Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Getting rid of DOS gimmicks/features

realism is by default authentic.
I think you should work on expanding your vocabulary.

Personally, I hate flashy, fantasy combat. It looks retarded an UN-immersive to me. It FEELS wrong to me. And this is kinda the point. What feels right is what someone got used to or conditioned to. It is way too subjective as a reference. Hollywood got so many things wrong that people now expect them in movies and it feels off to them when someone does it right.

Also, note that KcD and Mordhau are 1st person with direct control over 1 character. Hence there are some limitations to movement/positioning and animations that can make some things look off, and that something like BG3 wouldn't have to deal with.



Arrow curvature? Virtue signaling?
Methinks you had some issues in your past and are now venting/projecting here.

and authenticity isnt neccesarily realism.
Which is exactly my point.
get off your high horse.

And no, its not about limitaitons.
Compare for Honor and Mordhau and tell me you prefer Mordhaus combat presentation and feeling.

>issues
Sperg harder.

Sordak's our Official Forum Eccentric.

You know how every pub has its old geezer? The one who's always there, who's worldly wise, cantankerous and random? And it wouldn't be the same without him.

On the topic of addressing animations or effects, I can definitely agree with this. Magical effects are great for magical characters or magical moves, but not so much for a rogue/fighter type of character.

As for the arrow flight path, I hadn't noticed this before, but now that it was brought up it's rather jarring. It appears the character shoots almost linearly at a larger distance (20+m), but when standing next to an enemy the character shoots into the air for the arrow to fall back down. It makes no sense and looks silly.

@vometia That's all well and good, but outright dismissing valid criticisms and feedback with flaming or telling them to not post is not conducive to an appropriate discussion. Just saying.

Finally someone with a bit of sense

not any stylized effect is a magical effect.
When theres an impact animation or sparks for a sword strike, thats not magic.
thats just making it look not boring.

Cool

Although, with some of the quarrel heads I've seen, even a .22-level impact could be pretty gruesome !

Oh for sure. Personally I want hits to feel impactful, but that can be achieved with the swing/shoot animation, a good sound effect coupled with a reaction animation, and some blood or sparks if it’s a block. If we look at the current rogue sneak attack animation in BG3, it basically looks like a spell. Actually rewatching it again I don’t know what it’s suppose to look like. It’s overly fast with a twinkling orb thingy circling around with no real sense of impact. I really don’t like it. In fact I dislike it almost as much as the bow.

It might seem foreign to some, but things like this can actually determine whether I enjoy a game or not. After all, they’re contributing to the very core feel of the game, and are repeated for hundreds of hours.

Edit: I should add that the impact of a normal dagger attack is quite satisfying. Credit where it’s due.

I agree, especially with the jumping.
The jumping is pathetic! they need to change that =/

When standing next to an opponent and firing, I don't see any arrow at all. I'm trying to see it, but I can't. Is there a video that slows the attack down and shows it?

Yeah, I don't really want to dwell too long on the sort of unpleasantness it could cause! And as much as I'm "it's only like a .22", that is something that is absolutely capable of killing, even in relatively untrained hands and even at a distance while pretty much ignoring any mediaeval type body armour it finds on the way. No wonder these things were so feared.

I agree that they need to tame many of the DOS features and concentrate on creating features more true to D&D.


If they want to keep something like this they should use a D&D Perception check to see how well you can track and estimate what an enemy can and can't see while you are sneaking. It should not be automatic nor 100% accurate.


There are certainly many spells that create fog effects in D&D. And there could certainly be environmental fog effects. But when fog is used, it should make sense within the D&D system and not be as arbitrary and easy to create through mundane means as it is in DOS.

That said, the 1st level spell "Create and Destroy Water" has an option to "Destroy Water" which allows you to "destroy fog in a 30' cube within range." So D&D does have a low level method of dealing with fog effects. But it shouldn't be a mandatory spell to have because we can't go an hour without dealing with Fog effects.


I agree. Neat in DOS. Not consistent with D&D unless the spell or environment call for it. They need to tone it, and our interactions with it, way down.


Inventory management is always a problem in these kinds of games. But I don't think the core system in DOS is incompatible with D&D. Making it "less realistic" with some kind of auto-sell option isn't a fix.


The attack line visual (or something very much like it) should stay. It should just relay different information (like whether a target has half, three quarters, or total cover.) It could also be color-coded to indicate whether the attack is going to have Advantage or Disadvantage.

In this case I don't care whether it looks like DOS or not. Just that it's relaying mechanics relevant to D&D.


Yes, the mundane Jump action was unrealistic. What we saw was probably what we should be seeing from a Jump Spell. That's fine. There is a jump spell and it looks like they should be able to support it easily. As for Feather Fall... that's an iconic D&D spell. I was happy to see it implemented and happy to see verticality be a bigger part of the game. Not sure what the problem is there.



Default abilities like "Pin Down" on bows and "Bleeding Attack" on slash weapons isn't a D&D thing. D&D has a weapon effects system. Use it, not the DOS weapon system.


I know it must kind of hurt to not use so many of the "nifty" DOS mechanics in this D&D game... but they do need to live with the fact that they *are* building a D&D game.

dnd doesnt have weapon effect systems....

It most certainly does.

And it starts with not having weird abilities like the ability to pin and cause bleeding with mundane weapons.

Most notable and foundational parts of the 5e weapon system include:

1) Core Properties that define usability (for example): Finesse, Heavy, Light, Reach, Two-Handed, Thrown, Versatile, Special
2) Type: Slashing, Piercing, Bludgeoning
3) Material options: Wood, Steel/Iron, Silvered (Adamantine and Mithral only apply to armor in 5e)
4) Creator or intended user options (chart)
5) History details options (chart)
6) Minor properties options (chart)
7) Quirks options (chart)
8) Enhancement bonus (limited to +1, +2, or +3 in 5e)
9) And a plethora of historically "iconic" magic features that are often applied to certain types of weapons, but are (in practice) seen on other weapons in various adventures. Abilities like slaying (general), beserker, venom, dancing, defender, dragon slayer, flaming tongue, frost brand, giant slayer, lighting, thunderbolts, holy avenger, luck, disruption, smiting, terror, life stealer, speed, sharpness, vengeance, vorpal, wounding, and vicious. All of which are detailed in the Core DMG.

Further, I'd be remiss if I didn't mention two prominent *sub-systems*:

10) Sentience
11) Artifacts


Frankly, it's not a very complicated system and there is certainly enough in core for Larian to use to create a very recognizable D&D game over applying strange weapon effects/abilities/mechanics from DOS to D&D. I can be a DOS fan and still acknowledge that it's using a very different weapon system than the one that D&D uses.

you realize thats a completley different system to the one were talking about right?
that doesnt give you any more combat options at all

I am completely astonished that in a D&D game, people are actually calling for getting rid of surface interaction. That's ridiculous.

Yeah right?
this entire thread makes my head spin.
When have you ever heard of someone wanting to GET RID of features.

If someone decided to model accurate water physics into Turok 2 i definitly wouldnt bloody mind, sure theyll probably be compleltey pointless, but if Acclaim still had them lying around, why would i object to that?

Well this is a thread specifically about removing DOS gimmicks/features, so if it makes your head spin I would suggest you take your leave.

Personally I don’t mind surface interactions as long as the game isn’t built too much around them. If there’re just there for people to use if they wish, it’s fine. There are more pressing concerns pointed out in this thread.

Yes, but if taken too far, it just becomes another way of saying "make it look and play more like BG2." IF someone is arguing to get rid of surface interaction (did someone?), that would be too far (it is one of the features that made Larian's games stand out). Too prevalent in DOS games? Sure. Get rid of it? No way.

The whole point is to make it feel more like a BG game and less like a DOS game. They won’t be removing surface interactions altogether though so I wouldn’t worry about that.