Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

Dark Dreams of Furiae - a new module for NWN:EE! Buy now
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

BG3: Yay or Nay?

13468919

Comments

  • O_BruceO_Bruce Member Posts: 2,761
    Yay!
    It's almost like people had different points of view or something...
    ?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia.giphy.com%2Fmedia%2Fd2YVk2ZRuQuqvVlu%2Fgiphy.gif&f=1

    hybridialAdulPokota
  • SorcererV1ct0rSorcererV1ct0r Member Posts: 1,882
    edited June 2019
    Nay!
    As a side note - I have a theory, based on in anecdotal observation on these forums and a few others. Those that are "nays" in this thread are more likely to be people who also have a dim view of the new Star Wars movies. They're also likely to be people who think that Skyrim was worse than Oblivion and Morrowind. That Fallout 4 was awful, fallout 3 was "ehh" and that Fallout NV is the only one that holds a candle to 1&2. They'll hate D3. They probably found Dark Souls 2 to be the worst in that franchise as well.

    Let me see.

    1 - New star wars movie are awful and the MC is a Mary Sue
    2 - Skyrim offers less depth, less options, and less immersion than Morrowind
    3 - Fallout new vegas has the best gun mechanics and dialog mechanics
    4 - Diablo 3 is awful by a lot of reasons, monks with big and sharp axes to use unarmed attacks to name one
    5 - DArk Souls 2 receive a lot of undeserving hate.

    Will explain. They criticize the swarm bossed of DkS 2 do like Skeleton Lords, but the 3 has too and in a much gimmicky way, they criticize the linearity, but 3 is far more linear. DkS 2 has some problems, ADP and soul memory, but is far better than DkS 3. And has the best NG+ and PvP of the series.


    But the NAh is because

    Larien doesn't make games similar to BG in any way
    BG has and story that already ended.

    Post edited by SorcererV1ct0r on
  • KamigoroshiKamigoroshi Member Posts: 5,602
    edited June 2019
    Yay!
    I'd wager that any thrown stone versus Noober's great-grandchild will be accompanied with carefully detailed game engine physics. Or maybe even a cinematic clip. At this point, I'd throw in even the birth of the Mindboggling Flayer (aka Nooberlithid) into the mix. R.I.P my nerves...

    Voila: the perfect grimdark horror RPG!

    AdulSjerriebyrne20BallpointMan
  • SjerrieSjerrie Member Posts: 1,096
    @Kamigoroshi I'll await judgment on "BG3", but I can already appreciate the Nooberlithid.

    AdulBallpointMan
  • AdulAdul Member Posts: 1,989
    edited June 2019
    Some parts of this discussion are starting to resemble that really weird phenomenon I've been seeing all over social media where people go into prolonged vitriolic arguments over each other's tastes and opinions regarding various media properties, and sometimes even form politically infused tribal groups over those opinions. It reinforces my faith in humanity every time I see it.

    BelgarathMTHPokota
  • DinoDinDinoDin Member Posts: 703
    Yay!
    hybridial wrote: »
    DinoDin wrote: »
    It's fine to not personally like the Souls series or the OS series. No one is saying you have to enjoy them. But people should be able to point out that it's a weak argument to claim these games have low quality in any objective sense. Overwhelming acclaim and subsequent copycat titles is evidence!

    Copycat titles happen because that's how the market works, there's a demand for something these other guys did, so lets jump on that instead of making anything different.

    And sure, they can claim its a weak argument, I'd call them wrong and if they want to have an actual debate, we can, but this isn't really the place for it, and there is a point where I have done these arguments with people and am sick of it, and honestly I only brought it up because I wanted to be illustrative of this point;

    Was something liked by a lot of people: this is an objective observation based on clear stats.

    Did something do well with critics: also an observable fact

    Was it good: subjective, with everyone who ever played it having their own thinking of why it was good, or why it isn't; and nobody is going to just lie down and roll over because their viewpoint isn't the popular one, but you know, you're pointing it out because your arrogant enough to think they should. Yeah, sorry but no. And once again, I've been playing games since the mid 90s; I have absolutely no respect for the Games journalists of today, they don't represent me, and they are at worst dishonest and corrupt, at best, do the job for a living with no real passion or understanding for games design; and that part isn't even directly relevant either but it does demonstrate what "universal critical acclaim" in this context means to me. Not a lot. And I could say a lot more on the state of games now in general, but yeah I will stop there.

    I just feel like if the people who are looking forward to BG3 want to understand more why some of us are more cynical about it, they need to be understanding of how our thinking is different and how just because something did well doesn't mean we think its good. because we are clearly coming at it from a different angle.

    Implicit in much of this argument is a kind of extreme subjectivity about games. The logical endpoint of this view is that there is no way to talk about games except personal experience. That means that no one can really say a game "sucks". Just that it wasn't fun to you.

    If we can't have some kind of metric, external to our subjective experiences, we can't have a discussion about game quality. If you can't plant any mutually observable markers for me, well, it's literally impossible for me to "be understanding" of your thinking.

    byrne20Sjerrie
  • hybridialhybridial Member Posts: 179
    Nay!
    DinoDin wrote: »
    If we can't have some kind of metric, external to our subjective experiences, we can't have a discussion about game quality. If you can't plant any mutually observable markers for me, well, it's literally impossible for me to "be understanding" of your thinking.

    In some cases there isn't, because I just won't accept a mutual reality in which Dark Souls is considered good, there's just far too much obviously wrong with it to me for that my only conclusion is people liked this really badly designed, ugly, sloppy unfinished game because they have a masochistic streak and enjoy their patience being tried than their skills being tested, and then they wear it as some kind of badge of honour they can hold above others because supposedly the game's hard. I know some people like the story or whatever, I don't know about that, its not going to be something I consider when the experience of the game itself is so negative.

    And I do hate the fact that people do like it. So on the subject of that game, yeah you might not like discussing this one with me, and I've been through it all multiple times with people I know and who know me more and where I come from.

  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 20,504
    Yay!
    How is it a legacy game-related, this is what I'm wondering. 2 weeks ago we didn't know there would be a BGIII. All previous mentions about intents to create one (which date back to early 2000), with the last mention in an article from 2012 about Beamdog, didn't meet that level of negativity the current announcement is getting.

    All of a sudden, everything about it seems wrong to so many players. This is not about changes to legacy games. This is about a new game. The only connection is the title and the same area (world).

    How can it be "an echo-chamber bubble on this project" if the game was announced several days ago?

  • kanisathakanisatha Member Posts: 839
    Nay!
    All those old stories were just that: stories. This is real. That's why it is different. When something is a possibility, is hypothetical, people don't care that much. They care when it becomes real.

    KamigoroshiThacoBell
  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 20,504
    Yay!
    Ok, and then I have another question: did you see the real gameplay yet to judge? Right now everything game-related is hypothetical.

  • kanisathakanisatha Member Posts: 839
    edited June 2019
    Nay!
    And by the way, I am actually one of those people who WANTS something NEW. You know how long I have campaigned here in these forums for Beamdog to create a NEW IP game. I WANT a new D&D game that uses the current edition, is set in the current timeline, that has modern graphics that will look awesome on my 4K display, modern UIs, modern game systems, and yes making changes to rules as necessary to fit a video game because they are making a video game and NOT a tabletop simulator. I want all of these things; just not in a game called BG3. I have zero nostalgia for 2e, or even 3.5e, for the clunky old IE-style UIs and look, and for anything less than 4K graphics.

    Lotti
  • AdulAdul Member Posts: 1,989
    How is it a legacy game-related, this is what I'm wondering. 2 weeks ago we didn't know there would be a BGIII. All previous mentions about intents to create one (which date back to early 2000), with the last mention in an article from 2012 about Beamdog, didn't meet that level of negativity the current announcement is getting.

    All of a sudden, everything about it seems wrong to so many players. This is not about changes to legacy games. This is about a new game. The only connection is the title and the same area (world).

    How can it be "an echo-chamber bubble on this project" if the game was announced several days ago?

    I'd wager it's an exposure thing. With this iteration of BG3, we've had a game announcement, a teaser trailer shown at an expo, and a few interviews and update videos being released and referenced in articles in the span of a couple of days. That's quite the marketing event. That will reach a hell of a lot more people than some vague rumors or mentions of BG3 possibly being considered by someone. The wider internet outside of a few superfans now have access to the news of BG3 being in production, and that draws with it the concerns, speculations and ire of a lot of people who are doubtful of the prospects of the game or the ability of the developer.

    ThacoBellPokota
  • SorcererV1ct0rSorcererV1ct0r Member Posts: 1,882
    Nay!
    Imagine that by some reason, there are 2 decades since the last good soccer game and now, an company decided to make an soccer game, the company is famous for making an basketball game that some soccer fans liked and some disliked. The highest guy on that company openly says that an mechanic present on "soccer game 1/2" and on handball game doesn't work on a video game. Do you think that soccer game fans will not be concerned?

    [Deleted User]ArdanisSjerrie
  • DinoDinDinoDin Member Posts: 703
    Yay!
    kanisatha wrote: »
    And by the way, I am actually one of those people who WANTS something NEW. You know how long I have campaigned here in these forums for Beamdog do create a NEW IP game. I WANT a new D&D game that use the current edition, is set in the current timeline, that has modern graphics that will look awesome on my 4K display, modern UIs, modern game systems, and yes making changes rules as necessary to fit a video game because they are making a video game and NOT a tabletop simulator. I want all of these things; just not in a game called BG3. I have zero nostalgia for 2e, or even 3.5e, for the clunky old IE-style UIs and look, and for anything less than 4K graphics.

    So you can't be happy getting 85% of what you want? It has to be 100?

  • kanisathakanisatha Member Posts: 839
    Nay!
    Ok, and then I have another question: did you see the real gameplay yet to judge? Right now everything game-related is hypothetical.

    People aren't going to feel a need to wait. The game has been announced. It is real. It is happening. That's all people (and I mean only the hardcore fans of the original BG games and the D:OS games) need to know to start postulating about what might be.

  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 10,596
    Nay!
    Ok, and then I have another question: did you see the real gameplay yet to judge? Right now everything game-related is hypothetical.

    Larian has also confirmed that this game will have nothing to do with the Bhaalspawn, or the actual stories that BG was the focus of BG. With the so-called sequel having so nothing to do with the previous entries is extremely disrespectful of the brand. Especially since the games seem to be completely ignored in favor of P&P modules and canon. Its disrespectful and dishonest to call whatever this game is "BG3". It wouldn't matter if the gameplay is the best ever if there is no respoect shown to the series this game is supposed to be a part of.

    megamike15Ravenslight
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited June 2019
    Nay!
    The user and all related content has been deleted.

  • hybridialhybridial Member Posts: 179
    Nay!
    kanisatha wrote: »
    I have zero nostalgia for 2e, or even 3.5e, for the clunky old IE-style UIs and look, and for anything less than 4K graphics.

    This might make for a more interesting discussion, because I feel very different from you, and I feel it for a very unusual reason, I think.

    I don't think 4K state of the art graphics today look good. Why don't I? I think its because as game graphics become more advanced, their failings become far more obvious. I did see a video on the subject of rasterisation and the process of raytracing that made it all make sense to me. Right now these games can try to look lifelike, but they cannot 100% succeed. This is basically the uncanny valley, things like light not behaving realistically, animation not being fluid enough, textures looking flat, popup in the horizon, everything that no matter how good a game looks right now, it cannot hide, and it cannot address. And to me, yeah you spent all that money on the graphics and I just find them offputting because I find them excessive and ultimately failing to even look good. Going with some of the old school ways of rendering graphics leads to less realism but far more immersive aesthetics, and since such games don't have huge budgets they could be sold for less anyway leading to potentially better game experiences in terms of raw gameplay and storytelling. This is why I want BG3 to be a 2D background based isometric game. Its why I wish Cyberpunk 2077 was basically that. I do feel more than anything out of sync entirely with the AAA games market, which isn't too surprising, I'm completely out of sync with the summer blockbuster movie market too for a lot of similar reasons.



    Grond0Sjerrie
  • BallpointManBallpointMan Member Posts: 1,044
    Yay!
    A small preface: Can we maybe stop repeating ourselves? These topics are getting challenging to keep up with when posters are constantly repeating themselves.

    Whose fault is that?? Why is Larian holding back such really basic information? What are they afraid of? Why don't they just rip off the band-aid, announce it's going to be turn-based, and let the reaction be whatever the reaction is going to be? .

    It is the fault of whomever is jumping to conclusions about information they don't have.

    byrne20DinoDin
  • DinoDinDinoDin Member Posts: 703
    Yay!
    I'm not a fan of Skyrim, but I disagree about the origins of its controls. If you ever played the predecessors, especially if you played the first TES game, you'll see it's a pretty direct descendant. The actions of combat are nearly identical.

    A lot else changed, for sure, especially the leveling/progression system. But swiping your mouse in a slashing motion is exactly what you did in TES:Arena.

    semiticgod
  • BelgarathMTHBelgarathMTH Member Posts: 5,536
    @DinoDin , In Skyrim, you can't even bring up important menus by clicking on the screen. You have to press a key. And I didn't attack in Morrowind by swiping, I used my left mouse button.

  • kanisathakanisatha Member Posts: 839
    Nay!
    hybridial wrote: »
    kanisatha wrote: »
    I have zero nostalgia for 2e, or even 3.5e, for the clunky old IE-style UIs and look, and for anything less than 4K graphics.

    This might make for a more interesting discussion, because I feel very different from you, and I feel it for a very unusual reason, I think.

    I don't think 4K state of the art graphics today look good. Why don't I? I think its because as game graphics become more advanced, their failings become far more obvious. I did see a video on the subject of rasterisation and the process of raytracing that made it all make sense to me. Right now these games can try to look lifelike, but they cannot 100% succeed. This is basically the uncanny valley, things like light not behaving realistically, animation not being fluid enough, textures looking flat, popup in the horizon, everything that no matter how good a game looks right now, it cannot hide, and it cannot address. And to me, yeah you spent all that money on the graphics and I just find them offputting because I find them excessive and ultimately failing to even look good. Going with some of the old school ways of rendering graphics leads to less realism but far more immersive aesthetics, and since such games don't have huge budgets they could be sold for less anyway leading to potentially better game experiences in terms of raw gameplay and storytelling. This is why I want BG3 to be a 2D background based isometric game. Its why I wish Cyberpunk 2077 was basically that. I do feel more than anything out of sync entirely with the AAA games market, which isn't too surprising, I'm completely out of sync with the summer blockbuster movie market too for a lot of similar reasons.

    Fair enough, and yes I also enjoy these kinds of civil discussions. :)

    Re. 4K displays, all I know is that Yennefer (from Witcher 3) looks fantastic on my display. :wink:

    Sjerrie
  • SorcererV1ct0rSorcererV1ct0r Member Posts: 1,882
    Nay!
    (...)
    That means it has to be playable with a console controller, and that will influence everything in the game design from the top down. Every AAA game I've played in at least the last 10 years has shown the console influence of its design in the PC version. (...) , much as I would like to, because the PC keyboard controls were so clunky I found the discomfort of control prevented me from getting the least bit immersed into the actual gam

    Even Dragon Age Origins? BioWare did right on DA:O, only dumbed down the console version controlls and combat depth. About skyrim, try skyui and countless of mods. Skyrim is a bad game but is a good modding sandbox tool.

  • Nay!
    The user and all related content has been deleted.

    ThacoBellArdanis
  • SkipBittmanSkipBittman Member Posts: 146
    Yay!
    ThacoBell wrote: »

    Larian has also confirmed that this game will have nothing to do with the Bhaalspawn, or the actual stories that BG was the focus of BG.

    Nobody has said anything remotely similar to that. No need to twist his words.

  • BallpointManBallpointMan Member Posts: 1,044
    Yay!

    "Whose fault is it that I don't have this really basic information?"

    "Your fault, for not having the information"

    .

    I did not say that, please don't misquote me or put words in my mouth.

    It is not your fault for not having information. You bear 100% responsibility for any reactions or conclusions you (or anyone. Including myself) jump to when you do not have that information.

  • Nay!
    The user and all related content has been deleted.

    kanisathaThacoBellArdanis
Sign In or Register to comment.