Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 33 of 94 1 2 31 32 33 34 35 93 94
Joined: Feb 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Feb 2020
Originally Posted by Waeress
Hello! BG fan here. I am here to tell you that what I saw was a Baldur's Gate game.
I have wanted more Baldur's Gate since 2001 and I am very happy that I will at last be able to get that.


Then tell me what was baldurs gate on what you saw. What besides the name?

Joined: Nov 2019
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Nov 2019
Originally Posted by ThreeL
Originally Posted by Waeress
Hello! BG fan here. I am here to tell you that what I saw was a Baldur's Gate game.
I have wanted more Baldur's Gate since 2001 and I am very happy that I will at last be able to get that.


Then tell me what was baldurs gate on what you saw. What besides the name?


A dark story set on the Sword Coast around Baldur's Gate that I know will revolve around an Illithid invasion. Even more so there were mentions of the hells even early in the game and I am sure that our travels will take us there again.
A perfect evolution of gameplay mechanics to capture the DnD rules.
Volo
Harpers

And this is with only the very little information that has been released so far.

Joined: Feb 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Feb 2020
Originally Posted by Waeress
Originally Posted by ThreeL
Originally Posted by Waeress
Hello! BG fan here. I am here to tell you that what I saw was a Baldur's Gate game.
I have wanted more Baldur's Gate since 2001 and I am very happy that I will at last be able to get that.


Then tell me what was baldurs gate on what you saw. What besides the name?


A dark story set on the Sword Coast around Baldur's Gate that I know will revolve around an Illithid invasion. Even more so there were mentions of the hells even early in the game and I am sure that our travels will take us there again.
A perfect evolution of gameplay mechanics to capture the DnD rules.
Volo
Harpers

And this is with only the very little information that has been released so far.


So an idea is for you already baldurs gate enough? You dont mention anything about the gameplay.

Volo was such an iconic character...

Capturing the dnd rules with Level 1 rangers making firearrows on their own and especially one entire group first, than the other? Thats not at all D&D. Its their marketing that it is, but what makes it D&D? That theyre using dices or the name of spells?

Last edited by ThreeL; 03/03/20 07:30 PM.
Joined: Nov 2019
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Nov 2019
Originally Posted by ThreeL
Originally Posted by Waeress
Originally Posted by ThreeL
Originally Posted by Waeress
Hello! BG fan here. I am here to tell you that what I saw was a Baldur's Gate game.
I have wanted more Baldur's Gate since 2001 and I am very happy that I will at last be able to get that.


Then tell me what was baldurs gate on what you saw. What besides the name?


A dark story set on the Sword Coast around Baldur's Gate that I know will revolve around an Illithid invasion. Even more so there were mentions of the hells even early in the game and I am sure that our travels will take us there again.
A perfect evolution of gameplay mechanics to capture the DnD rules.
Volo
Harpers

And this is with only the very little information that has been released so far.


So an idea is for you already baldurs gate enough? You dont mention anything about the gameplay.

Volo was such an iconic character...

Capturing the dnd rules with Level 1 rangers making firearrows on their own and especially one entire group first, than the other? Thats not at all D&D. Its their marketing that it is, but what makes it D&D? That theyre using dices or the name of spells?


Yes, I say that the gameplay seems to be a perfect evolution. To me it looked much more like a DnD computer game than BG1 & 2 ever did (I replay them every 2-3 years becuase they are great games in many ways, but not all, and I am a huge fan).
Volo is an iconic character, in my opinion and in others. I mean he is up there with Elminster.

That your opinion is that it is nothing Baldur's Gate have nothing to do with my opinion. My best friend that have loved BG1&2 as long as I have, we played them a lot when they were released, are also of the opinion that this is BG3. So, you are clearly voicing your opinion and not some fact that all BG fans agrees with.

Joined: Mar 2019
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2019
Originally Posted by ThreeL
Originally Posted by Waeress
Hello! BG fan here. I am here to tell you that what I saw was a Baldur's Gate game.
I have wanted more Baldur's Gate since 2001 and I am very happy that I will at last be able to get that.


Then tell me what was baldurs gate on what you saw. What besides the name?


Maybe it is or isn't more BG. But DOS was more D&D than BG ever was, even without things like "magic missile" and "Vorpal swords" or whatever, Combining the unparalleled D&D type game of DOS with actual D&D rules is only sweeter.

Joined: May 2019
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: May 2019
Originally Posted by Emrikol
Originally Posted by ThreeL
Originally Posted by Waeress
Hello! BG fan here. I am here to tell you that what I saw was a Baldur's Gate game.
I have wanted more Baldur's Gate since 2001 and I am very happy that I will at last be able to get that.


Then tell me what was baldurs gate on what you saw. What besides the name?


Maybe it is or isn't more BG. But DOS was more D&D than BG ever was, even without things like "magic missile" and "Vorpal swords" or whatever, Combining the unparalleled D&D type game of DOS with actual D&D rules is only sweeter.

Saying D:OS was more D&D than BG is just plain silly and only serves to hurt your credibility. Heck even Swen himself would never try to make such a preposterous claim.

Joined: Feb 2020
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Feb 2020
Originally Posted by Raze
Originally Posted by Nyxery
Tech department seems to be doing not so good - they are after all reusing old engine

The game engine has been, and is being, significantly updated (moreso than from Dragon Commander to D:OS or D:OS to D:OS 2).


Originally Posted by Nyxery
and why the demo resembles DOS so much

The graphics for the character models, environment, etc, are all improved, the camera system has been updated (some of which is in progress).


Originally Posted by Nyxery
technical issues like non-functional saves (whic I'm guessing they broke while trying to cram in the dnd ruleset)

With significant overhauls of the engine, things like the save system have to be redone, as well. It isn't just the in-game mechanics that changed. The same was the case with the previous games, though it was mostly functional in the prototype builds when D:OS and D:OS 2 were first shown, in or leading into the respective Kickstarters.


Originally Posted by Nyxery
And since DOS it seems even that creativity is gone and all they do now is TB

Since D:OS all we've done is RPGs, as well. If that's an argument for RTwP, it's an argument to be creative with the genre, as well.


Originally Posted by Nyxery
both DOS and DOS2 had balance issues

And Divine Divinity's end game...


Originally Posted by Nyxery
Also they like to harp on missing attacks in RPGs and how bad it is

The only people I've seen harping on that are those who think any concern over missing too much means the enviable destruction of the entire system.
A single miss is slower in turn based, but real time combat can be slow, tedious and/or annoying with too much missing, as well.


Ok, I'm just concerned if the old engine will be ok. DOS2 had some issues, in particular save file corruption, I hope that will be fixed.

When I said "resembles DOS" I didn't mean art assets. I meant gameplay. Sure you now have your 1 action and 1 bonus action, but in general it felt and played just like DOS2.

Saves bit was just odd to me - I thought it'd be a priority to have it working for demo.

Creativity wise - yes and no. I wouldn't mind seeing something completely new from Larian. And I don't agree that sticking to RPG but trying something new instead of TB for gameplay is not creative. Making yet another TB RPG that follows pretty much same formula (TB, interactive environment for combat purposes, surface effect like oil, etc.) though is definitely not creative. What's worse it sets a trend for Larian of making everything they do since DOS into this template.

Yes, DOS, DOS2, and everything before. It doesn't really counter my point, only proves it. Larian gameplay always lacked polish and balance, as if their design dpt doesn't care or just is not capable of it.

Well, tbh I thrown in misses just for a good measure. Misses are fine in RPGs.

Joined: Mar 2019
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2019
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by Emrikol
Originally Posted by ThreeL
Originally Posted by Waeress
Hello! BG fan here. I am here to tell you that what I saw was a Baldur's Gate game.
I have wanted more Baldur's Gate since 2001 and I am very happy that I will at last be able to get that.


Then tell me what was baldurs gate on what you saw. What besides the name?


Maybe it is or isn't more BG. But DOS was more D&D than BG ever was, even without things like "magic missile" and "Vorpal swords" or whatever, Combining the unparalleled D&D type game of DOS with actual D&D rules is only sweeter.

Saying D:OS was more D&D than BG is just plain silly and only serves to hurt your credibility. Heck even Swen himself would never try to make such a preposterous claim.


BG1 & 2 had the races, the items, the spells, etc,of D&D. So, obviously, it's more in line with D&D that way. But RTwP? Sorry. That's not D&D. Unable to act outside the box (e.g push someone off a cliff)? That's not D&D. DOS2 replicates the table top system better than any game has before it. I think I recall from another thread that you stated you started playing RPGs in the 90s; if so, it makes perfect sense. BG is your baseline if you were born roughly 1984 to 1990. For those of us who grew up on table top D&D, using the BG games as a baseline for D&D is ridiculous.

Joined: Jul 2014
D
member
Offline
member
D
Joined: Jul 2014
Originally Posted by Emrikol
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by Emrikol
Originally Posted by ThreeL

Then tell me what was baldurs gate on what you saw. What besides the name?


Maybe it is or isn't more BG. But DOS was more D&D than BG ever was, even without things like "magic missile" and "Vorpal swords" or whatever, Combining the unparalleled D&D type game of DOS with actual D&D rules is only sweeter.

Saying D:OS was more D&D than BG is just plain silly and only serves to hurt your credibility. Heck even Swen himself would never try to make such a preposterous claim.


BG1 & 2 had the races, the items, the spells, etc,of D&D. So, obviously, it's more in line with D&D that way. But RTwP? Sorry. That's not D&D.

So, Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 aren't D&D? Of course they are. They calculate rounds in the background while providing a more immersive real-time experience.

A PC video game isn't a table-top game. And it isn't being played with a human DM. It's an adapted experience and isn't beholden exclusively to table-top format because it literally isn't a table-top format.

And "Baldur's Gate 3" is a statement that a game is the third entry in specifically the Baldur's Gate series, and not just general D&D. The Baldur's Gate series is a specific presentation of D&D-based gameplay. There are responsibilities to live up to the Baldur's Gate series name, and Larian aren't showing that they're living up to those responsibilities.

Joined: Mar 2019
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2019
Originally Posted by Delicieuxz
So, Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 aren't D&D?


Never said that.

Originally Posted by Delicieuxz
it literally isn't a table-top format?


Of course it isn't. But, being turn based and having the ability to use your environment makes it more D&D-like than can a game with RTwP and little to no environmental interaction.

Originally Posted by Delicieuxz
There are responsibilities to live up to the Baldur's Gate series name, and Larian aren't showing that they're living up to those responsibilities.


Which responsibilities? Be specific.

Joined: Jul 2014
D
member
Offline
member
D
Joined: Jul 2014
Originally Posted by Emrikol

Which responsibilities? Be specific.

To deliver on the expectations carried by the Baldur's Gate series name with an experience that is relateable to the series, and which resembles it rather than DOS2.

To be faithful to the brand and not use it as a cash-grab to promote the Divinity games, as Swen said he hopes "BG3" will do.


If Black Isle didn't think it right to call their cancelled 'Baldur's Gate 3' game Baldur's Gate 3 due to the differences it had with BG1 and BG2, despite that it would have still carried on the gameplay of BG1 and BG2, it's all the much more not right for Larian to call their D&D DOS formula game that bears no similarities with the Baldur's Gate series a "Baldur's Gate 3".

https://twitter.com/jesawyer/status/1234228179906134016
Quote
it's been a long time since i worked on The Black Hound, but i want to make clear (again) that i never had any intention of that game being called Baldur's Gate III or Baldur's Gate (whatever).

[Interplay] put that title on it after well over a year and a half of dev had been done.

they did it for contractual issues they had (they were only allowed to publish D&D games with baldur's gate or icewind dale in the title). i, and many others on the team, expressed concern over tacking the name onto a game that was made to be its own thing, not an IE/BG game.

the only connection it had was with IWD (maralie fiddlebender was a companion). it had no connection to BG at all.

in the end it didn't really matter, but i think it's important to note that the team's intention was never to use the BG name.

Joined: Mar 2019
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2019
Originally Posted by Delicieuxz
Originally Posted by Emrikol

Which responsibilities? Be specific.

To deliver on the expectations carried by the Baldur's Gate series name with an experience that is relateable to the series, and which resembles it rather than DOS2.


Well, see there you have it. When I hear "Baldur's Gate", I think D&D (because that is what it is/was supposed to be based on). And to me, what Larian has done with DOS2 is more true to D&D than BG, even without the trappings of races, classes, items, etc. in D&D. Yes, maybe they could have called it "Faerun Adventures" or some such. But, I don't think the Baldur's Gate name evokes in everyone what you think it does. For some people, it is that specific game; for others, it just says D&D.

As an aside, I wonder if the FF7 crowd is in an uproar over SquareEnix's decision to go RTwP with a classis game that was TB in the original.

Joined: Jul 2014
D
member
Offline
member
D
Joined: Jul 2014
Originally Posted by Emrikol
Originally Posted by Delicieuxz
Originally Posted by Emrikol

Which responsibilities? Be specific.

To deliver on the expectations carried by the Baldur's Gate series name with an experience that is relateable to the series, and which resembles it rather than DOS2.


Well, see there you have it. When I hear "Baldur's Gate", I think D&D (because that is what it is/was supposed to be based on). And to me, what Larian has done with DOS2 is more true to D&D than BG, even without the trappings of races, classes, items, etc. in D&D. Yes, maybe they could have called it "Faerun Adventures" or some such. But, I don't think the Baldur's Gate name evokes in everyone what you think it does. For some people, it is that specific game; for others, it just says D&D.

Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 aren't just supposed to be based on D&D - they are based on D&D and calculate rounds in the background of the real-time experience.

It is evident that the Baldur's Gate series name evokes the expectation of something different than a DOS game in plenty enough of the series' fans.

People for whom it merely evokes the idea of D&D obviously do not care much about the Baldur's Gate series and so their opinion on the matter isn't that important, since they don't care either way and aren't big fans of the Baldur's Gate series.

Quote
As an aside, I wonder if the FF7 crowd is in an uproar over SquareEnix's decision to go RTwP with a classis game that was TB in the original.

That's not a game I've been following but I'm sure there has been some uproar over it. When I heard about it I thought that it's an unfortunate change, myself. I still do.

But the theme of Final Fantasy games is that each one is a self-contained story in its own world. When a FF is a sequel to another specific game in the series, it uses a different titling, like Final Fantasy X-2. The FFVII remake isn't replacing the original game and isn't claiming to be its sequel. It is a re-imagining of it.


Joined: May 2019
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: May 2019
Originally Posted by Emrikol
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by Emrikol
Maybe it is or isn't more BG. But DOS was more D&D than BG ever was, even without things like "magic missile" and "Vorpal swords" or whatever, Combining the unparalleled D&D type game of DOS with actual D&D rules is only sweeter.

Saying D:OS was more D&D than BG is just plain silly and only serves to hurt your credibility. Heck even Swen himself would never try to make such a preposterous claim.


BG1 & 2 had the races, the items, the spells, etc,of D&D. So, obviously, it's more in line with D&D that way. But RTwP? Sorry. That's not D&D. Unable to act outside the box (e.g push someone off a cliff)? That's not D&D. DOS2 replicates the table top system better than any game has before it. I think I recall from another thread that you stated you started playing RPGs in the 90s; if so, it makes perfect sense. BG is your baseline if you were born roughly 1984 to 1990. For those of us who grew up on table top D&D, using the BG games as a baseline for D&D is ridiculous.

Silly stuff.
And btw, I've been playing tabletop D&D for 35 years.

Joined: Mar 2019
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2019
We're of similar age then and experience then. What makes DOS2 so un-D&D-like, aside from the obvious lack of the lore, classes, etc. Or is that it? Does TB and more freedom to improvise and be creative not matter?

I know that in certain obvious ways BG1 & 2 are more D&D, as I have stated; but that despite that, DOS2 plays more like a D&D session than BG ever could (understandably, with it being a 20 year old game).

Joined: May 2019
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: May 2019
That's because your mind is focused on the game being very similar to a tabletop D&D session. My mind, however, is looking at these games NOT in any way as a D&D tabletop session but as a D&D video game. That's the key point. I don't want a tabletop simulator. I don't want the game to be anything like tabletop. If I want to play tabletop, I can go do that. In BG3, just as with BG1&2, want a VIDEO game. A single player video game. No table. No other players. Just me, playing a video game.

Joined: Mar 2019
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2019
Fair enough. That's you and that's some others. That's not me and it's not some others. D&D is at the heart of all RPGs. While there are likely some developers who did not want their video game to be a faithful version of the table top experience, Larian does not seem to be one of them. And I would expect WotC isn't either. Were the creators of the original BG trying to get away from the table top experience? I highly doubt it. They just did the best rendition of it to date that they could.

Joined: Mar 2020
Banned
Offline
Banned
Joined: Mar 2020
Originally Posted by Emrikol
Fair enough. That's you and that's some others. That's not me and it's not some others. D&D is at the heart of all RPGs. While there are likely some developers who did not want their video game to be a faithful version of the table top experience, Larian does not seem to be one of them. And I would expect WotC isn't either. Were the creators of the original BG trying to get away from the table top experience? I highly doubt it. They just did the best rendition of it to date that they could.

and BG is at the heart of all computer RPGs.

Joined: Mar 2020
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Mar 2020
Originally Posted by kanisatha
That's because your mind is focused on the game being very similar to a tabletop D&D session. My mind, however, is looking at these games NOT in any way as a D&D tabletop session but as a D&D video game. That's the key point. I don't want a tabletop simulator. I don't want the game to be anything like tabletop. If I want to play tabletop, I can go do that. In BG3, just as with BG1&2, want a VIDEO game. A single player video game. No table. No other players. Just me, playing a video game.


Then what are you doing wasting your time here? This game is going to be as close as we can get to tabletop gaming. You will be able to play it by yourself or with friends.

Joined: Mar 2019
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2019
Originally Posted by kungfukappa
Originally Posted by Emrikol
Fair enough. That's you and that's some others. That's not me and it's not some others. D&D is at the heart of all RPGs. While there are likely some developers who did not want their video game to be a faithful version of the table top experience, Larian does not seem to be one of them. And I would expect WotC isn't either. Were the creators of the original BG trying to get away from the table top experience? I highly doubt it. They just did the best rendition of it to date that they could.

and BG is at the heart of all computer RPGs.


Oh how mistaken you are. RPG video games didn't start 1998 you know? Nor did it reach a climax then either.

Page 33 of 94 1 2 31 32 33 34 35 93 94

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