The presentation was far better than what i was expcting. I was expecting a combat where you never miss but the numbers are inflated and that they would get rid of spell slots... From "i will probably never buy this thing" i added BG3 to my wishlist and will see.
But people FEAR when a game becomes too similar to a different game from the same company. See Diablo 3. Is too wow like in his mechanics and visuals. BG3 seems only like D:OS2 visually speaking.
Just a note. See how P:K developers use the UI from the first game (and the game will be most likely fully released before BG3). This is what they say: "The UI in current videos is placeholder UI from the Pathfinder: Kingmaker, that we used to make our versions quicker and be able to present the game. We are going to make an overhaul, art in the UI will be completely different and usability will be enhanced."
Sounds very similar to how BG3 is using a lot of assets from D:OS 2. It's totally ok for games at this stage - one could say both games are at the pre-alpha stage.
I agree that the UI will still change substantial, but two comments.
It is one thing to do that when doing from one game in the series to the next. But it is different when you have to win over the fans of a beloved franchise and you know that they are afraid that it will look like a different game. At the very least it was extremely naive from a marketing perspective that this would go over very well.
While the UI will change, I think it will be cosmetic changes. Elements will be moved and buttons will look more like BG. However, BG was very minimalistic in the game window while the D:OS series tends to present a lot more information on the screen (status effects, hp bars, stealth detection, etc). This is still a stylistic break, where I am much more doubtful that it will change. And when I play PnP I wouldn't give the players exact enemy statistics during combat, so it is not a change I like.
I don't know why some folks keep insisting on this point in #1, but it's simply not true from a dispassionate analysis of what Larian has to do. There's no evidence that Larian "has to win over the fans of a beloved franchise". They simply have to win over the *current marketplace* of CRPG gamers.
Also the idea that the product they showed during the gameplay reveal was bad marketing, is also not in evidence. Again, some people need to recognize that their tastes are not at all indicative of the market's taste. There's no evidence that what Larian has done with the product so far is actually bad from an objective marketing standpoint. Quite the opposite, actually.
Just a note. See how P:K developers use the UI from the first game (and the game will be most likely fully released before BG3). This is what they say: "The UI in current videos is placeholder UI from the Pathfinder: Kingmaker, that we used to make our versions quicker and be able to present the game. We are going to make an overhaul, art in the UI will be completely different and usability will be enhanced."
Sounds very similar to how BG3 is using a lot of assets from D:OS 2. It's totally ok for games at this stage - one could say both games are at the pre-alpha stage.
I agree that the UI will still change substantial, but two comments.
It is one thing to do that when doing from one game in the series to the next. But it is different when you have to win over the fans of a beloved franchise and you know that they are afraid that it will look like a different game. At the very least it was extremely naive from a marketing perspective that this would go over very well.
While the UI will change, I think it will be cosmetic changes. Elements will be moved and buttons will look more like BG. However, BG was very minimalistic in the game window while the D:OS series tends to present a lot more information on the screen (status effects, hp bars, stealth detection, etc). This is still a stylistic break, where I am much more doubtful that it will change. And when I play PnP I wouldn't give the players exact enemy statistics during combat, so it is not a change I like.
I don't know why some folks keep insisting on this point in #1, but it's simply not true from a dispassionate analysis of what Larian has to do. There's no evidence that Larian "has to win over the fans of a beloved franchise". They simply have to win over the *current marketplace* of CRPG gamers.
Also the idea that the product they showed during the gameplay reveal was bad marketing, is also not in evidence. Again, some people need to recognize that their tastes are not at all indicative of the market's taste. There's no evidence that what Larian has done with the product so far is actually bad from an objective marketing standpoint. Quite the opposite, actually.
There is a significant portion of the CRPG gaming base that likes BG and their spiritual successors, especially Kingmaker and is not that enamored of the D:OS games. The point is that Larian had a chance to win some of them over, and did not do so. Larian's existing fanbase was in the bag anyway. The market is not monolithic, and Larian could easily have reached a wider audience than it did. Sure, the complaints come from a vocal minority, but it is still a sizable minority.
As it stands there is a larger than necessary portion of disappointed people, which is not good for them even though their fanbase is undoubtedly large enough to turn a healthy profit anyway.
Just a note. See how P:K developers use the UI from the first game (and the game will be most likely fully released before BG3). This is what they say: "The UI in current videos is placeholder UI from the Pathfinder: Kingmaker, that we used to make our versions quicker and be able to present the game. We are going to make an overhaul, art in the UI will be completely different and usability will be enhanced."
Sounds very similar to how BG3 is using a lot of assets from D:OS 2. It's totally ok for games at this stage - one could say both games are at the pre-alpha stage.
I agree that the UI will still change substantial, but two comments.
It is one thing to do that when doing from one game in the series to the next. But it is different when you have to win over the fans of a beloved franchise and you know that they are afraid that it will look like a different game. At the very least it was extremely naive from a marketing perspective that this would go over very well.
While the UI will change, I think it will be cosmetic changes. Elements will be moved and buttons will look more like BG. However, BG was very minimalistic in the game window while the D:OS series tends to present a lot more information on the screen (status effects, hp bars, stealth detection, etc). This is still a stylistic break, where I am much more doubtful that it will change. And when I play PnP I wouldn't give the players exact enemy statistics during combat, so it is not a change I like.
I don't know why some folks keep insisting on this point in #1, but it's simply not true from a dispassionate analysis of what Larian has to do. There's no evidence that Larian "has to win over the fans of a beloved franchise". They simply have to win over the *current marketplace* of CRPG gamers.
Also the idea that the product they showed during the gameplay reveal was bad marketing, is also not in evidence. Again, some people need to recognize that their tastes are not at all indicative of the market's taste. There's no evidence that what Larian has done with the product so far is actually bad from an objective marketing standpoint. Quite the opposite, actually.
There is a significant portion of the CRPG gaming base that likes BG and their spiritual successors, especially Kingmaker and is not that enamored of the D:OS games. The point is that Larian had a chance to win some of them over, and did not do so. Larian's existing fanbase was in the bag anyway. The market is not monolithic, and Larian could easily have reached a wider audience than it did. Sure, the complaints come from a vocal minority, but it is still a sizable minority.
As it stands there is a larger than necessary portion of disappointed people, which is not good for them even though their fanbase is undoubtedly large enough to turn a healthy profit anyway.
"As it stands there is a larger than necessary portion of disappointed people"
Just a note. See how P:K developers use the UI from the first game (and the game will be most likely fully released before BG3). This is what they say: "The UI in current videos is placeholder UI from the Pathfinder: Kingmaker, that we used to make our versions quicker and be able to present the game. We are going to make an overhaul, art in the UI will be completely different and usability will be enhanced."
Sounds very similar to how BG3 is using a lot of assets from D:OS 2. It's totally ok for games at this stage - one could say both games are at the pre-alpha stage.
I agree that the UI will still change substantial, but two comments.
It is one thing to do that when doing from one game in the series to the next. But it is different when you have to win over the fans of a beloved franchise and you know that they are afraid that it will look like a different game. At the very least it was extremely naive from a marketing perspective that this would go over very well.
While the UI will change, I think it will be cosmetic changes. Elements will be moved and buttons will look more like BG. However, BG was very minimalistic in the game window while the D:OS series tends to present a lot more information on the screen (status effects, hp bars, stealth detection, etc). This is still a stylistic break, where I am much more doubtful that it will change. And when I play PnP I wouldn't give the players exact enemy statistics during combat, so it is not a change I like.
I don't know why some folks keep insisting on this point in #1, but it's simply not true from a dispassionate analysis of what Larian has to do. There's no evidence that Larian "has to win over the fans of a beloved franchise". They simply have to win over the *current marketplace* of CRPG gamers.
Also the idea that the product they showed during the gameplay reveal was bad marketing, is also not in evidence. Again, some people need to recognize that their tastes are not at all indicative of the market's taste. There's no evidence that what Larian has done with the product so far is actually bad from an objective marketing standpoint. Quite the opposite, actually.
There is a significant portion of the CRPG gaming base that likes BG and their spiritual successors, especially Kingmaker and is not that enamored of the D:OS games. The point is that Larian had a chance to win some of them over, and did not do so. Larian's existing fanbase was in the bag anyway. The market is not monolithic, and Larian could easily have reached a wider audience than it did. Sure, the complaints come from a vocal minority, but it is still a sizable minority.
As it stands there is a larger than necessary portion of disappointed people, which is not good for them even though their fanbase is undoubtedly large enough to turn a healthy profit anyway.
Most people who like BG and his spiritual successors like PF:KM AND dislike D:OS dislike D:OS by thew modern mechancis that i already criticized a lot...
The graphics, i prefer more realistic graphics but lets be real. PF:KM has cartoonish graphics. BG3 doesn't seem mechanic wise like D:OS3.
Interesting but not only the UI who remembers me of DOS2. The 3d models too.
I guess the approach towards using old assets is the same. It's all placeholder (I mean, have you seen the D:OS 2 pre-alpha? It used all the assets, including models, from D:OS).
On this I am willing to accept and wait to see. In the Larian forum, to my question on this, a Larian dev has posted that they are certain not only UI but also character models and environment art assets are placeholders and will be changed later on.
Many actions converted to bonus actions (shove, jump, etc)
Game will fake numbers to avoid you having an extremely low hit chance
Senior Combat designer barely played BG and thinks RTwP is a mess
For me 1 is a plus. Items 2 3 and 4 are minuses (I want it to be as close as possible to PnP rules) and I think 3 has a high potential to break the system. Short rests an important balancing element.
Item 5 is an interesting bit of info, but hopefully they have other fans in the team. It was never to be expected that the entire design team consists entirely of BG fans.
Just a note. See how P:K developers use the UI from the first game (and the game will be most likely fully released before BG3). This is what they say: "The UI in current videos is placeholder UI from the Pathfinder: Kingmaker, that we used to make our versions quicker and be able to present the game. We are going to make an overhaul, art in the UI will be completely different and usability will be enhanced."
Sounds very similar to how BG3 is using a lot of assets from D:OS 2. It's totally ok for games at this stage - one could say both games are at the pre-alpha stage.
I don't think the UI was much of a big deal and it's not what gives me the feeling of D:OS2-ness (In fact I don't associate anything in particular at all with DO:OS2's UI, as far as I'm concerned it was very anonymous and demure, a decent UI but low-key and impersonal. I don't see any problem with BG3 becoming like D:OS2 in that regard. Except for the number one problem with Larian games UI/useability, that's been haunting them since their first Divinity game; the awful inventory management structure/design -- But iirc D:OS2 was the least bad a Larian game has ever been in that regard so...). But if it was, I'd be willing to give Owlcat bigger credit in this regard because of their next game being a sequel in a franchise, but also because they are a newcomer on the scene with (I think) only one game under their belt and no AAA ambitions for Pathfinder 2).
I don't think it would have been possible for BG3 to have a "BG-feel" UI, though. The norms for UI's have just changed too much. It's unusual for games to even attempt to have their UI be atmospheric any more, it's all sleek sans-seriff text and transparent windows with minimalist design. In fact I think D:OS2's UI is probably as far from the current UI design culture we're gonna get for a new game. It at least attempts to be atmospheric in the menus like the journal and such.
So in conclusion I don't think, if people think like me, that people are reacting to it looking like D:OS2 because D:OS2's UI was bad to them. I think they are rather reacting to it as an overshadowing cloud of vague "this feels like D:OS 3" gut feeling.
However, BG was very minimalistic in the game window
I'm sorry to break this from it's context but I simply couldn't disagree more. The BG game's UI was absolutely cluttered, I'd say maybe even a fourth or fifth of the screen was taken up by sidebars and the dialogue window (worse in BG1 than 2 of course). Sure, with resolution mods or in EE they take up a whole lot less space today, but back when they were released it was a whole different matter. I remember in combat sometimes the status symbols on your portrait would stack up much you would be unable to tell the characters health behind them on a glance, you might as well just mouse over them and look at the tool-tip.
While BG1&2 was still less cluttered than the 90's RPGames that preceded it (think Fallout, holy shit was it cluttered) and that I guess to a point they were tributing with stuff like the mannequin doll, I couldn't call it minimalist by any means.
I said it was minimalistic in the game window - that is the thing in the middle of the UI elements. And that is exactly the stylistic difference that interface was cleanly separated from your window in the game world.
I don't think the UI was much of a big deal <...> I think they are rather reacting to it as an overshadowing cloud of vague "this feels like D:OS 3" gut feeling.
I used the P:WotR quote about the UI to explain about re-using old assets, it's not only about the UI for BG3 (as I explained in the follow up comments). Here (it's in Russian but you can Google Translate into English) the head of St. Peterburg's branch of Larian Arthur Mostovoi says that it (old assets at this stage) is ok, they will gradually get rid of old assets not to confuse players - https://kanobu.ru/articles/intervyu-slarian-obaldurs-gate-3-poshagovoj-boevke-buduschem-divinity-ireaktsii-fanatov-375119/
Many actions converted to bonus actions (shove, jump, etc)
Game will fake numbers to avoid you having an extremely low hit chance
Senior Combat designer barely played BG and thinks RTwP is a mess
For me 1 is a plus. Items 2 3 and 4 are minuses (I want it to be as close as possible to PnP rules) and I think 3 has a high potential to break the system. Short rests an important balancing element.
Item 5 is an interesting bit of info, but hopefully they have other fans in the team. It was never to be expected that the entire design team consists entirely of BG fans.
The lack of short rest ALSO hurts certain classes mostly notable Warlocks who regain spell slots on short rest.
I said it was minimalistic in the game window - that is the thing in the middle of the UI elements. And that is exactly the stylistic difference that interface was cleanly separated from your window in the game world.
It's a difference of perspective then, because to me the sidebars are on top of the "game window", not cleanly separated from them
Many actions converted to bonus actions (shove, jump, etc)
Game will fake numbers to avoid you having an extremely low hit chance
Senior Combat designer barely played BG and thinks RTwP is a mess
For me 1 is a plus. Items 2 3 and 4 are minuses (I want it to be as close as possible to PnP rules) and I think 3 has a high potential to break the system. Short rests an important balancing element.
Item 5 is an interesting bit of info, but hopefully they have other fans in the team. It was never to be expected that the entire design team consists entirely of BG fans.
The lack of short rest ALSO hurts certain classes mostly notable Warlocks who regain spell slots on short rest.
Let's be honest here -- it is very unlikely the game, like 99.9% of all DnD games before it, will not allow you to restspam.
But in regards to that not implementing short rests is a bit of a missed opportunity too, since they would strike a good balance between not being able to rest and being able to rest as often as you want.
I said it was minimalistic in the game window - that is the thing in the middle of the UI elements. And that is exactly the stylistic difference that interface was cleanly separated from your window in the game world.
It's a difference of perspective then, because to me the sidebars are on top of the "game window", not cleanly separated from them
Many actions converted to bonus actions (shove, jump, etc)
Game will fake numbers to avoid you having an extremely low hit chance
Senior Combat designer barely played BG and thinks RTwP is a mess
For me 1 is a plus. Items 2 3 and 4 are minuses (I want it to be as close as possible to PnP rules) and I think 3 has a high potential to break the system. Short rests an important balancing element.
Item 5 is an interesting bit of info, but hopefully they have other fans in the team. It was never to be expected that the entire design team consists entirely of BG fans.
The lack of short rest ALSO hurts certain classes mostly notable Warlocks who regain spell slots on short rest.
Let's be honest here -- it is very unlikely the game, like 99.9% of all DnD games before it, will not allow you to restspam.
But in regards to that not implementing short rests is a bit of a missed opportunity too, since they would strike a good balance between not being able to rest and being able to rest as often as you want.
I did not mention it as the translation was unclear at this moment, but they said some things would progress while you rested.
I said it was minimalistic in the game window - that is the thing in the middle of the UI elements. And that is exactly the stylistic difference that interface was cleanly separated from your window in the game world.
It's a difference of perspective then, because to me the sidebars are on top of the "game window", not cleanly separated from them
Many actions converted to bonus actions (shove, jump, etc)
Game will fake numbers to avoid you having an extremely low hit chance
Senior Combat designer barely played BG and thinks RTwP is a mess
For me 1 is a plus. Items 2 3 and 4 are minuses (I want it to be as close as possible to PnP rules) and I think 3 has a high potential to break the system. Short rests an important balancing element.
Item 5 is an interesting bit of info, but hopefully they have other fans in the team. It was never to be expected that the entire design team consists entirely of BG fans.
The lack of short rest ALSO hurts certain classes mostly notable Warlocks who regain spell slots on short rest.
Let's be honest here -- it is very unlikely the game, like 99.9% of all DnD games before it, will not allow you to restspam.
But in regards to that not implementing short rests is a bit of a missed opportunity too, since they would strike a good balance between not being able to rest and being able to rest as often as you want.
Shortrest and restspam are two different things. You can for eg, only allow long rests on few occasions and like 3 short rests per long rest. Note that warlocks only regain spell slots up to circle 5 without a long rest.
The game allowing you to get around all combat encounters is something I already brought up from having seen it in another interview. In that interview, though, they said the dice rolls to be successful would be very difficult in many of those cases, so I don't know how "real" that is an option.
@elminster No to which question? The pictures look very different in design to the character shown. She looks like they want the player to find her attractive, rather than to represent the Gith visually.
@DinoDin "I don't know why some folks keep insisting on this point in #1, but it's simply not true from a dispassionate analysis of what Larian has to do."
Yes, lets engage in art with zero passion. That's the way to go! If Larian can't be passionate about BG, they never should have touched the franchise in the first place. And if a game can't make you feel anything, its failed as an experience.
Larian will be hosting a Reddit AMA where you can ask Swen (Creative Director), David (Producer), Adam (Senior Writer), Nick (Lead Systems Designer), and Jiji (Writing Director) your questions. 11:00 PT on March 12, over on Reddit.
More from the recent issue of their gazette:
"Though this journey began now years ago when we visited Wizards of the Coast for the first time in 2017, these past few weeks have been momentous and emotional, since this was the first time we were able to share Baldur’s Gate 3 with all of you, the people for whom the game is being made.
We will soon embark on an epic adventure as Baldur’s Gate 3 enters Early Access, and we couldn’t possibly venture forth without first gathering you, our party. One thousand of you gathered with us as we streamed the game live for the first time at PAX East in an auditorium filled to the brim, and an extra thousand of you were sadly turned away because there was no more space. Hundreds of thousands of you gathered online which - we’re told in confidence - broke some records. Thousands of you each waited three hours to gather with us at our PAX East booth, to see what would have happened if the dice rolls weren’t against us. It has been humbling and exciting to gather together as we start this new journey, venturing forth, going the way of the dice.
What you will eventually play has been in the planning at Larian and closely with Wizards of the Coast for over 4 years now, with their key creative people colliding with our key creative people in ways that we will eventually talk about in greater length. Our task is to create the ultimate Dungeons & Dragons game; a loving and modern sequel to Baldur’s Gate 2. Oozing with 5e D&D greatness, set in the world that you know and love. You will explore Baldur’s Gate 100 years after Baldur’s Gate 2. The Bhaalspawn saga has ended, and a new threat is converging on the city of Baldur's Gate. But the gods do not forget, and the shadows and scars of the past will not stay silent. You will meet and get to know many new characters, and encounter some of the legendary characters you know and love.
Most importantly, you’ll learn how their stories have evolved. And as you play, you will heavily influence their fate. Over the course of the past 3 weeks, the final missing ingredient has been added into our new development pipeline: you.
Let’s look at how we’ve evolved since the release of Divinity: Original Sin 2 in 2017. Firstly, we finished Divinity: Original Sin 2 with 120 people. DOS2 was shipped on the second version of the Divinity engine (we still haven’t found a cool name for it yet), and our Producer David Walgrave said recently in an interview with TechRaptor that in BG3 "there’s about 20-30% of the Original Sin engine left and we rewrote so many systems and so many things." We’ve been colloquially calling this 4.0 engine the “Baldur’s Gate Engine”, and it’s designed from the ground up for Baldur’s Gate.
But how does this happen? Between 2017 and the announcement of BG3 we’ve grown to 250 people + we have over 100 outsourcers working on this. Still independent. Funded entirely by yourselves who dived so eagerly into Divinity: Original Sin 2. We were quiet since the announcement just before E3 of the previous year. But internally, kinetic energy has propelled us forward with new systems, pipelines, and people who when not playing D&D were all helping us to put together what you saw at PAX East, 2020. There’s quite the adventure ahead.
We’ve built an engine that allows all 250 people at Larian collaborate to become the ultimate DM. Allowing for near-limitless reactivity, responsiveness, and a memory that never forgets who you are, or what you’ve done. No matter who you roll, dice-rolls, modifiers, and physical simulation have all been designed to simulate a D&D experience that feels as though it’s straight from the imagination, where no matter the dice roll the story will continue. It’s also a game that is intended to span the entire range of human emotion. It is in equal parts a dark and a light game. “We always want to make failure as interesting as it possibly can,” said Senior Writer Adam Smith. “We don’t put everything that’s cool and interesting behind success.”
“Light and dark are really good sources of advantage,” noted Swen in a recent GameSpot interview. The philosophies that define the rules in D&D 5e also define the narrative, where you’ll often make difficult decisions through initiative or through the roll of the dice. The Baldur’s Gate games were dark - sometimes darker than many people remember. Baldur’s Gate 3 is no exception, though in 2020 we’re able to take the gamut of emotion and experience and stretch it further due to systems, simulation, and of course also our cinematics team. Unfortunately we did not make it to the end of our PAX East 2020 live demo due to a feature (see: bug), but those in the hall witnessed a scene where Astarion’s hunger got the better of him, and through a series of dice rolls (and often audience choice), Astarion sank his teeth into Shadowheart to varying degrees of mortality. Astarion was happy (systemically), but Shadowheart often ended up dead (also without irony, systemically).
Baldur’s Gate 3 is on course to be a ‘Mature’ game, which is publishing language for “if you go any further the ratings board is going to be extremely annoying”. We want to push the limits of every theme within the game, which should allow you to play exactly how you’d like to play. Astarion may be a Vampire Spawn, but that doesn’t mean he has to be evil - if hungry. Though you saw one path at PAX East, there were many possibilities for good, and evil -- note also, everything in between. It has always been Larian’s plan to create games that allow you to play however you wish. This larger team, and this new engine, allow us to push this further than ever before. Much further than Divinity: Original Sin 2.
As you delve into an epic adventure that subverts the binary morality found in many RPGs, and explore Baldur’s Gate with new and existing characters, 100 years after the story of the first two games, dice roll by dice roll, we hope that together we can reignite that great sense of discovery you felt as you dived for the first time into Baldur’s Gate 1 & 2, bringing the experience of an open-ended D&D game to photo-realistic realisation, albeit with 5e rules in place of 2nd edition rules. Things have come a long way in 20 years, but what’s important to us is that you’re along for the ride."
""Though this journey began now years ago when we visited Wizards of the Coast for the first time in 2017, these past few weeks have been momentous and emotional, since this was the first time we were able to share Baldur’s Gate 3 with all of you, the people for whom the game is being made."
Confirmed, Larian's intended audience is solely their existing fans.
@ThacoBell following on from our other conversation I think that statement that @JuliusBorisov has shown above very clearly indicates that there will be links to Baldur’s Gate 1&2. But again you are ignoring that and only seeing what you want to see at this point. Example below:
‘’You will explore Baldur’s Gate 100 years after Baldur’s Gate 2. The Bhaalspawn saga has ended, and a new threat is converging on the city of Baldur's Gate. But the gods do not forget, and the shadows and scars of the past will not stay silent. You will meet and get to know many new characters, and encounter some of the legendary characters you know and love.’’
@megamike15 taken out of context clearly. They say they are sharing with all of you. The people for who this is being made’ To me that means everyone. Not a select few.
People complaining about an alpha stage software UI should have seen the UI in the early betas of BGII:EE... That was a mess with old and new icons mixed and part of the screen displaying the original backgrounds and parts with the new UI appearance.
Yes, lets engage in art with zero passion. That's the way to go! If Larian can't be passionate about BG, they never should have touched the franchise in the first place. And if a game can't make you feel anything, its failed as an experience.
There's no evidence Larian isn't engaging in this passionately. And you have no clue if BG3 will make you feel anything or not.
@ThacoBell following on from our other conversation I think that statement that @JuliusBorisov has shown above very clearly indicates that there will be links to Baldur’s Gate 1&2. But again you are ignoring that and only seeing what you want to see at this point. Example below:
‘’You will explore Baldur’s Gate 100 years after Baldur’s Gate 2. The Bhaalspawn saga has ended, and a new threat is converging on the city of Baldur's Gate. But the gods do not forget, and the shadows and scars of the past will not stay silent. You will meet and get to know many new characters, and encounter some of the legendary characters you know and love.’’
I think we are done discussing this now.
They also said they respect the BG franchise right before we found out that Sven never played them, that he hates rtwp, and that the combat designer hates rtwp. Not to mention that the "Baldur's Gate" they keep referring to is the version in the P&P modules and (with abdel) the novels. Nothing they say at this point can be taken at face value.
They also said they respect the BG franchise right before we found out that Sven never played them, that he hates rtwp, and that the combat designer hates rtwp. Not to mention that the "Baldur's Gate" they keep referring to is the version in the P&P modules and (with abdel) the novels. Nothing they say at this point can be taken at face value.
Playing BG games and looking at how BG 1&2 were getting world recognition (Larian had been started before that happened) doesn't mean they have to adore rtwp.
Think about it: would you prefer their team to attempt an experiment creating BG3 (rtwp) or use all their experience from many years (tb)? I certainly would prefer the latter.
@ThacoBell its not a discussion when someone like you doesn’t acknowledge clear facts. I’d rather discuss the game with people that actually are interested in it
Comments
But people FEAR when a game becomes too similar to a different game from the same company. See Diablo 3. Is too wow like in his mechanics and visuals. BG3 seems only like D:OS2 visually speaking.
Keep in mind that BG2 UI is very BG1 like
I don't know why some folks keep insisting on this point in #1, but it's simply not true from a dispassionate analysis of what Larian has to do. There's no evidence that Larian "has to win over the fans of a beloved franchise". They simply have to win over the *current marketplace* of CRPG gamers.
Also the idea that the product they showed during the gameplay reveal was bad marketing, is also not in evidence. Again, some people need to recognize that their tastes are not at all indicative of the market's taste. There's no evidence that what Larian has done with the product so far is actually bad from an objective marketing standpoint. Quite the opposite, actually.
There is a significant portion of the CRPG gaming base that likes BG and their spiritual successors, especially Kingmaker and is not that enamored of the D:OS games. The point is that Larian had a chance to win some of them over, and did not do so. Larian's existing fanbase was in the bag anyway. The market is not monolithic, and Larian could easily have reached a wider audience than it did. Sure, the complaints come from a vocal minority, but it is still a sizable minority.
As it stands there is a larger than necessary portion of disappointed people, which is not good for them even though their fanbase is undoubtedly large enough to turn a healthy profit anyway.
"As it stands there is a larger than necessary portion of disappointed people"
Where's the evidence?
Most people who like BG and his spiritual successors like PF:KM AND dislike D:OS dislike D:OS by thew modern mechancis that i already criticized a lot...
The graphics, i prefer more realistic graphics but lets be real. PF:KM has cartoonish graphics. BG3 doesn't seem mechanic wise like D:OS3.
https://jv.jeuxonline.info/actualite/57546/interview-edouard-imbert-senior-designer-combats-baldur-gate-3
For me 1 is a plus. Items 2 3 and 4 are minuses (I want it to be as close as possible to PnP rules) and I think 3 has a high potential to break the system. Short rests an important balancing element.
Item 5 is an interesting bit of info, but hopefully they have other fans in the team. It was never to be expected that the entire design team consists entirely of BG fans.
I don't think the UI was much of a big deal and it's not what gives me the feeling of D:OS2-ness (In fact I don't associate anything in particular at all with DO:OS2's UI, as far as I'm concerned it was very anonymous and demure, a decent UI but low-key and impersonal. I don't see any problem with BG3 becoming like D:OS2 in that regard. Except for the number one problem with Larian games UI/useability, that's been haunting them since their first Divinity game; the awful inventory management structure/design -- But iirc D:OS2 was the least bad a Larian game has ever been in that regard so...). But if it was, I'd be willing to give Owlcat bigger credit in this regard because of their next game being a sequel in a franchise, but also because they are a newcomer on the scene with (I think) only one game under their belt and no AAA ambitions for Pathfinder 2).
I don't think it would have been possible for BG3 to have a "BG-feel" UI, though. The norms for UI's have just changed too much. It's unusual for games to even attempt to have their UI be atmospheric any more, it's all sleek sans-seriff text and transparent windows with minimalist design. In fact I think D:OS2's UI is probably as far from the current UI design culture we're gonna get for a new game. It at least attempts to be atmospheric in the menus like the journal and such.
So in conclusion I don't think, if people think like me, that people are reacting to it looking like D:OS2 because D:OS2's UI was bad to them. I think they are rather reacting to it as an overshadowing cloud of vague "this feels like D:OS 3" gut feeling.
I'm sorry to break this from it's context but I simply couldn't disagree more. The BG game's UI was absolutely cluttered, I'd say maybe even a fourth or fifth of the screen was taken up by sidebars and the dialogue window (worse in BG1 than 2 of course). Sure, with resolution mods or in EE they take up a whole lot less space today, but back when they were released it was a whole different matter. I remember in combat sometimes the status symbols on your portrait would stack up much you would be unable to tell the characters health behind them on a glance, you might as well just mouse over them and look at the tool-tip.
While BG1&2 was still less cluttered than the 90's RPGames that preceded it (think Fallout, holy shit was it cluttered) and that I guess to a point they were tributing with stuff like the mannequin doll, I couldn't call it minimalist by any means.
I used the P:WotR quote about the UI to explain about re-using old assets, it's not only about the UI for BG3 (as I explained in the follow up comments). Here (it's in Russian but you can Google Translate into English) the head of St. Peterburg's branch of Larian Arthur Mostovoi says that it (old assets at this stage) is ok, they will gradually get rid of old assets not to confuse players - https://kanobu.ru/articles/intervyu-slarian-obaldurs-gate-3-poshagovoj-boevke-buduschem-divinity-ireaktsii-fanatov-375119/
The lack of short rest ALSO hurts certain classes mostly notable Warlocks who regain spell slots on short rest.
It's a difference of perspective then, because to me the sidebars are on top of the "game window", not cleanly separated from them
Let's be honest here -- it is very unlikely the game, like 99.9% of all DnD games before it, will not allow you to restspam.
But in regards to that not implementing short rests is a bit of a missed opportunity too, since they would strike a good balance between not being able to rest and being able to rest as often as you want.
I did not mention it as the translation was unclear at this moment, but they said some things would progress while you rested.
Shortrest and restspam are two different things. You can for eg, only allow long rests on few occasions and like 3 short rests per long rest. Note that warlocks only regain spell slots up to circle 5 without a long rest.
@DinoDin "I don't know why some folks keep insisting on this point in #1, but it's simply not true from a dispassionate analysis of what Larian has to do."
Yes, lets engage in art with zero passion. That's the way to go! If Larian can't be passionate about BG, they never should have touched the franchise in the first place. And if a game can't make you feel anything, its failed as an experience.
More from the recent issue of their gazette:
"Though this journey began now years ago when we visited Wizards of the Coast for the first time in 2017, these past few weeks have been momentous and emotional, since this was the first time we were able to share Baldur’s Gate 3 with all of you, the people for whom the game is being made.
We will soon embark on an epic adventure as Baldur’s Gate 3 enters Early Access, and we couldn’t possibly venture forth without first gathering you, our party. One thousand of you gathered with us as we streamed the game live for the first time at PAX East in an auditorium filled to the brim, and an extra thousand of you were sadly turned away because there was no more space. Hundreds of thousands of you gathered online which - we’re told in confidence - broke some records. Thousands of you each waited three hours to gather with us at our PAX East booth, to see what would have happened if the dice rolls weren’t against us. It has been humbling and exciting to gather together as we start this new journey, venturing forth, going the way of the dice.
What you will eventually play has been in the planning at Larian and closely with Wizards of the Coast for over 4 years now, with their key creative people colliding with our key creative people in ways that we will eventually talk about in greater length. Our task is to create the ultimate Dungeons & Dragons game; a loving and modern sequel to Baldur’s Gate 2. Oozing with 5e D&D greatness, set in the world that you know and love. You will explore Baldur’s Gate 100 years after Baldur’s Gate 2. The Bhaalspawn saga has ended, and a new threat is converging on the city of Baldur's Gate. But the gods do not forget, and the shadows and scars of the past will not stay silent. You will meet and get to know many new characters, and encounter some of the legendary characters you know and love.
Most importantly, you’ll learn how their stories have evolved. And as you play, you will heavily influence their fate. Over the course of the past 3 weeks, the final missing ingredient has been added into our new development pipeline: you.
Let’s look at how we’ve evolved since the release of Divinity: Original Sin 2 in 2017. Firstly, we finished Divinity: Original Sin 2 with 120 people. DOS2 was shipped on the second version of the Divinity engine (we still haven’t found a cool name for it yet), and our Producer David Walgrave said recently in an interview with TechRaptor that in BG3 "there’s about 20-30% of the Original Sin engine left and we rewrote so many systems and so many things." We’ve been colloquially calling this 4.0 engine the “Baldur’s Gate Engine”, and it’s designed from the ground up for Baldur’s Gate.
But how does this happen? Between 2017 and the announcement of BG3 we’ve grown to 250 people + we have over 100 outsourcers working on this. Still independent. Funded entirely by yourselves who dived so eagerly into Divinity: Original Sin 2. We were quiet since the announcement just before E3 of the previous year. But internally, kinetic energy has propelled us forward with new systems, pipelines, and people who when not playing D&D were all helping us to put together what you saw at PAX East, 2020. There’s quite the adventure ahead.
We’ve built an engine that allows all 250 people at Larian collaborate to become the ultimate DM. Allowing for near-limitless reactivity, responsiveness, and a memory that never forgets who you are, or what you’ve done. No matter who you roll, dice-rolls, modifiers, and physical simulation have all been designed to simulate a D&D experience that feels as though it’s straight from the imagination, where no matter the dice roll the story will continue. It’s also a game that is intended to span the entire range of human emotion. It is in equal parts a dark and a light game. “We always want to make failure as interesting as it possibly can,” said Senior Writer Adam Smith. “We don’t put everything that’s cool and interesting behind success.”
“Light and dark are really good sources of advantage,” noted Swen in a recent GameSpot interview. The philosophies that define the rules in D&D 5e also define the narrative, where you’ll often make difficult decisions through initiative or through the roll of the dice. The Baldur’s Gate games were dark - sometimes darker than many people remember. Baldur’s Gate 3 is no exception, though in 2020 we’re able to take the gamut of emotion and experience and stretch it further due to systems, simulation, and of course also our cinematics team. Unfortunately we did not make it to the end of our PAX East 2020 live demo due to a feature (see: bug), but those in the hall witnessed a scene where Astarion’s hunger got the better of him, and through a series of dice rolls (and often audience choice), Astarion sank his teeth into Shadowheart to varying degrees of mortality. Astarion was happy (systemically), but Shadowheart often ended up dead (also without irony, systemically).
Baldur’s Gate 3 is on course to be a ‘Mature’ game, which is publishing language for “if you go any further the ratings board is going to be extremely annoying”. We want to push the limits of every theme within the game, which should allow you to play exactly how you’d like to play. Astarion may be a Vampire Spawn, but that doesn’t mean he has to be evil - if hungry. Though you saw one path at PAX East, there were many possibilities for good, and evil -- note also, everything in between. It has always been Larian’s plan to create games that allow you to play however you wish. This larger team, and this new engine, allow us to push this further than ever before. Much further than Divinity: Original Sin 2.
As you delve into an epic adventure that subverts the binary morality found in many RPGs, and explore Baldur’s Gate with new and existing characters, 100 years after the story of the first two games, dice roll by dice roll, we hope that together we can reignite that great sense of discovery you felt as you dived for the first time into Baldur’s Gate 1 & 2, bringing the experience of an open-ended D&D game to photo-realistic realisation, albeit with 5e rules in place of 2nd edition rules. Things have come a long way in 20 years, but what’s important to us is that you’re along for the ride."
Confirmed, Larian's intended audience is solely their existing fans.
‘’You will explore Baldur’s Gate 100 years after Baldur’s Gate 2. The Bhaalspawn saga has ended, and a new threat is converging on the city of Baldur's Gate. But the gods do not forget, and the shadows and scars of the past will not stay silent. You will meet and get to know many new characters, and encounter some of the legendary characters you know and love.’’
I think we are done discussing this now.
There's no evidence Larian isn't engaging in this passionately. And you have no clue if BG3 will make you feel anything or not.
Because this was stated specifically in their own newsletter and nowhere else. Who gets the Larian newsletter? Pretty much only Larian fans.
They also said they respect the BG franchise right before we found out that Sven never played them, that he hates rtwp, and that the combat designer hates rtwp. Not to mention that the "Baldur's Gate" they keep referring to is the version in the P&P modules and (with abdel) the novels. Nothing they say at this point can be taken at face value.
Ah, so you are going to start discussions now and just leave. Got it.
That is wrong. Swen has played them. "Swen Vincke: There are a couple of reasons why we wanted to make Baldur's Gate III. Dungeons & Dragons is a big thing for us, and there's a certain refreshing thing about having an entirely realized and fleshed out world to pick from and create stories from. Which is literally what D&D is all about. The other thing is that Larian is made up of lots of people who either play D&D or for them Baldur's Gate was their first RPG." https://www.rpgsite.net/interview/8677-baldur-s-gate-iii-interview-at-e3-2019-we-chat-with-larian-ceo-swen-vincke-about-baldur-s-gate-and-partnership-with-wizards-of-the-coast
They even played original BG in the office: https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/comment/1077355/#Comment_1077355
It was also mentioned in their first BG video.
Playing BG games and looking at how BG 1&2 were getting world recognition (Larian had been started before that happened) doesn't mean they have to adore rtwp.
Think about it: would you prefer their team to attempt an experiment creating BG3 (rtwp) or use all their experience from many years (tb)? I certainly would prefer the latter.