Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 4 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
you shouldn't really compare BG3 to BG2 yet. But as far as introductions go, the introduction of Irenicus and Imoen and dungeon crawl to the Promenade are head in shoulders above our brief jaunt through hell and all the vague Absolute stuff.

But I'm someone who still enjoys going back the BG2 so maybe my opinion is colored by years of hind-sight. I can't be really sure what my first impression of BG2's intro was, except that it was heady and made me want to rush through the game to save a friend from being tortured (I was a more naive gamer then). I'll have a better impression of BG3 when, or if, they make the tadpole into a more effective ticking clock.

Joined: Nov 2020
A
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
A
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by Sozz
you shouldn't really compare BG3 to BG2 yet. But as far as introductions go, the introduction of Irenicus and Imoen and dungeon crawl to the Promenade are head in shoulders above our brief jaunt through hell and all the vague Absolute stuff.

But I'm someone who still enjoys going back the BG2 so maybe my opinion is colored by years of hind-sight. I can't be really sure what my first impression of BG2's intro was, except that it was heady and made me want to rush through the game to save a friend from being tortured (I was a more naive gamer then). I'll have a better impression of BG3 when, or if, they make the tadpole into a more effective ticking clock.
I prefer BG1's intruduction.

BG2's assumed that you've travelled with this predefined partt (Imoen, Jaheira, Minsc, Khalid and Dynaheir) in BG1. Even if it happened that these npcs died in your BG1 playthrough, which is pretty immersion breaking right from the start, imo. And then they made Imoen a Bhaalspawn, never explaining why her essence didn't return to the throne upon death as with other Bhaalspawn characters, including the main one.

Joined: Jan 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jan 2020
Originally Posted by Sozz
you shouldn't really compare BG3 to BG2 yet. But as far as introductions go, the introduction of Irenicus and Imoen and dungeon crawl to the Promenade are head in shoulders above our brief jaunt through hell and all the vague Absolute stuff.

But I'm someone who still enjoys going back the BG2 so maybe my opinion is colored by years of hind-sight. I can't be really sure what my first impression of BG2's intro was, except that it was heady and made me want to rush through the game to save a friend from being tortured (I was a more naive gamer then). I'll have a better impression of BG3 when, or if, they make the tadpole into a more effective ticking clock.

Literally ticking clocks are actually quite rare as they can be very limiting in how a game is played. Neither BG1 nor BG2 had a ticking clock, even though they had day/night passage of time. And we already know that the BG3 tadpole is quiescent to some degree.

What all 3 games share is an underlying sense of peril ( Sarevok, Irenicus/Bodhi, Tadpole/Absolute ) that serves as a narrative hook. However, you can easily "bunk off" in all 3 games to investigate everything that is not gated behind story arcs. Usually, in a first playthrough, I will largely follow the central plot with few diversions; but you can easily justify a slower pace as needing to gain the additional power to succeed.

To me, the story elements so far look promising and potentially complex; but I will withold judgement, as many games start with interesting scene-setting, only to taper off into a bland finale.

Joined: Oct 2020
R
addict
Offline
addict
R
Joined: Oct 2020
At the moment, it's hard to compare companions or storylines to BG2.
We don't even have the entire first act, along with quests for most of the companions.
Although even now the game is better than BG1 which has aged tragically in almost every way.

Joined: Apr 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Apr 2020
Originally Posted by vometia
Originally Posted by Emulate
BG2 is better, BG3 has a lot of issues many of which will likely never be fixed... BG3 doesn't even have proper fog of war so its not even really on the same level as it doesn't even abide by RPG standards set 30 years ago, fails on many levels.

Please don't try to reintroduce that discussion yet again. Thanks.

Really not trying to reintroduce a discussion, just have this to say to Emulate: First, you DON'T KNOW if the issues you mentioned (or didn't) will ever get fixed. Second, I truly believe the fog of war is overrated. It doesn't mean that because BG1 did it that BG3 HAS to do it. It doesn't define what a BG game is. And, way too easy to abuse it also. Personally, I'm glad it's gone.

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by ash elemental
Originally Posted by Sozz
you shouldn't really compare BG3 to BG2 yet. But as far as introductions go, the introduction of Irenicus and Imoen and dungeon crawl to the Promenade are head in shoulders above our brief jaunt through hell and all the vague Absolute stuff.

But I'm someone who still enjoys going back the BG2 so maybe my opinion is colored by years of hind-sight. I can't be really sure what my first impression of BG2's intro was, except that it was heady and made me want to rush through the game to save a friend from being tortured (I was a more naive gamer then). I'll have a better impression of BG3 when, or if, they make the tadpole into a more effective ticking clock.
I prefer BG1's intruduction.

BG2's assumed that you've travelled with this predefined partt (Imoen, Jaheira, Minsc, Khalid and Dynaheir) in BG1. Even if it happened that these npcs died in your BG1 playthrough, which is pretty immersion breaking right from the start, imo. And then they made Imoen a Bhaalspawn, never explaining why her essence didn't return to the throne upon death as with other Bhaalspawn characters, including the main one.

"Hello Xzar...I seem to remember you being dead..." ; "Nevermind that!...have a quest!" There were some things in Baldur's Gate you just had to roll with, the Heisenberg world-state of your BG1 narrative was one of those things :p but I get it.
I agree with you that making Imoen a secret child of Bhaal feels like a hasty story choice, but as far as death goes in D&D in general I tend to already be rolling my eyes, nobody really died, they're just mostly dead...except when you're gibbed of course.
And Imoen's revelation does nothing to detract from the introduction for me, I like BG:1's intro too but it doesn't get me as invested in the plot as the introduction in BG2 does.
Originally Posted by etonbears
Literally ticking clocks are actually quite rare as they can be very limiting in how a game is played. Neither BG1 nor BG2 had a ticking clock, even though they had day/night passage of time. And we already know that the BG3 tadpole is quiescent to some degree.

What all 3 games share is an underlying sense of peril ( Sarevok, Irenicus/Bodhi, Tadpole/Absolute ) that serves as a narrative hook. However, you can easily "bunk off" in all 3 games to investigate everything that is not gated behind story arcs. Usually, in a first playthrough, I will largely follow the central plot with few diversions; but you can easily justify a slower pace as needing to gain the additional power to succeed.

To me, the story elements so far look promising and potentially complex; but I will withold judgement, as many games start with interesting scene-setting, only to taper off into a bland finale.
Ticking clocks don't need to be literal to spur the narrative along, video games are interesting because they allow for them to actually be literal, but in most stories they serve as a way of adding tension and drama to every choice the character makes. If the tadpole in BG:3 was turned into a literal ticking clock, that would be fantastic but I would enjoy just as much a more clear introduction of their danger, as it is we have a scary thing in our head, everyone tell us how we need to be rushing to find a cure, but then everything else that happens in the first Act undercuts that as you dither around.
I was comparing introductions between BG2 and BG3, I was frustrated (in a good way) by the hurdles placed before me at the end of BG2's intro, while for BG3 I question the motivation of my character and the party.

Joined: Jan 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jan 2020
Originally Posted by Sozz
<snip>

To me, the story elements so far look promising and potentially complex; but I will withold judgement, as many games start with interesting scene-setting, only to taper off into a bland finale.
Ticking clocks don't need to be literal to spur the narrative along, video games are interesting because they allow for them to actually be literal, but in most stories they serve as a way of adding tension and drama to every choice the character makes. If the tadpole in BG:3 was turned into a literal ticking clock, that would be fantastic but I would enjoy just as much a more clear introduction of their danger, as it is we have a scary thing in our head, everyone tell us how we need to be rushing to find a cure, but then everything else that happens in the first Act undercuts that as you dither around.
I was comparing introductions between BG2 and BG3, I was frustrated (in a good way) by the hurdles placed before me at the end of BG2's intro, while for BG3 I question the motivation of my character and the party.[/quote]

Hmmm. Well, a literal "ticking clock" tadpole would lead to a pretty short game smile , since the host brain is devoured within hours. And ( if I remember correctly ), the first long rest conversations make it very clear that there is something unexpected happening. As do almost any and every conversation you have with anyone that claims they can heal you, but ( surprise ) find they can't.

I don't think we are really disagreeing; a good story has a narrative hook that drives you forward, and in BG3, "fear" of the tadpole is it, at least for the average "good-aligned" player. Shadowheart and Lae'zel, being sensible ladies, take the view that getting rid of the tadpole is paramount; but Astarion certainly doesn't, and both Wyll and Gale are curious about alternatives. We don't yet know other companions will think, but I suspect that any miniature giant space hamster that appears in the game will have a low opinion of tadpoles.

I don't know that BG2 ( which I preferred over BG1 ) was particularly narratively good after leaving Irenicus dungeon. The narrative pull was that you needed to free Imoen, but you couldn't do it directly, and were pretty much forced to run around doing side content to the point where you realised that there wasn't really that much urgency. At least, that was the way I felt. What made BG2 interesting for me was that, as you engaged in the side content, it began to weave a larger web of interactions between different actors. I see a lot of that in the way BG3 is constructed, but we are all different, so maybe you don't.


Mod edit to snip quoted post: Please reduce the size of any long posts being quoted. Use <snip>, selective quoting or spoilers.

Last edited by Sadurian; 05/04/21 08:49 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
I don't think we disagree either, I'm sorry if I was coming across that way.

How about this, every long rest you take stat damage; such as -1 CON, or every use of the Tadpole tests WIS, on a fail you take 1 permanent WIS damage, until a point at which you no longer have the choice *not* to use the tadpole. All these healers we run to in Act 1 can't cure us, but they can heal some of this damage(resetting the clock somewhat), or give us a bonus during these rolls. Ability score damage is very outre in current D&D but it certainly would up the peril of having been experimented by some Illithids.
It's really the lack of fear where I have issues, you don't have to be good-aligned to not want to use the tadpole, especially after the first time, just look at our evil/neutral party, only Astarion is gung-ho about using the tadpole, and there's probably more going on there too.
If we were undergoing a clear process, one that active use of the tadpole accelerated, you'd be getting more out our "Hook"/ Ticking Clock.

As for BG2, like I said, I was a more naive gamer then, but even now, especially with the game "checking in" with Imoen at Spellhold, I am fully on board for making a bee-line to her rescue, but I understand how on a metanarrative level you understand that there is really no consequence for not saving Imoen as soon as possible, but in terms of having a clear goal and narrative justification to do so in a timely manner, BG:2 does it better than 1 or 3(so far)

Joined: Oct 2020
R
addict
Offline
addict
R
Joined: Oct 2020
I can already see a shout on the forums if Larian actually dared to introduce a time limit for the game.
Most likely the forum would be dead.
Even in the case of Pathfinder, a lot of people complained about it and it was rather a game aimed at more hardcore rpg fans.

Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
One of the things that still stands out in my mind for the BG saga and all the old Infinity games, was just the steady clip at which its expansions and sequel were released.

For the time, and even by todays standards, they cranked those games out in what felt like a new entry like every six months for couple years running.

I recall picking up Baldur's Gate at Fry's at Christmas time, thinking it might be cool cause it was sitting right next to Fallout on the shelf. The Tales of the Sword coast expansion was out what, like a couple months later. For sure by the summer of 99, cause I remember playing it right after graduating, and by the time Durlags was dunzo they hit us with Planescape almost immediately. I remember it was plugged by a trailer showing Sigil on the ToSC cd, because that was the load disc for the main BG game and always in the drive lol. There was a little lull for BG2 to come out, like long enough to get mailed a t-shirt, but in the lead up they dropped Icewind Dale which was basically BG1.5, since the engine and gameplay was the same. It was basically the same as creating a 6 person party in BG:ToSC using the multiplayer lan but as a single player to create a custom party. Plus it had the killer art for the portraits, which was all cross compatible. So by the time you were done with that Shadows of Amn was on.

What all that did was to create sense of continuity, or an expectation of continuity/compatibility for a serialized D&D game on par with the gold boxes of the late 80s. Like where the same basic engine and systems would be used to do more than a single campaign. Which was cool cause it hadn't been that way in a while. And of course TSR had just imploded so that didn't bode well too well, but then those infinity games made D&D a hit again on the sneak attack. Just long enough in the stopgap for the Wizards to take over and crank out a new edition and new crpg game engine with NWN. I feel like that's what's missing a bit right now, that sense that there's for sure more stuff coming down the pike. I'd guess the Wizards were hoping that a D&D entry using the divinity engine could work in a similar way? Like to do a serialized thing piggybacking on Larian's obvious success with DOS by grafting it onto that, the same way they used Interplay's success with Fallout. My main hope is that this isn't just a one off. Basically so the convo can go how does "Infinity compare to Divinity?" rather than 'how to does BG3 hold up to BG2?" If that makes any sense

Joined: Mar 2021
T
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
T
Joined: Mar 2021
Can you compare BG2 to BG3? I don't think you can. Gaming and computers have evolved so much, its apples and oranges. Two completely different things. Like comparing a book to a movie, simply because they both have "stories"

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Tabuk
Can you compare BG2 to BG3? I don't think you can. Gaming and computers have evolved so much, its apples and oranges. Two completely different things. Like comparing a book to a movie, simply because they both have "stories"
Uh...first you can compare books and movies...second, these are both D&D CRPGs set in the same universe, it's more like comparing 2nd edition to 5th edition, which has multiple threads here I think.

Joined: Sep 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Tabuk
Can you compare BG2 to BG3? I don't think you can. Gaming and computers have evolved so much, its apples and oranges. Two completely different things. Like comparing a book to a movie, simply because they both have "stories"
I mean, you totally can compare those things. Apples are simpler to eat as you can just eat the skin and there are less juices, whereas you have to peel an orange.

Books are compared to movies all the time. See every single book that is made into a movie. The Hobbit book was short and sweet, whereas the Hobbit movies were needlessly drawn out into 3 installments and had unnecessary cameos and love stories. Harry Potter movies took a lot Ron's good points and gave them to Hermione, making Ron a much less sympathetic character. LOTR movies are much more compressed than the books, arguably a good thing making for a tighter and more enjoyable experience.

If we move away from direct book-to-movie adaptations, you can still compare a lot of things between them. Books are better at showing character's thought processes whereas movies have to show this through character's actions or dialogue. Intro hooks are vastly more important in books, as you'll probably still watch a movie if its first 5 minutes is meh, but a boring 1st chapter of a book can put you off from the large time investment.

It's reasonable to compare BG3 and BG2, as long as you keep the time and D&D version differences in mind. E.g., day-night cycle is totally a thing that could be in BG3, and its lack compared to BG2 makes the world less immersive. BG3 is turn-based, meaning that it's easier to micromanage all your characters and there are less trash fights, at the cost of combat speed. Etc

Joined: Mar 2021
T
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
T
Joined: Mar 2021
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
Originally Posted by Tabuk
Can you compare BG2 to BG3? I don't think you can. Gaming and computers have evolved so much, its apples and oranges. Two completely different things. Like comparing a book to a movie, simply because they both have "stories"
I mean, you totally can compare those things. Apples are simpler to eat as you can just eat the skin and there are less juices, whereas you have to peel an orange.

Books are compared to movies all the time. See every single book that is made into a movie. The Hobbit book was short and sweet, whereas the Hobbit movies were needlessly drawn out into 3 installments and had unnecessary cameos and love stories. Harry Potter movies took a lot Ron's good points and gave them to Hermione, making Ron a much less sympathetic character. LOTR movies are much more compressed than the books, arguably a good thing making for a tighter and more enjoyable experience.

If we move away from direct book-to-movie adaptations, you can still compare a lot of things between them. Books are better at showing character's thought processes whereas movies have to show this through character's actions or dialogue. Intro hooks are vastly more important in books, as you'll probably still watch a movie if its first 5 minutes is meh, but a boring 1st chapter of a book can put you off from the large time investment.

It's reasonable to compare BG3 and BG2, as long as you keep the time and D&D version differences in mind. E.g., day-night cycle is totally a thing that could be in BG3, and its lack compared to BG2 makes the world less immersive. BG3 is turn-based, meaning that it's easier to micromanage all your characters and there are less trash fights, at the cost of combat speed. Etc

you are smart enough to know, that I meant you can't constructively compare the two.

You can compare the NY Giants to the Dallas Cowboys, talk about the strength and weakness of each team in a constructive way. BUT comparing the 2020 Dallas Cowboys to the 1950 NY Yankees would be a waste of time, no valuable information could be obtained by that comparison, there are to many differences to talk about.

Comparing BG2 to BG3 is a waste of time, there are to many differences and not on the same, mmmm, anything.

"hey man you can compare anything dummy" is sort of not the point, and well, I think you know that. But instead of addressing my point or not addressing it, you made up a story , that had nothing to do with what anyone was saying.

Last edited by Tabuk; 08/04/21 04:49 AM.
Joined: Sep 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Tabuk
you are smart enough to know, that I meant you can't constructively compare the two.

You can compare the NY Giants to the Dallas Cowboys, talk about the strength and weakness of each team in a constructive way. BUT comparing the 2020 Dallas Cowboys to the 1950 NY Yankees would be a waste of time, no valuable information could be obtained by that comparison, there are to many differences to talk about.

Comparing BG2 to BG3 is a waste of time, there are to many differences and not on the same, mmmm, anything.

"hey man you can compare anything dummy" is sort of not the point, and well, I think you know that. But instead of addressing my point or not addressing it, you made up a story , that had nothing to do with what anyone was saying.
What do you think about the following comparisons?
Originally Posted by mrfuji3
It's reasonable to compare BG3 and BG2, as long as you keep the time and D&D version differences in mind. E.g., day-night cycle is totally a thing that could be in BG3, and its lack compared to BG2 makes the world less immersive. BG3 is turn-based, meaning that it's easier to micromanage all your characters and there are less trash fights, at the cost of combat speed [and smoothness of transition between exploring and combat].
I think these are constructive comparisons.

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
I honestly feel that the "trash fights" are sorely lacking in BG3. Sometimes it is nice to have fights that are fairly easy and make your characters feel powerful. As for day/night cycles, I feel that is mostly based on the story being told. Perhaps there are segments in the game later on where there are night missions?

Joined: Oct 2020
R
addict
Offline
addict
R
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by andreasrylander
I honestly feel that the "trash fights" are sorely lacking in BG3. Sometimes it is nice to have fights that are fairly easy and make your characters feel powerful. As for day/night cycles, I feel that is mostly based on the story being told. Perhaps there are segments in the game later on where there are night missions?


Trash battles are the worst way to waste a player's time. They are neither interesting nor demanding in any way.
I definitely prefer situations in which every fight is at least a medium challenge.

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Rhobar121
Originally Posted by andreasrylander
I honestly feel that the "trash fights" are sorely lacking in BG3. Sometimes it is nice to have fights that are fairly easy and make your characters feel powerful. As for day/night cycles, I feel that is mostly based on the story being told. Perhaps there are segments in the game later on where there are night missions?


Trash battles are the worst way to waste a player's time. They are neither interesting nor demanding in any way.
I definitely prefer situations in which every fight is at least a medium challenge.

Ahh but it doesn't have to be a waste of time! For instance, what if your evil assassin character sneaks into a shop and assassinates a shopkeeper without that turning into a 15 minute brawl with legions of guards that are perfectly set up across the shop?
Or perhaps you decide to rob a vagrant by the wayside?

Joined: Apr 2021
S
stranger
Offline
stranger
S
Joined: Apr 2021
To be Blunt it does not compare there to entirely different games set in the same world is all to be fair it would have been more accurate to call Baldurs Gate Orginal Bhaal Spawn Saga And I would argue this would be the Illythid Saga.
Then there the way Bioware Implemented D&D 2nd Edition Advanced rules and they went with RTWP with the formations in a 6 man squad and because of this, they have entirely different gameplay and styles.

I find with RTWP you get more low-level mobs through in if nothing else to make your feel powerful and got to admit I kinda like this faster pace game but still have to pause for the big fight to micromanage to make sure your support do not get caught out.

I find TB slower paced I mean you can go get cuppa take it easy more relaxed can still be super tough fights but will tend to be fewer mobs and I would say every fight is much more intense because of it.

I am finding the 4 man squad limit with the chain system rather constrictive tho but I suppose it adds to the challenge and you're defo gonna have to go without something.

To be honest of Recent the only game I found got close to BG2 feeling is Pathfinder: Kingmaker and that not tech DND rules it a take on them but I had the same kind of feeling I had when I played BG2 I say BG2 because I pref that one over BG it took everything Bauldurs Gate did and Turned the Diles way up

I agree with the peeps on the NPC chrs only one I kinda like is Lae'zel but she hates me cus I a goody-two-shoes saving the Tieflings and druids but I still kind of like here chr more than the other the worse being the Twilight Vampire oh god why.

Last edited by ShimmerUK; 08/04/21 06:54 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
I've been comparing BG2 and BG3 almost solely on their stories but that's because it's the most interesting part to me. That said the differences between a 6 and 4 man squad can certainly change the tenor of combat encounters but I think this has more to do with the relative power curves between 2nd and 5th edition than anything

I'd would put Kingmaker much closer to BG:1 than BG:2 and really just the first Act of Baldur's Gate.

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

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