Then he should have gone all the way and created homes and beds and schedules for everybody. What are we paying $70 for when porn on the internet is free?
Start developing games or fuck off Swen!
It's less of a burden to make cutscenes than it is to make all this for an entire game.
It affects me because nothing worthwhile is being made by studios with a good staff and decent budgets anymore. There fore there is an absence of good shit. People on here can be such a soyjack meme.
What's stopping him? The game's only been in EA for years, and day/night cycles were something they "promised" for DOS 2 (or was it DOS 1?)Disagree with him all you want but Swen wants 0 abstraction. For him it's all or nothing.
Just the first one and they dropped it after trying to do it because it was too much trouble.What's stopping him? The game's only been in EA for years, and day/night cycles were something they "promised" for DOS 2 (or was it DOS 1?)
Pillars of Eternity had the cycles though. Was it a big thing? No.
BG3 is looking like a far more ambitious role playing game than BG.
It's nothing of the sort. The breadth of what you can do in BG3 far exceeds Mass Effect, The Witcher, Dragon Age.aka streamlined RPG from circa 2007. dark age ressurected. voice acting, romances, companions, "cinematic" dialogue, cutscenes, all that stuff
bullshit lol. Its literally the same streamlined formula from the worst period for RPGsIt's nothing of the sort.
The breadth of what you can do in BG3 far exceeds Mass Effect, The Witcher, Dragon Age.
Whenever I see these hour-long streams, I wonder: do people really have that much free time to follow something like this? And even if they did, is this the option they choose to spend that time on, really? I think I really am getting old.
"aka streamlined RPG from circa 2007" You said it not me.first of all those are 15 years old games. secondly they are turds. lets not pretend its some accomplishment
ofc its gonna exceed them with modern knowledge and technology. dont be a dumb shill like infinitron
im gonna be honest I like some subsystems in BG3 (verticality, sneaking, mage hand and box-sorting (?))
but I wouldnt call BG3 ambitious at all. Do explain why?
I would say the 'unlikeable' characters (now dumbed down to be more likeable), the turn-based combat and the choices and consequences reactive gameplay are a lot more risky than in Dragon Age or Mass Effect.nothing risky about it
Almost forgot about that game thank you for reminding me. I should try it out.One developer did try to make the purest and truest successor to Baldur's Gate and hardly anyone cared (Black Geyser).
From what I've seen it has loads of reactivity, combat possibilities, and Larian's usual fuck-around mechanics.
they removed most of that. Even in ea now you find those only where it make senseFrom what I've seen it has loads of reactivity, combat possibilities, and Larian's usual fuck-around mechanics.
so exploding barrels = ambitious game? you retarded?
What's stopping him? The game's only been in EA for years, and day/night cycles were something they "promised" for DOS 2 (or was it DOS 1?)Disagree with him all you want but Swen wants 0 abstraction. For him it's all or nothing.
But I get it, zoophiliac gay sex is gonna sell the game more to the twitch audience, better game won't.
Except I did play the EA from day one. And one of the most notable changes since then is a pure streamline/dumbing down: giving Shadowheart a win button in the prologue.I wonder how many of the people here criticizing the streamlining the writing actually played the EA?
That got changed i am not sure why there was a reason behind tho. I didint like that change as well but she dont trust you right away. They added lot of moments and interaction that can make you easily fuck off the situation in the latest patch.Except I did play the EA from day one. And one of the most notable changes since then is a pure streamline/dumbing down: giving Shadowheart a win button in the prologue.I wonder how many of the people here criticizing the streamlining the writing actually played the EA?
Before, you couldn't free her, which meant the player had to win her trust. Now, you have an easy option to free her. Meaning she will by default trust the player and be friendly. Nauseating.
TBH, I found most of the original characters, with the exception of Gale (who really is like an Avengers reject) and Wyll (magical negro warlock with a hero complex), refreshing. A game that almost forced you to work with completely evil lunatics, or at least people who seemed evil. No default Chaotic Good snoozefests like Neera from NWN2. And the best part is that you aren't even forced at all. You can tell all of them to take a walk, or kill them.
It actually reminded me a bit of PST, where your default companions were a talking skull, whom you find out early on is lying about something, a thief with a rat tail, a succubus and an insane man who likes to burn things. (Though I guess that there, Annah has the hots for the player by default.) There was nothing generic about it, and someone who would typically play the lawful good paladin would have a hard time rationalizing why he's working with the scum of the earth. And in BG3, the tadpoles provide just such a rationalization.
But from the start, the whining from the playerbase has been that they want likeable characters. And so everyone got just a little bit nicer. Especially Shadowheart, who (spoiler) is supposed to get much nicer over time, since it's pretty clear she was a Selunite cleric who got brainwashed by the Shar cult. It's her CHARACTER not to be nice. There's a good reason she's not sucking you off the moment she sees you on the beach.
But this is why we can't have nice things. I'd almost be willing to bet that users whined about the color palette being too washed out and that's why they slapped on this awful Instagram filter that makes even dark dungeons look bright and colorful.