Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
So when I heard Larian was doing BG3 I was mostly happy, but I did have one concern, Larian's Divinity original sin series tends to umm how to put this... confuse "special snow flake" with "intreasting". it's not. characters with "super special magical afflications" (the ENTIRE batch of NPCs we have seem to fall into this) honestly aren't all that intreasting, and represent a, TBH, bit of a failure in the subtle world building that so often was seen in the past Baulder's Gate games.

Let's compare and contrast some of the characters from BG3 with characters you encounter early in BG1, (I use BG1 because most of your first companions in BG2 are carry overs)


BG1:
Imoen - she's basicly your kid sister, turns out she's a bhaalspawn sure, although I'm convinced that wasn't the original plan in BG1, but beyond that special thing that links her to your char, she's mostly pretty ordinary. It mostly serves as kind of a world building tool as it allows you to discuss your past with her etc.

Jahira & Kalheed - their big "secret" is simply that they are members of the Harpers. this serves as more of a world building tool, as it allows you to learn a little bit about the harpers etc. it also does occasionally work as a plothook.

The two Zhents- their name escaped me, but you learned a little bit about the Zhentarium etc through this, and saw their conflict with the harpers.

Misc: him and Dynaheir actually provide some information of rashimein, people mostly remember Misc for Boo etc, but you learn a lot about a far away land outside the game from them.

Basicly most of the companions serve as something of a gateway to learning more about the realms. they root the game firmly in the realms.


Meanwhile let's look at the companions from BG3:

Shadowheart: Cleric with a special secret, I dunno it yet but it looks like she might have some magical effect on her,

Astaron: He's a Vampire. there's a potential for a bit more later as it could create a fun conflict with a BG vampire's coven or something, and expand on that but.. yeah not getting much of a feel for that.

Gale: A waterhaveian mage...... who has to eat magic items because of course he does!

Wyll: I've not yet learned much about him but I FULLY expect he's not just some guy and will have something unuseal about him.


honestly, when you overload on this, it's less intreasting
















Joined: Oct 2020
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Oct 2020
You just said "There's a vampire and a mage that consumes artifacts and i don't know anything about anyone else, but i think they're bad."

How is that even slightly a fair assessment?

Joined: Oct 2020
W
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
W
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Deadstage
You just said "There's a vampire and a mage that consumes artifacts and i don't know anything about anyone else, but i think they're bad."

How is that even slightly a fair assessment?


How is that even a slightly fair assessment of what he said?

I generally agree, OP, that when you overdose on these unique traits that are supposed to draw interest you end up losing interest instead. If everyone is special, than no one is.

Joined: Oct 2020
Z
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Z
Joined: Oct 2020
I don't mind them being special. But in the old BGs you had this sense of naive and heroic world of magic and monsters, it was more fantastic and friendly. Even the bad guys were friendly and funny. Tiax, Xzar and Montaron, and of course Edwin. When it comes to BG3 it's missing the spirit of being a BG game. To me it's more like Dragon Age than BG.

The current NPCs are very mature, dark and complicated, which cool and fun and amazing. But I feel like I play Dragon Age. Both BG and Dragon Age are amazing games, but one is not the other. And the NPCs in those games were the window to the world.

Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
I don't mind mature dark and complicated, but I feel that a game where everyone is basicly a special snowflake, isn't, to be blunt, all that mature and complicated. It rather comes off as well... like some kids fan fiction.

Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
If you think this is bad, you should read some of the dialogue from the half demon character in DIVOS2... or the bad fanfic sex scenes in the final act. Ugh.

Was hoping being rooted in the Realms would have them reign it in a bit but the early access stuff so far shows no sign of it.

Last edited by Deemer; 09/10/20 03:51 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
yeah I've seen how larian tends to be that way, I was likewise hoping that it was more a stylistic choice they where going for and that they could write more...... grounded characters

Joined: Oct 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Zress
I don't mind them being special. But in the old BGs you had this sense of naive and heroic world of magic and monsters, it was more fantastic and friendly. Even the bad guys were friendly and funny. Tiax, Xzar and Montaron, and of course Edwin. When it comes to BG3 it's missing the spirit of being a BG game. To me it's more like Dragon Age than BG.

The current NPCs are very mature, dark and complicated, which cool and fun and amazing. But I feel like I play Dragon Age. Both BG and Dragon Age are amazing games, but one is not the other. And the NPCs in those games were the window to the world.


What i love about this post is that other people will say the exact opposite of this poster. How Baldur's gate is dark fantasy and humour has no place.

It is literally impossible for lairian to create a game that "feels" like Baldur's gate because the community can't even agree on what makes a true Baldur's gate game and what Baldur's gate I & II really had for content.

Given this is true should they really listen to fans about something as nebulas as X "feels" like Baldur's gate or Y doesn't "feel" like Baldur's gate? Because no matter what they do hundreds of "Real" Baldur's gate fans will riot over the "betrayal" of the franchise.

Joined: Feb 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Feb 2020
Originally Posted by Gothfather
Originally Posted by Zress
I don't mind them being special. But in the old BGs you had this sense of naive and heroic world of magic and monsters, it was more fantastic and friendly. Even the bad guys were friendly and funny. Tiax, Xzar and Montaron, and of course Edwin. When it comes to BG3 it's missing the spirit of being a BG game. To me it's more like Dragon Age than BG.

The current NPCs are very mature, dark and complicated, which cool and fun and amazing. But I feel like I play Dragon Age. Both BG and Dragon Age are amazing games, but one is not the other. And the NPCs in those games were the window to the world.


What i love about this post is that other people will say the exact opposite of this poster. How Baldur's gate is dark fantasy and humour has no place.

It is literally impossible for lairian to create a game that "feels" like Baldur's gate because the community can't even agree on what makes a true Baldur's gate game and what Baldur's gate I & II really had for content.

Given this is true should they really listen to fans about something as nebulas as X "feels" like Baldur's gate or Y doesn't "feel" like Baldur's gate? Because no matter what they do hundreds of "Real" Baldur's gate fans will riot over the "betrayal" of the franchise.


Very spot on smile

Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Gothfather
Originally Posted by Zress
I don't mind them being special. But in the old BGs you had this sense of naive and heroic world of magic and monsters, it was more fantastic and friendly. Even the bad guys were friendly and funny. Tiax, Xzar and Montaron, and of course Edwin. When it comes to BG3 it's missing the spirit of being a BG game. To me it's more like Dragon Age than BG.

The current NPCs are very mature, dark and complicated, which cool and fun and amazing. But I feel like I play Dragon Age. Both BG and Dragon Age are amazing games, but one is not the other. And the NPCs in those games were the window to the world.


What i love about this post is that other people will say the exact opposite of this poster. How Baldur's gate is dark fantasy and humour has no place.

It is literally impossible for lairian to create a game that "feels" like Baldur's gate because the community can't even agree on what makes a true Baldur's gate game and what Baldur's gate I & II really had for content.

Given this is true should they really listen to fans about something as nebulas as X "feels" like Baldur's gate or Y doesn't "feel" like Baldur's gate? Because no matter what they do hundreds of "Real" Baldur's gate fans will riot over the "betrayal" of the franchise.


I think anyone who thinks BG was "all serious all the time" needs to be smacked up side the head by a miniature giant space Hamster.


Joined: Oct 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Oct 2020
Keep in mind that each of these NPCs will be playable characters with their own twists on the main plot; in that context, making them "special snowflakes" to one degree or another makes some sense. These are all potential main characters. Maybe it would be better if they weren't, but, well, Divinity 2 is what landed Larian this gig, you know?

That said, some "lesser" NPC companions' could be a great addition. comparatively simple, likable, and broad archetypes. A paladin who just likes to help people. A rogue who just likes money. A barbarian who just likes hitting things with an axe. Characters that aren't going to be driving the plot, but also aren't going to competing for the spotlight. Hell, if anything, that reflects actual D&D much better than every character having a deep, complex backstory. Some people love playing those kinds of characters; some are just there for the combat, or to try out a silly voice, or just get a sense of satisfaction from a nice, simple power fantasy.

I mean, Minsc and Boo were never destined to be the main characters of the original games, but that didn't stop them from being the most beloved ranger and hamster team in the world.

Joined: Oct 2020
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Oct 2020
Larian has confirmed that for now they wanted to put out the more evil type companions. They said that normally people want to play the Good guys, and in most games that is the only route to satisfactory results or interesting gameplay. But in BG3 they wanted to allow more different playstyles and hence the first characters you see in EA will more likely lead you to those different playstyles to see that "hey, this works as well". Good guy companions will be coming to the game at some point.

This info is from the twitch.tv chat with Swen. Link is in his twitter.

Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
I kinda agree... I mean, I haven't seen everything from the current companions, but you have some good hack writing in place to make such an assortment of "DM's nightmare" characters work. My go to example for somthing like working always is Planescape Torment, where it did work quite well, also because the overarching themes of the world and story did support it. Not sure if it can in this game yet.

Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
OP Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by pasisti
Larian has confirmed that for now they wanted to put out the more evil type companions. They said that normally people want to play the Good guys, and in most games that is the only route to satisfactory results or interesting gameplay. But in BG3 they wanted to allow more different playstyles and hence the first characters you see in EA will more likely lead you to those different playstyles to see that "hey, this works as well". Good guy companions will be coming to the game at some point.

This info is from the twitch.tv chat with Swen. Link is in his twitter.


keep in mind, I'm not complaining about the companions being "bad" I have ZERO issues with bad guy companions, Edwin and Viconia are, just for example, absolutely BELOVED characters, but rather how heavy the special status of the NPCs seems to be, Kavode's statement makes sense and it never occured to me, and if that combined with the fact that we'll get more companions down the road who aren't quite as "special" then it could be good. (this mind you raises the concern of party size. even in BG2 with it's 6 man party size I had some companions who didn't get much attention) we'll see of course, this is early access and Larian would benifit from our imput even if it's to point out some holes in their writing.




Joined: Oct 2020
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Oct 2020
It's very obvious that Larian is setting up characters to encourage intraparty conflict. It's far from the normal approach to rpgs, but in theory it should result in more dynamic relationships than you see in most crpgs.

Really though, I feel like this is runoff from an issue I see spreading across most forms of media. Everybody seems to want to cash in on the success of Game of Thornes, so stories become dark and edgy with untrustworthy backstabbing characters. Rather than politics Larian went with party relationships.

Joined: Aug 2015
S
member
Offline
member
S
Joined: Aug 2015
I also hope they include more down to earth and normal characters. The current ensemble is a bit on the weird side, and I hope we don't end up with a cadre of extremely weird adventurers. My favorite character from Pillars of Eternity for instance is Edér - by a mile! He's a lovable farmboy who got caught up in something bigger than himself and he's not quite sure what to make of it all - he's just doing his best. He's got so much personality, but is at the same time very much just a normal guy.

It's almost as if they don't believe themselves capable of writing a normal and interesting character. They need a "gimmick" to be interesting, which is just kind of sad.

Joined: Oct 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2020
OP maybe didn't manage to convey it that well but he's right in that all the NPCs available so far are pretty over the top.

Lae'zel: Stands out by being a super arrogant, vicious Gith. Also has the super secret thing that the Githyanki dragon riders are looking for, apparently.

Shadowheart: Super emo, secretive Sharran. Is very secret and has a secret and also carries around a mysterious, secret artifact. Also, secrets!

Astarion: Super edgy secret vampire guy who is so obviously an evil vampire it's kinda ridiculous. Obsessed with death, wants to drink your blood and gets real moody when you didn't let him have cursed books of Necromancy.

Gael: Haven't talked to the guy much but by all accounts he eats magical items, has a super important quest that requires him to have a resurrection contingency, and is also a bomb. Fun guy though

Wyll: Swashbuckling Warlock good guy who is obviously spying on *someone* for his infernal mistress. And that's just what I got from the initial meeting with him, my 4-man party isn't big enough for 2 warlocks

Joined: Oct 2020
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Slapstick
I also hope they include more down to earth and normal characters. The current ensemble is a bit on the weird side, and I hope we don't end up with a cadre of extremely weird adventurers. My favorite character from Pillars of Eternity for instance is Edér - by a mile! He's a lovable farmboy who got caught up in something bigger than himself and he's not quite sure what to make of it all - he's just doing his best. He's got so much personality, but is at the same time very much just a normal guy.

It's almost as if they don't believe themselves capable of writing a normal and interesting character. They need a "gimmick" to be interesting, which is just kind of sad.


100% agree on this one.

Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
I would bet it's due to the fact that they're building the origins game style and they want a special story line for those characters that you can experience.
Also, I don't think it's that bad as long as we're limiting our party size.

Joined: Aug 2015
S
member
Offline
member
S
Joined: Aug 2015
Originally Posted by Alon Binyamin
I would bet it's due to the fact that they're building the origins game style and they want a special story line for those characters that you can experience.
Also, I don't think it's that bad as long as we're limiting our party size.


But it sort of runs counter to the D&D experience for me. The thing that makes you special is the adventure you're on NOW. You don't START OUT super-duper special. You don't show up at adventure day 1 with a long intricate and complicated story of friends and enemies made, battles won and lost, etc. That's... that's the story you're about to set out on

Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

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