Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Everyone needs to chill out.

If you're trying to say the two games don't look alike, I can't disagree with you there. But you're can't seriously be trying to compare the look of a game from 20 years ago with one today? Aside from a literal side by side comparison, how else do they not resemble one another. If you explained extensively, just paste in something you wrote elsewhere. Easy enough.



You still haven't given details. Gameplay = (RTwP)? Environment = no smashing objects or lighting surfaces on fire? Tone = whatever subjective idea you have in mind? Visuals = outdated graphics? What?

I am getting the impression this all boils down to RTwP, and you pretty much basically said. If so, D&D > BG. In aiming to be more D&D, Larian chose a system that resonates more with D&D than BG1 & 2.

You mean other than the fact that Larian's "BG3" was shown literally using DOS2's goofy movement and combat animations, its mouse cursors, its font text, and with a modified version of DOS2' UI that kept its design style?

Making a modern game doesn't mean it's going to look like every other modern game. Larian's "BG3" shouldn't look like DOS2 - but it does.


I and others have given plenty of explanations, in this thread and in others.


That's their right. But then th aren't making a Baldur's Gate series game and shouldn't be titling their game "Baldur's Gate 3".

And it doesn't boil down to RTwP, but RTwP is a massive factor and one that influences more than just the combat in the game. I already mentioned that the environmental design is tailored to the combat system. With a TB system we'll get more tight spaces and cramped environments and more heavily-scripted fights, whereas Baldur's Gate has expansive environments and a more natural sense to encounters. The combat system shapes the experience of exploring and also

You're trying to make the topic go in circles as if you think by doing so you can distract from the criticisms and bury them with meaningless posts. But the things you ask for details about have been discussed and detailed extensively on the forums in recent days. If you are unclear on anything, read through the recent topics to catch up. Your questions aren't new, and neither are the answers to them.

I disagree with dos clone to a degree. As long as they have the all the rules implace I am ok with it. Although man do I hate the jump animation and the power of shove. Both of those dont seem to do the requiste ability checks. And jump would have to be someone who had a 25 strength considering how far it is

Weren't you stating that BG3 doesn't look like BG2? You seem to have veered into comparing BG3 with DOS2.



You think you have, but there are just a lot vague statements about "feel" and such.



Again, so you imagine.

Huh? That Larian's "BG3" so closely resembles DOS2 means it doesn't resemble BG2.


False. I have given ample specifics, including in the very post you are quoting.


Again, so you are doing.

So from this we are supposed to know you mean DOS2 doesn't resemble BG instead of that BG3 doesn't resemble BG1 & 2? If you say so. So okay then, how then does DOS2 not resemble BG? If Larian was making BG3 with a UI that blocked off one third of the screen, would it more resemble BG1 & 2? If they didn't use the "goofy" animations (as you think them) but instead used pixelated figures would that make it more resemble BG1 & 2? What?




Like what? This?



What does "faithful" mean? Oh, the irony of you accusing me of going in circles.



If there is such an abundance of extenstively details answers on the forums, can't you simply copy and paste a few here? I have read though a lot of the stuff being posted; I don't see it. So again, please paste a few of what you think are "detailed" explanations of what should be done so BG3 resembles the originals.

Another poster who seems to agree with you at least gave such reasons as darker colors, no beaches, and dismemberment as examples of what they mean. I have yet to read anything specific from you, in any of your posts. The best I can find is you think TB will create a more cramped space, which is just asinine. In fact, Larian's system of including the ability to climb and jump does the exact opposite (which doesn't necessarily have to do with TB ... cramped or open spaces has nothing to do with TB vs RTwP).

You mention that this your chance to reach the devs to affect change. Good! Do so. What would you suggest? Based on a quote you posted, they already think they are doing so, so you need to do more. You need to exactly state what you think they should be doing. Help them understand, in excruciating detail if needed. Give examples of what the gamplay should be like, what the environment should be like, what the vibe should be like, and what visuals should look like (using the general categories you mentioned). Elaborate man, or at least, repost here or link to other threads wherein you think you did so.

We don't need to chill. We must criticize to improve the game.

"Tristan you MUST CHILL!" (cit)

Yes, there was a 3 week press tour leading up to PAX.

You are asking for things that have already been done plenty, and will continue to be done. You are not Larian and are not the target ear, yet even you have been catered to. But you just pretend you haven't seen anything. If that's the case, maybe ask a doctor for an eye examination? I see that you are just arguing and denying for the sake of not wanting to acknowledge the legitimacy of people's criticisms.

P.S. No, having a jump feature doesn't stop the environments from being cramped. They are still cramped, per DOS TB style. And if you had actually played BG 1 and BG 2 you'd know how ridiculous it is for you to claim that Larian's TB environments are anything but cramped to accommodate the TB gameplay. It's an assertion that's beyond silly.

I have the read the criticisms and comments, such as BG3 doesn't capture the feel of the originals; it isn't faithful to the franchise; it's too bright. What I am saying is these comments are vacuous and unhelpful. Let me help you a bit. As I stated another thread I started, BG1&2 have a fog of war; DOS2 did not and it does not look like BG3 will either. That is a specific example of how BG3 is deviating from BG2. Want another? It seems to me that the dialogues trees in DOS2 are much shorter than in BG2. Why can't you just produce similar specific examples? You have copied and pasted so many of your own comments in different posts and threads, yet you just can't do it for this. ThreeL made a post with what he/she feels are some examples, as has kyrthorsen. You have done nothing except for the "cramped" comment. If I missed more, fine; just paste or link.



A game can be less wide open without being cramped. I never felt cramped in DOS (except when you are supposed to, such as in small rooms).

If you think that, then you really do need an eye examination. Or a species test to see if you're actually a troll.

No hes very much right.
The complaints are either about minor details like some rules alteration or about broad thigns with no proof.

Ive asked you , multiple times, about providing screenshots from baldurs gate 1 and 2 and comparing them to screenshtos of baldurs gate 3 and telling me where the difference in tone is.
And so far nobody has actually done that.

Whcih leads me to believe that you have no atual argument and are just mad.

Play nice, guys. Nobody really wants to see personal insults, it's tedious.

I seem to be repeating this an awful lot lately, so to elaborate, play nice or I'll ban you.

Have a nice day.

Why are they mad? Because the tone of BG3 doesnt match the classic Baldurs Gate games. Your "Gotchas" are pretty weak dude, I've responded to you several times now and you seem to completly ignore them so I'll highlight this one for you.

Its a matter about preference. Noone can truly answer with flawless logic why they like a certain kind of music, movie or any kind of art. Whenever people try to explain they inveitably fail. Why? Because the answer you seek lies in the subconcious

Now thats not to say there isnt a place for constructive feedback. Like the one about screenshaking when using abilities, or overly flashy effects whenever a character use a mundane (non magic) ability. The fog of war issue. The side-initiative issue. Or the RTwP issue. But when the game comes to how it looks/feels it is impossible to argue some kind of point because neither you or I are correct.

So you've played a game that's not out, actually not even made yet to know it doesn't match the classic baldur's gate games?

so "i dont like it".
then my answer is "Ok". Anything you cannot discribe is irrelevant.
and the other stuff is either also irrelevant because they wont make it RTWP or... kind of asinine.
Like the screenshake stuff that baldurs gate 1 and 2 also had. Sure its a matter of taste, btu its a matter of taste that the original handled in the same way

And again, no examples. No details. Good job.

If that's true (which it might be), then there is no point in bringing it up (what are the devs supposed to do with that?). But, despite of the abundance of rhetoric by posters like Delicieuxz, and because of the posts by members like ThreeL, kyrthorsen, and kungfukappa, it is becoming clearer to me what the unhappy people really want is a game like Pillars of Eternity or Pathfinder with the rules and lore of D&D. Would this not be a fair assessment?

I want the game to look more like Pillars and Pathfinder and less like DOS, yes. I also want the devs to make the game they want to make. My feedback here, constructive or otherwise, isnt necessarily to get people to change their minds. I just want to offer up a perspective that I'm clearly not alone in having.