The part that makes me laugh here is that at the end of the day the only thing that truly matters is you’re own personal enjoyment. Why does it matter how many people don’t or do like it on YouTube? I certainly don’t care. The only thing I care about is getting my hands on Baldur’s Gate 3 when it comes out and experiencing for myself what looks to me to be an amazing DND/Baldur’s Gate game in the making. True greatness awaits and none of us should really care what anyone else thinks at the end of the day. If you like it then great! If you don’t like it then that’s a real shame but there are always plenty more fish in the sea and you can move on.
Again, "everyone's biggest concern"? Is it? Who is everyone? Very few are griping about the title.
I wish you guys would just be more honest and say "My concern". You aren't speaking for a large group.
Cuts both ways.
Not really, since the reaction has been overwhelmingly positive among the community of CRPG players.
No. It has been overwhelmingly positive for Larian customers. A good majority are in wait and see.
Overwhelmingly positive would be the reactions Cyber Punk have been getting.
A good majority? Where's the evidence?
Where is yours?
Go ahead, link me the RPGCodex or Reddit threads that claim this is going to be a massive success. The only ones claiming that are those who are die hard DOS fans.
I'll wait.
You already said that the youtube gameplay reveal video has something like a 90% thumbs up ratio. Pretty rare to see anything there with alotta views and that positive of a ratio.
Edit to add: Just checked and it's 12k up vs 1k down. Dunno, would love to see you guys post any kind of empirical evidence of even this basic degree to back up your claims.
Actually it isn’t. It’s rare to see the reverse though.
Let’s pick a game at random that I recently heard about Skull and Bones:
23 Minutes of Gameplay from IGN 9.2k likes to 2.1 dislikes. The main concern with the dislikes is that the game looks soulless, actually reading the comments their is more of a casual pass than excitement, yet it’s likes are still at 90% to 10%.
Cyberpunk 2077 since I mentioned it. Their Deep Dive video released only 6 months ago has over 5.5 million views and a like dislike ratio of 200k to 4k. That’s considered an overwhelming positive reaction IMO.
edited to provide links.
Dunno what to tell you, obviously these things are not scientific, so I'm not saying they're completely dispositive in of themselves. But a >90% like ratio qualifies as overwhelmingly positive in anyone's book. You guys can pretend otherwise, but until I see you demonstrate some evidence of a sizable number of people saying what you're saying, I'm going to keep calling you on conflating your personal tastes with something larger.
If you like it then great! If you don’t like it then that’s a real shame but there are always plenty more fish in the sea and you can move on.
In general I agree. The only problem is that while there are indeed plenty more fish in the sea, there are no Forgotten Realms fish in the sea.
Given how much of a super-fan I am of the Forgotten Realms, saying "move on" is kinda' mean-spirited (though I know you did not mean it that way at all). Just trying to give you a sense of where my feelings come from.
@kanisatha as you have pointed out I can assure you I didn’t mean it in that way and I am sympathetic to your situation as it would really suck for me if I did not like what I was seeing. I’m am just one of the fortunate ones that are ecstatic with what I have seen so far
Example of a game that majorly disappointed me - Sword Coast Legends ?
@kanisatha as you have pointed out I can assure you I didn’t mean it in that way and I am sympathetic to your situation as it would really suck for me if I did not like what I was seeing. I’m am just one of the fortunate ones that are ecstatic with what I have seen so far
Appreciate it.
Yeah ultimately it's an issue of how much I miss the Realms. It is my most beloved fantasy setting by far (and high-fantasy is my most loved genre). But nowadays I don't get to play TT D&D anymore. All the new videogames set in the Realms (SCL, the new Dark Alliance game, and sadly BG3) have ALL been a bust. But most painful of all, WotC even killed the FR novels line leaving me with the likelihood of never getting another FR novel to read (the new Drizzt novels not withstanding). So that's what it is.
Again, "everyone's biggest concern"? Is it? Who is everyone? Very few are griping about the title.
I wish you guys would just be more honest and say "My concern". You aren't speaking for a large group.
Cuts both ways.
Not really, since the reaction has been overwhelmingly positive among the community of CRPG players.
No. It has been overwhelmingly positive for Larian customers. A good majority are in wait and see.
Overwhelmingly positive would be the reactions Cyber Punk have been getting.
A good majority? Where's the evidence?
Where is yours?
Go ahead, link me the RPGCodex or Reddit threads that claim this is going to be a massive success. The only ones claiming that are those who are die hard DOS fans.
I'll wait.
You already said that the youtube gameplay reveal video has something like a 90% thumbs up ratio. Pretty rare to see anything there with alotta views and that positive of a ratio.
Edit to add: Just checked and it's 12k up vs 1k down. Dunno, would love to see you guys post any kind of empirical evidence of even this basic degree to back up your claims.
Actually it isn’t. It’s rare to see the reverse though.
Let’s pick a game at random that I recently heard about Skull and Bones:
23 Minutes of Gameplay from IGN 9.2k likes to 2.1 dislikes. The main concern with the dislikes is that the game looks soulless, actually reading the comments their is more of a casual pass than excitement, yet it’s likes are still at 90% to 10%.
Cyberpunk 2077 since I mentioned it. Their Deep Dive video released only 6 months ago has over 5.5 million views and a like dislike ratio of 200k to 4k. That’s considered an overwhelming positive reaction IMO.
edited to provide links.
Dunno what to tell you, obviously these things are not scientific, so I'm not saying they're completely dispositive in of themselves. But a >90% like ratio qualifies as overwhelmingly positive in anyone's book. You guys can pretend otherwise, but until I see you demonstrate some evidence of a sizable number of people saying what you're saying, I'm going to keep calling you on conflating your personal tastes with something larger.
Awesome.
You now want scientific proof or you're just going to keep calling people out because they don't agree with you.
How about you just stop calling people out for not being excited for this game. Realize that there are actual concerns about the marketing and reveal of this game. Hell the first question from the article Bengoshi posted was about this topic and the people being interviewed deflected. That is concerning. You PERSONALLY may not share those concerns, it doesn't mean they do not exist.
It is you who is conflating your personal tastes. I am still waiting for that link BTW to prove otherwise.
Again, "everyone's biggest concern"? Is it? Who is everyone? Very few are griping about the title.
I wish you guys would just be more honest and say "My concern". You aren't speaking for a large group.
Cuts both ways.
Not really, since the reaction has been overwhelmingly positive among the community of CRPG players.
No. It has been overwhelmingly positive for Larian customers. A good majority are in wait and see.
Overwhelmingly positive would be the reactions Cyber Punk have been getting.
A good majority? Where's the evidence?
Where is yours?
Go ahead, link me the RPGCodex or Reddit threads that claim this is going to be a massive success. The only ones claiming that are those who are die hard DOS fans.
I'll wait.
You already said that the youtube gameplay reveal video has something like a 90% thumbs up ratio. Pretty rare to see anything there with alotta views and that positive of a ratio.
Edit to add: Just checked and it's 12k up vs 1k down. Dunno, would love to see you guys post any kind of empirical evidence of even this basic degree to back up your claims.
Actually it isn’t. It’s rare to see the reverse though.
Let’s pick a game at random that I recently heard about Skull and Bones:
23 Minutes of Gameplay from IGN 9.2k likes to 2.1 dislikes. The main concern with the dislikes is that the game looks soulless, actually reading the comments their is more of a casual pass than excitement, yet it’s likes are still at 90% to 10%.
Cyberpunk 2077 since I mentioned it. Their Deep Dive video released only 6 months ago has over 5.5 million views and a like dislike ratio of 200k to 4k. That’s considered an overwhelming positive reaction IMO.
edited to provide links.
Dunno what to tell you, obviously these things are not scientific, so I'm not saying they're completely dispositive in of themselves. But a >90% like ratio qualifies as overwhelmingly positive in anyone's book. You guys can pretend otherwise, but until I see you demonstrate some evidence of a sizable number of people saying what you're saying, I'm going to keep calling you on conflating your personal tastes with something larger.
Awesome.
You now want scientific proof or you're just going to keep calling people out because they don't agree with you.
How about you just stop calling people out for not being excited for this game. Realize that there are actual concerns about the marketing and reveal of this game. Hell the first question from the article Bengoshi posted was about this topic and the people being interviewed deflected. That is concerning. You PERSONALLY may not share those concerns, it doesn't mean they do not exist.
It is you who is conflating your personal tastes. I am still waiting for that link BTW to prove otherwise.
I'm not calling you out for not liking the game. You guys are claiming to represent some larger or more worthy segment of the fanbase, and there's no evidence for that claim. It's important to note that even if you haven't articulated this directly, your arguments do rely upon this logic.
The irony is that this was very much a tactic used against SoD on its release by certain detractors. It's unfortunate to see the pattern repeating itself, and that's why I think it's worthy to call out the lack of facts supporting it.
There is a small group of BG fans who have expressed extreme disappointment with Larian's project so far. Those are the facts.
Also, just going to post some quotes that show that you have indeed conflated your view with many people's views:
"Everyone’s biggest concern is the title."
"A good majority are in wait and see."
Also useful to add another quote, because it's telling:
"The only people who are, are Larian fans (who are hyped and have blinders on because it is Larian) and Baldur’s Gate fans (who are a mixed bag)."
"Larian fans" can be stereotyped as mindless drones. Even though the OS series greatly outsold their previous titles -- which means most people are more correctly described as "OS fans" not "Larian fans".
"Baldur's Gate fans" are people with actual volition. Again, this is classing certain members of marketplace as more deserving or in some way greater than others. But everyone's money is green. And, imo anyways, the game is much more likely to depend on how it performs with people who weren't hardcore fans of BG than the reverse.
Again, "everyone's biggest concern"? Is it? Who is everyone? Very few are griping about the title.
I wish you guys would just be more honest and say "My concern". You aren't speaking for a large group.
Cuts both ways.
Not really, since the reaction has been overwhelmingly positive among the community of CRPG players.
No. It has been overwhelmingly positive for Larian customers. A good majority are in wait and see.
Overwhelmingly positive would be the reactions Cyber Punk have been getting.
A good majority? Where's the evidence?
Where is yours?
Go ahead, link me the RPGCodex or Reddit threads that claim this is going to be a massive success. The only ones claiming that are those who are die hard DOS fans.
I'll wait.
You already said that the youtube gameplay reveal video has something like a 90% thumbs up ratio. Pretty rare to see anything there with alotta views and that positive of a ratio.
Edit to add: Just checked and it's 12k up vs 1k down. Dunno, would love to see you guys post any kind of empirical evidence of even this basic degree to back up your claims.
Actually it isn’t. It’s rare to see the reverse though.
Let’s pick a game at random that I recently heard about Skull and Bones:
23 Minutes of Gameplay from IGN 9.2k likes to 2.1 dislikes. The main concern with the dislikes is that the game looks soulless, actually reading the comments their is more of a casual pass than excitement, yet it’s likes are still at 90% to 10%.
Cyberpunk 2077 since I mentioned it. Their Deep Dive video released only 6 months ago has over 5.5 million views and a like dislike ratio of 200k to 4k. That’s considered an overwhelming positive reaction IMO.
edited to provide links.
Dunno what to tell you, obviously these things are not scientific, so I'm not saying they're completely dispositive in of themselves. But a >90% like ratio qualifies as overwhelmingly positive in anyone's book. You guys can pretend otherwise, but until I see you demonstrate some evidence of a sizable number of people saying what you're saying, I'm going to keep calling you on conflating your personal tastes with something larger.
Awesome.
You now want scientific proof or you're just going to keep calling people out because they don't agree with you.
How about you just stop calling people out for not being excited for this game. Realize that there are actual concerns about the marketing and reveal of this game. Hell the first question from the article Bengoshi posted was about this topic and the people being interviewed deflected. That is concerning. You PERSONALLY may not share those concerns, it doesn't mean they do not exist.
It is you who is conflating your personal tastes. I am still waiting for that link BTW to prove otherwise.
I'm not calling you out for not liking the game. You guys are claiming to represent some larger or more worthy segment of the fanbase, and there's no evidence for that claim. It's important to note that even if you haven't articulated this directly, your arguments do rely upon this logic.
The irony is that this was very much a tactic used against SoD on its release by certain detractors. It's unfortunate to see the pattern repeating itself, and that's why I think it's worthy to call out the lack of facts supporting it.
There is a small group of BG fans who have expressed extreme disappointment with Larian's project so far. Those are the facts.
No. YOU are claiming that. You are claiming that the reaction has been overly positive when it hasn't been.
YOU are confusing your views and biases with what others think.
YOU are being dismissive and disrespectful of concerns people have. How many people need to raise the issue? How many locked threads does there need to be on Steam for you to say, ok, maybe this is a concern for people? Like seriously. Stop responding to people if your only concern is the semantics of how they address the issue.
YOU still haven't provided me with a link.
edit: and where did you get me not liking the game in the post you quoted? Another issue I have. Putting words in people's mouths. Rampant when it comes to these dismissive posts.
Also, just going to post some quotes that show that you have indeed conflated your view with many people's views:
"Everyone’s biggest concern is the title."
"A good majority are in wait and see."
Also useful to add another quote, because it's telling:
"The only people who are, are Larian fans (who are hyped and have blinders on because it is Larian) and Baldur’s Gate fans (who are a mixed bag)."
"Larian fans" can be stereotyped as mindless drones. Even though the OS series greatly outsold their previous titles -- which means most people are more correctly described as "OS fans" not "Larian fans".
"Baldur's Gate fans" are people with actual volition. Again, this is classing certain members of marketplace as more deserving or in some way greater than others. But everyone's money is green. And, imo anyways, the game is much more likely to depend on how it performs with people who weren't hardcore fans of BG than the reverse.
you are arguing Semantics for you first point.
You are arguing branding for your second. If you don't understand the concept of branding, I am not even going to touch it. You're already wasting enough of my time. But I will say this (AGAIN): Name this anything else but Baldur's Gate 3 and a vast majority of the raised concerns would be gone. That is poor branding management. If you can't grasp that concept, I can't help you.
I've already said that the youtube gameplay video has a >90% upvoting, apparently that didn't qualify for you as "overwhelmingly positive". That indicates you're not willing to be reasonable when presented with some pretty straightforward evidence. Anecdotes (citing a few obscure forum posts) do not trump empirical numbers. Especially numbers in the thousands.
I can go on the Larian forums, find people expressing extreme displeasure, and within seconds of reading, I find the same names as here. That's... not indicative of widespread outrage.
I've already said that the youtube gameplay video has a >90% upvoting, apparently that didn't qualify for you as "overwhelmingly positive". That indicates you're not willing to be reasonable when presented with some pretty straightforward evidence. Anecdotes (citing a few obscure forum posts) do not trump empirical numbers. Especially numbers in the thousands.
No I showed you how that metric wasn't a valuable one in determining if a game is overwhelmingly positive and providing a example how it wasn't comparing upvotes (quantitative) to the comments (qualitative). You dismissed it as not being scientific enough, yet your claims can just sit there as proof.
I can go on the Larian forums, find people expressing extreme displeasure, and within seconds of reading, I find the same names as here. That's... not indicative of widespread outrage.
Awesome. Now go to Steam and go the Reddit and go to the Codex. See if you can match up all the names get out of your little comfort bubble and actually research what you are claiming.
I've already said that the youtube gameplay video has a >90% upvoting, apparently that didn't qualify for you as "overwhelmingly positive". That indicates you're not willing to be reasonable when presented with some pretty straightforward evidence. Anecdotes (citing a few obscure forum posts) do not trump empirical numbers. Especially numbers in the thousands.
No I showed you how that metric wasn't a valuable one in determining if a game is overwhelmingly positive and providing a example how it wasn't comparing upvotes (quantitative) to the comments (qualitative). You dismissed it as not being scientific enough, yet your claims can just sit there as proof.
I didn't dismiss it as not being scientific enough, I merely said it wasn't ever going to be dispositive in of itself. We're not going to get anything scientific in this regard. However, I don't think a handful of forum posts is evidence of widespread outrage. And again, you've used phrases like "the majority of BG fans are wait and see". There isn't any evidence to back that up. Rather than rely on this non-falsifiable argument from authority, I just ask that you say "My concern", "What I don't like".
There's no evidence that the people who bought the BG games over the years are majority "wait and see" as you stated. Secondly, and more importantly, there's no evidence that BG fans deserve to be catered to more than "Larian fans" you've derided. In fact, for BG3, its sales depend a lot more on attracting OS fans than BG fans -- OS sales far outstrip BG sales. The gaming market is different today than it was around 2000.
So I think this underlying assumption that BG fans need to have their tastes satisfied to a greater degree than other consumers, it's just not in evidence for me, even if it could be proven. And it hasn't been proven that most of them are deeply skeptical of this game so far. It's also continuing to reinforce the idea that some consumers have more value than others.
I've already said that the youtube gameplay video has a >90% upvoting, apparently that didn't qualify for you as "overwhelmingly positive". That indicates you're not willing to be reasonable when presented with some pretty straightforward evidence. Anecdotes (citing a few obscure forum posts) do not trump empirical numbers. Especially numbers in the thousands.
No I showed you how that metric wasn't a valuable one in determining if a game is overwhelmingly positive and providing a example how it wasn't comparing upvotes (quantitative) to the comments (qualitative). You dismissed it as not being scientific enough, yet your claims can just sit there as proof.
I didn't dismiss it as not being scientific enough, I merely said it wasn't ever going to be dispositive in of itself. We're not going to get anything scientific in this regard. However, I don't think a handful of forum posts is evidence of widespread outrage. And again, you've used phrases like "the majority of BG fans are wait and see". There isn't any evidence to back that up. Rather than rely on this non-falsifiable argument from authority, I just ask that you say "My concern", "What I don't like".
There's no evidence that the people who bought the BG games over the years are majority "wait and see" as you stated. Secondly, and more importantly, there's no evidence that BG fans deserve to be catered to more than "Larian fans" you've derided. In fact, for BG3, its sales depend a lot more on attracting OS fans than BG fans -- OS sales far outstrip BG sales. The gaming market is different today than it was around 2000.
So I think this underlying assumption that BG fans need to have their tastes satisfied to a greater degree than other consumers, it's just not in evidence for me, even if it could be proven. And it hasn't been proven that most of them are deeply skeptical of this game so far. It's also continuing to reinforce the idea that some consumers have more value than others.
Once again. Putting words in my mouth:
"wide spread outrage" does not equal "some concerns."
I didn't say "a majority of Baldur's Gate Fans are wait and see" I said, lets see here:
Again, "everyone's biggest concern"? Is it? Who is everyone? Very few are griping about the title.
I wish you guys would just be more honest and say "My concern". You aren't speaking for a large group.
Cuts both ways.
Not really, since the reaction has been overwhelmingly positive among the community of CRPG players.
No. It has been overwhelmingly positive for Larian customers. A good majority are in wait and see.
Overwhelmingly positive would be the reactions Cyber Punk have been getting.
A good majority of CRPG players are in wait and see mode. (because I was responding to your claim that the reaction has been overwhelming positive. Then I gave you an example of what I thought overwhelmingly positive was (Cyberpunk) then expanded that reasoning a few posts later.
And once again, you have no grasp of branding so I am not going to readdress this point for the umpteenth time about the difference between catering to "BG fans" and "Larian Fans."
I should probably write a more positive defense of Larian rather than just tut tutting the critics. So here's the basic facts as I see them.
Larian made two hugely successful isometric, party-based, strategic combat RPG's. The two most commercially successful entries into the genre of the current generation. Critically successful as well. Games that borrow heavily from elements in the IE games.
It might not be your cup of tea, but that took a lot of work. And a lot of other studios with talented staffs were trying to do the same thing in these years, and no one succeeded as well as Larian. And Larian had no built-in advantages. It was not a well known studio prior to OS. The Divinity setting wasn't well known either. And it was definitely not at all known for making this particular subgenre of game. It didn't have a major publisher or marketing campaign. The success of the game spread organically, pretty much exclusively because of player and reviewer praise.
Because of all that hard work, they've been awarded the rights to make the BG3 sequel. Most of the work of making video games isn't fun, that's why you have to pay people to do it. Since they're the ones who know how to make an isometric, party-based, strategic combat CRPG in this era, I think they deserve some amount of deference in their design decisions. They, after all, know what the market wants more than we do. They know what their team can do well better than we do. As well, they're the ones who will suffer for making a low quality product. We can theorycraft about what would help or not help BG3, but we have no serious investment in its outcome. Our future employment doesn't depend on this title, for example.
At the end of the day if your game studio cannot produce games that are commercially successful, your game studio will not produce games for very long. Some companies take that logic too far, and cynically make games as a cashgrab. So far, this does not appear like a cashgrab product. Larian could make an action RPG instead or an MMO, and probably be in line for much larger sales numbers. This is still a title in a relatively niche genre.
"A good majority of CRPG players are in wait and see mode."
Glad you've clarified this. There's still no evidence for this. This is probably the most anticipated title in this subgenre. A good thing is we'll find out very shortly what these numbers are with early access.
Comparing this to a title like Cyberpunk is just unfair. Action RPG's outsell tactical RPG's by quite a factor in today's world. And, it's worth noting that Larian could have pursued such a game instead of opting to work on something that unlikely to ever have action RPG level sales.
I should probably write a more positive defense of Larian rather than just tut tutting the critics. So here's the basic facts as I see them.
Larian made two hugely successful isometric, party-based, strategic combat RPG's. The two most commercially successful entries into the genre of the current generation. Critically successful as well. Games that borrow heavily from elements in the IE games.
It might not be your cup of tea, but that took a lot of work. And a lot of other studios with talented staffs were trying to do the same thing in these years, and no one succeeded as well as Larian. And Larian had no built-in advantages. It was not a well known studio prior to OS. The Divinity setting wasn't well known either. And it was definitely not at all known for making this particular subgenre of game. It didn't have a major publisher or marketing campaign. The success of the game spread organically, pretty much exclusively because of player and reviewer praise.
Because of all that hard work, they've been awarded the rights to make the BG3 sequel. Most of the work of making video games isn't fun, that's why you have to pay people to do it. Since they're the ones who know how to make an isometric, party-based, strategic combat CRPG in this era, I think they deserve some amount of deference in their design decisions. They, after all, know what the market wants more than we do. They know what their team can do well better than we do. As well, they're the ones who will suffer for making a low quality product. We can theorycraft about what would help or not help BG3, but we have no serious investment in its outcome. Our future employment doesn't depend on this title, for example.
At the end of the day if your game studio cannot produce games that are commercially successful, your game studio will not produce games for very long. Some companies take that logic too far, and cynically make games as a cashgrab. So far, this does not appear like a cashgrab product. Larian could make an action RPG instead or an MMO, and probably be in line for much larger sales numbers. This is still a title in a relatively niche genre.
Awesome. No one has claimed Larian can't make an amazing D&D game. I already said, if you give this another name, you have the possibility to have another legendary title in D&D games like the Baldur's Gate series or the Neverwinter Nights series. They are claiming that this game isn't in the spirit of Baldur's Gate.
Fans of the series have waited 20 years for another full stand alone game similar to what they experienced with the original games. We can wait for a studio like Owlcat or Obsidian (both of which have produced commercially successful games) to fine tune their RtwP engine and use it to make a 5e D&D game centring around the aftermath of Throne of Bhaal (100, 200, 500 years later depending on when the timeline happens) even if it takes another 5 to 10 years to do so. That has now been ripped away, because why?
What sort of aftermath in 1490s DR to events in 1369 DR do we expect?
Regardless of what the game's called, what sort of follow up does anyone expect to a completed story?
I've been a fan of the series for 20 years and I feel dramatically out of the loop for this expectation.
Unfortunately, Murder in Baldur's Gate took the Bhaalspawn out of the story.
Also unfortunately, Bhaal's resurrected as of Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide.
Which situation in the Baldur's Gate games 20 years ago needs resolving over a century later in in-game time?
good questions. I am not the one releasing Baldur's Gate 3 though so I don't have the answers. Larian, according to their latest news letter have tied in legendary characters from the first two games in the series so it's wait and see time.
I can speculate such as the player character kills Bhaal again (the lord of murder shall perish) "but in his doom he shall spawn a score of mortal progeny, chaos will be sown by their passage," would be a very nice tie to the originals that could be worked off of.
I'm not sure it was so much deflected as your expectation of what BG3 is may differ from what others expect.
My own disagreement is with people extrapolating their demands into "this game will fail if my demands go unmet."
No, it was straight up deflection. They were asked specifically, "there's been a rather vocal portion of Baldur's Gate fans who didn't feel like this looked like a true sequel. What can you say to assuage their fears that this is actually a Divinity: Original Sin game in disguise?"
They were asked what can they say to encourage players that this is indeed a sequel to Baldur's Gate. Larian did not answer this question.
"Matt Holland: Well, there's a few things to that. At Larian, for a very long time, we've been trying to emulate a pen and paper experience and bring it to video games. I think it's just that. If people think it looks like Divinity, it's because we're trying to make that tabletop experience that D&D, well, is."
Nowhere is Baldur's Gate or the game being a sequel mentioned. They just said that the game looks like Divinity because they are making a D&D game. They never denied that it was just more divinity with a D&D skin. "If people think it looks like Divinity, it's because we're trying to make that tabletop experience that D&D, well, is." So Larian seems to think that Divinity is, for whatever reasons, more D&D than Baldur's Gate.
No, it was straight up deflection. They were asked specifically, "there's been a rather vocal portion of Baldur's Gate fans who didn't feel like this looked like a true sequel. What can you say to assuage their fears that this is actually a Divinity: Original Sin game in disguise?"
They were asked what can they say to encourage players that this is indeed a sequel to Baldur's Gate. Larian did not answer this question.
He said it's D&D. What is it that people expect from BG3 that goes beyond it being a CRPG using D&D rules? The original story is finished, and WotC's published 5e materials killed off the Bhaalspawn and brought back Bhaal. Seeing some of the characters? Okay, that's fine. But what are you looking for here? Reassurance that they'll do what a notional Bioware would have done with a third installment? That's impossible. The entire "true sequel" expectation is extremely nebulous, and I'd say at this point outright meaningless.
No, it was straight up deflection. They were asked specifically, "there's been a rather vocal portion of Baldur's Gate fans who didn't feel like this looked like a true sequel. What can you say to assuage their fears that this is actually a Divinity: Original Sin game in disguise?"
They were asked what can they say to encourage players that this is indeed a sequel to Baldur's Gate. Larian did not answer this question.
He said it's D&D. What is it that people expect from BG3 that goes beyond it being a CRPG using D&D rules? The original story is finished, and WotC's published 5e materials killed off the Bhaalspawn and brought back Bhaal. Seeing some of the characters? Okay, that's fine. But what are you looking for here? Reassurance that they'll do what a notional Bioware would have done with a third installment? That's impossible. The entire "true sequel" expectation is extremely nebulous, and I'd say at this point outright meaningless.
Not to mention that some fans expectations of what needs to be in a sequel is going to clash with other fans expectations. There was some interview that Julius posted where Vincke responded to a question about older fans, and Vincke said "can they be satisfied?" I get some critics here will be put off by that. But to me that means he truly gets it. There is no pleasing the fanbase because there is no consensus about what they want. Might as well just make the game you think will be good in 2020.
I should probably write a more positive defense of Larian rather than just tut tutting the critics. So here's the basic facts as I see them.
Larian made two hugely successful isometric, party-based, strategic combat RPG's. The two most commercially successful entries into the genre of the current generation. Critically successful as well. Games that borrow heavily from elements in the IE games.
It might not be your cup of tea, but that took a lot of work. And a lot of other studios with talented staffs were trying to do the same thing in these years, and no one succeeded as well as Larian. And Larian had no built-in advantages. It was not a well known studio prior to OS. The Divinity setting wasn't well known either. And it was definitely not at all known for making this particular subgenre of game. It didn't have a major publisher or marketing campaign. The success of the game spread organically, pretty much exclusively because of player and reviewer praise.
Because of all that hard work, they've been awarded the rights to make the BG3 sequel. Most of the work of making video games isn't fun, that's why you have to pay people to do it. Since they're the ones who know how to make an isometric, party-based, strategic combat CRPG in this era, I think they deserve some amount of deference in their design decisions. They, after all, know what the market wants more than we do. They know what their team can do well better than we do. As well, they're the ones who will suffer for making a low quality product. We can theorycraft about what would help or not help BG3, but we have no serious investment in its outcome. Our future employment doesn't depend on this title, for example.
At the end of the day if your game studio cannot produce games that are commercially successful, your game studio will not produce games for very long. Some companies take that logic too far, and cynically make games as a cashgrab. So far, this does not appear like a cashgrab product. Larian could make an action RPG instead or an MMO, and probably be in line for much larger sales numbers. This is still a title in a relatively niche genre.
Awesome. No one has claimed Larian can't make an amazing D&D game. I already said, if you give this another name, you have the possibility to have another legendary title in D&D games like the Baldur's Gate series or the Neverwinter Nights series. They are claiming that this game isn't in the spirit of Baldur's Gate.
Fans of the series have waited 20 years for another full stand alone game similar to what they experienced with the original games. We can wait for a studio like Owlcat or Obsidian (both of which have produced commercially successful games) to fine tune their RtwP engine and use it to make a 5e D&D game centring around the aftermath of Throne of Bhaal (100, 200, 500 years later depending on when the timeline happens) even if it takes another 5 to 10 years to do so. That has now been ripped away, because why?
It's been ripped away in part because Owlcat released a truly buggy and often unplayable game at launch. Something that is far more deserving of criticism as being a bad, cynical move by a developer than anything Larian has done. To cite just one example.
No, it was straight up deflection. They were asked specifically, "there's been a rather vocal portion of Baldur's Gate fans who didn't feel like this looked like a true sequel. What can you say to assuage their fears that this is actually a Divinity: Original Sin game in disguise?"
They were asked what can they say to encourage players that this is indeed a sequel to Baldur's Gate. Larian did not answer this question.
He said it's D&D. What is it that people expect from BG3 that goes beyond it being a CRPG using D&D rules? The original story is finished, and WotC's published 5e materials killed off the Bhaalspawn and brought back Bhaal. Seeing some of the characters? Okay, that's fine. But what are you looking for here? Reassurance that they'll do what a notional Bioware would have done with a third installment? That's impossible. The entire "true sequel" expectation is extremely nebulous, and I'd say at this point outright meaningless.
Great, thanks for finally agreeing. Calling this Baldur's Gate 3 is meaningless.
I should probably write a more positive defense of Larian rather than just tut tutting the critics. So here's the basic facts as I see them.
Larian made two hugely successful isometric, party-based, strategic combat RPG's. The two most commercially successful entries into the genre of the current generation. Critically successful as well. Games that borrow heavily from elements in the IE games.
It might not be your cup of tea, but that took a lot of work. And a lot of other studios with talented staffs were trying to do the same thing in these years, and no one succeeded as well as Larian. And Larian had no built-in advantages. It was not a well known studio prior to OS. The Divinity setting wasn't well known either. And it was definitely not at all known for making this particular subgenre of game. It didn't have a major publisher or marketing campaign. The success of the game spread organically, pretty much exclusively because of player and reviewer praise.
Because of all that hard work, they've been awarded the rights to make the BG3 sequel. Most of the work of making video games isn't fun, that's why you have to pay people to do it. Since they're the ones who know how to make an isometric, party-based, strategic combat CRPG in this era, I think they deserve some amount of deference in their design decisions. They, after all, know what the market wants more than we do. They know what their team can do well better than we do. As well, they're the ones who will suffer for making a low quality product. We can theorycraft about what would help or not help BG3, but we have no serious investment in its outcome. Our future employment doesn't depend on this title, for example.
At the end of the day if your game studio cannot produce games that are commercially successful, your game studio will not produce games for very long. Some companies take that logic too far, and cynically make games as a cashgrab. So far, this does not appear like a cashgrab product. Larian could make an action RPG instead or an MMO, and probably be in line for much larger sales numbers. This is still a title in a relatively niche genre.
Awesome. No one has claimed Larian can't make an amazing D&D game. I already said, if you give this another name, you have the possibility to have another legendary title in D&D games like the Baldur's Gate series or the Neverwinter Nights series. They are claiming that this game isn't in the spirit of Baldur's Gate.
Fans of the series have waited 20 years for another full stand alone game similar to what they experienced with the original games. We can wait for a studio like Owlcat or Obsidian (both of which have produced commercially successful games) to fine tune their RtwP engine and use it to make a 5e D&D game centring around the aftermath of Throne of Bhaal (100, 200, 500 years later depending on when the timeline happens) even if it takes another 5 to 10 years to do so. That has now been ripped away, because why?
It's been ripped away in part because Owlcat released a truly buggy and often unplayable game at launch. Something that is far more deserving of criticism as being a bad, cynical move by a developer than anything Larian has done. To cite just one example.
Awesome. So glad Larian's first game was a masterpiece with zero issues.
I am so glad you also ignored the 'why now' part of the post and not 5 years time when a RtwP engine can use the 5e (or even 6e if it takes that long) ruleset.
Awesome deflection. Maybe you should start giving interviews for Larian.
edit: And if you two still can't clue in: THIS SHOULD NOT BE A SEQUEL BUT IT'S OWN GAME.
I'll take a flawed BG3 in the hand over a perfect BG3 in the bush any day.
The further and further we get from BG2, the less likely it is that the sequel would resemble the predecessors, and the less likely it might get made at all.
Let me just add, since you're getting mighty personal, I'm under no obligation to respond to every point you make in your posts. Just as Larian is not obligated to name the games that they earned the rights to according to your tastes.
I'll take a flawed BG3 in the hand over a perfect BG3 in the bush any day.
The further and further we get from BG2, the less likely it is that the sequel would resemble the predecessors, and the less likely it might get made at all.
Let me just add, since you're getting mighty personal, I'm under no obligation to respond to every point you make in your posts. Just as Larian is not obligated to name the games that they earned the rights to according to your tastes.
Well enjoy your flawed BG3 then. Hopefully the hype you've consumed doesn't let you down too hard.
Comments
Dunno what to tell you, obviously these things are not scientific, so I'm not saying they're completely dispositive in of themselves. But a >90% like ratio qualifies as overwhelmingly positive in anyone's book. You guys can pretend otherwise, but until I see you demonstrate some evidence of a sizable number of people saying what you're saying, I'm going to keep calling you on conflating your personal tastes with something larger.
Given how much of a super-fan I am of the Forgotten Realms, saying "move on" is kinda' mean-spirited (though I know you did not mean it that way at all). Just trying to give you a sense of where my feelings come from.
Example of a game that majorly disappointed me - Sword Coast Legends ?
Yeah ultimately it's an issue of how much I miss the Realms. It is my most beloved fantasy setting by far (and high-fantasy is my most loved genre). But nowadays I don't get to play TT D&D anymore. All the new videogames set in the Realms (SCL, the new Dark Alliance game, and sadly BG3) have ALL been a bust. But most painful of all, WotC even killed the FR novels line leaving me with the likelihood of never getting another FR novel to read (the new Drizzt novels not withstanding). So that's what it is.
Awesome.
You now want scientific proof or you're just going to keep calling people out because they don't agree with you.
How about you just stop calling people out for not being excited for this game. Realize that there are actual concerns about the marketing and reveal of this game. Hell the first question from the article Bengoshi posted was about this topic and the people being interviewed deflected. That is concerning. You PERSONALLY may not share those concerns, it doesn't mean they do not exist.
It is you who is conflating your personal tastes. I am still waiting for that link BTW to prove otherwise.
My own disagreement is with people extrapolating their demands into "this game will fail if my demands go unmet."
I'm not calling you out for not liking the game. You guys are claiming to represent some larger or more worthy segment of the fanbase, and there's no evidence for that claim. It's important to note that even if you haven't articulated this directly, your arguments do rely upon this logic.
The irony is that this was very much a tactic used against SoD on its release by certain detractors. It's unfortunate to see the pattern repeating itself, and that's why I think it's worthy to call out the lack of facts supporting it.
There is a small group of BG fans who have expressed extreme disappointment with Larian's project so far. Those are the facts.
"Everyone’s biggest concern is the title."
"A good majority are in wait and see."
Also useful to add another quote, because it's telling:
"The only people who are, are Larian fans (who are hyped and have blinders on because it is Larian) and Baldur’s Gate fans (who are a mixed bag)."
"Larian fans" can be stereotyped as mindless drones. Even though the OS series greatly outsold their previous titles -- which means most people are more correctly described as "OS fans" not "Larian fans".
"Baldur's Gate fans" are people with actual volition. Again, this is classing certain members of marketplace as more deserving or in some way greater than others. But everyone's money is green. And, imo anyways, the game is much more likely to depend on how it performs with people who weren't hardcore fans of BG than the reverse.
No. YOU are claiming that. You are claiming that the reaction has been overly positive when it hasn't been.
YOU are confusing your views and biases with what others think.
YOU are being dismissive and disrespectful of concerns people have. How many people need to raise the issue? How many locked threads does there need to be on Steam for you to say, ok, maybe this is a concern for people? Like seriously. Stop responding to people if your only concern is the semantics of how they address the issue.
YOU still haven't provided me with a link.
edit: and where did you get me not liking the game in the post you quoted? Another issue I have. Putting words in people's mouths. Rampant when it comes to these dismissive posts.
you are arguing Semantics for you first point.
You are arguing branding for your second. If you don't understand the concept of branding, I am not even going to touch it. You're already wasting enough of my time. But I will say this (AGAIN): Name this anything else but Baldur's Gate 3 and a vast majority of the raised concerns would be gone. That is poor branding management. If you can't grasp that concept, I can't help you.
No I showed you how that metric wasn't a valuable one in determining if a game is overwhelmingly positive and providing a example how it wasn't comparing upvotes (quantitative) to the comments (qualitative). You dismissed it as not being scientific enough, yet your claims can just sit there as proof.
Awesome. Now go to Steam and go the Reddit and go to the Codex. See if you can match up all the names get out of your little comfort bubble and actually research what you are claiming.
I didn't dismiss it as not being scientific enough, I merely said it wasn't ever going to be dispositive in of itself. We're not going to get anything scientific in this regard. However, I don't think a handful of forum posts is evidence of widespread outrage. And again, you've used phrases like "the majority of BG fans are wait and see". There isn't any evidence to back that up. Rather than rely on this non-falsifiable argument from authority, I just ask that you say "My concern", "What I don't like".
There's no evidence that the people who bought the BG games over the years are majority "wait and see" as you stated. Secondly, and more importantly, there's no evidence that BG fans deserve to be catered to more than "Larian fans" you've derided. In fact, for BG3, its sales depend a lot more on attracting OS fans than BG fans -- OS sales far outstrip BG sales. The gaming market is different today than it was around 2000.
So I think this underlying assumption that BG fans need to have their tastes satisfied to a greater degree than other consumers, it's just not in evidence for me, even if it could be proven. And it hasn't been proven that most of them are deeply skeptical of this game so far. It's also continuing to reinforce the idea that some consumers have more value than others.
Once again. Putting words in my mouth:
"wide spread outrage" does not equal "some concerns."
I didn't say "a majority of Baldur's Gate Fans are wait and see" I said, lets see here:
A good majority of CRPG players are in wait and see mode. (because I was responding to your claim that the reaction has been overwhelming positive. Then I gave you an example of what I thought overwhelmingly positive was (Cyberpunk) then expanded that reasoning a few posts later.
And once again, you have no grasp of branding so I am not going to readdress this point for the umpteenth time about the difference between catering to "BG fans" and "Larian Fans."
Larian made two hugely successful isometric, party-based, strategic combat RPG's. The two most commercially successful entries into the genre of the current generation. Critically successful as well. Games that borrow heavily from elements in the IE games.
It might not be your cup of tea, but that took a lot of work. And a lot of other studios with talented staffs were trying to do the same thing in these years, and no one succeeded as well as Larian. And Larian had no built-in advantages. It was not a well known studio prior to OS. The Divinity setting wasn't well known either. And it was definitely not at all known for making this particular subgenre of game. It didn't have a major publisher or marketing campaign. The success of the game spread organically, pretty much exclusively because of player and reviewer praise.
Because of all that hard work, they've been awarded the rights to make the BG3 sequel. Most of the work of making video games isn't fun, that's why you have to pay people to do it. Since they're the ones who know how to make an isometric, party-based, strategic combat CRPG in this era, I think they deserve some amount of deference in their design decisions. They, after all, know what the market wants more than we do. They know what their team can do well better than we do. As well, they're the ones who will suffer for making a low quality product. We can theorycraft about what would help or not help BG3, but we have no serious investment in its outcome. Our future employment doesn't depend on this title, for example.
At the end of the day if your game studio cannot produce games that are commercially successful, your game studio will not produce games for very long. Some companies take that logic too far, and cynically make games as a cashgrab. So far, this does not appear like a cashgrab product. Larian could make an action RPG instead or an MMO, and probably be in line for much larger sales numbers. This is still a title in a relatively niche genre.
Glad you've clarified this. There's still no evidence for this. This is probably the most anticipated title in this subgenre. A good thing is we'll find out very shortly what these numbers are with early access.
Comparing this to a title like Cyberpunk is just unfair. Action RPG's outsell tactical RPG's by quite a factor in today's world. And, it's worth noting that Larian could have pursued such a game instead of opting to work on something that unlikely to ever have action RPG level sales.
Awesome. No one has claimed Larian can't make an amazing D&D game. I already said, if you give this another name, you have the possibility to have another legendary title in D&D games like the Baldur's Gate series or the Neverwinter Nights series. They are claiming that this game isn't in the spirit of Baldur's Gate.
Fans of the series have waited 20 years for another full stand alone game similar to what they experienced with the original games. We can wait for a studio like Owlcat or Obsidian (both of which have produced commercially successful games) to fine tune their RtwP engine and use it to make a 5e D&D game centring around the aftermath of Throne of Bhaal (100, 200, 500 years later depending on when the timeline happens) even if it takes another 5 to 10 years to do so. That has now been ripped away, because why?
Regardless of what the game's called, what sort of follow up does anyone expect to a completed story?
I've been a fan of the series for 20 years and I feel dramatically out of the loop for this expectation.
Unfortunately, Murder in Baldur's Gate took the Bhaalspawn out of the story.
Also unfortunately, Bhaal's resurrected as of Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide.
Which situation in the Baldur's Gate games 20 years ago needs resolving over a century later in in-game time?
good questions. I am not the one releasing Baldur's Gate 3 though so I don't have the answers. Larian, according to their latest news letter have tied in legendary characters from the first two games in the series so it's wait and see time.
I can speculate such as the player character kills Bhaal again (the lord of murder shall perish) "but in his doom he shall spawn a score of mortal progeny, chaos will be sown by their passage," would be a very nice tie to the originals that could be worked off of.
No, it was straight up deflection. They were asked specifically, "there's been a rather vocal portion of Baldur's Gate fans who didn't feel like this looked like a true sequel. What can you say to assuage their fears that this is actually a Divinity: Original Sin game in disguise?"
They were asked what can they say to encourage players that this is indeed a sequel to Baldur's Gate. Larian did not answer this question.
"Matt Holland: Well, there's a few things to that. At Larian, for a very long time, we've been trying to emulate a pen and paper experience and bring it to video games. I think it's just that. If people think it looks like Divinity, it's because we're trying to make that tabletop experience that D&D, well, is."
Nowhere is Baldur's Gate or the game being a sequel mentioned. They just said that the game looks like Divinity because they are making a D&D game. They never denied that it was just more divinity with a D&D skin. "If people think it looks like Divinity, it's because we're trying to make that tabletop experience that D&D, well, is." So Larian seems to think that Divinity is, for whatever reasons, more D&D than Baldur's Gate.
He said it's D&D. What is it that people expect from BG3 that goes beyond it being a CRPG using D&D rules? The original story is finished, and WotC's published 5e materials killed off the Bhaalspawn and brought back Bhaal. Seeing some of the characters? Okay, that's fine. But what are you looking for here? Reassurance that they'll do what a notional Bioware would have done with a third installment? That's impossible. The entire "true sequel" expectation is extremely nebulous, and I'd say at this point outright meaningless.
Not to mention that some fans expectations of what needs to be in a sequel is going to clash with other fans expectations. There was some interview that Julius posted where Vincke responded to a question about older fans, and Vincke said "can they be satisfied?" I get some critics here will be put off by that. But to me that means he truly gets it. There is no pleasing the fanbase because there is no consensus about what they want. Might as well just make the game you think will be good in 2020.
It's been ripped away in part because Owlcat released a truly buggy and often unplayable game at launch. Something that is far more deserving of criticism as being a bad, cynical move by a developer than anything Larian has done. To cite just one example.
Great, thanks for finally agreeing. Calling this Baldur's Gate 3 is meaningless.
It's a D&D game using a reworked divinity engine.
Awesome. So glad Larian's first game was a masterpiece with zero issues.
I am so glad you also ignored the 'why now' part of the post and not 5 years time when a RtwP engine can use the 5e (or even 6e if it takes that long) ruleset.
Awesome deflection. Maybe you should start giving interviews for Larian.
edit: And if you two still can't clue in: THIS SHOULD NOT BE A SEQUEL BUT IT'S OWN GAME.
The further and further we get from BG2, the less likely it is that the sequel would resemble the predecessors, and the less likely it might get made at all.
Let me just add, since you're getting mighty personal, I'm under no obligation to respond to every point you make in your posts. Just as Larian is not obligated to name the games that they earned the rights to according to your tastes.
Well enjoy your flawed BG3 then. Hopefully the hype you've consumed doesn't let you down too hard.