Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Low pool of EA testers worries me

About Baldur's Gate III being Divinity: Original Sin with a Baldur's Gate theme, trolls might also be saying that, but it doesn't seem incorrect.

Equipment names? Baldur's Gate.
Spells? Baldur's Gate.
Races? Baldur's Gate.
Combat system? Original Sin with Dungeons & Dragons elements.
User interface? Original Sin.
Party size? Original Sin.
Party management system? Original Sin.
Lack of a weather system? Original Sin.
Lack of a day/night cycle? Original Sin.
A lot of interactive objects? Original Sin.
A lot of environmental effects? Original Sin.
Story structure? Original Sin.
Party member names? Original Sin.
Party member personalities? Original Sin.

Some of the elements from the Original Sin games are definitely an improvement over the original Baldur's Gate games, but overall, Baldur's Gate III is far more like an improved Original Sin with elements from Dungeons & Dragons than an improved Baldur's Gate.

BG + BG2 were cool relative to their time and age. I loved them, too, but they are not state of the art anymore.

Technology and game design have evolved since then, this also includes (of course) the things developers can do when implementing game mechanics.

I have played BG2 for a while again during the last few days - and I honestly have to say: the magic is gone. BG2 feels clunky, unpolished, unwelcoming - but this is seen from the perspective of a post D:OS2-gamer, of course.

What I'm trying to say: being stuck in the past and wanting things to stay the same forever doesn't work. I see BG3, since we have good dice rolling (weighted dice, ability to improve dice roll outcomes) which enables player agency instead of having your story dictated by RNG, as it was at the start of EA, as a culmination, or a "best of", between D&D and the advances video game science and technology have made since BG2 came out.

And no, neither Solasta nor WotR are really good comparisons, both are, in comparison with BG3 even as it is now in EA, very "unpolished", with Solasta feeling more like a "tabletop simulator" instead of an actual, deep, AAA-level computer game.

Yes, both are really good games, but they are not even in the same ballpark, production-value and game-design wise, as BG3.

And also, yes, I agree that BG3 is not unsimilar to D:OS2 - but in my most honest opinion this is a good thing. D:OS2 is still one of the best video game RPGs that were ever produced. Modern and still a somewhat "old school" RPG.

Honestly, D&D rules are good as a guideline and general idea, but they don't make a AAA level video game. It's just too bland when playing alone, much more spice is needed, which Larian adds by utilizing the virtues already implemented in D:OS2 and then some.

Also, coming back to D:OS2 once again: this game was groundbreaking. In my opinion D:OS2 actually reshaped the meaning of the term "CRPG", because it really brought together the best of both worlds: CRPG gameplay on one hand, the possibilities of video games in the 21st century on the other hand.

This whole discussion reminds me on why, as a metalhead, I'm almost "disgusted" with about 99% of the "heavy metal scene". Watching 60 year old guys in AC/DC shirts with beer spilled all over it and still insisting that "only metal is music", etc... was never fun, and it feels cult-like.

Combat system? DnD 5e with still adjusting the perks of the system.
User interface? Originally similar to their DO titles, now distinctively BG3
Party size? DnD 5e
Party management system? Greatly readjusted in the last Patch.
Lack of a weather system? Would be nice, I agree.
Lack of a day/night cycle? Dragon Age Origins also miss out on this one for the same reason. They would have to re-shoot all of the campsite cinematics. Also the game has a concealment system that would have to be recreated entirely with a day/night cycle. I am fine with the current set up. Day=adventuring, night= party banter.
A lot of interactive objects? I would say intractability is one of the great strengths of BG3, compared to for instance Solasta where everything feels stale and static.
A lot of environmental effects? Greatly readjusted in multiple Patches.
Story structure? Like the three part story structure that is universal to western storytelling?
Party member names? Bullshit...
Party member personalities? See my previous point.

All those things in red are places where you could've just said "not inspired by or related to Baldur's Gate".

Also, 5E does not say that parties cannot have more than 4 members. It says 3-5 and it doesn't rule out more, so this whole "doing the DOS thing is actually totally forced by 5E" is obviously a very flawed argument. It's a design decision that Larian made because it fit perfectly with all the other things they'd decided. It isn't forced by 5E at all.

And I don't think there's too much "for some reason" over why Larian skips the time system. It's just easier to have time effects eliminated and not have to worry about it. You have complete control over lighting, you don't have to worry about schedules for your actors, and there's no problem having some people be in combat while others are not, even though this leads to an obvious time fracture. People outside of combat are subject to constant time whereas people in combat are in turnbased time-stands-still mode, so how do they merge the timelines after the combat ends? Answer is, they don't need to! Campsite cinematics and concealment are the least of the problems.

There is only one thing i can say to people who keep repeating that this is Original Sin 3 ...
Maybe, just maybe ... you should have listen to Swen, when he specificaly warned us about: if you are not quite sure, if this game will be for you, you should not buy it right from the start, but wait for some reviews first.
You can only blame yourself and your own inpatience. -_-

People are trying to tell Larian that their game isn't pushing the right buttons to really feel like a sequel to two legendary games whose name this game is borrowing, and you feel it makes sense to tell them essentially to fuck off with their perspective? To got eat a can of shit for expecting a BG franchise game to push the old BG buttons?

What's the point of that? What do you hope to achieve, aside from just annoying people?

Yes, Larian is not copying a game from before the turn of the millenium, that's true. They are adapting DnD 5e into a pc game that has strong narrative ties to the BG saga.

But, honestly, your argument that everything would be solved if they abandoned their turn-based design, it is just laughable, I mean What???? DnD is a turn-based system. They cannot implement it without their turn-based design. This is a tired argument. BG3 is a turn-based game, as it is an adaptation of a turn-based ttrpg. Deal it with already.

People are trying to tell Larian that their game isn't pushing the right buttons to really feel like a sequel to two legendary games whose name this game is borrowing

and you feel it makes sense to tell them essentially to fuck off with their perspective?

To got eat a can of shit for expecting a BG franchise game to push the old BG buttons?

What's the point of that? What do you hope to achieve, aside from just annoying people?

Nobody says they should copy. But they're good at what they do so "being influenced by" is certainly possible.

What they are doing, however, is making a DOS-D&D hybrid game that so far doesn't seem to have all that obvious connections with or influences from the BG saga at all, except the narrative will seemingly tie in with Bhaal's situation without having too much to do with anything the Bhaalspawn did. Even though the interesting bit, as far as the BG saga is concerned, is actually the Bhaalspawn rather than Bhaal himself.

Lastly, where did you come up with what "my argument" is? And did you wash your hands afterwards, because unless you have some speech-to-text thing going, not washing your hands after something like that is really bad. You know what they say about keyboards, they're dirtier than your average restroom. Take one apart one day, you'll believe it too.

But you're right that the turn-based design is forcing a lot of other things that in turn cause a lot of differences and probably isn't helping the game that much. FYI, the old 2E rules were turnbased too, but Bioware managed to come up with an alternative that worked better for what they were trying to do. I'm not as good at game design as Larian so I don't know what they could or should have done, but what I do know is that spending half an hour to kill 20 or so gobbos is a bit much. That same fight in BG1 and 2? Probably a couple of minutes at low levels, less at higher levels because there's no need to pause and micro.

They don't need your consent personally to create a sequal for the BG saga. They needed WotC's and they got the green light after their pitch with them. I am a fan of the original saga and I love what Larian has been creating so far. I don't want a slavish and uninspired clone of the old games. I want a rpg that could mean as much to a modern generation of players as the original saga meant back then. I want a pc experience that mirrors the joy of playing DnD with my mates. And so far it seems Larian will deliver that...

The earnest desire to recreate DnD within the framework of a video game. For me, that was the spirit of the BG saga and it is the spirit that is gonna make BG3 a fantastic game.

I think it actually already is.

Even in its current EA state one can easily extract 40+ hours of most excellent play time out of it - most fully released games today don't offer that.

Nah, people told larian 3/4 year ago, nobody seemed to care back then, and that didnt change so far ... they are just repeating it for the sake of conflict itself.
This isnt about improving the game, so they get what they want ... this is just about expressing their dissatisfaction, since they didnt get what they *expect* ... nothing more.

Yes i do.
I would say it should be obvious, since i allready did.

[quote=ArvGuy]To got eat a can of shit for expecting a BG franchise game to push the old BG buttons?

Not everything is a measure of which gatekeepers are better, you dinguses. Maybe instead of flagellating each other for another two hours, maybe look at the criticisms from an objective standpoint. Because since people keep bringing them up, perhaps they actually exist for a reason?

The few times people do elaborate further they bring in things that were never promised, dont make a title a baldurs gate title, cant really be narrowed down because people dont know themselves or have nothing to do with the game at all, etc etc. Mostly it comes to how their expectations havent been met somehow. Ive been playing the game since it came out, taking time off the game after playthroughs so I dont burn myself out but it seems these arguments just dont die down. They (generally) still cant narrow down what it is exactly that feels off to them and if anything, theyre just repeating themselves over and over. People also get defensive or offensive to others if they ask them to explain, leading to things kike you bring up. 15 replies and its people talking back and forth with not to much beeing said.