as well as its rather lackluster attempts at lite uses of the IP such as that modern Dark Alliance game)

5e is doing work to make D&D more accessible. But it's not the favourite of many (As far as I've seen) hardcore D&D fans. You know, the ones you mention have been waiting for a good D&D game since NWN2 (Which is 3.5e the same as Kingmaker and WotR) that jumped on BG3...

So according to you nobody has ever played D&D.

Because not in P&P and even less so in computer games anyone ever plays the unmodified D&D rules.

For this stuff I tend to think of the Editions as a way to demarcate the associated eras in Dungeons & Dragons, rather than the specifics of the ruleset. So more like a fast and loose shorthand the same way people speak in generational terms. I mean also how the reference tomes can be used as a signifier, with the specific art direction there to sort of define the age (whatever it is) that's helpful. Of course it's silly to do that, the same way it's silly to split generations into cohorts and then we leave like one half of the Highschool class on a cusp, just cause they happen to born in the Fall half of the school year rather than the Spring. Like say someone born in 1980 vs 1981 a few months later. It's not all that useful outside of marketing/grifting right? Very similar with the Editions in D&D, especially when a new one comes out. I'm mildly annoyed at the new designations with a year/date - 5e 2014 compared to 2024. I think it will get awkward in the same way as generational cohorts, if they just start doing this where every decade we get a new Edition, or every 5 years or whatever. Like as if it were the Olympics? Should have just been a 6th Edition probably, cause 6e is more expansive as a term and just sounds cooler hehe.

Sorry digressing, basic point was, instead of thinking about the DMG or the PHB publication dates, I gravitate more towards the actual campaigns or games or cartoons that are floating around at the same time. So like not just the books, but the modules or the PC games that hit around the same time. BG3 as a capstone for whatever 5e was makes sense, sort of the culmination of that. Again not for the ruleset 5e specifics the way Solasta works, but for all the inuendo or pop cultural stuff or slang code switching that floats along in the aether during whatever D&D Era.

Also there's a lag time on the current moment, always, so it's really the 2020 game as much as the 2023/24 game. it just felt like BG3 tapped into that somehow as an exemplar for the era. Now it is also a shorthand. People gripe about it's meme-bility, but then look at how much heavy lifting that's done too. We have all these new ways to allude to D&D and FR using the special code that we are all now totally conversant in. You can just say Gale-like and Lae'zel-eqsue I get an immediate impression. It can be cartooned and turned into a kind of language. I think that's also why it would have broader appeal, maybe than one might have guessed. The theatrical element just adds to the collective vocabulary there, cause now it can be referenced like a popular movie or television show as much as a game. Also maybe the idea that it might be the last of it's kind, first and last I guess. I think it still has legs, and that helps as well.

If I had to choose crystal balls, I'd probably go for Dwigs. If they made it, thing would sell like hotcakes probably and peeps would tune in for sure. I think someone just missed the boat cause clearly BG3 pretty much was the 50th anniversary. Like they can talk about it now, and sell new books and all the rest, but now it's here and still the only D&D thing I care about at the moment is BG3 heheh. Go figure

But it *feels* somewhat like a pen-and-paper roleplaying game. You can’t do everything, but you can do a lot, and you see and feel the dice roll.

And while D&D reigns supreme in the USA, in Europe there is a lot more variety of RPGs.

At a meeting of mostly p&p roleplayers end of last year, almost all had played BG3, but most didn’t actually play D&D.

So there are a lot more than just the D&D players who are interested in the game due to being a well-made RPG.

Not according to me, according to so called "D&D players"

Since kanisatha said that all these other D&D games were not considered D&D games for due to similar stipulations (Despite these same people apparently liking NWN2 with the same exact situation)

Larian's homebrew makes BG3 feel less like a D&D game and more like a Divinity game. Contrasting to all these other so called "Not D&D" games that actually retain their feel of being a D&D game because they're more accurate to their rulesets.


Which is kind of my point. It being a D&D game is not the main reason for the its popularity.

It being a AAA RPG likely did more than the D&D aspect (Though, much of the AAA budget went into making sexy characters - With mocap, VA, detailed models etc). With likely the Baldur's Gate name also doing more than the D&D aspect (Due to tugging at the nostalgia of anyone who had played a Baldur's Gate game before)

What made the game appealing to me was the sense of atmosphere and deep sense of immersion, it did not feel gamified but rather more simulated in this case respecting the ruleset of its own homebrewed world.
With the excessive use of mocap and talented VA's it of course heightened the sense of humanity in the game so made it that much easier to immerse, not being spoonfed also further weighted it for my brain to just dive in.

Maybe just a lot of people feel it resonated with them for same reasons?

Contrasting this: I recently got a request to run a D&D session and since I do not usually play it, I had to rely a lot on improvising based on stuff I remembered from bg3. That worked very well.

So while these are house rules, they do not make bg3 incompatible.

The best D&D CRPGs I've played since BG2 were ToEE and Solasta. Both were good in part but ultimately disappointing.

BG3 matches some of the better TT session in beats and themes. It has an adventuring day, decisive choices, camp time and party dynamics. It goes wilderness, save the town, save the city. And it had a ready made popular setting with massive lore to draw upon.

It's this last reason why I'm probably not going to buy Larian's next games. I played a lot of DOS and a little DOS2, and it's pretty weak lore wise.

And also, I don't want to learn another system. 5E is a really really good system. I don't want to downgrade. I installed WotR, and encountered systemic analysis-paralysis - that's a game design flaw from the 2000's!

Back to BG3, we've got quality VA, cinematics, better developed romances, quality model design...

Oh, and turn-based. Yes. Please. Single-player, can save anytime, and couch co-op.

There's more. BG3 is overflowing with positive game choices and features that make it very close to the TT experience. Which other game tops that?

First of all: Any term of success, your own life as well, is a mix of own doing and circumstance. Sometimes you're at the right time in the right place (and vice versa). But if this one was purely marketing and hype, it wouldn't be still as popular by now. Clearly people tried. And unlike with Starfield released at the same time, sticked around. Though Larian sure know how to sell their games. Clearly even the bear going viral wasn't a bait&switch. It seemed to have been a bait&promise fulfilled. Namely, that nothing, no matter how crazy, would be off-limits. Including playing through the game as a wheel of cheese.

And whilst the IP was meant to be a BIG part of it from the go (and it was, D&D also fitting their sandbox-y gameplay), they're now a name regardless of what they're doing next. See FromSoftware.



Full VO had been a thing in Original Sin 2 already. As that big time outsold Original Sin 1 already, Obsidian figured they'd to the same (plus ramp up their production value + game quality) and follow: big time outselling PoE1. That didn't happen, but then PoE has always been pitched on (Infinity Engine) nostalgia. Larian never did that. Even with Original Sin 1. Back then, going turn-based combat in an RPG couldn't be seen as merely "outdated", but nostalgic in itself... only the tiniest of indies had still be doing it by the mid 2000s. The notion was that: "Go TB, go bust."

But legend has it that back when conceptualizing Original Sin, it started out with something more action-based, as prior Larian games. Then Swen Vincke was in the shower one morning and supposedly went something like: "Wait a minute! Gazillions of people are playing turn-based games on their mobiles! This doesn't make sense. We always wanted to do this either way, let's do it."

I think in doing so they've aditionally cornered a market that is untapped in on their level of production (outside of maybe a few JRPGs). Whilst people who absolutely detest turn-based anything are vocal: If you think about it, it doesn't get more accessible than this. You don't need any reflexes, you're not bombarded with feedback and you have zero pressure. The market overall may not be as big (who knows). But if you're the only guy around... It also fits their cozy couch (coop) type of experience targeted like a glove. That's not to say that they're gonna make TB games exclusively.

Still, give those guys another ten years, and they may be the most popular RPG studio around -- except maybe, unlike Bioware, without going: "We want Call Of Duty's audience" and throwing it all out. It's not as if BG, in particular BG1, had ever been a game that had much to throw out to begin with. Currently replaying this. Safe for a few AD&D 2e quirks, which are not of Bioware's own making, it's almost as straight forward as Diablo meets Warcraft 2. Quests are mostly FedEx, with rarely multiple angles to take them on too. And then from Jade Empire/Kotor onwards, there was no turning back.


PS: I think Warhorse may be next in line, unless they bust their launch of KCDII. Maybe not in terms of popularity total. But certainly in gearing up a level. And it'd be probably no coincidence that all of these, FromSoft, Larian and Warhorse, started out in a niche and grew out of it over many years, rather than a big studio exec going like: "Ok, how can we double to triple our target audience as quickly as possible? By reaching out to Call Of Duty's, World Of Warcraft's, Gears Of War's audiences perhaps?" https://www.gamesindustry.biz/bioware-10-million-sales-is-a-hit

Err ... Biowares crucial fault was that they wanted to create a MMORPG - "The Old Republic" - but didnt have the necessary funding, so they sold themselves to EA.

Comparing pre-EA and post-EA Bioware with each other is invalid because post-EA isnt an independent company anymore. In fact its now nothing but a brand name. EA simply named all their development studios Bioware, to profit from the good name of pre-EA Bioware.

To make matters even worse, a storyfocused MMORPG turned out to be not such a great idea in the first place. So the success of TOR wasnt even that big.

Anyway, that and nothing else is the reason why Bioware is no more. There is only EA. Greedy, greedy EA.



I guess there is indeed a chance that BG3 will stay Larians most popular and successful game ever. Because of the added value from D&D.

People dislike the round based logic, the spells per day limitation, the simplistic armor class and hitpoints, and the other issues that are all caused by the fact that D&D is designed primarily for pen and paper, not for computer games, and thus has to keep all computations on the most simple level possible.

But despite these design constraints, D&D has a lot of depth and complexity to it, and a lot of decently developed lore in its settings, too.

Designing game rulesystems that work well isnt that easy, even if many people seem to be gloriously ignorant about this problem. On the one hand you want to give the player the flexibility to create an unique character, on the other hand you want the game to be balanced. This is not an easy problem to solve at all.

It's not such a bad idea. I mean, FFXIV is pretty successful and its biggest strength is the banger of a story that it leads you through.

The rest of that game is pretty so-so at best.

My experience of TOR was that the individual class stories were pretty decent. But after these short stories it was generic Star Wars slop where Jedi were all incompetent buffoons and all Sith were unrepentent jerkwads. Which is a complete departure from what Bioware had built up in KotoR 1/2 with their emphasis on Grey Jedi and Darth Malak's (Potential) redemption.


It's not just flexibility vs balance either.

It's being about being complex enough to allow for the flexibility. While still being accessible to people who have limited experience with the genre. (Since targeting only hardcore fans will lead to limited overall success)

Breadth, depth, and detail of the game, while making it approachable.

Plus, some people like me came from the mindless button-mashing let-down of Diablo 4, looking for something with more substance and mental stimulation/brain engagement than that