Larian Banner: Baldur's Gate Patch 9
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 18 of 18 1 2 16 17 18
Joined: Apr 2020
Location: Boston , MA
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Apr 2020
Location: Boston , MA
Originally Posted by Warlocke
Swen actually said that early in the development that WotC was much more hands on and cautious in their review process, and it is only after Larian built up their trust were they given more freedom. That might have been in the Dropped Frames interview.

Anyway, I’m not sure what the point is here.


They did say that. But not micromanaging, just overseeing. (They said they share the same idea of creating adventures and quests).

And more likely to stay true to the lore itself, because starting at Avernus was a decision that came from WotC (and likely mindflayers plot).


Joined: Jan 2018
W
old hand
Offline
old hand
W
Joined: Jan 2018
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Originally Posted by Warlocke
Swen actually said that early in the development that WotC was much more hands on and cautious in their review process, and it is only after Larian built up their trust were they given more freedom. That might have been in the Dropped Frames interview.

Anyway, I’m not sure what the point is here.


I guess you lost the point when you introduce the Wotc/Larian thing again grin


My point was that WotC gave Larian the rights to BG3 over other studios which were making games more faithful to BG’s mechanics specifically because WotC liked what they saw in DOS2. Therefore, Larian has no imperative to do anything differently in their formula, as it is that formula which got them the gig.

Whether they really like DOS2’s gameplay or are ambivalent seems to me to be a bit of a silly tangent that doesn’t in any way address the core conceit - Larian could make a different game than the one that they are but they don’t need to.

Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Originally Posted by Warlocke
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Originally Posted by Warlocke
Swen actually said that early in the development that WotC was much more hands on and cautious in their review process, and it is only after Larian built up their trust were they given more freedom. That might have been in the Dropped Frames interview.

Anyway, I’m not sure what the point is here.


I guess you lost the point when you introduce the Wotc/Larian thing again grin


My point was that WotC gave Larian the rights to BG3 over other studios which were making games more faithful to BG’s mechanics specifically because WotC liked what they saw in DOS2. Therefore, Larian has no imperative to do anything differently in their formula, as it is that formula which got them the gig.

Whether they really like DOS2’s gameplay or are ambivalent seems to me to be a bit of a silly tangent that doesn’t in any way address the core conceit - Larian could make a different game than the one that they are but they don’t need to.


No problem, I know.
That's always the last argument when someone don't agree with a player saying that the game could/should be a little bit less DoS and a little bit more BG smile

Sorry about those 2 useless posts.

Last edited by Maximuuus; 25/09/20 08:02 PM.
Joined: Apr 2020
Location: Boston , MA
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Apr 2020
Location: Boston , MA
Originally Posted by IrenicusBG3
Originally Posted by Warlocke
Swen actually said that early in the development that WotC was much more hands on and cautious in their review process, and it is only after Larian built up their trust were they given more freedom. That might have been in the Dropped Frames interview.

Anyway, I’m not sure what the point is here.


They did say that. But not micromanaging, just overseeing. (They said they share the same idea of creating adventures and quests).

And more likely to stay true to the lore itself, because starting at Avernus was a decision that came from WotC (and likely mindflayers plot).



On that topic about overseeing timestamp 15:32, per Mike Mearls:

https://youtu.be/Ju12JNh8gJs?t=932

Last edited by IrenicusBG3; 25/09/20 09:22 PM.
Joined: Jan 2018
W
old hand
Offline
old hand
W
Joined: Jan 2018
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Originally Posted by Warlocke
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Originally Posted by Warlocke
Swen actually said that early in the development that WotC was much more hands on and cautious in their review process, and it is only after Larian built up their trust were they given more freedom. That might have been in the Dropped Frames interview.

Anyway, I’m not sure what the point is here.


I guess you lost the point when you introduce the Wotc/Larian thing again grin


My point was that WotC gave Larian the rights to BG3 over other studios which were making games more faithful to BG’s mechanics specifically because WotC liked what they saw in DOS2. Therefore, Larian has no imperative to do anything differently in their formula, as it is that formula which got them the gig.

Whether they really like DOS2’s gameplay or are ambivalent seems to me to be a bit of a silly tangent that doesn’t in any way address the core conceit - Larian could make a different game than the one that they are but they don’t need to.


No problem, I know.
That's always the last argument when someone don't agree with a player saying that the game could/should be a little bit less DoS and a little bit more BG smile

Sorry about those 2 useless posts.


All gravy, beau. 😘😘😘

Joined: Mar 2003
Location: Canada
Support
Offline
Support
Joined: Mar 2003
Location: Canada
Originally Posted by sethmage
if i had to pick what irks me the most, it's current poster, very similar to DOS2

The artists actually tried a few different things to avoid that; if you want to feature the characters and have the name/logo prominent, though, there are a limited number designs that are effective and look good.

Joined: Jun 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2020
Originally Posted by vometia
Which is fine, as long as it stays away from "that" discussion (by way of an explanation, for a time it was at risk of becoming the TB/RT forum as the debate was going on in many different topics at the same time, to the exclusion of the actual discussion).

In terms of "generic action and twitch combat" I think can see the point. Where e.g. Mass Effect could be viewed as an "action RPG" in a literal sense, I think they took it too far with Mass Effect 2 which felt way too much like a shooter for too much of the time, which IMHO was not really conducive to the gameplay. Which is of course subjective and many people very vocally preferred it to the original; and while I didn't hate the game overall, I don't think their move in that direction enhanced gameplay, which I preferred to be more methodical and less, well, shooty.


Yeah, and to argue that anything action is an evolution of more cerebral gameplay is just wrong. You may have a preference for one over the other (I personally don't), but that's different.

Last edited by Sven_; 26/09/20 11:21 AM.
Page 18 of 18 1 2 16 17 18

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5