Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Baldur's Gate Baldur's Gate 3 RELEASE THREAD

jackofshadows

Magister
Joined
Oct 21, 2019
Messages
4,745
For me it was that ambush guy in the underground temple. Standard mode on release though. It took me several tries even though I wasn't exactly ambushed - scouted ahead and flanked him right away but had nothing vs invis. Still, even with something against that I couldn't burst him down in 1 round. So yeah, it was a tough fight for me but unfortunately, the toughest as it turned out. Overall it felt too easy. I even tried to front assault Kethric for laughs but he's left the room instantly and I managed to clear it iirc.
 

Barbarian

Arcane
Joined
Jun 7, 2015
Messages
7,899
Standard difficulty on release was a joke and tactician wasn't enough. You need to play honour mode, it is a much better game with the spiked difficulty.
 

Wirdschowerdn

Ph.D. in World Saving
Patron
Joined
Nov 30, 2003
Messages
35,476
Location
Clogging the Multiverse with a Crowbar

Josh Sawyer doesn't like Baldur Gate 3-style romances and that's part of why he doubts a new Pillars of Eternity would be a hit: 'I feel like I'm kind of out of touch with that audience'


News
By Andy Chalk
published 1 hour ago
It's not romances in general he doesn't care for, just the way they're typically implemented in videogames.

When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here’s how it works.

Baldur's Gate 3 screenshot - Halsin

(Image credit: Larian Studios)

Josh Sawyer is an RPG legend, with writing and design credits on games including Icewind Dale, Neverwinter Nights 2, Fallout: New Vegas, Pillars of Eternity, Tyranny, The Outer Worlds, and numerous others. But with the runaway success of Baldur's Gate 3 inspiring talk about the possibility of Pillars of Eternity 3, Sawyer expressed some doubt about his participation in it—not because he doesn't want to do it, but because he doesn't feel like he's hip to what modern RPG fans want.
One major obstacle to recreating BG3's success in a new Pillars of Eternity game, Sawyer said in a new Q&A video, is money: "Money doesn't fix all your problems, but there are some things you simply cannot do without money. For example, the production quality of the character models, the cinematics especially, all the animation, that's crazy. That's a lot of time and money. It's an expensive proposition."

That echoes what Sawyer said in 2023: That he'd be happy to take a run at Pillars of Eternity 3 if someone were willing to give him a BG3-sized budget to do it. But even with that budget, he isn't confident a new Pillars game would achieve the lofty heights of Baldur's Gate 3 because that's just not what he's into.
"Looking at Deadfire and how it was received and looking at BG3 and how it was received, I feel like I don't have the pulse of that audience, even if I ever did," Sawyer said. "Whether I did 20 years ago, or whether I do now, I don't think I've got it now. Things that [players] like and don't like, mechanically, story-wise, things like that. Or I do get it, and it's not—I don't dig it.
"So I feel like I'm kind of out of touch with that audience in a way that—if you want to give me a pile of money to make a game, I'll make it. I don't necessarily think it's going to appeal to the audience, the same audience [as Baldur's Gate 3], and make that money back."
In response to a follow-up question, Sawyer pointed to romances as one particular aspect of the RPG genre that doesn't really work for him, at least in the way they're typically implemented. Sawyer's not opposed to romances in games in general, but what fantasy RPG players are into is not what he's into.
"I'm out of step with that, and it's hard for me to sort of get it. And the things that I do get, I'm like, I get it—I don't like it," Sawyer said.

Keep up to date with the most important stories and the best deals, as picked by the PC Gamer team.
Contact me with news and offers from other Future brandsReceive email from us on behalf of our trusted partners or sponsors
By submitting your information you agree to the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy and are aged 16 or over.
"If I were to make romances in a game that were done in a way that I find appealing, would an audience enjoy that, or would they really actually even hate it more than romances not being in the game?"

It's a little weird for me to hear Josh Sawyer say he feels out of touch with the RPG crowd, but I found his comments about in-game romances very relatable. Yes, I eagerly pursued Viconia in Baldur's Gate 2, but in the 20-plus years since then RPG romances have come to feel like a checklist item—an achievement to be unlocked rather than an organic evolution of in-game relationships. That's reflected in the plentiful "how to have sex with everyone" guides for Cyberpunk 2077, which I mention because I'm currently playing it: The priority is not romance, but just gettin' it done so you can move on to the next one.

Some of this is no doubt because I am old, and my attitudes have changed over the years, and it's possible Sawyer could be feeling some of that same effect. But he's actually been pretty consistent on it: PC Gamer Associate Editor Ted Litchfield dug up an old form post from 2006 (via Reddit) in which Sawyer expressed very similar feelings about the state of RPG romances.

"I don't hate love in game stories; I just hate reducing love to shallow, masturbatory fantasy indulgence," he wrote.

"I appreciate that people wanted more romance options in NWN2, but sometimes I think that people want there to be romance 'victory' conditions for all companions. I think that can diminish some characters ... That bugs me. I don't like the idea that you can 'win' everything or get everyone on your side."


I don't hate love in game stories; I just hate reducing love to shallow, masturbatory fantasy indulgence. Maybe that's all love is to some people, but I think that's a pretty narrow view. Ego-stroking is very popular in CRPGs, which is one reason I don't feel comfortable doing CRPG writing anymore. I appreciate that people wanted more romance options in NWN2, but sometimes I think that people want there to be romance 'victory' conditions for all companions. I think that can diminish some characters. For instance, if Shandra and Qara had their own romance plots, I think some people would still want Neeshka to be romance-able, regardless of how Neeshka's author felt about the character's place in the storyo. That bugs me. I don't like the idea that you can win everything or get everyone on your side. I'm also not fond olf the idea that romance always has to resolve with a fade out to implied coitus, but that's another issue. I'll re-state what I wrote before: I want romance to receive either more or less attention in games. Anything worth doing is worth doing well, especially when it's something with so much emotional potential. But I certainly don't want to go the route of harem anime, which is total fantasy indulgence and gross pandering.



(Image credit: Josh Sawyer (Reddit))
Sawyer's most recent game, Pentiment, does not have romances, but oh boy does it have relationships—if narrative-focused games are your thing and you haven't played it yet, I would strongly urge you to give it a shot.

He's just ahead of his times. Again.
 
Joined
Jun 6, 2010
Messages
2,375
Location
Milan, Italy
Which fight did you guys considered the hardest/more challenging? In honour mode.
In Honor Mode? Probably...
- the Raphael fight (the risk of being nuked into oblivion if something goes wrong is pretty high and you are constantly conflicted between focusing the pillars to debuff him and nuking the adds to remove a nagging thereat)
- getting the Iron Throne right in a single attempt (having a clear plan about who needs to go where and when it's definitely time to rush back)

...are the two most challenging parts in the entire playthrough.

I had virtually no trouble with Sarevok, to the point I find it a bit underwhelming, so it's weird to see it mentioned as a difficulty peak.
 

Barbarian

Arcane
Joined
Jun 7, 2015
Messages
7,899
Which fight did you guys considered the hardest/more challenging? In honour mode.
In Honor Mode? Probably...
- the Raphael fight (the risk of being nuked into oblivion if something goes wrong is pretty high and you are constantly conflicted between focusing the pillars to debuff him and nuking the adds to remove a nagging thereat)
- getting the Iron Throne right in a single attempt (having a clear plan about who needs to go where and when it's definitely time to rush back)

...are the two most challenging parts in the entire playthrough.

I had virtually no trouble with Sarevok, to the point I find it a bit underwhelming, so it's weird to see it mentioned as a difficulty peak.

I nearly lost my playthrough when I faced the death knights together with Sarevok. Second time when it was just him and the 3 echoes it was still hard. He can attack you several times in a turn and hits like a mule, it is not uncommon for him to down or even kill 2 or more characters in a turn. Nuking the echoes before killing him makes him nigh invincible too.

Ironically Raphael fight was a non-event since I rigged the soul pillars with smokepowder before the fight.

The iron throne I mentioned, it was both challenging and fun.
 

processdaemon

Scholar
Patron
Joined
Jul 14, 2023
Messages
572
Which fight did you guys considered the hardest/more challenging? In honour mode.

In my playthroughs the Sarevok fight and the duel with Orin/Slayer as durge. In particular when I faced the slayer as a pure rogue and one time the 3 death knights joined the fight with Sarevok due to the tribunal doors being open and scratch staying behind. Some other interesting fights that come to mind were the iron throne rescue mission and the second fight with Ethel.

There is some stuff I haven't tried yet. Like siding with the emperor and facing the netherbrain "countermeasures". But that final fight is somewhat trivialized by all the countless "summon your allies" options you have.
I think objectively it's probably Raphael, but for me personally it was the fight with the robot on the top of the Arcane Tower (Bernard) and Cazador. For the Bernard fight I was caught off guard and low on resources because I hadn't intended to fight him (I misremembered what the non-combat dialogue option was) and his legendary action blindsided me. For the Cazador fight I stupidly assumed that because he was such a cakewalk in Tactician that he would be in Honour Mode too, then I blinked and two of my characters were down and I spent most of the rest of the fight on the back foot (I'm still not quite sure what happened there, it was a bit of a panicked blur). I agree that the Orin duel can be tough with a squishy resist Durge too.
 

MjKorz

Educated
Joined
Jul 11, 2022
Messages
530
Raphael is not immune to Hold Monster and it causes melee attacks to autocrit. That's all that needs to be said about that fight even after the inevitable resolve buff, 1 round is enough. BG3 has amazing itemization for DC casters.
 

jackofshadows

Magister
Joined
Oct 21, 2019
Messages
4,745
Is Raph not immune to it and similiar like forced dance on honor? Because it does trivialize that fight (although I've no idea even what he actually does, maybe he's harmless?).
 

Barbarian

Arcane
Joined
Jun 7, 2015
Messages
7,899
For me it was that ambush guy in the underground temple. Standard mode on release though. It took me several tries even though I wasn't exactly ambushed - scouted ahead and flanked him right away but had nothing vs invis. Still, even with something against that I couldn't burst him down in 1 round. So yeah, it was a tough fight for me but unfortunately, the toughest as it turned out. Overall it felt too easy. I even tried to front assault Kethric for laughs but he's left the room instantly and I managed to clear it iirc.

That was a good one too, specially when he summoned the squad.

I remember that "strangler luke" dude yeeted Shadowheart from the bridge one time. Had to finish the fight with only 3 man squad, made it much harder.
 

Barbarian

Arcane
Joined
Jun 7, 2015
Messages
7,899
Is Raph not immune to it and similiar like forced dance on honor? Because it does trivialize that fight (although I've no idea even what he actually does, maybe he's harmless?).

On tactician and honor mode most bosses have legendary resistance(+ 10 to all saves)and other buffs which make it pretty hard to disable them.

Not sure if lower difficulty features this.
 

Barbarian

Arcane
Joined
Jun 7, 2015
Messages
7,899
ITT according to the wiki he has "inevitable resolve" buff which causes all incapacitating conditions to last no more than a turn.

Also has high saving throws and advantage on all of them(magic resistance).
 
Joined
Jun 6, 2010
Messages
2,375
Location
Milan, Italy
On tactician and honor mode most bosses have legendary resistance(+ 10 to all saves)
Can be overcome with sheer volume of spells.
Doesn't "sheer volume of spells" (so targeting him with everything and the kitchen sink, I guess) imply that you are also not doing shit to the rest of the participants in the fight OR the pillars?
 

MjKorz

Educated
Joined
Jul 11, 2022
Messages
530
Doesn't "sheer volume of spells" (so targeting him with everything and the kitchen sink, I guess) imply that you are also not doing shit to the rest of the participants in the fight OR the pillars?
Depends on your party. If you have only one DC caster then you obviously have to rely only on that caster while the rest of the party does something else. Once you can hold him for one round it should be over with good martials autocritting.
 

Zed Duke of Banville

Dungeon Master
Patron
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
12,635
I mean, I did infiltrate moonrise, but I had to take the drider's lantern in order to get there.

I suppose you guys followed him instead of ambushing him and killing him with the Harpers.
There's a dialogue option for tricking the drider into giving his magic lantern to the party, without fighting him, but he will subsequently show up on the rooftop battle (possibly a bug).

Anyway, Ketheric's Tower should be an easy battle with the Harpers, because you'll only need to defeat a few defenders, having killed the rest of them earlier, group by group. +M
 

Junmarko

† Cristo è Re †
Patron
Joined
Jun 20, 2011
Messages
3,502
Location
Schläfertempel
Why do people think this game was so successful? For me the game is around a 7.5/10. Good but not great.

The combat is arguably the best aspect but gets boring later as the challenge is removed. Speaking of challenge, bad design decisions to have no constraints on long resting. I always get really bored by act 3 and I've only finished the game once despite making it to act 3 a handful of times (and it was an absolute chore to finish.)

Items are really well done. There are a lot of cool and unique items. Great job there.

The writing is pretty bad. Boring muh refugees. Main story is a disaster. Companions are mostly bad. The romance system was mega cringe. We're talking about peak cringe that I'm not sure any AAA game has ever reached.

So what reasons do you think this game became so successful? The high production values and pretty good combat?

They fucked up big time by putting Baldur's Gate in Act 3. This really tanked the replay value imo.

The city should be at the very forefront in Act 1 and serve as a central hub, allowing you to pick and choose where and what you want to do immediately. I can't bring myself to sit through the druid grove/swamp etc ever again. Act 1 is a very shit entry point.
 

DemonKing

Arcane
Joined
Dec 5, 2003
Messages
6,376
They fucked up big time by putting Baldur's Gate in Act 3. This really tanked the replay value imo.
You couldn't get into Baldur's Gate early in the original either, so possibly delaying entry was a form of tribute to that.
 

Junmarko

† Cristo è Re †
Patron
Joined
Jun 20, 2011
Messages
3,502
Location
Schläfertempel
Meanwhile, the audience:


They fucked up big time by putting Baldur's Gate in Act 3. This really tanked the replay value imo.
You couldn't get into Baldur's Gate early in the original either, so possibly delaying entry was a form of tribute to that.
Yes, but here it feels a lot more drawn out - nauseatingly so...

They should have really thought it through. The replay value sucks.

EDIT: I also think that out of BG1 & BG2, the fact that most people prefer the sequel says a lot. You are thrown into a city hub the moment you finish the "tutorial" dungeon. It doesn't railroad you at all.
 
Last edited:

ERYFKRAD

Barbarian
Patron
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
29,346
Strap Yourselves In Serpent in the Staglands Shadorwun: Hong Kong Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag. Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
Hardest fight I had was the one against the Sharran temple. Everything else took me a few tries, this one took a few more.
 

Russia is over. The end.

⚰️☠️⚱️
Patron
Vatnik
Joined
Sep 28, 2014
Messages
11,879
Location
USSR
I nearly lost my playthrough when I faced the death knights together with Sarevok. Second time when it was just him and the 3 echoes it was still hard. He can attack you several times in a turn and hits like a mule, it is not uncommon for him to down or even kill 2 or more characters in a turn.
I think I kept him in hold person almost the entire fight. I even killed 2 out of 3 echoes or something like that, before I understood what they did.

because you'll only need to defeat a few defenders, having killed the rest of them earlier, group by group. +M
You do that by starting the fights manually? Sounds like meta gaming abuse, in a game that's already so prone to abuse.
 

Russia is over. The end.

⚰️☠️⚱️
Patron
Vatnik
Joined
Sep 28, 2014
Messages
11,879
Location
USSR
On the subject of abuse, I don't know if I should even say that I beat the game.

For most of the tough fights I did this:
- Darkness on my own party, so the AI can't target us, especially the archers
- When it's my turn: step out, throw a spell / shoot an arrow, step back in

It became boring quickly, too.
 

Yosharian

Arcane
Joined
May 28, 2018
Messages
10,076
Location
Grand Chien
On the subject of abuse, I don't know if I should even say that I beat the game.

For most of the tough fights I did this:
- Darkness on my own party, so the AI can't target us, especially the archers
- When it's my turn: step out, throw a spell / shoot an arrow, step back in

It became boring quickly, too.
Bwahaha. BG3's AI still can't cope with this strategy. You might as well put the game difficulty on Easy.
 

Barbarian

Arcane
Joined
Jun 7, 2015
Messages
7,899
Hardest fight I had was the one against the Sharran temple. Everything else took me a few tries, this one took a few more.
On the subject of abuse, I don't know if I should even say that I beat the game.

For most of the tough fights I did this:
- Darkness on my own party, so the AI can't target us, especially the archers
- When it's my turn: step out, throw a spell / shoot an arrow, step back in

It became boring quickly, too.

You guys were not playing honor mode I reckon. You should try it, it does improve the game a lot.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom