Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
#814743 10/05/22 08:43 AM
Joined: Aug 2014
Ikke Online Happy OP
member
OP Online Happy
member
Joined: Aug 2014
Hi, after a pause I am now trying out patch 7. I think the game has a lot of potential, and I am curious what will be revealed in the full game. But I do have some issues with EA, and I think most of them have to do with a lack of immersion, or a near constant disbelief that I find hard to suspend. This is a serious problem, especially for an RPG, where being submerged in an alternate reality accounts for the majority of enjoyment to be had.

Here are some immersion killers I have encountered so far, excluding graphic/sound glitches that are likely to be solved during further development:

1) When you drop from the airship and meet people immediately afterwards, some dialogue options will tell others to 'wait at my camp'. But that camp had not been established yet.
2) In the crypt with looters, at the start of the game: all the plaques use a forgotten script, but the books are all readable.
3) Weights are inconsistent: 5 jugs weigh the same as a letter.
4) Burning candles in rooms that have been abandoned for many years do not make sense.
5) Perishable food in rooms that have been abandoned for many years does not make sense.
6) Equipped weapons are carried very strangely, they seem to be attached to the back by some force field. How does that work? Also it is very impractical. Why not have swords in scabbards, arrows in quivers, and longer weapons carried in hands? The only one that carries a weapon in hand now is my Tav. She has acquired a flaming sword and insists on carrying the flaming end in her bare left hand.
7) The game is 3D, but highlighted characters or objects get a 2D outline. That destroys the illusion of a 3D world. Highlighting should be 3D too. For example using a spotlight from above, or by increasing the luminescence of models.
8) Characters that aren't present can approve or disapprove of actions. How does that work?
9) Characters carry an enormous volume of stuff that would need a full shipping container in reality. But no one even carries a small handbag.
10) Defeated enemies stay dead, but party members are very easily resurrected.
11) Enemies do not seem to use jump or push combat maneuvers.
12) The option to send items to camp is utterly ridiculous. Or at least some kind of explanation should be given. And the option should not be available when no camp has been established. And again the playing field is not level. Why don't enemies send stuff to their camp? For example, the goblins that have found the druid's grove could write a note and send that note to their camp.
13) The limitation of 4 per party does not make sense in the game. A fifth can not join, saying you're full. How does that make sense? I understand the need for gaming mechanics, but please try to make them sensible in the game world.
14) Short rests are very strange: how can you fully heal by standing still for less than a second?
15) Long rests are strange too. Never in the game is a camping spot established, but from any place the party is teleported to a permanent camp somewhere, and teleported back to the same spot where the long rest was initiated after sleeping.
16) When zoomed out, the camera is able to show a lot of the game world. Much more than the playable characters could see in reality. It would be nice to have a first person view during exploration, and switch to overhead view during combat. And maybe faraway landscapes and objects could be made more hazy? Also the mini map shows info on charcters that are not in the line of sight.
17) Given the various personalities of companions, and the urgency of the tadpole problem, it does not make sense for them to hang around the campsite doing nothing while a party of 4 goes exploring. Can they be performing other tasks somehow? Hunting and foraging perhaps? Or be recovering from wounds?

I think two immersion problems could be solved in a single stroke: Have the party travel with a cart that is pulled by horses for example. The cart can carry all equipment and it allows a camp to be set up at safe locations. Of course the cart can not enter dungeons, so it will not be possible to loot 20 goblin shields from a dungeon without some serious running back and forth. But I don't think I would miss that. It is entirely reasonable to loot only gold and jewels from a dungeon.
Stil, a more permanent camp would probably be needed for the inactive characters to reside.

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Italy
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Italy
I agree pretty much on everything, but want to expand in some points:

Originally Posted by Ikke
7) The game is 3D, but highlighted characters or objects get a 2D outline. That destroys the illusion of a 3D world. Highlighting should be 3D too. For example using a spotlight from above, or by increasing the luminescence of models.[/color]
I think this is really a minor problem and purely mechanic i.e. not related to the IG lore and natural laws. Maybe you are right in saying that a 3D highlight would be better but I don't think is too much of a problem.

Originally Posted by Ikke
11) Enemies do not seem to use jump or push combat maneuvers.
Oh, believe me, they do.

Originally Posted by Ikke
13) The limitation of 4 per party does not make sense in the game. A fifth can not join, saying you're full. How does that make sense? I understand the need for gaming mechanics, but please try to make them sensible in the game world.
This is a whole thread in itself. Maybe a sensible explanation would be the need to guard the camp.
Still, I would prefer to be able to bring along every companion, even if this means having less of them. But, since the Focus is (sadly) on the multiplayer aspect of the game, I doubt they will increment the maximum number of characters in the party.

Originally Posted by Ikke
15) Long rests are strange too. Never in the game is a camping spot established, but from any place the party is teleported to a permanent camp somewhere, and teleported back to the same spot where the long rest was initiated after sleeping.
I think the long rest is fine, given that the background now changes depending on where you are. The only immersion-wise problem is the fact that you were adventuring with 4 characters and now in the camp, you have a dog, an owlbear, an undead priest and at least another companion who weren't with you in the dungeon you were exploring.

Originally Posted by Ikke
16) When zoomed out, the camera is able to show a lot of the game world. Much more than the playable characters could see in reality. It would be nice to have a first person view during exploration, and switch to overhead view during combat. And maybe faraway landscapes and objects could be made more hazy? Also the mini map shows info on charcters that are not in the line of sight.
I don't think the 1st person camera is an ideal solution in this game, but I totally agree that both the camera and the minimap should have a fog of war system that impede you to see what your character isn't supposed to be able to see. Why send someone to explore if I can already see everything? Also, it's taking away a lot of surprise effects.


Originally Posted by Ikke
I think two immersion problems could be solved in a single stroke: Have the party travel with a cart that is pulled by horses for example. The cart can carry all equipment and it allows a camp to be set up at safe locations. Of course the cart can not enter dungeons, so it will not be possible to loot 20 goblin shields from a dungeon without some serious running back and forth. But I don't think I would miss that. It is entirely reasonable to loot only gold and jewels from a dungeon.
I don't think that having the cart physically present would be a good thing, but I will be happy if they tell us of its existence via a cutscene, so at least I'll know why two people who have the same urgency as me to solve the tadpole problem are doing nothing to help.

Joined: Nov 2020
E
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
E
Joined: Nov 2020
Some great points here. I can only assume the concept of player immersion has never been a factor, otherwise they would have most likely been implemented in the first place. In my opinion, other glaring examples of world breaking are the lack of day/night/weather/calendar and also the magical way portal teleportation system.

I think fundamentally immersion was sacrificed on the altar of player convenience, their interpretation of 'fun' and perhaps also a desire to reach a more casual audience who are maybe put off by the notion of learning a new and deep rule set.

They've sort of shot themselves in the foot with their story arc...a race against time to find a cure but there is no in-game clock. The notion of adventuring suggests camping where you stop, not tracking back/teleporting to some fixed base camp every evening no matter your partys current location.

Joined: Aug 2014
Ikke Online Happy OP
member
OP Online Happy
member
Joined: Aug 2014
Originally Posted by Sharet
I think the long rest is fine, given that the background now changes depending on where you are.

I have had only one or two long rests so far, but the latest went like this: We were standing on on a rock peak, near the place where the sirens nested. The peak had just enough space for four people to stand on. The long rest button teleported us to a totally different place, which looked very much like the standard camping site from patch 5. After resting we were instantaneously back on the rock peak. So if the plan was to convey the idea of camping in situ, it failed.

Joined: Aug 2021
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2021
Great post! I mostly agree with the points made, except for "enemies don't push". There are two immersion-breakers that I find particularly egregious.

Originally Posted by Ikke
8) Characters that aren't present can approve or disapprove of actions. How does that work?
[...]
17) Given the various personalities of companions, and the urgency of the tadpole problem, it does not make sense for them to hang around the campsite doing nothing while a party of 4 goes exploring. Can they be performing other tasks somehow? Hunting and foraging perhaps? Or be recovering from wounds?

This drives me absolutely nuts. To clarify, the people Tav invites to camp have 1 or 2 days left to live (as far as they know). Once in camp, they sit on their hands rather than making any attempt at prolonging their own existence, waiting all day for you to return so they can impart their unsollicited opinions. It makes the tadpole feel unimportant and your companions seem super petty.


TRIBE!
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
I wonder if there is at least single point that dont have its own topic allready ... several in some cases. laugh

Originally Posted by Ikke
2) In the crypt with looters, at the start of the game: all the plaques use a forgotten script, but the books are all readable.
None of those books is ancient ... except the locked one deep down in the crypt ...
Seems understandable that they were simply brought there "later".

Originally Posted by Ikke
4) Burning candles in rooms that have been abandoned for many years do not make sense.
Could you provide screenshot?
Or at least closer description of the place you are talking about?

Since the only abandoned place i know about is the crypt ... and candles were burning only in first half, that was occupied by looters ... and if it dont make sense that they would light them to see what are they even looting ... i dunno what would. laugh

Originally Posted by Ikke
6) Equipped weapons are carried very strangely, they seem to be attached to the back by some force field. How does that work? Also it is very impractical. Why not have swords in scabbards, arrows in quivers, and longer weapons carried in hands? The only one that carries a weapon in hand now is my Tav. She has acquired a flaming sword and insists on carrying the flaming end in her bare left hand.
You can use toggle combat (or at least i think that is how they named it ... default Tab) for having weapons permanently unsheated, while runnig ... looks especialy good with staff ... and especialy bad wil daggers. laugh

But i just have to ask, since i ask everytime someone bring this topic up ...
How is weapon on back less believable than several tons weight lizard being able to fly ... person being able to defile gravity by his pure power of mind ... or fire that burns without burning anything? laugh

Originally Posted by Ikke
8) Characters that aren't present can approve or disapprove of actions. How does that work?
People talk ...
And since it would be quite confusing if you would just get 7 disaproovements from Shadowheart after Long Rest ... you get them imediatly. :P

Personaly i like this ... its much better, when they know what you have done and can react on it (even tho little later) ... than in some other games, where you are best buddy with Paladin, and if you went to do sidequest to burn orphanage, you just leave him chill in camp ... and then you are still best buddies. laugh

Originally Posted by Ikke
9) Characters carry an enormous volume of stuff that would need a full shipping container in reality. But no one even carries a small handbag.
I really hope backpacks will either remain for moders, or will be optional ...
Sure, it would "make sense" but it would also "look horrible". laugh

Originally Posted by Ikke
10) Defeated enemies stay dead, but party members are very easily resurrected.
Not just enemies ...
Some of us keep asking for option to ressurect NPCs that are not party members for quite some time ...

For example Kanon, or Arabella ... i just cant imagine my lawfull good Paladin to stand over dead child (or brave defender) holding litteraly 10 Scrolls of Revivify and 1 Scroll of True Ressurection ... saying "too bad we cant do anything" ... -_-

But i believe we should have option to torture Minthara by killing > ressurecting > killing > ressurecting > ... her, even if just for the fun of it. laugh

Originally Posted by Ikke
11) Enemies do not seem to use jump or push combat maneuvers.
Try to put some goblins asleep. wink

Originally Posted by Ikke
12) The option to send items to camp is utterly ridiculous. Or at least some kind of explanation should be given.
No, "some kind of explanation" certainly should NOT be given!
This is pure QoL game mechanic (so you can store some favorite item without needing to travel back to your camp), that have no place in the world and should not be recognizible by NPCs as something that is possible! Bcs from their perspective, you traveled to your camp, put something in the box, and traveled back!

Originally Posted by Ikke
13) The limitation of 4 per party does not make sense in the game. A fifth can not join, saying you're full. How does that make sense? I understand the need for gaming mechanics, but please try to make them sensible in the game world.
Same as abowe ... this mechanic should never exists in mind of NPCs ...

If we have full party make option to tell others to join us gray ... with system message that our party is full ...
No NPC should ever talk about full party, there is nothing like full party, EVER!

Except this:

Originally Posted by Ikke
14) Short rests are very strange: how can you fully heal by standing still for less than a second?
Thats the thing ... you dont "stant still for less than a second". wink
Sure you cant tell, for the lack of time in general ... but you dont. laugh

Originally Posted by Ikke
15) Long rests are strange too. Never in the game is a camping spot established, but from any place the party is teleported to a permanent camp somewhere, and teleported back to the same spot where the long rest was initiated after sleeping.
I wonder where from people take that thing about teleportation ...
Your party could easily walk aswell, just of the screen ... sure it would make things a bit weird sometimes since you walked somewhere ... and then, when too exhausted to continue, you walked the same range back to rest ...

But puting that aside, since there are waypoint portals that DO make any walking much shorter ... only from the fact that when you engaged long rest, it was hardly a noon ... and when you are in your camp, its usualy at least evening, but more likely a night ... you could presume that some time passed. No?

ANYWAY ...
This is one of things that was sacrificed on altar of cinematic gods ...
Since Larian wants to create every single conversation between our characters as cutscene with dialogue options ... they simply cannot let us "sleep anywere in the world we want" ... bcs it would make problems with cliping, problems with lights, problems with obejcts ... etc. etc.
(Just for the record i still believe that "stage" space around every camp location would be perfectly fitting all desired outcomes ... but lately it seems like im the only one. :-/ )

Originally Posted by Ikke
16) When zoomed out, the camera is able to show a lot of the game world. Much more than the playable characters could see in reality. It would be nice to have a first person view during exploration, and switch to overhead view during combat. And maybe faraway landscapes and objects could be made more hazy? Also the mini map shows info on charcters that are not in the line of sight.
I would love to have 1st person view for screenshot purposes ...
I would hate it as forced view. -_-

And im affraid it would not give you much immersive experience, since map we are walking on in Act 1 is not litteral transcription of the world (there is countless proofs all around).

Originally Posted by Ikke
17) Given the various personalities of companions, and the urgency of the tadpole problem, it does not make sense for them to hang around the campsite doing nothing while a party of 4 goes exploring. Can they be performing other tasks somehow? Hunting and foraging perhaps? Or be recovering from wounds?
Honestly ... no they cant.

And reason is exactly that variety of personalities and urgency of the tadpole problem ... the only thing they could do, that would make sense, would be to tell you "screw you Tav, either you go with me, or i go alone" ... anythng else would be just as ridiculous as sitting around the fire, just for different reasons.

Originally Posted by Ikke
Have the party travel with a cart that is pulled by horses for example.
I have seen some bad ideas around here ... but this one is the worse so far. laugh
I dont even know where to start ...

Last edited by RagnarokCzD; 10/05/22 11:06 AM.

Short coment on my English. smile

Anyway ... i cast Eldritch Blast!
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Italy
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Italy
Originally Posted by Etruscan
Some great points here. I can only assume the concept of player immersion has never been a factor, otherwise they would have most likely been implemented in the first place. In my opinion, other glaring examples of world breaking are the lack of day/night/weather/calendar and also the magical way portal teleportation system.

I think fundamentally immersion was sacrificed on the altar of player convenience, their interpretation of 'fun' and perhaps also a desire to reach a more casual audience who are maybe put off by the notion of learning a new and deep rule set.

They've sort of shot themselves in the foot with their story arc...a race against time to find a cure but there is no in-game clock. The notion of adventuring suggests camping where you stop, not tracking back/teleporting to some fixed base camp every evening no matter your partys current location.

+1 to everything you said.

Joined: Aug 2014
Ikke Online Happy OP
member
OP Online Happy
member
Joined: Aug 2014
Originally Posted by Etruscan
In my opinion, other glaring examples of world breaking are the lack of day/night/weather/calendar and also the magical way portal teleportation system.

I think I am fine with the portals. After all. they are magical, and magic does exist in the game world. But the fact that there are so many seemingly random portals everywhere does need some more explanation. Who made them? Why? How are they powered? Was this kind of portal everywhere in BG1 or BG2?

Originally Posted by Etruscan
I think fundamentally immersion was sacrificed on the altar of player convenience, their interpretation of 'fun' and perhaps also a desire to reach a more casual audience who are maybe put off by the notion of learning a new and deep rule set.

I don't think more immersion would necessarily lead to more difficult or deeper rules. It seems to be that what is mostly needed is some more creative thinking and more consistent world building. And in my thinking, fun is highly dependent on immersion.

Originally Posted by Etruscan
They've sort of shot themselves in the foot with their story arc...a race against time to find a cure but there is no in-game clock. The notion of adventuring suggests camping where you stop, not tracking back/teleporting to some fixed base camp every evening no matter your partys current location.

True. Altough I do rember Lae'zel commenting that taking a nap was highly innapropriate behaviour. That was it.

But also this inconsistency should be resolvable with some more creative thinking on the part of the developers.

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Ikke
Of course the cart can not enter dungeons, so it will not be possible to loot 20 goblin shields from a dungeon without some serious running back and forth. But I don't think I would miss that.
I would miss it! I would like the opposite: The option to remove encumbrance so that I can carry all my loot!

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Italy
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Italy
Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
But i just have to ask, since i ask everytime someone bring this topic up ...
How is weapon on back less believable than several tons weight lizard being able to fly ... person being able to defile gravity by his pure power of mind ... or fire that burns without burning anything? laugh

C'mon mate, you can justify anything from this point of view.

II mean, if we have magic how is this:
[Linked Image from s3.amazonaws.com]
so improbable?

This is a fantasy world where a lot of things are possible (such as a giant lizard flying) but other things are just meant to be mundane, such as a pointy stick you use to poke your enemies.
It's a stick, it is not meant to be able to stay glued to your back, nor it is practical in any way.

There are *magical weapons* that can fluctuate or magically anchor themselves to you, but this is not the case for ordinary objects.
And it's not like it's a technology problem either, since in DOS weapons were sheathed on the hips of the characters.

Last edited by Sharet; 10/05/22 11:17 AM.
Joined: Aug 2014
Ikke Online Happy OP
member
OP Online Happy
member
Joined: Aug 2014
Originally Posted by Icelyn
Originally Posted by Ikke
Of course the cart can not enter dungeons, so it will not be possible to loot 20 goblin shields from a dungeon without some serious running back and forth. But I don't think I would miss that.
I would miss it! I would like the opposite: The option to remove encumbrance so that I can carry all my loot!

I can understand why it can be fun to hoard stuff and maximize the amount of gold on your savings account. It is basic human psychology. But on the other hand, dealing with limitations, serious setbacks and difficult choices can also be very rewarding in a computer game. The bigger the losses you sometimes have to take (for example: not being able to drag heavy valuables out of a dungeon before it collapses), the more rewarding your successes will feel. That's also basic human psychology, I think.

I have fond memories of playing XCOM games in iron man mode, where party members would remain dead if they died and you had no option to load a saved game to bring them back to life. Those setbacks and defeats really hurt, but made the victory in the end all the sweeter, and the experience more memorable.

Joined: Jun 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jun 2020
Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
Originally Posted by Ikke
6) Equipped weapons are carried very strangely, they seem to be attached to the back by some force field. How does that work? Also it is very impractical. Why not have swords in scabbards, arrows in quivers, and longer weapons carried in hands? The only one that carries a weapon in hand now is my Tav. She has acquired a flaming sword and insists on carrying the flaming end in her bare left hand.

[...]

How is weapon on back less believable than several tons weight lizard being able to fly ... person being able to defile gravity by his pure power of mind ... or fire that burns without burning anything? laugh

When it floats six inches away from your back but remains stuck to you, and this happens for everyone and every weapon... it is.

I'll field this one, though it's a take-it or leave-it answer; I'm very confident that this is the dissonance that so many people experience about this and which you apparently don't, but here it is as best as I can explain:

Notice how everything you compared this to are intrinsically magical creatures or literal magic? As in, defined, quantified forces written into the world lore as part of tangible elements greater than themselves? Magic is a part of this realm, and it makes sense within the space of the realm it's written for - it has structure, form and rules that have been built up and defined. Most magical fire, because it is magical fire fuelled by the weave for its effect, generally does not remain around after the spell has been cast? In some cases, it can be maintained through concentration, and in some cases the initial spell burst of fire can ignite mundane objects in live, non-magical fire... but the magical fire itself doesn't stick around. This is part of the deep and wide-spread system of magic that permeates the world. So... when someone USES magic in this realm space, and they are a spellcaster with the capabilities to do so, this not only does NOT require ANY suspension of disbelief at all - it actually helps to deepen immersion for the viewer.

Now... comparatively... When the barbarian slings their axe over their shoulder and leaves it floating in mid-air behind them, glued by invisible force and distance to them... that's just silly and destroys immersion. There IS no magic involved here, and no other in-world tangible explanation. If you cast detect magic on this barbarian you will not detect anything - and this can be tested! The barbarian didn't cast a spell, and they could not do so anyway; they have no enchantment upon them, and no enchantment exists upon the weapon to explain this - it is a direct "You're actually playing a video game" world-break that pulls a player out of their immersion in the space to see it and notice it. It's a visible game mechanical element/limitation that's waving itself in your face while you're trying to play the game... and it's doing so constantly.

In short... you're comparing apples and elephants and asking why some people say that one of them fits in the freezer but the other doesn't; it's obvious to the people who point it out, and the only intelligible reason why you aren't seeing the difference seems to be that you personally have never actually put anything in the freezer at all - not really. This may not be the case, and I don't want to presume it is, but it is all I can think of to understand how you came to stand in a position that leads you to even ask a question like that in the first place.

Larian have always struggled with the concept of immersion in space. In comments made in interviews about their previous games and in the early days of BG3's development, it seemed almost like they legitimately didn't understand the concept, or why people would find it to be important. They came to grasp that this was something that people wanted and valued, when working on BG3 but still don't actually really seem to understand what it is, what preserves it, and what shatters it... and they also don't really seem to grasp why repeatedly breaking immersion for the sake of 'doing a funny' doesn't leave general immersion intact the rest of the time - it just doesn't, when that's a regular occurrence. They don't understand why being able to "burrow" into a cage that's hanging twenty feet above you in open air is a problem, or why it breaks immersion, or why you should not be able to do that. That's the problem.

All of this is subject to change of course; communication has been precious thin from beginning to end and it's always possible that they've taken time to learn and really begin understanding this concept since their last commentary on the matter... we can but hope.

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Savage North
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Savage North
Thanks for putting together this little list. Some points have been discussed a lot, some sound newer to me. Some points are fairly minor and easy to ignore, some are much bigger problems. But overall I agree with most of the diagnostic.

Etruscan kind of said it all already, but yeah, ... Larian probably never cared much for immersion in the first place. (In the same way that combat rules and balance are not high on their list of priorities either. And same for UI/playability, however fundamental this aspect of a video game is.)

Which is very sad, because story and immersion are important to me, in a 100-hour CRPG.


Originally Posted by Ikke
Originally Posted by Etruscan
I think fundamentally immersion was sacrificed on the altar of player convenience, their interpretation of 'fun' and perhaps also a desire to reach a more casual audience who are maybe put off by the notion of learning a new and deep rule set.
I don't think more immersion would necessarily lead to more difficult or deeper rules. It seems to be that what is mostly needed is some more creative thinking and more consistent world building.

I agree that making the game more immersive does not have to involve additional rules.

But regarding creative thinking and ideas, I kind of disagree, or I wouldn't formulate the situation this way. I think Larian has more than enough writers and designers that they could have very easily imagined solutions*. The various immersion issue don't strike me as being hard, requiring breakthrough ideas and intense work. The problem is mostly just that they probably don't care much and have no will to work too much on this.

(* : In fact some immersion mistakes, like in-world Lae'zel mentioning the video-game-only party size limit, or in-world Gale mentioning the players-only teleportation portals, only require removal. No brainstorming, new ideas, and creativity required.)


Hoping we'll be able to create great assumptions-free Custom Characters and be given great roleplay options.
Joined: Aug 2014
Ikke Online Happy OP
member
OP Online Happy
member
Joined: Aug 2014
Originally Posted by Drath Malorn
The various immersion issue don't strike me as being hard, requiring breakthrough ideas and intense work. The problem is mostly just that they probably don't care much and have no will to work too much on this.

That could be the case, as also stated by Niara. Well, I hope this thread can serve as a reminder for Larian that immersion is important to at least some people that would like to play their game.

Last edited by Ikke; 10/05/22 12:15 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Ikke
I can understand why it can be fun to hoard stuff and maximize the amount of gold on your savings account. It is basic human psychology. But on the other hand, dealing with limitations, serious setbacks and difficult choices can also be very rewarding in a computer game. The bigger the losses you sometimes have to take (for example: not being able to drag heavy valuables out of a dungeon before it collapses), the more rewarding your successes will feel. That's also basic human psychology, I think.

I have fond memories of playing XCOM games in iron man mode, where party members would remain dead if they died and you had no option to load a saved game to bring them back to life. Those setbacks and defeats really hurt, but made the victory in the end all the sweeter, and the experience more memorable.
They could add iron man mode for you, and dragon mode for me. biggrin

Joined: Jan 2009
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
I can agree with some or many of these complaints. But not all.


Originally Posted by Ikke
6) Equipped weapons are carried very strangely, they seem to be attached to the back by some force field. How does that work? Also it is very impractical. Why not have swords in scabbards, arrows in quivers, and longer weapons carried in hands? The only one that carries a weapon in hand now is my Tav. She has acquired a flaming sword and insists on carrying the flaming end in her bare left hand.

This problem has been with videogames from the beginning and it's not going to be solved in this one either - not when you have a ton of actions you need to peform while wearing a ton of weapons which you also need to mesh with a ton of different body types AND with a ton of different possible armors and clothing including underwear. It is simply impossible for the modellers to make the amount of possible permutations all look right.


Originally Posted by Ikke
9) Characters carry an enormous volume of stuff that would need a full shipping container in reality. But no one even carries a small handbag.

True to the tabletop version as well. Weight and inventory space is an abstraction in games. Even Solasta, which has pretty stringent limits on the amount you can carry allows for you to stash a ridiculous amount. The game would be less fun if you had "realistic" weight limits.


Quote
10) Defeated enemies stay dead, but party members are very easily resurrected.

Game.


Quote
12) The option to send items to camp is utterly ridiculous. Or at least some kind of explanation should be given. And the option should not be available when no camp has been established. And again the playing field is not level. Why don't enemies send stuff to their camp? For example, the goblins that have found the druid's grove could write a note and send that note to their camp.

Have you heard of the idea of "Anti-Frustration Features"? Lots of games do little things which are not realistic, but are done because this is a freaking game and games are supposed to be fun. The less tedious busywork you have to do which adds no interest in a game, the better.


Quote
13) The limitation of 4 per party does not make sense in the game. A fifth can not join, saying you're full. How does that make sense? I understand the need for gaming mechanics, but please try to make them sensible in the game world.

I would like at least 5 people in the party as well, but that's not likely to happen. What is your suggestion for "make them sensible in the game world"?


Quote
14) Short rests are very strange: how can you fully heal by standing still for less than a second?

Game. Time doesn't pass in the game. Do you want to wait around a real-time hour for the rest to complete? I doubt it.


Quote
16) When zoomed out, the camera is able to show a lot of the game world. Much more than the playable characters could see in reality. It would be nice to have a first person view during exploration, and switch to overhead view during combat. And maybe faraway landscapes and objects could be made more hazy? Also the mini map shows info on charcters that are not in the line of sight.

That will still mean needing to add a lot more stuff to the map for those "hazy, faraway landscapes", or expanding the map sizes to accamodate the far-away stuff. Maps can only be of a certain size to avoid causing performance problems. Lag isn't very immersive either.


Quote
17) Given the various personalities of companions, and the urgency of the tadpole problem, it does not make sense for them to hang around the campsite doing nothing while a party of 4 goes exploring. Can they be performing other tasks somehow? Hunting and foraging perhaps? Or be recovering from wounds?

Not a terrible idea to make use of other companions for foraging and such, but what wounds? Even if wounds were a thing - which they aren't, not even in the tabletop - there's no guarantee that they'll have wounds?

Quote
I think two immersion problems could be solved in a single stroke: Have the party travel with a cart that is pulled by horses for example. The cart can carry all equipment and it allows a camp to be set up at safe locations. Of course the cart can not enter dungeons, so it will not be possible to loot 20 goblin shields from a dungeon without some serious running back and forth. But I don't think I would miss that. It is entirely reasonable to loot only gold and jewels from a dungeon.
Stil, a more permanent camp would probably be needed for the inactive characters to reside.

You talk about immersion, but where did the party get a horse and cart from? Would they have it on the beach at the start? Do we need to watch the horse and cart move all the time? Will monsters be able to kill the horse?

There is a limit to how much realism can be put into game, and much of what you're asking for would add tedium for no gameplay benefit.

I will say that Solasta did have its own way of discouraging "20 goblin shields" by having strict weight limits and long travel - with random encounters - between places. But even that game did acknowledge players urge to maximize their income by collecting everything not nailed down, and they introduced a "Scavengers" faction which picks up all the loot you didn't take from dungeons you cleared and giving you the option to take any interesting bits you want from what was collected, and take a portion of the rest as income. That obviously won't work for BG 3, but the fact that they felt the need to put in that system acknowledges players will want to take it all.


Originally Posted by Ikke
I can understand why it can be fun to hoard stuff and maximize the amount of gold on your savings account. It is basic human psychology. But on the other hand, dealing with limitations, serious setbacks and difficult choices can also be very rewarding in a computer game. The bigger the losses you sometimes have to take (for example: not being able to drag heavy valuables out of a dungeon before it collapses), the more rewarding your successes will feel. That's also basic human psychology, I think.

I have fond memories of playing XCOM games in iron man mode, where party members would remain dead if they died and you had no option to load a saved game to bring them back to life. Those setbacks and defeats really hurt, but made the victory in the end all the sweeter, and the experience more memorable.

It does not make a lick of sense to bring up XCOM in this context, that's a completely different type of game with a completely different type of mindset behind it.

Not everyone likes playing one-shot, die-and-restart-from-the-beginning games. The Rogue-like/Rogue-lite genre tends to have short simple gameplay loop. Not a 100+ hour long game. Not a lot of people want to get to hour 89, have a party wipe and need to go back to the start, seeing 89 hours of the same content again just to get back to the 11 hours of new stuff.

Last edited by Stabbey; 10/05/22 12:46 PM. Reason: added quote
Joined: Aug 2014
Ikke Online Happy OP
member
OP Online Happy
member
Joined: Aug 2014
Originally Posted by Stabbey
Have you heard of the idea of "Anti-Frustration Features"? Lots of games do little things which are not realistic, but are done because this is a freaking game and games are supposed to be fun. The less tedious busywork you have to do which adds no interest in a game, the better.
If it was not possible to grab so much stuff, there also would not be a need to send stuff to camp. I think the game could even be more fun to play if you had to make choices based on your ability to carry things with you.

Originally Posted by Stabbey
I would like at least 5 people in the party as well, but that's not likely to happen. What is your suggestion for "make them sensible in the game world"?
It is not about the actual number, its is about having a reasonable explanation for the limit. For example, in a space sim the planetary landing craft could have a capacity of 4, meaning that only 4 at a time can go adventuring. It is up to Larian to think of something for BG3, but it should not be impossible. Maybe there are only four teleportation crystals available? And everyone agrees that teleportation crystals are indispensible for the exploration party?


Originally Posted by Stabbey
Quote
14) Short rests are very strange: how can you fully heal by standing still for less than a second?
Game. Time doesn't pass in the game. Do you want to wait around a real-time hour for the rest to complete? I doubt it.
Of course not. It had not realised yet that time does not pass in the game. But then I don´t understand the need to have two different kinds of resting, with one of them having cinematics and the other not.

Originally Posted by Stabbey
Quote
16) When zoomed out, the camera is able to show a lot of the game world. Much more than the playable characters could see in reality. It would be nice to have a first person view during exploration, and switch to overhead view during combat. And maybe faraway landscapes and objects could be made more hazy? Also the mini map shows info on charcters that are not in the line of sight.

That will still mean needing to add a lot more stuff to the map for those "hazy, faraway landscapes", or expanding the map sizes to accamodate the far-away stuff. Maps can only be of a certain size to avoid causing performance problems. Lag isn't very immersive either.

In general, too much is shown. Reducing visual information should not lead to lag. On the contrary. When you are hidden, the game demonstrates it can determine lines of sight. Perhaps a solution could be to just not display things to which the active character has no line of sight, and increase blur/haze for faraway objects.

Originally Posted by Stabbey
Quote
17) Given the various personalities of companions, and the urgency of the tadpole problem, it does not make sense for them to hang around the campsite doing nothing while a party of 4 goes exploring. Can they be performing other tasks somehow? Hunting and foraging perhaps? Or be recovering from wounds?

Not a terrible idea to make use of other companions for foraging and such, but what wounds? Even if wounds were a thing - which they aren't, not even in the tabletop - there's no guarantee that they'll have wounds?
Well, people needing time to recover could be an incentive to rotate people in your party. But if there is no flow of time...

Originally Posted by Stabbey
Quote
I think two immersion problems could be solved in a single stroke: Have the party travel with a cart that is pulled by horses for example. The cart can carry all equipment and it allows a camp to be set up at safe locations. Of course the cart can not enter dungeons, so it will not be possible to loot 20 goblin shields from a dungeon without some serious running back and forth. But I don't think I would miss that. It is entirely reasonable to loot only gold and jewels from a dungeon.
Stil, a more permanent camp would probably be needed for the inactive characters to reside.

You talk about immersion, but where did the party get a horse and cart from? Would they have it on the beach at the start? Do we need to watch the horse and cart move all the time? Will monsters be able to kill the horse?
You would need to earn your bagage train through a quest. Before you find a bag or more serious means of transporting goods you can not carry so much. I think that would actually improve gameplay. Guarding the horse and cart could be a task for those that are not allowed in the party, possible solving that other immersion problem.

Originally Posted by Stabbey
There is a limit to how much realism can be put into game, and much of what you're asking for would add tedium for no gameplay benefit.
I am just offering some suggestions from the top of my head. The game developers should be much better at coming up with solutions that increase immersion and do not hamper other aspects of gameplay.

Last edited by Ikke; 10/05/22 01:22 PM.
Joined: Aug 2014
Ikke Online Happy OP
member
OP Online Happy
member
Joined: Aug 2014
Originally Posted by Stabbey
It does not make a lick of sense to bring up XCOM in this context, that's a completely different type of game with a completely different type of mindset behind it.

Not everyone likes playing one-shot, die-and-restart-from-the-beginning games. The Rogue-like/Rogue-lite genre tends to have short simple gameplay loop. Not a 100+ hour long game. Not a lot of people want to get to hour 89, have a party wipe and need to go back to the start, seeing 89 hours of the same content again just to get back to the 11 hours of new stuff.

I brought it up as an example of how hurting the player can improve enjoyment of a game. If everything is easily achieved, your sense of accomplishment will suffer. In terms of BG3, maybe not being able to own every magical weapon there is will increase your satisfaction of having the one magical weapon that you were able to obtain and keep.

Joined: May 2019
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: May 2019
+1 to the overall point of immersion taking a beating in BG3 (and I would agree with most of the OP's points). I would also extend this issue to lack of consistency and accuracy relative to decades of FR lore and history, and to how the environment in the game looks and feels.

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
People nowdays don't seem play RPGs to get immersed in the world. RPGs have turned into what I call Arcade MMORPGs : Loot, fight, loot, quick travel, quick quest, loot, quick travel, fight, loot, quick rest, quick dialogue, fight etc etc...meanwhile world immersion, UI design and slow gradual story pacing goes down the drain.
I've been told to try out this modern <old school> indie RPG game called Atom RPG/Trudograd: Really loving it and getting this Fallout 2 vibe. Its actually quite brilliant.

[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]
[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]
[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]

Last edited by mr_planescapist; 10/05/22 03:50 PM.
Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

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