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

[Non-Edgy Gamer]

I could give you countless of examples many even worse than that bear scene.

Why say they're worse?

Isn't it all objectively just art? "Just a joke, bro."? It can't be better or worse if it's not bad at all.

But of course, you know it's bad. That's why you can place it on a scale of bad and worse. It's degenerate and in bad taste. The whataboutism that there have been other games that had elements that were in bad taste doesn't change that.

But the fact that it's released in this modern environment makes it worse than most of what you could bring up, since people are sick of society being flushed further and further down the sewer of sexual deviance.

 

[The_Mask]

I expect better from a modern day RPG run on supercomputers. BG1 and BG2 was more alive and those ran on a 200mhz processor and 20mb of RAM. The problem lies in Lazy developers who don't want to crunch, pussy games journalists who continue to police developers about crunching, and FAGGOT consumers who will consume any garbage served to them. It's a shitshow.

It *felt* more alive due to smoke and mirrors. Most NPCs were static. Most interactions were scripted. What they made look alive in BG I and II, can be easily done for BG III, as well.

You should probably be excited, actually: the city of Baldur's Gate will be rendered for the most part/fully, 100-some years after BG I. Right?

 

[Axioms]

Baldur's Gate 3 is a static narrative rpg. But it is based on an existing DnD IP so of course it is. Don't know why anyone would expect a living world from a DnD module adaptation.

I expect better from a modern day RPG run on supercomputers. BG1 and BG2 was more alive and those ran on a 200mhz processor and 20mb of RAM. The problem lies in Lazy developers who don't want to crunch, pussy games journalists who continue to police developers about crunching, and FAGGOT consumers who will consume any garbage served to them. It's a shitshow.

Was it more alive? Or is that just subjective feeling due to lower expectations and experience? Regardless, neither of them is particularly strong on choice and consequence. Like most such "cinematic rpgs" the C&C really comes down to different dialogue responses and choices.

Really we need a procedural non IP RPG with a strong character and social simulation where things can happen organically. Probably about 20 years away though, technology wise.

 

[Drakortha]

It *felt* more alive due to smoke and mirrors. Most NPCs were static. Most interactions were scripted. What they made look alive in BG I and II, can be easily done for BG III, as well.

You should probably be excited, actually: the city of Baldur's Gate will be rendered for the most part/fully, 100-some years after BG I. Right?

Smoke and mirrors, right. And BG3 couldn't even achieve that, correct?

25 years later and NPC's still remain static and it's more obvious than ever. I should probably be excited about the higher resolution graphics, though!

 

[mondblut]

Just noticed BG3 half-orcs actually look like full blooded orcs.

I thought D&D did away with half-breeds due to political correctness.

Regardless, half-orcs were always primarily Orcish in appearance. It was only about 10% that were considered passable enough to be mistaken for ugly humans.

I guess it's up to the player how human they want their rape baby to look.

In nuD&D there are no ugly people, only alternatively beautiful.

 

[Drakortha]

Really we need a procedural non IP RPG with a strong character and social simulation where things can happen organically. Probably about 20 years away though, technology wise.

You mean like the simulation we had in 2004 in The Sims 2?

We should have it in RPG's by now. And we would have it now if consumers were not predetermined to buy into fancy presentation and marketing each and every time. But consumers are not learning creatures and they continue to consume regressive SHIT!

 

[Axioms]

Really we need a procedural non IP RPG with a strong character and social simulation where things can happen organically. Probably about 20 years away though, technology wise.

You mean like the simulation we had in 2004 in The Sims 2?

We should have it in RPG's by now. And we would have it now if consumers were not predetermined to buy into fancy presentation and marketing each and every time. But consumers are not learning creatures and they continue to consume regressive SHIT!

Well The Sims doesn't really have a character or social simulation. Even putting aside dialogue, which storybros can't live without, they don't have interesting goals or interests or personalities, even in the context of a bland suburban world, much less a cool fantasy one.

 

[mondblut]

Rhetorical question:

Why is that trailer at least 50% showing the various mostly gay relationships you can have in the game instead of how it's supposed to represent playing Dungeons and Dragons?

 

[Drakortha]

Really we need a procedural non IP RPG with a strong character and social simulation where things can happen organically. Probably about 20 years away though, technology wise.

You mean like the simulation we had in 2004 in The Sims 2?

We should have it in RPG's by now. And we would have it now if consumers were not predetermined to buy into fancy presentation and marketing each and every time. But consumers are not learning creatures and they continue to consume regressive SHIT!

Well The Sims doesn't really have a character or social simulation. Even putting aside dialogue, which storybros can't live without, they don't have interesting goals or interests or personalities, even in the context of a bland suburban world, much less a cool fantasy one.

RPG developers should iterate and innovate on that kind of AI technology to better fit whatever RPG game they are making.

Why are we in 2023 and AAA games still have NPC's standing around waiting for you to interact with them? I thought we were past this horseshit when we went from Morrowind -> Oblivion. Look at Fable, even. I never thought I would be praising Oblivion for something but it's true, we're going backwards as games are becoming more like interactive, cinematic movies. That trailer that was linked on last page says it all. BG3 is "Fantasy Romance - The Movie"

 

[Axioms]

Rhetorical question:

Why is that trailer at least 50% showing the various mostly gay relationships you can have in the game instead of how it's supposed to represent playing Dungeons and Dragons?

Bro that is the most DnD5 thing I've ever heard, they know the audience. I don't say this as an insult, I don't care about relationships in my rpgs at all, gay, straight, or otherwise, but I acknowledge that normies love them. Imagine Bioware games without hanky panky, totally dead as a genre. Ya'll are just mad that it isn't all boy/girl these days. You loved that shit in old bioware games.

 

[Axioms]

Really we need a procedural non IP RPG with a strong character and social simulation where things can happen organically. Probably about 20 years away though, technology wise.

You mean like the simulation we had in 2004 in The Sims 2?

We should have it in RPG's by now. And we would have it now if consumers were not predetermined to buy into fancy presentation and marketing each and every time. But consumers are not learning creatures and they continue to consume regressive SHIT!

Well The Sims doesn't really have a character or social simulation. Even putting aside dialogue, which storybros can't live without, they don't have interesting goals or interests or personalities, even in the context of a bland suburban world, much less a cool fantasy one.

RPG developers should iterate and innovate on that kind of AI technology to better fit whatever RPG game they are making.

Why are we in 2023 and AAA games still have NPC's standing around waiting for you to interact with them? I thought we were past this horseshit when we went from Morrowind -> Oblivion. I never thought I would be praising Oblivion for something but it's true, we're going backwards as games are becoming more like interactive, cinematic movies. That trailer that was linked on last page says it all. BG3 is "Fantasy Romance - The Movie"

I think it is very computationally expensive to have a moving living world in real time. Maybe you could do it as an MMO but then you'd have the issue of too many heroes on the quest. Plus procedural dialogue would be meh.

As far as just moving around their limited "game area", sure they could probably have that working on BG. On the other hand a day/night cycle can't work well because no RPG functions in real time. They are all accelerated/adjusted time scales.

 

[Non-Edgy Gamer]

Regardless, neither of them is particularly strong on choice and consequence.

BG3 is very strong on choice and consequence. I'm not sure how anyone who has played the Early Access can say otherwise. Just look at the dialog checks, something even BG had precious few of.

Like most such "cinematic rpgs" the C&C really comes down to different dialogue responses and choices.

You should say "like most RPGs", since that's usually the case in every CRPG. But stat checks aren't limited to dialog. Look at the hag quest, where whether or not you see through the illusion spell cast on an entire area of the map is determined by a perception check.

Also, on plot, BG1 and BG2 always have the exact same plot progression for the main quest. BG2 adds one skippable area, the Sahuagin city, and lets the player chose how to get to the Asylum, but ftmp leads the player down a linear path they have little choice on. Whereas BG3 still retains some linearity (I *think* you always have to go to Moonrise Tower at some point, but I'm not sure), but gives you multiple paths and choices along the way just in Act 1. Side with the goblins, side with the druids, side with no one. Take the Underdark route, take the overworld route. And these are just the choices that I know about for sure.

Then there are all the other choices you can make as side quests that can wind up affecting the game - e.g., whether or not you get a hag eye, and which companions you bring along, leave behind or kill. Compare that to BG1 or 2, where the side quests basically determine what loot you bring along.

Yeah, I'm not sure how you can say that at all.

Really we need a procedural non IP RPG with a strong character and social simulation where things can happen organically. Probably about 20 years away though, technology wise.

We basically already have that. It's called PnP. And if you don't want to interact with a human, you can have GPT-4 be your DM.

 

[Drakortha]

I think it is very computationally expensive to have a moving living world in real time.

BRO, THEY DID IT IN 2006 WITH OBLIVION WHAT ARE YOU SMOKING?!?!

I'm done.

 

[Axioms]

I think it is very computationally expensive to have a moving living world in real time.

BRO, THEY DID IT IN 2006 WITH OBLIVION WHAT ARE YOU SMOKING?!?!

I'm done.

No they didn't though? I mean people walked around sure. A very small number of people. The biggest cities had like sub 1000 NPCs.

 

[Mebrilia the Viera Queen]

I think it is very computationally expensive to have a moving living world in real time.

BRO, THEY DID IT IN 2006 WITH OBLIVION WHAT ARE YOU SMOKING?!?!

I'm done.

No they didn't though? I mean people walked around sure. A very small number of people. The biggest cities had like sub 1000 NPCs.

Far less actually.

 

[Non-Edgy Gamer]

BRO, THEY DID IT IN 2006 WITH OBLIVION WHAT ARE YOU SMOKING?!?!

I think "not retarded, not broken, fully functional, believable etc." was implied, so no, not Oblivion.

I'm done.

I doubt it.

 

[Axioms]

Regardless, neither of them is particularly strong on choice and consequence.

BG3 is very strong on choice and consequence. I'm not sure how anyone who has played the Early Access can say otherwise. Just look at the dialog checks, something even BG had precious few of.

Like most such "cinematic rpgs" the C&C really comes down to different dialogue responses and choices.

You should say "like most RPGs", since that's usually the case in every CRPG. But stat checks aren't limited to dialog. Look at the hag quest, where whether or not you see through the illusion spell cast on an entire area of the map is determined by a perception check.

Also, on plot, BG1 and BG2 always have the exact same plot progression for the main quest. BG2 adds one skippable area, the Sahuagin city, and lets the player chose how to get to the Asylum, but ftmp leads the player down a linear path they have little choice on. Whereas BG3 still retains some linearity (I *think* you always have to go to Moonrise Tower at some point, but I'm not sure), but gives you multiple paths and choices along the way just in Act 1. Side with the goblins, side with the druids, side with no one. Take the Underdark route, take the overworld route. And these are just the choices that I know about for sure.

Then there are all the other choices you can make as side quests that can wind up affecting the game - e.g., whether or not you get a hag eye, and which companions you bring along, leave behind or kill. Compare that to BG1 or 2, where the side quests basically determine what loot you bring along.

Yeah, I'm not sure how you can say that at all.

Really we need a procedural non IP RPG with a strong character and social simulation where things can happen organically. Probably about 20 years away though, technology wise.

We basically already have that. It's called PnP. And if you don't want to interact with a human, you can have GPT-4 be your DM.

Siding with a different faction is like 25 year old tech, same for taking the right or left, or top/bottom path. Boring. BG3 does literally one thing and that is have higher production values than older games.

 

[Axioms]

I think it is very computationally expensive to have a moving living world in real time.

BRO, THEY DID IT IN 2006 WITH OBLIVION WHAT ARE YOU SMOKING?!?!

I'm done.

No they didn't though? I mean people walked around sure. A very small number of people. The biggest cities had like sub 1000 NPCs.

Far less actually.

Yeah google says ~220 or so for Imperial City in Oblivion and 235 in Morrowind. Morrowind stays winning. Plus that doesn't count that they don't sim characters except in the specific area you are in anyways.

 

[Silverfish]

Why is that trailer at least 50% showing the various mostly gay relationships you can have in the game instead of how it's supposed to represent playing Dungeons and Dragons?

Is there a better representation of playing D&D in a post-Critical Role, post-Big Bang Theory world than a gay relationship simulator?

 

[Mebrilia the Viera Queen]

I think it is very computationally expensive to have a moving living world in real time.

BRO, THEY DID IT IN 2006 WITH OBLIVION WHAT ARE YOU SMOKING?!?!

I'm done.

No they didn't though? I mean people walked around sure. A very small number of people. The biggest cities had like sub 1000 NPCs.

Far less actually.

Yeah google says ~220 or so for Imperial City in Oblivion and 235 in Morrowind. Morrowind stays winning. Plus that doesn't count that they don't sim characters except in the specific area you are in anyways.

Morrowind had not npc routines unlike oblivion tho.

 

[Theodora]

Bestiality in general is fairly rampant. Especially in Canada, where I guess that some forms are apparently legal.

And no, bears aren't generally considered very rapeable. But the general idea of sex with an animal (or something with an animal's body, if you want that excuse) is a problem. More so now than when Arcanum was released, since perversions are ubiquitous online and society appears to have few if any limitations left.

We've gone from "gays just want to tolerance" to "cut your kid's dick off or the government will take zher and do it for you" in less than 20 years. I think putting the breaks on on any issue is justified at this point, joke or not.

I mean, this just reads like a lot of conflating different issues. The stereotypical ~bestiality enjoyer~ is some hick , not metropolitan homosexuals or, god forbid, trans kids.

I mean if you have some meaningful evidence that "bestiality is rampant" or that either of those demographics have any meaningful correlation therein, then shoot, hit me with it. But otherwise we should probably just drop the topic because it'll just mean talking in circles in what would be little better than he-said,-she-said, societal issues edition.

 

[Non-Edgy Gamer]

Siding with a different faction

*bzzzzt* Wrong. You failed at reading. Again, there are stat checks in and out of dialog, multiple paths to take, tracking of influence. It's not just factions and it's not just dialog.

You can say other games have done it before, but other games have done everything before. Procedural tech is 20 years old too.

The sum is greater than all the parts, and the parts are more numerous than in any RPG in the past decade at least.

If you want a game with a living, near-sentient AI, well, your expectations are just silly. If you want a game where you can larp as if whatever simulation were real, you already had that with Oblvion like Captain Reddit over there said.

 

[EvilWolf]

Baldur's Gate 3 is literally Star Citizen that didn't have a $300 initial buy in and actually had an achievable scope and storyline that could be iterated and released into Early Access in parts. That's the "secret sauce" of BG3 that "major devs" will have to deal with in the future. Come up with a broad idea that you think is markatable, cut away the useless parts, start development, release a small part of your game into "Early Access" make changes to appease your, perceived, customer base as you go, repeat incrementally until you're ready for a full release, and ride it out until completion. It's that simple. You don't have to deal with QA either since your initial and incremented audience is constantly providing QA as they play, you CHARGE people to do literal QA for you.

 

[MerchantKing]

For anyone who has trouble keeping up with this thread and maybe missed the "release teaser" that came out, this is for you. This is the people they are appealing to. This is enormous decline. If you purchase this, you are ok with it. In fact, you like it. This about who you are going to fuck. The choice and consequences lead back to one thing, who your sexual partner is and if they approve of your actions. This is crpg's going forward. And people are applauding it.

Yes, I know it's old but it needs to be seen by the people on the fence and as a reminder of the people defending this game. These people are in favour of this being the direction of crpg's.

I purchased it before any of this shit came out. I was intrigued by the fact the game had romances, when I saw Shadowheart and heard there was a romance with her my credit card had already exited my wallet for the purchase.

Why didn't you just torrent this instead of buying it? Or even better, just play ToEE again? I started up that game again lately and I've been farming the wilderness for random encounter experience of course to get an extra level or two before the temple. Of course, you shouldn't be suprised, but I've been running into a lot of bear encounters. It would be fine, but I'd prefer pirates and gnolls since at least they drop valuable coins and loot I can get some gold from. I think the pirate, bandit, and undead unions must be on strike in my game since I usually expect more of their encounters. I should check in with the local Turnip sellers union--they'll be making a killing if that's the case.

 

[The_Mask]

Baldur's Gate 3 is literally Star Citizen that didn't have a $300 initial buy in and actually had an achievable scope and storyline that could be iterated and released into Early Access in parts. That's the "secret sauce" of BG3 that "major devs" will have to deal with in the future. Come up with a broad idea that you think is marketable, cut away the useless parts, start development, release a small part of your game into "Early Access" make changes to appease your, perceived, customer base as you go, repeat incrementally until you're ready for a full release, and ride it out until completion. It's that simple. You don't have to deal with QA either since your initial and incremented audience is constantly providing QA as they play, you CHARGE people to do literal QA for you.

It depends on how you look at it, because there is another ~80% of the game that wasn't QA tested by EA participants. And the game has been in development for far less than "Scam Citizen".

Technically, what Larian has done is just make the game perfectly agreeable to journalists and the casual player. Grognards, hardcore gamers and the occasional new fan (meaning the top 10% that actually see the ending cinematic(s)) can be reasoned with afterwards with patches and whatnot. Hopefully.