Baldur's Gate Baldur's Gate 3 RELEASE THREAD

[Fedora Master]

What are you, going through puberty or something! Suppose this is the audience, cringe memes and emotional reactions.

Not liking what he likes is VERY SERIOUS BUSINESS

 

[Fedora Master]

Christ, the way gnomes and halflings run really is off-putting. Almost as bad as in Wrath.

 

[Vic]

Christ, the way gnomes and halflings run really is off-putting. Almost as bad as in Wrath.

those halfing getting shot in the back while trying to run away tho

 

[Swen]

 

[whydoibother]

 

[darkpatriot]

* "Roll with failed checks" gameplay - provided! Show me another RPG that does that, in the last 20 years.

I am just in act 1, so maybe I am just being premature in my judgement, but they accomplished this by making the majority of the skill checks not very meaningful.

Either because you can select other dialog options to get the same outcome, can easily get the same outcome some other way without the skill check, or the benefit from the skill check is minor. Like skipping a combat or missing out on a minor reward/bonus.

There are skill checks where failure and success have literally the same outcome and lead to the exact same point in the conversation.

Maybe that will change as I get further in the game, but making skill checks so inconsequential that trying to save scum them isn't even worth it most of the time isn't exactly what I would call solving the problem or good design.


Besides, it was already solved with New Vegas (although I am sure earlier games used a similar system so it wasn't the first). Skill checks in conversations should be thresholds so there is no such thing as save scumming them. That way they can reward certain character builds in a meaningful way without someone just being able to save scum their way through every check no matter how bad their character is at those skills/actions.

That style of skill checks just needed refinement and improvement. Such as making it so the skill check wasn't always a win button, and some skill checks could actually lead to bad outcomes.

 

[Grauken]

Besides, it was already solved with New Vegas (although I am sure earlier games used a similar system so it wasn't the first). Skill checks in conversations should be thresholds so there is no such thing as save scumming them.

Next thing you start with, damage should not be rolled but deterministic to make sure people don't save scum combat. This would lead to rather boring gameplay

 

[Mortmal]

What competition does it even have for GOTY? Space Fallout?

Who would have thought in 1999 that 25 years later it's gonna be Swen vs Todd?

Spoiler

Indeed, and who would have thought that someone would finally resurrect the RPG genre and release a game that surpasses any of the classics.

 

[Lagole Gon]

Playing it slowly now. More bugs in Act III:
- Could be polish version only, but I encounter more and more empty books and letters. There's only "[]" in them.
- I was considering buying some powder arrows from gnomes. If you play around with them, split, move, whatever... these super explosive arrows lose their rare status and become super cheap. There's a downside to that. They weight 26 units each, lmao.

 

[Elthosian]

What competition does it even have for GOTY? Space Fallout?

What? Colony Ship RPG, of course

 

[BruceVC]

The connection to the original games is boilerplate

Fake news. There are multiple returning characters - Jaehira, Minsc, Viconia, Sarevok, and probably more. There are also Bhaalspawn.

Boilerplate would just be meeting Minsc in a bar somewhere, having him talk about his hamster and send you off on a quest.

Man you are bad at this.

Edgy can you believe Viconia makes an appearance, this game is getting better and better

 

[Mortmal]

So, what is the codex consensus? Is this game good? It's pure decline? Kingcomrade?

Best cRPG in a long time

BG3 is an unheard-of case of a Codex-worthy mainstream RPG :

* Reactivity to class/race -- unparalleled
* Evil path / multiple outcomes to quests -- at least viable, if not on par with the good path, the verdict is pending
* "Roll with failed checks" gameplay - provided! Show me another RPG that does that, in the last 20 years.
* Killable NPCs, including plot-important ones -- check.
The above sum up as "Choice & Consequence", a term coined here afaik. And then you also have:
* Combat -- D&D mechanics and monsters! Yes, 5e, but that's mandated by WotC :trollface: The worst I've heard so far about the combat is that Tactician needs balancing, which is achievable with mods.
* Exploration -- check.
Bonus:
* Can play as a tranny!

So, "is this game good"? "Is it pure decline?"

Haters put their eggs in the hate basket during the Early Access, and now are clutching at straws to shittalk the game - "muh culture wars", "watch out, gays!", "it's not KOTC2 combat", "the writing is not Tolstoyevski-grade", boo-hoo. BG3 is actually more inclined than much of the Codex top 20. It's just a lot of butthurt and fear of loss of internet cred.

Baldur's Gate 3 combat often holds its own and is comparable to Knights of the Chalice 2. Yes there's some issue with Hunter's Mark being cast after dealing damage, it's worth noting that these are likely to be addressed and fixed in a huge patch soon.

 

[Ryzer]

* "Roll with failed checks" gameplay - provided! Show me another RPG that does that, in the last 20 years.

Skill checks in conversations should be thresholds so there is no such thing as save scumming them. That way they can reward certain character builds in a meaningful way without someone just being able to save scum their way through every check no matter how bad their character is at those skills/actions.

Fuck off, it's retarded design , and also part of the reason New Vegas is steaming manure.
Accept failing and don't savescum, simple as.

 

[darkpatriot]

Besides, it was already solved with New Vegas (although I am sure earlier games used a similar system so it wasn't the first). Skill checks in conversations should be thresholds so there is no such thing as save scumming them.

Next thing you start with, damage should not be rolled but deterministic to make sure people don't save scum combat. This would lead to rather boring gameplay

Combat has far more mechanics involved and is in more gameplay intensive chunks than conversation. There are far more interactive decisions for you to make in combat than in conversation.

A tough fight that you have to replay a few different times and try different tactics for, and maybe even have a little luck with, isn't bad gameplay or design.


A conversation is a series of like 5-10 choices with very limited mechanics and where the majority of those choices are either flavor or different ways of saying "please continue". And almost all those choices you make are entirely deterministic. If you reload and go through a conversation a second time, the NPC will say the same thing and you will have the same series of options of what to choose to say.

You can't even form any tactics or strategies for getting through a conversation.


If a conversation began approaching even a significant fraction of the mechanical complexity and gameplay options as combat I think some randomization would be appropriate.

But BG3 has not achieved that. And until that is achieved, randomized skill checks in conversation are bad design.

 

[Mebrilia the Viera Queen]

So, what is the codex consensus? Is this game good? It's pure decline? Kingcomrade?

Best cRPG in a long time

BG3 is an unheard-of case of a Codex-worthy mainstream RPG :

* Reactivity to class/race -- unparalleled
* Evil path / multiple outcomes to quests -- at least viable, if not on par with the good path, the verdict is pending
* "Roll with failed checks" gameplay - provided! Show me another RPG that does that, in the last 20 years.
* Killable NPCs, including plot-important ones -- check.
The above sum up as "Choice & Consequence", a term coined here afaik. And then you also have:
* Combat -- D&D mechanics and monsters! Yes, 5e, but that's mandated by WotC :trollface: The worst I've heard so far about the combat is that Tactician needs balancing, which is achievable with mods.
* Exploration -- check.
Bonus:
* Can play as a tranny!

So, "is this game good"? "Is it pure decline?"

Haters put their eggs in the hate basket during the Early Access, and now are clutching at straws to shittalk the game - "muh culture wars", "watch out, gays!", "it's not KOTC2 combat", "the writing is not Tolstoyevski-grade", boo-hoo. BG3 is actually more inclined than much of the Codex top 20. It's just a lot of butthurt and fear of loss of internet cred.

Baldur's Gate 3 combat often holds its own and is comparable to Knights of the Chalice 2. Yes there's some issue with Hunter's Mark being cast after dealing damage, it's worth noting that these are likely to be addressed and fixed in a huge patch soon.

The combat is very good however there are some things i dislike. Mostly the lack of "Ready" and the "Dodge" reaction i can't see a single good reason why they don't implement it. Aside of that the combat is plenty of fun.

 

[jf8350143]

Want to play a evil warlock playthrough, and realize that the best clothes for Warlock requires you to keep the tieflings alive.

 

[Fedora Master]

(Dragonborn run like they're constipated too.)

 

[Eisenheinrich]

Hehe. Not so slavering loyal in my playthrough. Convinced them to to join Lolth because she treats spiders right, then they fucked off.

 

[toro]

* "Roll with failed checks" gameplay - provided! Show me another RPG that does that, in the last 20 years.

Skill checks in conversations should be thresholds so there is no such thing as save scumming them. That way they can reward certain character builds in a meaningful way without someone just being able to save scum their way through every check no matter how bad their character is at those skills/actions.

Fuck off, it's retarded design , and also part of the reason New Vegas is steaming manure.
Accept failing and don't savescum, simple as.

Dice rolling is a retarded way to simulate reality because it cannot avoid edge cases in which a successfull roll or a failure roll simply doesn't make sense.
"Roll with failed checks" is a self-imposed challenge without value for most people which will savescum because it's the common sense response when the dice system has a brainfart.
Anyway, a threshold system as in Underrail is better.

 

[Mebrilia the Viera Queen]

* "Roll with failed checks" gameplay - provided! Show me another RPG that does that, in the last 20 years.

Skill checks in conversations should be thresholds so there is no such thing as save scumming them. That way they can reward certain character builds in a meaningful way without someone just being able to save scum their way through every check no matter how bad their character is at those skills/actions.

Fuck off, it's retarded design , and also part of the reason New Vegas is steaming manure.
Accept failing and don't savescum, simple as.

Dice rolling is a retarded way to simulate reality because it cannot avoid edge cases in which a successfull roll or a failure roll simply doesn't make sense.
"Roll with failed checks" is a self-imposed challenge without value for most people which will savescum because it's the common sense response when the dice system has a brainfart.
Anyway, a threshold system as in Underrail is better.

I agree to disagree over here.

 

[Grauken]

Anyway, a threshold system as in Underrail is better.

Thankfully Larian disagreed and BG3 has dice rolls

 

[Mebrilia the Viera Queen]

Dice rolls that you can influence with plenty of tools. Competencies. Or simple inspirations so...

 

[whydoibother]

Anyway, a threshold system as in Underrail is better.

Thankfully Larian disagreed and BG3 has dice rolls

Dice is worse. Flat skill checks in New Vegas are better than percentages in Fallout 3, I thought we all agreed.

 

[Grauken]

Anyway, a threshold system as in Underrail is better.

Thankfully Larian disagreed and BG3 has dice rolls

Dice is worse. Flat skill checks in New Vegas are better than percentages in Fallout 3, I thought we all agreed.

Nope

 

[whydoibother]

Anyway, a threshold system as in Underrail is better.

Thankfully Larian disagreed and BG3 has dice rolls

Dice is worse. Flat skill checks in New Vegas are better than percentages in Fallout 3, I thought we all agreed.

Nope

Yep. Dice is okay in combat, its not okay in conversation. In combat, you can do damage control after you fail, and make a comeback, and win anyways. In conversation, failing a dice roll, ESPECIALLY in something you specifically built your character to succeed in, feels terrible, often you can't do anything to get the outcome you wanted, and you just reload. Its bad game design.