Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 7 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
My opinion is that Baldur's Gate 3, at least the EA, is not as broken as Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 and has far fewer exploits.

Joined: Nov 2020
E
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
E
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by alice_ashpool
My opinion is that Baldur's Gate 3, at least the EA, is not as broken as Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 and has far fewer exploits.

Can you elaborate further? Be interesting to hear your reasoning.

My own opinion couldn’t be any further from your own but it’s always good to have a conversation with opposing views.

Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Originally Posted by Etruscan
Originally Posted by alice_ashpool
My opinion is that Baldur's Gate 3, at least the EA, is not as broken as Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 and has far fewer exploits.

Can you elaborate further? Be interesting to hear your reasoning.

My own opinion couldn’t be any further from your own but it’s always good to have a conversation with opposing views.

There are less exploit in BG3 because everything is intended, so it's not exploits... it's just broken mechanics.
Alice is right !

Joined: Oct 2017
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2017
It's true, it's reasonable to say there are a lot of exploits and broken stuff in the original games. Especially when taking into consideration what each person considers to be "exploit" and "broken". Simple examples: Edwin, kensai mage, kensai thief, assassin being able to do 500+ backstab damage repeatedly during times stop, triple Bolt of Glory spell triggers that would kill Demogorgon in a couple rounds, completely invulnerable to absolutely everything blade that can make 9 attacks per round each dealing 30+ damage (which also cannot miss if during time stop), etc. In fact, just the fact that thief can "quaff potion of invisibility" and backstab every round is broken enough for many.

This is true whether it's vanilla BG or BG modded with Spell Revisions, Item Revisions, SCS, improved enemies, etc. Vanilla BG just have more "low-level" exploits that are mostly just oversights and bugs, which are fixed by fixpacks and other mods.

The cool thing about these "exploits" in the BG games is that, some (or most) are rather advanced and can be quite obscure, you can only find out by playing the game a lot, understanding how things work (or by reading guides) and being clever about it. They make you feel like you're smart and that you've just discovered something really cool. These exploits can be absurd, but in a good kinda way; you're being smart with the mechanics. It's also not quite to the point that you can completely disregard all other factors in combat.

Another thing, is that enemies can do many of these things to you too, but the devs were just forgiving about it when they made the game. There's also a reason why it doesn't feel quite so frustrating when enemies use these mechanics against you, and that's because there are countermeasures to everything. Even the most broken/absurd thing can be completely negated by something else. You just need to understand what counters what, and be smart. Here's where mods like improved enemies and SCS come it, I suppose.

And then there's the kind of exploits that blatantly sit there begging you to use, and trivialize encounters while allowing you to disregard most if not all other mechanics. You don't feel "wow I'm smart" when using these. You don't feel good when winning encounters using these.

My point is, even among broken and absurd mechanics, there's still the good kind and the bad kind.

Last edited by Try2Handing; 07/07/21 10:02 AM.

"We make our choices and take what comes and the rest is void."
Joined: Nov 2020
E
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
E
Joined: Nov 2020
Fair enough, seems I misunderstood Alice’s post then, if that’s the case.

Joined: Mar 2021
Location: Austin, TX
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Mar 2021
Location: Austin, TX
Originally Posted by Try2Handing
And then there's the kind of exploits that blatantly sit there begging you to use, and trivialize encounters while allowing you to disregard most if not all other mechanics. You don't feel "wow I'm smart" when using these. You don't feel good when winning encounters using these.

You should tell that to the people who roll up to an MP game and try to impress us all by using these exploits. They think they are super smart. They are legit shocked when no-one is impressed and we are like "yeah we don't do that because its lame".

Last edited by Blackheifer; 07/07/21 01:29 PM.

Blackheifer
Joined: Oct 2020
T
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
T
Joined: Oct 2020
While there were tons of in-game-mechanic exploits for BG2 that required a decent understanding of game knowledge - i.e. Thiefs using Mislead to backstab on every hit, Mages using Project Image Combos to caste an infinite amount of spells, there were some legit, in your face game mechanic exploits too in BG1/BG2.

I will say in the original games the exploit felt more like bugs than "deliberately design to be exploited" like many of Larian's. But to Alice's point, it was pretty abusable. Having replayed BG2 far more recently, most of my examples will be based on that game. Some of the big ones that stand out in my mind:


The Original Dialogue Bug
BG2 actually has a very similar "kill them while in dialogue bug" as BG3. Essentially, for any non-aggressive enemies, or ones you can catch fast enough prior to them turning hostile, you can pause, click on them to engage in dialogue, and then switch to attacking them. The NPC will stay neutral and wait for the dialogue to initiate while your entire party hammers at them till death. Sometimes this has the potential to wear off, but you can refresh stall duration by repeating the pause, click to talk and switch to attack again. This works in a good bunch of fights, with the most notable victims being the Dragons in SoA


The Original Barrels (Thief Traps)
While the original games didn't have explosive barrels, they did have thieves trap (and spell traps, though those are less terrible) - which also lets you bypass/cheese any fight, arguably with less effort (since you at least need to find and accumulate barrels. Traps just come back with rest, which is unlimited). While it is a least a class mechanic, it's not that much better since thieves are basically a requirement in BG2. Everything is vulnerable to traps. For a game where dice determines everything, traps always hits, and always damages (no saves, AC doesn't matter).

NPCs have no counters to these, just like Barrels in BG3 - for any non-immediately hostile enemies, you can literally set these traps right beside them while they'd just stand and watch as you plan their demise. In the cases you can't (i.e. dialogue auto-initiates, then fight), you can still set them up pretty easily short distant away and draw them in. Traps also don't go away - you can rest until you've set the max number of traps.

Points to BG2 for limiting the max number of traps to 7 on a map (although that basically kills anything), but deductions for doubling down on this in TOB by introducing the Spike Traps (basically traps on roids). At least in DOS2, non-Death Fog barrels become much less useful in the late game due to numbers bloat. In TOB you can one shot almost any boss/anything with Spike Traps (first time I fought Demogorgon I accidentally one-shot him with Spike Traps. I say "almost" because some bosses have multi-phases or transformations that make it less of a one-shot).


The Original Free Disengage
There is no such thing as opportunity attacks in BG2 - so you can freely disengage from melee any time you want. Even when chasing, enemies will almost never land a hit due to the clunky and slow attack animations. This exploit is extremely abuseable because the AI never does it to you.

In the most basic case exploit of this, you can use this to withdraw any hurt or losing combatants, and then reform via body blocking with your healthy tanks (who can also disengage freely) and force them to switch targets - making your HP more effective than the enemies, since you are essentially focus firing while they are not.

In the worst case of exploitation, you can essentially win many fights with melee enemies where you're outgunned by playing Starcraft with Pause. Have one party member draw aggro and run them in circles while the rest is "micro-ed" aways, shooting and casting as needed. Can be a bit of work, but skill requirement is limited thanks to pause.

Some bosses / high-level enemies do have very fast animations and can somewhat avoid the chase, but not fully (with some work you'll still derp them out). Obviously enemy casters / archers aren't as affected by this.


The Run Mid Fight and Rest Exploit
Can't get through a Lich's layers of buffs? You're out of spell? No need to stand and fight. Just run out of range (most easily via an area transition) and rest (best when you can run to an inn keeper). This dispels all the enemy buffs via duration, and you can just come back and kill them (most caster's contingencies only fire off once). If they have a second contingency (i.e. at 50% hp), just rinse and repeat. Alternatively, you can just do this because you're low on spells/hp. The primary victim of this is the poor Lich guarding Daystar in the City Gate district. However, this works on all the dragons (run out of their lair), Kangaxx (especially the 1st form which relies on buffs), and various others.


Clone Spells Cloned Expendable Items
This one sits more within the "in-game-mechanic" cheese, but it's too broken and obvious not to mention. Essentially, whenever you use a clone spell (Project Image, Simulacrum), the clone duplicates the quick slot items you have too. This means insanely powerful but expendable items, like the Protection from Magic scroll (2x only in BG2 - auto win against casters), can be used infinitely via this cheese. Even if you don't use it for something like the Protection from Magic scroll, just using this with something like a Rod of Resurrection (if casted on an alive party member, it's a instant, ranged full heal), is insanely powerful since now it doesn't consume any charges.

This trick was extra interesting in the original SoA, because you were level-capped to only be able to cast level 8 spells, but get access to level 9 scrolls (so you can cast a few via scrolls per game). With this trick, your casters could basically cast an unlimited amount of level 9 spells. It's less of an exploit in ToB since you'll get your own level 9 spells, but ToB also introduces Wish, which you can use to do this exploit an unlimited amount of times without rest.

Although the trick technically needs your mages to be able to cast level 7 spells, this isn't really the case thanks to Vhailor's Helm, which is available to you as soon as you get out of Irenicus's dungeon (prologue) and get enough money. While not usable by every class, you can still do the Rod of Resurrection or Protection from Magic scroll with it since those items can be used universally.

Last edited by Topgoon; 07/07/21 06:35 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
I was waiting for someone to bring up the fake talk exploit from BG:2 in the other thread

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
You can also add to this list off-screening enemies with fog rods. Since you can stack fog you can literally make an entire screen AOE. Even beholders have issues to resist it apparently. Never used it since balduran shieldd reflects beholder's rays and they just suicide on you but there's that.
It's worth mentioning since it's the closest to actual exploits together with the sloppy BG2 AI + being able to disengage mid fight and basically spam all buffs in the game each fight in most areas.



When it comes to mages being 100% broken and OP they do come with game knowledge though so I would call it way more legit.

I'm really curious how BG3 will work on higher levels though. For now we are still on low levels encounters so rather than BG2 the direct comparison would be BG1 actually. And when comparing low levels adventures of BG1 to BG3 I think there's no comparison and BG3 just straight up did it 100% better. From all aspects apart from party banters.
Goblins in BG3 are quite straightforward especially with the meatgrinder in the goblin's camp where they clearly just CAN'T win regardless of their numbers but that's what goblins always were in BG. Not speaking about the straight up retarded BOW meta of BG1.

Due to turn base vs RTWP it makes it a bit akward to spend so much time on trash -tier level encounters. Based on ALL of what was said above I would just say combat speed shoudld be improved in BG3 ( how exactly was alreaddy mentioned indefinite amount of times) and this will just make BG3 outclass older BG combats in all aspects.


Last comment regarding exploits: I think in BG3 they just made those exploits stand out way more since there is less of them ^^


Alt+ left click in the inventory on an item while the camp stash is opened transfers the item there. Make it a reality.
Joined: Jan 2021
member
Offline
member
Joined: Jan 2021
I've thought a lot about this. It is unfair to compare the two. They're entirely different games and only have a shared name to connect them. They're as foreign to each other as Fallout 2 (my favorite game of all time) and Fallout 3 & 4. Only the name and a few basic concepts are there to unite them. Take that thin connection out of the equation and you'll see how vastly different they are. BG 2 was made for a different player in a different time. It was intended for those who wished to suffer the long path, think through the puzzles and traps, and savor the sweet sensation of a hard fought victory. In essence, it was made for role players. BG3 is made for an era where the majority of players demand instant satisfaction, questlines that don't require thought, cheap and extremely trendy "romances", and insanely beautiful graphics. In that respect, it is perfectly fitting that it uses 5th edition rules, as they were dumbed down for the same audience (and for the same reasons). It's a fine game. It is fun to play. The graphics are very good. It is not, however, anything even remotely similar to Baldur's Gate 1 and 2. Enjoy it for what it is. If you still find yourself seeking an experience more in line with BG2, then perhaps try a different game like Pathfinder: Kingmaker.

I enjoy both, but I've been a part of this EA because I am excited to see what this game will eventually become. That being said, I have long since abandoned any hopes that it will ever be a true successor to Baldur's Gate 2.

Joined: Oct 2020
V
member
Offline
member
V
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by The_BlauerDragon
I've thought a lot about this. It is unfair to compare the two. They're entirely different games and only have a shared name to connect them. They're as foreign to each other as Fallout 2 (my favorite game of all time) and Fallout 3 & 4. Only the name and a few basic concepts are there to unite them. Take that thin connection out of the equation and you'll see how vastly different they are. BG 2 was made for a different player in a different time. It was intended for those who wished to suffer the long path, think through the puzzles and traps, and savor the sweet sensation of a hard fought victory. In essence, it was made for role players. BG3 is made for an era where the majority of players demand instant satisfaction, questlines that don't require thought, cheap and extremely trendy "romances", and insanely beautiful graphics. In that respect, it is perfectly fitting that it uses 5th edition rules, as they were dumbed down for the same audience (and for the same reasons). It's a fine game. It is fun to play. The graphics are very good. It is not, however, anything even remotely similar to Baldur's Gate 1 and 2. Enjoy it for what it is. If you still find yourself seeking an experience more in line with BG2, then perhaps try a different game like Pathfinder: Kingmaker.

I enjoy both, but I've been a part of this EA because I am excited to see what this game will eventually become. That being said, I have long since abandoned any hopes that it will ever be a true successor to Baldur's Gate 2.

I can not say I share the analogy. I played all Fallouts when they came out, and in 2008 I felt right at home. Sure, it changed from 2D to 3D, from 3rd to 1st person and combat was real-time instead of turn-based. Yet I immediately saw that this was a Fallout game, just from the look.
And then everywhere you saw references, characters and general lore connecting you to the world you played ten years before. Even character building was still very close or at least familiar to me. Plus Bethesda managed to add their own spin on things with environmental storytelling that felt like it was the same in the original games.

Now I played BG2 ten times or so know the location of every item special to me, can remember a lot of characters and the events unfolding, even some rather obscure things. Gameplay-wise I was never much invested in BG2, I mostly just fireballed and dual-wielded my way through it. However jumping into BG3 I never felt at home. I do see things that both games have in common, maybe even some parts of world-building, but this would also apply to Infinity and even more to PoE. I have not seen a character, item, location or even atmosphere that puts me back to Atkathla, or Irenicus' Dungeon, for example. I've seen a reference to space hamsters.
Gameplay mechanics also do not feel very similar or even inspired by BG, which does not mean one does it better, but I recently got Divinity 2 and here I immediately recognized the look, the combat and the gameplay mechanics.

Joined: Mar 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Mar 2020
I feel like the relation between Fallout 1-2 and 3 is very similar to the relation between BG1-2 and 3, at least from the development story view. I remember Fallout fans being very worried and Bethesda reassuring that the crew working on the game is full of Fallout fans and stuff. I think Baldur's Gate 3 will be very similar to Fallout 3 - Some very clear similarities to the source material, but a lot of the essence missing. I think it will be similar by the way it will be received as well - I think the general audience will like it while hardcore fans mostly won't, or at least not as much.


Larian's Biggest Oversight, what to do about it, and My personal review of BG3 EA
"74.85% of you stood with the Tieflings, and 25.15% of you sided with Minthara. Good outweighs evil, it seems."
Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
My favorite exploit in the originals was that you could arcane cast in full armor using hotkeys or potion-swapping.

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
OP Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Lets try to me relative here. For every BG2 exploit you've got about a dozen BG3 ones, some of which are completely broken mechanics lol.

Last edited by mr_planescapist; 08/07/21 01:53 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by mr_planescapist
Lets try to me relative here. For every BG2 exploit you've got about a dozen BG3 ones, some of which are completely broken mechanics lol.

It's easily the opposite. C# is just faster so it's easier to prevent certain exploits/bugs.


Alt+ left click in the inventory on an item while the camp stash is opened transfers the item there. Make it a reality.
Joined: Apr 2020
Location: Boston , MA
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Apr 2020
Location: Boston , MA
Originally Posted by VincentNZ
I can not say I share the analogy. I played all Fallouts when they came out, and in 2008 I felt right at home. Sure, it changed from 2D to 3D, from 3rd to 1st person and combat was real-time instead of turn-based. Yet I immediately saw that this was a Fallout game, just from the look.
And then everywhere you saw references, characters and general lore connecting you to the world you played ten years before. Even character building was still very close or at least familiar to me. Plus Bethesda managed to add their own spin on things with environmental storytelling that felt like it was the same in the original games.

Now I played BG2 ten times or so know the location of every item special to me, can remember a lot of characters and the events unfolding, even some rather obscure things. Gameplay-wise I was never much invested in BG2, I mostly just fireballed and dual-wielded my way through it. However jumping into BG3 I never felt at home. I do see things that both games have in common, maybe even some parts of world-building, but this would also apply to Infinity and even more to PoE. I have not seen a character, item, location or even atmosphere that puts me back to Atkathla, or Irenicus' Dungeon, for example. I've seen a reference to space hamsters.
Gameplay mechanics also do not feel very similar or even inspired by BG, which does not mean one does it better, but I recently got Divinity 2 and here I immediately recognized the look, the combat and the gameplay mechanics.

I completely agree. I think the Art design matters a lot. Bethesda somehow preserved the Art of original Fallouts (the font letters, font color, the UI is heavily inspired in the originals) where BG3 has no resemblance to the originals.

I felt the Fallouts were closer to the originals than BG3.

Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Is art design Larian or WotC's doing? Have you seen recent representations of the Forgotten Realms, and BG for that matter?

There might be another issue, BG:I had the more generic setting, whereas Athkatla was a more interesting and active part of the game in BG:II, so people coming from BG:II to BG:III which is set in Baldur's Gate might find it wanting

Feel free to tell me how I'm wrong about BG:I, I love it, but the last time I replayed it was to see how BGtutu worked.

Joined: Nov 2018
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Nov 2018
Originally Posted by virion
You can also add to this list off-screening enemies with fog rods. Since you can stack fog you can literally make an entire screen AOE. Even beholders have issues to resist it apparently. Never used it since balduran shieldd reflects beholder's rays and they just suicide on you but there's that.
It's worth mentioning since it's the closest to actual exploits together with the sloppy BG2 AI + being able to disengage mid fight and basically spam all buffs in the game each fight in most areas.



When it comes to mages being 100% broken and OP they do come with game knowledge though so I would call it way more legit.

I'm really curious how BG3 will work on higher levels though. For now we are still on low levels encounters so rather than BG2 the direct comparison would be BG1 actually. And when comparing low levels adventures of BG1 to BG3 I think there's no comparison and BG3 just straight up did it 100% better. From all aspects apart from party banters.

This! The immediate comparison in my mind was: In BG1 when I was stuck at these levels, it was incredibly boring and shallow and just did not feel fun for more most classes. Also found the wilderness incredibly boring and 'secrets' to find incredibly lacking, compared to BG2. BG3 has none of this. Just the way the system work--from the many ways to tackle the story, from the verticality of the battle space, how elements combine similar to D:OS, to having actual actions vs bonus action abilities to use--just makes BG3 superior to BG1 in every way. Also having incantations to use makes spellcasters infinitely more interesting to play.

Though, the comparison was about BG2. I don't think it's fair to compare this early. I disagree with the statement that BG3 doesn't feel like a Baldur's Gate game. I don't know if it's because a lot more was added to EA since this thread started, or if people weren't looking, but I see many nods to the previous Baldur's Gate games. I'm already confident BG3 will surpass my expectations and top BG1 and BG2 for me. BG2 was a beautiful, but flawed game. With player mods having to correct glaring issues, or make fights better. The summary of all the exploits above highlights in detail many reasons why, though I enjoyed BG2 a lot, I'm not holding it up on this amazing pedestal of mastery. That and the characters were pretty shallow as well. It's like I'm remembering a different game than some people.

I was a teen when I played BG2 and I still remember clearly my first reaction to BG2 all these years later. I didn't know the system that well and it was my first RTWP game. I died a lot in that first dungeon. Save scummed. Was hating just how bad it felt at times, but stubbornly changing up abilities and way I approached fights until I made it through. Which subsequently made me fall in love with the game, and get better at the game. And in a lot of ways shaped how I enjoy games and having to figure out that initial approach to how my character, abilities and companions all work together to tackle an encounter.

But what REALLY stuck with me over the years with BG2 wasn't thinking it was superb character or story writing, though the story I enjoyed well enough. It was things like being a Rogue and taking over the thieves guild, or a Druid and getting the Grove, etc. IT was how I could make some dark decision, and trying to become a vampire though that didn't work out. It was to exploration and discovery of areas and cool unique items that could work for my build. And I also agree with an earlier post that stated there were many ways to tackle story points that didn't feel linear to me at all in BG3. And if we were going to compare Act 1 BG3 with BG2, I'm pretty sure it would be more like all the stuff prior to branching off to discover the different class story arcs. Not much different IMO. I felt like I had just as much--if not more--agency to get lost, going around looking for secrets and actually finding to my delight that it would turn something up in BG3. The side quests are comparable. Though being in a city for BG2 was much more saturated with mini quests. But BG2 and BG3 are very similar in that at the start you are trying to solve 1 problem, and slowly learning that there is a much bigger story going on that you're getting yourself caught up in. In BG2 it was Imoen being taken and wanting to get her back, in BG3 it's not wanting to become a mindflayer and realizing there's actually a lot more going on with the tadpole and trying to get it removed. I'd even argue BG3 is more about you than BG2 was at the start of the game, but in neither case do you really have any idea of what's going on.

And as far as companions--thus far--goes. There's really no comparison. The voice acting is really good and having your companions actually be a living avatar moving around, reacting, and having facial expression is far superior to just voice alone, which to me wasn't that stellar in BG2. I hated Imoen. I didn't care about her. I didn't think the way she acted was compelling. Her reason for getting captured after the dungeon felt forced. But I remember thinking, oh good, I don't have to deal with her which naturally led to me puttig off the rescue as long as possible, discovering all the major quest arcs you can do prior. Minsc was a half-wit, without much going for him. Would he even stand out as much without Boo? Opinion of him was even worse in BG1. Jaheira was ok. I love Druids so I cared to be cool with her; even though she was always so judgemental. In contrast, even though some of the companions I started out with disliking in BG3, they felt more real and like breathing characters with their own issues. Esp when the game started hinting at deeper sides to them. If you know about Githyanki, you know why Lae'zel is the way she is. You start to see the facade for her own insecurities. LIke you literally get to experience her starting to change towards your character. All the others except for Shadowheart are pretty jovial to you from the start, but their layers peel back in other ways. I'm not going to sit here and do a psychoanalysis on all the companions. But there's an earlier comment I disagree with that said something along the lines of making them obnoxious doesn't give them depth. I kind feel like some of the nuances are kind of being missed. Is it perfection? No. But every single companion had something about them, that despite my first reaction to them, made me want to get to know them more. Story reveal and things they let slip, made me want to know the 'why' of it all.

Needless to say, I'm thoroughly enjoying BG3 early access. Was initially not going to touch it til full release but got bored waiting for a MMO to launch. And now I absolutely love the game, can't wait to see full release, which will add sooo much more to game. And not just ACt 2 and 3, but a lot of stuff withheld in from Act 1 apparently.

Joined: Apr 2020
Location: Boston , MA
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Apr 2020
Location: Boston , MA
Originally Posted by Sozz
Is art design Larian or WotC's doing? Have you seen recent representations of the Forgotten Realms, and BG for that matter?

There might be another issue, BG:I had the more generic setting, whereas Athkatla was a more interesting and active part of the game in BG:II, so people coming from BG:II to BG:III which is set in Baldur's Gate might find it wanting

Feel free to tell me how I'm wrong about BG:I, I love it, but the last time I replayed it was to see how BGtutu worked.

I meant the overall art of the game, not only the visuals (which you are correct BG1 is very simplistic). That includes the UI, hand drawn art sketchs for items, the fonts, the books, the little parchment that appears when you hover over NPCs. All this attention to details that defined how BG looked. There was an artistic coherence. I think Bethesda successfully incorporated many similar details of the original Fallouts. BG3 looks gamey (like DOS2), but I think they will work on that before releasing it.

Joined: Oct 2020
C
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
C
Joined: Oct 2020
If it wasn't called BG3 and set in a familiar area of the map, I wouldn't know it had anything to do with Baldur's Gate. The game feels nothing whatsoever like its predecessors. Different style, tone, theme and feel. It is the next Divinity game dressed up in a thin veneer of Baldur's Gate. I particularly dislike the way everything has to be so comedic and camp and weirdly anthromorphized. Why are the goblins likeable scamps who speak with a Cockney accent? Why are the ogres pure meme comic relief? Why is everything either adorable or funny? BG2 had isolated pockets of comic relief placed strategically throughout a mature, gritty setting. BG3 is just pure memes and campiness, everything is so low-brow. That worked fine in Divinity which was a game designed wholly around that style. It doesn't work here. The cartoonishness of everything makes me retch. Spam-eating food for healing? Shoving people thirty feet away? Throwing your boots at an enemy to deal damage? shoving your weapon into fire to deal fire damage? Walking on a puddle of poison deals damage? Ugh. It's a cartoon RPG and I'm so disappointed that they couldn't divest themselves of the unrealistic, cartoonish memefest that was Divinity.

Last edited by Clawfoot; 09/07/21 06:16 PM.
Page 7 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

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