Baldur's Gate Baldur's Gate 3 Early Access Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[underground nymph]

Larian allowing me to optionally play the game as a companion is bad because I want less content

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost

Opportunity cost of what? Taking a companion that was going to be fully written to begin with and letting you play it?
Or are you angry that it requires integrating companions further into the story and you demand a worse story?

I want a game to be centered on my custom character, acknowledging its presence in the world, defining the storytelling based on its choices. No problem if the NPCs are packed with content, just gimme the same amount of reactivity.

You will NEVER get the same reactivity as a premade character. Why is this so fucking hard to understand?
You're looking at a premade and saying "wow I wish I had that reactivity", but if they didn't exist you wouldn't even be complaining despite zero change to custom characters.

And yet somehow I don’t feel robbed playing Fallout 1 and Baldur’s Gate, while I can’t get rid of this feeling in the Larian’s BG3, where the custom character feels almost non-existent.

That's weird considering you can't play as a non-custom character unless you use mods, and most of the companion content isn't in the EA builds.

You wouldn't be lying, would you?

No, I wouldn’t. Funny thing is the NPCs even in their current state (i.e. being a party members) exhibit far more reactivity with the events unfolding than the player could ever dream of. They all have a unique story or trait, which the “main character” is lacking. Fleshing out the NPCs a-la Witcher, focusing the storytelling on them, while leaving the charname a generic nobody just isn’t what I would call a good RPG.
Hope that’ll change.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

No, I wouldn’t. Funny thing is the NPCs even in their current state (i.e. being a party members) exhibit far more reactivity with the events unfolding than the player could ever dream of. They all have a unique story or trait, which the “main character” is lacking. Fleshing out the NPCs a-la Witcher, focusing the storytelling on them, while leaving the charname a generic nobody just isn’t what I would call a good RPG.
Hope that’ll change.

So do you want the main character to be more predefined or the companions to be less unique?
Please specify which, you only get to pick one.

 

[underground nymph]

Guys how come Geralt has more personal story content than the main character of Fallout??? I don't get it.

Witcher is not a RPG.

Spoiler

Neither is Fallout 4, Rustie.

What about baldurs gate where you're playing a premade character you get to minorly customize? Is that an RPG?

How is it a premade though? A charname’s unique inheritance in the BG is a story driver. Other than this anyone is able to customize it as much as the chargen menu allows. If changing race, sex, physical attributes, skills, etc. are minor customization options, what are the major then?

The entire story for your character is predefined with no way to change it. You being a human or dwarf changed nothing and adds zero reactivity.

And I am totally ok with that as long as that story is engaging. The lack of reactivity in the BG was due to time and resources constraints. Now Larian has all what’s needed, and somehow they have managed to make a blander (if any) protagonist.

 

[underground nymph]

No, I wouldn’t. Funny thing is the NPCs even in their current state (i.e. being a party members) exhibit far more reactivity with the events unfolding than the player could ever dream of. They all have a unique story or trait, which the “main character” is lacking. Fleshing out the NPCs a-la Witcher, focusing the storytelling on them, while leaving the charname a generic nobody just isn’t what I would call a good RPG.
Hope that’ll change.

So do you want the main character to be more predefined or the companions to be less unique?
Please specify which, you only get to pick one.

I want the main character to be, you know, the main character. Easy as that.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

No, I wouldn’t. Funny thing is the NPCs even in their current state (i.e. being a party members) exhibit far more reactivity with the events unfolding than the player could ever dream of. They all have a unique story or trait, which the “main character” is lacking. Fleshing out the NPCs a-la Witcher, focusing the storytelling on them, while leaving the charname a generic nobody just isn’t what I would call a good RPG.
Hope that’ll change.

So do you want the main character to be more predefined or the companions to be less unique?
Please specify which, you only get to pick one.

I want the main character to be, you know, the main character. Easy as that.

You want the custom character to be custom and also be predefined with its own unique reactivity on the level of a completely predefined character.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

If every custom character had an optional questline to pursue that was tied to his class, background, whatever, would that alleviate most of the complaints about the lack of content for customs? As far as I can tell the pregens have some other storylines to follow which is what adds to their reactivity more than anything else.

 

[Slaver1]

The companions in BG3 are overkill with all their special conditions. They shouldn't necessarily be unique. If anything, they should be more grounded and believable with a gradual characterization arc that fleshes them out more. It already seems like too much, too fast with them. It's just another way Larian appeals to a younger more concentration bereft generation that rubs fans of Baldurs Gate the wrong way.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

If every custom character had an optional questline to pursue that was tied to his class, background, whatever, would that alleviate most of the complaints about the lack of content for customs? As far as I can tell the pregens have some other storylines to follow which is what adds to their reactivity more than anything else.

One thing they're overlooking is that by playing a predefined character, your choices in some areas are limited.

 

[AwesomeButton]

Has everyone gone stupid? Do you really want Larian to write reactivity to your custom character? IWD didn't have a lot of character class reactivity, mostly to paladin and druid, and was it a worse game? I say let larian concentrate their cringe on predefined PCs reactivity, and let players headcanon reactivity to their custom characters.

 

[underground nymph]

The companions in BG3 are overkill with all their special conditions. They shouldn't necessarily be unique. If anything, they should be more grounded and believable with a gradual characterization arc that fleshes them out more. It already seems like too much, too fast with them. It's just another way Larian appeals to a younger more concentration bereft generation that rubs fans of Baldurs Gate the wrong way.

Yep. They are basically a NPC equivalent of “button-awesome”, while the so called main protagonist are there mostly to behold their awesomeness and comment on a situation earning social credits.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

The predefined characters just get bonus reactivity over the base which is already a lot. Play through the EA as a drow for a good example of how different it is just by changing your race, you get a vastly different experience.
*ahem*

You being a human or dwarf changed nothing and adds zero reactivity.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

The companions in BG3 are overkill with all their special conditions. They shouldn't necessarily be unique. If anything, they should be more grounded and believable with a gradual characterization arc that fleshes them out more. It already seems like too much, too fast with them. It's just another way Larian appeals to a younger more concentration bereft generation that rubs fans of Baldurs Gate the wrong way.

Yep. They are basically a NPC equivalent of “button-awesome”, while the so called main protagonist are there mostly to behold their awesomeness and comment on a situation earning social credits.

the only one close to this the wizard, the rest are complete fuckups.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Play through the EA as a drow for a good example of how different it is just by changing your race, you get a vastly different experience.

I just realized this counts as unique custom character content because (so far?) there is no drow companion

 

[Grauken]

So, how close is this to being finished?

 

[Salvo]

The companions in BG3 are overkill with all their special conditions. They shouldn't necessarily be unique. If anything, they should be more grounded and believable with a gradual characterization arc that fleshes them out more. It already seems like too much, too fast with them. It's just another way Larian appeals to a younger more concentration bereft generation that rubs fans of Baldurs Gate the wrong way.

gale is an archmage but he lost his powers asnd he is also infected with illithid tadpole but it's not normal tadpole it's special SHADOW tadpole and also he is mystra's lover and he has an ARCANE bomb in his chest and he needs to eat artifacts and he's very special

do not steel btw

 

[rusty_shackleford]

So, how close is this to being finished?

my last response I got was "stop asking"

 

[underground nymph]

If every custom character had an optional questline to pursue that was tied to his class, background, whatever, would that alleviate most of the complaints about the lack of content for customs? As far as I can tell the pregens have some other storylines to follow which is what adds to their reactivity more than anything else.

Yes, but only partly. Introducing a major storyline(s) unique for the charname that will be defining how the world reacts will suffice me thinks.

 

[Grauken]

So, how close is this to being finished?

my last response I got was "stop asking"

feels like the biggest BG3 supporters will have burned out on the game once it comes out

 

[Slaver1]

The companions in BG3 are overkill with all their special conditions. They shouldn't necessarily be unique. If anything, they should be more grounded and believable with a gradual characterization arc that fleshes them out more. It already seems like too much, too fast with them. It's just another way Larian appeals to a younger more concentration bereft generation that rubs fans of Baldurs Gate the wrong way.

Yep. They are basically a NPC equivalent of “button-awesome”, while the so called main protagonist are there mostly to behold their awesomeness and comment on a situation earning social credits.

the only one close to this the wizard, the rest are complete fuckups.

Are you saying the flamboyant pansexual vampire running around at daytime doesn't pass for awesome where the BG3 fanbase are concerned?

 

[rusty_shackleford]

If every custom character had an optional questline to pursue that was tied to his class, background, whatever, would that alleviate most of the complaints about the lack of content for customs? As far as I can tell the pregens have some other storylines to follow which is what adds to their reactivity more than anything else.

Yes, but only partly. Introducing a major storyline(s) unique for the charname that will be defining how the world reacts will suffice me thinks.

This is just rephrasing what I posted earlier to make it sound better for you: you just want less content for the predefined characters.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

The companions in BG3 are overkill with all their special conditions. They shouldn't necessarily be unique. If anything, they should be more grounded and believable with a gradual characterization arc that fleshes them out more. It already seems like too much, too fast with them. It's just another way Larian appeals to a younger more concentration bereft generation that rubs fans of Baldurs Gate the wrong way.

Yep. They are basically a NPC equivalent of “button-awesome”, while the so called main protagonist are there mostly to behold their awesomeness and comment on a situation earning social credits.

the only one close to this the wizard, the rest are complete fuckups.

Are you saying the flamboyant pansexual vampire running around at daytime doesn't pass for awesome where the BG3 fanbase are concerned?

he's a vampire spawn, not a vampire. Vampire spawn date to at least 3.5e

 

[AwesomeButton]

he's a vampire spawn, not a vampire. Vampire spawn date to at least 3.5e

D&D has been a cringelord gathering place from the start. No point looking for a wholesome period. It can be argued that tastes have turned more and more depraved with the years, but I consider this a side effect, pop-culture seeping into D&D culture as D&D became more popular.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

he's a vampire spawn, not a vampire. Vampire spawn date to at least 3.5e

D&D has been a cringelord gathering place from the start. No point looking for a wholesome period. It can be argued that tastes have turned more and more depraved with the years, but I consider this a side effect, pop-culture seeping into D&D culture as D&D became more popular.

Not like the concept of what he is was unknown though. Look at Ghouls in VTM, you meet multiple in VTMB and potentially get your own.

 

[Salvo]

he's a vampire spawn, not a vampire. Vampire spawn date to at least 3.5e

D&D has been a cringelord gathering place from the start. No point looking for a wholesome period. It can be argued that tastes have turned more and more depraved with the years, but I consider this a side effect, pop-culture seeping into D&D culture as D&D became more popular.

Matt Mercer's and his scripted show's fault

 

[AwesomeButton]

he's a vampire spawn, not a vampire. Vampire spawn date to at least 3.5e

D&D has been a cringelord gathering place from the start. No point looking for a wholesome period. It can be argued that tastes have turned more and more depraved with the years, but I consider this a side effect, pop-culture seeping into D&D culture as D&D became more popular.

Matt Mercer's and his scripted show's fault

I still liked his voice acting in PoE and Deadfire