Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Joined: Oct 2020
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
Joined: Oct 2020
Larian, please change the game title: I can't stand "BG3-don't-feel-BG" threads anymore!!! I think that if you change the title to Neverwinter Nights 3 or Temple of Elemental Evil 2 people will stop complaining!

Joking aside, this game is great, and a great adaptation of the D&D ruleset and the Forgotten Realms setting. I really like what I see here. I want to give positive feedback for a change.

Before someone says anything, yes I was born in the 80s and I have extensively played BG and BG2, and PnP RGPs. I also agree that the implementation of the D&D ruleset could be further improved, D:OS mechanics should be toned down, and having a larger party would be great. No, I don't want RtwP - this was a limitation of BG and BG2 IMO. But other than that the game is awesome. Keep up the good work.

Last edited by Gabriel AT; 11/10/20 02:17 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Call it Gygax Reborn


What is the problem you are solving? Does your proposed change solve the problem? Is your change feasible? What else will be affected by your change? Will your change impact revenue? Does your change align with the goals and strategies of the organizations (Larian, WotC)?
Joined: Oct 2020
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
Joined: Oct 2020
Better yet, Sword Coast Legends 2. Pleople will have zero expectations for this game.

Joined: Jun 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2020
Wait there are people like the OP that don't feel like this is a BG game... omg they do come with brains!!! I personally think it should be called Wooby Jacks Guide to Faerun! okay still working on the title, maybe....

I actually agree with pretty much everything the OP states. well except for the titles it would just change the 'This isn't NWN it's DOS' or this isn't 'TEE it's DOS' by the haters, and close minded. Some of the DOS elements can be profound and could be toned down. Yet I also see that it's Larian not wanting to make a DOS game persay but it's their way of adding more tactics to battles, or they are doing it subconciously because they've not gotten over DOS habits. We as those that are playing EA can let them no with arguements such as OP, giving examples of things that don't seem to mesh. For instance the placement of barrels and such in this spot makes no sense. I've suggested that in the first ruin the barrels be removed simply because they make no sense why'd this group of adventurers be carrying that much oil. Especially when they figure on carrying loot out afterwards.

Though the above might be explained that they brought this much oil in case they needed it, and were planning on leaving it if need be. Maybe they planned to burn some undead with a trap, maybe they planned to tar and feather someone, or brought it in case they needed to refuel the lamps, or torches or whatever where in the ruins in the first place. Simply using the same mechanics as this doesn't make it DOS, or Jabby Wookies Guide. Now if the classes were all DOS, and it was set in DOS world then yeah I'd be on the DOS band wagon, and shaking my finger at Larian Studios harder then anyone else.

Joined: Oct 2020
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Oct 2020
If you take the time to read the FAQ it states that the game is very much a continuation of the BG series but is 100 years into the future. It's early access and they dont want to spoil the storyline. There are subtle hints in the game about the characters being something more than regular adventurers.

Joined: Oct 2020
D
addict
Offline
addict
D
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Shade_whisper
If you take the time to read the FAQ it states that the game is very much a continuation of the BG series but is 100 years into the future. It's early access and they dont want to spoil the storyline. There are subtle hints in the game about the characters being something more than regular adventurers.

Psssst. Might want to read OP's entire post wink

Joined: Oct 2020
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Shade_whisper
If you take the time to read the FAQ it states that the game is very much a continuation of the BG series but is 100 years into the future. It's early access and they dont want to spoil the storyline. There are subtle hints in the game about the characters being something more than regular adventurers.



I don't understand your point. Maybe you didn't read everything that I wrote?

Joined: Oct 2020
L
stranger
Offline
stranger
L
Joined: Oct 2020
I thought this was going to take a different direction.... I would love the title to be 'Baldur's Gate III' That way it would nicely sit after BG & BG II in my steam library.

Joined: Oct 2020
G
stranger
Offline
stranger
G
Joined: Oct 2020
idk, I'm kind of a fan of the "BG3-don't-feel-BG" I understand the need for a game to change to stay relevant and there are some changes I'm actually glad are being made, for instance I am a fan not having RtwP. (I would pause so much it wouldn't matter) so I'm glad that change is being made. Only feel like if they made just a couple of these changes the complaints from OGBG fan boys would shrink down. (and if it was my way there would be more XD!!)

Again just my opinions on why it doesn't "feel" like the OGBG ( I still love the game cant get enough!.. just give me a bigger party XD)

1 - Visual - I think a lot of it stems from the visual similarities BG3 has to DOS. the game looks and kinda feels a lot like DOS with D&D concepts thrown in there. Don't get me wrong, I thank is visually beautiful but you cant deny some times it feels like we are playing a DOS game.

2 - big party - the main complaint of OGBG fan boy's (my self included) both BG games have had a party cap of 6. this offered maximum party diversity in the game. I don't see us getting that type of diversity play out of a party size of 4. Pulse if the first 2 games had a cap of 6 why wouldn't the 3rd?

3 - no weapons from past games - A small but understandable complaint. I mean would it kill them to put some of the OG items in there?

4 - Party Members - ( I under stand its EA and we might get more) the lack of party members. only like 5 to pick from? but I can only bring 3? what if I want 3 pally's two theif's and one ranger. that's one thing that was unique about OGBG

Joined: Oct 2020
B
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
B
Joined: Oct 2020
Theres BG dont feel BG and then theres it plays way more like divinity than it does D&D. Play it like Divinity its easy, play it like D&D its a wall. With too much stuff changed from the ruleset for no good reason, primary example being cantrips with surface effects. For some reason? Maybe. No good reason is accurate.

Joined: Oct 2020
D
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
D
Joined: Oct 2020
I think the main reason for "it does not feel like baldurs gate" is not the branding and the story.
Right now the game is just excessivly far away from DnD5e. Baldurs Gate is a name of the DnD franchise. People expect to play a PC DnD adaptation. Right now that is not it. The "divinity-ish" elements are so present, that you are less working with DnD mechanics and more working with divinity mechanics. Thats why people call it divinity 3.

I played BG1 and 2 hundreds of hours as well as DOS2. I enjoyed both styles very much. And this game just feels more like DOS2, because its - arguably unnecessarily - far away from DnD.
The story is pretty damn promising to me, i like the setting, i like the chars. But its just not a DnD PC game right now. The most used and prominent game mechanics, especially in combat, are not DnD. Larian did bent or flat out break the DnD ruleset very very much to make the divinity style elements (such as all the explosives, surface effects, elemental ammunition, throwables) most prominent.
I think its a very fair point to say that this game is basicly DOS3 in a faerun setting and not BG3 with a "larian touch".

Baldurs Gate and DnD belong to each other. Its one Franchise. If you take the "Baldurs Gate" but drop the DnD, it is not really Baldurs Gate anymore.

Last edited by DuderusMcRuleric; 12/10/20 12:50 PM.
Joined: Dec 2017
F
stranger
Offline
stranger
F
Joined: Dec 2017
Hello to all,

I think there's a big misunderstanding about what baldur's gate basically is.

I already want to say that I'm a big fan of the saga, baldur's gate was my first RPG and one of my first games.
I played icewinder dale, pillar of eternity, neverwinter night, the first fallout etc ...

So the RPGs old scholl I know them well and I love them, but to be honest their strength was not the gameplay but the feeling of freedom the narration their atmosphere and background.

In this sense Baldur's 3 has all good, after more than 30 hours in the early access I feel freer than most of the RPGs I've played, the narration is largely worthy of a baldur's gate, the interaction with the companions makes me think a lot of dragon age origin, the universe has nothing to do with divinity which was cartoon and light while it's photorealistic and it's clearly dark fantasy.

To sum up, I think that saying that baldurs gate 3 is not a baldurs makes as much sense as saying that a game like the witcher 3 or mass effect is not an RPG because there is an action side to it that is missing the essence of what an RPG is.

The essence of baldur's gate is its dark fantasy universe, its dungeon and dragon sides, its narration, its feeling of freedom of action to make a quest, its characters with whom you can create links.

Sorry but if you really invest yourself on this point baldur's gate 3 is better baldur's gate than the previous ones, on the other hand yes it's modernised and it's a very good thing, so for people who say it's not a baldur's I invite them either to try to keep an open mind on the fact that modernising the license is not only not to destroy it but also to allow a wider audience who honestly would never have played at the first one what in the end can only sublimate it.

After all, if you are disappointed because you don't find this 90's RPG side of the game passing your way and playing a pillar of eternity, wasteland, desperados this nostalgic boomer style is not missing, but it's just not part of Larian's DNA which wants to make every time they make a game innovative in terms of gameplay, narration and multiplayer experience.

They fought to get the license as the boss is a big fan of this one that wizard coast doesn't give it to just anyone and it feels like from the first minutes of the game but they did it Larian style which besides being a good thing is likely to give birth to one of the best rpg of these decades.

I think that just for that the studio deserves that we keep an open mind that we don't get stuck on details (like six characters) that they certainly had in mind during the development of the game on which they made a choice to make the best RPG possible.

My point of view is that baldur's gate 1 was a revolution in the same way as fallout 1 was in its time from an RPG point of view, it's excellent that Larain doesn't try at all costs to do the same thing in HD, that he tries to innovate while keeping a structure that works and is coherent.

Joined: Oct 2020
G
stranger
Offline
stranger
G
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by FriendlyUndead


The essence of baldur's gate is its dark fantasy universe, its dungeon and dragon sides, its narration, its feeling of freedom of action to make a quest, its characters with whom you can create links.




You just described most of the D&D rpg games that we had. NWN, BG, IWD, Torment, ToEE, etc'. The reason each one of this games had a different name, and not just Baldur's Gate X, is because the story was different. Yes, Baldur's Gate is an rpg based on the rules of D&D, indeed this is the truth. But not every rpg based on the rules of D&D is Baldur's Gate. We can't just call every D&D game out there Baldur's Gate just because it's an rpg with D&D rules. Imagine reading a story with three chapters. The first two chapters tell a full story from beginning to end and then the third chapter is something else, 100 years in the future, different characters, and even different writer and writing style, but it's a fantasy story about D&D.

Joined: Dec 2017
F
stranger
Offline
stranger
F
Joined: Dec 2017
What you say is correct in the sense that NWN, IWD, Torment, ToEE, etc. are more or less copies of BG which as I said with fallout 1, we popularized the genre at the time.
Nevertheless as I said implicitly baldur's gate has its own universe of dark fantasy, its own features that made him the best rpg of the time, notably the twist of the narration brought by the dreams (or rather nightmare) of the hero.
Here not having the full game it's difficult to make a final opinion but nevertheless have found the graphic and artistic universe of baldur's gate the realistic and dark aspect, at the narative level we are on a darker tone more serious and more mature than DOS 2 for example, the notion of dreams at baldur's is also included in the game.
On the other hand as you say it's not a direct sequel of the first 2 opus, but it was never announced as such but as a reboot of the baldur's saga and that doesn't mean that we can't call it baldurs gate or fallout 2 and 3 are not fallout.
Simply baldur's gate 1 and 2 were made by Bioware with their Identity, here what is reproachable on the fact that BGIII is not BG is more the fact that Larian is not Bioware, which I find sad because when we see what Bioware does today with their license what sincerely thinks that for the moment we would have had an offline solo MMO opus that masquerades the license as for the Dragon age saga that never was the height of origins.
It's just my opinion but for me BG3 as it is now is largely at the height of what the games were originally.
And change game title is just a no sens, BGIII is a BG.

Joined: Oct 2020
D
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
D
Joined: Oct 2020
Perhaps "don't go for a DnD name, if you don't want to make a DnD game" would hit the nail better.

Its a good fantasy RPG, but it has not much to do with DnD.
If i want to play a soccer PC game, there are obviously limitations. Im fine with the AI making runs i can not control, im fine if different developers try to implement movement options, shots, dribbling options in different ways. Im fine with no hand-ball penalties since its completely random on PC. Like EA is developing the FIFA game. if now the license goes to a different company and in FIFA22 you now may use your hand, play with 2 balls, offside gets deleted, penalties are shot from 3 meters and you can upgrad your strikers with 800kmh ball launching bazookas but the keeper gets an MG42 in return people understandibly go: "hey: thats supposed to be a soccer game. This is not soccer at all anymore".

Like fine, go for another take on DOS. It was a great game. It really was. But dont make a DnD game if you do not want to make a DnD game.

Just see Kingmaker. Pathfinder is way more complex than dnd5e. they had to make adjustments. Invisibility and flying work differently, flanking works differently. But overall, that game is clearly a PC adaptation of the pen and paper game. The focus is on the pathfinder rules, and when necessary, they diviated. In BG3 right now the DnD Rules are a rough shape of you characters, but many important mechanics are DOS mechanics, not DnD mechanics.

Last edited by DuderusMcRuleric; 12/10/20 02:47 PM.
Joined: Jun 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2020
Blah, so tired of this debate. Especially about the things going boom, explosions, burning, yada, yada, the whole theres a mindflayer and stuff to early so it's gotta be DOS. The original BG games where based on an entirely different ruleset, one that had far less races, and classes. It was basic, had mechanics that didn't work well, and the ruleset itself was far different.

Narrowly focused views about the mechanics, graphics, etc are going to fall apart for anyone with half a brain, especially if you take into consideration how old the BG titles are, how technology has changed. They fall apart when again you look at the ruleset itself that is used for both, so again it will be different, just on this basic ass mechanic of the game. If it cannot be a BG title do to it's mechanics, graphics, developer, then there are alot of games that can't be. Dragon Age, GTA, Fallout, Madden, hell any game that came out in the same time as BG's first two titles. For every one of them has changed not only graphically, but mechanically. At times like Fallout who was made by the same developers has changed significicantly over the course of there evolution. Why is this the technology used has changed, the engines have been upgraded, licenses switched hands.

Licenses being used = Somethings may very well be under license to the old developers, or in a state of limbo that would be far more costly to get legal rights to then what we know. Which can explain some reasons why BG has a different feel to it.

Booms, fires, explosions, surfaces = Stop and think about the limitations of 5e, and playing a game which by its very principle is theatre of the mind, or is being played by plastic figures, on a paper map. Then stop and think what effects would be had if you hurled fire at someone? Turned them to ice, created a massive pool of grease, unleashed a barrage of electrical energy at them? Some of these effects I can see as being put in to add realism to the game. This doesn't make them DOS it makes them more real which increases immersion. Not that hard to grasp, unless your simply looking for nitpicky reasons to show your own idoicy, narrowminded views about something. Furthermore 5e has a class built around hurling items, creating explosions, hell it even has a class that uses pistols. The ruleset used by previous BG titles lack these. Later rulesets expanded on the throwables list, flasks of acid, oil, alchemists fire, tanglefoot bags, caltrops, and more carried over into 5e. This again doesn't make the game into DOS. How many other games have you played that had fire, explosions, etc in them? Pretty much any first person shooter. So should this game be called Farcry? No. How about a Tom Clancy game? again No. Adding things that make sense when it has basis in real world doesn't make it into a DOS game. It just makes it more real. Set someone on fire by hurling a firebolt at his rag wearing ass. Pretty sure theres a chance to set them aflame, and if they happen to standing in a pool of grease then we have a BBQ! So grab an ale, sit down, and please shut the fuck up about stuff that actually makes sense since it's proven in life to actually happen. Bloody forbid real world physiques and consequences are ever in a game to add realism, so our brains can better immerse itself in.

Barrels, barrels, barrels = why so many barrels? Adding barrels again doesn't make this game a DOS game doesn't matter if it was in DOS it's a mechanic, and again mechanics does not make a game something. IF you think graphics, and mechanics make a game this or that then your sadly wrong, and need to go. Again I'll point you to any original games made back in the same era as BG, like Fallout, GTA, Maddin, hell pick a game go on, pick one. Do to the technology that was around at the time these games are rough, as time progressed there mechanics, and graphics changed, the engine that was used evolved. As any game does except for MUDDs which are simply text based. Much the same as we supposedly evolved over the course the history.

Not adhering to 5e rules = In some ways I can see an arguement about this, and it's a very smaaaaall arguement. 5e rules as stated in the book are more like guidelines, each rule is open to the interpretation of the DM and may be changed to better fit their world. In this case that DM is Larian Studios, they are the ones that are writing the campaign, guiding us, giving us some nudges, rewarding our party with exp, gold, items. Oh yeah about items look at a 5e core rulebook look to see how many listed items are in it. Not very much, and again items don't make the game a BG or not BG. Unless they are pulled from some other cross universe. Such as finding Mehzune Razor in BG3.

By most reasoning of the close minded not just BG needs to be renamed but everything in our life needs to be renamed. It's all false, graphics are how something looks, by this standard fridges are no longer fridges, stoves are not stoves, cars would have to be renamed nearly every year. Mechanically how things work again stoves, fridges, cars, lights, etc would all have to be renamed. AFter all they no longer look the same, or function the same as they did back when they were first made. So go grab wibbety wook and call your friends, cause get this that thing in your hand isn't a cell phone it can't be called a cell phone. Not only does it look entirely fucking different, it works entirely fucking different. It's just trying to lure you in by calling itself a phone! Those that played the original BG game knows this cause they were there when it took three people to call someone. One to hold that massive handset, another to work the rotary, and the third to read the number!

Brief Summary

It's not mechanics/graphics/wether or not shit blows up that makes a game part of another game. It is setting, it is story, it is how shit interacts and comes together. Since we don't know the storyline, all arguements including mine are null and void. Why because we can only assume (look at that word, go ahead look at it. Whats it saying, ASS U ME) yup thats what happens when you assume, makes an ass out of both of us. Or it is an opinion again not a fact, and many of those opinions are simply to narrow in scope, to tightly focused and things that aren't relevant, or so close minded the jaws of life couldn't pry them open enough for them to respect, or even see anothers point.


Joined: Dec 2017
F
stranger
Offline
stranger
F
Joined: Dec 2017
I don't like soccer games so I'm not sure I understand the metaphor but what I'm not sure I understand is that the BGIII mechanisms have nothing to do with DOS 2 or you can play DOS to say that just the way it works in persuasion or in combat is very different on a lot of points like the CC the role of warrior mages or the random aspect the most inherited thing from DOS 2 is the interface in my opinion but it's all of them.
On the other hand I'm very curious knowing that like D&D the game throws dice for all of you, it takes back the stats, spells, races and classes of D&D. Why BG3 is a less good D&D game than BG1 or BG2 because I didn't play Pathfinder but I played BG1 and 2 and BG 3 for the move is much more in the D&D spirit in its freedom of action.

Joined: Oct 2020
D
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
D
Joined: Oct 2020
@clavis:

i dont think you got the idea, at least of many of the people complaining.
If you provide new mechanics, that de-legitimize the basic mechanics that game is supposed to be representing, then you can expect people to not be happy with it.
Why would you want to brand yourself with DnD if you plan do dumpster that stuff and do your own business. DOS2 was a perfectly fine game. But if you called DOS2 "basicly DnD" its a big hell no. This is not DnD.

Obviously creating a PC game of a pen and paper game you need to make some adjustments. Sure. But if you tweek beyond reason or even break so many things you reach the point where its not reasonable anymore to call it like this.


Quote
Then stop and think what effects would be had if you hurled fire at someone?

well if its a sticky burning liquid hitting you directly it might be an issue. But honestly... running over a ground burning from like 400ml of oil in full armor? no problem at all. You wont even feel it.
Or a flaming arrow setting you on fire? Honestly? take an old jeans. or if you have a gambison. Pull your Deodorant or hairspray and flame throw that thing for 5 seconds. it is not going to burn. Haven't you ever being a kid created some sort of little gas puff where your eyebrows got burned? a brief burst of flames does not set the world on fire.
So why is everything burning like gasoline or even explosive? Because in DOS2 everything is burning like gasoline and explosive. It is totally unnecessary. There are options to set people on fire in DnD but in BG3 EVERYTHING that is remotly a flame sets you on fire. And you claim realism?
Why would you need to buff all this stuff so hilariously that it makes no sense to use my sword anymore. In DnD5e there are alchemist fires. Use their rules. They can even set you on fire. They do 1d4 fire damage if they hit. Each turn they dot and you need to use your action to stop the fire. here we go. This is DnD fire it works fine compared to weapons.
DOS2 fire is: everyone gets to AOE set people on fire, doesnt even need to succeed a hitroll anyways and leaves a burnt area dealing even more damage plus setting other flamables wich are freaking everywhere on fire plus blocking passages. At this point its not "bringing in options". The option is there already in DnD. Its making options the developers want you to take so drasticly overpowered and obvious that its not increasing flexibility. Its a railroad. Its "here. take these 10 casks and alchemist fires and make a big bummbumm. thats what we want you to do".


How about shoving. In DnD there are options to shove. You can shove somebody as an action with a athletics check for 5 feet. also some classes like the battle master get to combine it with their attack. So yeah. In DnD u can absolutely shove people off cliffs if you give up your damage. If you feel this option is more valuable than striking with you flail.
In DOS2 you permanently shove or displace people. So what happens: You get to shove as a bonus action. You can get multiple bonus actions and shove multiple times. Even low STR chars for some reason can easily shov enemies. You can shove people for hilarious distances. You can shove with arrows. You can shove with explosives. They want you to shove shove shove. Its not about getting an option again. The option is there in DnD. Its about making it overpowered so you shove shove shove. Its a railroad.

And those are things that are not typical for DnD but for DOS hence why people feel that this is more DOS3 than BG3.

The only reason those actions and options, that exist in DnD, are so prominent is because they got buffed beyond sanity because the developers want every battlefield to be ruled by setting the world ablaze and shove shove shove. Because its a DOS/Larian signature feature wich they like. The list is countless. Having problems going where you need to go to shove shove shove. No problem, get a free disengage as bonus action you can even use to get through (over) your opponents.
Like... how can one not see that laugh

And that is the points. It IS the mechanics making the game feel not like baldurs gate. Because in Faerun its fighters being legendary heroes, fighting at expert skill with their swords. Its mages casting spells, sending fireballs. In BG3 its everyone being a freakin alchemist setting everything on fire with big explosions and kicking enemys 20 foot away like a dang frost giant. This is not DnD flavor combat. This is DOS flavor combat. Wich again is not necessarily a bad thing. But it is not the feel that DnD provides so it should not be in a DnD game.

End rant.


Last edited by DuderusMcRuleric; 12/10/20 05:10 PM.
Joined: Sep 2016
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Sep 2016
What I hate most about those other post that goes "this isnt BG3, it's DOS" is that most of them start out with "I have played all RPGs since 1979, I know all conceivable rules so I know what RPGs are and how to make them fun!". Like.. cmon dude this game isn't made purely for Baldur's Gate players and they are not going to go back to deprecated rulesets or game design principles because some games used back then. Things evolve.

Larian want to create a modern take of a old-school RPG IP with modern graphics and modern, streamlined game design principles. Not so hard to understand to be honest. Understandably some die-hard BG fans are going to be annoyed or let down, but it's this or nothing (probably). WOTC could have gone to Obsidian since PoE seems to be more in-line with how old school BG worked (dont quote me on this, I have neither played BG1-2 or PoE), but they didn't because they saw the potential of how popular Larians recent games was compared to PoE. That's my guess anyway...

Last edited by Zahhibb; 12/10/20 05:23 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Zahhibb
I have neither played BG1-2 or PoE

This is all you needed to say.

Page 1 of 2 1 2

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