I like their games and praise the company. There's nothing bad in that.
D:OS and D:OS 2 are not just "one" random game. We are talking about approximately 6 years of game development. The situation is close to Obsidian creating PoE and PoE 2. So the developers deserve the feedback, either good, or neutral, or bad. Larian "won" the Kickstarter era of classic RPGs, and they exist since late 1990-s.
But on this forum, people don't praise them much. This subforum activity nearly stopped because of all the negative comments.
And very often, the negative comments are based not on the experience of playing the previous games but just on the interviews or marketing. I appreciate all those who played D:OS 1 or 2 and share their opinions, even if negative.
But I just can't agree with non-stopping comments about the game using the title wrongly, using the wrong engine, using wrong references to DnD, as well as comments about the gameplay before this gameplay has been shown.
Well I disagree, @JuliusBorisov. I have cut back my posting in this subforum because I find it to be extremely hostile to and abusive of anyone who dares to have a negative view of either BG3 or Larian.
Oh and btw, my criticism of D:OS comes from having wasted hundreds of hours of my time playing that game.
I have plenty of criticisms of OS1. I've yet to play 2, but will buy it. OS1 has a crappy UI for being such a modern game, especially a game that expects you to do quite a bit of inventory management. The combat system isn't the game's strong point, imo. As well the written dialogue needed a good editor. It's full of unnecessary and uninteresting redundancy. But the engine and the way the basics of the game work are gorgeous, imo. Moving through the world and exploring all the little bits of the world is deeply rewarding in a way that's just not quite the case in PoE or PfK. The engine and world mean designers had a rich toolset to design dungeons, puzzles, and other interesting experiences that weren't just combat or dialogue. And since they can all take place within the core experience of the game, not as separate minigames, it adds a great immersive quality.
Edit to add: And since that engine is the *one* thing we know will be imported into BG3, it gives me super high hopes for the game.
I can agree with you on the engine, which seems to be quite robust and powerful. However, I really strongly disagree about the world in D:OS1. I am one of those players who puts in a lot of hours very slowly and thoroughly exploring and immersing myself in the world of my games, taking my sweet time to investigate every last little nook and cranny. This is how I ended up putting in hundreds of hours into a game whose gameplay, and especially combat system, I truly despised. I found the D:OS1 world to be uninteresting, empty, repetitive, cartoonish, and a huge disappointment.
To clarify, when I say world I merely meant the physical design of the spaces itself. I also have some issues with Larian's Divinity world. It might be a tad ironic to say, but I prefer fantasy settings that are more grounded. This gets into the writing of the game however, and so I think that's a different issue. I think both Obsidian's PoE games and the BG series did a better job of writing a fantasy realm that felt coherent.
I guess I just can't get how people can have a "negative view" of a game that hasn't come out, where we haven't so much as seen gameplay yet. And I think that's why some critics are getting a lot of pushback. There's definitely been several posts here already writing the game off as a failure based on, to me, faith alone. I don't think anyone else on this forum has special insight into BG3 that I don't, so I don't see how anyone can judge the game before there's any evidence out.
I get the feeling that this is rather mutual on both "sides", to be honest. There are just as many posts in this subforum here that basically praise this upcoming game (that we still know next to nothing about) based on their personal faith alone.
For instance, some posters list the Divinity or D:OS games as a case in point for their believe in BG3. Yet prior games are by no means an indicator that future titles of the same studio will also see the same level of critical success. On the contrary: nowadays it seems to be more often than not the exact opposite happens. Whenever we are talking about Bethesda with Fallout 76, Bioware with Anthem, or even Nintendo with their seemingly steadily watered down Pokemon games. That list just goes on and on...
You may call me pessimistic, but I had more than my personal share of getting burnt by riding the hype wave. Being cautious and skeptical about yet unknown products is just fine in my book.
To clarify, when I say world I merely meant the physical design of the spaces itself. I also have some issues with Larian's Divinity world. It might be a tad ironic to say, but I prefer fantasy settings that are more grounded. This gets into the writing of the game however, and so I think that's a different issue. I think both Obsidian's PoE games and the BG series did a better job of writing a fantasy realm that felt coherent.
Ah, glad you clarified, because this I very much agree with.
This then brings up my main criticism of Larian as a developer. They have, in my opinion, very strong technical skills, but their creative skills are at best average and in some cases quite weak.
But may I ask why you spend hundred hours into a game you do not like/despise/find uninteresting?
I left plenty of games in my graveyard after just a few hours of gameplay. Such as fallout 2, fallout 3, arcanum, dungeon siege, neverwinternights, pillars of eternity... If they are not good, I drop them. Why did you stick with the game?
To clarify, when I say world I merely meant the physical design of the spaces itself. I also have some issues with Larian's Divinity world. It might be a tad ironic to say, but I prefer fantasy settings that are more grounded. This gets into the writing of the game however, and so I think that's a different issue. I think both Obsidian's PoE games and the BG series did a better job of writing a fantasy realm that felt coherent.
Ah, glad you clarified, because this I very much agree with.
This then brings up my main criticism of Larian as a developer. They have, in my opinion, very strong technical skills, but their creative skills are at best average and in some cases quite weak.
One thing to keep in mind though, is that they've expanded the size of the company a great deal just for this title. So Larian of today is not necessarily yesterday's Larian. I think we mostly agree on Larian's strengths and weaknesses. I'm probably a tad more positive. IMO, it's a perfect marriage. The built-in D&D world and ruleset help shore up Larian's shortcomings. I'm excited to see, for example, the spellcasting freedom of the BG games combined with Larian's ability to design a variety of non-combat, non-dialogue challenges within the game space.
It's relatively unheralded, but one thing that helped BG be successful is that the designers didn't have to do as much of the foundational labor that an original RPG setting would require. They could focus specifically on the characters and plot.
The built-in D&D world and ruleset help shore up Larian's shortcomings. I'm excited to see, for example, the spellcasting freedom of the BG games combined with Larian's ability to design a variety of non-combat, non-dialogue challenges within the game space.
It's relatively unheralded, but one thing that helped BG be successful is that the designers didn't have to do as much of the foundational labor that an original RPG setting would require. They could focus specifically on the characters and plot.
For someone who has never played the D:OS games, this got me interrested. I love skill checks and/or other actions in the middle of dialogues. Do you mean this was prevalent in D:OS?
I remember with great love and nostalgia how ie KotOR had these amazing features where you sometimes could use your jedi/sith powers in the middle of dialogues. I had fond, O so fond, memories of force choking people when they didn't say or do exactly what I wanted (yes, in-game I can be quite the psycho - please don't judge me!)
I've said many times that all I know about Baldur's Gate III is its name and that Illithids are involved in the story. Certainly not enough to love/hate the game or to say if it'll be a success/failure. I just need more information before I can have an opinion.
For OS1, it has two systems that interact in the dialogue. You have a charisma skill that you can boost on level up. And there's serious rewards to boosting it for one member of your party. As well the game has a number of roleplaying moments where your PC's make something akin to moral choices. This gives you personality scores. The two system combine to create checks in the dialogue, though those checks merely give you a "score" for a chance game, i.e. they increase your odds of winning a dialogue check, don't guarantee it.
It's one of the better uses of a charisma system in a game, imo. Sort of encourages you to make a "talker" member of your party, akin to using the high CHA guy in BG. Except, you have to make the difficult choice of boosting charisma or some other skill.
But what I was specifically praising was that outside of combat and dialogue, you can use a number of your skills, such as magic spells like teleport or invisibility to "solve" certain puzzle elements. In the beginning of the game this is quite basic, like casting a rain spell on a burning obstacle. But this increases in complexity as the game goes on.
But may I ask why you spend hundred hours into a game you do not like/despise/find uninteresting?
I left plenty of games in my graveyard after just a few hours of gameplay. Such as fallout 2, fallout 3, arcanum, dungeon siege, neverwinternights, pillars of eternity... If they are not good, I drop them. Why did you stick with the game?
It's a valid question. I guess it is because I am very strongly of the personality of wanting/needing to finish anything I start and dislike giving up on something. It takes a lot for me to give up on something. I found Skyrim to be utterly stupid and boring from a pretty early stage, yet could bring myself to quit only after I had put well over 300 hours into it. I'm an avid gardener and I have brought many a plant back from what others would have surely classified as dead. Hell, I gave up on my marriage which was broken from pretty much day 1 only after ten years!
The built-in D&D world and ruleset help shore up Larian's shortcomings. I'm excited to see, for example, the spellcasting freedom of the BG games combined with Larian's ability to design a variety of non-combat, non-dialogue challenges within the game space.
It's relatively unheralded, but one thing that helped BG be successful is that the designers didn't have to do as much of the foundational labor that an original RPG setting would require. They could focus specifically on the characters and plot.
For someone who has never played the D:OS games, this got me interrested. I love skill checks and/or other actions in the middle of dialogues. Do you mean this was prevalent in D:OS?
I remember with great love and nostalgia how ie KotOR had these amazing features where you sometimes could use your jedi/sith powers in the middle of dialogues. I had fond, O so fond, memories of force choking people when they didn't say or do exactly what I wanted (yes, in-game I can be quite the psycho - please don't judge me!)
Yes it does, but not anything more than what the PoE and P:K games have in them. And, a big chunk of its checks in the middle of dialogue is in the utterly aggravating decision-making mini-game between the game's dual protagonists.
Thanks for your replies, mates. It would be so cool to see more possibilities rather than charisma, ie using a Charm spell in the middle of dialogue, or a feeble mind if you are being outsmarted by some dude, or why not invisibility and than scamper away if you feel things are going sour?
But I guess it would be very hard to code all that. Ah, one can dream.
Mmm.. force chokes..
@Skatan "There's been some harsh words from both "sides", if I may use that term even though I dislike it in this case, but it's important to stress the fact that no one should feel "attacked" because of what they feel/think/believe."
Its not equivalent though. There have been at least 3 bannings from people attacking those who have been skeptical about "BG3". There was even a poster who made a dummy account after getting banned, just to hurl more insults at me. I think there's been like, some warnings on the skeptic's side. Maybe a single ban. Skeptics have, across the board, been attacked far more often.
@ThacoBell This is not something you can judge upon as all the PMs and warnings are private. I recommend not to evaluate anything in this context from the moderation standpoint.
Don't make the mistake of viewing people being negative or positive about a game that does not exist as organized groups. If someone gets banned that doesn't reflect on others who may hold similar views but haven't crossed the line.
I do not know if BG3 is going to be good or bad, but I do not think the game's quality will be dependent on which name they use for the Bhaalspawn.
Here's a German Live-Talk of what Larian showed on gamescom 2019.
A rough English summary from yours truly:
Larian "suggested" the reporters to not ask any questions concerning BG3. The reason being that they have the policy to not say anything new. And that they already told all informations on E3 anyway. And since all of the gaming journalists were apparently on E3, it would be "silly" to do a Q&A on the gamescom as well. They apparently also weren't willing to do a recorded interview with Orkenspalter TV.
What they did do however was playing a Murder of Baldur's Gate based PnP homebrew(?) session with them. Which may or may be not be part of BG3's prequel story. All of that on the Cosplay Village's stage. And for two hours, at that.
They also spoke about Larian asking them not to reveal any of the character names which were part of the PnP session's storyline. Well, basically they were under NDA.
It has to be said however that the folks over at Orkenspalter TV very much liked to game with Larian's people on stage and would love to do this again in the future.
People can defend Larian all they want, that's their choice. It's my choice to not purchase the game and to complain loudly about what I dislike about it. Maybe they will take it into account, maybe they won't, but at least they will know what my problem is and what they could have done better if it doesn't go well.
If you're not going to play the game, I'm not sure why you expect Larian to take what you're saying into account. Would you take seriously someone criticizing your work who never experienced it themselves?
If I was making a sequel to a beloved series, I would absolutely take it seriously if there were longtime fans of that series who felt angry and alienated by my design decisions. I would, at least, question if they were the right choices. First impressions affect more than the potential early buyers, it affects the reviews and perception of the game as a whole.
A suggestion, not meaning you cannot have these discussions here, but if you want to impact the game in a positive manner you could voice any concerns you have in the Larian forum dedicated to bg3. I hardly expect them to read everything posted here. You have a greater chance of being heard and taken seriously in their own forums.
I agree, but I would also add it wouldn't be very smart of them not to check BD's section on their game and gauge opinion. There is massive overlap in terms of potential fanbase here.
If you're not going to play the game, I'm not sure why you expect Larian to take what you're saying into account. Would you take seriously someone criticizing your work who never experienced it themselves?
and dismissing people's feedback on why they don't want to play the game is any better?
If you're not going to play the game, I'm not sure why you expect Larian to take what you're saying into account. Would you take seriously someone criticizing your work who never experienced it themselves?
and dismissing people's feedback on why they don't want to play the game is any better?
Absolutely yes. I don't think the designers at Larian should be wasting any time reading these forums. They're the ones with an actual stake in the game. They're the ones whose future incomes depend on the game being good. They're the ones actually doing the labor. And the overwhelming majority of folks here have no professional experience in the field.
And I'd include myself in all of that. There's no reason to even dream of satisfying the varying tastes on this forum alone. Since I think of games as artistic expression, I'd rather they commit to their personal vision for the game and run with it. I don't think they need to waste any time reading our feedback or similar feedback even on their own forums. Not at the stage where they're making creative decisions. That's how actual masterpiece games get made. Games that are desperate to please every fan end up like Skyrim, imo.
Beta testing, late alpha glimpses? Sure that's the time for player feedback on balance, QA, fine tuning, etc. But the creative vision of the game should be theirs and theirs alone. And let the chips fall where they may.
I just recently found out about BG3 and with the opinion of someone who's never really played games like these or know much about D&D and whatnot, i think the game looks great and the choices you have are endless. The dialog choices you get too vary from being someone nice to being someone who's the complete opposite.
Comments
I can agree with you on the engine, which seems to be quite robust and powerful. However, I really strongly disagree about the world in D:OS1. I am one of those players who puts in a lot of hours very slowly and thoroughly exploring and immersing myself in the world of my games, taking my sweet time to investigate every last little nook and cranny. This is how I ended up putting in hundreds of hours into a game whose gameplay, and especially combat system, I truly despised. I found the D:OS1 world to be uninteresting, empty, repetitive, cartoonish, and a huge disappointment.
For instance, some posters list the Divinity or D:OS games as a case in point for their believe in BG3. Yet prior games are by no means an indicator that future titles of the same studio will also see the same level of critical success. On the contrary: nowadays it seems to be more often than not the exact opposite happens. Whenever we are talking about Bethesda with Fallout 76, Bioware with Anthem, or even Nintendo with their seemingly steadily watered down Pokemon games. That list just goes on and on...
You may call me pessimistic, but I had more than my personal share of getting burnt by riding the hype wave. Being cautious and skeptical about yet unknown products is just fine in my book.
This then brings up my main criticism of Larian as a developer. They have, in my opinion, very strong technical skills, but their creative skills are at best average and in some cases quite weak.
I left plenty of games in my graveyard after just a few hours of gameplay. Such as fallout 2, fallout 3, arcanum, dungeon siege, neverwinternights, pillars of eternity... If they are not good, I drop them. Why did you stick with the game?
One thing to keep in mind though, is that they've expanded the size of the company a great deal just for this title. So Larian of today is not necessarily yesterday's Larian. I think we mostly agree on Larian's strengths and weaknesses. I'm probably a tad more positive. IMO, it's a perfect marriage. The built-in D&D world and ruleset help shore up Larian's shortcomings. I'm excited to see, for example, the spellcasting freedom of the BG games combined with Larian's ability to design a variety of non-combat, non-dialogue challenges within the game space.
It's relatively unheralded, but one thing that helped BG be successful is that the designers didn't have to do as much of the foundational labor that an original RPG setting would require. They could focus specifically on the characters and plot.
For someone who has never played the D:OS games, this got me interrested. I love skill checks and/or other actions in the middle of dialogues. Do you mean this was prevalent in D:OS?
I remember with great love and nostalgia how ie KotOR had these amazing features where you sometimes could use your jedi/sith powers in the middle of dialogues. I had fond, O so fond, memories of force choking people when they didn't say or do exactly what I wanted (yes, in-game I can be quite the psycho - please don't judge me!)
It's one of the better uses of a charisma system in a game, imo. Sort of encourages you to make a "talker" member of your party, akin to using the high CHA guy in BG. Except, you have to make the difficult choice of boosting charisma or some other skill.
But what I was specifically praising was that outside of combat and dialogue, you can use a number of your skills, such as magic spells like teleport or invisibility to "solve" certain puzzle elements. In the beginning of the game this is quite basic, like casting a rain spell on a burning obstacle. But this increases in complexity as the game goes on.
Yes it does, but not anything more than what the PoE and P:K games have in them. And, a big chunk of its checks in the middle of dialogue is in the utterly aggravating decision-making mini-game between the game's dual protagonists.
But I guess it would be very hard to code all that. Ah, one can dream.
Mmm.. force chokes..
Its not equivalent though. There have been at least 3 bannings from people attacking those who have been skeptical about "BG3". There was even a poster who made a dummy account after getting banned, just to hurl more insults at me. I think there's been like, some warnings on the skeptic's side. Maybe a single ban. Skeptics have, across the board, been attacked far more often.
I do not know if BG3 is going to be good or bad, but I do not think the game's quality will be dependent on which name they use for the Bhaalspawn.
Here's a German Live-Talk of what Larian showed on gamescom 2019.
A rough English summary from yours truly:
Larian "suggested" the reporters to not ask any questions concerning BG3. The reason being that they have the policy to not say anything new. And that they already told all informations on E3 anyway. And since all of the gaming journalists were apparently on E3, it would be "silly" to do a Q&A on the gamescom as well. They apparently also weren't willing to do a recorded interview with Orkenspalter TV.
What they did do however was playing a Murder of Baldur's Gate based PnP homebrew(?) session with them. Which may or may be not be part of BG3's prequel story. All of that on the Cosplay Village's stage. And for two hours, at that.
They also spoke about Larian asking them not to reveal any of the character names which were part of the PnP session's storyline. Well, basically they were under NDA.
It has to be said however that the folks over at Orkenspalter TV very much liked to game with Larian's people on stage and would love to do this again in the future.
and dismissing people's feedback on why they don't want to play the game is any better?
Absolutely yes. I don't think the designers at Larian should be wasting any time reading these forums. They're the ones with an actual stake in the game. They're the ones whose future incomes depend on the game being good. They're the ones actually doing the labor. And the overwhelming majority of folks here have no professional experience in the field.
And I'd include myself in all of that. There's no reason to even dream of satisfying the varying tastes on this forum alone. Since I think of games as artistic expression, I'd rather they commit to their personal vision for the game and run with it. I don't think they need to waste any time reading our feedback or similar feedback even on their own forums. Not at the stage where they're making creative decisions. That's how actual masterpiece games get made. Games that are desperate to please every fan end up like Skyrim, imo.
Beta testing, late alpha glimpses? Sure that's the time for player feedback on balance, QA, fine tuning, etc. But the creative vision of the game should be theirs and theirs alone. And let the chips fall where they may.