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

[Pizzashoes]

Swen calls his players midcore, casual dungeons and dragons players. Yup. But like he said, even some of the players who are still replaying BG 2 are part of Larian's player base.

Jaheira has kids? Khalid is rolling in his g-g-grave.

 

[Barbarian]

Ironically bg2 is both linear and simplistic compared to this. No skill or even attribute checks, railroaded plot with barely any c&c, npcs barely acknowledge your class, race or even gender.

Not even turn-based ITT. Even the fagfinder games far surpassed original trilogy in quality and depth.

I guess it comes down to nostalgia, aesthetics and hatred of faggotry basically(specially the latter)

 

[Infinitron]

"Midcore" is a funny term but it describes something real.

Let's say you're a moderately plugged in gamer who has time to play one big turn-based RPG a year. You have to choose one. Larian have become very good at making the game that gets chosen by such people.

 

[Saravan]

"Midcore" is a funny term but it describes something real.

Let's say you're a moderately plugged in gamer who has time to play one big turn-based RPG a year. You have to choose one. Larian have become very good at making the game that gets chosen by such people.

I keep thinking about old school fans that have jobs and kids now and no longer the time or energy to devote all their time to gaming. I heard the same take constantly with regard to D2 fans that were expected to return to D4.

The problem is such games are typically shit as was the case for D4. I got kids and I definitely do not want games to be designed around my schedule instead of the nolifers, they end up just being streamlined garbage.

 

[Arbiter]

Let's say you're a moderately plugged in gamer who has time to play one big turn-based RPG a year. You have to choose one. Larian have become very good at making the game that gets chosen by such people.

Fortunately they are not releasing an RPG every year.

 

[Kiste]

Ironically bg2 is both linear and simplistic compared to this. No skill or even attribute checks, railroaded plot with barely any c&c, npcs barely acknowledge your class, race or even gender.

Not even turn-based ITT. Even the fagfinder games far surpassed original trilogy in quality and depth.

I guess it comes down to nostalgia, aesthetics and hatred of faggotry basically(specially the latter)

But BG2 does have a day-night cycle. That's all that matters. Apparently.

 

[cvv]

BG3 pushes the envelope when it comes to story choice und reactivity, which is much more relevant for the type of game it tries to be.

Does it really?

How many times have we heard all this before? BG3's marketing is a repeat of The Outer Worlds marketing.

Yes, and a bunch of RPGs before that.

Plus - and that's especially relevant for Outer Worlds - what good is awesuhm reactivity and SIXTEEN THOUSAND DIFFERENT ENDINGS, if the story is retarded, the writing cringy and the characters hateful?

 

[Artyoan]

"Midcore" is a funny term but it describes something real.

Let's say you're a moderately plugged in gamer who has time to play one big turn-based RPG a year. You have to choose one. Larian have become very good at making the game that gets chosen by such people.

They are very good at it but I'm at a loss for explaining what is in the secret sauce. I'm not sure Swen knows either. I enjoyed DOS1/2 quite a bit but nothing about those screams runaway success with the 'midcore' crowd. Yet it happened.

 

[processdaemon]

I think part of the success is because they advertised the co-op so well. I know quite a few people who played D:OS2 with their partners/ spouses who aren't generally into video games and using it as quality time probably makes it more accessible for people with other commitments. I don't know the stats for number of co-op vs. single player playthroughs so can't say for sure.

 

[jaekl]

I remember playing Divinity Original Sin whenever it came out in couch co-op with a buddy of mine. In the first 1 - 2 hours, we ended up getting in a shouting match over the rock paper scissors dialogue minigame and we quit, never to return.

 

[Artyoan]

I think part of the success is because they advertised the co-op so well. I know quite a few people who played D:OS2 with their partners/ spouses who aren't generally into video games and using it as quality time probably makes it more accessible for people with other commitments. I don't know the stats for number of co-op vs. single player playthroughs so can't say for sure.

According to Swen it is the 'systemic nature':

That's one of the surprising statistics, because we thought we were really competing with other developers for that archetypal classic RPG player - it turns out not at all. The market is more about the midcore RPG player. I think it's because of the systemic nature that such people like it. That was certainly the reason for the success of DOS2

So he's crediting 'systemic nature' which is a very vague statement. I assume he means just having 'extra' systems like the capability of interacting with a ton of items, some crafting, some verticality, environmental combo effects etc. Basically extras that don't often amount to that much tactically but are neat nevertheless and help with non-combat activity and exploration. Coop layered on top.

Elder Scrolls has a similar dynamic of having a ton of extra systems that don't amount to much as a cohesive whole but they are there and can be interesting, especially as a mod springboard.

So if its all about the extra systems that attract the 'mid-core', why is no one else doing much of that? Especially environmental interactions and a ton of moveable scenery. Lets get Josh Sawyer on the line and prod his mind about going that route with PoE3.

 

[Cat Headed Eagle]

DOS makes you colaborate with your partner, which is a new way of looking at it, because most of the times it's just like there's two of you and little else.

 

[Infinitron]

So he's crediting 'systemic nature' which is a very vague statement. I assume he means just having 'extra' systems like the capability of interacting with a ton of items, some crafting, some verticality, environmental combo effects etc. Basically extras that don't often amount to that much tactically but are neat nevertheless and help with non-combat activity and exploration. Coop layered on top.

Elder Scrolls has a similar dynamic of having a ton of extra systems that don't amount to much as a cohesive whole but they are there and can be interesting, especially as a mod springboard.

So if its all about the extra systems that attract the 'mid-core', why is no one else doing much of that? Especially environmental interactions and a ton of moveable scenery. Lets get Josh Sawyer on the line and prod his mind about going that route with PoE3.

"I can cast a water spell and put out the fire, this is cool". Sometimes it's that simple.

 

[CodexTotalWar]

Yeah, I believe that's what he means by system - i.e. the various ways a player can interact with the game-world.

IMO it can be quite a big deal though, when it comes to changing the feel of gameplay decisions by a player. Most traditional CRPGs have very limited system interactivity - i.e. most of the choices you can make comes up in a dialogue box or prompt the developer has specifically laid out for you.
This leads to a situation where all your choices/decisions feel like a multiple choice quiz the dev is giving you.

Whereas in games like DOS, Deus Ex, Elder Scrolls etc because the additional systems are there, you can be more proactive with your choices and come out feeling like you actually thought of a solution as opposed to it being something 100% preplanned and presented to you by the Dev. Even if the devs totally planned for it.

A good example of this in BG3 is

Spoiler

In the goblin camp, realizing you can use the Silence spell to hide the noises you make to break down a wall to create an alternative entrance. Nothing is prompted you just have to know the gameplay system and actually give it a try. In most other CRPG it'd be a skill check prompt in dialogue or a pre-laidout button you can click. Even the breaking of the wall is unprompted, you choose whatever spell, item, attack to damage the wall. It's clearly still put in there by the devs but how a player feels coming up with the idea is totally different.

 

[Cat Headed Eagle]

Out of the people I know who play DOS, I'd say like 80% play it co-op. It's like the game calls for it. Probably because it makes you create two characters.

 

[AwesomeButton]

Whereas in games like DOS, Deus Ex, Elder Scrolls etc because the additional systems are there, you can be more proactive with your choices and come out feeling like you actually thought of a solution as opposed to it being something 100% preplanned and presented to you by the Dev.

I've often given the same description of Witcher 3 - a bunch of minigames, that the player takes turns at playing and are nothing remarkable if taken individually, but taken togather and tied by a short story serving for motivation, i.e. your typical side quest, can amount to a fun half-hour or so of gameplay. You have the combat, the "follow the red trail" witcher senses, the dialogue, the horseriding, the swimming, the boxing. A quest makes use of at least three of those, taking turns a couple of times. In the end, the player is left with the impression that he chose what tools to use to get to the end of the mini-story.

 

[Gargaune]

At the time, [Baldur's Gate 1 and 2] were the pinnacle of what the RPG genre could do, and I think they've done very well, they're a testament to craftsmanship, a job well done, and they're still really good RPGs, if only because of the Enhanced Edition or the iPad version - I play them on the iPad, it's really great.

Swen pwning unprestigious Codexers and wisely praising Beamdog's valuable Enhanced Editions.

 

[smaug]

If I hated the original BG, should I avoid this? Or is it different enough to warrant playing?

Is there a lot of non-combat spells, abilities and mechanical interactivity that actually makes for good exploring? Don’t mind meh D&D combat

 

[Darth Valer]

A good example of this in BG3 is

Spoiler

In the goblin camp, realizing you can use the Silence spell to hide the noises you make to break down a wall to create an alternative entrance. Nothing is prompted you just have to know the gameplay system and actually give it a try. In most other CRPG it'd be a skill check prompt in dialogue or a pre-laidout button you can click. Even the breaking of the wall is unprompted, you choose whatever spell, item, attack to damage the wall. It's clearly still put in there by the devs but how a player feels coming up with the idea is totally different.

I didn't know this and my mind actually broke. Holy shit.

 

[AwesomeButton]

I've formed an opinion, and it is that unlocking racial ability score increases is better than locking them to the races.

Why? First, you can still stick to your race of choice's canonical ability score increases if you want to, but if you don't want to, no one is stopping you. I'd rather not have my race choice push me towards specific classes because of which of my ability scores are getting a racial bonus.

Now whine against it all you want.

 

[notpl]

If I hated the original BG, should I avoid this? Or is it different enough to warrant playing?

Is there a lot of non-combat spells, abilities and mechanical interactivity that actually makes for good exploring? Don’t mind meh D&D combat

I doubt there is ever going to be another RPG that does those things you describe better. Being able to shapeshift into a bird or spider or somesuch to access the second storey of a building, or the above situation a poster described with the use of a Silence spell to mask the sound of demolition - these things are wholly unique to this game, they would just be a text line with an attribute requirement next to it in any other RPG, even wonderfully reactive and esteemed games like Age of Decadence or ATOM RPG. Where BG1 and 2 were essentially just board games, this game has the potential to be a sort of isometric Deus Ex, and do it far better than the last game to try this (Hard West). That's why I'm excited, at any rate. D&D combat is rote pablum, but the systems simulation combined with big-budget reactivity and world design might create something truly special.

 

[jackofshadows]

Why? First, you can still stick to your race of choice's ability score increases if you want to, but if you don't want to, no one is stopping you. I'd rather not have my race choice push me towards specific classes because of which of my ability scores are getting a racial bonus.

Uhh but that's their exact reasoning, yeah. Same for multiclassing. Which makes the whole system a lot more boring and the choice rather cosmetic if we put aside various non-combat race oriented interactions.

It was up to the player whether he would choose something more effective or just to their liking. Same with feats, skills, spells etc etc. Now this decision has been taken away.

Personally I like to finding that balance between something that I like and something optimal. It also can potentially promt to try to play some race you wouldn't play other way same as it was with me when I was playing Arcanum. Here I was thinking to pick a gith for example because of their armor proficiency and very nice ability bonuses.

 

[jackofshadows]

If I hated the original BG, should I avoid this? Or is it different enough to warrant playing?

Is there a lot of non-combat spells, abilities and mechanical interactivity that actually makes for good exploring? Don’t mind meh D&D combat

It's vastly different gameplay wise. Potentially there's much, much less combat but more various interactions with the game systems, see the interview above, Swen isn't lying.

 

[Cat Headed Eagle]

If I hated the original BG, should I avoid this? Or is it different enough to warrant playing?

Is there a lot of non-combat spells, abilities and mechanical interactivity that actually makes for good exploring? Don’t mind meh D&D combat

It's a turn based game. That alone might make it or break it for you. Interactivity in Larian games is mostly highlighted in combat.

 

[AwesomeButton]

Which is makes the whole system a lot more boring

But how does the restriction make it more exciting?

and the choice rather cosmetic if we put aside various non-combat race oriented interactions

I'd say "makes the choice an RP choice", which I'm fine with. It still ensures that playing a Githyanki Cleric (which should be a rare sight) or a Half-Orc Paladin +2 Charisma (I admit it's a disgusting sight), will be a different experience than if you instead played a Dwarf Cleric and Human Paladin respectively.

Two downsides of course - it's far easier to add exactly that kind of proper reactivity if race choice is nudging the player towards class via the means of ability score bonuses. I doubt a Half-Orc Paladin and a Githyanki Cleric would get proper reactivity to their race/class combinations. The second downside is that we don't know how much we can rely on race and class reactivity in the first place, even for the less exotic combinatons than those which are now possible. So you have to make a choice at the beginning of the game extending some trust to the game dev that your choice of race was not "meaningless" from RP point of view.

On a separate note, since the ability score restrictions unlock only came about recently, I wonder what's the situation with NPCs' ability score bonuses. I suppose they are all boosting the "default" scores for that race. If so, this makes it really fine in my book. Only the player character gets to break the rules a bit, the rest of the world is "normal" as far as that goes.