Baldur's Gate 3 to enter Early Access in August 2020
anastiel
Member, Translator (NDA) Posts: 246
https://youtu.be/iWtEDCuc4s4
https://youtu.be/-YsT9eQ_CO41
anastiel
Member, Translator (NDA) Posts: 246
Comments
I imagine it's mostly the rule of cool. Same reason stuff like Pokémon have flashy and colourful attacks. It also helps distinguishing between actions with visual ques which I'm sure is of use for some people.
So yeah, if one isn't really into that then the animations would offer little of value.
EDIT: I should note that I'm all for visual representation of my characters' actions. It helps with immersion and can often feel very rewarding.
Sure. I was expecting that at least some people will say that even in TB combat they have value to them. But I find them not just valueless but downright silly. And my immersion has already been completely shattered by combat happening in turns. Hence my hoping there will be the option, for people like me who'd rather save those seconds of time the animations play out, to turn them off.
Yes, it's arguably un-immersive. But so too, arguably, is a pause button and quite analogous, NPC's giving audio responses during paused order placement.
The quick little game play in Sven blurb looks good. I am liking the UI better. I guess we'll see more on the 18th.
Epicness is earned, not given :P
Astarion was a high elf, so he looks like a high elf. Not all vampire spawns look like that, they retain the looks they had in life.
ed: "A Vampire Spawn is a Medium undead, neutral evil monster in DnD 5th edition.
Vampire spawn appeared as they did in life, though their features were hardened and appeared predatory. They lived their lives in darkness and believe they were better than other living or undead creatures. Even though they did not possess all of the standard vampire powers, they still had the affections of all their traditional weaknesses and vulnerabilities.
When it came to a life of adventuring, vampire spawn would seek vengeance on their creators, or penance for their new damnation. If these monsters could overcome their ravenous emotions, they might seek out knowledge, glory, or power. Pride was the true driver of the vampire spawn, since they believed themselves better than others"
...And this is a vampire in 5e https://www.dndbeyond.com/monsters/vampire
So I think Larian is doing the same they´ve been doing all this time: they`re just following the new edition because his new game is based in Baldur´s Gate, yes, but in Baldurs Gate 5e.
Sure, they retain most of their abilities and receive new ones (and some weaknesses).
In fact, I assume that Asterion is able to walk in daylight only thanks to the tadpole in his head because that would be difficult for a vampire spawn.
You can always add PC class levels to any vampire creature, so I´ll go for a yes. I´m not sure about the "world lore" reason but I always assumed that turning into a vampire does not impede your cognitive processes.
I think it´s not the case with your emotional intelligence and empathy because you become an evil creature, no matter your alignment in life.
An example of Vampire caster:
https://jsigvard.com/dnd/monster.php?m=Vampire Spellcaster
Oddly enough divine healing magic does not have effect on undead but also do not damage them. (Yeah, I know, it´s weird) and many undead are vulnerable to necrotic damage (The good old negative damage) as any other living creature (they usually are resistant but they receive damage). Yeah, you can use harm and inflict wounds on most undead.
In fact, spells like "regenerate" or "feast of heroes" does not specify that undead are not affected (cure wounds states that undead are immune) so you can use them to heal a vampire. RAW, Goodberry too. Yeah... druid´s goodberry ( I rule it´s not possible in my campaigns anyway)
I suppose the lack of the duality positive/negative energy comes because, after the Spellplague, the Negative Energy plane collapsed into the Elemental Chaos, mixing with all the other Inner Planes. The goddess Shar managed to channel some of this death energy into the Plane of Shadow and create the Shadowfell.
So now everything is mixed. You can heal damage, and deal radiant and necrotic damage.
Radiant damage harms vampires (also harms any living creature) and you can channel divinity to cause necrotic damage so I assume being undead does not give you any particular penalty using divine magic if your god does not have something against undead (And in 5e you do not need to follow a god anyway, you can worship all of them or none and still you receive spells... Don´t ask)
https://www.5esrd.com/gamemastering/monsters-foes/monsters-by-type/undead/vampires/vampire-priestess/
Deities such as Chemosh, Myrkul, and WeeJas are patrons of necromancers, death knights, liches, mummy lords, and vampires. Gods of the Death domain also embody murder (Anubis, Bhaal, and Pyremius), pain (Iuz or Loviatar), disease or poison (Incabulos, Talona, or Morgion), and the underworld (Hades and Hel).
A BG4 is possible, even likely, but I wouldn't bet on anything beyond that. In an interview in 2019 before BG3 was revealed, Swen spoke extensively about how there are only so many games he can make in his lifetime and that life is too short to make the same games again and again and that he wants to be able to make many different types of games before he is done. That's why even though D:OS fans were wanting a D:OS3, Larian moved on to something else entirely.
I wonder what the DLC/Xpac strategy is going to be. Larian has basically not at all done that with the OS games.
9 over 10 mindflayers recommend low-level adventurers come to the Underdark.
This is different!?
Yes, this is Baldur's Gate 3, not Divinity Original Sin 3. It *is* different.
It plays like Divinity. It looks a lot like Dragon Age. Larian has yet to be able to demonstrate how its BG3 and not, AT BEST, a spin off. I don't see "BG3" in anything thats been released.
Well I, on the other hand, don't see much of Divinity in there. If anything, the gameplay Larian shows lately has much more in common with Dragon Age Origins, which is fine by me, because I loved DAO. Also, I don't have a problem if this game will be more of a spin-off rather than sequel, as long as the story will be compelling and gameplay will be at least good (and it seems very good at the moment). We have very different expectations about this game, which is fine. I don't have any problem with BG3 being marketed as BG3 and not BG: Illithid Invasion, or something. My only concern was that this game will be just DoS3 on steroids, but it seems VERY different from DoS2, so I am very confident it will be a good game. Time will tell if it will be JUST a good or maybe an excellent game.
Well, we can all have our perspectives, but from Swen's pov it is moving on to something different. But I also agree that if Swen wants to make something different, the first thing that he should have changed is shifting from TB to RtwP.
I don't understand how the gameplay looks like Dragon Age: Origins, because DA:O is real time with pause, which couldn't be more different from this. I do see the stylistic similarity in the cutscenes and character dialogue trees, though. So to me, it looks like Divinity: Original Sin combat with DA:O character interaction.
It's absolutely a completely different gamestyle than BG1 and BG2. I think the arguments arise from people disagreeing about whether it *should* be just like BG1 and BG2 in order to "deserve" the name.
I've heard the argument that yet another top-down, isometric, real time with pause game cannot be financially successful in the current market. Given the mixed success of the last few attempts to do it, especially Pillars of Eternity 1 and 2, the second of which was considered a financial failure, I'm willing to consider that it may be true that another game just like BG1 and BG2 can't succeed today.
As always, I'm withholding judgement on whether I can enjoy "BG3" on its own merits until I see a finished product. I gave up any hope early on that whatever is coming out is "Baldur's Gate" in anything but name, though.
I´m going to put Graphics aside. (both games, DoS and BG3 use the Larian´s game engine, BG3 a more advanced version so I expect to find similarities) Honestly, I´m not that interested in the graphics part of the game. If the game looks good it`s better, of course, but unless the graphics made it nauseating or unplayable I can manage. I mean, Undertale or To the Moon have very basic graphics and those are fantastic games.
Skipping the looks of the game (Most of the designs of creatures, weapons, etc are the same of the books of WoTC anyway, and yeah, some of them are as weird as in the game) if you try to analyze the gameplay the game, in general, uses the rules of 5e in exploration and combat, not the ones of the other games.
You do not have action points but turns in combat in 5e and of course, you cannot reserve actions to gain more actions in the next turn like in fallout. You do not have cooldowns in your skills. You use abilities, spells and classes of 5e. You do not have fixed classes in 5e nor a magic spell mechanics in Dao.
You do not have side initiative mixed with turn-based... etc.
You have to roll perception and knowledge to find things while exploring, rest to regain health and spells, you have a camp mechanic...
Races are different, lore is different... In some other thread, there were people discussing that what makes a D&D game is the lore and the setting, and some of those people are here saying that BG3 is a DoS game even tho BG3 has WoTC advisors making sure that the lore, setting and the game mechanics are flawlessly implemented... Sounds strange.
I understand many games look alike in photos and videos, but that doesn´t make them the same game. The first Witcher is made in Aurora engine, same as NWN2 and they are very different games. Tyranny and PoE2 are made by the same studio using the same game engine and they are pretty different games.
Superficially they may seem similar, but the few I see of the game is the same I could see in a campaign of D&D5e, hardly what can I find in DA or DoS games, honestly.
Well said. This is the thing people are missing. Folks comparing it to OS are only looking superficially at the fact that it's turn-based. The game has combat more akin to Temple of Elemental Evil or... actual 5e tabletop. The OS games don't own TB RPG combat. And it looks like many of the crucial tactics of OS, such as hoarding action points for a power turn, simply won't exist in BG3.