Originally Posted by Couchpotato
Why Larian can justify calling Baldur's Gate 3…Baldur's Gate 3

Are people still debating about this? It's time they stopped, this is so ridiculous. Especially the "style is different" argument or even better, the "it's not RTwP" argument (I don't think the fact it's a different company was really put forward by many people). As for the plot, who cares, it's the name of the city they're ending up at, and it should play an important role, it's fine.

I personally don't care that it's named BG3. When I first saw someone would make a BG3, I was excited, then I realized it would be Larian and was a bit "meh", and finally I settled with the idea they make good games and that it would be fine, nevermind the name association with BG 1 & 2.

But the marketing argument from Larian (allegedly) that it would increase its success and renown seems to be a big miscalculation if it's true, since this choice is more a source of discontent than success, and it was so predictable. This also made them adopt (or adapt?) the D&D ruleset, which really doesn't suit their style.

Being Larian's ultimate RPG, it would have been a success whatever the name anyway, but they wanted more. The question is, what other setting / name could they have chosen for their glory quest? In order to enter the hall of fame, does one have to imitate someone famous, or make one's own fame?