Baldur's Gate 3 - Gameplay and Impressions

Originally Posted by ChaosTheory
I don't understand the "it looks like DOS so therefore it's not BG" criticism. Did you want iso with hand-drawn maps or something? I understand if you don't like the way Larian writes dialogue, as OS 1 was pretty bad, but I thought they improved quite a bit for the sequel.

The bottom line for me is this:

1) Larian made 2 RPGs I really enjoyed already.

2) It's D&D, which I love. And it's a Baldur's Gate SEQUEL-- arguably the single greatest classic RPG series ever made.

3) It looks a lot like Neverwinter Nights 2, which I actually enjoyed more than BG.

4) I also see the XCOM vibe here, and XCOM is my favorite game series ever.

5) The graphics/character models/animations look brilliant to me.

This game looks pure-win to me.

BG hand-drawn maps still look 1000x better then most of contemporary 3d wannabe production. DOS included.

Not that I would hate DOS for how it looks like, just sayin.

Originally Posted by Stingray
Yep. Fallout 3 was a much bigger departure from Fallout 2, than BG3 will be from BG2. Meanwhile, Fallout 3 won GOTY on this very site, and Fallout 3 wasn't even very good BG3 will be very good.

Well, it certainly didn't get my vote…

Originally Posted by Andrew23
BG hand-drawn maps still look 1000x better then most of contemporary 3d wannabe production. DOS included.

Not that I would hate DOS for how it looks like, just sayin.

BG2 is, imo, a terrific looking game, even now. But I think that's because they had kick-ass designers and artists. The technical methods only take you so far.

To use a different example, FFXIII was criticized for a lot of things but generally lauded for its graphics. And its graphics were certainly polished and technically proficient. But the cut scenes were incoherent and the design was uninspired. It technically had better graphics than its predecessors, but it was much ado about nothing. You can't be a great painter because you buy expensive paints and an expensive brush and know everything there is to know about painting technique. You also have to have some freaking talent.

Hopefully BG3 has some great, creative, inspired artists working on it. What methods they use to go about putting their vision in the game is much less important to me.

Originally Posted by ChaosTheory
I don't understand the "it looks like DOS so therefore it's not BG" criticism. Did you want iso with hand-drawn maps or something? I understand if you don't like the way Larian writes dialogue, as OS 1 was pretty bad, but I thought they improved quite a bit for the sequel.

That is summing the resemblance to graphics. It looks more than D OS, it smells like, it tastes like, it feels like , it sounds like D OS.

2) It's D&D, which I love. And it's a Baldur's Gate SEQUEL--

Only by paper.

This game looks pure-win to me.

Of course it is. It soothes.

Originally Posted by JFarrell71
Who wants to tell him that Larian is not an American company?

They are not. And. They serve. They are here to serve. There is no nationality, gender, race to serve the master in the american system. Where the idea comes from.

Originally Posted by Stingray
Yep. Fallout 3 was a much bigger departure from Fallout 2, than BG3 will be from BG2. Meanwhile, Fallout 3 won GOTY on this very site, and Fallout 3 wasn't even very good BG3 will be very good.

Bold statement. And of course BG3 is going to be awesome: it is UgoIgo. This feature alone earns it a retinue of no player left behind program fanatics.
Reviewers who will have the wrong idea of emitting doubts about the quality of the product will get themselves a rough treatment.

Originally Posted by Andrew23
BG hand-drawn maps still look 1000x better then most of contemporary 3d wannabe production. DOS included.

BG maps being hand-drawn is a widespread myth. They're actually done in 3D, pre-rendered, and then shipped with the game as 2D images. Sometimes tweaks are done by hand on the resulting 2D image. Pre-rendering allows an unlimited level of detail on the maps since you don't have to worry about the impact on framerate at runtime.

We didn't see anything really BG related yet.
The second we'll see some footages of Beregost or even Baldur's Gate (city), the hype will be real (I actually hope there won't be too many easter eggs or callbacks to the first games, that would be lame).

I'm just glad to be going back to the Sword Coast, with a new adventure and a system closer to DnD.

PS: Only thing I don't like really are the stupid animations/dances that characters do when activating non magical abilities, and the ugly glows and effects…
It was already silly in DOS and it has nothing to do in a DnD setting.

Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur
They are not. And. They serve. They are here to serve. There is no nationality, gender, race to serve the master in the american system. Where the idea comes from.

Sure buddy.

Originally Posted by Stingray
BG maps being hand-drawn is a widespread myth. They're actually done in 3D, pre-rendered, and then shipped with the game as 2D images. Sometimes tweaks are done by hand on the resulting 2D image. Pre-rendering allows an unlimited level of detail on the maps since you don't have to worry about the impact on framerate at runtime.

Ever since the invention of the free-movement camera in RPGs, I'm unable to return to the dark ages of pixel-hunting on fixed perspective maps, hand-drawn or otherwise.

Originally Posted by Winterfart
We didn't see anything really BG related yet.
The second we'll see some footages of Beregost or even Baldur's Gate (city), the hype will be real.

BALDUR'S GATE 2 does not have Baldur's Gate (or Beregost) in it. I guess that's not a real Baldur's Gate game either?

Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur
They are not. And. They serve. They are here to serve. There is no nationality, gender, race to serve the master in the american system. Where the idea comes from.

Your gaze pierces the night. Only you can free our eyes from the gloam of ignorance. Only you can show us the way out of institutionalized double standards. Stream your way into our hearts, oh Chien. Lead us to a greater tomorrow.

Originally Posted by JFarrell71
BALDUR'S GATE 2 does not have Baldur's Gate (or Beregost) in it. I guess that's not a real Baldur's Gate game either?

Wrong guess, then.

All I'm saying is we haven't see much to link this game to the other YET.

Chill out.

Originally Posted by Winterfart
Chill out.

Hey, don't blame me. I didn't put your foot in your mouth.

Well, I'm blaming you.

I'm not critizising your new favourite game, It's the opposite.

So learn to read, or CHILL OUT.
(better doing to both, actually)



PS: BTW the devs said the game was taking place near the city of Baldur, that's why I didn't talk about Akathla…

Originally Posted by Winterfart
So learn to read, or CHILL OUT.
(better doing to both, actually)

I get it, you're embarrassed. You're just making it worse, though. I can only read what you write, bud.

Oh, no another annoying person.

Bye.

Originally Posted by TomRon
@joxer, Turn based might indeed be a better fit for this game, I'm just saying it won't feel like BG to me. I think both NwN2 and PF:KM (and PoE as well) did a fine job of handling a more complex system than BG in RTwP, so I don't really see why they *couldn't*.

I'm basicly on the same boat. I really hoped that the combat system would be designed around real time with pause mechanics. There is so much one can do with such system. Turn based just feels so rigid. The gameplay in baldur's gates has a great flow because they're not turn based. It can be really fast paced. And you need to be able to think on your feet since encounters aren't always easier to predict. I love the uncertainty that comes with rtwp system. You can't always be fully in control of your party which is fun in it's own way. And you have to be able to react when things go south.

I will be playing BG3 at some point naturally, but I just wish they had not just settled on TB. I wanted to see how Larian would have designed the rtwp system..maybe there is even room for new innovations?

Edit: I can't help myself of not quoting this article: https://www.pcgamer.com/it-sucks-tha…is-turn-based/

First off, I love the feeling of stacking up a bunch of orders, then watching the results of my decisions unfold in real-time in front of me. It makes a battle feel like an actual fight—a chaotic, kinetic scrap—and not just a game of rock, paper, scissors with goblins. Watching your party swiftly and efficiently take out a group of powerful enemies, with spells, buffs, debuffs, and attacks that you've carefully thought about and queued up, is immensely satisfying. And if you screw up, you can quickly pause, reassess the battlefield, and try a different strategy without having to wait for every enemy on the board to take a turn.

Delrith intreviews Swen (I suggest skipping the first minute):



I saw a bear. Damn.

The Sword Coast would have nothing to fear if JFarrell71 was defending it.

I'm somewhat baffled by this. Why not just make D: OS3? Or, if they really want to do D&D, start a fresh franchise with Wizards of the Coast?

I'm sure this will be a perfectly fine game, just like D: OS1 and 2 were, but there's nothing here that indicates it will be a Baldur's Gate game.

Comparisons to things like Fallout, Elder Scrolls or GTA are inaccurate, because in those cases the name of the setting is also the name of the franchise. The games are mainly related via the franchise.

Baldur's Gate, on the other hand, is simply one of several series set in the Forgotten Realms, so the keyword here is Forgotten Realms, not Baldur's Gate. Direct sequels should therefore be related either in style or story, or it's just a marketing gimmick.

I'm getting Torment: Tides of Numenera feelings here, and that's not a good sign, as that was nowhere near Planescape: Torment in my opinion.

Originally Posted by ChaosTheory
I don't understand the "it looks like DOS so therefore it's not BG" criticism. Did you want iso with hand-drawn maps or something? I understand if you don't like the way Larian writes dialogue, as OS 1 was pretty bad, but I thought they improved quite a bit for the sequel.

The bottom line for me is this:

1) Larian made 2 RPGs I really enjoyed already.

2) It's D&D, which I love. And it's a Baldur's Gate SEQUEL-- arguably the single greatest classic RPG series ever made.

3) It looks a lot like Neverwinter Nights 2, which I actually enjoyed more than BG.

4) I also see the XCOM vibe here, and XCOM is my favorite game series ever.

5) The graphics/character models/animations look brilliant to me.

This game looks pure-win to me.

I agree with everything here (except loving the D&D), but have now come out in a rash at the thought of the crushing disappointment if they mess this up.