Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 6 of 16 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 15 16
Joined: Nov 2020
E
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
E
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by Soul-Scar
At the end of the day Larian don't pay any heed to these forums. It is simply a place where we can say what we feel is the good, the bad and the ugly.

The good,

The combat and classes are decent D&D adaptations.

The Bad,

The world is DOS

The Ugly,

The world is DOS

As simply as it gets. lols laugh


laugh

Joined: Mar 2015
member
Offline
member
Joined: Mar 2015
Originally Posted by Soul-Scar
It is not a "timed quest" as it isn't a quest. It is a choice in a world that doesn't revolve around the player. Goblins plan to attack and destroy the camp, they don't necessarily want the tieflings dead just the druids, story options? Convince the tieflings to team up with the goblins for a free road to BG. It isn't super mario world where you need to complete level 1.1 to progress to level 1.2.

The player is a character in a living world that happens to exist and function before player got there right? If the player died on the ship and wasn't there to "save the day" what would happen? Currently in BG 3 absolutely nothing. The world would be midday forever and everything and everyone would wiggle about "awaiting player 1" to insert coin. The astral plane isn't as static as the BG world currently.

My suggestion wasn't "do this" my suggestion was "do something" or "something must happen". Inaction doesn't prevent the world from turning until you decide, you are not a deity at level 1. It rains, it gets windy, wildlife eat grass or get eaten. Causality!

Yes, but games like BG3 revolve around exploring the world. In reality, you wouldn't stop to investigate every single chest or even the conflict between Goblins and Tieflings. You would care for the Tadpole.

And many people play the game to open every single chest and do every single quest. They want to have absurd amounts of time to do all that. Which is admittedly highly unrealistic.

Joined: Mar 2015
member
Offline
member
Joined: Mar 2015
Originally Posted by DiDiDi
(2) Don't remember that at all, which Lich was that?

There were actually several wink But the one I'm referring to is just the tavern which you come by in front of the gate (The map you have to enter to leave Amn). In this tavern there is a picture on the wall which is a hidden door. If you step through, you are directly entering a small tomb housing a lich.

Joined: Oct 2021
J
addict
Offline
addict
J
Joined: Oct 2021
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
You obviously don't remember the "DoS3" thing but you know what ? If you say so, let's say you're right wink

My point is that the vast majority of people clearly like what they're seeing and experiencing. It's not even debatable.

It's okay to have an opinion that disagrees with the majority, but I don't think it's helpful to suggest that "a lot" of players have a problem with this game because it doesn't "feel like BG." That's just not true. The numbers don't support that argument, not at all.

And it's also a bit ridiculous. I mean, it doesn't "feel" like BG? What does that even mean? The original post was talking about how elves were the most unique race. Well, guess what? Now tieflings and dragonborn exist in Forgotten Realms. They didn't before, so the whole DnD has kinda changed, you know?

Not to mention, games don't look the way they used to. That "change" is pretty darn apparent also, because now things are visually stunning. Back when people were playing BG, they would've been blown away to see even ten minutes of play of BG3, and they would've been praising the future.

It doesn't "feel" like BG. C'mon, gimme a break. Of course there are differences, and to hyperfocus on those differences means ignoring all the similarities.

It's like, Elturel went to hell. Is that too epic for you? Well, was it too epic when the city of Phlan got teleported because of a plot by Bane?

People want to complain about how exciting the first act is. Okay. I guess. Whatever. I mean, I like it. And while I appreciate the concern trolling over whether the second and third act will be able to live up to the pacing of the first act... I guess I'll just wait and see before casting my vote on that one.

Meanwhile, I don't care what level someone thinks a character should be before they're allowed to interact with a Mind Flayer or a Cambion. That seems like arbitrary nonsense to me, like someone's mind got stuck thinking inside a box. Like only 5th level characters qualify for an express ticket to the underdark. Gosh. How do all the 1rst level drow and gnomes and duergar exist there?

Not to mention that the game doesn't even expect you to fight Mind Flayers and Cambions yet. They've just been introduced, and they've been shown fighting one another. If *you* fought them, that was *your* choice, not the games.

Consider, if you will, two things:

1. What if... the Nautiloid were a ship on the ocean? And the Mind Flayers were human slavers. And the ship was under attack by Sahuaguin. And you had to escape, which led to the ship crashing ashore somewhere in the middle of nowhere. Would it still be too much? Too epic? If not... is it really just the aesthetic that makes it all too much?

and

2. What if... there had never been a DoS 1 or 2? Then BG3 just appeared as it is now. What I'm getting at is that saying the game is DoS 3 isn't actually an argument. It doesn't mean anything. There's no steak there, only sizzle, only rhetoric. It's not saying what's wrong with the game in any constructive way because it's appealing to an authority (an authority that no one ever agreed with, I might add) that apparently says BG3 can't look like DoS.

Joined: Oct 2021
J
addict
Offline
addict
J
Joined: Oct 2021
Originally Posted by Etruscan
1. Nobody is asking for 2nd Edition, don't be facetious. Sure, it feels like D&D; a Larian rendition of D&D liberally smothered with their idiosyncratic, 'hilarious' style and Superhero companions. It bears little resemblance to a BG game, which is the point many people are making. It is a marked departure from the original games.

There's nothing facetious about it. DnD changed editions, and those changes have impacted the way DnD feels. Period. It's a fact.

Again, I point to the original post, talking about how elves were this unique race. Well, now there are tieflings and dragonborn and and and and and... The races have changed, the classes have changed, the spells have changed, there's more, always more.

Of course those things *feel* different.

Additionally, computer graphics have changed. It's dramatically different now. So of course that's also going to *feel* different.

But the more things change, the more they stay the same, as the saying goes. It's still a setting with basic character classes, there are still spells, and clerics and wizards.

As for plot, the plot of this story is that there's something special about you. Just like there was something special about you in BG. In this story, you have a tadpole in your head. The action of the plot pushes you forward to find a cure; in other words, it gives you a goal to pursue. And in your pursuit, you find mysteries that need to be solved.

So goes the adventure.

Originally Posted by Etruscan
2. That's your own perception of the feedback provided and is absolutely not the intention. There is little palpable sense of achievement when you level up constantly and are inundated in magical (and non magical) loot from the very beginning. In essence, it gets boring very quickly and starts to feel like a MMORPG.

We're in Early Access. Do you actually think the leveling is going to be the same on full release? Do you really think the pacing of leveling will be just like this?

I don't even understand why an argument like this is being made. On full release, the game isn't going to rush you to 4th level and leave you there forever.

Originally Posted by Etruscan
People aren't piling on hate, they're giving valid feedback...consider that perhaps it is because they care?

I'm sure some people are trying to be constructive. And I'm sure some people care.

But when I see a bunch of buzz words about the "lousy writing" and such, I begin to wonder. For instance, saying a game needs a day/night cycle has nothing to do with whether or not it's filled with terrible writing, but it gets lumped together in the oddest ways in some comments. It's to the point where *it feels to me as if* there are attacks that don't make any sense, as if they're thrown against the wall in a wild effort to see what sticks.

Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Originally Posted by JandK
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
You obviously don't remember the "DoS3" thing but you know what ? If you say so, let's say you're right wink

My point is that the vast majority of people clearly like what they're seeing and experiencing. It's not even debatable.

I agree and I never said something else. I'm a part of those players that like BG3 and are hyped by the game but that are/were also "dissapointed" at the same time because it does not feel at all like a Baldur's Gate game.
But I saw many people saying "DoS3", "not BG game" and so on. What numbers are you refering to ? The number of players that would have buy if "..." ?

Nothing in BG3 has been inspired by Baldur's Gate and I think they made a mistake.
But obviously the majority don't care. The majority haven't even played the old games when they were not considered old.

Last edited by Maximuuus; 17/11/21 10:03 PM.
Joined: Oct 2021
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2021
Originally Posted by lucad83
[quote=RagnarokCzD]

I could do the same to you: in this whole thread you've been the only person to say that Larian communicated effectively and it's us fools who failed to understand their vision. How much is that? Since it's just you and not a hundred people I will take your estimate and add a couple of zeros: 0,00000001%.

.

I don't see an issue with how Larian has communicated in regards to what they were planning to do. They were clear it would be a fun game based on DnD 5e and that it would use the Divinity engine. That is pretty much exactly what they delivered thus far.

Joined: Oct 2021
J
addict
Offline
addict
J
Joined: Oct 2021
Originally Posted by Ranxerox
Originally Posted by lucad83
[quote=RagnarokCzD]

I could do the same to you: in this whole thread you've been the only person to say that Larian communicated effectively and it's us fools who failed to understand their vision. How much is that? Since it's just you and not a hundred people I will take your estimate and add a couple of zeros: 0,00000001%.

.

I don't see an issue with how Larian has communicated in regards to what they were planning to do. They were clear it would be a fun game based on DnD 5e and that it would use the Divinity engine. That is pretty much exactly what they delivered thus far.


I agree with Ranxerox, so another +1.

Joined: Oct 2021
J
addict
Offline
addict
J
Joined: Oct 2021
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Nothing in BG3 has been inspired by Baldur's Gate and I think they made a mistake.

See, this is exactly what I'm talking about.

There's no way for you to know what inspired the writers. I mean that. Literally. There is literally no way for you to know. Yet you feel confident enough to proclaim it without a doubt.

How could you possibly know what inspired the writers? You haven't even seen the whole game. You don't know the mystery behind the tadpole or who the Absolute is or what's going on with the dead three. I'm talking about the entire plot here, the entire mystery of what's happening to the character.

None of that is known.

There is literally no way to know what inspired the writers, and what parts of that inspiration may have come from BG.

Do you see what I mean?

Joined: Oct 2020
D
member
Offline
member
D
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Ranxerox
I don't see an issue with how Larian has communicated in regards to what they were planning to do. They were clear it would be a fun game based on DnD 5e and that it would use the Divinity engine. That is pretty much exactly what they delivered thus far.
And if the game was named Divinity: A Forgotten Realms Adventure, many of us would be silent - at least those of us that care more about BG3 being a Baldur's Gate game rather than being a faithful D&D 5e game. But the game's name is Baldur's Gate 3 and right now, it sure seems right now like a false advertising. Larian's (especially Swen's) interviews regarding what they consider fun (and what they do not) give me the feeling that they don't even think the originals are any good. With that kind of game/world design philosophy (which is not bad, mind you, and works for DOS, I guess), I really have to wonder what other than a cheap nostalgia cash grab and free media coverage made them making "BG"3 and not DOS3. In the history of cRPGs (and dungeons), there were many D&D games set in Forgotten Realms, that by itself didn't make them Baldur's Gate games.

And it's not a one specific thing - I don't care specifically for RTwP, AD&D 2e, actually not necessarily even the Forgotten Realms setting - it's almost every design decision Larian went for (their comfort zone is DOS and it seems they will never leave it) is in conflict with the game being an actual worthy sequel.

Joined: Oct 2020
D
member
Offline
member
D
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Arne
The map you have to enter to leave Amn.
Huh? Amn? Amn is a country/region, not a single location/map... Do you mean Athkatla? Whatever, not important, I guess... smile

Joined: Oct 2021
J
addict
Offline
addict
J
Joined: Oct 2021
Originally Posted by DiDiDi
Originally Posted by Ranxerox
I don't see an issue with how Larian has communicated in regards to what they were planning to do. They were clear it would be a fun game based on DnD 5e and that it would use the Divinity engine. That is pretty much exactly what they delivered thus far.
And if the game was named Divinity: A Forgotten Realms Adventure, many of us would be silent - at least those of us that care more about BG3 being a Baldur's Gate game rather than being a faithful D&D 5e game. But the game's name is Baldur's Gate 3 and right now, it sure seems right now like a false advertisment and nostalgia cashgrab. In the history of cRPGs (and dungeons), there were many D&D games set in Forgotten Realms, that didn't make them Baldur's Gate games.

And it's not a one specific thing - I don't care for RTwP, AD&D, actually not necessarily even the Forgotten Realms setting - it's almost every design decision Larian went for (their comfort zone is DOS and it seems they will never leave it) is in conflict with it being a worthy sequel.

In simple terms, what makes it DOS and not BG?

Joined: Mar 2015
member
Offline
member
Joined: Mar 2015
Originally Posted by DiDiDi
Originally Posted by Arne
The map you have to enter to leave Amn.
Huh? Amn? Amn is a country/region, not a single location/map... Do you mean Athkatla? Whatever, not important, I guess... smile

Ah, sorry, yes Athkatla. It's been some time 😅

Joined: Oct 2020
D
member
Offline
member
D
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by JandK
In simple terms, what makes it DOS and not BG?
Distinctively DOS-like (or Larian-like?) world building/design and a complete lack of verisimilitude is my main gripe with the game as of now: https://forums.larian.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=800706#Post800706

Related to that is non-existent flow of time (though I mentioned that in the post as well I think). 90s RPGs even older than BG were able to pull off time flow and day & night, BG3 not having it (just like DOS games don't) is a crime. Not necessarily for timed-quests and such - that's not at all the point.

The "everything is special, everyone is a unique superhero snowflake, every bigger quest (on level 1-4!) is basically a major region-altering event" style of writing screams DOS as well. Well, specifically DOS2, DOS1 was kinda toned down in that regard IIRC (was a long time ago). I mean in BG1/2 you play as a literal child of a god, but most of the characters/companions (with some notable exceptions - which is perfectly fine) you encounter are not memory-wiped vampire spawns from other world that used to have sex with Mystra and turn into nukes when they die. In the first ~3 hours of BG3 playthrough, there's more of this crap than in whole BG1 including the expansion... BG2 and especially ToB had more of this, of course, but in those games you progress towards being a high-level epic hero and then continue progressing towards literal godhood. It makes sense to pace and carefully dose these kind of things as you become more powerful/renown, otherwise it falls completely flat. When everything is special, nothing is special.

Combat. I don't think I have to explain anything here, do I? Although I actually don't mind TB and don't think the game HAS to have RTwP. But it is distinctively DOS-like, surfaces and all. It's the engine, I guess...

Controls/interface - again, I don't think I have to explain, engine-related thing.

One positive thing I will say is that when I fully zoom out in specific locations, I do get the feeling that purely visuals/graphics-wise, this could work. As long as I don't touch my keyboard and mouse and am somewhere where the dead, static, theme-park world building philosophy isn't immediately apparent, I do get some Baldur's Gate vibes.

Joined: Oct 2021
J
addict
Offline
addict
J
Joined: Oct 2021
Originally Posted by DiDiDi
Distinctively DOS-like (or Larian-like?) world building/design and a complete lack of verisimilitude...

Kind of off to a bad start. These are just broad topic buzz words.

In other words, what about the world building...?

In other words, there isn't a complete lack of verisimilitude. Notice the way you're using hyperbolic language? Clearly, there are elements where there's a sense of realism.

Let me put it this way, someone reading a story will ask three questions:

1. So what? --does the person following the story care about what's happening?
2. Huh? --does the person following the story understand what's happening?
3. Oh yeah? --does the person following the story believe the events are plausible?

You apparently have an issue with number three. There's something happening that you feel isn't plausible. To that, I reply:

1. It's not everything. So it's not a *complete* lack of verisimilitude. As such, what is it that you don't find plausible?

and

2. What does that have to do with it being DOS and not BG? Are you arguing that DOS has a complete lack of verisimilitude but BG is all about the verisimilitude?

See what I mean? I feel like these are all buzz words. No examples, no steak, just accusations that it's bad, and bad apparently equals DOS?

Originally Posted by DiDiDi
Related to that is non-existent flow of time (though I mentioned that in the post as well I think). 90s RPGs even older than BG were able to pull off time flow and day & night, BG3 not having it (just like DOS games don't) is a crime. Not necessarily for timed-quests and such - that's not at all the point.

So it's not BG because the sun doesn't go down? Does that sound reasonable to you? It's a "crime" that the sun doesn't go down?

Originally Posted by DiDiDi
The "everything is special...

What's special about everything?

Originally Posted by DiDiDi
...everyone is a unique superhero snowflake...

I assume by "everyone" you mean the origin characters. Sure, people like to play unique characters. There's a lot of "chosen one" literature in fantasy. It's pretty common. I recall someone being awful special in the original BG, don't you?

Originally Posted by DiDiDi
...every bigger quest (on level 1-4!) is basically a major region-altering event...

I'm trying to follow you. I really am.

Basically, every game in Forgotten Realms, BG or not, has had a story that impacted the surrounding region. There's nothing new there. So what are you talking about, I wonder?

Every quest... is a major region altering event... as in saving or not saving the fishmongers? As in letting the owlbear cub live or die? As in picking up the letters from Scratch's old master/friend? As in trying to get healed by a hag and maybe saving a pregnant Mayrina from giving up her child? As in building up a connection with the Zhentarim?

Sure, there are some big things happening in the main plot. That's what the whole of the story is about, so it's not strange that it might be big enough to alter the region. The Duke has been kidnapped. Maybe the Absolute is a new god (who knows?), and if so, that would be a big event.

I don't know. Lots of big events in Forgotten Realms, the Bhaalspawn not being the least, I'd say. Heck, even the iron being contaminated was region altering.

Originally Posted by DiDiDi
I mean in BG1/2 you play as a literal child of a god...

Yep. Some people might even call that a unique superhero snowflake trait, but to each their own.

Originally Posted by DiDiDi
...but most of the characters/companions (with some notable exceptions - which is perfectly fine) you encounter are not memory-wiped vampire spawns from other world that used to have sex with Mystra and turn into nukes when they die.

You're putting all the characters together in an attempt to exaggerate. Regardless, they're all potential player character, pre-generated. That's what the origin characters are, so yes, they each have something special about them, to make them more enticing as player characters.

Originally Posted by DiDiDi
In the first ~3 hours of BG3 playthrough, there's more of this crap than in whole BG1 including the expansion...

This game is too action packed and exciting!

Originally Posted by DiDiDi
BG2 and especially ToB had more of this, of course, but in those games you progress towards being a high-level epic hero and then continue progressing towards literal godhood.


So progressing toward literal godhood = good, but BG3 = too big and epic.

Are you sure all of what you're saying makes sense in your head?

It's like, what's actually too big about BG3? Anything other than the background of the origin characters, which are designed to be player characters? And which even you have to admit aren't as big and crazy as being literal Bhaalspawn.

Originally Posted by DiDiDi
It makes sense to pace and carefully dose these kind of things as you become more powerful/renown, otherwise it falls completely flat.

Is this concern trolling about whether or not Acts 2 and 3 can live up to the pacing of Act 1?

While I appreciate the crystal ball, I'd rather wait and see how the next two acts play out. For what it's worth, I suspect you're wrong, and that Larian has even more in store for us, despite the first act being so action packed. In other words, I don't think they're out of ideas, and I don't think the story tension can't continue to rise toward a climax, despite your assertions otherwise about it all falling flat.

Originally Posted by DiDiDi
Combat. I don't think I have to explain anything here, do I?

Yes.

Originally Posted by DiDiDi
Although I actually don't mind TB and don't think the game HAS to have RTwP. But it is distinctively DOS-like. It's the engine, I guess...

Plenty of games have been turn based. One of the best DnD games ever, in fact, at least in my opinion. Temple of Elemental Evil. It was very faithful to the system, and it worked on a turn based system. Luckily so, because DnD lends itself to a turn based approach, being that DnD is, of course, turn based.

Originally Posted by DiDiDi
Controls/interface - again, I don't think I have to explain, engine-related thing.

This is what I think it comes down to. How you move your characters around. The user interface mechanic feels like DOS. Well. For what it's worth, I think that's something that's easy to overcome. Just my opinion.

Originally Posted by DiDiDi
...the dead, static, theme-park world building philosophy isn't immediately apparent...

More buzz words. What does any of this really mean? In simple terms.

Originally Posted by DiDiDi
I do get some Baldur's Gate vibes.

Yeah. Me too.

Joined: Apr 2020
Location: Boston , MA
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Apr 2020
Location: Boston , MA
Now we are saying that we misunderstood Baldur's Gate 3 as Baldur's Gate game instead of whatever Larian's vision is? You must be kidding.

We went from a immersion-centric game to a game that completely disregards immersion in favor of game mechanics. How is that fair?

And I can't even understand these people defending BG3, as if improving immersion and writing quality would somehow worsen the game.

Joined: Oct 2021
J
addict
Offline
addict
J
Joined: Oct 2021
Originally Posted by IrenicusBG3
We went from a immersion-centric game to a game that completely disregards immersion in favor of game mechanics. How is that fair?

The game doesn't completely disregard immersion. That's a baseless accusation.

You don't like it. I get it. But your subjective taste is not the definitive guide to whether or not a game disregards immersion. "Completely" disregards it, no less. Cares not one whit for immersion, apparently. Imagine that.

I mean, seriously. Consider how ridiculous that would be if a company designing a role playing game didn't care about immersion.

Again, this is what I mean when I talk about buzz words and hyperbole.

I think constructive criticism is great, but I'd like to challenge some of these notions about how the game is filled with bad writing and "theme park" locations and the kind of oh-so-special characters that would never have made it into a game about a Bhaalspawn.

Originally Posted by IrenicusBG3
And I can't even understand these people defending BG3, as if improving immersion and writing quality would somehow worsen the game.

I'm all for improvement. The problem is not everyone agrees with you that your version of better is actually better.

Joined: Jan 2021
L
member
Offline
member
L
Joined: Jan 2021
Honestly I could care less what edition of D&D BG3 runs off of. It could be GURPS for all I care. But Larian chose to go with the name 'Baldur's Gate 3'-thy hung their hat on nostalgia for a game two decades old, from a series that was basically the bedrock of what could be called the 'golden era' of D&D video games that lasted until 4th edition hit. It has some big boots to fill, some expectations to hit. That much hardly has to be said. And while I think Larian has been doing an absolutely stellar job in so many departments, I don't think they have quite hit the mark in a couple areas. Not so much in the overall quality-which is mostly pretty good, I have to say-but in their endeavor to evoke the essence of that particular era I think they have slipped just a bit more than I'm comfortable with.

I understand that we can't rewind time and just place BG III in the 2nd or 3rd edition Forgotten Realms- 5th is might not be as alien as 4th, but it still feels 'off'. Too many shifts, retcons etc. As a game set in 5th edition that's a sequel to one set in 2nd, it invites comparisons between the two and I find myself wondering silly stuff like 'If we ran into Haer'dalis, would he look like one of the 5th edition Tieflings, or like his BGII self?' when I see the Tieflings. Or I'll read a book about the Red Wizards or the Spellplague etc and I remember how so many places I used to like got blown up or otherwise completely changed. Yeah, I know. Not Larian's fault since WoTC called the shots on that and it's nostalgia talking-'You can't go home again' indeed. But it's a game that's built and sold on nostalgia so I don't feel entirely unjustified in feeling disappointed.

Other stuff though? I think Larian could, should...and hopefully will consider changing or at least laying off a bit until later in the game. The whole 'Michael Bay' thing talked about earlier. Yeah, it's hyperbolic, but there's a truth behind it. BG III promises the most epic, earth-shattering adventure pretty much right off the bat. I'm honestly half-expecting wotc's next 'Spellplague'-level event to get launched with this game as a tie-in at this point. Too many gods, the Nine Hells, Githyanki...all deeply involved. Where can it lead, who knows? But it promises to be quite the event. And we the player are right there in the thick of it. It's true we start out fighting goblins, but already we are graduating to significantly harder enemies and threats we aren't even out of the first act yet. D&D computer games typically (near universally) start you out on the low-end of things, scrapping with goblins and kobolds, then orcs, etc. I think the idea is so you can see and appreciate your character grow over the course of the game and experience the 'arc' of growing into a battle-hardened hero. But we are already scrapping adamantine golems and giving drow and Githyanki dirtnaps. How do you escalate from what are traditionally some of the more infamously formidable opponents you'd face in Toril? Are we going to really be fighting back-alley thieves guild thugs in Baldur's Gate after killing mindflayers and cambions in the first act (potentially even in the prologue!). I hope they tone it down, but I don't know if they even can at this point.

The companions, yeah, that's another thing. They all feel strongly like the star of the show.....which they are actually, because of the origins system. But if this is going to be the story of the player character, wouldn't it be best to build the story around...the player character rather than a cast of 7-8 other characters they have to share the spotlight with? It's also very front loaded. 8 party members all right off the bat, but you gotta choose your 3 soon, cause the rest are gone in act II. It's limiting and overwhelming. I think this could be alleviated much by the inclusion of some additional non-origins party members down the line. I have the most hope for this to be addressed some time. Hopefully Larian will talk about it some in the future, since this seems to be a pretty common observation/complaint.

Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Online Content
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Originally Posted by JandK
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Nothing in BG3 has been inspired by Baldur's Gate and I think they made a mistake.

See, this is exactly what I'm talking about.

There's no way for you to know what inspired the writers. I mean that. Literally. There is literally no way for you to know. Yet you feel confident enough to proclaim it without a doubt.

How could you possibly know what inspired the writers? You haven't even seen the whole game. You don't know the mystery behind the tadpole or who the Absolute is or what's going on with the dead three. I'm talking about the entire plot here, the entire mystery of what's happening to the character.

None of that is known.

There is literally no way to know what inspired the writers, and what parts of that inspiration may have come from BG.

Do you see what I mean?

Why do you think I'm specificaly talking about the writers ?

Last edited by Maximuuus; 18/11/21 06:07 AM.
Joined: Feb 2021
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
I REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY hope they don't force us to be locked into a set party in Act 2. That would REALLY suck.

I want MORE characters to choose from, not less. 4 feels so dang limited already. I even just tried to mod the game for 6 because 4 is driving me crazy.

Don't introduce me to cool characters like Karlach and make it seem like they'll be available party members only to lock us into like 3 companions.

Page 6 of 16 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 15 16

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