Baldur's Gate 3 - A Comparison with Divinity: Original Sin 2
- Thread starter HiddenX
- Start date
JFarrell71
SasqWatch
Fextralife compared Larian's second to last game with maybe one third of their more recent game. Not as catchy, but a more accurate headline.
Having played both I would say why choose? Play both. I also feel, having played both for many hours, they are different and should be judged on their own merits.
Saxon1974
Keeper of the Watch
- Joined
- February 24, 2010
- Messages
- 875
I like but don't love DOS2. For some reason the slightly whimsical style just turns me off. I like the art style of Pillars of Eternity better. Also, the camera in the DOS games I just cannot stand. I always feel like I cannot see everything in the environment very well. I had to use a mod that lets the camera pan more so I can could see around better. Always surprised this isn't brought up by more people.
I end up getting bored after about 40-60 hours in DOS2, the story and world just doesn't really do it for me. I hope that being familiar for years with the Forgotten Realms I will enjoy that aspect more.
BG3 sure looks like the same irritating camera and style of world so hopefully I like it better.
I end up getting bored after about 40-60 hours in DOS2, the story and world just doesn't really do it for me. I hope that being familiar for years with the Forgotten Realms I will enjoy that aspect more.
BG3 sure looks like the same irritating camera and style of world so hopefully I like it better.
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2010
- Messages
- 875
Personally I enjoyed the art style in DOS2, but I agree the story was pretty generic and forgettable. I had no issue with the camera, but I always increase edge scroll speed, so maybe I'm panning around more than I usually do. Hmm... Now that I think about it I actually found the camera too close in a few places.
What I really enjoyed was the companion interactions and quests. I hope it is as good in BG3.
I feel like the video was clickbait more than anything else. Let's throw two very popular games in the title and act like you need to choose one. It's literally 10 minutes of just stating things that are really obvious.
The idea is to give an overview to people who haven't tried BG3 yet. Fans of D:OS2 and fans of D&D have a problem with this title since it sits somewhere on the middle, and this has made a lot of noise and criticism, it makes sense to have a proper comparison for the D:OS2 fans (Fextralife is a big fan of D:OS2).
That's how I see it anyway.
Eh? Perhaps, but I doubt most of the people interested in BG3 really care about a comparison to D:OS2. I guess it might be useful to people who hated it and want to avoid anything remotely similar.
No, it's more likely for people who liked D:OS2 and are not sure about BG3.
But what you suggest works too :lol: Actually that's what I wrote in Couch's news thread where he linked that video too.
Same here.
I hope to love BG3.
I quite liked the story in DOS2. I found it surprising and liked how they tied all the threads at the end. Haven't followed other Divinity plots, though. Maybe they have repeated the story in their previous games...
Carnifex
SasqWatch
I've no idea what Balur's Gate three will be like, but I'm praying just as hard as possible that the mechanics are nothing like Original Sin two's.
There is no armour system so yay. There is a lot that could be done for ease of use and I think it will get there but slow going as the game still crashes for me sometimes.
It would be safer to wait until the actual release to get a definitive opinion, although I doubt Larian will do a 180 on this.
The main point is the ruleset, we know it is quite close to D&D 5E, with some adaptations that may be a problem for purists. IMO they are not game-breaking, just unnecessary.
There are similarities in other components, hopefully they won't put you off. It's mostly positive at the exception of the first one (again, it's just my opinion):
- As @Silver; said, thankfully they didn't implement the double armour system they used in D:OS2 as a patch to counterbalance the AoE mess... but the AoE mess is still there, to a lesser extent.
- The UI has similarities, in particular the awkward "chain gizmo" to group party members (I'm still hoping they finally let it go, but I doubt it). Overall it's as user-friendly as D:OS2, with tooltips giving detailed info, junk flags, etc.
- The world is as interactive as D:OS2, you can move crates, climb on them, open any container, break things, throw items at people, and so on.
- The map is open-world, everything is packed on the same map and there are no transitions from one area to another - some doors transport you to a "sub-map" but it's direct and not annoying. It's really the same as D:OS2 except I'm not sure there is a new map for each act.
So what is the armor system like? I haven't played DnD since third edition (maybe 3.5?) many years ago. I'm also glad they didn't go with the armour system from DOS2. It was way to "gamey".
I'm not sure how to answer this other than point to the SRD. There isn't much difference with 3 or 3.5 AFAIK, except you need to be proficient with the type of armour you wear or you'll get a penalty.
The typical armour adds to the AC, with a caveat on dexterity saving throws and arcane check.
Check pg. 57 for proficiencies, 62-64 for armour, 90 for combat
https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/systems-reference-document-srd
Other than armour, perhaps the different types of actions/bonus actions/reactions/interactions have changed since 3 and 3.5, to check. That's one area Larian went creative.
PS: the SRD document isn't the most friendly. It is *possible*, by looking - not on WotC of course, to find a PDF of the Player's Handbook
It's a nice book, by the way, the physical book too but it tends to lose its pages after a few times.
Nope sorry as most game-play videos show some footage but don't focus on them.