Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Larian, beware of the influx of voices so early on

Just one thing i wanted to say that i hope Larian and others here are aware of regarding the massive influx of new voices here (mine included).

All it takes is a quick read through the forums, steam discussions, etc, to see there's clearly a massive pool of people that don't get the game, don't understand the concepts, don't understand what Early Access is, and don't understand Larians' vision for BG3.


I wrote a massive entry and then just decided to TLDR and keep it short and to-the-point.



TLDR:

Don't be so quick to make changes or take on feedback and make decisions on it this early on. Wait until the initial hype dies-down and the people that truly care about the game are able to not be drowned-out by the influx of new voices and streamer-clusters and people that don't really fully understand what's going on and feel like somehow just because they bought the game that they are owed changes based on how THEY want the game to be.

Don't think there is risk of that. There was an outcry about how awful the armor system was during DOS2 feedback and it changed nothing.

Larian's vision is a big reason for the feedback being so negative - it's not an interpretation of DnD, it's an adaptation with a lot of things included that might make a great game but do not make a great DnD game.

Take environmental damage - The constant fire damage sapping hit points because fire bolt sets things on fire is entirely Larian ideology - the fire does not set cobblestones on fire. It also got changed to 1d6 instead of 1d10 because it sets on fire, but that is not DnD that is Larian.

I can accept certain things need to change to fit into the game, but ultimately crafting from potatoes and eggplants is a Larian thing, not a DnD thing.

TLDR: Larian has taken DnD, spun it larian-style and has failed to hit overwhelmingly positive.

I'm actually more worried about the opposite, that everyone who is testing and voicing their opinion on how stuff works will be disregarded because they have committed to a design philosophy. So cantrips being overpowered, jumping disengage for everyone, etc. will stay despite pretty vocal opposition.

I'm just happy they changed their dialogue from the ridiculous past tense to in character dialogue. Past tense dialogue would've been a dealbreaker for me and since I got my wish and didn't sacrifice the goat in vain, I'll swallow any other camels.

Being real though, isn't that you having expectations of the game being something it's not (A DND clone), and being upset about that on the grounds that you had expectations and because they aren't met somehow it's taking something away from you or "What DND is" ?

I'm just trying to gain insight to the mentality here on these sorts of things.

Baldurs Gate is a DnD story. Larian made clear the mechanics are based on the 5e ruleset, the most popular version of the rulesets that exist.

Alot of people were or are exited because Larian is a great company when it comes to writing, characters, story but tend to have trouble with mechanics, but since they were adapting 5e which is a very solid system it was believed that weakness would be compensated.

In short alot of the negative feedback comes from the fact that the game doesn't feel at all like 5e, the ruleset its supposedly based on.

It plays more akin to DivOs 2 than 5e and thats simply not what a lot of people hoped for and I would argue its not an unfair expectation when the developer stressed that the game is based on the 5e ruleset.

Now a lot of the most basic mechanics of 5e are either missing, were replaced or were drastically changed. Missing would be acceptable, its EA. Replaced would have to have a damn good reason, outright adding new mechanics that are not part of 5e also has to have a good reason.

Speaking as someone who's fine with the changes they made to the system on principle even if there are some things I wish they'd kept the same, I don't think that was an unfair expectation to have. Larian devs talked a lot about trying to make this game feel like an authentic tabletop experience, so the degree of change that's been presented goes against the expectations they were creating.

Don't worry, they know how to handle this. They had plenty of training with DOS 1 & 2. We weren't much silent with those titles either.

Didn't work that much in those games tho, did it.

There are really so many people that dislike the bonus disengage for everyone? Because I vote for give shove and disengage as a bonus action for the tabletop too.

Do not remember the last time any player forfeit an attack to use the so-situational-that-is-nearly-useless shove action.

That change eliminates one of the class features of the rogue. Shove as a bonus action is usually only accessible for the shield master feat user, for a good reason.

I see a LOT of people that just don't understand DnD. It is frustrating, both as a player and a DM of 5e, to see people complaining about legitimate 5e systems. It is nice to finally have a 5e based game, and I personally will be upset if they change the 5e mechanics to suit the complaints of people who have no idea what they are talking about when it comes to Dungeons and Dragons 5e.

What the hell are you talking about? DOS 2 is one of the most successful CRPGs of the last decade. Where do you live? In a cave?

IMHO it did: feedback was considered, reviewed and often incorporated but they didn't concede to everything, no matter how strongly expressed; the outcome of which can often result in something that nobody is really happy with.

It's a tricky one because often the self-styled hardcore gamers want something they genuinely believe will improve the game but which could alienate the majority of players (and no amount of calling them "casuals" will alter the fact that games developers have to eat) so they have to be careful to not go too niche; but then again there are conspicuous examples of Really Bad Ideas which have been impervious to feedback and excused with "artistic integrity" which have ruined not just games but reputations.

I'm also reminded of the likes of Oblivion which even now gets a lot of hostility on the basis that "Morrowind was better", but much of what is "wrong" with it was due to Bethsoft catering to all the feedback they got about stuff that was wrong with Morrowind. Fortunately most of its (largely subjective) failings can be addressed with mods, but it's interesting that the game that was trying to address the criticisms of its predecessor got infinitely more criticism because of it.

Please don't pass opinion off as fact.

I only thing I don't love about the game is the performance I'm getting, which I'm hoping will be worked out while it's optimized.
Everything else is great.

I think it will be harder for them to ignore the posts this time... Alienating a certain amount of people for your own IP is one thing but they probably don't want to alienate the D&D fanbase when creating a D&D game. Of course I guess the reality is they mainly have to please WOTC and Hasbro so they can alienate everybody as long as the game makes the right amount of money. :p

Shame. I grew to dislike the system a lot, after initial positive first impression.

I mean the game is designed for fans of DnD, that is why they got the rights to make BG3 and call it DnD. If they change the DnD 5e ruleset for one, it will piss off the very fanbase the game is designed for. For two, it could potentially piss off WotC who own DnD and could yank any future DnD titles.

This game is designed for a specific audience. It's okay to not be the person the game was designed to please. What is NOT okay, is expecting the devs to change it and then piss off the very people the game was made for!

Isn't 3.5e still more popular than 5e?