Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Re: Perhaps Larian is the wrong studio [Re: Vekkares] #722570
30/10/20 07:15 AM
30/10/20 07:15 AM
Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 303
A
Aurgelmir Offline
enthusiast
Aurgelmir  Offline
enthusiast
A

Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 303
Look we are in alpha of the game still. I think Larian will listen to everyone who say "Make it more like DnD 5e".
Larian is the right studio for this, they just need to realize how the 5e rules work.

What larian isn't the right studio for though is Baldur's Gate die hards who'd much rather just have the same game with better graphics. And no BG1 and 2 weren't great examples of how to translate DnD to the computer, they were okay examples. I would argue that if Larian just implements the darn Players Handbook rules as written, keeps some of their house rules, then you'll have a game that's a hell of a lot closer to the table top game than BG1 ever was. BG1 was a good game, especially great for it's time, but it made sacrifices to the computer god too.

Re: Perhaps Larian is the wrong studio [Re: N7Greenfire] #722577
30/10/20 07:20 AM
30/10/20 07:20 AM
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,180
Tuco Offline
old hand
Tuco  Offline
old hand

Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,180
Originally Posted by N7Greenfire
Yeah no. They are translating pnp to a 3 d world, you want fully authentic pnp on the compute get tabletop simulator

That's not a particularly solid argument.
Sounds like something silly an average BG3 redditor fanboy would say to defend Larian blindly.


Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. You too can join the good fight HERE
Re: Perhaps Larian is the wrong studio [Re: Tuco] #722579
30/10/20 07:26 AM
30/10/20 07:26 AM
Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 167
N
N7Greenfire Offline
member
N7Greenfire  Offline
member
N

Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 167
Originally Posted by Tuco
Originally Posted by N7Greenfire
Yeah no. They are translating pnp to a 3 d world, you want fully authentic pnp on the compute get tabletop simulator

That's not a particularly solid argument.
Sounds like something silly an average BG3 redditor fanboy would say to defend Larian blindly.

So you think there should be no high ground advantage? dont think a ball of fire hitting someone isnt going to splash embers around...

Everything they've done makes sense in the context of making pnp a real world.

If you want an easy/unrealistic mode, yeah it will probably be a difficulty option. The default game should feel like a real world though.

Re: Perhaps Larian is the wrong studio [Re: N7Greenfire] #722580
30/10/20 07:30 AM
30/10/20 07:30 AM
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,180
Tuco Offline
old hand
Tuco  Offline
old hand

Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,180
Originally Posted by N7Greenfire

So you think there should be no high ground advantage?

I honestly don't give a shit about that specific topic, even if other people seem to care a lot. I don't think advantage on height is the end of the world.
But that's not the point. The point is "Hehe, tabletop stuff is just for try-hards, videogames rule" is not a good argument in general.

P.S. And "disengage on jump" is stupid no matter how you look at it, by the way. You don't have to be a tabletop purist to think so.

Last edited by Tuco; 30/10/20 07:31 AM.

Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. You too can join the good fight HERE
Re: Perhaps Larian is the wrong studio [Re: Tuco] #722588
30/10/20 07:45 AM
30/10/20 07:45 AM
Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 167
N
N7Greenfire Offline
member
N7Greenfire  Offline
member
N

Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 167
Originally Posted by Tuco
Originally Posted by N7Greenfire

So you think there should be no high ground advantage?

I honestly don't give a shit about that specific topic, even if other people seem to care a lot. I don't think advantage on height is the end of the world.
But that's not the point. The point is "Hehe, tabletop stuff is just for try-hards, videogames rule" is not a good argument in general.

P.S. And "disengage on jump" is stupid no matter how you look at it, by the way. You don't have to be a tabletop purist to think so.

Huh?

What you are asking for literally removes complexity and realism from the world.

A goblin occupied ruin is going to have nasty water puddles and various hazards everywhere for instance. Getting rid of that for table top authenticity both makes no logical sense and makes things less complex.

Re: Perhaps Larian is the wrong studio [Re: N7Greenfire] #722608
30/10/20 08:07 AM
30/10/20 08:07 AM
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,180
Tuco Offline
old hand
Tuco  Offline
old hand

Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,180
Originally Posted by N7Greenfire

Huh?

What you are asking for literally removes complexity and realism from the world.
.


Uh?
No, I'm not.


Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. You too can join the good fight HERE
Re: Perhaps Larian is the wrong studio [Re: Tuco] #722613
30/10/20 08:15 AM
30/10/20 08:15 AM
Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 167
N
N7Greenfire Offline
member
N7Greenfire  Offline
member
N

Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 167
Originally Posted by Tuco
Originally Posted by N7Greenfire

Huh?

What you are asking for literally removes complexity and realism from the world.
.


Uh?
No, I'm not.

Removing logical mechanics means removing complexity are realism dude.

Re: Perhaps Larian is the wrong studio [Re: N7Greenfire] #722630
30/10/20 08:28 AM
30/10/20 08:28 AM
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,180
Tuco Offline
old hand
Tuco  Offline
old hand

Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,180
Originally Posted by N7Greenfire

Removing logical mechanics means removing complexity are realism dude.


Ok, start listing what "logical mechanics" I did ask to remove and maybe I'll get the impression you aren't just making questionable assumptions.


Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. You too can join the good fight HERE
Re: Perhaps Larian is the wrong studio [Re: N7Greenfire] #722682
30/10/20 09:40 AM
30/10/20 09:40 AM
Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 241
S
Sludge Khalid Offline
enthusiast
Sludge Khalid  Offline
enthusiast
S

Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 241
Originally Posted by N7Greenfire
Originally Posted by Tuco
Originally Posted by N7Greenfire
Yeah no. They are translating pnp to a 3 d world, you want fully authentic pnp on the compute get tabletop simulator

That's not a particularly solid argument.
Sounds like something silly an average BG3 redditor fanboy would say to defend Larian blindly.

So you think there should be no high ground advantage? dont think a ball of fire hitting someone isnt going to splash embers around...

Everything they've done makes sense in the context of making pnp a real world.

If you want an easy/unrealistic mode, yeah it will probably be a difficulty option. The default game should feel like a real world though.


Hello my good sir. Are you a lawyer in RL? That was the best argument for highground advantage that I’ve heard so far. Seriously. Advantage and a ball of fire? Man, wish I had heard that before. Wouldn’t be here discussing DnD rules.

I’m not even discussing how harmful that advantage system is. Because you know? The game should be made according to the laws of physic IRL. In the next path brace yourselves: “summon familiar” spell will be renamed to “whistle to your dog“ because Larian decided to stay faithful to reality. Oh yeah, of course the only race available will be humans.


Bye

Last edited by Sludge Khalid; 30/10/20 09:42 AM.
Re: Perhaps Larian is the wrong studio [Re: N7Greenfire] #722694
30/10/20 09:54 AM
30/10/20 09:54 AM
Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 94
Zefhyr Offline
journeyman
Zefhyr  Offline
journeyman

Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 94
Originally Posted by N7Greenfire
Yeah no. They are translating pnp to a 3 d world, you want fully authentic pnp on the compute get tabletop simulator


It's funny because I don't agree at all ! ^^"

Maybe I'm wrong but as I see it, it's...

The developers who did BG1 and 2 just think about developing a good game, fun, based on D&D but with all the advantages a video game could brought (D&D was an inspiration, the major point was doing great).

It looks like the developers who are doing BG3 are focusing on creating a game which will be a D&D game and a DoS style game, forgetting the advantages a video game can brought (BG looks like an inspiration and the major looks like to be implementing D&D and Dos system).

I know my english is terrible but I hope you will get my point.

When looking for developping an amazing game thx to the knowledge of D&D seems like a good idea.
Overthinking and trying to give life to a pure copy/past of pen and paper D&D miwed with DoS system in a video game may be a bad idea.

How I iamgine the guys now and bach then ( with a major disagreement) :
The original devs may have think :
"
- hey guys ! Imagine, we are going to do a game with real fights ! It's gonna be soooo cool ! Finally we are going to be able to experience fights in reality time ! no need for GM or pen and paper, it's gonna be all in real time, draw your sword and cast your spell !
- but it's gonna be messy ? We wont be able to control all our characters at the same time...
- NP, we will used pause to give orders when needed and that's all ! Real fights, dudes !
- Damn right dude, real fights ! It's gonna be awesome !
"

The actual devs may be thinking
"
- hey guys. We have to re-do it as a pen and paper game, ok ?
- but we keep the real time fights ?
- Dude ! Forget about real times. We love turn-based so it's gonna be turn-based !
- But it wont be as epic and flowing than before ?
- Who cares ! We did turn-based games, so we'll do it again ! Because this is how D&D worked !
- But with a computer we could recreate huge fights against hords of goblins, kobolds, gnolls,...
- Shut up Bobby ! It's gonna be turn-based, they will never be more than 5 ennemies and that's all !
- But what if we really need to have more than 5 ennemies ?
- I don't care Bobby ! Gamers will have to wait !
- Are you not afraid ti will be a little long and boring so ?
- I DONT CARE BOBBY I AM DOING THE GAME I WANT TO DO !!!
- But the previous games...
- You're fired Bobby.
- ...meh. "

Of course, it's just my opinion ! (but, at least, I make myslef laugh xD)

Re: Perhaps Larian is the wrong studio [Re: Vekkares] #722727
30/10/20 11:04 AM
30/10/20 11:04 AM
Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 308
robertthebard Offline
enthusiast
robertthebard  Offline
enthusiast

Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 308
As I read through these comments, one thing occurs to me: If BG had had an early access similar to this one, the 2/2.5e rules lawyers would have ripped it to shreds. The "expert" writers would have torn the story down "but it's just a "the Chosen One" trope story", etc. I wonder, if it had had it's own message board, how many dumpster fire threads it would have had for it's EA. I also wonder if one of those would have been "Maybe BioWare isn't the right company to develop this". Of course, back then there weren't a lot of companies that were even doing games, let alone that could have done it the justice that BioWare did. I read an earlier post here that said that BG redefined the cRPG, and that's not exactly true, it actually defined the cRPG. Prior to this, I was happily playing Doom and Quake as Freeware, and the same was true for Mortal Kombat. I got my hands on BG and never looked back. They inspired a lot of people, including CDPR, who used the engine from NWN to make The Witcher.

So my takeaway is that maybe Larian is the perfect company to do this. I played the Outer Worlds. It was a good game, but it wasn't genre defining. I also played NWN 2, yeah... Admittedly, barring the "rocks fall, everyone dies' ending, and the expansions, which were "meh" at best, the other issue was Atari, and their DRM, which they eventually patched out, which not only messed up the actual game it was supposed to protect, but interfered with my licenses to music that were completely unrelated to the game it was supposed to protect. But I digress. Most of the complaints about this game would have appeared in a BG EA situation. There would have been thread after thread complaining about RTWP gameplay mechanics too. My first experience with TB combat in a cRPG was ToEE. I shelved it, and never looked at another TB game, until after this one was announced, and it was indicated that it would have TB combat. So I looked up who was doing it, and found DOS 2. I bought it, figuring I'd play it to get used to the system, and to see what they were about as developers, because up until then, I'd never heard of them.

I'm glad I did, because it gives me some perspective on the "but it's just DOS 3" arguments, which I don't agree with, at least, not on it's face. There are elements, and assets that cross over, and the vast majority of those I actually don't mind in the least. I understand not wanting flush hundreds of manhours down the drain recreating every plate in a game. It's a huge waste of time and money. The "barrelmancy" argument falls flat, mainly because it never occurred to me to exploit it, maybe? Or, alternatively, because exploding barrels have been a trope for as long as I can remember, in games that have nothing to do with Larian. This, of course, has to be swept under the rug because "but Larian used it". Yeah? So did Square Enix, check out all the latest Tomb Raider reboots. "But Food", Bethesda says "Hello", particularly ironic since I fired up FO 4 yesterday for a bit, and you'll never guess what's on the loot tables for healing items... It's been a while since I fired up FO 3 or NV, I wonder if I'll find food there too? If I use TES: Oblivion as a "benchmark" I'm betting yes?

I also don't agree with the "but it's not DnD" posts, on their face. I say that from the perspective of someone that's played BG, BG 2, IWD, IWD 2, NWN, NWN 2, Dungeons and Dragons Online, and Neverwinter, off the top of my head. All of those games are officially licensed DnD games, and all of them are wildly different, to degrees in some cases, with the "actual rules". Note that I'm not just going with 5e in that assessment, although Neverwinter is supposed to be 5e. DDO was supposed to be 3.5e, but it's wildly different from NWN, which used the same ruleset. Yet, for all of that, they are all officially licensed which means, at the end of the day, they're all DnD games. So Larian is guilty of doing what lots of other game companies have done before. What's worse? They're guilty of doing what lots of game companies are going to continue to do going forward. Why? Because it works. Because it's possible to make great games doing this kind of stuff.

Anyone mad about barrelmancy needs to play DDO and get the quests in the 12, or maybe convince someone to get them a guest pass, and do the quest "Undermine". That quest predates Larian by quite a while, but my favorite thing to do is to blow up the barrels, because it creates a lovely chain reaction, that can wipe an entire party. Of course, it can also clear most of the mobs in the rooms where it's an issue, so if used wisely, it's a great tactic for clearing it, and is likely intended as such. Hey, if ya'll are really mad about barrelmancy, you should play Horizon Zero Dawn. Some of those robots come equipped with their own barrels.

Re: Perhaps Larian is the wrong studio [Re: robertthebard] #722808
30/10/20 01:19 PM
30/10/20 01:19 PM
Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 42
C
coredumped Offline
apprentice
coredumped  Offline
apprentice
C

Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 42
Originally Posted by robertthebard
As I read through these comments, one thing occurs to me: If BG had had an early access similar to this one, the 2/2.5e rules lawyers would have ripped it to shreds. The "expert" writers would have torn the story down "but it's just a "the Chosen One" trope story", etc. I wonder, if it had had it's own message board, how many dumpster fire threads it would have had for it's EA. I also wonder if one of those would have been "Maybe BioWare isn't the right company to develop this". Of course, back then there weren't a lot of companies that were even doing games, let alone that could have done it the justice that BioWare did. I read an earlier post here that said that BG redefined the cRPG, and that's not exactly true, it actually defined the cRPG. Prior to this, I was happily playing Doom and Quake as Freeware, and the same was true for Mortal Kombat. I got my hands on BG and never looked back. They inspired a lot of people, including CDPR, who used the engine from NWN to make The Witcher.

So my takeaway is that maybe Larian is the perfect company to do this. I played the Outer Worlds. It was a good game, but it wasn't genre defining. I also played NWN 2, yeah... Admittedly, barring the "rocks fall, everyone dies' ending, and the expansions, which were "meh" at best, the other issue was Atari, and their DRM, which they eventually patched out, which not only messed up the actual game it was supposed to protect, but interfered with my licenses to music that were completely unrelated to the game it was supposed to protect. But I digress. Most of the complaints about this game would have appeared in a BG EA situation. There would have been thread after thread complaining about RTWP gameplay mechanics too. My first experience with TB combat in a cRPG was ToEE. I shelved it, and never looked at another TB game, until after this one was announced, and it was indicated that it would have TB combat. So I looked up who was doing it, and found DOS 2. I bought it, figuring I'd play it to get used to the system, and to see what they were about as developers, because up until then, I'd never heard of them.

I'm glad I did, because it gives me some perspective on the "but it's just DOS 3" arguments, which I don't agree with, at least, not on it's face. There are elements, and assets that cross over, and the vast majority of those I actually don't mind in the least. I understand not wanting flush hundreds of manhours down the drain recreating every plate in a game. It's a huge waste of time and money. The "barrelmancy" argument falls flat, mainly because it never occurred to me to exploit it, maybe? Or, alternatively, because exploding barrels have been a trope for as long as I can remember, in games that have nothing to do with Larian. This, of course, has to be swept under the rug because "but Larian used it". Yeah? So did Square Enix, check out all the latest Tomb Raider reboots. "But Food", Bethesda says "Hello", particularly ironic since I fired up FO 4 yesterday for a bit, and you'll never guess what's on the loot tables for healing items... It's been a while since I fired up FO 3 or NV, I wonder if I'll find food there too? If I use TES: Oblivion as a "benchmark" I'm betting yes?

I also don't agree with the "but it's not DnD" posts, on their face. I say that from the perspective of someone that's played BG, BG 2, IWD, IWD 2, NWN, NWN 2, Dungeons and Dragons Online, and Neverwinter, off the top of my head. All of those games are officially licensed DnD games, and all of them are wildly different, to degrees in some cases, with the "actual rules". Note that I'm not just going with 5e in that assessment, although Neverwinter is supposed to be 5e. DDO was supposed to be 3.5e, but it's wildly different from NWN, which used the same ruleset. Yet, for all of that, they are all officially licensed which means, at the end of the day, they're all DnD games. So Larian is guilty of doing what lots of other game companies have done before. What's worse? They're guilty of doing what lots of game companies are going to continue to do going forward. Why? Because it works. Because it's possible to make great games doing this kind of stuff.

Anyone mad about barrelmancy needs to play DDO and get the quests in the 12, or maybe convince someone to get them a guest pass, and do the quest "Undermine". That quest predates Larian by quite a while, but my favorite thing to do is to blow up the barrels, because it creates a lovely chain reaction, that can wipe an entire party. Of course, it can also clear most of the mobs in the rooms where it's an issue, so if used wisely, it's a great tactic for clearing it, and is likely intended as such. Hey, if ya'll are really mad about barrelmancy, you should play Horizon Zero Dawn. Some of those robots come equipped with their own barrels.



I think it's pretty clear at this point from your numerous posts that you're happy to be playing this DOS3. Everything that Larian changed was spectacular and nobody should ever need or want anything different.

You try to justify their poor choices with arguments such as "errr other games do it" which makes no sense.
"Oh, I'm a very experienced player that shelved ToEE because it was turn based but then discovered my new god: Larian" who gives a shit? People aren't giving their feedback on the feedback forum based on robertthebard greatest adventures. You even justify the idiotic changes to AC, HP, every goblin having grenades and magical arrows in another post with "oh but I played a campaign with my friends that was just defending a village from goblins, if we didn't make them more exciting, the campaign would suck"... Well maybe the campaign did suck. That doesn't mean that because of your poor experience in that game goblins in BG3 should be changed. It messes up a whole bunch of systems which you conveniently ignore. Have also read somewhere you saying that the reason for all these magical arrows and grenades and what not in every pleb goblin makes sense because some NPC gave it a reason... I mean... That's silly isn't it? Then let's have 3 red dragons guard princess Gut in her temple and have an NPC at the entrance show you a reason for it as well: "welp, this here is princess Gut Targaryen, our very own khaleesi, live with it.". People find these things annoying, and rightly so.
You don't agree with people saying the game looks a lot like DOS when you have posts stating 80 reasons for exactly why people are saying this.
"I understand not wanting flush hundreds of manhours down the drain recreating every plate in a game". Well, so do I, but that's not my problem. They are marketing their product in a way and developing it in another. There are a lot of problems with the fact that they are using the same engine as in DOS. And people are stating them here, that's what the feedback forum is for. Answering "welp, they would have to spend more time and money to make it better, so leave it's ok as is" to these things... I don't even know what to call it... This is a full priced game, not some 5 dollar indie game thrown at the store, the customer should be able to expect quality and things properly done.

Re: Perhaps Larian is the wrong studio [Re: coredumped] #722830
30/10/20 01:55 PM
30/10/20 01:55 PM
Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 37
V
Vekkares Offline OP
apprentice
Vekkares  Offline OP
apprentice
V

Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 37
Originally Posted by coredumped
Originally Posted by robertthebard
As I read through these comments, one thing occurs to me: If BG had had an early access similar to this one, the 2/2.5e rules lawyers would have ripped it to shreds. The "expert" writers would have torn the story down "but it's just a "the Chosen One" trope story", etc. I wonder, if it had had it's own message board, how many dumpster fire threads it would have had for it's EA. I also wonder if one of those would have been "Maybe BioWare isn't the right company to develop this". Of course, back then there weren't a lot of companies that were even doing games, let alone that could have done it the justice that BioWare did. I read an earlier post here that said that BG redefined the cRPG, and that's not exactly true, it actually defined the cRPG. Prior to this, I was happily playing Doom and Quake as Freeware, and the same was true for Mortal Kombat. I got my hands on BG and never looked back. They inspired a lot of people, including CDPR, who used the engine from NWN to make The Witcher.

So my takeaway is that maybe Larian is the perfect company to do this. I played the Outer Worlds. It was a good game, but it wasn't genre defining. I also played NWN 2, yeah... Admittedly, barring the "rocks fall, everyone dies' ending, and the expansions, which were "meh" at best, the other issue was Atari, and their DRM, which they eventually patched out, which not only messed up the actual game it was supposed to protect, but interfered with my licenses to music that were completely unrelated to the game it was supposed to protect. But I digress. Most of the complaints about this game would have appeared in a BG EA situation. There would have been thread after thread complaining about RTWP gameplay mechanics too. My first experience with TB combat in a cRPG was ToEE. I shelved it, and never looked at another TB game, until after this one was announced, and it was indicated that it would have TB combat. So I looked up who was doing it, and found DOS 2. I bought it, figuring I'd play it to get used to the system, and to see what they were about as developers, because up until then, I'd never heard of them.

I'm glad I did, because it gives me some perspective on the "but it's just DOS 3" arguments, which I don't agree with, at least, not on it's face. There are elements, and assets that cross over, and the vast majority of those I actually don't mind in the least. I understand not wanting flush hundreds of manhours down the drain recreating every plate in a game. It's a huge waste of time and money. The "barrelmancy" argument falls flat, mainly because it never occurred to me to exploit it, maybe? Or, alternatively, because exploding barrels have been a trope for as long as I can remember, in games that have nothing to do with Larian. This, of course, has to be swept under the rug because "but Larian used it". Yeah? So did Square Enix, check out all the latest Tomb Raider reboots. "But Food", Bethesda says "Hello", particularly ironic since I fired up FO 4 yesterday for a bit, and you'll never guess what's on the loot tables for healing items... It's been a while since I fired up FO 3 or NV, I wonder if I'll find food there too? If I use TES: Oblivion as a "benchmark" I'm betting yes?

I also don't agree with the "but it's not DnD" posts, on their face. I say that from the perspective of someone that's played BG, BG 2, IWD, IWD 2, NWN, NWN 2, Dungeons and Dragons Online, and Neverwinter, off the top of my head. All of those games are officially licensed DnD games, and all of them are wildly different, to degrees in some cases, with the "actual rules". Note that I'm not just going with 5e in that assessment, although Neverwinter is supposed to be 5e. DDO was supposed to be 3.5e, but it's wildly different from NWN, which used the same ruleset. Yet, for all of that, they are all officially licensed which means, at the end of the day, they're all DnD games. So Larian is guilty of doing what lots of other game companies have done before. What's worse? They're guilty of doing what lots of game companies are going to continue to do going forward. Why? Because it works. Because it's possible to make great games doing this kind of stuff.

Anyone mad about barrelmancy needs to play DDO and get the quests in the 12, or maybe convince someone to get them a guest pass, and do the quest "Undermine". That quest predates Larian by quite a while, but my favorite thing to do is to blow up the barrels, because it creates a lovely chain reaction, that can wipe an entire party. Of course, it can also clear most of the mobs in the rooms where it's an issue, so if used wisely, it's a great tactic for clearing it, and is likely intended as such. Hey, if ya'll are really mad about barrelmancy, you should play Horizon Zero Dawn. Some of those robots come equipped with their own barrels.



I think it's pretty clear at this point from your numerous posts that you're happy to be playing this DOS3. Everything that Larian changed was spectacular and nobody should ever need or want anything different.

You try to justify their poor choices with arguments such as "errr other games do it" which makes no sense.
"Oh, I'm a very experienced player that shelved ToEE because it was turn based but then discovered my new god: Larian" who gives a shit? People aren't giving their feedback on the feedback forum based on robertthebard greatest adventures. You even justify the idiotic changes to AC, HP, every goblin having grenades and magical arrows in another post with "oh but I played a campaign with my friends that was just defending a village from goblins, if we didn't make them more exciting, the campaign would suck"... Well maybe the campaign did suck. That doesn't mean that because of your poor experience in that game goblins in BG3 should be changed. It messes up a whole bunch of systems which you conveniently ignore. Have also read somewhere you saying that the reason for all these magical arrows and grenades and what not in every pleb goblin makes sense because some NPC gave it a reason... I mean... That's silly isn't it? Then let's have 3 red dragons guard princess Gut in her temple and have an NPC at the entrance show you a reason for it as well: "welp, this here is princess Gut Targaryen, our very own khaleesi, live with it.". People find these things annoying, and rightly so.
You don't agree with people saying the game looks a lot like DOS when you have posts stating 80 reasons for exactly why people are saying this.
"I understand not wanting flush hundreds of manhours down the drain recreating every plate in a game". Well, so do I, but that's not my problem. They are marketing their product in a way and developing it in another. There are a lot of problems with the fact that they are using the same engine as in DOS. And people are stating them here, that's what the feedback forum is for. Answering "welp, they would have to spend more time and money to make it better, so leave it's ok as is" to these things... I don't even know what to call it... This is a full priced game, not some 5 dollar indie game thrown at the store, the customer should be able to expect quality and things properly done.



Finally someone that understands and articulates what im trying to say! Thank you sir, you are the reason I posted. I am not saying lets fire them, im saying they came into this thinking they could make D:OS-The DND skin. I dont want that. My main concerns are a closer to DnD balance. I know the hate for barrellmancy is strong. The higher ground is a dumb mechanic almost everyone hates. I know the ground effects arent liked. Beyond that, small changes could make this more DnD, less OS. My main "ask" is the character import/export so I can play with friends easier. That makes this more of a DnD experience. I hate the idea of being force to play as an NPC, if I dont start a brand new game with a friend. I want an entire party of player characters, not being forced to play as the Origin characters. Again all things that require small changes to what they have already done. Its not horrible, especially in this state, but I would say, if youre inviting people to pay full price for your alpha build to give you feedback, RESPOND to those people. A small customer service team on the forums or a weekly update chat addressing the top items on the forums, which is super easy to do. Something to open discussions with your paying testers.

Re: Perhaps Larian is the wrong studio [Re: coredumped] #722832
30/10/20 02:01 PM
30/10/20 02:01 PM
Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 308
robertthebard Offline
enthusiast
robertthebard  Offline
enthusiast

Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 308
Originally Posted by coredumped



I think it's pretty clear at this point from your numerous posts that you're happy to be playing this DOS3. Everything that Larian changed was spectacular and nobody should ever need or want anything different.

You try to justify their poor choices with arguments such as "errr other games do it" which makes no sense.


Is that really where you want to go? Really? First line: Happy with DOS 3, second line "err, other games do it". Yeah, some quality arguments there mate. Your whole argument is based on "but another game did it", but now you have a problem with the argument? That's a little inconsistent isn't it? Of course, it's to be expected.

Quote
"Oh, I'm a very experienced player that shelved ToEE because it was turn based but then discovered my new god: Larian" who gives a shit?


Was there any point here besides attempting a personal attack on me, or my game experience? I'm flattered, really.

Quote
People aren't giving their feedback on the feedback forum based on robertthebard greatest adventures. You even justify the idiotic changes to AC, HP, every goblin having grenades and magical arrows in another post with "oh but I played a campaign with my friends that was just defending a village from goblins, if we didn't make them more exciting, the campaign would suck"... Well maybe the campaign did suck. That doesn't mean that because of your poor experience in that game goblins in BG3 should be changed. It messes up a whole bunch of systems which you conveniently ignore. Have also read somewhere you saying that the reason for all these magical arrows and grenades and what not in every pleb goblin makes sense because some NPC gave it a reason... I mean... That's silly isn't it? Then let's have 3 red dragons guard princess Gut in her temple and have an NPC at the entrance show you a reason for it as well: "welp, this here is princess Gut Targaryen, our very own khaleesi, live with it.". People find these things annoying, and rightly so.


What about that gave you the impression that it sucked? That it's not how you would have done it? Here we are again, with your blatant hypocrisy of "If I find it fun, it should be the way it is, to hell with what everyone else thinks, especially if they have the unmitigated gall to disagree with me". Hey, I have you a solution to people challenging your ideas, submit your feedback privately if you can't handle your thoughts being challenged. There's a feedback button on the launcher. Also, yeah, what was I thinking, using the story to justify the story. I should be so ashamed of myself, yeah? Wait. That's actually bassackwards, isn't it. People that don't pay attention to plot points, and then don't understand the story are the real problem here. Thanks for pointing that out. So, I guess my next question has to be "when are you going to start paying attention to what's actually presented in game, instead of finding a bandwagon to jump on?", right?

Quote
You don't agree with people saying the game looks a lot like DOS when you have posts stating 80 reasons for exactly why people are saying this.
"I understand not wanting flush hundreds of manhours down the drain recreating every plate in a game". Well, so do I, but that's not my problem. They are marketing their product in a way and developing it in another. There are a lot of problems with the fact that they are using the same engine as in DOS. And people are stating them here, that's what the feedback forum is for. Answering "welp, they would have to spend more time and money to make it better, so leave it's ok as is" to these things... I don't even know what to call it... This is a full priced game, not some 5 dollar indie game thrown at the store, the customer should be able to expect quality and things properly done.


...and? You see, I've played it recently, and for all the "this is the same/same(ish)", there are things that are different too. Right down to the basic art style of the games. Now maybe you still get an allowance from mom? I don't know, but I have to be fiscally responsible for myself. That means that, if I don't have to flush money down the drain, I don't do it. You want to know what's really weird? Hammers look like hammers, every where I go. Hey, there's even different hammers. The same is true for plates, and glasses. Some of them even look different, lots of that in game, and out here in the real world. So yeah, not changing those assets doesn't bother me in the least bit. You know what I noticed right out of the gate? The character models are way different. The creature design is way different, and the types of creatures are different. Not as way different as other things, but a rat, by any other name...

"But it's not DnD, so why do I have to roll all these dice"... That's pretty common too, isn't it? I'm even going to blow another hole your narrative: Some of those I actually agree with, like stomping the tadpole. Pass one check, be done. I know, I know, "but you're not allowed to think differently, if you do you're some kind of phobe, or ist", right? I mean, that's the only argument you haven't used, yet. I hope I didn't step on your moment by demonstrating that I know this is coming, but really, it's already a tired cliche put out by people that just don't understand that people don't have to agree with them, and just don't have anything left to support why they should. Another misconception on your part, and frankly it's starting to look more like it's deliberate, than not understanding what's being presented, is that there's a world of difference between flushing hundreds of manhours down the drain redesigning plates, and doing other things to improve the game. If what two plates, from two different games drives you this far over the edge, I can't imagine the hell you must go through going to restaraunts, where they may have the same supplier, or if the dishes at mom's house look like the dishes at grandma's house.

What specific problems are there with the engine? Do all BG games now have to be in the Infinity Engine? I hope not, I mean, BioWare moved away from that to Aurora for NWN. Unless it's still that you're way freaked out by dishes looking the same, or hammers? That's a "You" issue, not an "engine" issue.

Re: Perhaps Larian is the wrong studio [Re: Vekkares] #722851
30/10/20 02:29 PM
30/10/20 02:29 PM
Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 303
A
Aurgelmir Offline
enthusiast
Aurgelmir  Offline
enthusiast
A

Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 303
Originally Posted by Vekkares

Finally someone that understands and articulates what im trying to say! Thank you sir, you are the reason I posted. I am not saying lets fire them, im saying they came into this thinking they could make D:OS-The DND skin. I dont want that. My main concerns are a closer to DnD balance. I know the hate for barrellmancy is strong. The higher ground is a dumb mechanic almost everyone hates. I know the ground effects arent liked. Beyond that, small changes could make this more DnD, less OS. My main "ask" is the character import/export so I can play with friends easier. That makes this more of a DnD experience. I hate the idea of being force to play as an NPC, if I dont start a brand new game with a friend. I want an entire party of player characters, not being forced to play as the Origin characters. Again all things that require small changes to what they have already done. Its not horrible, especially in this state, but I would say, if youre inviting people to pay full price for your alpha build to give you feedback, RESPOND to those people. A small customer service team on the forums or a weekly update chat addressing the top items on the forums, which is super easy to do. Something to open discussions with your paying testers.


I think you should shy away from "almost everyone" style arguments. That's probably informed by confirmation bias, and well those of us who likes something usually don't talk about it on the forums.


Personally I find this argument about "this is Divinity Original Sin" is stupid. Firstly, DOS is more than barrels, surfaces and height advantage. DOS has a completely different action economy and ruleset altogether. If I was coming into this game expecting to play DOS then I'd be very disappointed that they "dumbed down" the combat and character creation system. Sure in DOS Barrels and surfaces play a part, and is part of what makes that game cool, but it's not the main point of the game.

Besides surfaces is a part of "the DnD experience", they work somewhat differently than DOS, but they are there. My personal opinion is that Larian should read the Players Handbook again, and implement it as is, then see where their ideas can be added. I think the issue with Height advantage is an issue of balanceing it, not an issue of "it's stupid" the idea is great, and something I know is house ruled at many tables.

As for your "ask": Larian has stated they are planning to add a Mercenary system, and you can recruit "build it yourself" characters from the camp. This would solve your issue, and don't require an import export function.

This is stil a work in progress, don't act as if it's a finished game. This is the Alpha build, treat it as such. Major changes will come, and I'm sure they have heard us loud and clear: "Make it more like Dungeons and Dragons 5e".

Re: Perhaps Larian is the wrong studio [Re: Svalr] #722883
30/10/20 03:17 PM
30/10/20 03:17 PM
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 999
Massachusetts, USA
kanisatha Offline
old hand
kanisatha  Offline
old hand

Joined: May 2019
Posts: 999
Massachusetts, USA
Originally Posted by Svalr
Obsidian are busy with Avowed anyways.
Last game they made was.... Grounded, lol.

Whatever you personally might think, both Grounded and their game before that, The Outer Worlds, have sold very well. And TOW is only now coming out of its Epic exclusive and going to Steam, GOG, and consoles, and Grounded is in EA, so both games are potentially looking at plenty more in sales. Clearly Obsidian is a very versatile studio capable of making a variety of types of games in a range of genres and be very successful with them. Hit or miss, they're not defined by just one game.

Re: Perhaps Larian is the wrong studio [Re: Vekkares] #722894
30/10/20 03:30 PM
30/10/20 03:30 PM
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 16
U
ulric Offline
stranger
ulric  Offline
stranger
U

Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 16
Larian has proven with DOS2 that they can do really great roleplaying.
But the DOS world is their own creation. Players had no expectations of the game and were unbiased.

I carry 10 years of D&D TableTop experience around with me. I expect a D&D computer game to feel like a TT game.
BG2 has done that. Also there were deviations from the rule system, but these did not undermine the D&D game feeling.
I expect exactly the same from a BG2 successor.

But BG3-EA does not meet this expectation. The DOS2 game elements are much too dominant and do not really fit the D&D rules.
At the same time, many D&D rules are implemented completely unimaginatively. A game master who lets everything be decided by the dice in every conversation would soon be out of a job.

I think Larian has massively underestimated this expectation. The question now is how they deal with the protests.

Re: Perhaps Larian is the wrong studio [Re: ulric] #722897
30/10/20 03:42 PM
30/10/20 03:42 PM
Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 20
Marktheshark Offline
stranger
Marktheshark  Offline
stranger

Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 20
Originally Posted by ulric
Larian has proven with DOS2 that they can do really great roleplaying.
But the DOS world is their own creation. Players had no expectations of the game and were unbiased.

I carry 10 years of D&D TableTop experience around with me. I expect a D&D computer game to feel like a TT game.
BG2 has done that. Also there were deviations from the rule system, but these did not undermine the D&D game feeling.
I expect exactly the same from a BG2 successor.

But BG3-EA does not meet this expectation. The DOS2 game elements are much too dominant and do not really fit the D&D rules.
At the same time, many D&D rules are implemented completely unimaginatively. A game master who lets everything be decided by the dice in every conversation would soon be out of a job.

I think Larian has massively underestimated this expectation. The question now is how they deal with the protests.



This is exactly right.
Larian was the correct studio for Divinity Original Sin 3, not Baldur's Gate 3. That's why the most prominent form of feedback on this forum is "This isn't D&D 5e."

Re: Perhaps Larian is the wrong studio [Re: Vekkares] #722898
30/10/20 03:42 PM
30/10/20 03:42 PM
Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 265
R
Rhobar121 Online content
enthusiast
Rhobar121  Online Content
enthusiast
R

Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 265
I wonder why people keep saying about the dominant DoS systems. There is no point in complaining about the barrels, it's not something you have to use.
There is no fight in the game that you cannot complete without using barrels.
It reminds me of the attitude "you either play the way I enjoy it or not at all".
The only mechanic directly from DoS that requires tuning is fire.

Re: Perhaps Larian is the wrong studio [Re: Marktheshark] #722920
30/10/20 04:03 PM
30/10/20 04:03 PM
Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 13
millenialboomer Offline
stranger
millenialboomer  Offline
stranger

Joined: Oct 2020
Posts: 13
Originally Posted by Marktheshark
Originally Posted by ulric
Larian has proven with DOS2 that they can do really great roleplaying.
But the DOS world is their own creation. Players had no expectations of the game and were unbiased.

I carry 10 years of D&D TableTop experience around with me. I expect a D&D computer game to feel like a TT game.
BG2 has done that. Also there were deviations from the rule system, but these did not undermine the D&D game feeling.
I expect exactly the same from a BG2 successor.

But BG3-EA does not meet this expectation. The DOS2 game elements are much too dominant and do not really fit the D&D rules.
At the same time, many D&D rules are implemented completely unimaginatively. A game master who lets everything be decided by the dice in every conversation would soon be out of a job.

I think Larian has massively underestimated this expectation. The question now is how they deal with the protests.



This is exactly right.
Larian was the correct studio for Divinity Original Sin 3, not Baldur's Gate 3. That's why the most prominent form of feedback on this forum is "This isn't D&D 5e."


That's not right at all. While I'm sure there are plenty of studios who could handle Baldur's Gate 3, Larian is absolutely one of them. By giving them feedback on how unfun their 5E changes are, we stand to convince them to change them. Advantage is a powerful mechanic in 5E and they surely will see that their house rules are handing it out too easily, among other things.

Page 2 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.2