Baldur's Gate Baldur's Gate 3 Pre-Release Thread [EARLY ACCESS RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[Turuko]

I didn't realize people on this forum actually had that piece of shit of Dragon Age Origins in such a high regard.

It's not that people hold it in such a high regard, but in the context of what might happen to BG3 it's a bearable amount of popamole and it has some good points outside of that, like the origin stories. Again, you can't expect a TB party-based 5E 2D RPG with great itemization and story, it's just not gonna happen.

Dragon Age was pretty good when Bioware could get out of their own fucking way. The story is generic and dumb, VO was okay, and characters were mostly forgettable. The combat was pretty good, though. I liked the multiple abilities for different classes and they all felt different and viable enough to be interesting. The game is incredibly easy now but it was decently difficult back in the day.

DA2 and DA3 were complete garbage, though.

the combat was, shit it still is, busted

 

[BING XI LAO]

Belgium is an abomination. The Flemish shouldn't be leeched off by those socialist psuedo-French parasites

 

[smaug]

Why would that be a bad thing though for them? I guess some BG fans would hate it, however, didn’t OS2 sell like 2 million?

Making an analogy with shooters, lawbreakers tried to mix and attract arena shooters fans and hero shooters fans and failed miserably. Why an hero shooter fan would play LB instead of overwatch? And why an arena shooter would play LB over Quake? See, they tried to please Greeks and Trojans and ended pleasing no one. Puzzle gimmicky battles, cooldowns, armor and magical armor <<<insert other 5000 "modern" bs mechanics>>> can be interesting for D:OS players, but for BG fans, can be awful. The same way, an D:OS2 fan can see problems on BG. This will be awful. Is like trying to mix an Argentine Dulce de Leche with Italian Pasta Salad and American Bacon. Will just not work. What makes BG interesting is that spells, cast by an PC or NPC are insanely deadly and the combat is tense. What makes D:OS2 great is the tactical aspect. Petrification on failed save for an BG fan will not be an problem and make sense in the world. For an D:OS2 can be seen as an unbalanced broken mechanic.

So, if Larian is making a big AAA title and it hits big time, then BG fans become irrelevant no?

 

[Cryomancer]

Why would that be a bad thing though for them? I guess some BG fans would hate it, however, didn’t OS2 sell like 2 million?

Making an analogy with shooters, lawbreakers tried to mix and attract arena shooters fans and hero shooters fans and failed miserably. Why an hero shooter fan would play LB instead of overwatch? And why an arena shooter would play LB over Quake? See, they tried to please Greeks and Trojans and ended pleasing no one. Puzzle gimmicky battles, cooldowns, armor and magical armor <<<insert other 5000 "modern" bs mechanics>>> can be interesting for D:OS players, but for BG fans, can be awful. The same way, an D:OS2 fan can see problems on BG. This will be awful. Is like trying to mix an Argentine Dulce de Leche with Italian Pasta Salad and American Bacon. Will just not work. What makes BG interesting is that spells, cast by an PC or NPC are insanely deadly and the combat is tense. What makes D:OS2 great is the tactical aspect. Petrification on failed save for an BG fan will not be an problem and make sense in the world. For an D:OS2 can be seen as an unbalanced broken mechanic.

So, if Larian is making a big AAA title and it hits big time, then BG fans become irrelevant no?

Yes, and more people will think that cRPG is the BS that BG3 will be.... WotC said that they will listen to Larian on making the 6e, so 6e will probably be an new 4e. If Pathfinder 2e din't sucks, will be an good chance to make Pathfinder the most famous pnp RPG again.

 

[PulsatingBrain]

You're making a lot of assumptions based on nothing.

 

[smaug]

I’m just proposing theories.

I don’t care about BG, but watching the drama unfold is very entertaining.

 

[Cryomancer]

You're making a lot of assumptions based on nothing.

""The very obvious one would be that you tend to miss a lot when you roll the dice, which is fine when you’re playing on the tabletop, but it’s not so cool when you’re playing a video game," https://www.pcgamer.com/baldurs-gat...-divinity-and-dandd-5th-edition/#comment-jump

"Dungeons and Dragons’ leveling system is too slow for Baldur’s Gate 3" http://nuclearcoffee.org/dungeons-and-dragons-leveling-system-is-too-slow-for-baldurs-gate-3/

"have talked about how spell slots might not be the most intuitive thing. One of the things with Dungeons and Dragons, which I think is very important, is the method by which we do things is not as important for tabletop players as the actual effect on the table.”"https://www.pcgamesn.com/baldurs-gate-3/dungeons-and-dragons-6th-edition

Someone who says that missing obvious not work on video games, when it worked not only on D&D games(IWD1/2, BG1/2, ToEE, NWN, NWN2), but in other games(kotor 1/2, diablo 1/2, morrowind <<<insert over 9000 examples>>>), the leveling system and the spell slot system that worked well even on Dark Souls 1/2, clearly will produce an SCL2 with Baldur's Gate name.

 

[PulsatingBrain]

Has any game ever had characters level as slowly as in real tabletop? I'm not that experienced with tabletop, but my understanding was that it's much slower.

And the comment about spell slots I think might be a miscommunication. He's had them in every game he was involved with.

Either way, this is still nothing until we see what's actually there. Sven always does a lot of talking and he's not a designer

 

[PulsatingBrain]

drama

It's a fairly tame discussion. Try Breaking Bad. That'll blow your fucking tits off if you find this exciting

 

[smaug]

drama

It's a fairly tame discussion. Try Breaking Bad. That'll blow your fucking tits off if you find this exciting

what

 

[PulsatingBrain]

what

There is a miniscule amount of drama to be observed around this game.

 

[smaug]

dude have you seen the steam forums?

 

[PulsatingBrain]

I'll check it out

 

[PulsatingBrain]

It's nothing to write home about at a glance. Lots of discussion. I don't get what you're talking about. By drama do you just mean lots of discussion? Vast majority of people don't even seem too worked up

 

[glass blackbird]

Has any game ever had characters level as slowly as in real tabletop? I'm not that experienced with tabletop, but my understanding was that it's much slower.

I think the Goldbox games might be comparable. In Pool of Radiance your mages max out at like, level 6, I think?

 

[Decado]

I didn't realize people on this forum actually had that piece of shit of Dragon Age Origins in such a high regard.

It's not that people hold it in such a high regard, but in the context of what might happen to BG3 it's a bearable amount of popamole and it has some good points outside of that, like the origin stories. Again, you can't expect a TB party-based 5E 2D RPG with great itemization and story, it's just not gonna happen.

Dragon Age was pretty good when Bioware could get out of their own fucking way. The story is generic and dumb, VO was okay, and characters were mostly forgettable. The combat was pretty good, though. I liked the multiple abilities for different classes and they all felt different and viable enough to be interesting. The game is incredibly easy now but it was decently difficult back in the day.

DA2 and DA3 were complete garbage, though.

the combat was, shit it still is, busted

I disagree. I thought it was pretty good (especially with the fix pack that did things like applying bonuses correctly to two-hand weapons, etc.). I got a lot of hours out of that game.

I think people are forgetting how dry the CRPG scene was in the late 2000s. Getting a game like DA:O in 2009 was a pretty nice deal. It's easy to be dismissive now, being on the other side of the CRPG "renaissance" fostered by Kickstarter and mid-tier indie studios like Warhorse. None of that shit was really around in the late 2000s.

 

[smaug]

Depends on your race, a human goes to level 6* mage, I think. Race restrictions probably lower.

 

[Turuko]

Dragon Age was pretty good when Bioware could get out of their own fucking way. The story is generic and dumb, VO was okay, and characters were mostly forgettable. The combat was pretty good, though. I liked the multiple abilities for different classes and they all felt different and viable enough to be interesting. The game is incredibly easy now but it was decently difficult back in the day.

DA2 and DA3 were complete garbage, though.

the combat was, shit it still is, busted

I disagree. I thought it was pretty good (especially with the fix pack that did things like applying bonuses correctly to two-hand weapons, etc.). I got a lot of hours out of that game.

I think people are forgetting how dry the CRPG scene was in the late 2000s. Getting a game like DA:O in 2009 was a pretty nice deal. It's easy to be dismissive now, being on the other side of the CRPG "renaissance" fostered by Kickstarter and mid-tier indie studios like Warhorse. None of that shit was really around in the late 2000s.

oh i do remember, it was the first big production party based rpg in years
shit i have it on Steam and Origin and i can't even remember why
but wizards have, to this day afaik, more than 1 game breaking spell that trivialize the game

 

[Tigranes]

DAO combat was decent, and it had enough trappings of a proper RPG, at a time when every other RPG seemed to be made just along a completely different set of systems & philosophy. It was essentially like playing BG2/Arcanum and then not getting to play any RPGs for about 8 years - so "oh god, there's a party I can control", and "oh wow, elemental environmental interaction finally", "Oh wow thieves aren't useless in melee", was all pretty refreshing.

Now, well, it's a bit quaint to go back and see how dual-wielding thieves do about 8 million damage per second by spamming MMO-y abilities, for example.

 

[Carrion]

I thought DA:O combat sucked ass. The MMO influence was obvious with the tank/healer/DPS trinity at the center of it all, complete with an aggro system on top of it. With just a four-man party and three classes, it didn't feel like you had a lot of flexibility in choosing your party composition. Obviously there were also cooldowns and ridiculous HP bloat, meaning that in the toughest battles you mostly ended up repeating the same sequence of abilities over and over again until the enemy finally dropped dead. The amount of trash combat in the game was obnoxious, and although I give the devs some credit for trying to add variety to the encounters with enemy positioning, obstacles etc., the bestiary was just way too limited to keep your interest. You rarely had to change your tactics from one fight to another, revenants and the Derp Roads tit monster being the only exceptions that come to mind right away.

BG3 being like DA:O isn't the best-case scenario, it's a nightmare scenario.

 

[Lacrymas]

The system didn't allow for much difference in the same class and that's why they felt too limited. If there were D&D-like feats and talents in addition to the active abilities, you might get quite a lot of leverage with just 3 classes. There are some inklings of this, like melee vs ranged Rogue and especially with specialization, but it wasn't nearly enough and the cookie-cutter nature of some abilities meant that you won't really go for other abilities on 2 different mages or melee rogues. It needed more thought put into the combat and character system, but alas.

 

[Lilura]

BG3 being like DA:O isn't the best-case scenario, it's a nightmare scenario.

It's the best-case scenario going by what they have said so far.

 

[Mortmal]

yes and noticed how they locked the thread comparing it to solasta in steam forums. This BG3 is not going to be incline for sure.

 

[Curratum]

Didn't people really like DA:O? I never played it.

 

[fantadomat]

Didn't people really like DA:O? I never played it.

Normal people do,half the codex don't and the other half is with lukewarm feelz.