Literally.

Like wtf this game is seriously groundbreaking i have never seen anything like it. There is literally nothing like it available on the market and i would associate it with the equivalent of GTA5 but for a RPG. BG3 is the GTA5 for RPGS.

The combat is unreal, the writing is unbelievable, the graphics are the best. It is immersive like no other game before it. It is far better then both BG2 and DOS2 easily, no contest.

To back up my claims BG3 is currently outselling cyberpunk on steam and cyberpunk is in full release and BG3 is in EA.

Due to BG3 apparent success i am hoping to see more from larian involving forgotten realms and D&D.

WOW so impressed

Edit

PS Larian you need to tone done the wokeness in BG3, we dont need all this diversity and equality BS in our faces. In my opinion i generally tune into games like this to tune out from the world and relax i dont want to see political issues thrust in my face. Apart from this well done 100%.

I'm really enjoying this game. I think it has the potential to be amazing when it's finished.

I refuse to believe this post isn't bait, it's too perfect.

I wouldn’t be that harsh.

10/10 for sarcasm. lol. "The GTA5s of RPGs..." OMG if Larian picks up on that, I swear...

[quote=mr_planescapist][quote=Wormerine][quote=teclis23]
i would associate it with the equivalent of GTA5 but for a RPG. BG3 is the GTA5 for RPGS.
[/quote]
I wouldn’t be that harsh.[/quote]

10/10 for sarcasm. lol. "The GTA5s of RPGs..." OMG if Larian picks up on that, I swear...[/quote]


Please elaborate?

You have to admire form, right? It's perfect. I'm imagining bugs bunny waving a red cape right in front of an anvil.

Maybe get some hate-addled alt-right thickos to write a game for you then. I'm sure it would be every bit as funny and beautiful and imaginative.

Let's leave the inflammatory language to other boards, please.

I agree with Op for the most part. Larian is doing a fabulous job on this game and it has potential once released.

The Pol Corr of the game is subtle. I like that. It's not trying to force it down your throat or make it a main part of the storyline. Astarion is a homosexual, yes, but that's not why you would take him in your party. He's also a vampire spawn, so although it seems his preferences steer toward that direction, it's not exactly clear if he's exclusive toward men.(I haven't heard his full story yet, so probably wrong, but not going to make assumptions) When you live that long with an unquenchable thirst for blood and killing, there's not telling which direction you would go in that case.

The times we live in seems to be forcing these personal issues. I can appreciate it when a game, movie or show adds them subtly without it being forced.

I both agree and disagree, I think the game is doing a lot of things great. They, to me, nailed the difficult implementation of Speak with Dead and Speak with Animals has good relevance. And some implementations work better in the game, Truestrike on an Eldritch Knight actually is fairly good in the githyanki fight. However, I am still bugged by the direction of how some things are implemented, like Find Familiar. Overall, I think its a positive but could be doing even more to make this a 10/10/

I suppose it depends upon the origin character’s dream sequence. You should be able to tell their preferences canonically that way.

Gameplay wise they are all bisexual. I don’t like it because I think it waters down their personalities. I’d rather they be hard coded in some manner. But it seems a lot of players want to be able to romance anyone.

And I still don’t understand why people assume Asterion is gay. He’s somewhat effeminate but that’s not a sign of his sexual orientation.

I'm not sure that's true. I suspect that if you actually polled players, you'd find most of them would prefer the companions were, as you put it, hard coded.

In fact, many of us are hungry for new fantasy RPG games. There hasn't been anything new in recent years, so I'm really looking forward to this game.

Not really... Unless amulet that grants "Speak with the Dead" and plentiful potions of "Speak with Animals" are for testing purposes only, Larian once again doesn't actually have balls to make character builds relevant. "Speak with ..." would be interesting indeed, if it was a unique, optional content available only to those who will invest in it. Unless something changed with Druid patch, it is very much like "see ghosts" or "teleport" from D:OS2 - just normal content hidden behind a gimmick.

Honestly, it's because there's a man in his backstory and that's it. Other male characters have relationships with women, so audience simply has no choice who to "make gay". Gale slept with goddess, Wyll dated cambion. Shadow also confirms some man comes into her dreams. At the same time, Astarion sees a man in a dream, and Lae sees a woman. But we know that Astarion's dream is not romantic, and there is nothing in common with other dreams.

I am as inclined as you are to believe that there is nothing like this in Astarion. And in fact, he has statements that rather show his interest in women. Ppl just prefer not to notice it.
I would say that Astarion and Lae are more like bisexual characters than anyone else, because they really don't really care who they sleep with. The rest of the characters are more straight. Even if game positions them as "bisexual" their backstories may show their tendencies...





I don't agree with you.

For example, Gale and Astarion are popular as romance characters, Wyll is not so popular. So, make Astarion or Gale gay, and you'll see the crowd come out with torches, figuratively speaking. The same thing will happen if you close Gale or Astarion for LGBT, the hype will be incredible. In a bad way ofc. I've already seen this on Mass Effect forum. Believe me. Anyway I believe that all characters can be traced to their true tastes. But give possibility of romance to everyone, and at least no one will complain.

Speak with animals in now even easier
Druids + Amulet and you can "speak with anyone".

But on the other hand it would be tedious as hell if it required spellslots. It could be more interresting if rituals was something and if it was opened to such spells. There it would be a part of "builds" (or not... because you can change your prepared spells everywhere...)

Are they popular with male or female players? With male or female main characters? How popular is popular? Do 70% of the players romance them? More? Less? Do you have those numbers?

In regards to the crowd and torches, I agree. But that says nothing about what the majority of players want. It just acknowledges a vocal, aggressive group.

The weight of discussion 'romance' in this game generates is comical out of proportion.

Not to Larian who knows their target audience.

So yeah, Single Player dating Sim and Dress up game?

Yep. Check out the subreddit lol. It's very thirsty

They “divinitized” BG3 because that’s the only way they know how to design a game. It is their N+1 sandbox solutions. If you killed everyone you can use that as Swen himself said.

Well, my druid had to give the amulet to Shadowheart, because some dead refuse to "speak with their killer", and Shadowheart has that disguise spell. Unless there is another way around it.

Larian has these numbers. And they have already said that the most romanceable character is Gale, and the most discussed (or popular) is Astarion. It was in one of their posts. Just statistics. Unfortunately, it is not possible to determine the gender, because women can play male characters and man can play female characters. So trying to find out the gender statistics is pretty useless.



Nothing new? Romance are the most discussed thing if game have this. Or do you think the popularity bioware games came from a deep plot or mechanics? Please, we just wanted to kiss lizard.

The game is <so good> that I started playing BG2 again and realized how BG3 as a Baldurs gate game is overwhelmingly bad.
But it looks great! And the rated PG13 cinematic telltale dialogues are a comical treat. And the romances...next level stuff if your under 30. Really makes you want to dress-up as your favorite NPC companion!
Larian did a great job with their target audience.

Oh, let people have their fun. And it's not like people haven't been cosplaying Minsc for years. If you don't like the game, by the way, what keeps you here?

Some men just want to watch the world burn.

Criticizing a game for its childish tone on some aspects is equal to wanting to world to burn? I just like to be negative/very critic of things.
Unlike other people who likes seeing roses in everything.

Yep, you are practically histories greatest monster. On an unrelated note, comedic overstatement and sarcasm are myths. 😁

@mr_planescapist, I actually quite enjoy your "negative/very critic of things".

That allows me to go full throttle on "seeing roses in everything" without feeling that I might unbalanced things a bit with my 2 cents.

So I encourage you to keep going and .. impress us a bit more !

The story of Baldurs Gate 1 and 2 were absolutely the draw.

It wasn't the romance.

The romances in BG2 make an absolute embarrassment of this games romance options BTW.

It is a rather loud minority that talks about all of that. Also, speak for yourself with this "we" stuff. :P Some of us actually play games for the story, deep or not, and I happen to like the combat mechanics in the ME trilogy. Those games probably also had my favourite companions out of most that I have played, but like in every other game, I still didn't care one bit about romance.

I never understood this hype for romances in such games.
The only "romances" I loved was in the Final Fantasy series but it's not really the same and romances are a part of the emotions related to the story.

In those games it's not so Im' not really interrested. Anyway, in Baldur's Gate 3 I didn't see any romances...
Companions like your actions a bit and even if you nearly never talked with them in private, the only thing that happen is sex.

I don't really understand why this is called "romance" by players.

Maybe I'm too old but usually when I started a relashionship with drunked sex, it never lead to any romance...

The draw to you maybe. You're in no position to generalise about everyone else.

The main story to BG2 isn't that complex. Mad wizard abducts you, you escape, rescue Imoen, get back your soul, kill baddie. The story to one is even more bare. You go through 60% of the game before you hear the name Sarevok and 90% before you realise he's the same guy you met that killed Gorion. Nothing drives you as a player to follow the main story, except quest givers and it's a videogame, so why not?

What made them popular to my mind was they were first games that married (for then) decent graphics, with videogame concepts and the world of d%d and Faerun. Done with humour. And, when it came to BG2 great characters. And yes, romance. I remember reviews making a big deal of it back then.

Story wise Planescape Torment and Mask of the Betrayer are better arguably thematically with more player agency, a more complex central conceit. But BG is regarded as more of a classic. That's because BG did other things right too, especially 2. Great battles, puzzles, a great performance from David Warner, a few superb dungeons, interesting enemies.

Overall you have to look at BG as a whole, 2 1/2 games to judge its story. You're comparing this to one act of EA. The story of BG3 is the thing that's got me most excited.

Also, if you rate the romances in BG2, try out Anomen's. You're in for a shock.

I quite like the Shadowheart scene. You share a bottle of wine, looked at the stars and she may or may not confide a bit in you

A lot of people enjoy dnd because it let's you roleplay a character. Kinda sounds like you look down on these types of people.

Exactly. We all remember the backlashes suffered by Mass Effect 3 and Andromeda were born not out of lackluster plots and mechanics, but because there simply wasn't a Wrex romance.

I am joking, of course. A romance with a masculine, overgrown frog would have only quenched a minority's needs. For the majority they would have needed something more akin to Jared Leto's Joker, but a bit more anime.

If it is like Pillar of Eternity (both of them), then it´s acceptable, perfectable Ok with it.

But, if it is like Pathfinder Kingmaker, then it´s a big turn-off (at least for me). No, I don´t want to receive lecture about how to treat my girlfriend or how some people suffer more than others.

"Romance" in RPGs are usually very naive. I simple don´t care most of times. Until now there are no character that I think it´s interesting for "romance", none of female at least. Well, it´s my opinion only.

Wow you guys... That was joke about lizard lol. But not a joke about the discussion, otherwise there would not be so many guides on romance. Even if game doesn't have romance functions, people are more likely to discuss about characters, express sympathy or hatred. Of course, I'm talking about more mass social networks, and not some forums. Nowadays, few people use forums to communicate and spread their word. To be honest, I can't remember the last time I saw the message "mechanics in this game were amazing!!"on Twitter. Yea.





Many people rejected MEA just because Jaal wasn't available for male characters (not joke). It's a good thing you didn't read bioware forums before MEA was release, many people didn't care about plot, mechanics, or graphics at all. Or do you think they changed Jaal orientation for nothing? No cuz ppl cry a lot about that. So yea, I cant say 'romance it's nothing'. You can advertise your game very well just because of this feature.

The core story of BG1/BG2 is simple but delivered in a very solid narrative. The writing and voice acting were very solid and sometimes even stellar. But what really stood out was the political background and all the lore that was detailed for you throughout the world. It made feel you were in a living world. That was the charm of BG1/2 story.

I like the main ideas for BG3, but I feel the writing is off. The characters seem immature with some silly dialogues. I feel that Raphael and Astarion should be menacing but they sound comical.

That game was born dead. That the devs changed one of their own characters in such a way only speaks of a desperate attempt not to lose even more of their playerbase than they already had.

If their game is more than romance, and has the backing that entails, devs don't even need to consider turning Garrus from the original trilogy into a gay bird, or Judy from Cyberpunk into a straight pixel.

Of course, again, i'm joking. Patching the sexual orentation of a female fictional character would likely summon more pitchforks than desperados.



Have you tried mocking Astarion for dreaming about Cazador? It's straight up what you're saying.

The menace is just lost in the overblown dramatics, which is kind of fine in Astarion's case since he's mostly a joke anyway (not meant as an insult) but feels pretty strange with Raphael.

Praise when praise is due though, the companions' dialogues after meeting did do a fantastic job of building him up for me way more than his talk alone managed. Wyll's little tale about how the devil will take everything was especially eerie and cool.

Bit of a segway, but lowkey there needs to be a VAs appreciation post. I'm not super into anyone but damn. Everyone's pretty freaking awesome in this game.

Well.... yes. But after that I would like to retreat to my digital fantasy world and have a good time - not wrestle with UI, nor deal with a teenage angst of my companions.

Nice sarcasm lol




Not gonna happen, woke is the current norm and Larian is making a AAA game which means they want to reach the widest audience possible. If anything the woke is going to get even worse.

The story of Baldur´s Gate is great because they have great characters, not a great plot. The lore that made it look like a living world and great character more than compensate for a "simple" story.

I stop reading shingeki no kyojin because it´s the complete opposite of Baldur´s Gate, that is complex plot with A LOT of characters that I dislike, profound dislike.

I will ONLY buy indies games then or enjoy more than 1000 roms from SNES to playstation 2 that I have in my external HD.

As I said before, if it´s like Pillars of Eternity, then Ok, it´s great. But, if it´s like Pathfinder Kingmaker or Siege of Dragonspear, forget.

A solid narrative does not a classic make. Apart from that the points you mention are more or less what I said. The attention to detail and the sense that this world was really alive is what sold BG.

As for characters, don't forget this series had Quayle, Tiax, Jan Jansen and even Khalid. Sure, a few of these were comic relief, but look at a fan favourite, Edwin. He's a lawful evil Red Wizard straight up murderer. Yet he's also bumbling, pompous and very very funny. Bioware weren't afraid to write characters different from 'how they're supposed to be'.

Astarion shouldn't sound menacing at all. He should be *charming*. He's never tasted human blood, feasted on nothing but rats and insects for 200 years. He's pretty pathetic at the start of the game. But he maybe should have the potential to be menacing, show a hint here or there. So should Gale to think of it. I personally really hate bringing Astarion along as a character, but I do recognise he appeals to the "I can save him" tumblr crowd. Which is okay in my book. Why shouldn't someone with different interests to mine also be catered for?

The devil should instil wariness more than fear. He's not a demon, violence isn't his m.o. Like Innateagle says I think the companions' reactions are right with most wary and Gale thinking he's clever enough to outsmart him. I hope it blows up in his face

I'm more a fan of the lore than the minutia of mechanics. I really don't care if they change a few things here and there. What excites me about this game is the lore and the possibilities. At it's heart it has Shar (possibly Selune too), Jeargal and the Dead Three, githyanki, mindflayers, the hells and devils, the Black Network, hints of the Shadow Thieves. This is the first game since BG that could only have been set in Faerun, rather than have that backdrop added like a coat of paint the way NWN 1 and 2 did. I'm pretty sure that of all the current companions Shadowheart is going to be the only one I take along on my first full playthrough of the main game.

I have a feeling also that WotC have learned from their mistakes and are going to integrate the lore of this game into campaign lore in a way they never did until recently.

An 'Evil' play through of BG2 is the single best way to show how to properly handle the Evil alignment I have ever seen in text or games.

They are all distinct characters, with depth, and history and motivation that is far beyond Chaotic Stupid.

The romance option there, blows anything in this game out of the water.

Honestly it's a meme to compare this game to BG2. It's not close.

Oh yes, Astarion and tumblr. You think over there BG3 is a synonym for Astarion smut. I don't get the appeal frankly.
I think the first two games did a lot right, as someone mentioned, the stories are simple, but well executed, the side quests are good, some nice companions... not Anomen though, he is the worst. Only Sebastian in Dragon Age 2 is close.

I want to join the appreciation for the voice actors in BG3, they are really doing a great job.

Jan Jansen was spectacularly written as was Edwin. Old Bioware humor was very different and didn’t make characters sound silly as in BG3 and this was a time before dark fantasy was popularized by Game of Thrones. So it makes Larian’s writing even more inadequate. I think pathetic as you said was a very good description. Raphael doesn’t need to be violent, but should sound manipulative. They tried, but to me he is still comical.

I loved the political intricasses of the first games and i think Larian premise is creative and interesting. Who doesn’t like Mind Flayers? But im afraid the plot will probably derail into Gods battleground again.

That's a really good point... why is that however? Is his VO bad? I don't necessarly think so, I did like his delivery lines. Is it because his writing is campy? So was Jon.

At least to me, I think it is, because how hard games tells you how powerful, scary, and manipulative his is... while he actually does bugger all. Transporting us is impressive but after that he is all bark and no bite. Deal he is selling is so obviously rotten and he sounded like a "used car salesman". As a sinister character (be it classic or modern, like Master Mirror from W3) he is just doesn't make a great first impression - unless, he is supposed to look like someone who postures as someone far bigger and powerful as he actually is. Though, even intentionally humiliated Loki had more presence.

Will you explain this a bit more? It seems that you are implying that someone who doesn't like romance is looking down on people. You can roleplay a character just fine without that stuff if that is what you want to do. With DnD it is quite possible the rest of the group will thank you for it since the hormonally maladjusted player tends to make others uncomfortable. With a single player video game, none of us who don't care about that stuff are saying you are wrong for liking it, we are just expressing our opinions that happen to be different to yours.

I was amused not annoyed, hard to project tone in text. Just try to understand for people who are not interested in this sort of thing and who are playing a game that is not advertised as a dating sim, it gets depressing to hear a minor aspect of it mentioned as if it is the most important thing ever when there is so much more that needs to be done before release. Would be the same for anyone not interested in a specific part of the game no matter what it is. I avoid most sites that discuss games mostly because they turn into echo chambers. Prefer forums where discussions are actually possible, sometimes Reddit but not for this game for obvious reasons. :P

Scribe, I mean this in the *nicest* way possible. What are you doing here, man? You've mentioned you gave up on the game ever being good. What makes you tarry here any longer if this game is something you dislike? I'm not trying to be rude, I genuinely want to know.

Waiting. There is no way Larian just let's this game flounder while they focus on romance options.

So I'm waiting for the updates that will make me log in again. I'm already satisfied I can fix a lot of the issues so what I specifically want is.

Paladin.
A way to skip cut scenes.
Better movement system.

I'll take 2 out of 3....

Very funny to me that people think BG3 NARRATIVE is grade AAA material. I think its slightly worse than BG2, but better than BG1. Basically, they are in the same ballpark.
To put things in perspective, Planescape: Torment surpasses all of these games.
And Disco Elysium is on a totally different level.

As no surprise, I am huge David Warner fan and the tone inflexions that he does to convey disdain, arrogance and condescendence are priceless and save all his lines. And he has some good lines too.

I think Raphael VA is very good. And I agree that he sounds like a used car salesman rather than someone negotiating your life. And I think it is multifactorial (writing, directing, Mo cap).. His transformation is more comical than anything. maybe they should invest in his sinister human form more.


I think every of these games has its charms.

BG1/2 with political intricacies of the sword coast.
Planescape with its original and surreal story, cast and setting.
Disco Elysium with its psychedelic philosophical writing.

Im a huge fan of BG2 characters and world, planescape story and DE dialogue writing.

It's also a byproduct of this game's pacing being all over the place. Like, the stakes are high but don't feel that way, and therefore Raphael sounds, as Gale puts it, like the one who needs us.

Personally, i think the encounter would have been better if the tone was cooler and Raphael himself more quietly manipulative or just full blown cool dude being cool. Think President Snow from Hunger Games or Al Pacino from Devil's Advocate.

The sneaky devil the companions build him up as, basically.

I think the problem with Raphael is how he is introduced and inserted into the current narrative.

The entire scene just feels those random extra sequences that movies add in so they can add it to a trailer to say "and we've got devils too!"

He enters the narrative with little to no introduction or foreshadowing, and worst of all, completely abandons it immediately after. It feels totally random as there's no clear cause and effect for him showing up (i.e. if he had shown up due to the player tampering with the soul coin, etc, that would make more sense). There are also serious tonal issues with the scene, since it feels like the developers are genuinely trying to surprise the player. However, Raphael's disguise is wax-paper and the transition to the "reveal" happens only seconds later. It's utterly predictable in a hilarious way, but the story seems to want to frame it as serious.

Overall, at this point Raphael feels disconnected to everything else this point - his scene contributes nothing - no new obstacles, no new characters motivations, and no consequences.

This is coming from someone who does not feel like every D&D adventure needs to start slow, mundane, and within a Tavern. I'm perfectly okay with the more high-stakes, cinematic premise that Larian has chosen. HOWEVER, even within that context, Raphael's introduction feels like a DM randomly yelling "If you thought hell, dragon, giths, and mindflayers weren't enough, and now a devil shows up!"


Compare Raphael to a certain character from the Witcher 3 (Spoilers):

Your comparison is spot-on, especially considering that character's reveal is very much similar to Raphael's from a purely narrative stand point. They both go from affable, to eerie, to fucking evil. It's just that in the Witcher 3, like you said, they take their time to introduce every facet while in BG3 it's everything at once.

The worst thing about Raphael is the "What's better than a devil you don't know? A devil you do" line. And it's presented as if it's clever. Awful.

That's said, I think you're being too harsh on the scene. Everybody knows that making deals with with devils never work out well; it's not going to be possible to introduce devils -- especially cartoonish dnd devils -- in a way that doesn't make them come off as used sale carsmen unless you do it in a much slower paced way. The problem to me is less in the way Raphael is presented and more in the way that the tadpole is presented -- it doesn't feel like a grace condition so you don't feel like you even have to consider taking Raph's offer. You get one little scene of your character being ill at the campsite and that's it. If they wanted to make the condition seem serious they would have to make the characters be like that one scene, except all through the day too.

I do think the entire scene would be better if he just stayed in human guise all throughout though.

I think one of the ways that Raphael could be introduced better and have more of an effect on the story as a major player is if Korilla Hearthflame was better used. Right now, she's a one-off character who Raphael sends to bail you out if you get captured by Priestess Gut, but she could work very well as a right-hand woman to Raphael who shows up more frequently, preferably before you even meet Raphael himself. If at certain scenes she just showed up to check in and offer commentary, that'd be cool! Like after the Auntie Ethel debauchle, if Korilla was just leaning against the wall in the other room and mentions how "My boss Raphael could have this sorted out in a jiff if you'd just let him.", and also would act as a decent foil to him with her more muted, less theatrical personality. It's an easy way to keep Raphael relevant to the story without cheapening his actual appearances.

Oh gosh, yes. Between all his terrible lines, this is the worst.

+1 very well said regarding how raph and the devil plot is currently introduced and implemented - tbh i feel similarly about a number of other features feeling disconnected too. there are a lot of neat ideas and cool moments in bg3, but all told the mix and delivery needs reworking.
glad the game is blowing fam away after four hours to the point where we are saying an unfinished ea build is the equivalent of gta5 - it does make the whole thread seem somewhat click baity as others have pointed out but maybe thats the intention . i think you also dilute and weaken your position editing your post to include a rant about 'wokeness, which reinforces this threads clickbaity nature

I am hundred percent agree with Nyloth and ready to sign by each word)

By my impression, BG3 characters have absolutely no problems with "watering down" based on romantic preferences.

Their availability just gives players more freedom to get fun their own way, built up their own perception on the canon, and relieves from focus on the LGBTQ matter, which has no input into the plot, and rather keeps this place for plenty of the other story to uncover.

This way, I can finally take a rest from the real-world social agenda, and I am immensely happy that I don't have to think deeply through the reasons a character doesn't want to sleep with me based on what's between my legs. Can't tell for others, but for me "hard-coded" characters are no fun, and that's not a part of character's identity I would be happily explore in RPG.

So, I am quite pleased with the way Larian make the game so far. This approach allows me to see characters my way, not theirs, or anybody's else.


P.S.: also seemed to me that Astarion is bisexual, and a bit more into women. He's flirted with Shadowheart in party banters after all:)

I hate Raphael, he doesn't work at all for me. I'm always being as unfriendly as the game lets me to him.
Who is Korilla? Never have met her.

If you get captured and imprisoned by Gut she shows up to get you out of the shackles before Gut has a chance to take a closer look at your guts.

And I'm glad you saw fit to highlight the op's comparison while ignoring the many others who compared the game to Disco Elysium, Planescape and Baldur's Gate trilogy. At least this dude followed his statement through with reasons for making it, including a fact, rather than baldly stating his opinion under the mistaken impression that it is a fact (which I note you do). It is unreasonable to compare an unfinished first chapter of a game to a full one favourably or unfavourably to be honest. That doesn't seem to stop people doing it.

I personally hope the game reflects Larian's and DnD's progressive outlook in case anyone is interested.

Second if anyone expects the depiction of a cambion - a 5e half devil - to be anything like the literation depiction of Judaeo-Christian evil incarnate - in collection mode no less- especially when one is basically a whole dlc dedicated to this story... well that is down to them not this game. Even a pit fiend wouldn't come close. The closest would be an arch devil, maybe even Asmodeus himself. Which would be ridiculous in this context.

Devil's m.o., which the witcher gets right, is to offer a deal where the person taking it thinks they'll never have to fulfil the conditions. Or something they think will fulfil the conditions, but at the time don't realise will actually cost them something dear. Like the cultists after Karlach. The devil then manipulates fulfilment to get what he wants. All about the fine print with them.

Raphael *is* a used car salesman. What he's saying is the equivalent of 'sale ends Friday', he's reminding you of urgency when at that time in the story the lack of urgency has become part of the mystery itself. What he's offering on the surface is without a doubt a million times worse than the alternative. Seven days of excruciating agony then your soul gets snuffed out. No afterlife with your god. Versus an eternity of indescribable suffering. No contest. Your companion's give you what to take out of this. Wyl: don't trust him he'll take everything. Shadowheart: there's no right answer here, he's testing you. Gale: what if it's not our souls he's after but the tadpoles. In short he's clearly introduced as another player in the game.

And, no, he's not there to say 'we have devils too'. If you look at the books around, you can see they are foreshadowing hells and devils as an important part of the story later.

And you do in fact know there's something different about your tadpoles: you override the mindflayer's control of the fishermen which clearly shouldn't be possible. This is pointed out by one of your companions. Your tadpole overwhelmed a fully developed , albeit injured, mindflayer.

No-one's claiming that the writing is stellar, but it absolutely is solid - feel free to have your own opinion, but if you want to be convincing about it back it up with an argument at least.

Here is act one condensed:

We have to escape the ship is under attack. We need to get these mindflayers out asap. There's no time to rest we have a timebomb in our heads. Huh, that's funny we should be changing by now, but we're not. This drow seems to be like us but doesn't know about tadpoles and mentions the Absolute. This dying man calls himself a True Soul and think the tadpole makes him special. Says the Absolute is power. This priestess is talking to the tadpole and believes it is a god, something's behind this. The goblin chieftain is infected but doesn't seem to be allied with the mindflayers, or at least he doesn't realise it. The mindflayer calls the Absolute absolute unity. Moonrise towers seem to have something to do with it, maybe dark Justiciars too?

That's act 1's core, but there's also story reasons to explore east and west (Ethel and githyanki). All of your companions have a compelling reason to be with you (they're all using you to some degree or another). There is a strong driving force moving the plot along the whole chapter. When you stop chasing the main story to focus on helping someone you lose approval from the more self centred companions (a fact which annoyed a lot of players btw)

In short the story deepens the more you explore geographically, further you're given good reasons to do this. Writing 101: Act One is the set up. Please stop expecting resolutions in act 1, they won't happen.

Overall though I do agree that maybe more could be made of Raphael, maybe as has been suggested incorporate his agent more or foreshadow him earlier? If you're an elf or half elf you won't even get that scene with her. (btw if you think nothing comes of the scene in Act 1, get the artefact scene with Gale then don't feed him any. You'll be surprised). The devil you know is a bit cheesy too I agree.

On a level of presentation, I think it's a mistake to have him keep the same clothes he wears in human form. That does look a bit silly in my eyes. Maybe an outfit that gives him some more menace in devil form would be better.

lol wut? - kinda rambling here ^ fam but im glad we got to this agreement eventually

Kinda. Yeah.


Was replying to about four people at once, probably should have snip quoted, couldn't be arsed. I'll know next time

Korilla should definitely get more screen time. At least have her visit the player character in the camp, or better join as a follower.

Thanks, I haven't had that situation yet.

Further offtopic Korilla observations

Perhaps I'm confused here, you guys all seem to be trashing on Raphael as if his entire plot arc is already in the game. As far as I've seen, he shows up one time, dangles the possibility of helping, and then vanishes regardless of how you talk to him and never comes back. This is clearly not fully implemented.

I admit it's kind of weird he doesn't acknowledge the soul coin that could be in your inventory which should be able to be used as contractual tender, and he won't let you just sign away your soul immediately. That said, there's only one encounter in what is clearly going to be a series of repeating encounters. It's real hard to be too judge-y about him.

What do you have to do to get captured by Gut?


As about Raphael (to the poster above me) : Of course you can judge, if you find a character interesting or not based on one conversation. The one with Raphael wasn't that short. Maybe I change my opinion about him later on, but I doubt it. I don't like his voice acting that much either.

He might be after something else than simply a soul. In the harpy nest there is

I was also completely blown away FROM this game. It feels so incredibly NOT like Baldurs gate game.
But Its ok. I have accepted the fact that this is <DOS3: a D&D wannabe adventure in Faerun>. And its great!

I personally thought it was pretty clear that they were criticising him as he appears in-game right now.

Sure, any criticism needs to be taken with "it's not finished yet". Still, to me it seemed like one of the most polished encounters, and one that was advertised heavily, so it not working, and not intruiging me at least, is worrying.

Something that came to my mind while writing - just rewatched the cutscene. "Direction" is rather unexistant. Just set of boring shots with stiff animations - at best showing objects talked about (like food or wider shot of the room) but not communicating anything. Having cinematic look can make things better or worse. Having a scary devil talk to us fully lighter from a generic medium closeup does make him rather unintimidating. What's more, through visual language we are presented as equals.

For now, I feel, BG3 cinematics detract from the experience - it's better to imagine conversation, than watch a dull one. It's Dragon Age: Origins bad. Are they going to revise major encounters? Are they just building technology? It could be, but considering the sheer size of the game, I can't imagine it getting Witcher3 treatment. That use of cinematic language (shot composition, framing, lighting etc) is what elevates Mass Effect 1&2 (ME3 visibly stumbles in that regards) and WItcher3, and lack of it makes other RPGs looks like dolls awkwardly muppeting at each other.

EDIT: See O'Dim's reintroduction in HoS (timestamps 38 minute mark in case the timestamp doesn't work). Geralt sitting in dark selling his situation, O'Dim literally appearing from shadows, throughout the whole encounter he is shot from underneath and Geralt is from above. And yes, it is because he is standing and Geralt is sitting and having viewpoints and camera shots allign is critical, but they are shot there way to communicate the towering presence of O'Dim. He kneels when he offers help, gets back up when mentioning his capabilities (he doesn't need to say much as his VO and shot compositions reinforces his power). They come back to the same level as they "negotiate", Geralt in a clear "prisoner pose" and Master Mirror still being somewhat taller then Geralt is.

That's basic choreography but actually enhances the conversation.

Hmm, interesting argument with some good points thanks.

I had another look at the scene. I would disagree that his introduction necessarily hints at malice, that sense grows throughout the scene. It's not so much as he appears from the shadows, rather the devs use the shadows to gradually bring him into focus to be visible just as Geralt says 'someone to talk to'. They could have achieved the same by blurring and focusing on him as Geralt says these words. But yes, definitely he's introduced with a visual clue that there is something supernatural about the timing. He appears just when Geralt is at his lowest.

The shot composition would be the same if say he was a jailer who was offering Geralt's freedom in return for a favour. So it doesn't especially say he is a being of great power, not yet anyway. It's not so much that this guy is uber powerful, though, more than Geralt here is screwed and in a bad spot. But you are right, it absolutely highlights the imbalance of power in the scene.

Here is the Raphael scene: This is a patch 1 version, a lot clunkier than later versions which are smoother.

You can see they do in fact play with angles and shot composition. But nowhere near the level of the Witcher scene. The camera is a bit flat. This is especially true for the MC shots. They should definitely change some angles for these, tilt the camera a little. A shot from behind Raphael's back pointing downwards to the MC would definitely add a bit of menace too. I think they do this once or twice quickly, but most of the time when the MC has dialogue it is a flat close up.

Like. your core choice in this scene - how to reply to Raphael - in this version they seem to focus on a painting of him, while you make that choice. This seems a bizarre artistic decision. For that dialogue, he should definitely be in focus looming over you as you ponder this lose/lose proposal. (As a side note why even include the option to accept his deal if he's going to reject it? This shouldn't be an option)

There are a few capstone scenes in act 1, this being one of them. Your post has definitely convinced me if they are going for cinematic with this game, they should use the tools of cinema a little more. But they are definitely doing it and also refining as they release more patches. Hopefully they also take note of interesting observations such as yours.

Watching the scene as a youtube video, rather than actually playing it myself, I did however feel Raphael is perhaps the teeniest bit over campy. They could dial that down a little without losing whatever it is they are trying to get across.
(I personally think they could dial Volo down a notch too).

Have to try that with my next non-elven or non-halfelven character.

How did we even got to the Raphael scene? But I agree, it is one of possibel more encounters, so maybe it gets better. Still, as Wormerine said, Raphael was featured heavily in trailers and stuff, but I found this encounter ... lacking. There are a lot of minor encounters, even with characters, I don't like, that are much more meorable - on the top of my head I would say Alfira, Gut, Abdirak, Kagha (but she is a bit more than a minor encounter), the tiefling couple, the three tiefling adventuerers, the artist in the Zhentarim hideout, Mol, Arabella and her parents, Volos goblin caretaker, the deep gnome at the windmill (love that guy)...

Drow will not work for the same reason, just so you know.

I thought so, since they are elves.

It's hard to play as a non-elf though, especially since half-orc isn't in the game. I had no idea that could happen.

The Byzantine paths through the game is one of it's best features, but it's very difficult to organise all the paths such that the dialogue always makes sense. I hope the rest of the game remains as convoluted.

Super glad the target audience wasn’t little kids like NWN II

Yes, we've upgraded to horny teens instead

I was also blown away the first ~10 hours of my first playthrough - it IS hard not to be - graphics, voice acting... Also the whole prologue is a cool, non-cookie-cutter-fantasy experience, at least that first time.

Then, the more I played, the more major flaws became apparent. Most of that involves the combat mechanics - and also annoyances like party controls, inventory management and some story/dialogues/"romances" silliness - but mostly the combat.

And then I couldn't even bring myself to finish my druid playthrough when the new patch came... Those flaws/annoyances (again, mostly combat encounters) seemed to annoy me the more and more I played - not a good sign when you intend to do a full/completionist 100+ hours playthrough (when the game is out).

I think I'll just leave the EA for now and wait for the full release. I really hope it turns out to be at least an 8/10 game in my book, but I'm very skeptical at this point as Larian has yet to even acknowledge my (and definitely not just my) gripes with the game, let alone do something about them. But everyone will be romanceable, THAT'S the most important thing for Larian and their target audience, it seems...

exactly