Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Should have given this to Obsidian

You are comparing the second game to larians first. If you really want to compare do it with kingmaker, and go look back when they first went live with the game or EA.

Edit* here ill tell you cause it pissed me off, I picked that game up right when it went live, played maybe 30-40 hours and started finding out the build i wanted to do had missing feats. Stuff you was suppose to get was marked unavailable in the tree. An this continued for months, I came back periodically to check and see if the fixed the stuff broken. No, 30-40 hours wasted.

Anyway, i know they continued to break end game stuff on every patch. games not perfect nor is that company and I'd wait a year after release and check forums before purchase.

Edit2* I will give them this though, the guy that made turn based mod for the game. The company actually hired them or payed that guy and incorporated it into the game. I don't know the full story but it sounded pretty good.

Why would I compare it to the first Kingmaker game?? Wrath of the Righteous is also in Beta, and BG3 is Larians 3RD RPG GAME using basically the same system.
I just thought that is really cool having 6 party members, tons of playable NPCs and all these different variation of classes available. Something that BG3 should of a least have.
Its like EVERY SINGLE CRPGS out there feels MORE LIKE BALDURS GATE than BALDURS GATE 3. Its so incredibly ironic, I just dont understand why people dont get it. Especially Larian.

Wrath of the Righteous is the second game in the series and they already have a lot of the base game setup because of the previous one. This is Larians first attempt at a different game, different system, hence why its dumb to try and compare the two...

The rest of the junk you typed is just the same old stuff I've read a million times on these forums, could care less.

This is hilarious. BG3 is basically using the ENTIRETY of DOS2 system, just upgraded. EXACTLY like what PATHFINDER IS DOING. Are you this naive in believing the entire BG3 is game is a brand new system from the ground up?
Should I list the multitude of similar gameplay systems and UI BG3 is borrowing from DOS2? I can give you a couple DOZENS off the top of my head.
Just wow. Its dump to compare two games because its Larians first try in making an CRPG? ! ? Uuuuh, Larian has been making RPGs for over two decades now. Im sure they are well aware and highly skilled in programming GAME RPGs whatever the system. lol.

No why don't you list what is different between dos2 and bg3. Then compare, kingmaker to wrath. Wrath looks identical to kingmaker btw.

Edit* it's 4:30am, night mr.p

It’s running using the upgraded engine, but systems are different. Don’t confuse “feel” of the game, with actual systems running underneath. I think a complaint that BG3 feels more like D:OS3 then DND, is a fair one, but it is a different system, I implemented from ground up.

Think of how Bethesda adapted Fallout3, making it ElderScrolls like. It is not ES, and it adapts Fallout1&2 systems but it does feels like it. Then Obsidian took over and arguably made less changes from Fallout3->New Vegas, then there were from Elder Scrolls->Fallout3, and yet it felt like Fallout again. I am really quite impressed, how Larian took BG3 and DND 5e, and made it not feel like it. That’s an impressive feat, even if a misguided one IMO.

Speaking of which, I just need to get used to Larian being my new Bethesda, and BG3 being my Fallout3. Let’s just hope, that some where down the line, I will get my New Vegas.

I pre-ordered Pathfinder: Kingmaker, followed parts of the early access and made the largest wiki basically single-handed expecting the game let me get my BG-groove on. Then came the huge let down. Even when you looked past all the game-breaking bugs and borked mechanics that took Owlcat about a year to iron out, the story and writing was average at best, the characters flat tropes. I was reminded that for me, game evolution had not been frozen in time over two decades, and that I had changed too. I suspect a large majority of those who still hold BG2 on a pedestal like the pinnacle of RPGs, want to feel blown out of the water like they once were as naive, impressionable, youth. A much, much harder goal when jaded by time and by so much on offer.

To say every single CRPG feels more like the original BG-series (Baldur's Gate is more than that even before the inclusion of BG3), is a view that lacks even a semblance of nuance. At the best of times, only somewhat true if you completely disregard story, narration, characters and interaction (which was the true essence of BG-series in my mind), to focus on purely mechanical issues. 6 vs 4, and RTwP vs TB is flogging the proverbial dead horse. These things were simply mechanics of the original series, not the essence of it as you seem to think. Larian, for their stubborn belief that Larian cheese is "the one way", at least understands this clearly.

The reason Bioware went with RTwP over TB, which would've been the more faithful AD&D implementation, is believed to largely be the PACING. Rolling a lot of dice and moving individual characters with pause is quite time-consuming. Especially when you throw in lots of trash encounters with enemies designed to "cheat the system" (ie. Kobold Commandos that were counted as 1/2 HD mobs in terms of XP, but were significantly more dangerous) like Bioware did. In BG3 everything is painstakingly handcrafted. This only becomes more true with a larger party. So if you want, in your own words, something that feels MORE like Baldur's Gate, then you also want something that feels LESS like D&D in a very significant way (another issue I believe you harp on). Or you have to disregard a common criticism of combat already being too slow-paced with a smaller party.

Maybe Larian isn't the blind fools you take them for, but that it's you who refuse to see that Larian has to make compromises in a game based on tabletop mechanics yet reflect contemporary computer game design. Mind you, I'm guilty of thinking this too when it comes to much of the Larian cheese, but at least I like to think my criticisms are well-reasoned.

Pathfinder Kingmaker isn't a good example on game development, imo. I've played it at release and it was buggier than the BG3 EA. And it was not only the bugs, but also the missing features. One of the sorcerer bloodlines had a bonus to spell dc for spells that weren't even in the game, there was a spell focus feat (universal, I think it was called) for spells that weren't in the game either. What was the point of that, to give a player such trap choices at character creation? (There were even more trap choices considering how many class features were bugged.)

Wrath having so many classes, spells, feats etc. is not necessarily a positive thing, at least not for me. It sounds like the devs are repeating the same mistake as with PK.

Larian's forum loop.

OK, I totally agree to that.

As for Kingmaker:
I think that Kingmaker (in its current state, with most of the bugs fixed) is a better game than BG2.
The story is also better I think.
The story of BG2: Evil mage tortures you and kidnaps your girlfriend. You go after him to save her and kick his ass. When you reach him he escapes and you go after him again until you finally finish him in the final encounter.
I think Super Mario Brothers has the same story.
In BG2 it is very well done and that is fine, but the main story is neither complex or new.
Also, most of the content has nothing to do with the main story. You want to save your friend, but you have time to kill dragons, liches and cultists left and right.
The companions were also quite one dimensional. I cannot play BG without Minsc, but he is nothing but "the good hearted idiot who talks with his hamster".
And many game mechanics felt very unintuitive in BG1+2, though this was a problem of 2E, not that the dev messed with the rules.

In Kingmaker the main quest is with you throughout most of the game. And as baron/king it is also your job to solve problems in your country. OK, it feels strange when a guy in a tavern asks the king to bring some ingredients.
While companions are also not the most complex personalities ever, it is nice that their personal quests are spread over several acts across the whole game.

I admit that BG3 is not great in creating a DnD feeling, especially game mechanics wise (jumping, dipping, hight advantage and so on).
But the world building is fantastic. The critical path is rather short, but in almost every place you can discover you find something that is related to the main story. You find things related to the tadpole or illithids in general and possible ways to remove it.You find followers of the absolute or creatures who are connected to them or who suffer under them.
OK, I do not think the BG3 companions will win a prize for being the most interesting NPC in gaming history. From the ones we have I respect shadowheart most. She is a follower of an evil god, but she is very pragmatic and not a psycho killer.

Just to be sure: BG1+2 are great games and I enjoyed playing them.
I also admit that playing BG3 gives me a different feeling, but this is not bad by itself.
But BG1+2 were not perfect and games (just as everything else) keep on developing and I think some things have improved since then.
While I have my problems with some game mechanics and UI of BG3, regarding world building and reactivity it is already an absolute masterpiece.

Regarding companions I think the best one ever is Kreia from KotoR2.
In terms of games that evoke emotions, I think Nier Automata is my favourite so far.
Though it is my personal taste that I prefer games that question the the typical expectations of good vs evil over the classical heroic stuff.

Great post.

As I pointed out earlier, you're given a really solid reason to explore all directions in BG3. I get that some people have issues with certain aspects of this game, but as far as level design and story it's fairly solid.

I think that owlcat so far delivers what they they where advertising. The game feels like pathfinder (DnD) more than bg3 ever will (if larian doesn’t suddenly come to mind and kick Sven out)

I'd say you're given the opposite of solid reasons to explore. Look at the whole Zorru thing, Lae'zel gets the patrol's position straight up pointed to her on her map. Why. Just keep it vague in dialogue, highlight the whole area instead of giving me a pointer in gameplay, and suddenly i'm no longer going out of my way to get Karlach's quest.

Ethel and the east section are a bit better because one could naturally stumble on her and the brothers while trying to avoid the goblin ambush in the settlement, but the only real story reason to venture that way, other than playing an entirely trusting character who confides in random old women, is the whole Khaga situation, which isn't really all that overt.

As for the Underdark, i think that's just iffy level design. Why place the cool optional area (tower) in the easily accessible lower left corner, the map's exit (duergars and boat) in the middle, and the only piece of story-relevant content, which also gives a really compelling reason to explore the cool option area, in the upper parts (myconid village and 'good' mindflayer).

Obviously none of the above would be issues if it wasn't for the plot's underlying urgency, and hell if i tune that big detail out the exploration feels very BG-like especially in the Underdark. But since urgency is a thing, i believe that approach should be most defintely sacrificed for a cleaner and more streamlined level design, at least until we're straight up told the tadpoles won't act out at any moment.

For me, as someone who's entire love for RPGs began with BG1 in 1998, and who has replayed BG1&2 countless times, the RPGs I love to replay nowadays are PoE1, PoE2, and P:Km. I consider these three games to be the true heirs to the IE games and to the cRPG genre as a whole. I passionately love these games. And P:Km, for whatever flaws it had on release (and keeping in mind it was made by a very tiny group with a very tiny budget making their first ever game), it has now matured into a truly fantastic game (and its continuing sales success reflects this). I can't wait to get P:WotR into my hands (I'm not in the beta), as I am supremely confident it will be the most awesome cRPG I have ever played.

For all the issues I have with BG3, what we've see of the main plot, themes, and narrative drive is stronger, and more Obsidian-esque for me than many of its contemporaries.

I quite like BG3's Mask of the Betrayer-esque plot set-up (so far), and for me it has the potential to be more like an Obsidian-style story (rich in theme and narrative potential) than BG2, PF:KM and the few other games we've discussed in this thread.

PF:KM and BG2 are some of my favorite RPGs with fantastic gameplay, but for me their main plot has always merely been serviceable. This isn't to say the stories in either games are bad, just that these stories lack the deeper theme that Obsidian titles tend to explore. Most of BG2 and PF:KM's stories emotional core are tied to the companions, which is a very fine approach, but also very non-Obsidian approach to RPG storytelling.

I'm incredibly excited for WoTR (considering that I have 800+ hours in Kingmaker) - I think it'll be a fantastic RPG and it'll scratch the number crunching, munchkin optimizer side of me. I'd be delighted if the story this time around is much deeper and philosophical, but considering that they are limited by adapting a TTRPG module, I'm not holding my breath in that regard. Just for the love of god I hope they improve the enemy AI this time around.

lol, mate

1. If you approach the githyanki first you can go through the blighted village full of hostile goblins or jump across the river see the gnolls/hyenas and follow the bridge. This leads directly to the tollhouse and the Karlach quest. I specifically didn't say the game funnels you into every quest or every house. That would be bad design. Furthermore you go under the bridge leading to the githyanki, which leads you to the gnoll encounter, which might lead you to the zhentarim. The burning inn is on the way anyway. Then you get to the githyanki. I think you're getting confused between a suggestion of a story reason to explore and a divine mandate to do so

2. Yes you can meet Ethel on the road, even miss her in the camp. But if you do talk to her the first thing she does is give you a potion of GREATER healing for free and tells you she's a healer of sorts. I would say you would have to be actually UNtrusting not to take a chance given this is precisely what you have all agreed you need (Shadowheart doesn't trust her). Furthermore if you speak with her as Astarion, Shadowheart or Wyl, you are specifically alerted to the fact this is no ordinary woman. But again, no-one is saying you are forced to take any of these options, merely that the options exist

3. You are specifically pointed to this area. The mindflayer says he needs ingredients that can help you and the hobgoblin has mentioned the owner of the tower, an acquaintance of theirs, collects herbs/fungi. Even on the ground floor you can see this might be a suitable place to get the ingredients. Furthermore there are multiple ways to get to the UD, one of which lands you more or less outside the door.

It's perfectly fine to have an opinion on the urgency of the story, it is a subjective experience that no-one can take away from anyone after all. And not everyone will play the same character or speak to the same npcs after all. But they've set it up so if you rest twice, speak to the dead drow and the true soul (all of which should happen before you have to choose which direction to take) then the fact that you aren't changing is yet another thing to investigate. Also the fact that they have gated a lot of the companion scenes behind resting shows that as a character you have probably come to terms with the fact that however long you've got, it's longer than the usual 7 days.

It is okay to think the plot should be more urgent. I think to be honest though they have to balance that with exploring (it is a videogame after all). I imagine some people don't think they've got that right and some do.

I don't understand your first point. You're told where the githyanki patrol is and it's pointed out in the map. Straight, village, bridge, left. I didn't mention the gnolls precisely because they're on the way, just like the inn is, but for Karlach you just have to willingly go the wrong way.

Don't get your second point either. At the end of the day i said what you said, which is that there isn't any real story reason to explore the swamp other than one dialogue with Ethel and the situation at the grove.

As for your third... same. What i said is that it makes no sense for the mindflayer to be placed in a less accesible part of the map than that of the optional area it sends you to, and that the area exit sitting in the middle of it all makes just as much sense.

I also don't see how the badly implemented rest/dialogue system is anything more than a case of ludonarrative dissonance. To get every dialogue available you gotta rest twice before reaching the grove(SH+Astarion's camping dialogues, then Gale's mirror scene), twice around the grove(at least one SH dialogue and then Raphael), once to get Astarion's reveal, thrice if you get all the dreams, and so on and so forth.

So, about two/three weeks worth of rests to explore a relatively small area while you're constantly reminded that you might just turn at any moment. Or maybe you won't. No hurry. It's not like we're reminded by every npc/companion, and indeed shown in one of the first scenes in the game, that the situation's pretty FUBAR.

This to say, it's not my opinion that the plot should be more urgent, that's all Larian, and neither do i believe that the areas should be gimped. What i'd like is for the latters to make sense with the former, and that until the urgency's reduced. All it takes, like i said, is for the level design to be a bit cleaner.

For example, roughly keep the Underdark as it is, with the encounters spread all over and the 'main' entrances at the bottom(Hag's lair and goblin's fort), but move the tower and beach at the upper corners with the myconid village more to the middle. Slide Karlach a bit west, maybe above the gnolls or something. That way i'm still exploring, i'm still getting reward for exploring, but doesn't clash as badly with the over-reaching story.

Everyone experiences the game differently, but I'd have to say that I don't really agree. The plot starts with great urgency, but you fairly quickly realise that while your hitchhiker is a concern you need to investigate and address, something else is happening.

In particular, you constantly meet other NPCs that are NOT from the ship, living happily with the tadpole. At this point it becomes clear that time is not the trigger ( even if you companion dialogue sometimes thinks it is ), and that cautiously searching more widely for information to solve the mystery is perhaps a better strategy.

I like the level design exactly because it is NOT streamlined and linear. You do not need to go to find everything, you do not need to do anything in a particular order to progress. Whatever you choose to do leads to discovering more information, which interlinks into a generally coherent world state, and perhaps gives you access to future allies and resources.

Eventually, after ( as Raphael says ) you have exhausted every opportunity for help ( assuming you choose to look ), you can decide to pick a side with Halsin or Minthara, just to discover they are equally useless. In the released game, you may actually be able to ignore them both and travel on to Moonrise Towers regardless.

The point of this part of the game is to introduce the dramatis personae that will allow you to get the most out of the rest of the game. It is to be hoped that the story continues to make sense, regardless of what you choose, and that is a real challenge for the Larian writers.

I'm not a great fan of the mechanics of the game, but I do like the way they have approached the storytelling so far.

"I don't understand your first point. You're told where the githyanki patrol is and it's pointed out in the map. Straight, village, bridge, left. I didn't mention the gnolls precisely because they're on the way, just like the inn is, but for Karlach you just have to willingly go the wrong way.

Don't get your second point either. At the end of the day i said what you said, which is that there isn't any real story reason to explore the swamp other than one dialogue with Ethel and the situation at the grove.

As for your third... same. What i said is that it makes no sense for the mindflayer to be placed in a less accesible part of the map than that of the optional area it sends you to, and that the area exit sitting in the middle of it all makes just as much sense.

I also don't see how the badly implemented rest/dialogue system is anything more than a case of ludonarrative dissonance. To get every dialogue available you gotta rest twice before reaching the grove(SH+Astarion's camping dialogues, then Gale's mirror scene), twice around the grove(at least one SH dialogue and then Raphael), once to get Astarion's reveal, thrice if you get all the dreams, and so on and so forth.

So, about two/three weeks worth of rests to explore a relatively small area while you're constantly reminded that you might just turn at any moment. Or maybe you won't. No hurry. It's not like we're reminded by every npc/companion, and indeed shown in one of the first scenes in the game, that the situation's pretty FUBAR.

This to say, it's not my opinion that the plot should be more urgent, that's all Larian, and neither do i believe that the areas should be gimped. What i'd like is for the latters to make sense with the former, and that until the urgency's reduced. All it takes, like i said, is for the level design to be a bit cleaner.

For example, roughly keep the Underdark as it is, with the encounters spread all over and the 'main' entrances at the bottom(Hag's lair and goblin's fort), but move the tower and beach at the upper corners with the myconid village more to the middle. Slide Karlach a bit west, maybe above the gnolls or something. That way i'm still exploring, i'm still getting reward for exploring, but doesn't clash as badly with the over-reaching story.[/quote]




Yes, i seems we are at a bit of difference of communication. My first point is that there are two - yes two - ways to get to the githyanki. One, the way you described, the other by the path just to the right where Scratch is and jump over the river. This leads to the road with the hyenas which leads etc etc.

Second point you ACTUALLY said: "but the only real story reason to venture that way, other than playing an entirely trusting character who confides in random old women, is the whole Khaga situation, which isn't really all that overt.
" I pointed out this was not the case. Not hard to understand, to be honest. If you're prepared to try a goblin priestess, you're equally prepared to try an old healing woman. Your companions mention this as an option too, Wyl especially. Again I pointed out it doesn't apply for all characters in all walkthroughs, just that it's there.

Third point, I completely misread you, sorry. I normally get to the UD from the temple as you're told there is an entrance that way. The myconids are basically the first friendly faces you see if you arrive that way. So if you do it that way you get the quest before the tower.

I'm pretty sure the map isn't to scale, meaning that the area it represents is probably supposed to be much bigger.

As for sleep, your companions pretty much yawn and demand bed every so often, so I take that as what is supposed to be the passing of another day in story terms. It never seems to be what would be a full day, granted, but there you go.

I wasn't talking about Pathfinder kingmaker, why is everyone talking about that game?
I mentioned the new game Pathfinder game Wrath of the righteous which is also like BG3 in EA/beta. Yea its not perfect, so is BG3 far form perfect. But Warth of the righteous plays more like a prior Baldurs gate game, upgraded to modern standards. Has 6 party members. Tons of cool classes and kits. Realtime with pause AND turn base. A pretty good UI. Day/night atmosphere with calendar/time. The dialogues seem fun and with lots of options.
Sheesh that all. Wasnt trying to start a war, just making a point THAT THERE ARE MODERN GAMES FEEL and PLAY MORE LIKE THE CLASSIC BG GAMES MORE THAN BG3. Having JUST THE STORYLINE doesn't make a game 100% Baldurs gate for me. The gameplay and atmosphere should also have a say in this.