As Julius says, there's no evidence that games that do early access end up as bad games any more than games that don't. There is evidence that Larian has taken their core consumer base pretty seriously in their past titles, most especially in the OS games. With tons of post-release fine polishing -- as much as any other company releasing RPG's in this era. So I don't think a cynical take on this news at all matches with the facts.
I'll for sure say that if players don't want to play a game during early access, or, heck, even until after all the DLC comes out, that's totally justified. I think the original Pillars title was an incredibly great product post DLC. I think Pathfinder:Kingmaker was a trainwreck of a product on its initial release. So, yeah, I totally think players are justified in wanting their first playthroughs to be on the absolute best polished version of the game.
So yeah, I probably won't play early access either, but I don't think the end product is going to be hurt by its usage.
I personally would not pay for Early Access, but that's because it's just the way I am as a consumer. I prefer to buy the finished product, when most bugs are already ironed out. If they do release a demo of BG3 though, I will happily download it to get a personal look at how the game's going to play; I'm not averse to the general concept of developers letting players in early to look around, get a sense of how players are likely to take to various features etc.
Transcription of what WotC president Chris Cocks said :
"D&D is coming up on its sixth year of growth. [...] D&D also has a massive digital gaming potential. The global market for roleplaying games on PC and consoles has reached $12 billion annually.
Among the demographics that play these games, 65% have a positive brand awareness for Dungeons and Dragons, among the highest of any fantasy IPs whether that's in gaming or general entertainment and we have seven games in development ready to meet that demand.
The first of these games coming to market is Baldur's Gate III. Baldur's Gate III is the long-awaited third installment in the hit roleplaying game franchise beloved by generations of D&D and RPG fans alike. It is the result of our collaboration with Larian Studios, famous for the critically acclaimed Divinity series of roleplaying games.
The game is a story-driven RPG that pushes the boundary of the genre and offers unparalleled player freedom, high-stake decisions, unique companions, and memorable content. Larian will be showing the game next weekend at PAX East and it will enter early access later this year."
Been there, done that. My recommendation of waiting out the coming Early Access remains the same.
Assuming we are not talking about a cash-grabby hit and run studio here are some ways to go about buying the game:
Option 1: Pay for Early Access, play a bad beta version at the start - Great if you feel like spending your time for free to improve it. You could do a quite a bit if you want to give feedback, hunt for bugs, etc. For you, great if you want to participate in making the game better and be part of the community, bad in nearly any other sense. Can be good for you, is good for the game, great for the studio.
Option 2: Pay for EA, forget about it until it's released and patched - No wasting of your time, still good for the studio, the extra money in development could still help bring a better game. You can be happy you're supporting the studio and patiently wait, then play a polished game. So-so for you, nice for the game, good for the studio.
Option 3: Skip EA, buy the game when it's out (if any good) - Business as usual. Uncomplicated, no risk. So-so for you, so-so for the game, so-so for the studio.
Option 4: Skip EA, skip release date, skip DLCs, skip a year or two more, get a great price when there's a sale - You get the best product you can get (if sufficiently many people are not like you) at the lowest price. Miss out on community, hype, social fun but you save money and don't waste time on half-finished stuff. Can be good for you, is bad for the game, bad for the studio.
Depending on how the game seems to be going, I'd go for either option 2 or 4. Option 1 is great if you have the time and interest, but I don't have these any more.
Any of these can be a good choice (for you), depending of what you're after. I wouldn't go for option 1 if I want a polished product and no wasted time, but I wouldn't go for 4 if I want to participate a lot and the game to be the best game possible.
Tomorrow is a special day. The Baldur's Gate 3 gameplay will be revealed.
Irrelevant of what you think about that game, this feels like a truly surreal moment. Almost 20 years have passed since the BG2 release. And now we're getting the gameplay of the next game in the series!
I keep thinking about @kanisatha 's and other users' views. Here's my answer: if potential D:OS 3 was using RTwP, I'd still play it - because RPGs for me are characters, stories first and foremost, the gameplay always comes second. I'd be interested to explore the D:OS universe, even in RTwP.
I hope this will serve as a kind of reconciliation - we'll get the info about BG3 gameplay (and combat mode) tomorrow - but I really don't want these TB vs RTwP fights to continue.
@JuliusBorisov Think you might have mixed up your script and got the one from Larian by mistake. Shouldn't you say something along the lines of "it's been shy four years and a month since we last saw a new Baldur's Gate game in the series"?
Siege of Dragonspear is a really great testament the Infinity Engine can still excite players nowadays. But chronologically, it comes before BG2, and BG3 will be 100 hundred years later. So I stand by my message.
I'm excited to see what they come up with from using the Baldur's Gate name to brew up interest! Perhaps a few Easter eggs to give a throw back to those who played the originals!
Personally I find the style of dialogue, past tense table-top-like, jarring to say the least. Like it's our protagonist re-telling their story after the fact.
Yep, seeing the enemy 3d portraits up in the left corner and the combat log reporting "Combat started" sure tells the tale of BG3 using TB combat. Ah well, back to play Kingmaker.
I guess we'll see more soon, but it sure looks like the obvious prediction that the game would bear little to no resemblance to its supposed predecessors is getting a confirmation today.
As someone who enjoyed Divinity Original Sin 2, I admit I would enjoy this game if it didn't have the 'Baldur's Gate' name attached to it. As a separate, D&D 5E game I would even look forward to it.
...But nothing about the screenshots screams/'feels' like Baldur's Gate to me. Not yet.
The lack of drawn portraits and different POV during dialogue doesn't fit IMHO.
I'm trying to keep an open mind, to judge after the gameplay shown later today, but this feels more like D:OS3 to me personally.
I agreed, I wrote a bit about that on the leaked screenshot thread. The interface is very D:OS and very little BG, same holds for character portraits and icon design.
The past-tense narrative style CHARNAME dialogue is not exactly doing much for me ("And then I said xxxxx" instead of "xxxx"). It will be interesting if that gets used to foreshadowing at some point as in this structure: "I asked about xxxx, not knowing yet that yyyyy").
Reverse grip on that sword - also not a fan, but just seems to be fashionable at the moment.
Aesthetically I like many of the screenshots, especially the arch.
We have no idea when that dialogue takes place. It may be your character telling something that happened in the past to someone else.
I wouldn't say "may" it is clear written as the events having happened in the past from the perspective of CHARNAME. Only question will be how much that framing matters.
Open questions would be: is this for the entire game or just a portion of it? And if it ever takes you to the present and if so for how long. Will the narrative rely in some ways on being presented as something that happened in the past or is it just a stylistic choice?
We have no idea when that dialogue takes place. It may be your character telling something that happened in the past to someone else.
I wouldn't say "may" it is clear written as the events having happened in the past from the perspective of CHARNAME. Only question will be how much that framing matters.
Open questions would be: is this for the entire game or just a portion of it? And if it ever takes you to the present and if so for how long. Will the narrative rely in some ways on being presented as something that happened in the past or is it just a stylistic choice?
What I meant is we have no idea if the entire game is written in the past tense. This could be a scene where charname is telling someone something that happened in the past.
I like the quality of the models in dialogue mode.
The depth of field there is really bad though, with the either sharp or one level of blurry (lack of)gradation. Hopefully that improves.
Looks like already having the rtwp + turn mode is possible. On the "in battle" screenshot the AP (action point?) is unused even right after shooting an arrow (that trajectory), which seems like enough time may have passed for the next round to start. Edit: Actually, not really, everybody else seem to be patiently waiting their turn.
I like that the effects of fire (on the arrows from the traps) are local and don't flood the screen with shiny.
The maps look a bit too busy, it seems like there's always something getting in the way. Trees and the like.
The retelling voice gives creative freedom to fill in the blanks, but I imagine it would cause trouble with well-written/humorous dialogue options for CHARNAME.
Can't say I'm impressed or turned off. Hopefully the rules implementation, encounters, story, writing, etc, are good enough to ignore anything else.
@ThacoBell I will have to disagree with you there. It’s only a small amount we can see but I like what I see so far and can’t wait to see more. You’re more than entitled to your opinion though. Times change and games evolve. I personally never wanted an infinity engine copy for Baldur's Gate 3. And I’m only seeing positive things so far.
Comments
I'll for sure say that if players don't want to play a game during early access, or, heck, even until after all the DLC comes out, that's totally justified. I think the original Pillars title was an incredibly great product post DLC. I think Pathfinder:Kingmaker was a trainwreck of a product on its initial release. So, yeah, I totally think players are justified in wanting their first playthroughs to be on the absolute best polished version of the game.
So yeah, I probably won't play early access either, but I don't think the end product is going to be hurt by its usage.
And btw @JuliusBorisov that's why I keep asking when AAO will leave Early Access, because I won't even consider buying it until then.
"D&D is coming up on its sixth year of growth. [...] D&D also has a massive digital gaming potential. The global market for roleplaying games on PC and consoles has reached $12 billion annually.
Among the demographics that play these games, 65% have a positive brand awareness for Dungeons and Dragons, among the highest of any fantasy IPs whether that's in gaming or general entertainment and we have seven games in development ready to meet that demand.
The first of these games coming to market is Baldur's Gate III. Baldur's Gate III is the long-awaited third installment in the hit roleplaying game franchise beloved by generations of D&D and RPG fans alike. It is the result of our collaboration with Larian Studios, famous for the critically acclaimed Divinity series of roleplaying games.
The game is a story-driven RPG that pushes the boundary of the genre and offers unparalleled player freedom, high-stake decisions, unique companions, and memorable content. Larian will be showing the game next weekend at PAX East and it will enter early access later this year."
https://wccftech.com/baldurs-gate-iii-to-debut-in-early-access-later-this-year-game-will-offer-unparalleled-player-freedom/
Assuming we are not talking about a cash-grabby hit and run studio here are some ways to go about buying the game:
Option 1: Pay for Early Access, play a bad beta version at the start - Great if you feel like spending your time for free to improve it. You could do a quite a bit if you want to give feedback, hunt for bugs, etc. For you, great if you want to participate in making the game better and be part of the community, bad in nearly any other sense. Can be good for you, is good for the game, great for the studio.
Option 2: Pay for EA, forget about it until it's released and patched - No wasting of your time, still good for the studio, the extra money in development could still help bring a better game. You can be happy you're supporting the studio and patiently wait, then play a polished game. So-so for you, nice for the game, good for the studio.
Option 3: Skip EA, buy the game when it's out (if any good) - Business as usual. Uncomplicated, no risk. So-so for you, so-so for the game, so-so for the studio.
Option 4: Skip EA, skip release date, skip DLCs, skip a year or two more, get a great price when there's a sale - You get the best product you can get (if sufficiently many people are not like you) at the lowest price. Miss out on community, hype, social fun but you save money and don't waste time on half-finished stuff. Can be good for you, is bad for the game, bad for the studio.
Depending on how the game seems to be going, I'd go for either option 2 or 4. Option 1 is great if you have the time and interest, but I don't have these any more.
Any of these can be a good choice (for you), depending of what you're after. I wouldn't go for option 1 if I want a polished product and no wasted time, but I wouldn't go for 4 if I want to participate a lot and the game to be the best game possible.
Irrelevant of what you think about that game, this feels like a truly surreal moment. Almost 20 years have passed since the BG2 release. And now we're getting the gameplay of the next game in the series!
I keep thinking about @kanisatha 's and other users' views. Here's my answer: if potential D:OS 3 was using RTwP, I'd still play it - because RPGs for me are characters, stories first and foremost, the gameplay always comes second. I'd be interested to explore the D:OS universe, even in RTwP.
I hope this will serve as a kind of reconciliation - we'll get the info about BG3 gameplay (and combat mode) tomorrow - but I really don't want these TB vs RTwP fights to continue.
Honestly; looks like "DOS3" But i really wish that is only visual wise. Not mechanic wise.
...But nothing about the screenshots screams/'feels' like Baldur's Gate to me. Not yet.
The lack of drawn portraits and different POV during dialogue doesn't fit IMHO.
I'm trying to keep an open mind, to judge after the gameplay shown later today, but this feels more like D:OS3 to me personally.
That said the area screenshots are beautiful.
The past-tense narrative style CHARNAME dialogue is not exactly doing much for me ("And then I said xxxxx" instead of "xxxx"). It will be interesting if that gets used to foreshadowing at some point as in this structure: "I asked about xxxx, not knowing yet that yyyyy").
Reverse grip on that sword - also not a fan, but just seems to be fashionable at the moment.
Aesthetically I like many of the screenshots, especially the arch.
Screenshots. Can’t wait for the full reveal later.
I wouldn't say "may" it is clear written as the events having happened in the past from the perspective of CHARNAME. Only question will be how much that framing matters.
Open questions would be: is this for the entire game or just a portion of it? And if it ever takes you to the present and if so for how long. Will the narrative rely in some ways on being presented as something that happened in the past or is it just a stylistic choice?
What I meant is we have no idea if the entire game is written in the past tense. This could be a scene where charname is telling someone something that happened in the past.
The depth of field there is really bad though, with the either sharp or one level of blurry (lack of)gradation. Hopefully that improves.
Looks like already having the rtwp + turn mode is possible. On the "in battle" screenshot the AP (action point?) is unused even right after shooting an arrow (that trajectory), which seems like enough time may have passed for the next round to start. Edit: Actually, not really, everybody else seem to be patiently waiting their turn.
I like that the effects of fire (on the arrows from the traps) are local and don't flood the screen with shiny.
The maps look a bit too busy, it seems like there's always something getting in the way. Trees and the like.
The retelling voice gives creative freedom to fill in the blanks, but I imagine it would cause trouble with well-written/humorous dialogue options for CHARNAME.
Can't say I'm impressed or turned off. Hopefully the rules implementation, encounters, story, writing, etc, are good enough to ignore anything else.
This is not the next game in the series. This does not look or feel anything like BG.
Games DEVOLVE.
Modern games are worst than 20 yo games in every aspect(except graphics) and looking to the screenshots, looks more like "DOS3" than "BG3"...