Thanks. My reactions to the one about the leveling.
“That’s actually been one of the things that we’ve been struggling with, because it’s a very slow leveling process in the books,” he says. As D&D players will know, gaining ten or 12 levels on the tabletop is a journey that could last weeks, but for a videogame, it’s “not a lot.”
Uh oh. Totally disagree here, I like having each level be significant and count, and not dinging all the time.
Nevertheless, Larian is making a D&D game. Therefore: “We wanted to stick to it. ...
Thank god.
So we’re figuring out ways of letting you still feel that you’re progressing in a meaningful manner, but in a videogame manner.”
Hmm. I am curious, but I have doubts about how that would turn out. What way could that be? Constantly getting new items? I hope not. Other permanent boni? Does not seem fit D&D either.
I must say, I am a bit annoyed how he keeps continuing that things from the past games do not work in video games. Did he even like them?
Yeah, I don't like that either. He keeps mentioning things that need to be changed for a good videogame, but these things were there for BG series and they worked out quite well. After each interview, I feel more like he's making another Divinity game under Baldur's Gate title. It might work out well for them, but will definitely only get hatred from me.
Yeah, I don't like that either. He keeps mentioning things that need to be changed for a good videogame, but these things were there for BG series and they worked out quite well. After each interview, I feel more like he's making another Divinity game under Baldur's Gate title. It might work out well for them, but will definitely only get hatred from me.
Yeah if that's all this turns out to be, I guess being genuinely angry would be perhaps taking it too hard, but I'd be bitter and disappointed and not really happy with Larian no matter how unfair that might be. When they made their own games, fine, but to take Baldur's Gate 3 and ruin it for me, I wouldn't care how other people think of it, just how let down I am that a game with that name is a game I don't even want to play.
Yeah, I don't like that either. He keeps mentioning things that need to be changed for a good videogame, but these things were there for BG series and they worked out quite well. After each interview, I feel more like he's making another Divinity game under Baldur's Gate title. It might work out well for them, but will definitely only get hatred from me.
I won't get angry at it either, I did not expect any sequel to Baldur's Gate in the first place, and even if it turns out to be bad it won't affect my enjoyment of the first two games, given that the story of CHARNAME was concluded in ToB. I survived Ultima 9 and Gothic 3, both of which were not only disappointing games but also managed to screw up being the story to a meaningful conclusion in line with the previous games
The only remaining concern for me would be that it is a commercial success, but goes into a direction I do not like at all (in terms of gameplay), and the all other studios follow the new trend. But even that's life.
The only remaining concern for me would be that it is a commercial success, but goes into a direction I do not like at all (in terms of gameplay), and the all other studios follow the new trend. But even that's life.
Based on commercial trends, I really hold a position that most people like bad, and thats why I won't accept the popularity argument when it comes to discussions on the quality of things, because really, Twilight was popular, 50 Shades was popular, Micheal Bay movies are popular. It's so easy to show how little popularity has anything to do with quality that there's no consistency to it as an argument.
Baldur's Gate III will pick up immediately after Descent Into Avernus, and the Descent Into Avernus publication will serve as a primer for fans interested in what has happened in the 100 years between Baldur's Gate II and Baldur's Gate III. Fans familiar with the original Baldur's Gate games may be surprised to learn that the city has survived two cataclysmic events - the Spellplague and the Sundering - both of which were used to explained D&D's gradual transition from 2nd Edition (the rules that Baldur's Gate and Baldur's Gate II use) and the Fifth Edition rules that will serve as the foundation of Baldur's Gate III. As the story is initially set in Baldur's Gate, Descent Into Avernus should also provide details about the city and may explain what has happened to some of the many characters of the original Baldur's Gate games (many of whom are surprisingly still alive after 100 years.)
Baldur's Gate: Descent Into Avernus will be released on September 17, 2019. No release date has been announced for Baldur's Gate III.
I'll be completely fine if Larian makes this game based on their own understanding of what a good RPG, a good DnD (and most importantly, a good 5E DnD) game should be, how it should be played, etc, if they create this game not looking back at what BioWare did 20 years ago, not looking back at how things worked in the video game interpretations of 2E and 3E.
Actually, once I started to use this approach, a lot of questions about mechanics and gameplay stopped being that important to me, be it a TB/RtwP argument, levelling, misses, etc. Mechanics and gameplay will be what they consider the best for a good 5E DnD videogame.
Of course, they won't be blind to classic BG games in terms of adventuring, party play, stories, - all that.
I'll be completely fine if Larian makes this game based on their own understanding of what a good RPG, a good DnD (and most importantly, a good 5E DnD) game should be.
That's fine, but based on past evidence they're not going to make a good game in my estimation, I think their understanding is kind of lacking in a lot of ways.
“That’s actually been one of the things that we’ve been struggling with, because it’s a very slow leveling process in the books,” he says. As D&D players will know, gaining ten or 12 levels on the tabletop is a journey that could last weeks, but for a videogame, it’s “not a lot.”
Nevertheless, Larian is making a D&D game. Therefore: “We wanted to stick to it. So we’re figuring out ways of letting you still feel that you’re progressing in a meaningful manner, but in a videogame manner.”
Does this mean showering the player with magical loot and a constant grind to upgrade equipment?
What else could you do to make players feel "progression"? There's only XP levels and equipment.
Magic items in BG feel special and magical, while in most modern games upgrading gear feels as special as taking out the trash or washing dishes. DOS2 is guilty of that as well. You find some "legendary" level 9 sword, and after 30 minutes of playing you have to upgrade it to some level 11 basic item. The compulsive need to put more GAME in the game makes everything feel bland. Sometimes less is more.
Magic items in BG feel special and magical, while in most modern games upgrading gear feels as special as taking out the trash or washing dishes. DOS2 is guilty of that as well.
Let's not forget that special unique piece of armor that a boss drops...
...which is absolutely useless and not special at all because you've spent so many hours grinding and upgrading your vanillla armor is now god-tier.
@Sjerrie Yeah pretty much the same info again. I’m definitely betting on it being turn based now. I just got the impression by the way they talk about it that it will be.
I have to keep reminding myself that this game won't take place in the city of Amn. When a lot of players hear the words Baldurs Gate they think of II so the city of Amn comes to mind. I'm just happy to be back in Faerun after playing so many fantasy games that are heavily inspired by BG.
I think when Swen says something doesn't work in a video game, it's code for "it doesn't fit the sensibilities of the overwhelming majority of gamers today." Larian is pretty much stuck between a rock and a hard place creating a game that the fans of old-school CRPGs will scrutinize with a microscope, but which is also an AAA(ish) game that needs to sell well to people who have never played or seen a CRPG before and are coming to it with a completely different mindset.
And I hate to say it, but since the latter group likely makes up the majority of their target audience, I'm pretty doubtful that they will create a game with us veterans in mind. Call me a pessimist, but I've seen it happen over and over—it's the Elder Scrolls situation—once big money enters a franchise, the games are going to start reducing in complexity.
Or dare I say they're going to start getting... dumbed... down?
I think when Swen says something doesn't work in a video game, it's code for "it doesn't fit the sensibilities of the overwhelming majority of gamers today." Larian is pretty much stuck between a rock and a hard place creating a game that the fans of old-school CRPGs will scrutinize with a microscope, but which is also an AAA(ish) game that needs to sell well to people who have never played or seen a CRPG before and are coming to it with a completely different mindset.
And I hate to say it, but since the latter group likely makes up the majority of their target audience, I'm pretty doubtful that they will create a game with us veterans in mind. Call me a pessimist, but I've seen it happen over and over—it's the Elder Scrolls situation—once big money enters a franchise, the games are going to start reducing in complexity.
Or dare I say they're going to start getting... dumbed... down?
Pretty much what I said in another thread. People keep forgetting this is a AAA game, and that makes it a completely different type of RPG than the very niche games we're comparing it with.
I think when Swen says something doesn't work in a video game, it's code for "it doesn't fit the sensibilities of the overwhelming majority of gamers today." Larian is pretty much stuck between a rock and a hard place creating a game that the fans of old-school CRPGs will scrutinize with a microscope, but which is also an AAA(ish) game that needs to sell well to people who have never played or seen a CRPG before and are coming to it with a completely different mindset.
And I hate to say it, but since the latter group likely makes up the majority of their target audience, I'm pretty doubtful that they will create a game with us veterans in mind. Call me a pessimist, but I've seen it happen over and over—it's the Elder Scrolls situation—once big money enters a franchise, the games are going to start reducing in complexity.
Or dare I say they're going to start getting... dumbed... down?
Pretty much what I said in another thread. People keep forgetting this is a AAA game, and that makes it a completely different type of RPG than the very niche games we're comparing it with.
Well, Baldur's Gate was AAA, but I get what you're saying. Times are different now, and so are AAA audiences.
I think when Swen says something doesn't work in a video game, it's code for "it doesn't fit the sensibilities of the overwhelming majority of gamers today." Larian is pretty much stuck between a rock and a hard place creating a game that the fans of old-school CRPGs will scrutinize with a microscope, but which is also an AAA(ish) game that needs to sell well to people who have never played or seen a CRPG before and are coming to it with a completely different mindset.
And I hate to say it, but since the latter group likely makes up the majority of their target audience, I'm pretty doubtful that they will create a game with us veterans in mind. Call me a pessimist, but I've seen it happen over and over—it's the Elder Scrolls situation—once big money enters a franchise, the games are going to start reducing in complexity.
Or dare I say they're going to start getting... dumbed... down?
Pretty much what I said in another thread. People keep forgetting this is a AAA game, and that makes it a completely different type of RPG than the very niche games we're comparing it with.
Well, Baldur's Gate was AAA, but I get what you're saying. Times are different now, and so are AAA audiences.
I don't know if BG qualified as AAA, even relative to that time-frame. 1998 BioWare was a tiny studio with rather limited resources.
I think when Swen says something doesn't work in a video game, it's code for "it doesn't fit the sensibilities of the overwhelming majority of gamers today." Larian is pretty much stuck between a rock and a hard place creating a game that the fans of old-school CRPGs will scrutinize with a microscope, but which is also an AAA(ish) game that needs to sell well to people who have never played or seen a CRPG before and are coming to it with a completely different mindset.
And I hate to say it, but since the latter group likely makes up the majority of their target audience, I'm pretty doubtful that they will create a game with us veterans in mind. Call me a pessimist, but I've seen it happen over and over—it's the Elder Scrolls situation—once big money enters a franchise, the games are going to start reducing in complexity.
Or dare I say they're going to start getting... dumbed... down?
Pretty much what I said in another thread. People keep forgetting this is a AAA game, and that makes it a completely different type of RPG than the very niche games we're comparing it with.
Well, Baldur's Gate was AAA, but I get what you're saying. Times are different now, and so are AAA audiences.
I don't know if BG qualified as AAA, even relative to that time-frame. 1998 BioWare was a tiny studio with rather limited resources.
BG1 was definitely one of the largest PC releases of its year. It was that, Star Craft, and Half Life. PC games didn't really get any bigger back then.
But if we want to get more specific, Wikipedia defines an AAA game as one released by a mid-size or major publisher. That's still not too specific, but I think Black Isle definitely qualified as at least mid-size. Granted, AAA didn't mean much back then as there was not much of an indie game industry to contrast it with.
Comments
Of course... any cult with a modicum of self respect uses robes with highly mystical significant symbols... but we're getting off topic here
welll it's not my fault i suck at them and find the battles to slow.
https://comicbook.com/gaming/2019/06/11/baldurs-gate-iii-dungeons-and-dragons-descent-into-avernus/
https://www.pcgamesn.com/baldurs-gate-3/dungeons-and-dragons-6th-edition
https://www.pcgamesn.com/baldurs-gate-3/leveling-system
https://www.escapistmagazine.com/v2/2019/06/11/baldurs-gate-iii-interview-from-divinity-to-baldurs-gate/
Thanks. My reactions to the one about the leveling.
Uh oh. Totally disagree here, I like having each level be significant and count, and not dinging all the time.
Thank god.
Hmm. I am curious, but I have doubts about how that would turn out. What way could that be? Constantly getting new items? I hope not. Other permanent boni? Does not seem fit D&D either.
I must say, I am a bit annoyed how he keeps continuing that things from the past games do not work in video games. Did he even like them?
Yeah if that's all this turns out to be, I guess being genuinely angry would be perhaps taking it too hard, but I'd be bitter and disappointed and not really happy with Larian no matter how unfair that might be. When they made their own games, fine, but to take Baldur's Gate 3 and ruin it for me, I wouldn't care how other people think of it, just how let down I am that a game with that name is a game I don't even want to play.
Based on commercial trends, I really hold a position that most people like bad, and thats why I won't accept the popularity argument when it comes to discussions on the quality of things, because really, Twilight was popular, 50 Shades was popular, Micheal Bay movies are popular. It's so easy to show how little popularity has anything to do with quality that there's no consistency to it as an argument.
Actually, once I started to use this approach, a lot of questions about mechanics and gameplay stopped being that important to me, be it a TB/RtwP argument, levelling, misses, etc. Mechanics and gameplay will be what they consider the best for a good 5E DnD videogame.
Of course, they won't be blind to classic BG games in terms of adventuring, party play, stories, - all that.
That's fine, but based on past evidence they're not going to make a good game in my estimation, I think their understanding is kind of lacking in a lot of ways.
Does this mean showering the player with magical loot and a constant grind to upgrade equipment?
What else could you do to make players feel "progression"? There's only XP levels and equipment.
Magic items in BG feel special and magical, while in most modern games upgrading gear feels as special as taking out the trash or washing dishes. DOS2 is guilty of that as well. You find some "legendary" level 9 sword, and after 30 minutes of playing you have to upgrade it to some level 11 basic item. The compulsive need to put more GAME in the game makes everything feel bland. Sometimes less is more.
Let's not forget that special unique piece of armor that a boss drops...
...which is absolutely useless and not special at all because you've spent so many hours grinding and upgrading your vanillla armor is now god-tier.
New interview stream in around 50 minutes.
And I hate to say it, but since the latter group likely makes up the majority of their target audience, I'm pretty doubtful that they will create a game with us veterans in mind. Call me a pessimist, but I've seen it happen over and over—it's the Elder Scrolls situation—once big money enters a franchise, the games are going to start reducing in complexity.
Or dare I say they're going to start getting... dumbed... down?
Pretty much what I said in another thread. People keep forgetting this is a AAA game, and that makes it a completely different type of RPG than the very niche games we're comparing it with.
Well, Baldur's Gate was AAA, but I get what you're saying. Times are different now, and so are AAA audiences.
I don't know if BG qualified as AAA, even relative to that time-frame. 1998 BioWare was a tiny studio with rather limited resources.
BG1 was definitely one of the largest PC releases of its year. It was that, Star Craft, and Half Life. PC games didn't really get any bigger back then.
But if we want to get more specific, Wikipedia defines an AAA game as one released by a mid-size or major publisher. That's still not too specific, but I think Black Isle definitely qualified as at least mid-size. Granted, AAA didn't mean much back then as there was not much of an indie game industry to contrast it with.
Do we get more XP killing him, listening or using a permanent silence spell on him?