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

So here is where I learned this term:
https://youtu.be/F0RW3upLoJI?t=870
On UI: 14:30, On Skeuomorphic UI: 15:20

In some ways old UI was far more invesive. But I felt to projected the feel of world better, then D:OS2 which is... abstract? Gamey?

That is an amazing video, thanks for posting. Monochromatic and skeumorphic was the artstyle the originals went for. Whereas Larian was "gamey" and colorful.

The original was more intrusive in the sense they took more of the screen (and I agree we do not need a U shaped UI), but was cleaner in the playable screen without the projected bars, percentages and lines.

I understand where Emriko is coming from completely and I'd have to agree with this. And you don't see it nearly as much on these forums from what I've experienced thus far, as elsewhere (thankfully). To some extent regardless of what angle of approach you're coming from, you have to come into these sort of things understanding the balance between what's likely to or has a reasonable chance for change and what's definitely not going to change. There's a fine yet defined line between truly constructive feedback, and beating the same drum repeatedly as an agent of chaos because choices were made that the person doesn't agree with. And so no one misunderstands what I'm saying: this isn't in any way, just like the point Em I believe is making, to say there's any issue with anyone expressing their feelings about the greater 'BG game' debate at large. But there's a difference between simply and constructively saying that and doing so in a rational/mature manner, and bringing up the same thought ad nauseum, interjecting it wherever possible. That's when it starts crossing the line from being just simply an expression of opinion, and becoming something that becomes counter-productive to the overall objective of constructive discussion and feedback for the overall community at large (and the atmosphere it takes place in).

For Annyliese: This kind of subject is exactly why I said what I did in response to your post the other day too. Constructive criticism and feedback presented in the proper manner is refreshing, and a healthy thing long term for the game and the community's gaming experience in the end...and to my mind input such as that should be positively reinforced whenever possible from anyone. And I'm sure Larian likely feels the same way. But I can definitely understand Em's angle on this as well, having seen more than my fill of it as of late.

Disclaimer: the above is in no way any commentary on the greater 99%/1% thought process or debate therein from where this tangent sprung - just simply reinforcing the specific thought here.

I think you're right in a way but do you know what criticism those that looks to hope BG3 will fail always say ? Something like "This game is not Baldur's Gate".

As everyone here on the official BG3's forum, I have great hopes for this game. Only the name of this game means a lot to me because BG is the best video game experience I had in my life. It absolutely defined all my tastes for video game. It's my top 1, and every RPG in a way were compared to it because it is the ultimate RPG experience to me.
(That doesn't mean it's absolutely perfect)

I'm clearly not alone thinking like this. Everywhere on forums, reddit, social media,... Whatever is their feelings or their opinions, there are many people talking about BG3 only because it's BG.

Reactions arround the game are very different. Some had already forgotten BG3 because it's TB. Others are waiting to see, other hate it and consider Larian/WoTC had betrayed the video game licence for a reason or another... Many others still hope to see a great RPG that will meet several expectations that suits the unbelievable experience they had with Baldur's Gate for the last 20 years.

I'm one of those and that's exactly why I'm here and why I'll play the EA.
I absolutely don't want a "copy" of the older BG.
I really love many fresh and interresting mecanics of DoS1/2 but when I hear about BG3/Larian, I really hoped the game will meet their awesome mecanics with the experience Baldur's Gate was.

It's a matter of taste but whatever you expect and love this new TB game, this new D&D5 game, this new awesome party based RPG or something else... There are still many people that are dissapointed for a reason or another. I know it because I'm talking about it a lot with many people on other forums, reddit or social media.

I think lots of little things could meet the expectations of many more players and that's why I'm here, trying to give a constructive feedback.
I don't deny that sometimes, the emotion is great because people here tend to love the game and don't want to talk about any changes (that's absolutely normal on the official forum) but also because in french we would say something like : this game walk on eggs...
According to me it will be a great RPG but it could be the end of something... Or it's ressurection.

Maybe I'm too optimistic, maybe I'm not a target for the marketing division of WoTc and/or Larian but I think it's still time to gather more people arround the game instead of dividing them.

I guess no one will read that

Haha. Making a false strawman claim by pushing a strawman yourself. Nice.

A strawman is when you make a up a false position for your opponent and argue against it. Your position is this:



I'm not seeing much, if any, distortion of your position on my end.

It is complete distortion, with a bit of ad hominem attack thrown in too. But I have no interest in arguing this or anything else with you.

To be fair a creature or player character of D&D5e would have more options than one of 2e and there are more mechanics in place in the game than in the old IE games so that would require a more complex UI than before.

That said, a skin that would be related to the style of previous games would be welcome, but an UI that gives the best functionality and the most info on screen should be the priority to make the combat more enjoyable.

It was not clear in the previous gameplays, but I hope that they UI (specially the spell UI) would let us get some kind of customization so you can group and move your spells. Maybe a fav tab with the spells/skills you use more often.

I really missed the "quick casting" UI used in games like NWN2 in other recent modern games like Stygia, Mordheim, Tyranny or Pathfinder. It´s a little clunky at high levels when you have a lot of spells/skills to choose from.

I have no problem with people who feel like any game isn't to their liking, even if I like the game. I also have no problem with people outright hating on a game I enjoy, so long as they can explain their reasoning well and give proper, constructive criticism of the game.

Preferences are things everyone has. Just like butt holes, everyone has one and they'll always stink at some point or another. ^_^

I do like to add in my input here and there and I do enjoy online debates because it helps keep my mind sharp and I may learn new things from people I'll likely never meet.

However, there are a few things that I feel should definitely be addressed, and I feel it applies to the whole BG3 v DOS2 discussion. There are several key differences between what has been shown for BG3 and what is in DOS and DOS2. It's also important to note that BG3 is not even close to being done so not all the aesthetics are final, and they may change significantly during early access, which is something that did happen with DOS2.

I like to use this analogy. A person says they like lemon cake, I say awesome. A person says they like chocolate cake, I say awesome. A person says "I like that lemon cake" while pointing at a chocolate cake makes me raise an eyebrow and go "that's not a lemon cake, it's a chocolate cake with lemon frosting." It looks the same but it's not the same at all.

That little bit of frosting is as much a part of the cake as the cake itself, and for some people that aesthetic and slight taste of the cake can ruin the whole cake for them and they can't get past it. But then there are the people who absolutely insist that the chocolate part of the cake is most definitely lemon and you simply cannot tell them otherwise.

For many, the frosting is no big deal, it's the cake sponge itself that matters. For others they haven't tasted that sponge yet but are judging the whole cake by the appearance and color of the frosting and determining if they like it or hate it. For others they take it as a whole, like some parts of it and dislike others. Maybe the flavors work well but there's a few bubbles of air, or the cake didn't bake fully and is still slightly gooey on the inside.

I feel this analogy applies to the discussion I've read so far. I, for one, am looking forward to tasting this "cake" of a game and seeing how it works out, and hopefully help make it the best "cake" it can be.

Agreed. But I don't think it is too hard to balance a functional UI with skeumorphic/monochromatic look.

Thanks that is very very interresting.
Hope Larian had/will have such an analyse while doing their game because it catch very interresting points about what people liked in the old games (and why they liked it).

man the UI, now weve hit rock bottom.

the Infinity engine UI is awfull. Blatantly.
no it doesnt look "integrated into the world" at all. Its just bad. i dont want to need 3 clicks to cast a spell

I think rock bottom is "those random rocks don't look like Baldur's Gate rocks" and asking for the developers to change them.

It's dated. Takes too much space and covers too much of the screen. U shape isn't necessary with higher resolution screens. Still, there is some functionality I wish Larian would borrow - or even better, from updated PoE2 design. I doesn't need to look the same. Just let me play the game, without having to spend 10 minutes sorting and assigning skills and items to the hot bar.

I find it odd that people say a game does or does not look like Baldur's Gate. Any game, no matter who the developer is, would be using modern graphics and technology so there won't be hand-drawn, 2-D, 8-bit Infinity Engine graphics or UI.

If it wasn't Larian, it would be Obsidion, Owlcat, or maybe none of them and we would't be getting a sequel because Wizards of the Coast would say no to each and every one of them. If it was one of them, it would still be following D&D 5E rules because that's what Wizards of the Coast want.

I honestly feel if another company was making BG3 the complaints wouldn't be "they're just remaking Divinity" but instead would be "They're trying to copy Divinity!"

Obsidian and Owlcat games (whatever they're TB or not, or both) are way closer to what BG1/2 feels and looked like and they also use more modern graphics and technology.
I don't think lot of people asked for 2-D and 8-bit infinity engine graphics or UI, even if that's something lots of you seems to think.

I guess if one of them was chosen by WoTC, whatever the rules, no one would even think about DoS.

Agreed. I think P:K is the most BG-like game of the modern era, for example. I wouldn't think of DOS.

But WotC did choose Larian. So it might give an incentive as to where they want the licence to go.

God damn it stop lying.

I love Pathfinder Kingmaker, i love it for one particular reason: Low(er)poly Models with Hand drawn textures.

You know what that DOESNT look like? Baldurs Gate.

Infinity engine games are the exact opposit of that, youd know that if youd be in any way interrested in the process of how this stuff gets made.
The infinity engines sprites were pre rendered.
that means that they could use higher fidelity 3D than any PC at that time cold render in real time and turn it into sprites. Some of the infinity engine stuff might be Handdrawn, im looking at IWD 1 here but i might be wrong.

Either way for readabilitys sake, The infinity engine games featured "high poly" base meshes with limited colour schemes to make them easier to read. So youd have relativeley big surfaces with the same "colour" , only variations in shading that was rendered.

Pathfinder Kingmaker is the exact opposit.
it uses Low poly (by todays standards) 3D models but hand paints the shadows on it. Lots of Kingmaker models look a bit like a beautifull mess when you look at em from a zoomed out perspective, when you zoom in you see the intricacies of the textures, some realy nice colour blending going on, realy neat hand painted shadows.

Not only is the process the opposit of one another, the stylistic choices are the opposit aswell.

Baldurs Gate and infinity Engine games go through readiability but high "fidelity" before baking it into sprites. Meanwhile Kingmaker is more like expertly painted warhammer miniatures.



Its hard to put these things into concrete terms, but TL;DR: youre wrong.

Larian, with its appeal to photorealism, is much closer to the original Art direction of the infinity engine.
that is high fidelity 3D with easily readable colours and photorealistic palettes that leave the colour variation to the in engine shading.


it just aggrevates me when you people are constantly saying things that are so blatantly wrong to anyone that even takes a cursory glance at what youre talking about, just to shit on something you hate out of principle.

I agree with the first part of what you said. As for the second, all I can say is if WoTC had chosen them instead of Larian, a lot of people would have thought about DOS, as in, "why oh why didn't they choose to use a game like DOS instead of PoE?" And I think WoTC had the foresight to avoid being in the position of having to ask themselves the same question.