Larian Studios - Website Tease

Originally Posted by Maylander
Fairly certain the most successful RPG in recent years with tactical combat is DA: I, which is RTwP,

Pity successful doesn't mean "good". DA: I was a yawn fest as far as combat was concerned for me. Easily the worst of the series. The damn thing nearly plays itself at times. It certainly shouldn't be any model for a prospective BG3 to follow, successful or otherwise.

I'll also have to gently disagree with you regarding the system for a potential BG3. Whilst it makes perfect sense to follow tradition of real time with pause and I'd have no problem if they went in this direction, my counter argument is that it's even more logical to go back further to the roots of AD&D. We haven't had a quality AD&D product for years and for me, hearkening back to the Goldbox games by incorporating a deep AD&D turn based system would be a wonderful way to go. Give us a full complement of six characters though; none of this half assed 4 or 5 character nonsense.

I did think this was going to be D:OS3 at first to be honest, although that assumption is probably too obvious as others have stated. The diablo-style III is worrying though and I really wish they wouldn't choose to do this, but rather simply make another AD&D game in the Forgotten Realms. There's been too many failures by modern developers at making genuine sequels recently for my taste. (Bard's Tale IV and Underworld Ascendant) and it'll take me awhile before I'm confident in gathering my party and setting forth on this one.

Originally Posted by Maylander
If they wanted to make another TB game, go for D: OS3. If they're actually making BG3, stick with RTwP since that's what BG1 and 2 had.

There's a third option now, thanks to Tower of Time: real time with slow time. No reason you can't have 3 gears (stop, slow, real) or even a slider that goes from 0 to 2X.

That's a great point there, Tower of Time did a lot of things right. That's a game that I'm looking forward to replaying later this year or next, due to the many changes that have landed since I completed my first run through.

Originally Posted by Carnifex
That's a great point there, Tower of Time did a lot of things right. That's a game that I'm looking forward to replaying later this year or next, due to the many changes that have landed since I completed my first run through.

Now, that is a game I've managed to overlook (or I've forgotten all about it). Certainly looks interesting. Bought it on sale on GoG now. Thanks to both of you.

pibbur who wonders where he's been the last 12 months.

I'd be happy enough if they took their current engine, transposed it to DnD, and got rid of the loot-scaling and elemental shenanigans.

Originally Posted by Zloth
There's a third option now, thanks to Tower of Time: real time with slow time. No reason you can't have 3 gears (stop, slow, real) or even a slider that goes from 0 to 2X.

And if they really want to be creative, they set the lower bound to -2X instead of zero.

Originally Posted by Andrew23
What I did. Ok.

Based on statement: "IMO DD and EGO Draconis are better games then DOS1+2"
I dared to comment: "That seems more like usual mistake of personal preferences for general game quality".

I made logical assumption and by used expession at the same time I left some space for mistake on my side. Whats your problem?

I have no desire to carry on with you, but I'll call out bullshit every time. Your full response was…

Well, that seems more like usual mistake of personal preferences for general game quality. He likes 3rd person action rpgs more, which makes all isometric party-based games worse then any 3rd person action game. For some reason happens all the time. People going into discussions about games in genres they dislike, bashing them for not being something else. Funny.

Seems pretty obvious you were berating him because of his preference. He said his opinion was that DD and Eco Draconis were better, and that riled you up for some reason despite the fact that he didn't bash anything like you claim.

Originally Posted by Pessimeister
The diablo-style III is worrying though and I really wish they wouldn't choose to do this, but rather simply make another AD&D game in the Forgotten Realms. There's been too many failures by modern developers at making genuine sequels recently for my taste. (Bard's Tale IV and Underworld Ascendant) and it'll take me awhile before I'm confident in gathering my party and setting forth on this one.

That's exactly how I feel. Whether it's a movie or a game, sequels rarely live up to expectations when this much time has passed since the last installment. Your examples are the same games I thought of when I saw the announcement. My only hope is that Larian having greater resources compared to inXile or OtherSide might make a difference.

I expect it'll be a sequel in name only, but I still wish they weren't using that title.

Originally Posted by JDR13
I have no desire to carry on with you, but I'll call out bullshit every time. Your full response was…


Seems pretty obvious you were berating him because of his preference. He said his opinion was that DD and Eco Draconis were better, and that riled you up for some reason despite the fact that he didn't bash anything like you claim.

Anyones preference doesnt make any game better then the other. Counts double when comparing apples with oranges, doom and civilisation or ego draconis and D:OS.

But it seems I received good advice, so I will follow it. Go on as you please…

Originally Posted by Maylander
Fairly certain the most successful RPG in recent years with tactical combat is DA: I, which is RTwP

I tried my damnedest to play DA:I as a tactical game (crank up the difficulty, zoom all the way out, issue individual commands every turn), and that is not what the game was trying to be. At all.

Unlike Pessimeister I enjoyed Inquisition, but that was in spite of itself. I think combat was designed around the way a friend played it, with the difficulty low enough that he could just let the companions do whatever and never pause -- basically treating it as an action game.

Yeah, calling DA:I a "tactical combat" RPG is amusing. Not sure if it was trying to be one? But if it was, it kinda failed miserably at it?

But also, Maylander may have just meant "tactical combat" in the sense of "not action/twitch combat".

Originally Posted by JDR13
That's exactly how I feel. Whether it's a movie or a game, sequels rarely live up to expectations when this much time has passed since the last installment. Your examples are the same games I thought of when I saw the announcement. My only hope is that Larian having greater resources compared to inXile or OtherSide might make a difference.

I expect it'll be a sequel in name only, but I still wish they weren't using that title.

First thing I'd think of is Fallout. Bethesda acquired the Fallout name and then cranked out Fallout 3 (and later sequels) in a completely different style, that most hardcore original Fallout fans didn't like and still don't. (Even though they may be considered quality games by a completely different set of people.) Pretty much exactly the same situation you're worried about here, from what I can tell. If BG3 is coming from Larian it'll be a great RPG, they've never made an RPG that wasn't (imo). But maybe you won't like it.

Originally Posted by Stingray
First thing I'd think of is Fallout. Bethesda acquired the Fallout name and then cranked out Fallout 3 (and later sequels) in a completely different style, that most hardcore original Fallout fans didn't like and still don't. (Even though they may be considered quality games by a completely different set of people.) Pretty much exactly the same situation you're worried about here, from what I can tell. If BG3 is coming from Larian it'll be a great RPG, they've never made an RPG that wasn't (imo). But maybe you won't like it.

I'm a big fan of Larian, and the Divinity series in particular, but not every game they've made was great. Beyond Divinity and Dragon Commander immediately come to mind.

As far as the Fallout comparison, I think Pessimeister's examples are a lot better in terms of what we're afraid of. Fallout 3 was very divisive for sure, but at least it was a solid game for those who like that style. The disappointment in Underworld Ascendant and Bard's Tale IV seems a lot more universal.

Maybe I’m just kidding myself, but D:OS engine with D&D ruleset, monsters, settings and weapons and armor sounds like an absolutely amazing idea.

If it has to be BG3, so be it.

Originally Posted by Pessimeister
There's been too many failures by modern developers at making genuine sequels recently for my taste. (Bard's Tale IV and Underworld Ascendant) and it'll take me awhile before I'm confident in gathering my party and setting forth on this one.

Not that I disagree with you, especially on the part about many disappointments in recent years. Its just funny that quite a few were not really made by new developers. Underworld Ascendant, Bards Tale IV, Shroud of Avatar. Maybe those projects would end up better if done by really new blood. Just thinking aloud :-)

Yea, just because a game series had two games that were done in a certain way - such as Baldur's Gate games being real time with pause; or say the Fallout games - in this case isometric and turn based - doesn't mean the next in the series can't be radically different.

Fallout 3 also came to my mind as well. That was a huge departure from the previous games, this time going 3D and first person (pretty close to a "shooter", but also different)

So, my perfect vision of BG 3 would be:
isometric
turn-based
a story set in a different city or region of the forgotten realms world
the story will basically be completely new, but with a faint BG "tie-in".
but nothing too major.
Must start out low level (start at level 1) and use a good D&D system.
Party of 6 characters (I agree this is ideal)

Originally Posted by JDR13
I'm a big fan of Larian, and the Divinity series in particular, but not every game they've made was great. Beyond Divinity and Dragon Commander immediately come to mind.

Beyond Divinity was a great RPG to me personally. Obviously not one of the "all time greats", but still. As for the critics, it does have a higher Metacritic score than ELEX, a game that seems to be loved by many around here recently. As for Dragon Commander, as far as I know it's not considered an RPG and I haven't played it (although I plan to get around to it someday).

As far as the Fallout comparison, I think Pessimeister's examples are a lot better in terms of what we're afraid of. Fallout 3 was very divisive for sure, but at least it was a solid game for those who like that style. The disappointment in Underworld Ascendant and Bard's Tale IV seems a lot more universal.

I'm confident that, if Larian is making BG3, it will also be a "solid game for those who like its style". I'd go even farther than that and replace the word "solid" with "great". So I still think the Fallout comparison is by far the most apt one. There will be BG fans who don't like it, because it's not what they wanted or what the series was in the past.

Originally Posted by Stingray
Beyond Divinity was a great RPG to me personally. Obviously not one of the "all time greats", but still. As for the critics, it does have a higher Metacritic score than ELEX, a game that seems to be loved by many around here recently. As for Dragon Commander, as far as I know it's not considered an RPG and I haven't played it (although I plan to get around to it someday).

I'm not sure what a third-person open-world game from another developer has to do with Beyond Divinity, but my point was that it's not considered great (or even very good) by most. That doesn't really mean anything in relation to a possible BG3, I'm just saying that not everything Larian has done was a home run.

Originally Posted by Stingray
I'm confident that, if Larian is making BG3, it will also be a "solid game for those who like its style". I'd go even farther than that and replace the word "solid" with "great". So I still think the Fallout comparison is by far the most apt one. There will be BG fans who don't like it, because it's not what they wanted or what the series was in the past.

I don't think we're talking about the same thing. I said his examples are better in terms of what we're afraid of. In other words, what could happen in a bad-case scenario which seems to be the more common one with sequels to older titles. You seem to be projecting a good-case scenario which is fine, but we obviously won't know until after the game is released.

Of course, the best-case scenario would be if they manage to make a game that appeals to both old and new fans alike while capturing the essence of the orignal trilogy.

Originally Posted by JDR13
I don't think we're talking about the same thing. I said his examples are better in terms of what we're afraid of. In other words, what could happen in a bad-case scenario which seems to be the more common one with sequels to older titles. You seem to be projecting a good-case scenario which is fine, but we obviously won't know until after the game is released.

Of course, the best-case scenario would be if they manage to make a game that appeals to both old and new fans alike while capturing the essence of the orignal trilogy.

Nah, I'm projecting the "expected-case scenario" which is based on Larian's long track record of making a variety of different kinds of RPGs, every one of which I thoroughly enjoyed.

If it turns out best-case, then that's even better.

Frankly, it's ludicrous to mention Underworld Ascendant and Larian in the same breath and imply that they may put out something like that.