|
|
|
journeyman
|
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Baldur's Gate 2: Shadows of Amn released September 24, 2000 and the expansion for it released in June 21, 2001. That is still close to 20 years ago and wasn't released 3 years ago
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: May 2020
|
Baldur's Gate 2: Shadows of Amn released September 24, 2000 and the expansion for it released in June 21, 2001. That is still close to 20 years ago and wasn't released 3 years ago Dragonspear for BG1. They even brought back the original voice actors and everything. It was to serve as a bridge expansion filling the time gap between BG1 and BG2.
Last edited by Traycor; 07/11/20 06:17 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
stranger
Joined: Oct 2020
|
The shear mental gymnastics required to state that:
1. The forums are filled with complaints about the game feeling like DoS rather than BG
but also
2. That is somehow not a problem for a game that is supposed to be the third game in a trilogy that only *exists at all* because of the 20+ years of popularity of those BG games
is staggering. I absolutely concur with you on this statement. Some of the DOS fans are starting to look like twisted contortionists unable to straighten out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Wtf is with people on this forum being really immature then proceeding to accuse everyone who disagrees with them of being children?
Last edited by Svalr; 07/11/20 07:05 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Duchess of Gorgombert
|
|
Duchess of Gorgombert
Joined: May 2010
|
This is yet another formal request to condense all of these into one megathread where everyone can troll each other making the same tired, terrible points.
Maybe they can get their own section of the forum. I've been meaning to do that for ages as it's not exactly an original observation in these parts. I should at least make a start.
J'aime le fromage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
|
The shear mental gymnastics required to state that:
1. The forums are filled with complaints about the game feeling like DoS rather than BG
but also
2. That is somehow not a problem for a game that is supposed to be the third game in a trilogy that only *exists at all* because of the 20+ years of popularity of those BG games
is staggering. I absolutely concur with you on this statement. Some of the DOS fans are starting to look like twisted contortionists unable to straighten out. I completely agree with the above. Things blatantly similar to DOS/DOS2: 3D World design / camera Character creator Origin stories 4 playable characters Short list of companions. From 6 to 8 probably. No time; no calendar, no day/night Dialogue Tags Cursors UI Inventory management Character selection Color palette Barrel/grenades/no ammo... Surfaces Itemization Menus Trade system/windows Wacky physics (jumps for example..) Enemy HP bloat. More wacky stuff from DOS I probably forgot to mention.. Things similar to Baldurs gate: Top down view DnD system World of Faerun aaaand....uuuh....Minsc?? New stuff: Cinematic dialogues Hardcore cringy sex scenes. Come one everyone now, this is 2020. We are all supposed to LOVE the current game not criticize it. Game <names> don't mean anything anymore. Like movie remakes.
Last edited by mr_planescapist; 07/11/20 08:39 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Sep 2017
|
Being a longtime fan doesn't give you credentials or give you rights over how a game should be made. Translation: I'm happy with playing DOS3 and if you're not, then shut up! Larian being deceptive about their intentions of doing a faithful port of D&D does not matter! 50 pages of voicing this complaint is just trolling. Nice shilling.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Duchess of Gorgombert
|
|
Duchess of Gorgombert
Joined: May 2010
|
Guys, quit throwing around stuff like troll, shill and other inflammatory comments, please. I don't really care about your PoV regarding the subject matter but I do care about people being civil.
J'aime le fromage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Sep 2017
|
Guys, quit throwing around stuff like troll, shill and other inflammatory comments, please. I don't really care about your PoV regarding the subject matter but I do care about people being civil. That was not me being uncivil. That was me using a decoder key on an attempt to shoot down this conversation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Sep 2017
|
The shear mental gymnastics required to state that:
1. The forums are filled with complaints about the game feeling like DoS rather than BG
but also
2. That is somehow not a problem for a game that is supposed to be the third game in a trilogy that only *exists at all* because of the 20+ years of popularity of those BG games
is staggering. I absolutely concur with you on this statement. Some of the DOS fans are starting to look like twisted contortionists unable to straighten out. I always thought dividing people into groups of DOS-fans, BG-fans and D&D-fans were a bit of a false dichotomy. I'm a bit of a fan of all, much more recently a fan of DOS2 which I praised as a spiritual successor of Baldur's Gate. I shot down people voicing the BG3 is DOS3 complaint prior to early access as premature and immature as I thought, and still think parts of the complaints are petty. Now though, I definitely agree with most of the criticisms. Not only because of the perception of Larian not really respecting the legendary title this game would not exist without, but because Larian themselves ensured us they would do a faithful port of D&D as far as they could - when this is obviously blatantly deceptive. I even think BG3 has promise of greatness, but mostly despite Larian's meme-combat, excessive loot /gear focus, and radical departure from D&D 5e.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Saying that the game doesn't "feel" like D&D, to YOU, is perfectly fine feedback. Accusing people of being deceptive, with no proof other than your personal feelings, is most definitely not civil.
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Oct 2020
|
I love BG1 and 2 and the rest of the Infinity Engine games. And I also love D:OS 1 and 2. And on top of that I also love what I've seen of BG3 so far. Does that make be crazy?
Last edited by Peranor; 07/11/20 10:02 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
stranger
Joined: Mar 2020
|
For me it currently feels like Turn-based WoW instead of BG3. There is something about it, I can't pinpoint exactly. Maybe it's the still goofy animations. A death animation for example looks ridiculous, they jump up and die like cartoon characters. And the silly combat dance is equally off-putting. The super glowy icons, the over the top effects for spells don't help either. Every spell has super duper over the top flashy effects. The magic missiles for example, I would tone down the super glow and add trails/tracers. The hulk jumps are silly, the insane force pushes look out of place, etc..
As I said before, I think this game is too far gone in terms of Art direction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Aug 2014
|
@Firesnakes, I responded to you on a different thread, but I'll repeat it here
While it is technically true that Facing rules are in the DMG, there are a other important components to that rule that Larian didn't implement.
Namely, the "a creature can change its facing as a reaction to another creature's move." This component of the rule basically negates facing unless you are surrounded by enemies because you only have 1 reaction. Thus, Larian's implementation IS a rule change.
In addition, DMG Facing: "A creature can only target creatures in its front or side arc." Depending on how you equate "threatening" with "targeting", this might imply that you'd provoke an AoO from circling around a creature. Not implemented by Larian.
On all your other points I agree. Monsters can have ranges of HP, the only reason DMs don't typically do this is because it is a hassle to run encounters with differing-HP goblins.
The DM is allowed to change monsters or make up new ones.
These ^ follow the rules. I argue with Larian's implementation (decrease AC+increase HP+don't change Saves=nerfed ST/HP-affecting spells) but Larian is not going against the rules of 5e in these cases.
Common sense should also apply with the facing. Being able to leapfrog back and forth over a melee opponent to always attack with advantage in a 1v1 situation is just... well dumb. But I'm afraid the devs at Larian might think it's good to let players do this. They seem to be all about removing restrictions and letting players do OP stuff. But the restrictions are what make the game. As a player, I feel rewarded when I master those restrictions and become good at the game. I'd love to hear from Larian what they think of all this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Sep 2017
|
Saying that the game doesn't "feel" like D&D, to YOU, is perfectly fine feedback. Accusing people of being deceptive, with no proof other than your personal feelings, is most definitely not civil. Really now? This is just me saying this kind of feels like DOS3? Objectively this is a pretty radical departure from D&D which Larian did in fact assert they were faithfully porting. YOU are the uncivil one to so easily dismiss this as purely based on "feeling" of a few malcontents when it is so clearly NOT. I even stated as much in the post you responded to. Stop this hypocrisy NOW. This is what Larian said regarding this very issue a year and a half ago: "We asked Vincke about the experience of adapting D&D, to which he replied:
We started by taking the ruleset that's in the Player's Handbook. We ported it as faithfully as we could, then there were some number of things that we saw that doesn't work that well, and so we started looking for solutions to do that. The hardest part—and this is the most interesting part also about it, because there's a lot of stuff from the rules that actually ports quite well, so—but the most interesting part is the role of the Dungeon Master...
Whatever is not in the book he'll say "Well, I'll do this," and the Dungeon Master says "Sure!" And then he'll think about what type of check he's going to make you do, and then that's going to be what you're going to roll with, and the entire party will work with that. In a video game, you don't have that, so in a video game you have to make systems that allow you to do this. And so, coming up with those systems has been a lot of fun, and making them link to the ruleset as it is has been the interesting bit about that."The second paragraph of this quote is the caveat that Larian took and went crazy with to excuse not really sticking with the first paragraph. If you agree this is a faithful D&D port, then fine - this wouldn't be deceptive, but I guess that would make you a denier of objective reality. The changes already made WILL INEVITABLY force an avalanche of homebrew to fix now broken classes, feats and spells so this issue will get worse unless Larian begins to adjust to the feedback provided. Which is the meaning of early access after all. https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019...-turn-based-rpgs-and-dreams-coming-true/
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Saying that the game doesn't "feel" like D&D, to YOU, is perfectly fine feedback. Accusing people of being deceptive, with no proof other than your personal feelings, is most definitely not civil. Really now? This is just me saying this kind of feels like DOS3? Objectively this is a pretty radical departure from D&D which Larian did in fact assert they were faithfully porting. YOU are the uncivil one to so easily dismiss this as purely based on "feeling" of a few malcontents when it is so clearly NOT. I even stated as much in the post you responded to. Stop this hypocrisy NOW. This is what Larian said regarding this very issue a year and a half ago: "We asked Vincke about the experience of adapting D&D, to which he replied:
We started by taking the ruleset that's in the Player's Handbook. We ported it as faithfully as we could, then there were some number of things that we saw that doesn't work that well, and so we started looking for solutions to do that. The hardest part—and this is the most interesting part also about it, because there's a lot of stuff from the rules that actually ports quite well, so—but the most interesting part is the role of the Dungeon Master...
Whatever is not in the book he'll say "Well, I'll do this," and the Dungeon Master says "Sure!" And then he'll think about what type of check he's going to make you do, and then that's going to be what you're going to roll with, and the entire party will work with that. In a video game, you don't have that, so in a video game you have to make systems that allow you to do this. And so, coming up with those systems has been a lot of fun, and making them link to the ruleset as it is has been the interesting bit about that."The second paragraph of this quote is the caveat that Larian took and went crazy with to excuse not really sticking with the first paragraph. If you agree this is a faithful D&D port, then fine - this wouldn't be deceptive, but I guess that would make you a denier of objective reality. The changes already made WILL INEVITABLY force an avalanche of homebrew to fix now broken classes, feats and spells so this issue will get worse unless Larian begins to adjust to the feedback provided. Which is the meaning of early access after all. https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019...-turn-based-rpgs-and-dreams-coming-true/ "There are some things on the chopping block, however. It's an interpretation of D&D, specifically 5th Edition, because porting the core rules, which Larian tried to do, doesn't work. Or it works, Vincke clarifies, but it's no fun at all. One of the culprits is missing when you're trying to hit an enemy, and while the combat system has yet to be revealed, you can at least look forward to being able to smack people more consistently. "You miss a lot in D&D—if the dice are bad, you miss," he says. "That doesn't work well in a videogame. If I do that, you're going to review it and say it's shit. Our approach has been implementing it as pure as we can, and then just seeing what works and what doesn't. Stuff that doesn't work, we start adapting until it does." This interpretation should still be more true to the tabletop RPG than its predecessors, however, capturing the feel of D&D even if it's not borrowing every single system and rule. Some of this is because of a difference in technology. Black Isle faced a lot of limitations that Larian doesn't." https://www.pcgamer.com/baldurs-gate-3-will-combine-the-best-of-divinity-and-dandd-5th-edition/
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Sep 2017
|
Common sense should also apply with the facing.
Being able to leapfrog back and forth over a melee opponent to always attack with advantage in a 1v1 situation is just... well dumb.
But I'm afraid the devs at Larian might think it's good to let players do this. They seem to be all about removing restrictions and letting players do OP stuff.
But the restrictions are what make the game. As a player, I feel rewarded when I master those restrictions and become good at the game. I'd love to hear from Larian what they think of all this.
This is pertinent criticisms I agree fully with. It feels like a cheap gimmick...and the ever-burning candles for dipping weapons in flame is an even worse offender. Meme combat. For all my criticisms, I am appreciative of Larian's efforts toward making the combat more tactical by increased mobility and incentivising using advantageous positioning. This really worked in DOS2. I also know Larian is trying to balance the binary RNG-nature of D&D - nobody likes to miss. But this all feels like abuse more than use. An exploit more than a feature. Boring not fun.
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Sep 2017
|
Relativism I would disagree with despite firmly of the opinion that turn based combat is a better approximation than Baldur's Gate's real time with pause. The rest of the game was pretty firmly D&D 2e outside the story element changes (which I enjoy in BG3 more than in BG1/2), whereas BG3 is unadulterated homebrew. I do agree with some of the homebrew, I'm not basing my criticisms on some kind of "D&D-purism". When I criticize Larian for failing to live up to expectations of a more "faithful port", I'm firmly in favor of playing an engaging game, as opposed to a D&D simulator. Solasta exists for those kinds of people. I also disagree with the gushing "promotional" article you linked to, though I would be much more inclined to agree had they stated it would contain the best of the original Baldur's Gate and DOS2 and not the best of D&D and DOS2. Except they are bringing on one of the most widely criticized aspects of DOS2, which is pretty incompatible with D&D (yet a better fit with BG1/2); MMO, Diablo, Fallout 4-style of hyper focus on loot and gear. Compulsive pack-mule roleplaying 
Last edited by Seraphael; 07/11/20 01:49 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
enthusiast
|
|
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2020
|
MMO, Diablo, Fallout 4-style of hyper focus on loot and gear. Compulsive pack-mule roleplaying That may have been DOS (for which gear also had levels, so turned useless every couple hours), but I don't see it here. Quite the contrary, the (hand-placed) unique items/loot seems reasonably rare. That is, compared to other modern games, obviously BG1 is an entirelly different beast of its own (one I miss very much). I'm curious what the game will play like come full release, anyhow. It's clear there may be significant changes coming, including "stabilized" pseudo-RNG, loaded dialogue dice, and more.
Last edited by Sven_; 07/11/20 01:54 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jul 2014
|
That may have been DOS, but I don't see it here. Quite the contrary, the (hand-placed) unique items/loot seems reasonably rare. That is, compared to other modern games, obviously BG1 is an entirelly different beast of its own (one I miss very much).
Well, we are already in a much better place than in the past (I FIERCELY hated the randomized loot in both DOS 1 and 2) but I'd say there's still some fine tuning to do to reach an ideal spot with loot distribution. Right now there are arguably a bit too many magic items for a level 4 cap and UNQUESTIONABLY way too much random low value loot cluttering our inventories in the most annoying way. At least Kingmaker "solved" this issue by systemic design: 1) by having a shared stash between all party members that made the minute busywork a little less busy (and yes, I think it's one of these cases where giving up a bit of "realism" is beneficial) 2) by giving strong incentives to actually travel light (tiredness mechanics and effects on travel speed plus bland time limits that rewarded you for moving quickly) and making non-magic equipment (armors and weapons) too heavy/cheap to even deserve being carried around.
|
|
|
|
|
