Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback So is Larian actually listening to feedback here?

Also, I’m not following you regarding head-count comparison between both companies. Address the major complaints of a community should be easier in a larger team compared to a smaller one.

Such a hate for Solasta. Mechanically, Solasta is far superior than current BG3.

That's not hate, that's simply the reality. I bought Solasta, I played Solasta and it is what it is - right now it is literally 4 areas - 1 "city" and 3 linear, tunnel quest areas with super linear quests and NWN2 level graphics - a game from 2006, just a bit shinier spells.

It is exactly that, so I am not even sure what exactly you want me to glorify there. Story? Nothing to write home about - absolutely linear one path tunnel campaign. Characters and companions? You literally don't have any of note and there are simply no companions by definition.

Its only value is for RAW purists where they try to jump out of their skin to make it as close as they can to 5e core rules and in my personal opinion - the combat suffers for it. IMO, Solasta shows very well exactly why Larian did the changes they did with all these shitty reaction popups, smite popups and what not with your lowbie characters stiff as fuck with single action per turn and little more than that, except for odd minor utility spell or power.

That's not hate, that's simply the reality. I bought Solasta, I played Solasta and it is what it is - right now it is literally 4 areas - 1 "city" and 3 linear, tunnel quest areas with super linear quests and NWN2 level graphics - a game from 2006, just a bit shinier spells.

It is exactly that, so I am not even sure what exactly you want me to glorify there. Story? Nothing to write home about - absolutely linear one path tunnel campaign. Characters and companions? You literally don't have any of note and there are simply no companions by definition.

Its only value is for RAW purists where they try to jump out of their skin to make it as close as they can to 5e core rules and in my personal opinion - the combat suffers for it. IMO, Solasta shows very well exactly why Larian did the changes they did with all these shitty reaction popups, smite popups and what not with your lowbie characters stiff as fuck with single action per turn and little more than that, except for odd minor utility spell or power.

Well, that’s a matter of acknowledging the feedbacks from the community and not to actually change it. We’re not expecting them to implement the DnD5e rules by the book, yet there are pain points spread all over this forum with actual arguments regarding balance issues - mainly in the combat pillar.

Compared to redesign the other pillars (social interaction & exploration) - combat is the less tricky one.

Maybe look at this from a different angle: they made less content than Larian for now, and started updating their mechanics and giving their feedback for questions raised - earlier. We should look where both games would be 1 year from now.

I don't think Larian's PR strategy here has been perfect (I think they can be more transparent), but to expect implementation or commitment to certain changes by this point is kind of nuts. We're only a month out of Early Access. For a project this huge, it makes sense that they'll need to take time to parse feedback, debate solutions, and test before committing to any changes.

Larian's biggest mistake IMO has been their PR communication during patch updates. Raving on and on about meaningless stats and puppy petting without even mentioning if they've been looking at mechanical feedback is a poor move as it gives off an impression of a distracted child. The "humorous", nonchalant tone used in those updates makes exacerbates this. They don't have to commit to any changes (since they probably don't know at this point), but just an acknowledgement will do wonders.

I look at it from a simple angle of expecting to see a good RPG game first and only then everything else second and quite frankly - that game barely qualifies as RPG, especially in 2020. Heck, it would barely qualify as RPG back in 2002 seeing NWN.

It is a faithful 5e combat simulator and simply nothing else. It's about as much RPG as Xcom is and heck at least in Xcom you sort of have illusion of different paths, here it's just one thing.

I don't think Larian's PR strategy here has been perfect (I think they can be more transparent), but to expect implementation or commitment to certain changes by this point is kind of nuts. We're only a month out of Early Access. For a project this huge, it makes sense that they'll need to take time to parse feedback, debate solutions, and test before committing to any changes.

You need at least a few weeks just to wait for a proper range of feedback to kick-in - you can't simply take week 1 reactions and start running with that as it will skew your response base.

Then you need time to parse through it all and figure out which feedback you actually agree with - as not all of it is universal. More so, a lot of "individual" feedback points affect a larger system as a whole and can't be implemented in isolation. This is on top of having a larger organizational structure that will require the proper time spent on getting internal buy-in to changes.

All of that needs to be done before they even do internal testing, nevermind put it in a public patch. The only thing that will piss people off who demand Change X and not getting it fast enough is if you give them X and then have to take it away later because it turns out it doesn't work with Y and Z.

Larian's biggest mistake IMO has been their PR communication during patch updates. Raving on and on about meaningless stats and puppy petting without even mentioning if they've been looking at mechanical feedback is a poor move as it gives off an impression of a distracted child. The "humorous", nonchalant tone used in those updates makes exacerbates this. They don't have to commit to any changes (since they probably don't know at this point), but just an acknowledgement will do wonders.

The thing about Larian is that they will make the game they want to make. Our feedback is the smallest part of their process. It was the same in DOS2. Yes, they made changes of one or two of the glaring issues people ranted about, but for the most part nothing changed except bugs and refinements based on heat maps.

Swen is stubborn, and he won't change his mind.

He created this project to show a wider audience "Larian's formula" of CRPG. They openly co-opted the BG name to do this.

That means DOS. That means puppy petting and cringe worthy companions and binary dialogue options and tons of barrels everywhere.

BG3 will never become the game D&D or BG fans expected.

That's not hate, that's simply the reality. I bought Solasta, I played Solasta and it is what it is - right now it is literally 4 areas - 1 "city" and 3 linear, tunnel quest areas with super linear quests and NWN2 level graphics - a game from 2006, just a bit shinier spells.

It is exactly that, so I am not even sure what exactly you want me to glorify there. Story? Nothing to write home about - absolutely linear one path tunnel campaign. Characters and companions? You literally don't have any of note and there are simply no companions by definition.

Its only value is for RAW purists where they try to jump out of their skin to make it as close as they can to 5e core rules and in my personal opinion - the combat suffers for it. IMO, Solasta shows very well exactly why Larian did the changes they did with all these shitty reaction popups, smite popups and what not with your lowbie characters stiff as fuck with single action per turn and little more than that, except for odd minor utility spell or power.

Despite all the above, I believe that Solasta will be ok, given its 35 bucks price and first shot for that tiny studio. It will be a fair time burner for people like me who like turn based tactical combat games, but it's obvious it won't be even 1/3 of what BG3 will be and I'm being generous there.

The thing about Larian is that they will make the game they want to make. Our feedback is the smallest part of their process. It was the same in DOS2. Yes, they made changes of one or two of the glaring issues people ranted about, but for the most part nothing changed except bugs and refinements based on heat maps.

Swen is stubborn, and he won't change his mind.

He created this project to show a wider audience "Larian's formula" of CRPG. They openly co-opted the BG name to do this.

That means DOS. That means puppy petting and cringe worthy companions and binary dialogue options and tons of barrels everywhere.

BG3 will never become the game D&D or BG fans expected.

From IGN article:

One of the more difficult elements of developing Baldur’s Gate 3 with player involvement is that there are numerous different ‘camps’ of people interested in the game. There’s Larian’s long-term fans, who are crying out for there to be more ‘surfaces’ in the game (a mechanic used in the Original Sin games to create dynamic fire, poison clouds, oil slicks, and more). Then there’s players of the D&D tabletop game, who’d rather have surfaces removed all together. And then there’s old-school Baldur’s Gate fans, who want the real-time combat of the BioWare original games back. There’s a lot of people pulling in a lot of directions.

Lol, I was an idiot to sepnd 90 bucks on this game. Oh well.