Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 4 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Joined: Mar 2019
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2019
Originally Posted by Exclusif
The whole point is to make it feel more like a BG game and less like a DOS game.


Yes, that is the point of the thread. But it is a dead argument if taken too far. BG3 will most certainly, and to a large extent, look, feel, and play more like a DOS game from 2017 than a BG game from 1998.

Joined: Mar 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Mar 2020
Originally Posted by Emrikol
Originally Posted by Exclusif
The whole point is to make it feel more like a BG game and less like a DOS game.


Yes, that is the point of the thread. But it is a dead argument if taken too far. BG3 will most certainly, and to a large extent, look, feel, and play more like a DOS game from 2017 than a BG game from 1998.


That’s why I said more like a BG game and less like DOS game, with the start point being what’s been shown thus far. I think everyone realizes that it won’t look and play like a 1998 game.

Joined: Mar 2019
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2019
Originally Posted by Exclusif
I think everyone realizes that it won’t look and play like a 1998 game.


I think most people realize it. I don't get the impression everyone does.

Originally Posted by Exclusif
That’s why I said more like a BG game and less like DOS game


There are two ways of interpreting this: (a) if the game is currently, for example, 90% DOS and 10% BG, it should be more like 80% DOS and 20%, or (b) if the game is currently 90% DOS and 10% BG, it should be more like 40% DOS and 60% BG. If the arguments being put forth are aiming for (b), then there's a problem.

Joined: Mar 2013
S
veteran
Offline
veteran
S
Joined: Mar 2013
The mask starts slipping doesnt it.
youd remove a feature that any DM would love to have at their disposal (so they dont have to houserule it) and that people would have praised BG1 to all high heavens if it had it back in the day, just because it isnt like the original.

Why not argue in favor of the removal of 3D graphics while youre at it.

Joined: Mar 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Mar 2020
Originally Posted by Emrikol
Originally Posted by Exclusif
I think everyone realizes that it won’t look and play like a 1998 game.


I think most people realize it. I don't get the impression everyone does.

Originally Posted by Exclusif
That’s why I said more like a BG game and less like DOS game


There are two ways of interpreting this: (a) if the game is currently, for example, 90% DOS and 10% BG, it should be more like 80% DOS and 20%, or (b) if the game is currently 90% DOS and 10% BG, it should be more like 40% DOS and 60% BG. If the arguments being put forth are aiming for (b), then there's a problem.


Well it’s a BG game so ideally it should be 100% BG and 0% DOS, but we all know that’s not going to happen at this point. The game is simply not going to make a complete U-turn. It’s not the vision they have, and just the fact that it’s built in a tweaked DOS engine makes that pretty much impossible.

We can only hope for the end product to feel more like BG and considerably less like DOS than I does today. And even if I’m concerned, what’s been shown has potential, and there’s still very much hope given early access and all.

Joined: Mar 2019
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2019
Originally Posted by Exclusif
Well it’s a BG game so ideally it should be 100% BG and 0% DOS


That's where the disagreement lies. It can still be a BG game while being heavily a DOS+ game (meaning like DOS2 but better graphics, more features). 100% BG is BG (archaic graphics and all)

Originally Posted by Exclusif
We can only hope for the end product to feel more like BG and considerably less like DOS than I does today


A few of you are hoping for that, yes. The rest of us are looking forward to an improved DOS type game with D&D lore and rules (and yes, a story and setting that connects the it with BG).

Joined: Mar 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Mar 2020
Quote
That's where the disagreement lies. It can still be a BG game while being heavily a DOS+ game (meaning like DOS2 but better graphics, more features). 100% BG is BG (archaic graphics and all)

No, if BG3 didn’t have the BG lore and a rewritten rule system it would be 100% The next DOS game. That doesn’t mean it’s not evolving some aspects like the graphics, but it would still very much be DOS. BG2 was 100% a BG game, yet it added a lot of dimensions to the franchise. A DOS2 with better graphics is not a BG game, it’s DOS3, at most.

Quote
A few of you are hoping for that, yes. The rest of us are looking forward to an improved DOS type game with D&D lore and rules (and yes, a story and setting that connects the it with BG).


It’s not a few, at all. Even on this Larian forum a lot of people seem to want a game that has its own identity. I think you’ll see in the final product that’s what the devs want as well.

Last edited by Exclusif; 18/03/20 05:52 PM.
Joined: Mar 2013
S
veteran
Offline
veteran
S
Joined: Mar 2013
you approach this discussion completley the wrong way and thats why arguing with you over this is pointless.

you know what a 100% BG game is?
BG1 or 2.

By the metrics that you apply. If a feature that is in DoS makes soemthing , percentually, more a DoS game.
Then having a "proper" Baldurs Gate game by your standards menas an Infinity engine game.

So why should anyone listen to you. What you are talking about is bloody ridiculous.

You do not allow any form of improvement.

Last edited by Sordak; 18/03/20 06:05 PM.
Joined: Mar 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Mar 2020
Originally Posted by Sordak
By the metrics that you apply. If a feature that is in DoS makes soemthing , percentually, more a DoS game.
Then having a "proper" Baldurs Gate game by your standards menas an Infinity engine game.

So why should anyone listen to you. What you are talking about is bloody ridiculous.

You do not allow any form of improvement.


If you read my comment again you’ll see that I said the exact opposite. I have no desire for another game in the infinity engine. I very much want a modern game that evolves the franchise in just the right ways without loosing its roots. And I wouldn’t be here if I didn’t think there’s still a chance we’ll get that. What’s been shown has potential; it just needs some course correcting.

Joined: Mar 2019
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2019
Originally Posted by Exclusif
A DOS2 with better graphics is not a BG game, it’s DOS3, at most.


Right. But DOS2 with better graphics and more features, and D&D lore and rules, is a BG game.

Originally Posted by Exclusif
Even on this Larian forum a lot of people seem to want a game that has its own identity. I think you’ll see in the final product that’s what the devs want as well.


A game with its own identity is one thing (and what needs to be done to achieve that is another). But futilely trying to recapture the identity of a game made twenty years ago is something else (especially from a company like Larian who has had great success with a different approach).

Joined: Mar 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Mar 2020
The fact that the game is 20 years old doesn’t mean anything. No one wants it to have the same graphics. Baldurs Gate is one of the most iconic computer RPG franchises of all time. It has a strong identity that can be captured, and has nothing to do with age. BG3 belongs to that franchise.

But I mean let’s be honest, you just want DOS3 so it really does become rather meaningless to discuss.

Joined: Mar 2019
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2019
Originally Posted by Exclusif
But I mean let’s be honest, you just want DOS3


I would like DOS3, sure. I like the idea of a combination of an improved DOS2 game with D&D rules and lore even better; which is exactly what we're getting.

Originally Posted by Exclusif
It has a strong identity that can be captured, and has nothing to do with age


Like a few who have come before you, I don't think you have any clear idea on what you're talking about.

Originally Posted by Exclusif
rather meaningless to discuss


Probably right, but for different reasons.




Joined: Jan 2014
E
Eli Offline
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
E
Joined: Jan 2014
Originally Posted by kyrthorsen

3) overusing surfaces interactions (water, grease, blood etd - same as DOS; please enough with DOS features),


I agree 100%. One of the most jarring features in D:OS games is barrels everywhere (completely out of place) and nonsensical surface interactions that transform the battlefield into a vfx mess. It can be fun for 1 or 2 combat encounters, but otherwise it's just a shallow and repetitive gimmick.

As long as they stick to the depth and complexity of the D&D ruleset, it'll be fine. This, of course, includes not altering the 'to hit' probability formula, because missing attacks isn't frustrating, it's a core aspect of D&D.

Joined: Sep 2016
R
stranger
Offline
stranger
R
Joined: Sep 2016
Originally Posted by Exclusif
The animations need to be reworked from the ground up. It’s a great opportunity to distinguish the game from DOS2. They’re too jolly, goofy and not at all in line with the more grounded tone of Baldurs Gate.

Everyone is talking about the jumping animation, which is one of the more obvious ones. The shooting animation is probably in most need of a change though. It’s just so silly. The arc isn’t needed when aiming at an enemy at these distances. If there’s a big obstacle in the way, like a fortress wall, by all means use the arc, otherwise remove it. And make the animation more forceful.

Also, the running animation seem to be a copy paste from DOS2 thus far. It’s swanky and just not a quality animation. It needs to change into a more realistic animation that has weight and determination to it.

Things like this really contribute to the overall tone of the game. Right now it doesn’t have its own voice. It just screams DOS.


I completely agree good sir.
Not saying that BG3 should copy BG2, but the tone must avoid DS2 since it is about another universe of things. I would think that different rules and stories - require different tone overall.

Joined: Mar 2019
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2019
Originally Posted by Eli
Originally Posted by kyrthorsen

3) overusing surfaces interactions (water, grease, blood etd - same as DOS; please enough with DOS features),


I agree 100%. One of the most jarring features in D:OS games is barrels everywhere (completely out of place) and nonsensical surface interactions that transform the battlefield into a vfx mess. It can be fun for 1 or 2 combat encounters, but otherwise it's just a shallow and repetitive gimmick.

As long as they stick to the depth and complexity of the D&D ruleset, it'll be fine. This, of course, includes not altering the 'to hit' probability formula, because missing attacks isn't frustrating, it's a core aspect of D&D.


Getting rid of barrels would be a step in the right direction. That alone might reduce the near ubiquitousness of the surface fires and such. How to balance keeping these features (a must IMO) and not letting them be a constant factor in every fight might not be easy, though. But that's what EA is for.

Joined: Jun 2019
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2019
The problem isn't the amount of barrels. The problem is that there seem to be to many poison, flammable and water barrels. They need to make some of the barrels be just barrels, barrels with loot in them or just plain barrel mimics.

Joined: Mar 2019
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2019
Originally Posted by Nobody_Special
The problem isn't the amount of barrels. The problem is that there seem to be to many poison, flammable and water barrels. They need to make some of the barrels be just barrels, barrels with loot in them or just plain barrel mimics.


Yes, that is the implication. Normal barrels? No problem.

Joined: Mar 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Mar 2020
Originally Posted by Nobody_Special
The problem isn't the amount of barrels. The problem is that there seem to be to many poison, flammable and water barrels. They need to make some of the barrels be just barrels, barrels with loot in them or just plain barrel mimics.

A group of DnD players walk into a bar
The bartender asks, “what’re you all in for?”

The group says “we’re hunting mimics”

The bartender laughed, the group laughed, the table laughed. They killed the table.


I do want the elemental effects, but the barrels need to be plain barrels. Or water barrels. Barrels usually hold ale or water. Not poisonous gas.

Joined: Mar 2019
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2019
Originally Posted by radko
the tone must avoid DS2 since it is about another universe of things. I would think that different rules and stories - require different tone overall.


"Tone" is vague and unhelpful, as are similar terms like "aesthetic," "feel," "mood," "atmosphere," etc.

If you just mean is that it shouldn't look anything like DOS2, that is not only unrealistic (because that would be wasting time, effort and money recreating a lot of resources that are still fairly fresh and ready to reused and improved upon), but also moot (because it will have a resemblance to DOS2).

Joined: Mar 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Mar 2020
Originally Posted by Emrikol
Originally Posted by Exclusif
But I mean let’s be honest, you just want DOS3


I would like DOS3, sure. I like the idea of a combination of an improved DOS2 game with D&D rules and lore even better; which is exactly what we're getting.

Originally Posted by Exclusif
It has a strong identity that can be captured, and has nothing to do with age


Like a few who have come before you, I don't think you have any clear idea on what you're talking about.

Originally Posted by Exclusif
rather meaningless to discuss


Probably right, but for different reasons.


Yes it is what we’re getting, which is what people take issue with, since it’s a Baldurs Gate game. You like it because in most regards it pretty much is DOS3, and since you’re getting what you want your mind shuts out any form of dynamic thinking and instead puts forth emotional statements presuming no one knows what their favorite franchise is about. Cmon man.

I have a crystal clear idea of what I’m talking about, just to put that to rest. Just like the countless of other people on the Internet that’ve typed up long, specific explanations of what the Baldurs Gate franchise is about and what they miss in BG3. At this point I’m truly just worn out by explaining it to Larianitos that keep failing to make any rational sense, and for mysterious reasons sees people’s opinions on a game as personal attacks on their own emotional well being.

Even if we had no clue what BG is about, it’s not our responsibility, but Larian’s, since they decided to make a direct sequel to a legendary game.

It is indeed meaningless to discuss with someone that’s already getting what they want. Or so it seems.

Page 4 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

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