Baldur's Gate Baldur's Gate 3 Pre-Release Thread [EARLY ACCESS RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[whydoibother]

As for the constant comparison in-between IE games: it is a complete waste of time. I wouldn't be able to tell if IWD was better looking than BG, and even if I would, it'd be my subjective opinion anyway. But it is clear that the two games differed in theme and graphics too, and imho the theme was in sync with the art style in both games, and this is all what objectively matters.

It depends how intimate you are with IWD and BG. Like, if you've played them or not. I haven't seen anyone who has played both say that IWD backdrops don't look better than BG ones. And I haven't seen anyone argue that BG2 has better paperdolls and mundane sprites than BG.

Maybe people just don't like the white ice&snow visuals of the first Icewind Dale areas, and thats the memory they have left of it when they fail to exist that forest whatever-it-was-called.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Maybe people just don't like the white ice&snow visuals of the first Icewind Dale areas,

these people are wrong

 

[Elex]

Someone can upload screen in a place that don’t downscale it?

 

[holla_cabezas_de_mierda]

i don't mind the rp style dialogue but the past tense feels weird

why wouldn't it be like "I don't trust this man, I draw my weapon" or "Ask where he appeared from"

the way it is makes it sound like you're recounting a story after the fact

it would be like that if they have somehow integrated a DM into the game. Either a live one or a computer one or both? I think that is perhaps Swens long term dream, to have a DM mode all the time, maybe even in single player somehow..so maybe that?

 

[Theodora]

Mostly with I was talking about how IWD looked and was put together as a package with the music, the UI etc.. not the entire game play part. I actually am not sure IWD 2 is better looking because I am playing it now and the character sheets suck actually, and I had forgotten how limited they were.... IWD's and BG's are better.

But my point was the IWD games were to me very nicely made games, visually where as Larians games lack the same artistic style. Josh Sawyer seems to be able to make good looking games. Also I think he has a track record of making very enjoyable games when confined by a rule set he did not design himself, whether he likes that fact or not..... such as with New Vegas, IWD 1+2 perhaps others....

To be honest it's much easier to make a classy aesthetic with 2D assets. Non-pixel indie games have me convinced photorealism has to die before more 3D games become something visually memorable. (jRPGs do this much better, because even 'anime' styles have more variance than circling the real.)

 

[whydoibother]

Maybe people just don't like the white ice&snow visuals of the first Icewind Dale areas,

these people are wrong

I don't have any screenshots, but just from memory, the first area is a white base, with brown roads, and brown roofs. Basically 2 colors only. And there was a cave near, which is just brown and black inside. I don't have any visual memories from Icewind Dale, because it wasn't very interesting visually.
But maybe thats just me.

 

[Lilura]

But maybe thats just me.

No, it's just the beginning of the campaign that's a bit visually drab. Later on, you get stuff like this:

 

[Orma]

I agree with this. I don't like joshs home brew system he did with PoE,

I just wish he had not gone off and designed his own gaming system for PoE. .

PoE's system can be rough at times, true. But he pretty much perfected it in Deadfire, it has probably the most varied (in terms of viability) and iniutive dual-classing system in any game, and most fun to experiment\theorycraft in.

but I think if he was forced to make an AD&D game he would do a much better job.

Unlikely, cuz he kinda hated it at the time.

I actually think he is very talented at making an artistic good looking game.

Yes.

All his games have looked professional and artistic and even beautiful.

Agreed

I think he would design a much better game than Larian honestly given the same challenge and the same constraints, if he were willing to do it and work within the AD&D rules system.

Probably

 

[Grunker]

I don't have any visual memories from Icewind Dale, because it wasn't very interesting visually.

why do you bother indeed

 

[SausageInYourFace]

Obviously posting with apparent hindsight etc. etc. but: why were people so sceptical that it would be an actual cRPG given Larian is publishing it as well, and hot on the success of Original Sin 1 + 2?

Obviously because a lot of posters are obsessive whiners and faultfinders combined with either willful or actual retardation.

For instance crying for months about how this is surely going to be some kind of action RPG (with no information whatsoever to either support or to refute you), then when the game of course turns out to be turn-based after all, immediately switch gears to whine and complain about something else.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Desolate Dancer]

IWD is objectively better looking than BG, simply because IWD maps and backgrounds are all hand-painted after being rendered.

Again, you cannot say that objectively. For example, I wasn't aware of that, but now you're telling me, which means I didn't realize this just by looking at them, which means that making it so didn't really shape the average player's perception, which means that making the extra effort had a diminishing return. Why? Because both IWD and BG looked perfectly gorgeous, especially for their time and age, in sync with their respective themes. So arguing about the technicalities like production methods and marginal differences in certain details makes no sense if e.g. one is 9/10 art style wise and the other is 9.2/10...

 

[soulburner]

But Icewind Dale and IWD II and both pillars games were extremely good looking and well put together games, even more so than BG.

Disagree on IWD and IWD2 being better than BG (which was seminal and laid all groundwork), but yeah, Infinity wasn't the best engine out there, but its output was respectable:

Wow, looking at those main menus brings back so much memories of great gameplay and artwork. Not only do these games all look phenomenal to me, their interfaces are just so beautiful. Each and every button seems to have a soul. Looking at each screenshot, I can hear the music and the sounds the buttons make. Which reminds me I did not finish IWD2 ever, still have the savegames backed up and a little slow day at work, so...

 

[Bester]

I told you this was going to be DOS3.

I installed DOS2 back then to see what kind of game it was. Someone asked why. I said:

I'm curious about how BG3 will play, since it's basically DOS3 I've been told.

 

[Sreggin Etah I]

they should make at least the UI similar to the infinity engine UI.

If they make the UI looking like DOS UI then the game will feel like a mod.

 

[whydoibother]

But maybe thats just me.

No, it's just the beginning of the campaign that's a bit visually drab.

I am specifically only talking about the start, since most people quit when they have to go through the hack&slash forest and realize this isn't Baldur's Gate. We've had this talk before (or was it on another forum?) and many people testified they quit before getting out of the snow. So it makes sense they'd claim Baldur's Gate to be more visually appealing.

 

[Lacrymas]

It might be possible that we are gonna explore in third person, but switch to "isometric" when combat or puzzles happen. As for IWD vs BG maps, obviously IWD wins.

 

[Readher]

It might be possible that we are gonna explore in third person, but switch to "isometric" when combat or puzzles happen. As for IWD vs BG maps, obviously IWD wins.

The terrain graphics (trees, etc.) don't look good enough for 3rd person exploration imo.

 

[Lilura]

both IWD and BG looked perfectly gorgeous, especially for their time and age, in sync with their respective themes. So arguing about the technicalities like production methods and marginal differences in certain details makes no sense if e.g. one is 9/10 art style wise and the other is 9.2/10...

Overall, IWD backdrops flaunt the following over BG:

Increased fidelity and color depth (technical).
Expert use of color, lighting and shadow (artistic-technical).
Visual effects such as haze (artistic-technical).
Superior composition and layout (handcrafted as opposed to ramshackle copy-pasta).

BG has only a few examples of IWD-quality backdrops, one of which is Durlag's Tower exterior.

The difference is more than .2 of a point.

 

[holla_cabezas_de_mierda]

Mostly with I was talking about how IWD looked and was put together as a package with the music, the UI etc.. not the entire game play part. I actually am not sure IWD 2 is better looking because I am playing it now and the character sheets suck actually, and I had forgotten how limited they were.... IWD's and BG's are better.

But my point was the IWD games were to me very nicely made games, visually where as Larians games lack the same artistic style. Josh Sawyer seems to be able to make good looking games. Also I think he has a track record of making very enjoyable games when confined by a rule set he did not design himself, whether he likes that fact or not..... such as with New Vegas, IWD 1+2 perhaps others....

Yes, I share that view. As an aesthetic package, IWD is head and shoulders above BG. My point was that, as a total package, it's nowhere near BG ambition. Not even in the same ballpark. IWD2 I think is ambitious, and squeezed out the most technical juice, but it's easier to push an engine to its limits when you didn't need to lay down groundwork for its basic function and potential.

I agree. I don't even think they are trying to be. There are no companions, or world freedom to adventure and explore the map or anything. But its also part of the fun of IWD if one is into that..the total party building, or whatever... or also playing it solo or with 2, or 3 etc..characters etc..to me it always seems they left a lot of money on the table. I thought they could have churned out every classic AD&D module in that engine, and people would have bought them up. Or a good number of them. Like once they had the engine, just made a bunch of modules until people stopped buying them. Not the complicated companion ones, just the IWD types.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

tbh I don't remember BG having impressive art whatsoever at the time. It was just alright.
IWD has it beat on that front easily, aged like fine wine

 

[Dzupakazul]

That's true in BG, IWD and BG2 as well (which don't technically have builds, but I'm talking barebones optimization of a physical-based leveling template). Player THAC0 is almost always ahead of enemy AC, and player AC is almost always ahead of enemy THAC0. To the point where we miss only 5% of the time and get his only 5% of the time. Of course, with arcane augmentation (say, Mirror Image, Stoneskin), we don't get hit at all by mundanes. My point against "missing isn't fun" is that we work towards only missing 5% of the time and getting hit only 5% of the time. This can also be attained with buffs.

Throne of Bhaal renders AC-based defense insanely difficult to itemize for due to shields being relatively unattractive items and other forms of defense (spells and %-based physical damage reduction) being easier to work into your build than stacking AC, which naturally has a cap that you can only extend further with AC bonuses against specific weapon types. It's difficult to itemize for avoidance against the drow kensai in Sendai's coven and elite fire giants, and it's unrealistic to rely on AC against Abazigal, either. Popular difficulty mods likely skew this further.

 

[holla_cabezas_de_mierda]

As for the constant comparison in-between IE games: it is a complete waste of time. I wouldn't be able to tell if IWD was better looking than BG, and even if I would, it'd be my subjective opinion anyway. But it is clear that the two games differed in theme and graphics too, and imho the theme was in sync with the art style in both games, and this is all what objectively matters.

It depends how intimate you are with IWD and BG. Like, if you've played them or not. I haven't seen anyone who has played both say that IWD backdrops don't look better than BG ones. And I haven't seen anyone argue that BG2 has better paperdolls and mundane sprites than BG.

Maybe people just don't like the white ice&snow visuals of the first Icewind Dale areas, and thats the memory they have left of it when they fail to exist that forest whatever-it-was-called.

I have never met this person, until now maybe. Seriously.

 

[Grunker]

As far as backgrounds go it's BG2 > IWD > BG1

 

[Cryomancer]

I was seeing some leaked screenshots https://imgur.com/a/h6KujfN#caVuocp


And this took my attention.

Honestly; looks like "DOS3" But i really wish that is only visual wise. Not mechanic wise.

 

[Desolate Dancer]

It depends how intimate you are with IWD and BG. Like, if you've played them or not. I haven't seen anyone who has played both say that IWD backdrops don't look better than BG ones. And I haven't seen anyone argue that BG2 has better paperdolls and mundane sprites than BG.

I'm more intimate with BG1 and 2 than with IWD1 and 2, sure, since I openly admit that I didn't like the IWD games. I played them through once, and that's it, the game itself didn't carry much replay value for me, it wasn't interesting in any way, shape or form. It was pretty, and yes, I can perfectly accept the explanation that more effort was spent on IWD art dept but that's not saying much. Arguing that the end-result is objectively better is a frivolous exercise... art cannot be objectively measured. You cannot declare that Art Nouveau is objectively better than Cubism, even if the former is clearly more time-consuming to produce than the latter. Unfortunately, you cannot separate the observer's subjective experience regarding the matter when you compare the two games, so you cannot say that IWD "objectively looked better", since if someone hates snow, then it was obviously less-arousing for them to glance upon an IWD landscape than on a Sword Coast one. And I cannot blame them. IWD was pretty, through and through... but was it better looking or a better game for me? Nope.

To put this into another perspective, I don't think BG would have been better had they received the same technical effort art style wise as IWD, in fact, I'm afraid it might have had the opposite effect. This is because the game's overall theme must be in sync with the art style.