Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Joined: May 2019
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: May 2019
Originally Posted by The Composer
D&D 5e is turnbased.
I can accept your overall point, but this specific bit really bothers me (including when others keep saying this same thing). D&D 2e and 3e were TB too, and yet we got the IE games and the NwN games where RTwP worked totally fine. So this argument just doesn't wash.

Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Pathfinder is also turnbased -> yet P:Km and WotR are RTwP.

Something I haven't seen mentioned (apologies if I missed it) is that P:Km began as a RTwP game; TB was only added later. I'm not sure how much more difficult it'd be to add a RTwP mode onto TB game, but I could imagine it being more difficult.

Joined: Sep 2017
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2017
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by The Composer
D&D 5e is turnbased.
I can accept your overall point, but this specific bit really bothers me (including when others keep saying this same thing). D&D 2e and 3e were TB too, and yet we got the IE games and the NwN games where RTwP worked totally fine. So this argument just doesn't wash.

Then complaining about straying from the ruleset it insists to inherit is hypocritical.

Edit: Not saying you are. Just that referring to those games as good interpretations of their ruleset at the time is inaccurate. If you change something that fundamentally changes how the game is played, then it's not an accurate translation. So making BG3 RTwP is one of the biggest deviations from 5e that could be made.

Whether it's better or worse is irrelevant.

Last edited by The Composer; 28/04/22 07:16 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
R
addict
Online Content
addict
R
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Pathfinder is also turnbased -> yet P:Km and WotR are RTwP.

Something I haven't seen mentioned (apologies if I missed it) is that P:Km began as a RTwP game; TB was only added later. I'm not sure how much more difficult it'd be to add a RTwP mode onto TB game, but I could imagine it being more difficult.

I bet it would be more difficult. The AI itself would probably have to be rewritten as it would be moderately playable with the current one. In the case of RTWP, AI has to be relatively stupid for the player to have any chance.
Even with pathfinder how it works. The AI in the game is downright dumb, instead the opponents have extremely high stats. Blackwater before nerfs is probably one of the best-known examples.

Joined: May 2019
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: May 2019
Originally Posted by The Composer
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by The Composer
D&D 5e is turnbased.
I can accept your overall point, but this specific bit really bothers me (including when others keep saying this same thing). D&D 2e and 3e were TB too, and yet we got the IE games and the NwN games where RTwP worked totally fine. So this argument just doesn't wash.

Then complaining about straying from the ruleset it insists to inherit is hypocritical.

Edit: Not saying you are. Just that referring to those games as good interpretations of their ruleset at the time is inaccurate. If you change something that fundamentally changes how the game is played, then it's not an accurate translation. So making BG3 RTwP is one of the biggest deviations from 5e that could be made.

Whether it's better or worse is irrelevant.
Yes this is correct. I have been quite open about my personal views against D&D rules and mechanics, no matter its edition. And I have also been clear that I for one do agree with and support Larian's deviations from strict 5e adherence when and where it makes sense to me. This is the one big area in which I deviate from my fellow critics of BG3.

Joined: Mar 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Mar 2020
Their are better games to do speed runs on.

Besides...Sword Coast Legends tried and failed.

Joined: Oct 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2020
"D&D 5e is turnbased"

Well. it's an easy fact to state but it's not enough to understand what D&D is about. It's, from my point of view, veryyyy irrelevant.

Inded, D&D is a game created for people who was seeking adventures in fantasy worlds. They assemble in some caves, sometimes they disguise as the heroes they wanna be and they tried their best to immerse themselves in their adventures...

SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO D&D is about reduce the gap between the gamers and their wonderfull adventures in fantasy world. Their creator tried their best to immerse the gamers and I am sure that, if they could, they would have send them in their world like in "SAO" or all this webtoons talking about people in VR fantasy world.

What I mean is, they don't do D&D Turn-based because it was the best choice to immerse themselves. They choose turn-based cause it was the best choice REGARDING THEIR POSSIBILTY to immerse themselves !

So yeah D&D, a paper game, is turn-based because no one find how to do a real-time roleplay.

But, what is wonderfull is that with computer it's possible ! We can do it. BG1 and BG2 did it. Pathfinder did it. A lot of games did it.
And it's far more immersive to play a real-time fight than a turn-based one.

Turn-based game are good, this is not the question. They are good, but they are not the best choice if you want to respect the spirit of D&D.

More, if you want to stick with the "D&D5 is turnbased", so you have to had "it's paper game" and "it's all about imagination and narrative so drop the graphics" and maybe people should play it with a pen and... we could find tons of others examples which would be completely irrelevant.

The point of doing a D&D video game is to go further than the original system. If you don't want to change it... just sell board game and leave the video game for people who actually want to enhanced the system without hiding behind a "fact" as simple as "it was like this and that's all" to justify their personnal choice.

I tried BG3 openminded, I didn't agree with the Turn-based choice but as a player of a lot of them (DD, HOMM, KB, Waste, etc) I thougth, let's try.
Si I tried and it didn't keep his promise.
Firstly because the fighting system is far from equilibrate.
Secondly because it didn't respond to the spirit of BG and D&D.
Turn-based can be really good, but here it is not.

The fights in BG was intense, fast and furious. D&D is about adventure, amazement, thrill and excitement.
This is not what TB delivers. TB is kasparovly fun as long as it's balanced and without 15+ opponents, it's a nice, peacefull and quiet travel through a pleasnt journey. SO,this is fun but this is not BG fun.

Denying it means you don't understand what BG was.


Larian decided to go TB, it's their choice. It wasn't a necessity, it wasn't inevitable, it wasn't "for the best". It was because they can't stop themselves to force their Divinity model in a big licence.
It had nothing to do with D&D in first place. It just shows a kind of stubborness and excessive pride, from my point of view, and a misunderstanding (or a not-caring) of BG-licence.

So saying "D&D is turnbased" as an absolute argument to justify Larian's choice is irrelevant in a lot of ways.
It looks like a way to try to close a debate Larian can't win without admitting they don't understand or give a care about BG-spirit in the first place.

Because, at the end, when the game will be released and people will play it and it will be a success, it will ever be seen has à "Divinie Divinity : Baldur's Gate Cosplay".

But I'll play the game probably and even I will enjoy it at some point. Nevertheless, as huge as its success will be, intellectually, from a creative point of view, it will ever be a fail.

As this poll as few meaning since lots of BG fans leaved the forum a long time ago. It's one thing to see his favorite licence being used as a springboard to promote the gameplay of a studio, it's another one to have to listen people trying to convince you it's for the best interest of your favorite licence instead of admitting their greed.


PS: for people saying BG1 and 2 fights was messy and all. I don't really get it. I'm not a hardcore gamer, but I ever understand what was happening, which spell was summoned, who was hitting who... It was pretty clear from my point of view, fun to watch and interesting to play since there was this micromanagement with the thrill.
More, there was mod to level up the difficulty, making fights harder and really challenging at some point. You had to think carefully how you engaged them and you had to be watchful to take the right decision during the fights. It was fun.

Joined: Jun 2019
Location: Orion's Belt
member
Offline
member
Joined: Jun 2019
Location: Orion's Belt
After playing close to 100 hrs when EA was first released. Real time for sure. The rounds are so slow and boring. IMO, I will still play of course I just like a faster style game, oh and we/I run our table top games fast as well with house rules. Keeping the game flowing is important to me and my group.

Last edited by Doomlord; 05/05/22 12:52 AM.

Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering. Legion of Doom - Dungeons and Dragons online - server Orion -
Doom ~ Khazadoom ~ Nexus
Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
To quote Red Letter Media (youtube channel on movie reviews etc...)
There was this incredible movie called Stand by Me (1986)...I think its the perfect allegory of so many modern <reboots>. Including games.
At this point <BG3> is a dead corps. Zero respect to the license or what it was. Like Star trek reboots and the new horrendous shows based on it. Like Star wars.

Out of morbid curiosity I took the journey in order to see that corpse, when I saw it I was appalled, shocked to what was done to it.
Now I can only move on, just saddened. But stronger and hopeful that something NEW and ORIGINAL will be created. Not just for the marketing $$$.

Glad people love it, more power to you. I was scammed into thinking it was a Baldur's Gate game.

Last edited by mr_planescapist; 03/05/22 10:50 PM.
Joined: Mar 2021
Location: Austin, TX
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Mar 2021
Location: Austin, TX
This is a silly conversation. I mean, the game is TB, so what's the point of a million threads about RTWP? This is not going to change and frankly for the style and pace of the game there is no reason it should. Turn-based is a perfect fit for the way this game is structured. Multiplayer also works a LOT better with a turn based approach.

Bg1 and bg2 had multiplayer, but it was not a great system. Bg3 multiplayer is legit a LOT of fun. I am taking a break for a bit after 1,200 hours played - because Elden Ring - but I look forward to coming back to a finished game.

Ok back to Elden Ring - FromSoft has officially made my list of "awesome game studios that love gaming", next to Larian.

Anyway please finish game. Want play.


Blackheifer
Joined: Mar 2020
Location: Belfast
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Mar 2020
Location: Belfast
Originally Posted by mr_planescapist
At this point <BG3> is a dead corps. Zero respect to the license or what it was. Like Star trek reboots and the new horrendous shows based on it. Like Star wars.
I must disagree here. Not with the middle part - I don't think Larian cares for continuing BG legacy. But unlike the films and IP you mention I do think they have artistic merit. Even though not my favourite of "cRPG renessaince" D:OS1, alongside with Disco Elysium, IMO they have been new two genuinely fresh entries into the genre, with potential to expand cRPG into new directions. I just wish Larian would continue to do their own thing, without skinning a classic IP and wearing its skin for marketing purposes.


Originally Posted by Blackheifer
Ok back to Elden Ring - FromSoft has officially made my list of "awesome game studios that love gaming", next to Larian.
Hopefuly, now when they achieved midespread acclaim, they won't follow ER with their own version of Cyberpunk77.

Joined: Oct 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Blackheifer
This is not going to change and frankly for the style and pace of the game there is no reason it should. Turn-based is a perfect fit for the way this game is structured.

Wow, wow, wow, wow, woooow !
No, it's absolutely not "perfeclty fit" and it's one of the main reason TB seems to be so forced into it.

Expedition : vikings or expedition : rome are "perfectly fit" for TB. They have been created and thougth around this concept.
Lot of games have been thougth this way (numenera, DD, etc)

BG3 wasn't.
One example : fighting in the goblin's village, against 15-20 goblins it's DAMN BORING AND LONG AND NOT FUN. And that's the perfect proof that this game isn't structured for TB cause there is no game created with the ambition to have "boring, long and not fun fights".


Larian simply decided "we did TB, we'll do TB, no matter the subject, we'll crush it and put our TB in it. We'll take the licence, we'll take the D&D system and we are going to put OUR TB with OUR CATNIP/BARREL/SHOVE SYSTEM in it because we are the beeeeeeeeeest and there is nothing over TBBBBBBBBBBB and we don't give a crap about the licence we get !!!!!). I'm barely exaggerating.

IMO, this is pure arrogance.

Joined: Mar 2021
S
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
S
Joined: Mar 2021
Maybe I’m in the minority but I like the big fights in BG3 with lots of opponents. I don’t find them boring. It usually requires some strategy to deal with that many enemies. I genuinely enjoy the combat sections in this game and sometimes even initiate combat with random NPCs if I’m bored lol. I’d actually love some kind of battle game mode where you could just select a bunch of enemies and a location and fight them.

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Italy
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Italy
Originally Posted by Flooter
Originally Posted by Tuco
Moving from RTWP to turn-based tactical combat is pretty much the only area where I feel Larian made a significant improvement over the original without losing anything in the trade-off.

I agree with Tuco that the change from RTwP to turn-based was for the better.

I could never really figure out what was going on in BG1 combats. Characters tended to clump together, I wasn't sure what the visual effects meant and I always felt like someone in the party was doing nothing because they were done casting their spell, or their target was dead or some other reason. In the end, I'd tap spacebar compulsively, effectively pausing twice every in-game second just to check that my party wasn't about to die out of nowhere.

Turn based combat provides legibility and focus. Those make for memorable moments which can link together to form a compelling combat narrative. He hit me so I shoved him so his pal threw a firebomb so I Misty Stepped. It's been a while since I last played BG1, but I don't recall having a fight that didn't go like: "enemies showed up so we all got into a sweaty pile to see who would drop dead first."

+1

Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Zefhyr
Originally Posted by Blackheifer
This is not going to change and frankly for the style and pace of the game there is no reason it should. Turn-based is a perfect fit for the way this game is structured.

Wow, wow, wow, wow, woooow !
No, it's absolutely not "perfeclty fit" and it's one of the main reason TB seems to be so forced into it.

Expedition : vikings or expedition : rome are "perfectly fit" for TB. They have been created and thougth around this concept.
Lot of games have been thougth this way (numenera, DD, etc)

BG3 wasn't.
One example : fighting in the goblin's village, against 15-20 goblins it's DAMN BORING AND LONG AND NOT FUN. And that's the perfect proof that this game isn't structured for TB cause there is no game created with the ambition to have "boring, long and not fun fights".


Larian simply decided "we did TB, we'll do TB, no matter the subject, we'll crush it and put our TB in it. We'll take the licence, we'll take the D&D system and we are going to put OUR TB with OUR CATNIP/BARREL/SHOVE SYSTEM in it because we are the beeeeeeeeeest and there is nothing over TBBBBBBBBBBB and we don't give a crap about the licence we get !!!!!). I'm barely exaggerating.

IMO, this is pure arrogance.
Larian creates & gained their fame with TB games. D&D 5e rules are TB. So yes, BG3 being turn-based should be a perfect fit for both Larian and BG3.

The problem is that Larian doesn't seem to fully understand the rules of D&D 5e and/or that they expect players to shorten combats via use of cheese (or that Larian thinks that long combats are fun). This would STILL be a problem if Larian implemented RtwP, but probably be even worse because now Larian would have to create an entire RtwP system, adding many new possibilities for poor implementation.

Joined: Oct 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2020
mrfuji3, I am not expecting anything from Larian at this point. I did, I really genuinely did.
D&D is TB, I already explain my point of view avout this statement.
Curiously, BG was RTwP and D&D at the same time. So, nothing impossible here. Again, it's about will and I'm ok with that as long people don't try to persuade me it was inevitable and for the best.



QUOTE :
" I could never really figure out what was going on in BG1 combats. Characters tended to clump together, I wasn't sure what the visual effects meant and I always felt like someone in the party was doing nothing because they were done casting their spell, or their target was dead or some other reason. In the end, I'd tap spacebar compulsively, effectively pausing twice every in-game second just to check that my party wasn't about to die out of nowhere.

Turn based combat provides legibility and focus. Those make for memorable moments which can link together to form a compelling combat narrative. He hit me so I shoved him so his pal threw a firebomb so I Misty Stepped. It's been a while since I last played BG1, but I don't recall having a fight that didn't go like: "enemies showed up so we all got into a sweaty pile to see who would drop dead first." "



I... don't know how to react because I harldy understand. I can still clearly remember the visual effect of a lot of spell from BG1 and 2. Sometimes just seeing the incantation was enough to determinate what a wizard was going to cast. So I can't help bu think that you may have not play a lot to BG to be unable to read the fights. of cour,se sometimes, we had to tap spacebar compulsively, it was just how intense the fights was. Focus on the cast from a lich or the breath of a dragon. Look at this thug trying to go for my wizards or this guy who jsut disappeared after drinking a potion. It may not be perfect but I can't get how the fights would have been impossible "to figure out".
I mean, I'm not a hardcore gamer and I get it.

About your memories of BG... Again, can't say much. Personnaly, I have a lot of memories from epic fights. Sometimes I had this guy running in circle to avoid being killed, sometimes it was this dragon surrounded by all of my invocation just to keep him busy and focus to the other side of the room. There was this lich which was a damn pain in the ass. All this bowman, I had to deal with my thief so they wont shut down my wizards. The giants, the drows, the illithids.
There was this fight when I leave the Nashkel's Mines, unexpected, intense. I was exhausted since I didn't try to sleep surrounded by the kobolds, so I had to deal with this mercenaries with low spells. Good position, good focus, good used of spell and abilities and just a bit of luck and we overcame it !
I can rememer this first assassin, the demogorgon, irenicus, the rats, the spiders ! and so much more !


My memories from BG3 ?

Of course there was some great times and nice fights (although...) but most of them wasn't really worth remembering or not in the good way.

" I shoved him, so he came to me, so I shoved him, so he came to me, so I shoved him, so he died."
and its variation
" He shoved me, I shoved him, He shoved me, I shoved him."
or this one
" He shoved me, so I died"
but, ok it's not all about shove (or barrel...) there are all this fights...
" Ho a minotaur ! a fun fight! No, wait, I'm dead."
" Ho, two red hat ! We are 4 guy surviving intense crash, should be fine. Ho wait, they rape me, let me try again.... I just climb to the higher place of this witch's place and shove and send arrows."
Better !
I fight minthara ! it was like....
"she killed my friend. I made him stand up. She killed him again. I made him stand up again. Ho ! She killed him again! No problem... I'm gonna make him stand again. But wait... Whaaat is she doiiiiiiing!!! killing him again !!! No probelm, I made him stand again ! And I will win cause I have this girl dealing 1-2 damages from the back. Just need to be patient, 30 minutes shoudl be enough.
I fights somes duergars too, really funny.
"Hello boss, you wanna fight ? What ? you have people popping from everywhere in the high ? Ho... and they shove half of my team dead in one round ?
Hmmmmm.... let's reload it.
I placed my team, I tried, I reloaded and reloaded until... I win the shove contest being the first doing it !
What a wonderful fight. All this magics, this skills, this tricks, just to end up with a lame "shove".

I feel sorry because I enjoyed DD and DD2, I enjoyed lot of games in TB, I'm actually enjoying Expedition : Rome TB and I was full of hope to enjoy BG3 TB when I tried it, but what they did ? This is not good job.

Joined: Mar 2021
Location: Austin, TX
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Mar 2021
Location: Austin, TX
Originally Posted by Sharet
Originally Posted by Flooter
Originally Posted by Tuco
Moving from RTWP to turn-based tactical combat is pretty much the only area where I feel Larian made a significant improvement over the original without losing anything in the trade-off.

I agree with Tuco that the change from RTwP to turn-based was for the better.

I could never really figure out what was going on in BG1 combats. Characters tended to clump together, I wasn't sure what the visual effects meant and I always felt like someone in the party was doing nothing because they were done casting their spell, or their target was dead or some other reason. In the end, I'd tap spacebar compulsively, effectively pausing twice every in-game second just to check that my party wasn't about to die out of nowhere.

Turn based combat provides legibility and focus. Those make for memorable moments which can link together to form a compelling combat narrative. He hit me so I shoved him so his pal threw a firebomb so I Misty Stepped. It's been a while since I last played BG1, but I don't recall having a fight that didn't go like: "enemies showed up so we all got into a sweaty pile to see who would drop dead first."

+1


Haha, yeah I always felt like I was playing some version of Rock-em-sock-em robots with 6 players. It was SO much harder to set up complex coordinated maneuvers with the weird stuttering pause and then watch nothing turn out correctly methodology behind RTWP.

On top of that there was way more ways to cheese the AI, like have dangerous foes run in circles around a "locked" on aggro target while you plink away at them (like Drizzit). Combat never felt satisfyingly in any kind of intellectual or tactical capacity.

Combat was more like two people turning hoses on each other to fight, except one is an idiot and easily tricked.


Blackheifer
Joined: Mar 2021
Location: Austin, TX
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Mar 2021
Location: Austin, TX
Originally Posted by Wormerine
Originally Posted by Blackheifer
Ok back to Elden Ring - FromSoft has officially made my list of "awesome game studios that love gaming", next to Larian.
Hopefuly, now when they achieved midespread acclaim, they won't follow ER with their own version of Cyberpunk77.

Yeah, CD Project Red is off the list after that whole Cyberpunk debacle.

I mean FromSoft just rolled up and showed everyone you don't have to create a game that appeals to the lowest common denominator and that people will legitimately enjoy a challenging experience with a good story and no p2w or loot boxes or any other crap.

It's - of course- up to us, the fans and gamers to hold them to account and keep them honest with constructive feedback. Nothing lasts forever, and I am sure EA is already offering them bucketloads of money to buy them out and ruin their IP's.


Blackheifer
Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Zefhyr
mrfuji3, I am not expecting anything from Larian at this point. I did, I really genuinely did.
D&D is TB, I already explain my point of view avout this statement.
Curiously, BG was RTwP and D&D at the same time. So, nothing impossible here. Again, it's about will and I'm ok with that as long people don't try to persuade me it was inevitable and for the best.

I feel sorry because I enjoyed DD and DD2, I enjoyed lot of games in TB, I'm actually enjoying Expedition : Rome TB and I was full of hope to enjoy BG3 TB when I tried it, but what they did ? This is not good job.
Sure. D&D games can work perfectly well as RtwP (though I personally dislike that gameplay style). Bg1&2, Pathfinder games, etc are all extremely successful examples, so it's clearly not impossible.

For Larian specifically though, at this moment in their company, I'd say it was inevitable that they'd make BG3 a TB game. If anyone is to blame for BG3 being TB, it's WotC for choosing Larian.
But obviously Larian's current implementation of D&D 5e has a lot of problems, problems which were neither inevitable or for the best. And for that we can definitely blame Larian.

Joined: Oct 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Sure. D&D games can work perfectly well as RtwP (though I personally dislike that gameplay style). Bg1&2, Pathfinder games, etc are all extremely successful examples, so it's clearly not impossible.

For Larian specifically though, at this moment in their company, I'd say it was inevitable that they'd make BG3 a TB game. If anyone is to blame for BG3 being TB, it's WotC for choosing Larian.
But obviously Larian's current implementation of D&D 5e has a lot of problems, problems which were neither inevitable or for the best. And for that we can definitely blame Larian.

I totally agree !

From my point of view, Obsidian would have been a clever choice since PoE already feel a little like BG.

Blackheifer, I can't get how you play BG 1and especially 2 until the end if you just let your party rush in ?
You didn't used spell ? You never dissipate magic defenses of a lich or extra wizard ?
I can't imagine how someone could won the game without thinking some fights.
Saying BG1 and 2 was like looking at a fight of orcs and soldiers in warcraft 3 is not serious.

You had to think carefully where and when used some spells. stun people, slow some others, haste yours, protect them, etc etc.
There was a lot of spells and skills.

But, please, tell me how you beat the demogorgo for example. I'll be glad to learn it.

PS: Drizz't was known to be a sort of easter egg and funny (still hard) to fight. Speaking abotu cheesy fight in BG 1 and 2 but playing BG3.... ha ha ?

Page 2 of 3 1 2 3

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