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

[Harthwain]

throwing the boots thing is just so fucking stupid. imagine hitting an orc with a pair of shoes. Shoes do no damage to anything. WTF. George Bush, a 70 year old man dodged a pair of shoes up at a podium. Even if he had been hit, so the fuck what?

If I remember correctly, in the Middle East having a shoe thrown at you is considered a great insult.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

throwing the boots thing is just so fucking stupid. imagine hitting an orc with a pair of shoes. Shoes do no damage to anything. WTF. George Bush, a 70 year old man dodged a pair of shoes up at a podium. Even if he had been hit, so the fuck what?

It only works if you're wearing clogs. I understand Dutch pirates used them as emergency weapons.

 

[rhollis]

From the GameSpot interview:

Mike: Do you see Larian always kind of sticking to fantasy as far as-

Swen: No.

Mike: No? Do you have genres you have talked about wanting to go into?

Swen: No. We always wanted to make very big RPGs. The idea is that if we can manage to be successful with this, we essentially free ourselves, so that we can actually start exploring other things at the scale that we want to do it at.

From the Eurogamer interview:

Walgrave: ...Every time that we build a game, we look for something new to add on top of it. And mostly we don't stick to just one new thing. We want to have a couple of really unique features.

Like a Civilization-style rule-of-thirds, change 30 percent for each new game thing?

Walgrave: Yeah. It's not about change, it's about new stuff. We try not to throw away things that we know work. For instance, Divine Divinity is a very old game but there were things in there that we made because we didn't have a lot of people [that are still in Larian games now]. So systemics, for instance, is a very cheap way of making sure that you have a lot of gameplay that is consistent and that makes sense.

Swen pep talk to Larian staff: *I told them to grin and bear this Baldur's Gate shit just a little longer. Make one more tired D:OS clone and we can finally pursue our dream project: space tranny simulator.*

You can manage 11 players just fine while playing Blood Bowl 2 with a gamepad. On a timer (2 or 3 minutes per turn).

I meant 4 players in terms of screen space and couch coop, a big selling point of D:OS on console. Easier to manage inventory between 4 guys. Doubt that’s a problem in blood bowl but can’t say I’ve tried it.

From what I have seen the inventory management shouldn't be a problem when it's magically shared by all team members, accessible mid-combat and regardless of your teammates' status.

And if you can manage 4 team members in a split-screen co-op, then you can manage 6. It's just one person more to divide between both players. So I fail to see consoles specifically being the problem here or the sole reason for us having a party of 4. Evenmoreso considering that in both DO:S 1 and DO:S 2 party size was limited to 4, and that's before there were console versions for them (which came in later, for both games. DO:S series started as PC-oriented).

So, yeah, I don't really get the whole talk about the apparent consolization.

Well of course it didn't start out that way. How are you going to get Kickstarter cash promising it will be console accessible? That doesn't change the fact that the EE was geared towards console ports and that Pillars scored higher on PC metacritic than D:OS, but the console ports scored lower. TB is better-suited for consoles, and Larian knows this.

If not to streamline the user experience (which would really only benefit console players) what is your reason for using the D:OS party cap in a BG game?

 

[Rinslin Merwind]

throwing the boots thing is just so fucking stupid. imagine hitting an orc with a pair of shoes. Shoes do no damage to anything. WTF. George Bush, a 70 year old man dodged a pair of shoes up at a podium. Even if he had been hit, so the fuck what?

I want you remind you, that wearer of these boots is vampire that can accidentally bite sick people and since this undead happens to be filthy elf - legs can stay unwashed through thousands years. It's not punch from shoe thats kills enemy, it's poisonous gas and sickness carried by boots . This vampire slowly gassing his enemies, it's actually powerfull mechanism of self defence.

 

[Tacgnol]

Are the retarded, over the top, cartoonish animations for jumping, pushing, punching etc is a requirement for 5E too?

I suspect even when Larian is trying really hard not to be goofy and over the top, they still can't help themselves to some degree.

I just hope it doesn't extend to the writing (I'm sure it will though).

 

[Generic-Giant-Spider]

Tnx to our own Pink Eye and his anon friends pkm community is ready for this long war.

throwing the boots thing is just so fucking stupid. imagine hitting an orc with a pair of shoes. Shoes do no damage to anything. WTF. George Bush, a 70 year old man dodged a pair of shoes up at a podium. Even if he had been hit, so the fuck what?

I wish Bush caught those shoes and calmly stated, "Mine now."

 

[Reinhardt]

Everyone in this thread will still play this, but half will whine how much suffering it brings to them.

 

[Harthwain]

If not to streamline the user experience (which would really only benefit console players) what is your reason for using the D:OS party cap in a BG game?

The number of companions themselves.

DO:S 1 had 4. DO:S 2 had 6. With party limited to 4 (2 of which were basically the players) it meant that you had only enough companions for 2 playthroughs in DO:S 1. In DO:S 2 you had only one mandatory player, so you had 3 party members + yourself. 6 (companions) : 3 (number of NPC companions per party) = 2 (playthroughs).

Given the above trend I am suspecting that keeping the party limit at 4 means we won't have many more companions than 6 (and I think the limit of Origins in the demo during the character creation was exactly 6, which does suggest the number of companions available to you). Of course, there could be other reasons as well, but this is the one that jumps at me the most.

 

[hell bovine]

Also, who doesn’t enjoy cleaving a pack of exploding gibberlings every once in awhile? Trash mobs, while primarily a nuisance, do serve some purpose by relaying the power fantasy as you level up.

I think you've lost me here. Trash mobs are boring 100% of the time.

 

[NJClaw]

Is this really true? It's not that I doubt you, but six party members is, of course, the traditional number, and often in OG D&D there were lots more, especially if you included retainers and/or henchmen.

Wow, how far D&D has slid into Shitsville. Makes me sad.

From 3.x onwards a party of 4 is seen as the "standard" because that's the baseline to build encounters. They give you a big table with appropriate challenges for a party of 4 and they give you tips on how to adjust things if your party is smaller or bigger (big spoiler: the math is completely broken, challenge ratings for monsters are broken, everything is unbelievably broken and the table is almost useless unless you play with highly unoptimized characters).

Yes, CR for example is calculated based on an average party size of four PCs of the same level. When this became the standard, I have no idea.

This was the standard in 3.x. However, in 5th edition it's quite different: they give you a set amount of "experience points" for each character (depending on his level), you add up these experience points and use the total sum to "buy" monsters to build your encounter. It works seemingly for a party of any size up to 6.

Imoen was a mistake.

A beautiful one, indeed.

I wish internet would stop fighting over Turn based vs RTWP. Can't people like different things? That's not the issue here.

Joyned: Wednesday
Oh boy, you are in for a ride.

DND, 5e especially, is HIGHLY dependent on its grid, and it's becoming harder and harder to run combats without it like we used to do with older editions.

What game have you played? D&D 3.5 and 4 where highly dependend on the usage of a grid, but D&D 5 has taken great steps to let the player play without one.

What's wrong with the initiative system?

It sucks big sweaty balls that it's a simple "your party turn - all the enemies turn".

 

[holla_cabezas_de_mierda]

This game is gonna SUCK. I'm buying it because I'm weak willed, but I'll tell you this: I'm going into it knowing it'll suck. I am giving it zero chance. It's like holding a job interview for a bum. He'll never work for my company, he'll never be shit in my world, but I'll humor him for a few hours and mock him. Fuck you Baldur's Gate III. I'm gonna tear this piece of shit apart so hard that if you fanboy this game you better hope I get murdered or taken out by an icy road and sharp turn. This game is gonna GET IT. Fuck, I'm so pumped for it. YEAH.

the clean faggots shiny armor and frilly smocks trigger the shit out of me. All the characters look like they ran to makeup for 2 hours before appearing on set. Its gay as hell. Their clothes are absolutely gleaming, their hair looks like it has gel in it. WTF. WHY? Why all these sexually confused faggots running around with puffy shirts like in a Seinfeld episode or a Shakespeare play? When did this becomes peoples idea of D&D and why is it appealing?

 

[rhollis]

If not to streamline the user experience (which would really only benefit console players) what is your reason for using the D:OS party cap in a BG game?

The number of companions themselves.

DO:S 1 had 4. DO:S 2 had 6. With party limited to 4 (2 of which were basically the players) it meant that you had only enough companions for 2 playthrough in DO:S 1. In DO:S 2 you had only one mandatory player, so you had 3 party members + yourself. 6 (companions) : 3 (number of NPC companions per party) = 2 (playthroughs).

Given the above trend I am suspecting that keeping the party limit at 4 means we won't have many more companions than 6. Of course, there could be other reasons as well, but this is the one that jumps at me the most.

How is Larian not wanting to write and record more companions a valid reason when you've got 350 people on the project? Especially when it totally fucks with your ability to experiment with party composition, a hallmark of the BG series. Sure, it's a pain in the ass to write romances for every companion (not sure why Larian felt that was necessary), but since they have gone the route of not writing dialogue for the PC or differentiating between genders or alignments, at least they don't have to write or record a ton of reactivity.

Having played D:OS2 for around 20 hours on a gamepad, I can say it was already relatively annoying to control four characters. It would quickly become frustrating with more IMO, but either way, streamlining for gamepads and limiting the number of available companions are not adequate reasons.

BG2 had 16 companions. How many playthroughs does that add up to? This is severe decline and not worthy of the "gather your party" tag.

 

[rhollis]

Also, who doesn’t enjoy cleaving a pack of exploding gibberlings every once in awhile? Trash mobs, while primarily a nuisance, do serve some purpose by relaying the power fantasy as you level up.

I think you've lost me here. Trash mobs are boring 100% of the time.

Not sure where I lost you. Have you exploded gibberlings? Trash mobs suck, but how can a horde of gibberlings, which screech and splode in glorious chunks the instant they arrive on screen be boring? My point was trash mobs of course are undesirable but they do reinforce a sense of power progression.

 

[holla_cabezas_de_mierda]

Here's a question I haven't seen brought up. Why are they using that ugly ass githyanki female as the face of their game? Is it to attract the SJW crowd and their love of ugly, angry, stronk wahmen?

every character must look sexually confused and like they might at any moment start fucking any other character or creature or furry on screen for any reason, or no reason at all. Its a rule. The Michael Jackson nose and face best translated this idea and feeling to a contemporary audience.

 

[Generic-Giant-Spider]

the clean faggots shiny armor and frilly smocks trigger the shit out of me. All the characters look like they ran to makeup for 2 hours before appearing on set. Its gay as hell. Their clothes are absolutely gleaming, their hair looks like it has gel in it. WTF. WHY? Why all these sexually confused faggots running around with puffy shirts like in a Seinfeld episode or a Shakespeare play? When did this becomes peoples idea of D&D and why is it appealing?

They look like characters in a parody play of a Baldur's Gate game. They're too clean and fresh faced, there's no grit or rawness to their visuals. Their portraits are shit too while in previous BG games the portraits really helped sell you on a character and what they were all about. Keldorn is a good example of how much a picture can tell you about someone. Battle scars all over his face, gray has settled into his hair, heavy bags under his eyes, blood splattered on his plate, you know this is a guy that is grizzled and has seen tons of shit, been in tons of shit, and walked away from tons of shit. Yet, the most important part? The expression. It's fierce, yet it holds to it a calm certainty. Not arrogant or smug, but a silent confidence that tells you this character is indeed a proper knight (or in this case paladin/inquisitor) who knows gallantry. When shit goes south, this is the dude you want at your back and to rally with.

You're not getting any of that with BG3's portraits which are all lifted from their insipid and goofy looking in game models. They look like a group of traveling theatrical bards, not adventurers or heroes or cutthroats or whatever else.

 

[holla_cabezas_de_mierda]

throwing the boots thing is just so fucking stupid. imagine hitting an orc with a pair of shoes. Shoes do no damage to anything. WTF. George Bush, a 70 year old man dodged a pair of shoes up at a podium. Even if he had been hit, so the fuck what?

If I remember correctly, in the Middle East having a shoe thrown at you is considered a great insult.

geroge bush thought it was hilarious. He actually seems to be enjoying himself.

 

[Naveen]

the clean faggots shiny armor and frilly smocks trigger the shit out of me. All the characters look like they ran to makeup for 2 hours before appearing on set. Its gay as hell. Their clothes are absolutely gleaming, their hair looks like it has gel in it. WTF. WHY? Why all these sexually confused faggots running around with puffy shirts like in a Seinfeld episode or a Shakespeare play? When did this becomes peoples idea of D&D and why is it appealing?

Contemporary fantasy is basically cosplaying. This is clear in the art direction, but even more so in books I believe. Characters are self-insert cosplayers.

 

[rhollis]

the clean faggots shiny armor and frilly smocks trigger the shit out of me. All the characters look like they ran to makeup for 2 hours before appearing on set. Its gay as hell. Their clothes are absolutely gleaming, their hair looks like it has gel in it. WTF. WHY? Why all these sexually confused faggots running around with puffy shirts like in a Seinfeld episode or a Shakespeare play? When did this becomes peoples idea of D&D and why is it appealing?

Contemporary fantasy is basically cosplaying. This is clear in the art direction, but even more so in books I believe. Characters are self-insert cosplayers.

the clean faggots shiny armor and frilly smocks trigger the shit out of me. All the characters look like they ran to makeup for 2 hours before appearing on set. Its gay as hell. Their clothes are absolutely gleaming, their hair looks like it has gel in it. WTF. WHY? Why all these sexually confused faggots running around with puffy shirts like in a Seinfeld episode or a Shakespeare play? When did this becomes peoples idea of D&D and why is it appealing?

They look like characters in a parody play of a Baldur's Gate game. They're too clean and fresh faced, there's no grit or rawness to their visuals. Their portraits are shit too while in previous BG games the portraits really helped sell you on a character and what they were all about. Keldorn is a good example of how much a picture can tell you about someone. Battle scars all over his face, gray has settled into his hair, heavy bags under his eyes, blood splattered on his plate, you know this is a guy that is grizzled and has seen tons of shit, been in tons of shit, and walked away from tons of shit. Yet, the most important part? The expression. It's fierce, yet it holds to it a calm certainty. Not arrogant or smug, but a silent confidence that tells you this character is indeed a proper knight (or in this case paladin/inquisitor) who knows gallantry. When shit goes south, this is the dude you want at your back and to rally with.

You're not getting any of that with BG3's portraits which are all lifted from their insipid and goofy looking in game models. They look like a group of traveling theatrical bards, not adventurers or heroes or cutthroats or whatever else.

I think it's a side effect of the origin system too. Every companion is also a potential PC themselves. As a result, their characterizations are essentially class agnostic. Imagine how Keldorn would have been designed if he also had to work as a bard.

 

[Harthwain]

How is Larian not wanting to write and record more companions a valid reason when you've got 350 people on the project?

Well, we do know that Larian "has plans to add more races and classes" (on top of the existing 15 races, subraces and 8 classes), so who knows? Perhaps there will be more companions in the future? Some sites do seem to think so:

While more companions are set to be released at a later date, the five available with Early Access [...]

But we shall see...

Sure, it's a pain in the ass to write romances for every companion (not sure why Larian felt that was necessary), but since they have gone the route of not writing dialogue for the PC or differentiating between genders or alignments, at least they don't have to write or record a ton of reactivity.

I think you underestimate the amount of work that each companion requires (no matter how shitty he or she may end up being), considering that they all have to be made from scratch (graphics-wise, sounds-wise, gameplay-wise) and tested for a 3D game. And there are things besides companions they need to pay attention too:

"We went very far to implement as much as we could from the [D&D] player handbook," Larian CEO Swen Vincke told me during a hands-off demo. "So that means that there's a lot of stuff that you can do to fool around with and test it. I've been test running this like 50 times and it's always different. I always have to do different things to be able to survive."

As well as getting feedback from players on bugs and problem areas, Larian will hoover up data to help polish it up for the proper launch. And it's not just stuff from the player handbook that it's implementing; Larian's developed a bunch of new systems and features, including simultaneous turn-based combat. It's also got to figure out how much damage random objects, such as a tossed shoe, do in combat—it seems like everything is fair game.

BG2 had 16 companions. How many playthroughs does that add up to? This is severe decline and not worthy of the "gather your party" tag.

I don't disagree that having more companions is always better than less, but didn't Pillars of Eternity had 8 companions? And Tides of Numenera 6? I think this shows that creating companions isn't that easy as BG2 makes it look.

 

[hell bovine]

Not sure where I lost you. Have you exploded gibberlings? Trash mobs suck, but how can a horde of gibberlings, which screech and splode in glorious chunks the instant they arrive on screen be boring? My point was trash mobs of course are undesirable but they do reinforce a sense of power progression.

Nothing glorious about exploding gibberlings. Filling maps with trash mobs is like getting fillers for your face: you might think it makes you look prettier, but in reality you just look like your face is melting.

 

[ItsChon]

Nothing glorious about exploding gibberlings. Filling maps with trash mobs is like getting fillers for your face: you might think it makes you look prettier, but in reality you just look like your face is melting.

Lmao. People cite Fallout death animations as excuses for its lackluster (if not outright bad) combat all the time. But when someone does it for BG, people have a problem with it...

'k.

 

[Reinhardt]

If not to streamline the user experience (which would really only benefit console players) what is your reason for using the D:OS party cap in a BG game?

The number of companions themselves.

DO:S 1 had 4. DO:S 2 had 6. With party limited to 4 (2 of which were basically the players) it meant that you had only enough companions for 2 playthroughs in DO:S 1. In DO:S 2 you had only one mandatory player, so you had 3 party members + yourself. 6 (companions) : 3 (number of NPC companions per party) = 2 (playthroughs).

Given the above trend I am suspecting that keeping the party limit at 4 means we won't have many more companions than 6 (and I think the limit of Origins in the demo during the character creation was exactly 6, which does suggest the number of companions available to you). Of course, there could be other reasons as well, but this is the one that jumps at me the most.

Gith womyn and edgy goth cleric. I don't see enough companions for even one run yet.

 

[Reinhardt]

Why all these sexually confused faggots running around with puffy shirts like in a Seinfeld episode or a Shakespeare play?

Nigga, IT'S LITERALLY VAMPIRE ELF FAG you are talking about. What else this creature should wear? Latex shorts?

 

[Elex]

Hands can only push and throw (it being able to attack in demo was a bug), but it's still better than familiars.

Familiars are great for things that you can’t do/are pointless in a videogame, exploration/scouting.

 

[rusty_shackleford]