Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 81 1 2 3 4 5 80 81
Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Ikke
Does everyone agree with this assessment? If so, Larian should really start to work on improving immersion. I haven't played P:WotR yet (I prefer to play a mature and bug free game), but so far my biggest problems with BG3 EA have to do with immersion breaking (e.g. fast travel without portals, send stuff to camp, 2D yellow outlines on 3D shapes, ...). In my point of view, it stands to reason to try to avoid breaking immersion in an RPG as much as possible. The better a players succeeds at playing a role, the more fun she/he is having, right?
But it is good news that the developers of P:WotR did manage to get immersion right.
I do not agree. I would hate for fast travel to be removed. For me removing fast travel and having to walk to portals would be tedious not immersive.

Joined: May 2010
Location: Oxford
Duchess of Gorgombert
Offline
Duchess of Gorgombert
Joined: May 2010
Location: Oxford
Guys, let's stay away from stuff like skin colour and sexuality, please. It never ends well. Thanks.


J'aime le fromage.
Joined: Aug 2021
member
Offline
member
Joined: Aug 2021
Originally Posted by Icelyn
Originally Posted by Ikke
Does everyone agree with this assessment? If so, Larian should really start to work on improving immersion. I haven't played P:WotR yet (I prefer to play a mature and bug free game), but so far my biggest problems with BG3 EA have to do with immersion breaking (e.g. fast travel without portals, send stuff to camp, 2D yellow outlines on 3D shapes, ...). In my point of view, it stands to reason to try to avoid breaking immersion in an RPG as much as possible. The better a players succeeds at playing a role, the more fun she/he is having, right?
But it is good news that the developers of P:WotR did manage to get immersion right.
I do not agree. I would hate for fast travel to be removed. For me removing fast travel and having to walk to portals would be tedious not immersive.

I agree, ppl always ask for no fast travel, or more immersive fast travel until they have to spend half of the game just walking around a huge map and the same places over and over again. So, you're right, Fast travel should never be removed from any game with a big map.

Joined: Mar 2020
Location: Belfast
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Mar 2020
Location: Belfast
Originally Posted by Tuco
Frankly I have no idea what people mean when they say "You can't really compare DOS 2/BG 3/POE II/WOTR".
Yes, you can. They are literally minor variation in the same exact genre.
I mean you can, but it's pointless.

I disagree that difference between Larian RPG and Obsidian RPG is minor - one prioritises online play and player interaction, second one worldbuilding and story. That IMO makes them fundamentally different experiences. You CAN play Larian RPG as you would PoE2 or Pathfinder, as I do, but that means missing out on a major focus on the game - which is coop.

I wouldn't claim that D:OS2 was worse then PoE2, it's just that coop RPG (coop centric, not RPG with coop mode) is not something I have much interest in. It doesn't make D:OS2 bad, it's just makes it bad in things I care about in an RPG.

Last edited by Wormerine; 12/08/21 12:37 PM.
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
Originally Posted by Avallonkao
I agree, ppl always ask for no fast travel, or more immersive fast travel until they have to spend half of the game just walking around a huge map and the same places over and over again. So, you're right, Fast travel should never be removed from any game with a big map.
One of the very reasons people ask for no fast travel (or to better say it: "not OVERLY convenient fast travel that works at any given moment") is that taking it into account in the design phase helps precisely creating a game where you are NOT assumed to be zipping back and forth at any given second.

I'd rather get a game where I'm assumed to be moving through the game world at natural pace (and when the context required it, even being stranded in enemy territory with no easy way out) rather than a game that assumes (and so after a while implicitly REQUIRES) that I'll be zapping all over the place every two seconds.
Aside for being an erratic design focus, it also has the not negligible side effect of destroying ANY sense of scale in the fictional world.

A notable example of this is the first Dark Souls, before the shitty idea of giving to the player the "lordvessel" (bonfire warp) from the get go: your first descent in Blight Town or your first climb up to Anor Londo were memorable experiences ESPECIALLY because of that feeling of "Well, there's no convenient way back now". Something that the sequels failed to capitalize on.

It's like the good old argument against quest markers: give designers license to have unlimited and convenient access to a quest marker at any given time and you'll suddenly get a game where almost every quest is designed under the assumption that the player doesn't need much in terms of explanations and context because the marker will always be there to guide them.

Which is how you typically get some of the dullest quest design in existence. Something that plagued the modern era of triple A games. The difference between the average quest in Gothic 2, Fallout 2 or Ultima VII or in Oblivion/Skyrim can be downright baffling.
Even The Witcher 3 suffered significantly from this issue. Disabling on-screen helps and markers often left a player with hardly any context to go by and to proceed in a questline.

Last edited by Tuco; 12/08/21 12:47 PM.
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
Originally Posted by Wormerine
I mean you can, but it's pointless.

It's like comparing different subgenres of shooters. Metro, Doom, CoD are kinda different things
,
But they are not different subgenres, they are the exact same one, with marginal variations in flavor: top-down party-based CRPGs with a big focus on narrative progression, companions storylines and tactical combat.

Last edited by Tuco; 12/08/21 12:47 PM.
Joined: Sep 2017
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2017
I do not know why you have to choose when you could have both. PF: WoTR comes next month so we could play it until bg3 finally comes, they do not even overlap. Honestly, I´ll be happy to have several games to choose from, some time ago finding a CRPG game in between a tide of MMORPGS or shooters was a titan´s quest.


Anyway, the new trailer of WoTR looks good




That said, it seems there are some strong feelings about that, judging by the comments and images you can find online.

[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]

Last edited by _Vic_; 12/08/21 01:58 PM.
Joined: Aug 2021
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Aug 2021
Not gonna lie, that last picture kinda shot down any interest I had for the game.
..And not just because I loathe the stupid virgin/chad thing.

But I guess different taste for different people?
Or the game is actually pretty good, but some of the fanbase is rather inane.

Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
I know the virgin/chad meme is never meant to be taken seriously, but still... Mentioning HP bloat as a downside of BG3 while ignoring that PF is every bit as guilty of it if not more is at very least a bit disingenuous.

Originally Posted by _Vic_
I do not know why you have to choose when you could have both.
Eh, personally I didn't choose. Which is precisely why I already bought and I'm playtesting both.
The fact that I don't think they are mutually exclusive doesn't mean there's no ground to compare them (or any other title in the same genre, for all that matters).

Last edited by Tuco; 12/08/21 02:14 PM.
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Originally Posted by Icelyn
Originally Posted by Ikke
Does everyone agree with this assessment? If so, Larian should really start to work on improving immersion. I haven't played P:WotR yet (I prefer to play a mature and bug free game), but so far my biggest problems with BG3 EA have to do with immersion breaking (e.g. fast travel without portals, send stuff to camp, 2D yellow outlines on 3D shapes, ...). In my point of view, it stands to reason to try to avoid breaking immersion in an RPG as much as possible. The better a players succeeds at playing a role, the more fun she/he is having, right?
But it is good news that the developers of P:WotR did manage to get immersion right.
I do not agree. I would hate for fast travel to be removed. For me removing fast travel and having to walk to portals would be tedious not immersive.

Opening a map, click on a location, entering the area by the right side of it, having a notification that "x"hours has passed while walking (BG1/2)

VS

Open an awefull map, click a name on a list, being teleported because "stfu, it's magic" (BG3)

No one ever said that fast travel should to dissapear.
But fast travel can easily look like... A travel.

Last edited by Maximuuus; 12/08/21 02:16 PM.
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Opening a map, click on a location, entering the area by the right side of it, having a notification that "x"hours has passed while walking (BG1/2)

VS

Open a awefull map, click a tp point on a list, being teleported because it's magic (BG3)

No one ever said that fast travel should to dissapear.
But fast travel can let players think that it is... A travel.
It's also worth noting that a lot of games when competently designed manage to make their "fast travel system" its own reward. Like the aforementioned Dark Souls, which forces you to move through the environment at a natural pace and feel the sense of immersion (and occasionally isolation) and THEN at some point finally rewards you with an item that unlock warp between keypoints.

Same goes with Gothic 1 and 2: you are forced to fight teeth and nails for any few meters of ground you explore at first, but then the game at some point "opens up" and starts rewarding the players with a system of runes that allow them to teleport to specific keypoints in the world map.

There are many, more imaginative ways that games could use to "unlock fast travel" if they really tried. For instance an open world game could have a ground mount and then a flying mount later on, even ON TOP of a (less forgiving) network of portals.
But I'm digressing a bit since these are not examples that apply to BG3, specifically.

Last edited by Tuco; 12/08/21 02:23 PM.
Joined: Aug 2014
member
Offline
member
Joined: Aug 2014
Originally Posted by Tuco
Originally Posted by Avallonkao
I agree, ppl always ask for no fast travel, or more immersive fast travel until they have to spend half of the game just walking around a huge map and the same places over and over again. So, you're right, Fast travel should never be removed from any game with a big map.
One of the very reasons people ask for no fast travel (or to better say it: "not OVERLY convenient fast travel that works at any given moment") is that taking it into account in the design phase helps precisely creating a game where you are NOT assumed to be zipping back and forth at any given second.

I'd rather get a game where I'm assumed to be moving through the game world at natural pace (and when the context required it, even being stranded in enemy territory with no easy way out) rather than a game that assumes (and so after a while implicitly REQUIRES) that I'll be zapping all over the place every two seconds.
Aside for being an erratic design focus, it also has the not negligible side effect of destroying ANY sense of scale in the fictional world.

A notable example of this is the first Dark Souls, before the shitty idea of giving to the player the "lordvessel" (bonfire warp) from the get go: your first descent in Blight Town or your first climb up to Anor Londo were memorable experiences ESPECIALLY because of that feeling of "Well, there's no convenient way back now". Something that the sequels failed to capitalize on.

It's like the good old argument against quest markers: give designers license to have unlimited and convenient access to a quest marker at any given time and you'll suddenly get a game where almost every quest is designed under the assumption that the player doesn't need much in terms of explanations and context because the marker will always be there to guide them.

Which is how you typically get some of the dullest quest design in existence. Something that plagued the modern era of triple A games. The difference between the average quest in Gothic 2, Fallout 2 or Ultima VII or in Oblivion/Skyrim can be downright baffling.
Even The Witcher 3 suffered significantly from this issue. Disabling on-screen helps and markers often left a player with hardly any context to go by and to proceed in a questline.

I fully agree with all of that!
Besides, the opposite of having non-immersive fast travel is not removing fast travel altogether. The game design could also make fast travel more immersive. And yes, that will probably mean having less access to it. But that could still fit in with a fun and immersive game. As an example of the point Tuco made, perhaps the game developers could make the gaming areas more lively and dynamic if players spend more time walking through them. Additionally, players could be encouraged to spend more time thinking about which routes to follow and the order of tackling quests (as you would do if the game were real). So I think anti-immersion fast travel could be countered by adding more immersion elsewhere.

Joined: Dec 2020
Location: Finland
T
addict
Offline
addict
T
Joined: Dec 2020
Location: Finland
Originally Posted by _Vic_
I do not know why you have to choose when you could have both. PF: WoTR comes next month so we could play it until bg3 finally comes, they do not even overlap. Honestly, I´ll be happy to have several games to choose from, some time ago finding a CRPG game in between a tide of MMORPGS or shooters was a titan´s quest.


Anyway, the new trailer of WoTR looks good




That said, it seems there are some strong feelings about that, judging by the comments and images you can find online.

[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]
About your picture. I know you dont want to heat this likely.

BG3 at full release will not be even near 20 level characters I am perfectly fine with this excpect it to have level 10-13 maximum level and example in Solasta DnD 5th maximum level is 10.
25 classess is utterly unealaistic expectation that will never happen for BG3 full release. They have said the main classes from Players Handbook will be inclunded at full relasese (if not already released before that example likely one new class in Patch 6). The remaining classes that will be included in full release (if not before that in a patch) added are in alfabetic order: Barbarian, Bard, Monk, Paladin and Sorceror.

I would be more worried about will this game have much more subclasses and Cleric Domains? Only time will show much this game will have.

No I dont want to this game to have maximum level 20 and 25 base classes and released date postponed to year 2024 or 2025.
It is enough slow current release date expectations is roughy October-December 2022 or January-December 2023 and that inciudes all classes from PHB, but not freaking 25 clasess.

Last edited by Terminator2020; 12/08/21 03:09 PM.
Joined: Aug 2014
member
Offline
member
Joined: Aug 2014
Does P:WotR have toilets? I can't recall spotting one in BG3 EA. Admittedly there are plenty of bushes, but the situation does need to change once the environment becomes more urban.

Joined: Jul 2019
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jul 2019
Originally Posted by Tuco
Honestly I thought I was loving the WOTR beta, but the more I progress in it, the more I get genuinely annoyed about how OVERTUNED most of the encounters are when playing at "core rules".
At least playing in turn-based model it feels like basically any fight is designed to make you survive only if give 100% of what's in your arsenal AND if RNG is on your side.
That's a problem I had with Kingmaker. They greatly bloated enemy stats even on normal for whatever reason, and playing on Hard, the game was a nightmare until the end of chapter 1.
I can see people being turned off by some encounters that I genuinely considered to be unfair. I'd asked on reddit and people playing the beta said that WotR had corrected this.

Joined: Feb 2021
U
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
U
Joined: Feb 2021
Originally Posted by teclis23
My honest opinion from what i have seen so far;

Wrath of the righteous looks incredibly good and so does BG3.

WOTR does appear to be offering a lot more mechanics through mythics paths where you can become angels, devils and liches ect....it looks really really frickin good....like really good. WOTR also possibly looks to have better story writing and companions. Owlcat are based in Poland and arent necessarily all about diversity and gender neutral crap like Larian is. I think Larain have gone waaaayyyyy to far with this stuff and Owlcat have completely tuned it down eg Larian has gone woke and Owlcat are not woke.

BG3 on the other hand looks better visually and i think has more potential due to there budget.

Thoughts people?

Owlcat is based in Russia not Poland.

Joined: Jul 2019
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jul 2019
Originally Posted by Avallonkao
The only thing I agree with is immersion. Larian is amazing when it comes to gameplay, etc. But immersion is not one of their strong, DOS2 was terrible at this and broke immersion all the time for me, BG3 is suffering the same issue.
I wouldn't agree with this. Talking only about BG3, gameplay is by far the most criticized aspect of the game, with the criticism escalating after Solasta came out with a superior adaptation of 5E ruleset translated into better combat.

Joined: Aug 2021
member
Offline
member
Joined: Aug 2021
Originally Posted by _Vic_
I do not know why you have to choose when you could have both. PF: WoTR comes next month so we could play it until bg3 finally comes, they do not even overlap. Honestly, I´ll be happy to have several games to choose from, some time ago finding a CRPG game in between a tide of MMORPGS or shooters was a titan´s quest.


Anyway, the new trailer of WoTR looks good




That said, it seems there are some strong feelings about that, judging by the comments and images you can find online.

[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]

About the image. Jokes aside, I 100% agree with the waifu statement and Astarion too. And never should anyone make fun of the amazing barrelmancy, barrelmancy is life. *_*

Joined: Dec 2020
Location: Finland
T
addict
Offline
addict
T
Joined: Dec 2020
Location: Finland
Originally Posted by Avallonkao
Originally Posted by _Vic_
I do not know why you have to choose when you could have both. PF: WoTR comes next month so we could play it until bg3 finally comes, they do not even overlap. Honestly, I´ll be happy to have several games to choose from, some time ago finding a CRPG game in between a tide of MMORPGS or shooters was a titan´s quest.


Anyway, the new trailer of WoTR looks good




That said, it seems there are some strong feelings about that, judging by the comments and images you can find online.

[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]

About the image. Jokes aside, I 100% agree with the waifu statement and Astarion too. And never should anyone make fun of the amazing barrelmancy, barrelmancy is life. *_*
Jokes???
Maybe if I win EUROJACKPOT 100 million+ EURO. Well then I could buy much of Larian and get much power to decide.
I could say DELETE Astarion grin. Well and some other things on plus side I do like.

Well though I still agree on this:
Originally Posted by Terminator2020
BG3 at full release will not be even near 20 level characters I am perfectly fine with this excpect it to have level 10-13 maximum level and example in Solasta DnD 5th maximum level is 10.
25 classess is utterly unealaistic expectation that will never happen for BG3 full release.
No I dont want to this game to have maximum level 20 and 25 base classes and released date postponed to year 2024 or 2025.
It is enough slow current release date expectations is roughly October-December 2022 or January-December 2023 and that inciudes all classes from PHB, but not freaking 25 clasess.

Last edited by Terminator2020; 12/08/21 08:05 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Tuco
There are many, more imaginative ways that games could use to "unlock fast travel" if they really tried. For instance an open world game could have a ground mount and then a flying mount later on, even ON TOP of a (less forgiving) network of portals.
But I'm digressing a bit since these are not examples that apply to BG3, specifically.
I love dragon mounts. grin

Page 3 of 81 1 2 3 4 5 80 81

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