That review could very well have been written by me. A very painful read. Without even having played the game, this was exactly how I envisioned the game turning out. And just like the author, I also would find myself constantly save-scumming those endless D20 rolls, and that will get aggravating pretty darn quickly. Tedious combat - no surprise there at all. But most of all, the horribly written companions? I'll take the "empty" companions of BG1 over these oh-so-very-detailed companions any day. Feel very strongly now that my skepticism and pessimism were wholely justified and have been vindicated. Yeah it's EA. Maybe some of this stuff will get "fixed." But how do they fix the fact that this was their (the BG3 devs') first impetus? Their gut feel for how a BG3 game ought to be? Any fix, I fear, will be putting a band-aid on a sucking chest wound.
In the spoilers regarding the first few encounters of the beginning of the game, the review author showed me that my sense of honor and morality was going to be horrifically offended at least three times. I would have rage quit the moment the game forced me to kill innocent people. I would *not* accept help from anyone who had just tried to kill me. And even the *succeeded* intelligence check leading to a main character death would have been very likely to cause a rage quit from me.
I wish I could say I was surprised, but I knew this was Larian's writing style. (Very edgy, very biased towards evil characters. Any good characters have to have something seriously wrong with them if they're included in the game.) I was hoping to be proved wrong, but all that hope has been immediately dashed.
Everything the reviewer points out confirms everything I was afraid this game would be. BG3 will be getting a hard pass from me. I don't want my money to go to support the creation of this kind of a game, even though I'm in a small minority of gamers.
Luckily I have a treasure trove of older games to keep me entertained.
To be fair, now that I have played it, that is one of several outcomes. I persuaded the innocents to leave. I didn't engage in a battle of wills with the mind flayer (suicide for a low level character of any type) but still killed it. Astarion never even tried to kill me. I've been playing as a good character and have not been forced into anything evil. Yet.
But aren't all of these based on D20 checks? And very high checks at that? So at best, to avoid those evil outcomes, one would likely have to save-scum a lot.
Some based on D20 checks, some based on class that are auto-wins, sometimes it's just about making the right choice.
But I have no issue with having to roll for skill checks. In fact, I like it a lot. This is classic tabletop DnD in action. Skills matter just as much, if not more, than feats and raw power.
That review could very well have been written by me. A very painful read. Without even having played the game, this was exactly how I envisioned the game turning out. And just like the author, I also would find myself constantly save-scumming those endless D20 rolls, and that will get aggravating pretty darn quickly. Tedious combat - no surprise there at all. But most of all, the horribly written companions? I'll take the "empty" companions of BG1 over these oh-so-very-detailed companions any day. Feel very strongly now that my skepticism and pessimism were wholely justified and have been vindicated. Yeah it's EA. Maybe some of this stuff will get "fixed." But how do they fix the fact that this was their (the BG3 devs') first impetus? Their gut feel for how a BG3 game ought to be? Any fix, I fear, will be putting a band-aid on a sucking chest wound.
In the spoilers regarding the first few encounters of the beginning of the game, the review author showed me that my sense of honor and morality was going to be horrifically offended at least three times. I would have rage quit the moment the game forced me to kill innocent people. I would *not* accept help from anyone who had just tried to kill me. And even the *succeeded* intelligence check leading to a main character death would have been very likely to cause a rage quit from me.
I wish I could say I was surprised, but I knew this was Larian's writing style. (Very edgy, very biased towards evil characters. Any good characters have to have something seriously wrong with them if they're included in the game.) I was hoping to be proved wrong, but all that hope has been immediately dashed.
Everything the reviewer points out confirms everything I was afraid this game would be. BG3 will be getting a hard pass from me. I don't want my money to go to support the creation of this kind of a game, even though I'm in a small minority of gamers.
Luckily I have a treasure trove of older games to keep me entertained.
it's dishearining seeing the comments for that review. so many " this is how i play dnd so it's fine." or " i'm glad they are catering to the ce crowd".
so i gusse people like me that tend to play ng and cg are out of luck.
Sorry, but I don't see this being the outcome of BG3's success at all. BG3's success may lead to more games, D&D or otherwise, that are just like BG3. But there's no reason why it would lead to more games in general and specifically games that are unlike BG3.
I don't have any insider knowledge into the buisiness strategy of WoTC, but I do see that this is common for large, successful IPs. They tend to have a main series of games and a variety of spinoffs and lesser known titles. Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest, Fallout, Elder Scrolls, they've all done it. If they feel like more eyes are on DnD because of this, I can see the reasoning for pursuing this path.
I'm more confident in the fact that if it was a flop, we wouldn't see another DnD game for several more years at least. And the title that did come out would be likely to cater more to casuls and non-DnD players, not less.
the original baldurs gate and to a lessor extent fallout 1 and 2 set the current standard for crpg after they suffered a dark age in the mid 90's.
dos did the same for modern crpgs so we are most likely gonna see alot more games in this style if bg 3 does very well.
There is also kind of a huge jump in terms of the stories tone in the game. Like you go from "lets get off this mindflayer ship that is getting attacked by dragons and devils" to a more traditional game start very quickly.
By traditional game start I mean a wilderness areas with more traditional low level enemies (bandits, goblins).
It's a bit deflating. Especially when its not a decision you are making (its not like BG2 where you have more say over what area you will visit next).
Edit: Also its not really clear to me why my character wouldn't track someone down and ask them where the nearest big city is. Like it feels like going to a big city to look for treatment first should be a diverging option or something.
that sounds like a pacing issue. it should start normal then get to the over the top style near the end.
edit: lets use planescape torment as an example. it does not just start with the weird stuff as soon as you start the game. it's alot more down to earth and normal { atlest for sigil} in the hive. then you get to the noble district where it starts doing more weirder quests.
The Mindflayer ship is an epic SETTING for the beginning of the game. Your encounters are not. You are fighting imps (for the most part). This is highlighted by the last battle before you crash. You are fighting imps, but right in front of you, the Mind Flayer is battling a demon. If you take too long, a couple more demons show up. You have to kill the imps and make your way to the helm of the ship BEFORE allowing those adds to reach you. So it is actually EXACTLY like SWTOR in that regard. It's crystal clear you need to escape, not fight.
The Mindflayer ship is an epic SETTING for the beginning of the game. Your encounters are not. You are fighting imps (for the most part). This is highlighted by the last battle before you crash. You are fighting imps, but right in front of you, the Mind Flayer is battling a demon. If you take too long, a couple more demons show up. You have to kill the imps and make your way to the helm of the ship BEFORE allowing those adds to reach you. So it is actually EXACTLY like SWTOR in that regard. It's crystal clear you need to escape, not fight.
If only I could give all the reactions to this post. @jjstraka34 seems to be playing the same game as I do. Several users in this thread haven't played the game yet but are discussing things that can only be judged from the game. Let's PLEASE leave this thread for reviews/opinions of those who played (eg. our great wizard @elminster who shares good feedback) and don't use it for sharing biased opinions on what you see/read. There are few other threads for that.
So, ship crashes, in usual Larian fashion you are left on a beach. I wander around and accidentally run into combat with three 15 HP Intellect Devourers. I figure I'm screwed, as even my character says one or two hits might be lethal for me. So, what to do?? Well, I am a Rogue, I have a bow. I shoot. I can't let them near me, so I jump away after each shot. They never get in range and all three fall within about 6 or 7 turns. It's this kind of obvious yet still satisfying freedom that Larian does so well at, and it's why their last two games have been so popular. You have so many options at your disposal when it comes to combat.
Taking 6-7 turns to accomplish this would be too tedious and frustrating and aggravating for me.
That combat takes about 10 mins to finish. Are 10 mins tedious and frustrating and aggravating? Not for me.
God yes. 10 minutes for what should be a trash mob fight?
The first time I fought the brood mother in Dragon Age: Origins, it took me close to 10 minutes to defeat her and that was an epic battle.
Even if you don’t use cheese tactics, you can drop any of the dragons in Baldur’s Gate in less than 10 minutes.
It's worth considering the sum of total combat encounters by time. A 10 minute trash fight in BG3 might replace 5 trash mob encounters in BG2. If that's the case, then the combats might be more reasonable in nature.
It reminds me of actual tabletop D&D. You only have a few encounters per session. BG1/2/NWN/PFKM/etc all throw a lot more at you because their fights are so fast, relative to tabletop.
And I keep saying, this isn’t a tabletop session. I am not goofing around with friends. I am being immersed in a story and a journey and if that pace of story is interrupted by meaningless battles that take 10 minutes to complete then it becomes jarring.
Perhaps that's what *you* want, but not everyone. I want it to feel more like a table top session than a visual novel.
[
But there's no evidence of this. From all the reviews, both from players and reviewers, it certainly looks like there's just as much combat in this game as in any other comparable game. That certainly was true of the D:OS games.
This is certainly *not* true, by the way. The number of fights in DOS:2 is MUCH smaller than the number of fights in BG2 - whether you define that by area, time, dungeon or anything. I've played both extensively, and they're not comparable.
So, ship crashes, in usual Larian fashion you are left on a beach. I wander around and accidentally run into combat with three 15 HP Intellect Devourers. I figure I'm screwed, as even my character says one or two hits might be lethal for me. So, what to do?? Well, I am a Rogue, I have a bow. I shoot. I can't let them near me, so I jump away after each shot. They never get in range and all three fall within about 6 or 7 turns. It's this kind of obvious yet still satisfying freedom that Larian does so well at, and it's why their last two games have been so popular. You have so many options at your disposal when it comes to combat.
Taking 6-7 turns to accomplish this would be too tedious and frustrating and aggravating for me.
That combat takes about 10 mins to finish. Are 10 mins tedious and frustrating and aggravating? Not for me.
God yes. 10 minutes for what should be a trash mob fight?
The first time I fought the brood mother in Dragon Age: Origins, it took me close to 10 minutes to defeat her and that was an epic battle.
Even if you don’t use cheese tactics, you can drop any of the dragons in Baldur’s Gate in less than 10 minutes.
It's worth considering the sum of total combat encounters by time. A 10 minute trash fight in BG3 might replace 5 trash mob encounters in BG2. If that's the case, then the combats might be more reasonable in nature.
It reminds me of actual tabletop D&D. You only have a few encounters per session. BG1/2/NWN/PFKM/etc all throw a lot more at you because their fights are so fast, relative to tabletop.
And I keep saying, this isn’t a tabletop session. I am not goofing around with friends. I am being immersed in a story and a journey and if that pace of story is interrupted by meaningless battles that take 10 minutes to complete then it becomes jarring.
Perhaps that's what *you* want, but not everyone. I want it to feel more like a table top session than a visual novel.
So I've gotten pretty far and I can safely say I enjoyed the experience. The world feels like Faerun. Most of the folks you will meet don't seem overly comical or overly grimdark. It feels like a proper low level adventure, once you are past the ship segment. I am liking the setting enough that I find myself talking to every npc in an area.
There's quite a bit of exploration, and you can easily miss things if you don't scale every wall and look behind every bush.
I'm starting to already hit areas that are blocked off during the EA. Ah well, I'll set it down for now and pick it back up whenever it gets fully released.
It's 5th edition, so it's a mixed bag as far as I'm concerned, but you know what you're getting. For those who haven't played 5th, it has elements of 2nd that will feel familiar. You will find yourself picking a "kit" within the first few levels that will define your character as you go in.
Are there any time limits to the quests? I've been thinking about taking a long rest but the druid leader seemed like she wanted things sorted out soon. I don't want to push things heh.
Apparently my natural curiosity is stronger than my fear of spoilers... besides, I don't think anyone will reveal major plot spoilers even in this thread without tags.
So, a question for those who have actually started playing: Is it true what some people said, that you are literally forced to kill innocents? Or are there other choices, or is it something that happens because of the mind control thing?
I try to be good in life and games alike and wouldn't choose to be a coldblooded murderer, but I could imagine making choices in grey areas when lives depended on it, like traveling with someone who tried to kill me before.
So, are there difficult choices with difficult solutions, or frequent situations where clear evil is the only option?
And I'd like to hear from people who have actually been playing, not just reading about it.
Is it true what some people said, that you are literally forced to kill innocents?
They are mind controlled, but you aren't forced to kill them. You can talk them down, and judging by the sheer number of unique class interactions, some classes may have another way through.
So, are there difficult choices with difficult solutions, or frequent situations where clear evil is the only option?
There are plenty of opportunities to do good, and I found at least one encounter that I felt was a grey area and was indecisive about the correct choice.
If you want to hear the story.
There are these baby-faced goblin kids, really cute little guys, picking on a Druid captured by the others. This druid is the head of the grove and is needed to defend it from the incoming goblin attack. If I try to free him, I have to enter combat with the kids. I really, REALLY don't want to do that. So I decided I couldn't do anything for the time being, and I would come back later and hopefully they would be gone. Which may be the case since the main force already left for the grove and I could intercept them right now.
Ok, I left the ship and.. there is no Shadowheart at her usual spot, there are no enemies nearby, there is a dying mind flayer inside the crash site, but I cannot talk to him. Something bugged, or I miss something?
Ok, I left the shop and.. there is no Shadowheart at her usual spot, there are no enemies nearby, there is a dying mind flayer inside the crash site, but I cannot talk to him. Something bugged, or I miss something?
If I'm understanding this correctly then it sounds bugged.
Are there any time limits to the quests? I've been thinking about taking a long rest but the druid leader seemed like she wanted things sorted out soon. I don't want to push things heh.
I have been meaning to talk about resting. There seems to be a bit of tension here, with the main plot making you feel like resting is a really bad idea, and storyline events only happening on rests.
I don't know about you, but if I had a mind flayer parasite in my head and I thought I only had a few days to live I would try to rest as little as possible until I found a cure.
I know they tell you it has been altered to some degree, but iirc nothing tells you that you won't die in a matter of days.
I don't think there are any time limits though. Its been days and the druid leader hasn't done the thing.
The Mindflayer ship is an epic SETTING for the beginning of the game. Your encounters are not. You are fighting imps (for the most part). This is highlighted by the last battle before you crash. You are fighting imps, but right in front of you, the Mind Flayer is battling a demon. If you take too long, a couple more demons show up. You have to kill the imps and make your way to the helm of the ship BEFORE allowing those adds to reach you. So it is actually EXACTLY like SWTOR in that regard. It's crystal clear you need to escape, not fight.
If only I could give all the reactions to this post. @jjstraka34 seems to be playing the same game as I do. Several users in this thread haven't played the game yet but are discussing things that can only be judged from the game. Let's PLEASE leave this thread for reviews/opinions of those who played (eg. our great wizard @elminster who shares good feedback) and don't use it for sharing biased opinions on what you see/read. There are few other threads for that.
Wait, so first it was "wait until Larian actually releases something, you can't judge based on interviews alone." Now its, "You can't judge anything unless you played EA." I'm sorry, but I disagree VERY strongly with this. You don't need to be holding the controller to experience the story. You don't have to have to hold the controller to look at the graphics and presentation. 90% of what makes RPGs unique can 100% be judged without ever playing it.
Sorry, but I don't see this being the outcome of BG3's success at all. BG3's success may lead to more games, D&D or otherwise, that are just like BG3. But there's no reason why it would lead to more games in general and specifically games that are unlike BG3.
I don't have any insider knowledge into the buisiness strategy of WoTC, but I do see that this is common for large, successful IPs. They tend to have a main series of games and a variety of spinoffs and lesser known titles. Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest, Fallout, Elder Scrolls, they've all done it. If they feel like more eyes are on DnD because of this, I can see the reasoning for pursuing this path.
I'm more confident in the fact that if it was a flop, we wouldn't see another DnD game for several more years at least. And the title that did come out would be likely to cater more to casuls and non-DnD players, not less.
Fair enough. But for me, 'no more D&D games' and 'games like BG3' are both exactly the same thing. Either way, I am denied the ability to enjoy playing a D&D game.
Yeah, just like SoD could be judged without playing it, solely based on reviews and YouTube videos. I don't say you can't have an opinion based on that, just please - don't share it in the thread called "spoilers spoil away".
Sorry, but I don't see this being the outcome of BG3's success at all. BG3's success may lead to more games, D&D or otherwise, that are just like BG3. But there's no reason why it would lead to more games in general and specifically games that are unlike BG3.
I don't have any insider knowledge into the buisiness strategy of WoTC, but I do see that this is common for large, successful IPs. They tend to have a main series of games and a variety of spinoffs and lesser known titles. Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest, Fallout, Elder Scrolls, they've all done it. If they feel like more eyes are on DnD because of this, I can see the reasoning for pursuing this path.
I'm more confident in the fact that if it was a flop, we wouldn't see another DnD game for several more years at least. And the title that did come out would be likely to cater more to casuls and non-DnD players, not less.
Fair enough. But for me, 'no more D&D games' and 'games like BG3' are both exactly the same thing. Either way, I am denied the ability to enjoy playing a D&D game.
Honestly, I'm sorry to hear that. That's how I was worried BG3 would make me feel.
I don't think rtwp DnD games are off the table, so tbh I'm still holding out hope, plus there are a few big projects being worked on that excited me just as much as BG3 did anyways.
Maybe I'm just optimistic. But we got SOD, the EE's, and BG3 in the past several years. DnD games are nearly as common now as they were in the Gold Box days.
Anyone find a reason for the existence of the scrawny bugbear? (its a hostile bugbear in the blighted village). Besides being just something to kill with a rock?
5e already has the slowest combat among D&D editions(i don't consider 4e a D&D game). And what larian does? Reduces the damage even more of firebolt and other weapons/spells...
5e already has the slowest combat among D&D editions(i don't consider 4e a D&D game). And what larian does? Reduces the damage even more of firebolt and other weapons/spells...
I also dislike when game devs think they know better about how to do DnD than DnD players.
But it doesn't even register when I'm playing honestly. It's an issue that will last for the first couple levels basically.
Yeah, just like SoD could be judged without playing it, solely based on reviews and YouTube videos. I don't say you can't have an opinion based on that, just please - don't share it in the thread called "spoilers spoil away".
I seriously doubt the majority of people who review bombed SoD even looked at it beyond, "this character exists". I don't think its fair to stonewall criticism of things that doesn't require someone to play it to be able to understand or enjoy it. Remember the great fun we had with Shadowheart jokes? No one had to play the game to know the name is silly.
Yeah, just like SoD could be judged without playing it, solely based on reviews and YouTube videos. I don't say you can't have an opinion based on that, just please - don't share it in the thread called "spoilers spoil away".
I seriously doubt the majority of people who review bombed SoD even looked at it beyond, "this character exists". I don't think its fair to stonewall criticism of things that doesn't require someone to play it to be able to understand or enjoy it. Remember the great fun we had with Shadowheart jokes? No one had to play the game to know the name is silly.
Funny story, I learned about SOD because of the controversy. I heard about a new Baldurs Gate interquel in the form of some complainy political b.s and practically had a heart attack. I was so out of the loop after such a long stretch of no interesting DnD news.
Btw it turns out thieves tools are destroyed on a failed use. So that was probably why I saw lockpicking grey out. This is not how things are handled in PnP. But it is what it is.
Yeah, just like SoD could be judged without playing it, solely based on reviews and YouTube videos. I don't say you can't have an opinion based on that, just please - don't share it in the thread called "spoilers spoil away".
I seriously doubt the majority of people who review bombed SoD even looked at it beyond, "this character exists". I don't think its fair to stonewall criticism of things that doesn't require someone to play it to be able to understand or enjoy it. Remember the great fun we had with Shadowheart jokes? No one had to play the game to know the name is silly.
Funny story, I learned about SOD because of the controversy. I heard about a new Baldurs Gate interquel in the form of some complainy political b.s and practically had a heart attack. I was so out of the loop after such a long stretch of no interesting DnD news.
Like as much as I hate the direction BG3 has gone, I still wouldn't condone review bombing it. When people want a game review, they want to know what the person experienced while playing it. But a bunch of nerds discussing what they see as either strengths or weaknesses is not a review. Its people sharing their opinions. And its healthy.
Ok, I left the shop and.. there is no Shadowheart at her usual spot, there are no enemies nearby, there is a dying mind flayer inside the crash site, but I cannot talk to him. Something bugged, or I miss something?
If I'm understanding this correctly then it sounds bugged.
It must be, I remember Swen was fighting intelect devourers around the crash site (he even killed one, throwing a boot). And Shadowheart should wait in front of that gate. Unless the fact that I failed Arcana check when I tried to help her on the ship resulted her not showing up... which would be extremely odd.
No, she's still supposed to show up there. It's definitely a bug. Try reloading an earlier save? There will be at least two autosaves from the intro section.
I also suggest having a gander at whatever forum or site they want you to report bugs in and report your happenings there.
Comments
Some based on D20 checks, some based on class that are auto-wins, sometimes it's just about making the right choice.
But I have no issue with having to roll for skill checks. In fact, I like it a lot. This is classic tabletop DnD in action. Skills matter just as much, if not more, than feats and raw power.
it's dishearining seeing the comments for that review. so many " this is how i play dnd so it's fine." or " i'm glad they are catering to the ce crowd".
so i gusse people like me that tend to play ng and cg are out of luck.
the original baldurs gate and to a lessor extent fallout 1 and 2 set the current standard for crpg after they suffered a dark age in the mid 90's.
dos did the same for modern crpgs so we are most likely gonna see alot more games in this style if bg 3 does very well.
By traditional game start I mean a wilderness areas with more traditional low level enemies (bandits, goblins).
It's a bit deflating. Especially when its not a decision you are making (its not like BG2 where you have more say over what area you will visit next).
Edit: Also its not really clear to me why my character wouldn't track someone down and ask them where the nearest big city is. Like it feels like going to a big city to look for treatment first should be a diverging option or something.
edit: lets use planescape torment as an example. it does not just start with the weird stuff as soon as you start the game. it's alot more down to earth and normal { atlest for sigil} in the hive. then you get to the noble district where it starts doing more weirder quests.
If only I could give all the reactions to this post. @jjstraka34 seems to be playing the same game as I do. Several users in this thread haven't played the game yet but are discussing things that can only be judged from the game. Let's PLEASE leave this thread for reviews/opinions of those who played (eg. our great wizard @elminster who shares good feedback) and don't use it for sharing biased opinions on what you see/read. There are few other threads for that.
Perhaps that's what *you* want, but not everyone. I want it to feel more like a table top session than a visual novel.
Guess not all the fights are 10 minutes long then.
This is certainly *not* true, by the way. The number of fights in DOS:2 is MUCH smaller than the number of fights in BG2 - whether you define that by area, time, dungeon or anything. I've played both extensively, and they're not comparable.
I did say me.
But I am not allowed to have an opinion in this thread anymore so it’s not like it matters.
There's quite a bit of exploration, and you can easily miss things if you don't scale every wall and look behind every bush.
I'm starting to already hit areas that are blocked off during the EA. Ah well, I'll set it down for now and pick it back up whenever it gets fully released.
It's 5th edition, so it's a mixed bag as far as I'm concerned, but you know what you're getting. For those who haven't played 5th, it has elements of 2nd that will feel familiar. You will find yourself picking a "kit" within the first few levels that will define your character as you go in.
I can safely say I'm warming up to it.
So, a question for those who have actually started playing: Is it true what some people said, that you are literally forced to kill innocents? Or are there other choices, or is it something that happens because of the mind control thing?
I try to be good in life and games alike and wouldn't choose to be a coldblooded murderer, but I could imagine making choices in grey areas when lives depended on it, like traveling with someone who tried to kill me before.
So, are there difficult choices with difficult solutions, or frequent situations where clear evil is the only option?
And I'd like to hear from people who have actually been playing, not just reading about it.
They are mind controlled, but you aren't forced to kill them. You can talk them down, and judging by the sheer number of unique class interactions, some classes may have another way through.
There are plenty of opportunities to do good, and I found at least one encounter that I felt was a grey area and was indecisive about the correct choice.
If you want to hear the story.
If I'm understanding this correctly then it sounds bugged.
I have been meaning to talk about resting. There seems to be a bit of tension here, with the main plot making you feel like resting is a really bad idea, and storyline events only happening on rests.
I don't know about you, but if I had a mind flayer parasite in my head and I thought I only had a few days to live I would try to rest as little as possible until I found a cure.
I know they tell you it has been altered to some degree, but iirc nothing tells you that you won't die in a matter of days.
I don't think there are any time limits though. Its been days and the druid leader hasn't done the thing.
Wait, so first it was "wait until Larian actually releases something, you can't judge based on interviews alone." Now its, "You can't judge anything unless you played EA." I'm sorry, but I disagree VERY strongly with this. You don't need to be holding the controller to experience the story. You don't have to have to hold the controller to look at the graphics and presentation. 90% of what makes RPGs unique can 100% be judged without ever playing it.
Honestly, I'm sorry to hear that. That's how I was worried BG3 would make me feel.
I don't think rtwp DnD games are off the table, so tbh I'm still holding out hope, plus there are a few big projects being worked on that excited me just as much as BG3 did anyways.
Maybe I'm just optimistic. But we got SOD, the EE's, and BG3 in the past several years. DnD games are nearly as common now as they were in the Gold Box days.
If you get a bad dice roll and get into combat with someone you don't want to hurt, you can end it without killing them.
I also dislike when game devs think they know better about how to do DnD than DnD players.
But it doesn't even register when I'm playing honestly. It's an issue that will last for the first couple levels basically.
I seriously doubt the majority of people who review bombed SoD even looked at it beyond, "this character exists". I don't think its fair to stonewall criticism of things that doesn't require someone to play it to be able to understand or enjoy it. Remember the great fun we had with Shadowheart jokes? No one had to play the game to know the name is silly.
Funny story, I learned about SOD because of the controversy. I heard about a new Baldurs Gate interquel in the form of some complainy political b.s and practically had a heart attack. I was so out of the loop after such a long stretch of no interesting DnD news.
Like as much as I hate the direction BG3 has gone, I still wouldn't condone review bombing it. When people want a game review, they want to know what the person experienced while playing it. But a bunch of nerds discussing what they see as either strengths or weaknesses is not a review. Its people sharing their opinions. And its healthy.
It must be, I remember Swen was fighting intelect devourers around the crash site (he even killed one, throwing a boot). And Shadowheart should wait in front of that gate. Unless the fact that I failed Arcana check when I tried to help her on the ship resulted her not showing up... which would be extremely odd.
I also suggest having a gander at whatever forum or site they want you to report bugs in and report your happenings there.