Minsc is super absurd too, although I dont recall a character like him beforehand. Points for originality? He's still absurd.
Minsc is a dumber Don Quixote. As well the endearingly chivalrous but low intelligence sidekick isn't anything new. The "gentle giant" trope. It's very well-tread territory. It's also not bad. But it is cliche seeming at a superficial level, exactly the kind of level folks are using to write off BG3 characters.
Even with Minsc, we get a deeper look into him than just his jokiness. We see him slide into more uncertainty with Dynaheir's death. You can see him clinging more quickly to anyone that can provide that missing emotional support. Keldorn and Aerie being the standouts.
I think maybe the larger difference is not so much in the characters being stereotypes - some of Baldur's Gate 1 characters are definitely stereotypes.
The difference for me is that all the BG 3 characters seem to be stereotypes of epic archetypes. Sure, Alora is your typical halfling thief and Edwin is the stereotypical power-hungry wizard.
But Edwin's doesn't have a Sphere of Annihilation implanted. It's the combination of stereotypes and epicness that makes BG 3hard to swallow for me.
Minsc is sort of a wacky stereotype, but he is -storywise- still just a pretty random ranger with some brain damage.
the main thing is 5th edition has epc levels at around 20 instead of 40. so to us oldies these characters don't seem to fit a low level adventure they seem like they should be in the 12 range.
I'm on the side that BG1 were very stereotypical and exaggerated characters. To me the reason BG1 manages to pull them off despite this is likely how shallow they were -- just a handful of lines and interactions. Had the BG1 characters had more content, like we more or less expect from companions these days, I think they would have been seen in a much, much less favourable light.
Another thing here is that I believe that many, or at least some, of the characters were based on old RPG characters of the developers (I know that at least Minsc were). The stereotypes that they embody are very common among tabletop players. They're archetypes that people in general tend to want to play. With BG1's shallow implementation you get the "self-insert" effect on them (except instead of a "self-" it's a "character-I-like-insert"). This keeps them from grating on you like a very stereotypical but more involved NPC would be.
edit: Oh, and I forgot the relevant part -- I'm not too worried about the NPCs besides maybe Vampire Boi, though Shadowheart's name is of course ridiculous. It's hard to expect companions to be immediately unique and not stereotypical in some way. In fact I think it's the drive to be unique that leads to pretentiousness such as "Shadowheart".
Minsc is super absurd too, although I dont recall a character like him beforehand. Points for originality? He's still absurd.
Minsc is a dumber Don Quixote. As well the endearingly chivalrous but low intelligence sidekick isn't anything new. The "gentle giant" trope. It's very well-tread territory. It's also not bad. But it is cliche seeming at a superficial level, exactly the kind of level folks are using to write off BG3 characters.
Even with Minsc, we get a deeper look into him than just his jokiness. We see him slide into more uncertainty with Dynaheir's death. You can see him clinging more quickly to anyone that can provide that missing emotional support. Keldorn and Aerie being the standouts.
I think maybe the larger difference is not so much in the characters being stereotypes - some of Baldur's Gate 1 characters are definitely stereotypes.
The difference for me is that all the BG 3 characters seem to be stereotypes of epic archetypes. Sure, Alora is your typical halfling thief and Edwin is the stereotypical power-hungry wizard.
But Edwin's doesn't have a Sphere of Annihilation implanted. It's the combination of stereotypes and epicness that makes BG 3hard to swallow for me.
Minsc is sort of a wacky stereotype, but he is -storywise- still just a pretty random ranger with some brain damage.
I think this is a reasonable complaint. I also dont love the epicness necessarily. It doesnt really seem plausible to me that a goddess would give a mission of incredible importance to a level 1 cleric.
That said, from a narrative perspective - it makes sense to put the character into that position before the game starts rather than after the game starts (since you dont have unlimited narrative real-estate to include all of that information during the game itself).
the main thing is 5th edition has epc levels at around 20 instead of 40. so to us oldies these characters don't seem to fit a low level adventure they seem like they should be in the 12 range.
Another design decision in 5e that I despise. To say nothing of how they gutted the lore, character depth, how their new rules break established worlds, etc.
The download on GOG in 66 GB. If that is the size of Act 1 (which is all we are getting for the moment), then this game is going to be absolutely massive, even compared to Original Sin II, which is already quite large in scope.
The download on GOG in 66 GB. If that is the size of Act 1 (which is all we are getting for the moment), then this game is going to be absolutely massive, even compared to Original Sin II, which is already quite large in scope.
Most probably the game is fully or almost fully downloaded then locked by software to Act I. The objective of an early access like this is to find bugs/glitches and test gameplay with your target group, not allow the player to play the game to the end
The download on GOG in 66 GB. If that is the size of Act 1 (which is all we are getting for the moment), then this game is going to be absolutely massive, even compared to Original Sin II, which is already quite large in scope.
Most probably the game is fully or almost fully downloaded then locked by software to Act I. The objective of an early access like this is to find bugs/glitches and test gameplay with your target group, not allow the player to play the game to the end
I'm surprised I didn't think of this before. But it makes sense. Its a not an uncommon practice.
The download on GOG in 66 GB. If that is the size of Act 1 (which is all we are getting for the moment), then this game is going to be absolutely massive, even compared to Original Sin II, which is already quite large in scope.
Most probably the game is fully or almost fully downloaded then locked by software to Act I. The objective of an early access like this is to find bugs/glitches and test gameplay with your target group, not allow the player to play the game to the end
I'm surprised I didn't think of this before. But it makes sense. Its a not an uncommon practice.
Didnt Diablo 2 do this waaaaaaaay back in the day? Or was it they had their first expansion technically on the CD? Something like that.
Didnt Diablo 2 do this waaaaaaaay back in the day? Or was it they had their first expansion technically on the CD? Something like that.
Diablo 1 had a spawn installation that would allow you to play in multiplayer with only 1 copy. I think D2 required multiple copies. IIRC we juggled the Play CD around to start the game on every computer to play in LAN
For those playing so far: Is Early Access worth $60, or am I waiting for a full release (and potentially a "we're releasing for real!" sale)? I... kinda don't have room in the budget at this exact moment.
@Pokota honestly It’s not a full game and has many bugs and issues at the moment as expected with an early access game so if you are on a budget and are not certain that it’s a purchase you want to make I would recommend waiting as this is a game that still needs a lot of work.
I am having a blast so far and really enjoying it, and have no regret about buying it in early access. It does appear that there is a decent amount of content from the get go but even then they have said that save files might go missing every time they update. I’ve already had one of my saved games just disappear lol
It does appear that there is a decent amount of content from the get go but even then they have said that save files might go missing every time they update. I’ve already had one of my saved games just disappear lol
Ok the disappearing/incompatible save games is a major deterrent for me, even without other factors in consideration.
Manually copying the save files to another folder would prevent them from disappearing, but of course that will not help with potential savefile/patch incompatibilities.
Manually copying the save files to another folder would prevent them from disappearing, but of course that will not help with potential savefile/patch incompatibilities.
You could put steam into offline mode to prevent any updates from happening and just play the current state of the game.
Why is everything so camp? Every NPC you talk to feels like Nicolas Cage at his worst. This isn't something that just feels like an early access thing, either. The writing is so primitive.
For those playing so far: Is Early Access worth $60, or am I waiting for a full release (and potentially a "we're releasing for real!" sale)? I... kinda don't have room in the budget at this exact moment.
After seven hours of playing my personal opinion is that:
Is the game worth it? Yeah, It´s great so far, and it´s improving.
Is the EA worth it for 60$? Uh... I´ll wait if I were you for that price =P
There are many things still in the making and the game is not very stable nor optimized (As expected for an EA)
So, now that (some) MP issues are fixed there´s a trick if you want to play with more than one custom character from the beginning
Open the game directory (browse local files on Steam), open the bin folder, launch the game from the exe as admin. You can do this 4 times so you are running the game in multiple windows. Start a LAN game with one and join with the others. Create a character in each, venture forth, and close all of the BG3 windows except the host.
This will be a proper feature by launch so you won’t need to jump through all of these hoops.
I'm trying to stop watching early access YouTube videos. The game looks amazing. I could see myself in character creation for days. Is it just me or has Baldurs Gate, just gone mainstream? There are so many people hopping on the band wagon right now. Some YouTubers clearly don't have a clear about BG or forgotten realms (one was referring to Drow, as Drough)...but everyone is impressed. I've even started seeing d&d adverts on YouTube telling the clueless masses what d&d is. Normally I feel it's new Vs old school gamers, but for once we might both be happy.
It´s happening with D&D 5e in general in the past years. It´s very popular right now in a wide amount of social groups.
If you add to that a legendary name like Baldur´s gate you create a tremendous impact.
I do not see that like something potentially bad. More public, more adventures and books. Also, I kinda like it for personal reasons.
My little second cousin came some time ago and asked me about D&D because of the streamers, Stranger things, etc. First I give some pointers to him and his friends, now they´re using D&D beyond features and playing their own campaigns online, have an r20 and Foundry account and stuff like that.
Same as when after playing BG and NWN or VTM: bloodlines I asked my uncle about the tabletop games they`re based on.
It´s kind of nice that different generations have something in common to talk to when we have a family reunion.
They want to ban RPGs from family celebrations or send us to eat with the dog outside, tho XD. I do not mind. I bet the dog would make a terrific tarrasque.
Comments
I think maybe the larger difference is not so much in the characters being stereotypes - some of Baldur's Gate 1 characters are definitely stereotypes.
The difference for me is that all the BG 3 characters seem to be stereotypes of epic archetypes. Sure, Alora is your typical halfling thief and Edwin is the stereotypical power-hungry wizard.
But Edwin's doesn't have a Sphere of Annihilation implanted. It's the combination of stereotypes and epicness that makes BG 3hard to swallow for me.
Minsc is sort of a wacky stereotype, but he is -storywise- still just a pretty random ranger with some brain damage.
Another thing here is that I believe that many, or at least some, of the characters were based on old RPG characters of the developers (I know that at least Minsc were). The stereotypes that they embody are very common among tabletop players. They're archetypes that people in general tend to want to play. With BG1's shallow implementation you get the "self-insert" effect on them (except instead of a "self-" it's a "character-I-like-insert"). This keeps them from grating on you like a very stereotypical but more involved NPC would be.
edit: Oh, and I forgot the relevant part -- I'm not too worried about the NPCs besides maybe Vampire Boi, though Shadowheart's name is of course ridiculous. It's hard to expect companions to be immediately unique and not stereotypical in some way. In fact I think it's the drive to be unique that leads to pretentiousness such as "Shadowheart".
I think this is a reasonable complaint. I also dont love the epicness necessarily. It doesnt really seem plausible to me that a goddess would give a mission of incredible importance to a level 1 cleric.
That said, from a narrative perspective - it makes sense to put the character into that position before the game starts rather than after the game starts (since you dont have unlimited narrative real-estate to include all of that information during the game itself).
Another design decision in 5e that I despise. To say nothing of how they gutted the lore, character depth, how their new rules break established worlds, etc.
Congratulations to Larian and WotC on launching Baldur's Gate 3 to Early Access!?
We can't wait to embark on a new journey in the Sword Coast!??⚔️
~ Beamdog Team, 10.06.2020
No problems in GOG so far. Did anyone try Stadia?
New story, you mean. "Baldur's Gate has new stories to tell" makes more sense.
Most probably the game is fully or almost fully downloaded then locked by software to Act I. The objective of an early access like this is to find bugs/glitches and test gameplay with your target group, not allow the player to play the game to the end
I'm surprised I didn't think of this before. But it makes sense. Its a not an uncommon practice.
Didnt Diablo 2 do this waaaaaaaay back in the day? Or was it they had their first expansion technically on the CD? Something like that.
Diablo 1 had a spawn installation that would allow you to play in multiplayer with only 1 copy. I think D2 required multiple copies. IIRC we juggled the Play CD around to start the game on every computer to play in LAN
I am having a blast so far and really enjoying it, and have no regret about buying it in early access. It does appear that there is a decent amount of content from the get go but even then they have said that save files might go missing every time they update. I’ve already had one of my saved games just disappear lol
Manually copying the save files to another folder would prevent them from disappearing, but of course that will not help with potential savefile/patch incompatibilities.
There is a Beamdog joke in this post somewhere, but I’ll save it.
You could put steam into offline mode to prevent any updates from happening and just play the current state of the game.
After seven hours of playing my personal opinion is that:
Is the game worth it? Yeah, It´s great so far, and it´s improving.
Is the EA worth it for 60$? Uh... I´ll wait if I were you for that price =P
There are many things still in the making and the game is not very stable nor optimized (As expected for an EA)
Open the game directory (browse local files on Steam), open the bin folder, launch the game from the exe as admin. You can do this 4 times so you are running the game in multiple windows. Start a LAN game with one and join with the others. Create a character in each, venture forth, and close all of the BG3 windows except the host.
This will be a proper feature by launch so you won’t need to jump through all of these hoops.
If you add to that a legendary name like Baldur´s gate you create a tremendous impact.
I do not see that like something potentially bad. More public, more adventures and books. Also, I kinda like it for personal reasons.
My little second cousin came some time ago and asked me about D&D because of the streamers, Stranger things, etc. First I give some pointers to him and his friends, now they´re using D&D beyond features and playing their own campaigns online, have an r20 and Foundry account and stuff like that.
Same as when after playing BG and NWN or VTM: bloodlines I asked my uncle about the tabletop games they`re based on.
It´s kind of nice that different generations have something in common to talk to when we have a family reunion.
They want to ban RPGs from family celebrations or send us to eat with the dog outside, tho XD. I do not mind. I bet the dog would make a terrific tarrasque.