Baldur's Gate 3 - Gameplay and Impressions

JFarrell71 said:

The setting and the rules, which is all that needs to connect it.

Click to expand...

If that's your opinion, that's fine, but it's obvious not everyone feels the same. I think Moorkh is referring more to the overall feel of the game or the "soul" if you will, and I agree. Of course we're only judging an early gameplay video at this point, so no one knows for sure.

Not that it doesn't look promising. I like a lot of what I saw, but to me it's Baldur's Gate in name only. I would have preferred that they used a different title or at least used a subtitle rather than "3".

JDR13 said:

If that's your opinion, that's fine, but it's obvious not everyone feels the same. I think Moorkh is referring more to the overall feel of the game or the "soul" if you will, and I agree.

Click to expand...

How am I or anyone else supposed to respond to claims that a short video doesn't display the "soul" of Baldur's Gate? There's nothing objective about that, and it would mean a thousand different things to a thousand different people.

Moorkh can talk about what he means when he says "special art-wise", but he doesn't, so I'm left to conclude that he a) can't articulate it, b) is just nostalgic for a game and doesn't know what is special about it save that it's special to him because he liked it years ago, or c) wants it to have sprite art on prerendered backgrounds.

JFarrell71 said:

How am I or anyone else supposed to respond to claims that a short video doesn't display the "soul" of Baldur's Gate? There's nothing objective about that, and it would mean a thousand different things to a thousand different people.

Moorkh can talk about what he means when he says "special art-wise", but he doesn't, so I'm left to conclude that he a) can't articulate it, b) is just nostalgic for a game and doesn't know what is special about it save that it's special to him because he liked it years ago, or c) wants it to have sprite art on prerendered backgrounds.

Click to expand...

That's amusing considering the only person here acting like what they said was objective is you. Moorkh was obviously just stating his opinion.

Rather than being triggered because someone else might not be as enthused about it as you are, you should just accept that not everyone is going to feel the same way.

JDR13 said:

Rather than being triggered because someone else might not be as enthused about it as you are, you should just accept that not everyone is going to feel the same way.

Click to expand...

Don't care whether people like what I do or not. But there's a lot of disliking for the sake of disliking going on.

To those who think BG3 is not a Baldur's Gate game:
Don't you remember how some game series have changed over time? Elder Scrolls, Ultima or GTA?
E.g. the change from 90° top town GTA2 to 3D GTA3 - it changed the game experience completely, but GTA3 was the GTA that got this series so popular.
A game series should be allowed to change over time - and has to change over time to attract a new audience. The old will not grow.

People can dislike whatever they want. We dont owe anything to Larian. We dont have to give their game chance for whatever artificial reason. People who loved BG and didnt like DOS, can rightfully question if this will be game for them.

That said, I kinda liked what I saw in this BG3 gameplay. It has all parts that I like in my games. On the other hand, DOS also had potential to be great game for me. Yet, I didnt like it much. The story, the visual design, the characters. It just didnt work. For me, that game was missing some important part which is hard to describe in few words. Soul? Why not.

Looks great to be honest, I really liked what i saw. Granted, it does look similar to OS 2. I still like the look though.

This is probably pre-alpha, right? OS 2 pre-alpha was quite different from what was released. I am fairly certain that many things will change by release. They usually take feedback pretty seriously and will change things that do not appeal.

That said, I hope the game has those darker tones that BG had.

It looks somewhat better than I expected. It looks like Larian has made some significant improvements to their engine and I'm hoping it will get even better in the next year (or 2).

I am disappointed about the lack of RTwP though. I will probably hold off on buying it till it goes on sale unless they have a good physical collectors edition.

I watched Swen's presentation live for a bit and there were people raging in chat because it looked too much like a D:OS game. What did they expect? Larian is using their own engine that they built over the years, there are going to be similarities. They were never going to create a Baldur's Gate game that looks and plays exactly like the previous games, Swen loves building a better game with each new game he creates, so he would not just copy the previous Baldur's Gate games.

However, I do think that it would have been better if they just created a total new game in the D&D universe and not call it Baldur's Gate. WotC is handing out licenses to every developer on the planet (there are 7 games in development right now). Larian could've asked for a license and created something else, and they would receive a lot less flak for it.

All that said, I do think it looks already quite good. And it's only early access. Larian does not hesitate to make big changes or start over parts if something doesn't work, so a lot can still change.

Those videos show exactly what could be expected from Larian's Baldur's Gate 3 - and I like it. I don't know about the "soul" of Baldur's Gate, and I couldn't care less. We're in 2020 now, and I'm really glad about a few things, such as the fact that they went turn-based, they toned down the absurd humor from Divinity, and they added cutscenes, voiceovers, and more meaningful dialogue choices.

All in all, this is a preorder as soon as available and day 1 binge for me.

The one obvious negative thing I can think about is that I wish that such an important and iconic RPG release didn't have Early Access so that whenever I got my hands on it, it'd be a full and freshly finalized product, not a certain iteration of something that has been around for a while and thoroughly dismantled by streamers and their thousand viewers in a way that doesn't even feel like a new game anymore. I truly, truly hate profoundly the Early Access culture for anything that's not like.. an online only shooter.

I suppose companies use EA as source of cheap betatesting workforce. Why not, if people are even willing to pay for that opportunity. Im certainly not. I only pay for finished games, with current Pathfinder Kickstarter being rare exception.

If someone already said it, sorry, but I didn't notice anyone did.

1. Unlike live service shills, BG3 presentation was not made by using mushrooms.
2. It's 2020, loading times should be almost instant, but okay it's some alpha build.
3. Noone in the audience asked if we'll continue Vicky romance. How come?
4. The build we saw obviously can't be ported to phones. I feel so sad about Beamdog.
5. Noone asked if the deadly weapon of doom, shoes, have different hit/enchantment stats for example higher poison damage if worn.

As a 45 year old player who entered rpg world with BG1, and who backed PoE 1 and 2 and W2 and W3, and didn't much like DoS 1 and 2, I am disappointed with how the game looks like. But than again, I had low expectation when Larian was announced for BG3 production as I expected turn base and the same or similar engine and gameplay.

I will not go deep into what doesn't work for me (apart from the game visuals and turn based system (which I liked in FO1 and FO2)).

I respect all others that like how the game looks. Good for you and I hope the game will turn to be all you ever wanted.

Although I am enormous fan of BG1 and BG2 I am not very sad that BG3 will not work for me. It cannot be made for everyone and I respect that.

I wish Larian a great success with BG3 and a lots of very happy players

Best,
aa

Kylex said:

To those who think BG3 is not a Baldur's Gate game:
Don't you remember how some game series have changed over time? Elder Scrolls, Ultima or GTA?
E.g. the change from 90° top town GTA2 to 3D GTA3 - it changed the game experience completely, but GTA3 was the GTA that got this series so popular.
A game series should be allowed to change over time - and has to change over time to attract a new audience. The old will not grow.

Click to expand...

Yeah, you are probably right, BG3 isnt meant for old fags - all those remakes, sequels part 3, reforges of nowadays are meant for people, who would like to play some of old games, but cant stand their outdated graphics and archaic systems.
I guess game companies now do researches and polls to see their potential audience and chances for commercial success and tiny oldfag BG fanbase isn't make it for them.
But we can still express our attitude and wishes here, even if we all know game isn't for us, right?!

joxer said:

This. I want that game.

Click to expand...

Well he didn't that's the problem if he did it it would be one, not two and throwing full armor is just ridiculous you know how long it takes to put armor on and off...0 filter

Andrew23 said:

I suppose companies use EA as source of cheap betatesting workforce. Why not, if people are even willing to pay for that opportunity. Im certainly not. I only pay for finished games, with current Pathfinder Kickstarter being rare exception.

Click to expand...

No. It's been a while EA versions are not meant for betatesting.
Players interested in betatesting apply to the unstable branch or the equivalent.

EA was a consequence of the crowdfunded movement. It pushes vid products into a management similar to TV shows, anime etc

TV show value comes from additionnal episodes, they seldom are thought in completeness. They have a start and from this start, additionnal content keeps being added to build up.

Dismissing this dimension in early access is to claim that the ultimate goal of a TV show is its final season, episode or whatever, when usually it is the one episode, season that matters the less.

It changed. Before, a game was thought as a complete unit. The renewal of interest comes from within, there was no addition.

EA versions are the opposite: constant input of new content, that renews interest. No new content, no interest. That was the conclusion given by EA products: the product had interest until no new content was released. The final version itself provides no interest. That was the process of adding content that generates interest.

The presentation was rich. At least for the part that watched first since sleep stroke first.

Non gamers breathed a sigh of relief: it went the UgoIgo way. They have got their affirmative action program, they are included. The opposite would have been very surprising.
The lacks in gameplay is nothing new with the environment playing as a puzzle.

The presentation showed how it is cultural now and how devs fear outsiders.
The presentation was rehearsed, it was staged. Very far from the candid approach delivered by streamers.
It displays certain ways of playing and it exposes how this vid product is not meant as a game but rather as an activity to allow people to replicate patterns.It is ritualized. What matters is the gesture, not the meaning.
That is how outsiders are feared as they may not be indoctrinated. They may not know the gesture and they might grope, experiment looki_ng for a meaning.
They might have the bad idea of strolling behind stages, look behind the mirror.
This vid product exists to serve a certain idea of self reflection players have. They perceive themselves in a certain way and play vid products to get that perception strengthened.

Stingray said:

Anyone with solid taste should want both, and play both.

Click to expand...

This makes having poor tastes somehow being lucky.

Looks nice but I am not sure that Larian will be able to pull Bioware's BG or DA:O excellent story telling and companions and single player elements. I am also a bit concerned about the agreement with Stadia which might affect the hardware specifications of the game (since I still use old toasters to play crpgs). So I backed PathfinderotW!

JFarrell71 said:

What do you (and others) mean when you say this? Surely you didn't think a game in 2020 would have sprite art on prerendered backgrounds. What would make it "feel" like Baldur's Gate?

Click to expand...

From a customer's perpective, this question is irrelevant. Simply because an answer can be processed by elimination. It does not look like BG or you know you've got a BG feel when you see it.

Defining how this or that is this or that is unnecessary as long as the ability to eliminate what is not this or that stays.

It is another telling situation provided by this situation. Quite often on this site, songs are sung about the big bad corporations and how they destroyed personal expressions in devs etc They provided bland products.

Or Hollywood. Same movies made over and over again. Then directors whose work is recognized at sight. When seeing a trailer, immediately, it is know whether this is a work by this director or it is not. Putting the finger on the causes is useless for a customer. All it is required is the capacity to tell that this or that movie is in fact not made by the director.

Tasting brewage, same. It is not required to know how this brewage tastes the way it tastes as long as it stays possible to tell that other brewages are not that brewage.

The issue of knowing how matters for people who make. It is an essential issue anytime a maker dies without having completed his works. How to step in her foot.
For example, when Hugo Pratt died, considering how big the contribution of his work was through Corto Maltese, knowing how was essential to determine who could be worthy of taking up the standard.