I wasn’t even making an argument. Just stating a point of fact.
There is something to be said, which was discussed up thread a lot.
Will Baldur’s Gate 3 be closer to DOS2 or Baldur’s Gate 2? I think it is fair to say it will be closer to DOS2, and for me personally, that blows. I am not the biggest fan of DOS2. I enjoyed it in parts, but with a truckload of caveats. Meanwhile, Baldur’s Gate 2 is the one of the best CRPGs ever made. I replayed the whole damn thing as recent as 2020 and had a total blast.
I think this is the flexibility of the modern PC platform to devs in action. You don’t have a physical release, so you don’t need to care about shipping and retail schedules. A digital release is just pushing a button to update everyone’s EA version. (I know it’s more complicated than that, but work with me here.) There really isn’t any print journalism so you don’t worry about publishing coordination. You can just tell streamers to start whenever.
A lot of the intial comparisons to D:OS2 have been refined and sanded away through EA as well. Really, the worst things that are still obvious to me is the 4 party player cap and the inventory management still sucks. Both can be helped through mods hopefully.
There is going to be a lot of resistance from anyone who comes in hoping for a clean application of the D&D ruleset, anyone who wants a true successor to BG1 and 2, and anyone who wants D:OS with a Baldur’s Gate filter. Through EA Larian has been able to make BG3 it’s own game, so the faster you can get over what BG3 isn’t the quicker you will be able to appreciate what BG3 is.
Larian did not make games like Baldur’s Gate. Obsidian did, and Owlcat games, and those Black Geyser folks, but definitely NOT Larian. Not even fucking close.
They managed to somehow swipe the IP because DOS2 sold a shitload.
Completely right. Larian made games more like Ultimas 5-7. Divine Divinity was inspired by U7 in the same way old Samsung phones were “inspired” by iPhones. They’ve evolved a lot since then.
I do expect BG3 to have a lot more similarities to the old Infinity engine games simply due to the name. But I haven’t played it yet, waiting on the full release, so I expect others could fill that in.
Woof, the angst is alive apparantly. I can understand the disappointment in not getting a directly successor to BG2 with something akin to the the Pathfinder series.
However, I appreciate Larian keeping the license alive and enjoy what their doing with it so far, even if it is a different direction. We even get to continue the stories of a few beloved companions. I wonder how much influence Wizards of the Coast wields with the story of both Baldurs Gate and the specific crossover companions.
I think in retrospect Larian would have preferred it be a stand alone Baldurs Gate than BG3 at this point. Initially it’s all about the marketing and hype, but I think it will be able to stand on its own legs. I wonder how much influence Wizards had on that decision as well.
Haha, well sure, but quality wasn’t the point. I thought the discussion was about sequel similarities to originals and whether they could be called ‘successors’ to them or not.
And I don’t disagree with those that say BG3 is more D:OS than BG2, regardless of the D&D overlay. Only saying that the vitriol is more pronounced because they aren’t just the same dev taking a different direction but entirely unrelated to them.
Their first game might even be worst in this regard because it was much easier to just get annihilated instantly by crossing into a high level zone. My problem here is it’s literally night vs day e.g. you’re level 5 but wondered into a level 15 level zone, prepare to die in 1 hit!
I wish I could say this was the cool factor of exploring an area and being like “oh shit” and retreating but it’s not. It’s pure MMO level zone on/off shit.
I never played DOS1, but played 2 and (mostly) liked the way leveling was handled which reminded me quite a bit of Kings Bounty where you were only strong enough to take on the next battle, and if you were gated in one area you had to revisit older areas and hunt and peck to find the next progression spot. I enjoyed the challenge as opposed to steamrolling the game.
I know what you’re talking about and it’s a good comparison. But it also makes little sense for an RPG. King’s Bounty is not a story focused game, and most of the progression you get is from fighting neutral faceless enemies. Both games are tuned to constantly keep you gated but it makes little sense in a story-focused RPG to have such system. It doesn’t feel like a roleplaying immersive simulation when you know you have to clean up the map to stay on top of the progression curve. In fact, DOS2 feels very wrong when playing on the hard difficulty.
I don’t like a lot about d20 systems but they don’t have this sort of dramatic progression DOS2 had and I expect BG3 to be smoother in that regard.
Not that I’ve noted. There were certain armor slots unavailable in EA. By the end of EA you’ll have access to plenty of magical items (not a treasure trove, but felt like enough), but most of them were minor conditional effects. Like if you use a healing spell your next attack is at advantage, or if you are under 50% health you gain +1 attack bonus. There were also a few magical items that felt suitably powerful and unique for Levels 1-5. Armored helmets do prevent critical hits. Heavier armors present stealth and dex disadvantages.
