Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General BG3, DOS and the D&D rule-set

The changes that some people want just aren’t going happen. Not because they are unpopular, but because they simply aren’t the game Larian are making. Between them and Wizards of the Coast, they decided what they wanted to achieve and have put in a huge amount of work to build it. I think people should respect or at least accept that.

Some minor changes might be possible through optional game modes, but not things like fundamental mechanics, world design, story, etc. that many complain about. I don’t see much point in arguing about things that are already set.

I think it will be a shame if many fans of the original games don’t give it a chance because they are convinced it isn’t Baldurs Gate enough. Not because I don’t want to hear their opinions, but because they might miss out on enjoying what could be a very good game, even it’s not quite the game they were hoping for.

Most game series that have kept going over similar timescales has changed just as much and sometimes more. Final Fantasy went from turn based to action, GTA from top down to full 3D open world, Resident Evil lost the fixed camera angles, etc. The main difference is that BG disappeared and other companies have released games structurally similar to the originals since. That’s fine, but really no reason why BG3 should have gone the same way.

His post didn’t read that way to me but that’s fair.

There are some aspects of the game, such as it being turn based or being called “Baldur’s Gate 3,” for example, that are absolutely not going to change at this point, but people like to keep exhausting the issue because . . . it makes them feel good? I don’t know. I don’t see the point in retreading that ground on those sorts of matters endlessly.

As to market appeal, broader considerations definitely play into the design. It doesn’t matter that it is a relatively niche market. In order to make all of this effort worth their time and justify the licensing fees to make a sequel to an old school legendary title (even one as niche as BG), Larian needs to deliver a product that maximizes earnings potential within the limits of their particular target market.

This is actually what the essence of 5th edition is, as it was designed to be as approachable and easy to pick up as possible compared to its more esoteric predecessors.

I don't know how going from RtWP to turn-based, removing day/night cycle or limiting exploration, among other things is appealing to large markets. In fact the trend is the opposite where many franchises (JRPGs and cRPGs) went from turn-based to action. RtWP is the midpoint between them and it seems more logic to improve it or create a new system that would be more dynamic. A game with a technology from 20 years ago was able to represent a more believable world.

I agree that at this point they will not change the core mechanics, but it looks they decided to play safe instead of pushing the franchise and the RPG genre forward. It would made more sense to start from where BG2 left instead of starting from where DOS 2 left (which had much lower standards).

Any business will always want to maximize their earnings. This is obvious. But the key point, what I believe @etonbears was making, is that the target audience/market for classic, old-school cRPGs is very small. By my estimation it is only about 2 million, roughly the sales number for D:OS2. I don't see how Larian can spend a AAA budget on BG3 and be limited to a max sales number that small. Even DA:I, a game that tried to be both classic cRPG and open world action RPG at the same time and probably disappointed both audiences, still managed to bring in 10 million buyers. So I think any AAA RPG needs to be able to do at least that much in sales numbers to be financially viable.

I don't think that WotC's sales forecasts are based on Call of Duty, so probably they are not projecting 10 million+ units.
But it bugs me that they want to sell more and are implementing TB combat, given that JRPGS are changing combat systems from TB to real time because it sells more.

Because they are changing RTwP to TB(Or both in the same game), that sells more, not RTWP to Real time.

That said, I´m perfectly ok that they continue making games that are not ARPG in real-time because there are enough of the former already to choose from. I hope games with alternative mechanics different from ARPGs in RT could still have profit margins so we could have more of them.

It was very easy to implement AD&D2 into RtwP because that was a much simpler game. I don't see how you can adapt 5e faithfully into a RtwP game. You would have to cut out so much. Reactions, bonus actions, all would become normal abilities, and then how would you balance all that? Juggling cooldown timers? Yuck. D:OS2 and XCom have proven that turn based tactical games have a market, so it isn't such a big risk. Playing it safe? Sure? Larian are making this game, and they should play to their strengths and do what they do best. That will make the best product possible. And I don't think there is as much hunger for RtwP as you do. Pillars of Eternity sputtered out and died in the second installment. I have never met anybody that says they like the gameplay for Dragon Age: Inquisition. Among those I know that do like it, it is the world, the lore, and the characters which draw them.

Anyway, If this game is successful, hopefully there will be a lot more D&D games to come, spanning a variety of genres and with different budgets. Despite owning the license to such a prolific and influential game as D&D, WotC has been pretty shy about engaging in the video game market. Now they are breaking out a bit. I don't know about Dark Alliance and their GoPro trailer, also, Drizzt . . . Blehg. But If WotC are feeling more comfortable getting their IP out there then maybe you will see the RtwP game of your dreams.

74000 backers for the PoE's crowdfunding campaign.
That's more than DoS + DoS2.
They obviously missed some things to keep their audience hyped (what Larian did) but the hunger is here.

PoE had a better hype just talking about the video game Baldur's Gate, not about D&D, about The Realms and/or a TB game mode.... Imagine if they were...

I hope Larian won't miss that.
I guess this audience is not (as we can read here) "a few haters that only complain and live in the past".

The name is not the game.

PS : DA:I is bad, but EA sold way more units than every game we're talking about.

I just want a great D&D game - I just purchased DOS2 but i cant bring myself to play it so close to early access BG3 in August (hopefully) - anything else i buy will just sit in steam collecting dust until I get a chance to play BG3 - & you are spot on about Blade Runner - legend of a movie - god the new one was rubbish ..so disappointing


maybe you have a better strategy ... to wait for BG3.

DOS 2 have many interesting features too...the action points, the ergonomics overall is spectacular, it became easy to manage combat despite the many alternatives, items and spells one could use.

There are so many good aspects of DOS, that they raised expectations for BG3, combining their engine with D&D rules.

as for blade runner 2...well.. I did the opposite...first I lowered my expectations based on average movie sequels...and then enjoyed it a lot.
I like movies with less dialogues and without excessive fast action sequences.

I also suggest for Larian Studios an alternative mode to play BG3 : minimalist mode - with 20% barrels, items and boxes only - kind of like the native indian level of economic trading.

(in this mode...you stick to mostly the same magical items, and just improve them throughout the game...and when you find one, it means a lot more.

I guess they can call it the "Low Carbon emissions mode" ..hahaha..

Eh? This makes no sense.

You’re saying Dragon Age and many JRPGs moved towards action RPG because that’s where the bigger market is, which is fair enough. So then how is it “playing safe” to go the other way and make BG3 even more tactical and even closer to the tabletop game?

Dragon Age games are one way of “moving the genre forward” from the old Baldurs Gate games. They are still real time with pause, but with 3D graphics, fully voiced dialogue, cinematics, and a more action feel. I like them, although IMO they made some mistakes in Inquisition.

What Larian have done with Baldurs Gate is also moving forward, just in a different direction. You wanted something else, which is fine, but just personal preference. There’s no need to keep dumping on the developers.

Honestly this is a great time for RPG fans in general. A few years ago people were predicting that mainstream single player RPS were a dying breed, and building games around things like micro transactions were the only way developers could justify the costs. BioWare certainly headed in that direction, but they may turn it around for DA4 after the reaction they’ve had recently. The Witcher 3 however had phenomenal success, and with Cyberpunk, CDRP seem to be going much more RPG. Vampire: The Masquerade – Bloodlines 2 looks interesting too. Pillars of Eternity and Pathfinder revived the old Infinity Engine style, while Larian are completely revamping turn based RPGs. Then we have the likes of Disco Elysium snapping up awards for doing things differently again.

The genre is flourishing at the moment, with different developers taking different approaches, so there’s basically something for everyone.

Use the pinned topic, please. Stray TB/RTwP posts are likely to be deleted.

It's getting old. Like as if nobody can think outside of those square boxes anymore. Nu-XCom for instance has proven that turn-based can even have the look&feel of an action movie… it's not simply "good old TB" (capital T, capital B). Additionally, Baldur's Gate has never been solely about its combat -- though being a comparably combat heavy game it was a big part of it.

In general, the only vote that matters is eventually with your wallet. If you don't like something about a game, the setting, the itemization, whatever, you don't buy it, whilst at the same time supporting games that are more to your tastes.

I think it applies to all of us. I’ll copy my comments to pinned topic if anyone wants to reply to me.

And apologies for my part in it.

Exactly what I said, the choice for TB has nothing to do with market, which is going towards action. They chosen TB and other DOS2 mechanics for BG3 because they already had that ready for DOS2, so they didn’t have experiment further. They said themselves, they chose TB because they had lots of experience with it.

Keeping the same DOS2 mechanics is a missed opportunity for pushing the genre forward. Of course there are improvements (verticality, branching decisions), but there are many other compromises from prior BG2 mechanics.

Cyberpunk 2077 on other hand is really pushing the genre further in many aspects with a huge amount of new ideas along with fantastic world simulation and immersion.

And regarding the DD 5th edition rule set you always have to do adaptation from tabletop to a video game. Even doing TB you have to adapt (like they are doing with reaction), so this is not an excuse to choose an archaic system.

I’ve copied my post to the pinned topic if you want to talk about there.

Slightly OT: Whether Cyberpunk is really pushing much remains to be seen. The Witcher games are more like side-steps to me, of the "interactive movie" kind. In particular the 3rd game for all its redeeming qualities almost plays itself. The RPG mechanics meanwhile are pretty shallow -- and that's from somebody who argues that Arkane's Prey offers a deeper RPG experience than many a self-proclaimed RPG. Probably a reason why the ad blurb itself lists Cyberpunk as an "open-world action adventure story" kind of game.

I'm personally also getting tired of every big budget game eventually going down the action route, but that's me. Whether BG3 will truly break new ground or not, I'm more interested in the long-term direction Larian may be heading into than CD Projekt Red. Larian also share much more in common with Bioware of old, which is translating the pen&paper feels to a screen. Both companies are hailing from completely different ideas and ideals anyhow.

I agree with @IrenicusBG3 that games like CP2077 are what are really showcasing true roleplying nowadays. And TW3 is a fantastic true roleplaying game with the player's input into playing the role of the Witcher being extensive and significant. As such, CDPR is for me the best RPG studio out there at present. By contrast, beginning with 4e and now with 5e, D&D has become less and less about roleplaying and more and more about combat. D&D now is just a tactical combat game with some RP elements mixed in, and this seems to be how BG3 is shaping up, which is not surprising because this was the case with the D:OS games as well. Now there's nothing inherently wrong with a game being a tactical combat game. Just don't call it an RPG.

The 5th edition has its fans and critics, but the common consensus is that 5e is the most-RP focused of the latest editions; for many good reasons.

Sorry I don't see that. But then again, maybe the very definition and understanding of what constitutes RP has been subverted nowadays. I mean, we have people on this forum saying that in an RPG the story and the characters and the lore don't matter and it's the rules and mechanics that are central to the game. When presented with that as the argument for what is an RPG, what's there for me say to that?

Yeah, 5e has a lot of changes to make combat more fluid and engaging, but there is nothing in there to prevent good role playing. I’ve played a warlock / arcane trickster who was 100% RP, did not have a single combat ability, and it was amazing.