Originally Posted by KillerRabbit
Nice review. Found myself agreeing with nearly everything you said *except* the "too much loot" point. I got a little dopamine rush each time I got something new . . .

I find the itemization in an RPG to be a very subjective thing. I mean people love their Diablo, and I never could get into those games. For me PoE2:Deadfire set a new gold standard for items, but there are people who didn't like it. I am looking forward to DnD style items in BG3 - if they stick to roots it should be more to my tastes.

Originally Posted by KillerRabbit
I think the one cRPG that manged "neither" was Ps:T. The nameless one had lived multiple lives and whatever you chose mapped onto one of those lives.

Also recent Disco Elysium which had a very Torment-like vibe. I felt Torment is on the complete side of spectrum then D:OS2 - it manages to have a cake and eat it to. It gives you a blank slate to draw on, it's dialogue system is heavily reactive to character you have built, constantly encourages to express your character via a dialogue system with a robust choice of dialogue lines and also various intentions for those lines (when you lie you get to express it!), and of course the centre-piece of the game "What can change the nature of a man?" At the same time they use the amnesia to have a deep story and backstory, which your character reacts to, but isn't enslaved to AND it doesn't leave player disconnected because you are on the same page as protagonist for the entire experience. There is a reason why an amnesiac in an RPG is such a tired trope by now.

[EDIT: when it comes to roleplaying I thing D:OSs loose a lot due to multiplayer design. I had a great time playing through D:OS1 with a friend of mine, but found it barren and static by myself. Very much the same with D:OS2. In traditional RPG NPC are designed to react to you: companions are a prime example: they are resonating boards amplifying PC actions and giving a taste of societies reaction. In BG2 this was mostly tied to alignment. In later, more sophisticated designs companions would represent factions and themes, challenging players actions and communicating approval/scorn of the people inhabiting the world.

No such thing in D:OS2: without a buddy to react to player actions the game is fairly uncaring as to what you do. Companions aren’t really designed to support your PC, and the conflict that could be is dropped, as it was designed for Coop players to compete for the divinity, not for creating engaging conflict for a soloplayer]

Originally Posted by KillerRabbit

If BG3 is going to overcome that problem I think they need to hire / highlight a writer who is a longtime D&D fan. Which was the case with BG1 -- Minsc was someone's character.

And that's why I decided to make a disclaimer that my issues are with D:OS2, not directly with BG3. I think, it is doing a disservice to writers to suggest that they can write in one style only. Even, if BG style medieval fantasy isn't to someone liking, I don't think it is a problem - as an artist you will work on things you don't much care for, and your job is to do it well anyway.

What I would be less worried about, is not whenever writers can pull it off, but what is the writing process and its hierarchy in the deveopment. I think it's fare to say that for Bioware-of-old, Black Isle and Obsidian narrative and characters have been of utmost importance. I am pretty sure that's not the priority and appeal of D:OS1&2, and I am not sure if I should expect more of the same for BG3 or I will be surprised by some reorganisation of priorities. I didn't love everything I have seen in the demo, but I liked a few things.

Last edited by Wormerine; 16/05/20 01:04 AM.