Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Better without the Baldur's Gate name?

Dirt with millennia of history, though!

It seems like the complaint has thankfully gone away from the "BG3 doesn't look like a BG game" vein to one of "BG3 shouldn't look like DOS2." At least there is involves a clearer definition of terms. As for that argument, I am okay with it lookng similar to DOS2, since I loved that game. As you have expressed yourself, you didn't like DOS2 very much at all, which leads you to dislike the similarity. I can understand that. But I think we need a better argument than that (which you and/or others might have stated already. I haven't followed every last post). Ideally, a fresh new look that everyone (or a substantial majority) liked would be great, but that comes at the cost of time and money, and worst of all, is risky (since you don't know how the 'new look' would be received). For all we know, WotC might never have agreed to the deal if they didn't make it similar.

You made it pretty clear you didn't like D:OS2, so I wouldn't expect this to suit someone like you. But you have to admit, this is all a matter of preference.

Here's to help.

In debates, there are a few techniques that are heavily discouraged because they don't actually help the debate, but they are things that happen regularly, in politics, in forums, in sports or whatever.

1. The Strawman. A strawman argument is where a person creates a caricature of the opponents argument and make arguments against the caricature and not actually arguing against what the person you are debating is actually saying.

2. The Ad Hominym. This is a flat out rude technique. Basically you are insulting a person to discredit what they're saying. It's going "this person is a big doo-doo head and a doo-doo head couldn't possibly know anything about (subject)."

Since the settings of Rivellon and the Sword coast both have European-Plains&Seas&Mountains-medieval art (and that´s all they have in common) I fail to see why they should waste the time of designers and animators to recreate new models and textures for walls, rocks and brushes if they have them already; just because some people think they look like some game they do not like.

Maybe if we´re talking about character or creature design, I may agree, but let´s be honest, if a tree looks like a tree and a rock looks like a rock, I do not think they have to change the model so they do look like less "DoS2".

I think they can spend their time doing other things for the game.

Exactly

I believe this dates from a time when straw men were literal things that were used for e.g. bayonet practice and it was observed that it was easier to fight a constructed straw man than an actual person, hence the subsequent application in debating to an artificially constructed version of someone else's position.

Of course I could look up the precise etymology but that would be boring!

Ok. I don't think I made a caricature of any argument. My comparison was, I think, pretty fair and accurate.

No, you didn't. IMHO it was a reasonable comparison.

And that's the point. I shouldn't have to have liked D:OS2 in order to like BG3.

That's your opinion and preference. Others can and do have different preferences and priorities. I don't care for and don't want any voiceovers. Imagine how much else they could do with the game if they did away with voiceovers. In this vein, I would much rather they spend their time fixing the look of the game than so many other things they're spending their time on.

Actually, about 3/4 of the game engine was updated or rewritten, and in addition to graphics quality improvements, there were also some changes to file formats used to make assets easier to manage, etc. I'm not sure about the basic textures, but no models / icons / characters / etc are being reused* (textures would at least be looked at for quality vs size; as mentioned, even if entirely new a texture of a common rock is going to be relatively similar to an old texture of a common rock).


* Obviously during development there were a lot of placholder and reused assets, replaced as development progressed.

You should really label this message as "important" and use it as a banner of the forum. And share it in RPG codex and steam forums too.

Early Access will give people a better look at the gameworld. If some still think it 'looks' like D:OS 2 after that, the actual assets being different probably won't matter.

its irrelevant if the engine is rewirtten.

if you sticky that then people will find something else.

Wether or not the engine is the same is irrelevant, its the game you make in it.
This is just one point of contention people will pick up to complain about.

In reality it is not the FACT that the engine is based on the OS2 engine. Its that they dont like the idea that it isnt exactly how they imagined it in their head.
Almost any complaints about the game not beeing "Baldurs gate enaugh" are a smokescreen.
Theres no point adressing those arguments since they are all bad faith arguments.

you cannot win.

Indeed!

That's an extremely important point too - what we've seen thus far is both (a) just a sliver of even the Act 1 content by all accounts, and even then (b) anywhere from 3 to 7 months old by the time we get to experience any of it. Not saying what ends up being experienced will satisfy say kath or some others in the end, but the point being, our exposure and experience, regardless of which side of the fence on this issue you fall currently, is extremely limited at the moment.

Had similar experience but when coming to US. Some say seeing something on pictures isn't the same as seeing them inperson, but I feel it's the opposite. Places always look far more interesting through a lense.

In many cases I'd agree with you....but try coming back over and visiting Crater Lake in Oregon at some point in your life if possible - I'd be curious to see if you felt the same there. As long as you visit on either a cloudless day, or a day with blue skies and a few white puffy clouds, I've yet to see a photo that did justice to the comparative of seeing it with my own eyes.

Indeed!

Ah, but could the reality compare with my childhood memories (a different sort of lens)?

Thats good to hear. Another issue I think is that alot of the footage we see Swen constantly adjusts the camera and I'm one of those players who prefer the rigid isometric view. Like I didnt even know you could slightly adjust the camera in D:OS1 before you announced in the EE that the camera "now has full 360 movement" instead of whatever the original had. All comes down to preference.