Baldur's Gate 3 - Gameplay Explained

RockPaperShotgun had some questions for Larian about Baldur's Gate 3.

loading…

New Baldur's Gate 3 gameplay? Go on then. And loads of new Baldur's Gate 3 information as we quiz the game's lead system designer about combat, stealth, classes and, er, how vampires work in Baldur's Gate 3. Loads of juicy stuff here, and more to come!

loading…

Our first Baldur's Gate 3 gameplay breakdown explained stealth and combat, and now we look at Baldur's Gate 3 spells, death, alcohol, reactions, halflings… all the words that get your video flagged. I hope you enjoy this Baldur's Gate 3 features deep dive with Larian Studios' Nick Pechenin.

More information.

Honestly, I don't want to get too hyped, but this game looks like it will have no close competitors for game of the year, to put it lightly.

What year will that be?
Or you ment to say: betatest of the year?

Well it wouldn't surprise me as Original Sin 1&2 made our GOTY and most wanted lists before. Though Pathfinder: Wrath of the Righteous will be hard to beat as well in 2021.

Also there are a lot of RPGs probably releasing next year.

Some of them.

1. Alaloth: Champions of the Four Kingdoms
2. Black Geyser: Couriers of Darkness
3. Colony Ship - A Post-Earth Role Playing Game
4. Death Trash
5. Diablo IV
6. Encased
7. Edge of Eternity
8. Solasta: Crown of the Magister
9. The Waylanders
10. Vampire - The Masquerade: Bloodlines 2
11. Werewolf: The Apocalypse

Then we have Wasteland III and Cyberpunk 2077 this year.

I seriously doubt wasteland 3 will be able to reach even top 10 best of the worst games of the year.

On topic, I have high hopes for BG3 but as I said before - I want from it to allow me roleplaying a mind flayer. If it does, my vote is guaranteed.

Originally Posted by joxer
I seriously doubt wasteland 3 will be able to reach even top 10 best of the worst games of the year.

wasteland 2 made plenty of lists and it looks much better & improved.

Don't really care about the Co-Op elements though so we'll see.

On topic, I have high hopes for BG3 but as I said before - I want from it to allow me roleplaying a mind flayer. If it does, my vote is guaranteed.

Well you have a mind flayer parasite in your brain that grants you super powers. So ergo you are one is some measure. Question is do you embrace it or reject is the story.

I haven't looked much at companions because I don't want spoilers, but I love the design of the githyanki companion. If all the others are like that, we may finally have in our hands a RPG game where companion interactions are actually fulfilling and meaningful, and not just minmax bots to aid you in combat. It's a quality that is a rarity these days.

Hmmm, is it just me, or BG3 looks way too similar to OS2?
Right now BG3 seems to be a big huge mod for OS2 and not a brand new game.

While the DnD mechanics look commendable, I just can't get excited by this. It all looks so derivative.

Orcs, goblins, Underdark, Lolth, Illithids… I would have been intrigued by this 20 years ago, but I find myself bored by the premise of such a trite setting. While one can hope it attracts more people to DnD as BG1 did so before, I just wish the genre wasn't stuck on the Forgotten Realms for all time. But then we wouldn't have the name recognition that comes with a needless BG sequel, now would we?

Originally Posted by duerer
Hmmm, is it just me, or BG3 looks way too similar to OS2?
Right now BG3 seems to be a big huge mod for OS2 and not a brand new game.

It does and it's the reason why were seeing a new Baldur's Gate game. Wizards of the Coast seen how much those games sell, and Swen pitched it with his game engine.

Personally would have preferred the original version but that was cancelled twenty years ago. Though Owl Cat could of developed a similar game if given the chance.

Still I'm sure I will enjoy playing Swen's vision also.

The "BG3 looks like a OS2 reskin" is a baseless meme at this point. It was cute when we didn't know anything about the game and we had seen just a few screenshots, but now it feels like people who get stuck in that simplification are either looking to scorn the studio for lack of creativity or identity towards the Baldur's Gate franchise, or just haven't bothered to dig further.

Nothing in Baldur's Gate 3 plays like it did in Original Sin. The only similarity comes from the graphical aspect, which is derived from using a very similar in-house game engine, only somewhat evolved in the time lapse between both games, and the fact that both are party-based RPGs with turn-based combat. But many games in the past have used the same engine and looked similar while retaining completely different identities, and such is the case here, I believe.

It is a fool's trap to fall into the comparison, because there is none. No systems are similar, the combat rolls and skill rolls are completely different, the gearing and levelling is completely different, the mood and the theme, the way you interact with companions, NPCs and the world, everything is completely different, and in my opinion saying "BG3 is a mod of OS2" only does a disservice to your perceived intelligence as an individual.

Perhaps the fault is that some of us would like the game to look more "old-school", because Larian gave Baldur's Gate a facelift that possibly conflicts with the old-school crew, and falls outside of their sacred sanctum. But that is out of the charts now, and all that remains in order to enjoy it is to embrace it as it is.

Notice I said game engine not plays like OS 1&2. Again game engine the graphics are similar. I'm sure Swen will reuse systems and other stuff as well. Again never said copy.

It's the same with every Unity Isometric game. They look the same. Also you are daft if you don't think OS 1&2 isn't the reason why Larian got the IP for the third game.

If that's not a satisfactory answer for you whatever.

Note: Previews/players so far compare it/says it's similar to the OS games but better.

I am sure Larian got the IP because they were worth it, and they proved it with OS1 and 2. I am also sure other studios could have done a good job at it, not so sure if as good as Larian is doing, as they seem fully invested in it. going all lengths to make a superb product that DnD fans can identify with.

I do wonder if Owlcat of Obsidian had picked up the IP, would people be like "oh it looks like a Pathfinder/PoE mod". I'm sure they wouldn't, because both those games lack identity themselves, and while good games, just follow the well proven old-school formula absent innovation or taking any risks of any kind, which in turn squared them into the old-school RPG niche that keeps them from ascending higher. Last I heard, PoE frachise, good as it is, wasn't even a huge financial success. Can't speak of Pathfinder, but I imagine they won't be having a commercial in the break time of the Superbowl either.

That is what Larian has to deal with as they aim to elevate Baldur's Gate to be more than an old-school RPG, and hopefully they'll succeed. If they don't, I'll be the first to lament it here.

I think it looks similar to a fantasy rpg.

What it boils down to is different developers and visions, versus old time players, and new modern gamer's with different expectations. I hope it turns out good as well.

Originally Posted by rune_74
I think it looks similar to a fantasy rpg.

Yep but it's using the Bladur's Gate name, if it didn't would be less controversy.

Originally Posted by Nereida
I am sure Larian got the IP because they were worth it, and they proved it with OS1 and 2. I am also sure other studios could have done a good job at it, not so sure if as good as Larian is doing, as they seem fully invested in it. going all lengths to make a superb product that DnD fans can identify with.

I do wonder if Owlcat of Obsidian had picked up the IP, would people be like "oh it looks like a Pathfinder/PoE mod". I'm sure they wouldn't, because both those games lack identity themselves, and while good games, just follow the well proven old-school formula absent innovation or taking any risks of any kind, which in turn squared them into the old-school RPG niche that keeps them from ascending higher. Last I heard, PoE frachise, good as it is, wasn't even a huge financial success. Can't speak of Pathfinder, but I imagine they won't be having a commercial in the break time of the Superbowl either.

That is what Larian has to deal with as they aim to elevate Baldur's Gate to be more than an old-school RPG, and hopefully they'll succeed. If they don't, I'll be the first to lament it here.

Curious what you mean by "more than old-school RPG". Are you talking about the co-op features? Could care less about that. I didn't really think the Original Sin games were that good, I think they were Ok at best and they WAY over did the environment effects use in combat scenarios. I also dont like how they are in big chunks of land masses and you cannot freely explore the entire world as you want but have to move through chapters to see new areas.

Count me in the camp that thinks it looks like the OS2 engine with D&D rules added in.

Speaking about old-school that is what I prefer personally and again I am curious what innovations you are talking about? If its social aspects or co-op could care less about that too. Maybe new school is also console ports?

Pillars of Eternity franchise didn't sell great because of the writing IMO not the style of game it was. It had large lore dumps all over the place with bland boring writing and just didnt draw people in that much myself included. I liked the first game but didnt love it.

Also why do all the characters in BG3 look like they just came from the hair salon in Beverly Hills?

Originally Posted by duerer
Hmmm, is it just me, or BG3 looks way too similar to OS2?
Right now BG3 seems to be a big huge mod for OS2 and not a brand new game.

You know it's not just you. It's been stated approximately 241 times on this forum alone.

Originally Posted by Saxon1974
Curious what you mean by "more than old-school RPG". Are you talking about the co-op features? Could care less about that. I didn't really think the Original Sin games were that good, I think they were Ok at best and they WAY over did the environment effects use in combat scenarios. I also dont like how they are in big chunks of land masses and you cannot freely explore the entire world as you want but have to move through chapters to see new areas.

Count me in the camp that thinks it looks like the OS2 engine with D&D rules added in.

Speaking about old-school that is what I prefer personally and again I am curious what innovations you are talking about? If its social aspects or co-op could care less about that too. Maybe new school is also console ports?

Pillars of Eternity franchise didn't sell great because of the writing IMO not the style of game it was. It had large lore dumps all over the place with bland boring writing and just didnt draw people in that much myself included. I liked the first game but didnt love it.

Also why do all the characters in BG3 look like they just came from the hair salon in Beverly Hills?

My grandfather didn't care about cellphones when they became the thing of the future. The fact that you don't care about something does not mean it isn't good, or even necessary.

To me, co-op is essential, but maybe that's because I have someone to play with and I've grown with different groups of online roleplayers that have rolled dice in every possible online media, from Roll20 to Sword Coast Legends, loving an hating every one of them for different reasons.

To me, verticality is also essential.

To me, a polished and responsive user interface is essential.

To me, having abilities with tactical value that feel impactful and battletide-swinging are essential.

To me, that my spells and abilities have environmental impact and can create opportunities (or calamities) for your party is also essential.

To me, beautifully animated 3D environments are essential.

To me, even that the Githyanki companion looks like she came out from the hair salon in Beverly Hills is essential, in a way.

I don't particularly care about console ports, but if it brings more people to the game, sure, why not? As long as the game doesn't suffer because it has to be accommodated to the fact that it will need to be played with a controller, I'm game.

Maybe you think you could call your mom just the same if you just wait to get home and dial up her number, but the world somehow preferred cellphones. And I somehow prefer games that live up to what the modern technologies can offer.

Originally Posted by Nereida
The "BG3 looks like a OS2 reskin" is a baseless meme at this point. It was cute when we didn't know anything about the game and we had seen just a few screenshots, but now it feels like people who get stuck in that simplification are either looking to scorn the studio for lack of creativity or identity towards the Baldur's Gate franchise, or just haven't bothered to dig further.

Nothing in Baldur's Gate 3 plays like it did in Original Sin. The only similarity comes from the graphical aspect, which is derived from using a very similar in-house game engine, only somewhat evolved in the time lapse between both games, and the fact that both are party-based RPGs with turn-based combat. But many games in the past have used the same engine and looked similar while retaining completely different identities, and such is the case here, I believe.

It is a fool's trap to fall into the comparison, because there is none. No systems are similar, the combat rolls and skill rolls are completely different, the gearing and levelling is completely different, the mood and the theme, the way you interact with companions, NPCs and the world, everything is completely different, and in my opinion saying "BG3 is a mod of OS2" only does a disservice to your perceived intelligence as an individual.

Perhaps the fault is that some of us would like the game to look more "old-school", because Larian gave Baldur's Gate a facelift that possibly conflicts with the old-school crew, and falls outside of their sacred sanctum. But that is out of the charts now, and all that remains in order to enjoy it is to embrace it as it is.

This would have been a very good posting if it wasn't for the comment about intelligence.

It wasn't mean as an offense, but as an observation. I am also, on occasion, victim of jumping to conclusions without checking the facts, especially when tainted by confirmation bias. Which is a behaviour absent of intelligence on my part, when it does occur, and often regrettable.

Note I also said "perceived intelligence", not actual intelligence. Does not mean to be less intelligent to do such things, only appear so, in that circumstance.