Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 4 1 2 3 4
Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Can you please list all of the things that are properties of baldur's gate 1&2, why they are essential, and then show how this does not meet them and fails to be "baldur's gate"? People tend to do this appeal to the people "we all know what it was like, right? And this isn't, right? Yeah of course we do!" without actually doing a breakdown. It's a schizophrenic compilation of loosely associated elements that doesn't paint a good picture to anyone whos never played as to what the past or present actually are much less be able to have a rational comparison of the two sides.

Last edited by Orbax; 27/10/20 11:56 PM.

What is the problem you are solving? Does your proposed change solve the problem? Is your change feasible? What else will be affected by your change? Will your change impact revenue? Does your change align with the goals and strategies of the organizations (Larian, WotC)?
Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Tuco

Or they could address the fact that 1 cubic meter of water weights a ton (not hyperbole, I mean a literal TON) and that not even an ogre would be able to launch full barrels approaching that volume around up to meters away as if they were stones, let alone humans and co.

When "sticking to a degree of realism and common sense" and "fixing a potential exploit" can be solved in one shot. A proper matter of killing two birds with a stone.


There is a bit of abstraction when it comes to moving mechanics in video games, to be fair. You're not literally telekinetically hurling the barrel around with your mind. But a party of four people could probably find a way to move a barrel from point A to point B if they wanted to.

That said yah, at the very least the barrels shouldn't be able to be carried in your inventory. They should be way beyond your carry capacity.

Joined: Oct 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by robertthebard
I've seen "but ground effects aren't DnD"? I linked to a video from Outside Xtra for that one. Maybe you've heard of Merilwyn's Meatgrinder? Two ground effect spells in one encounter, in an actual PnP game, the absolute horror.


Ground effect spells are fine, noone complains about them. They are part of the rules and they use up resources, in this case spell slots. Cantrips, however, that deal damage and cause a ground effect, are not. It would be fine if it was either damage a target creature/destructble object or target the ground to create an effect, but not both.
It provides cantrips with a lot more power and versatility than they are supposed to have in the rules.

Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
Originally Posted by SaurianDruid

There is a bit of abstraction when it comes to moving mechanics in video games, to be fair..

Well, sure, but when toning down on the "abstraction" also contributes to shut down a recurring exploit that is annoying a lot of people, I'd call it a win win.
You have both a game that makes more sense and a system with far less abusable failure points.


Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. SAY NO TO THE TOILET CHAIN
Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Traycor
Originally Posted by robertthebard
The problem with confirmation bias is that you can find it everywhere you look. A lot of people came in wanting x, but expecting y, and what do you know, they found y. It's hilarious, and popcorn worthy to watch them circle the wagons on someone that disagrees, especially if it happens to be someone that never played y. So far I've been told that I can't cite story reasons for things that happen in the game, despite the game explaining to us that something is up. Talk to Volo in the Grove about the goblins if you want a precise example of what I'm talking about. Then there's "barrelmancy". Ok, it's funny to read, but this is something that people act like it never happened in games before Divinity. I'd imagine they'd be shocked to learn that it not only has, but predates Larian by years. Then there's the "rule lawyers" that don't understand the rules, but just know that Larian got it wrong.

Some things they do have wrong: Being able to change armor in combat springs to mind. Other things seem a whole lot more like "but I don't like that someone else can, or will do this, so it needs to be removed". Things like save scumming? They'll sing the praises of BG 1 and 2 all day long, but "conveniently" forget that that's where people that do save scum a lot learned it, or, at least, that's the original origin of the Save Scummer's Guild of Planet Earth motto, Trademark pending. "Save early, save often, save before and save after". Why did BioWare want people making all these saves? So that if things went sideways, they could reload, w/out losing a few hours of gametime in the process. This, like the "camp abuse" thing are things that are well within their control to eliminate, all they have to do is not do it, but that's not enough, it has to affect everyone, or they haven't lawyered their rules appropriately. They're not unique here, you can find them anywhere save mechanics are included in games.

I was multiple 10s of hours into gameplay before I figured out you could "Short Rest". I had been using food to heal up. Even after discovering it, I still tend to save it for an emergency. I've seen "but ground effects aren't DnD"? I linked to a video from Outside Xtra for that one. Maybe you've heard of Merilwyn's Meatgrinder? Two ground effect spells in one encounter, in an actual PnP game, the absolute horror. Someone was going on about dropping rocks on someone. Admittedly, I'm far from an expert in every encounter in the game, but I found one place where I could do that, well, two, but it was way more effective at the door to the temple than it was against the ogres... It didn't seem to do much to them at all, except make 'em mad, anyway.

Then there's the house rules argument. The problem, of course, is that WotC has to approve everything that gets into the game, and they are quite heavy handed when it comes to that, in case nobody's noticed all the PC changes they've been making to games, including things like Magic the Gathering. It's a talking point, I guess, but it ignores the fact that if it's in game, it's been approved.

Save scumming shouldn't bother people. That's a player's choice that doesn't affect the game itself (and is very Baldur's Gate). Not sure why you associate save scumming with barrelmancy. A 5e game should at least have the illusion of realism, and players carrying (and tossing) multiple large barrels that would weigh 100+ lbs each... that flies in the face of (fake) realism. You can't even pretend your characters can do that unless this is a cartoon. It removes all narrative weight from the story. Also, the game will by necessity be balanced for exploding barrels making them mandatory for proper play.

EDIT: Also, WotC likely spent most of their "approval" time going over the Forgotten Realms and how to handle their property. It is highly unlikely that someone from the small WotC staff is combing over every proposed rules change at Larian. The rules will only be evaluated by WotC at a broad level, and likely only a few times a year, if that.

You should check out the lawsuit that the Dragonlance creators have filed against WotC/Hasbro to see just how wrong you are about their creative control.

Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Arjuna
Baldur's Gate and Baldur's Gate 2 were two of the Most Popular and Widely played video games EVER,


Both of the games were successful for the times, but I think that it's worth remembering that Divinity Original Sin 2 was incredibly successful and Baldur's Gate 3 has already sold well over 1m and it's in EA and has been very well-received.
Meanwhile PoE sales weren't nearly as impressive and the expansion actually didn't do well at all to the point that the devs said that a sequel is unlikely. And PoE is sorta regarded as a spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate in a more traditional way.
Lets not overstate the importance of Baldur's Gate 1 and 2, Larians formula has been incredibly successful and shown to work too.
And the competition today is way higher than it was back when Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 came out too.

I agree with some of the OP's point, but I think that people kinda gotta stop acting as if just because it's different than Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 or the tabletop then it's bad and wrong.
In the end of the day it's a video game and certain things need to work a certain way to make it functional.
There wouldn't be much of a point for example to knock someone down if they could just get up easily and keep fighting, you'd just be wasting your own actions ( or the enemy ) and it'd turn more into just a dps race.
Whether it '' makes sense '' from an irl pov or not is another matter entirely.

Joined: Oct 2020
D
stranger
Offline
stranger
D
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Svalr
Originally Posted by Arjuna
Baldur's Gate and Baldur's Gate 2 were two of the Most Popular and Widely played video games EVER,


Both of the games were successful for the times, but I think that it's worth remembering that Divinity Original Sin 2 was incredibly successful and Baldur's Gate 3 has already sold well over 1m and it's in EA and has been very well-received.
Meanwhile PoE sales weren't nearly as impressive and the expansion actually didn't do well at all to the point that the devs said that a sequel is unlikely. And PoE is sorta regarded as a spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate in a more traditional way.
Lets not overstate the importance of Baldur's Gate 1 and 2, Larians formula has been incredibly successful and shown to work too.
And the competition today is way higher than it was back when Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 came out too.

I agree with some of the OP's point, but I think that people kinda gotta stop acting as if just because it's different than Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 or the tabletop then it's bad and wrong.
In the end of the day it's a video game and certain things need to work a certain way to make it functional.
There wouldn't be much of a point for example to knock someone down if they could just get up easily and keep fighting, you'd just be wasting your own actions ( or the enemy ) and it'd turn more into just a dps race.
Whether it '' makes sense '' from an irl pov or not is another matter entirely.



You silly hamster.

The one common thread between all the D&D RPGs ever licensed (with the exception of the action titles) is the offer of an authentic rules edition experience within a computer game. The reason why the 5e crowd is so upset is that Larian does not seem to be making a real effort to deliver that. And I too want to play BG3 under 5e rules, not D:OS 3 cleverly skinned as BG3.

Last edited by dmwyvern; 28/10/20 02:07 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
Z
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Z
Joined: Oct 2020
I think that BG3 gameplay has little to do with the game feeling less like a BG game. Yeah, I will agree about the surfaces and the goblins using exploding arrows and zombies drinking healing potions. But I think it's much deeper than that.

Look at the Fallout games for example. Obviously Fallout: New Vegas is totally different game from the first two, and yet, they captured the magic of Fallout and made a worthy sequel, even though game-wise the games are fundamentally different. The reason is that the world in Fallout is the main character. The way NPCs talk, their mannerism, the music, the atmosphere. The gameplay is only our vehicle to experience the world. But many players who played Fallout 1 and 2 felt back at home when they played New Vegas.

It's like Star Trek: TNG, DS9 and Voyager all speak the same language and make you believe everything really happens in the same universe, and suddenly you get Star Trek: Picard and like BG3 it might be a good product on its own right, but it is clearly not related to those who came before it.

In BG3 it's a different world, the NPCs have totally different mannerism, you will never hear something like: "Dang and bloody blast it! I swear I be thrice-damned the way ye yank me about from one place to the bloody next 'ere since we met! What does ye want now?" (Krogan Bloodaxe, BG2). It is much easier now to just write "Fuck yes" (Karlach, BG3) instead.

I am very disappointed so far.

Joined: May 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: May 2020
Originally Posted by robertthebard
You should check out the lawsuit that the Dragonlance creators have filed against WotC/Hasbro to see just how wrong you are about their creative control.

Interesting, just went and read about it. Sad to see, but I don't see the connection to creative control. WotC didn't move forward with a book contract they signed for some undisclosed reason, and the authors countersued for breach of contract. The rest looks like regular lawyer stuff.

If Larian was having to get every adjustment to the balance of this game pre-approved by WotC, then it would be impractical to even make the game. It would be such a slow and cumbersome process that you couldn't make a game under those conditions. Especially when you realize the tiny tiny team behind 5e.

Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
I read it too, it revolves heavily around creative control:

Defendant was embroiled in a series of embarrassing public disputes whereby its non-Dragonlance publications were excoriated for racism and sexism. Moreover, the company itself was vilified by well-publicized allegations of misogyny and racist hiring and employment practices by and with respect to artists and employees unrelated to Dragonlance. Plaintiff-Creators are informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that a decision was made jointly by Defendant and its parent company, Hasbro, Inc., to deflect any possible criticism or further public outcry regarding Defendant's other properties by effectively killing the Dragonlance deal


What is the problem you are solving? Does your proposed change solve the problem? Is your change feasible? What else will be affected by your change? Will your change impact revenue? Does your change align with the goals and strategies of the organizations (Larian, WotC)?
Joined: May 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: May 2020
Originally Posted by Orbax
I read it too, it revolves heavily around creative control:

Defendant was embroiled in a series of embarrassing public disputes whereby its non-Dragonlance publications were excoriated for racism and sexism. Moreover, the company itself was vilified by well-publicized allegations of misogyny and racist hiring and employment practices by and with respect to artists and employees unrelated to Dragonlance. Plaintiff-Creators are informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that a decision was made jointly by Defendant and its parent company, Hasbro, Inc., to deflect any possible criticism or further public outcry regarding Defendant's other properties by effectively killing the Dragonlance deal

But most of that is totally unrelated to Dragonlance, and then the authors speculate with no evidence that WotC killed the book deal based off PR concerns. Even if true... that has nothing to do with creative control. That's lawyers and public relations damage control.

Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
They were referencing the fact that the other properties of wotc - the ones that they had creative control over - were mismanaged to the point of public outcry for both internal operations and things like the vistani racism in curse of strahd. They removed the word exotic from tomb of annihilation because it is indicative of euro centric colonialism. With a crisis across multiple products, Weiss et al were claiming that due to their other racist, sexist, colonialist, etc... products that they nixed the deal in case their books might cause more trouble. You can't control authors, so you cancel the deal. You can approve or deny changes to a product that you are licensing out to a third party. Larian, picking up a book from 4 months ago, would have alignment in the game. This is a creative control issue that needs to be addressed as it was part of the reason they had an issue in the first place with "evil"/dark skin drow and "dumb" orcs.

So there's definitely an element of it in there. To what extent, who knows, but so far I've seen all the damage control things wotc did recently in the game DNA.

I don't really care, I just decided to add information for some reason lol.


What is the problem you are solving? Does your proposed change solve the problem? Is your change feasible? What else will be affected by your change? Will your change impact revenue? Does your change align with the goals and strategies of the organizations (Larian, WotC)?
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Originally Posted by dmwyvern

The one common thread between all the D&D RPGs ever licensed (with the exception of the action titles) is the offer of an authentic rules edition experience within a computer game. The reason why the 5e crowd is so upset is that Larian does not seem to be making a real effort to deliver that. And I too want to play BG3 under 5e rules, not D:OS 3 cleverly skinned as BG3.


We have to make up our minds... BG3 is just a random custom campaign with custom rules inspired by 5e in a custom world inspired by the FR...

It's absolutely not a consistent 5e game or an epic journey in a consistent world like BG were.

It's just another (cool) Larian game... and nothing more.

Last edited by Maximuuus; 28/10/20 04:08 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
C
CMF Offline
member
Offline
member
C
Joined: Oct 2020
Why can't it be not a pure 5e game and still be another cool Larian game but also epic journey like BG.

The journey is not the mechanics, the journey is the story and trials and tribulations to overcome and feel accomplished at the end.

This statement just shows an internal bias to find reason to not like bg3.

Last edited by CMF; 28/10/20 04:19 AM.
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Originally Posted by CMF
Why can't it be not a pure 5e game and still be another cool Larian game but also epic journey like BG.

The journey is not the mechanics, the journey is the story and trials and tribulations to overcome and feel accomplished at the end.

This statement just shows an internal bias to find reason to not like bg3.


You just forget that everything is a whole.
The mecanics and the gameplay are also a part of the journey and the story.

Last edited by Maximuuus; 28/10/20 04:18 AM.
Joined: Jan 2014
L
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
L
Joined: Jan 2014
HERE WE GO AGAIN BOYZ.

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGH!

5e is SUPER BALANCE AND UNSAILLABLE. IT HAS 40 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE PLUS MILLIONS OF USERS! HOW COULD LARIAN EVER COMPETE (or anyone for that matter).

IT IS THE PINNACLE OF HUMAN TABLETOP ACHIEVEMENT. BG1 AND 2 WERE THE BEST CRPGS eveeeeerrrRRR! (Not like Torment doesn't exist, Arcanum, Fallout 2 etc. )

I would think somewhere there that the script was given to WotC and liberties were asked and pre-approved.

... Or maybe the reason why they haven't replied to feedback is because WotC put down the banhammer and now they have to redo everything but animations!

Joined: May 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: May 2020
Originally Posted by Orbax
They were referencing the fact that the other properties of wotc - the ones that they had creative control over - were mismanaged to the point of public outcry for both internal operations and things like the vistani racism in curse of strahd. They removed the word exotic from tomb of annihilation because it is indicative of euro centric colonialism. With a crisis across multiple products, Weiss et al were claiming that due to their other racist, sexist, colonialist, etc... products that they nixed the deal in case their books might cause more trouble. You can't control authors, so you cancel the deal. You can approve or deny changes to a product that you are licensing out to a third party. Larian, picking up a book from 4 months ago, would have alignment in the game. This is a creative control issue that needs to be addressed as it was part of the reason they had an issue in the first place with "evil"/dark skin drow and "dumb" orcs.

So there's definitely an element of it in there. To what extent, who knows, but so far I've seen all the damage control things wotc did recently in the game DNA.

I don't really care, I just decided to add information for some reason lol.

Thanks for the reply. I've seen some of these issues WotC is dancing with. However, from what I can tell, WotC gave Weiss and Hickman 70 pages worth of changes, which they made and were approved. There were also extra changes after that they made that were approved though not required. It sounds like WotC had all the creative control they wanted on these novels.

This sounds more like a case where WotC thought for some reason that being associated with the authors would cause them more problems, so they backed out of the deal. They were scared of doing business with them (not having a creative dispute).

And I do think WotC has heavily approved the story Larian is employing (both creative and brand presentation) and discussed rules with them extensively. They probably gave them a document of guidelines to follow on rule changes. However, I don't think WotC wants Larian calling them every other day with a laundry list of rules changes they are experimenting with. Then calling back again on Wednesday for more changes. Then calling for the third time this week to get more approvals. That wouldn't make any sense. Larian has more freedom than that (which I think is obvious from the extensive and sweeping alterations to 5e).

Joined: Oct 2020
C
CMF Offline
member
Offline
member
C
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Originally Posted by CMF
Why can't it be not a pure 5e game and still be another cool Larian game but also epic journey like BG.

The journey is not the mechanics, the journey is the story and trials and tribulations to overcome and feel accomplished at the end.

This statement just shows an internal bias to find reason to not like bg3.


You just forget that everything is a whole.
The mecanics and the gameplay are the journey AND the story.



(Figured I should continue conversation here instead of editing my post after you replied to it for coherency sake as it is out of sequence)

The reason this game is called Baulder's Gate is the lore and location.

D&D player handbooks don't write the books and game stories, they create an interface for the players to interact with a world.

BG1&2 were not even 5e, so because this game isn't 5e is the invalidating feature to make it and BG game then inherently 1&2 were not BG games with that logic.

You could argue that the writing style is different and by that you feel a variance in story telling that makes it unfamiliar to you and offsetting. Like a different author picking up a book after the original stopped a series.

It could be some of the best writing ever, but because it is different that often puts fans off. Like changing an actor mid way in a movie or tv series, or as I said adapting a new writer to tell a story.

That does not make the story better or worse, but the allegiance and bonds that the previous fans had is not the same so they feel betrayed, which I think is what is impacting so many of you. Nostalgia and unfamiliarity in storytelling.

If you guys can get past that, then you may enjoy this, but no one is making you and that is your prerogative and own opinion. Just hope people understand that these are down to subjective opinions and not hardline rules that clearly make something good or bad. Because those are your standards, not a universal standard.

Joined: May 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: May 2020
Originally Posted by CMF
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Originally Posted by CMF
Why can't it be not a pure 5e game and still be another cool Larian game but also epic journey like BG.

The journey is not the mechanics, the journey is the story and trials and tribulations to overcome and feel accomplished at the end.

This statement just shows an internal bias to find reason to not like bg3.


You just forget that everything is a whole.
The mecanics and the gameplay are the journey AND the story.



(Figured I should continue conversation here instead of editing my post after you replied to it for coherency sake as it is out of sequence)

The reason this game is called Baulder's Gate is the lore and location.

D&D player handbooks don't write the books and game stories, they create an interface for the players to interact with a world.

BG1&2 were not even 5e, so because this game isn't 5e is the invalidating feature to make it and BG game then inherently 1&2 were not BG games with that logic.

You could argue that the writing style is different and by that you feel a variance in story telling that makes it unfamiliar to you and offsetting. Like a different author picking up a book after the original stopped a series.

It could be some of the best writing ever, but because it is different that often puts fans off. Like changing an actor mid way in a movie or tv series, or as I said adapting a new writer to tell a story.

That does not make the story better or worse, but the allegiance and bonds that the previous fans had is not the same so they feel betrayed, which I think is what is impacting so many of you. Nostalgia and unfamiliarity in storytelling.

If you guys can get past that, then you may enjoy this, but no one is making you and that is your prerogative and own opinion. Just hope people understand that these are down to subjective opinions and not hardline rules that clearly make something good or bad. Because those are your standards, not a universal standard.


BG1 & BG2 used the current 2e rules at the time. That's why people want BG3 to use the current 5e rules. It also helps that 5e is way more popular by orders of magnitude than all previous editions combined.

As for your tonal comparisons, think of it like a comic book. If you pick up an issue of Batman, you expect it to look, feel, and read like a Batman book no matter who wrote it and who the artist is. The franchise has a set tone. It's not unreasonable for people who have been playing BG games for 20 years (and to a lesser extent NWN for 3e) to expect a consistency in the tone and presentation of the brand.

Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
I didn't see that part about the changes, interesting! Yeah pure speculation at this point but I've read most of their books and they're a bit... Grittier? Than you'd normally associate with d&d. I mean it's a different realm than the forgotten realms and works very differently and just is that way. It just strikes me like it would if Lucasfilm was killing a deal with Timothy Zahn... Seems like a bad idea and an overreaction to something, I just can't fathom what spooked them.


What is the problem you are solving? Does your proposed change solve the problem? Is your change feasible? What else will be affected by your change? Will your change impact revenue? Does your change align with the goals and strategies of the organizations (Larian, WotC)?
Page 2 of 4 1 2 3 4

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