Game News Baldur's Gate 3 Community Update #14: Patch 6 - Forging the Arcane

[Fenix]

Much ado about nothing.

 

[KeighnMcDeath]

I wouldn't always count on mod support to fix or make a game better. I didn't try the demo or buy early access (or buy it as GOG does have it) so I should shut my trap.

Maybe like a bandaid I should just rush buy the latest: BG3, DISCO, Path WOTR, CP2077... eh whatever else.

Nah... I can wait longer.

 

[MicoSelva]

I remember being awestruck when I first reach the Underdark in Baldur's Gate 2. It was such a nice surprise and a new, unknown situation for my party to deal with. It still gives me shivers when I think about it.

These days RPG devs seem keen on revealing everything up front, sacrificing mystery and joy of exploration for marketing. I really hate this.

 

[Ulfhednar]

They keep saying ‘Baldur’s Gate 3’, but when I watch the video it’s just BalD:OS Gate 3... meh...

 

[gulagdandy]

I feel like at least 50% of the negative reception to BG3 on this forum comes from people who don't have time to watch Larian's long-ass streams and are subconsciously resentful that they're expected to watch them to see whether the game is good.

I've seen the streams and you feel wrong young padawan. We actually think it might be a good Larian CRPG but not a good Baldur's Gate game. The only thing that respects the saga is their logo.

If *you* also watched their streams carefully you can also realize that their bought the franchise for marketing reasons, all the gimmicky shit that they will put on (twitch integration and other atrocities) are mainstream bullshit.

I'm not a nostalgia fag and I will support innovation but if you choose to do that with a title that already exists (and especially this one) you need similarities as well, especially fundamental ones, otherwise go ahead and create a new title. If that was the case would this title created such noise ? I doubt it. If the game was not called BG3 would mainstream CRPG players would be that excited? I don't think so.

So, yeah we've seen the streams. Looks decent for Larian's standards (maybe even good to very good) but... it's not... a Baldur's Gate title.

This is my biggest complaint with what I've seen so far. In what sense is this a "Baldur's Gate" game? This isn't rhetorical, I genuinely do not fucking know. It looks for all appearances like the BG logo stamped on a generic DnD game.

I mean. It's an isometric CRPG set in the Forgotten Realms, and it will ostensibly feature some characters from the original games at some point. So yeah, I can see how it can be considered a sequel. But I agree with everyone here that it could have taken more design cues from BG1 and 2.

I personally would have liked it if they at least had referenced the original UI. I think it's pretty iconic and holds up pretty well, and much more immersive than the current one.

 

[Roguey]

I remember being awestruck when I first reach the Underdark in Baldur's Gate 2. It was such a nice surprise and a new, unknown situation for my party to deal with. It still gives me shivers when I think about it.

These days RPG devs seem keen on revealing everything up front, sacrificing mystery and joy of exploration for marketing. I really hate this.

https://www.mobygames.com/game/baldurs-gate-ii-shadows-of-amn/cover-art/gameCoverId,7320/

Visiting the Underdark was a selling point on the box itself. Back then you just didn't pay any attention to these things.

 

[Decado]

I feel like at least 50% of the negative reception to BG3 on this forum comes from people who don't have time to watch Larian's long-ass streams and are subconsciously resentful that they're expected to watch them to see whether the game is good.

I've seen the streams and you feel wrong young padawan. We actually think it might be a good Larian CRPG but not a good Baldur's Gate game. The only thing that respects the saga is their logo.

If *you* also watched their streams carefully you can also realize that their bought the franchise for marketing reasons, all the gimmicky shit that they will put on (twitch integration and other atrocities) are mainstream bullshit.

I'm not a nostalgia fag and I will support innovation but if you choose to do that with a title that already exists (and especially this one) you need similarities as well, especially fundamental ones, otherwise go ahead and create a new title. If that was the case would this title created such noise ? I doubt it. If the game was not called BG3 would mainstream CRPG players would be that excited? I don't think so.

So, yeah we've seen the streams. Looks decent for Larian's standards (maybe even good to very good) but... it's not... a Baldur's Gate title.

This is my biggest complaint with what I've seen so far. In what sense is this a "Baldur's Gate" game? This isn't rhetorical, I genuinely do not fucking know. It looks for all appearances like the BG logo stamped on a generic DnD game.

I mean. It's an isometric CRPG set in the Forgotten Realms, and it will ostensibly feature some characters from the original games at some point. So yeah, I can see how it can be considered a sequel. But I agree with everyone here that it could have taken more design cues from BG1 and 2.

I personally would have liked it if they at least had referenced the original UI. I think it's pretty iconic and holds up pretty well, and much more immersive than the current one.

I'm not picking on you, but I want to focus on a word you used (that I assume you used on purpose) which is "ostensibly." Because what the word actually means (and again, not picking on you) is that something appears a certain way that it may not actually be; to use the literal dictionary term it means "apparently or purportedly, but perhaps not actually."

And I have to say that your use of the word has quite remarkably captured the feeling I get when I watch the game being played -- when I read the dialog, when I see the combat, when I look at the classes, when I try to follow the limited story that has so far been released. This game is ostensibly a Baldur's Gate game. It makes a great effort to appear as one; it is apparently or purportedly a Baldur's Gate game, but perhaps not actually. What does it mean that some characters from the original games may appear, at some point? One gets the feeling he is about to have his expectations subverted. This is only ever enjoyable when you don't know it is happening and further, only works occasionally (in the hands of a truly gifted writer, for example, which I am sure we are not dealing with here).

The whole thing feels flimsy, artificial. It's fake news. They have had ample opportunities to showcase how this game will connect to the first two, or at least proceed from them. As I recall, the original third entry in the BG story -- The Black Hound -- was not directly related to BG 1/2. Okay. Maybe that would have worked, and maybe not. But the license was surely in better hands at the time. Maybe Black Isle were the only ones who could release a BGIII only tangentially connected to BG 1/2, and maybe we wouldn't have cared. But too much time has passed, and there has been 20 years of pontificating over BG2. You cannot just pick this thing up again, unless it bears some semblance to the thing it used to be.

The fanfare of Larian's BG 3 announcement quickly dissolved. We're left with a rather generic looking DnD game, one that exists amidst a growing crowd of similar games to include Pillars, Pathfinder, Solasta, and more.

The game will no doubt do well, buttressed by "people" who "like" "hardcore RPGs." Sure, fine, whatever. But by my lights, Sven has some explaining to do. In what way is the Baldur's Gate title anything more than a marketing ploy, a way to borrow the credibility of the two preceding games? To put it another way, if the words "Baldur's Gate" were removed from the title of the game, what would change? Would you know it was the third in a series? If not, what is the name doing -- other than what I suspect it is doing, which is not good?

 

[MicoSelva]

I remember being awestruck when I first reach the Underdark in Baldur's Gate 2. It was such a nice surprise and a new, unknown situation for my party to deal with. It still gives me shivers when I think about it.

These days RPG devs seem keen on revealing everything up front, sacrificing mystery and joy of exploration for marketing. I really hate this.

https://www.mobygames.com/game/baldurs-gate-ii-shadows-of-amn/cover-art/gameCoverId,7320/

Visiting the Underdark was a selling point on the box itself. Back then you just didn't pay any attention to these things.

The only thing I read about it before release was a short preview blurb in a printed magazine. I never saw the box until it arrived in the mail. Also, Polish box is different. You should not assume things.

 

[Roguey]

The only thing I read about it before release was a short preview blurb in a printed magazine. I never saw the box until it arrived in the mail. Also, Polish box is different. You should not assume things.

'fair nough, but that info was there for the people looking for it https://web.archive.org/web/2000081...lt.ign.com/features/intelligence/bg2soa.shtml

Gameworld: The game is named for and takes place in the region of Amn, which lies to the south of Baldur's Gate. Some of the varied game locations that have been revealed to date are the Elven forests of Tethir, an underwater city, the Cloudpeak Mountains, the Underdark, the Astral plane, the Abyss, and the capital city of Amn, Athkatla.

 

[Gyor]

As any D&D fan worth their dice knows, Sorcerers are available in two flavours: Wild Magic and Draconic Bloodline.

And anyone who can use search engine knows that technically there 7 flavors of sorceror in 5e, but as always there some bullshit that prevents players to receive full package.

Not to mention that classes with unpredictable magic can be theoretically fun at table, but if your sorc will fry his own party with failed spell in CRPG - the only thing player will be rolling is his/her eyes while loading previous save/starting new game. For same reason rerolls don't matter as much.

Possibility of adding new character on fly can solve problem with unexpected deaths, but many games don't even allow to start with custom party and force poorly written canon fodder on you as much as possible. Even after decades ghost of Bioware's corrupt influence haunts D&D RPG's *sad sigh*.

And Dragon sorc is boringly standard at this point *yawn*

Starting off with Wild Magic was silly, it's by far the most niche and off putting of the Sorcerer subclasses, Divine Soul and Shadow Soul would have been the easiest to implement and are among the most popular.

But that is my only complaint, Sorcerers are fun.

 

[Skdursh]

I don't really care who gets butthurt over the truth of it, but Larian makes pretty decent games. As far as modern big-name RPGs go, they are the best we are getting out of the AAA sector. Naming this "Baldur's Gate 3" was a mistake, but that's really the only negative thing I can say about it.

 

[Rinslin Merwind]

Starting off with Wild Magic was silly, it's by far the most niche and off putting of the Sorcerer subclasses, Divine Soul and Shadow Soul would have been the easiest to implement and are among the most popular.

Btw, in the middle of the fucking night, my mind (tormented by boredom and insomnia) conjured a theory that in was push from WoTC to shoehorn Wild Magic sorc into he game, because there a certain youtube channel doing a D&D campaign with plot involving a Wild Magic sorc and Divination wizard and, oh boy, sponsorships form WoTC drop like a rain, even though channel is not very big. Also some codexers compained about WoTC being obsessed with Divination wizard( this school manipulates with rolls too), so maybe WotC really intervened in development of BG3. This could also explain, why Larian decided to add new classes, instead of ,you know, finishing the fucking game first.

P.S. After writing this comment I want to sleep again, truly, every BG3 thread is magical place. This one casting sleep and main one casting power word - blind and mind blank, just to forget stupid nonsense written here.

 

[Larianshill]

Btw, in the middle of the fucking night, my mind (tormented by boredom and insomnia) conjured a theory that in was push from WoTC to shoehorn Wild Magic sorc into he game, because there a certain youtube channel doing a D&D campaign with plot involving a Wild Magic sorc

So, you think WotC has some sort of plot...

 

[Bigg Boss]

I don't really care who gets butthurt over the truth of it, but Larian makes pretty decent games. As far as modern big-name RPGs go, they are the best we are getting out of the AAA sector. Naming this "Baldur's Gate 3" was a mistake, but that's really the only negative thing I can say about it.

This is how I feel. It might not feel like Baldur's Gate but it feels ok for what it is. They really do need to keep the Divinity out of the BG though. If I buy this shit and find myself casting rain and then lightning to stun I will throw my fucking monitor out the window.

 

[Fenix]

This game is ostensibly a Baldur's Gate game.

Uncanney valley effect?

 

[Delterius]

Starting off with Wild Magic was silly

how dare you

assume being silly is a bad thing

 

[Tyrion8338]

I`ve loved original baldur`s gate games and I really enjoyed bg3 early access. I`m looking forward to playing full version.

 

[luj1]

Naming this "Baldur's Gate 3" was a mistake, but that's really the only negative thing I can say about it.

The ruleset and cinematic dialogue are shite

Plus cringe writing, idiotic companions and SJW stuff