Baldur's Gate Baldur's Gate 3 Pre-Release Thread [EARLY ACCESS RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[DalekFlay]

I hope all of the game is set in Baldur's Gate only. Cyseal but 5 times bigger. Visit all districts of the city, including sewers and what have you. Of course, you will get to visit many other dimensions because there are quests that lead you there..

As shit as Dragon Age 2 was I liked the idea of focusing on one city and seeing it change across a long story. I could go for that, with excursions to the outskirts and nearby lands of course. However I'd guess this would be viewed as too limiting by most designers.

 

[Abu Antar]

I hope all of the game is set in Baldur's Gate only. Cyseal but 5 times bigger. Visit all districts of the city, including sewers and what have you. Of course, you will get to visit many other dimensions because there are quests that lead you there..

As shit as Dragon Age 2 was I liked the idea of focusing on one city and seeing it change across a long story. I could go for that, with excursions to the outskirts and nearby lands of course. However I'd guess this would be viewed as too limiting by most designers.

Probably, but Flames of Vengeance was set in one city, wasn't it? To be really honest, I liked the structure of BGII. Just spread out side quests a bit more. Have one big city and some surrounding areas.

Generic-Giant-Spider I'm not familiar with 5E (suppose this will be the ruleset), but BGII was good with how it handled items and level scaling in general. I don't love BGII for its writing. It was the sense of adventure, encounters and in my opinion, items were also good in the game. I really hope they don't use the Larian code of random items being far superior than cool looking unique items. Like in Divinity II. Found a cool random bow and sword. They were so superior that I sold all other random weapons and didn't even care to look at unique weapons for several hours.

I will trust Larian with one thing: Exploration. I mostly have enjoyed it in Larian games, and it was one thing that I liked in BGII.

 

[vortex]

I hope all of the game is set in Baldur's Gate only. Cyseal but 5 times bigger. Visit all districts of the city, including sewers and what have you. Of course, you will get to visit many other dimensions because there are quests that lead you there..

I would rather it has smaller areas (bigger than in BG1) but with more climate and environmental variations. Underdark and aquatic areas most importantly.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Flames of Vengeance is probably the single best piece of work Larian ever produced

 

[Roguey]

What is so different about sawyer that makes it impossibru to ape.

His 'balance' and multi-classing system wasn't really unique and has many parallels to other games and even multiplayer games

I'm talking about writing, not gameplay. Sawyer done poorly would be something similar to Deadfire.

 

[Efe]

by that logic they should have called icewind dale games "baldurs gate: other side of the world" or torment "baldurs gate: into the planes" ?
cos like you said, set in same world (or setting) with a new story.

I didn't realize Icewind Dale and Planescape Torment were set in and around Baldur's Gate. Weird.

is baldurs gate 2 set in or around the city?
im not saying this game has to follow the existing story. Im saying they shouldnt name it BG3 just to cash in.
again as an example: imagine they published a book named "lord of the rings 4: Gangbang at the angband" (and its not a porn parody) with zero relevance to already concluded story

they got what they deserved with canceled black hound when they tried to do the same and they will certainly get their due here again

 

[rusty_shackleford]

by that logic they should have called icewind dale games "baldurs gate: other side of the world" or torment "baldurs gate: into the planes" ?
cos like you said, set in same world (or setting) with a new story.

I didn't realize Icewind Dale and Planescape Torment were set in and around Baldur's Gate. Weird.

is baldurs gate 2 set in or around the city?
im not saying this game has to follow the existing story. Im saying they shouldnt name it BG3 just to cash in.
again as an example: imagine they published a book named "lord of the rings 4: Gangbang at the angband" (and its not a porn parody) with zero relevance to already concluded story

they got what they deserved with canceled black hound when they tried to do the same and they will certainly get their due here again

Wouldn't the blame go at the feet of the people who created the problem in the first place by naming the game BG2 instead of something to do with bhaalspawn

 

[Barabus]

Make Baldurs gate great again

 

[Generic-Giant-Spider]

I don't love BGII for its writing. It was the sense of adventure, encounters and in my opinion, items were also good in the game.

I hear this, it's why I quite liked BG1 on that merit alone. After you play through it a few times you know where to go and a lot of the maps are basically point A to point B but I enjoy that down time to hear the ambiance and the various lines uttered by party members as you walk through forests and stuff with the occasional enemy encounter. It's strangely relaxing.

 

[DalekFlay]

is baldurs gate 2 set in or around the city?

You and the other guy can be as pedantic as you want about this but there's obviously a massive difference between "on the Sword Coast near Baldur's Gate" and the settings of Icewind Dale and Planescape.

im not saying this game has to follow the existing story. Im saying they shouldnt name it BG3 just to cash in.
again as an example: imagine they published a book named "lord of the rings 4: Gangbang at the angband" (and its not a porn parody) with zero relevance to already concluded story

they got what they deserved with canceled black hound when they tried to do the same and they will certainly get their due here again

I mean, of course it's being done for brand recognition and nostalgia reasons. Every sequel is, unless it was planned in advance, and people bitch about those too because they didn't get a complete story the first time around. If they continue the story people will complain it was finished and didn't need continuing, if they create a new story in the same region people like yourself will complain it's not a true sequel. They're fucked either way, as most of us are in the internet age where everyone and their mother has a bullhorn for their bullshit, but they're hoping to make money and presumably enjoy the IP, so they're rolling the dice anyway.

 

[SausageInYourFace]

In other news:

That was a pretty short-lived gig.

 

[Chippy]

Pathfinder: Kingmaker was close enough for me. Otherwise calling anything BG3 and not continuing the Bhaalspawn saga by casting resurrection on all party members, or carrying on from the end of BG2 is just manipulation and IP rape.

Is it IP rape if the Black Isle original plan was to make BG3 but to make it something else since BG2 closed the Bhaalspawn saga? I mean they could call it at the end of the day some stupid shit like "Tales of Baldur's Gate", but of course that putting a 3 next to the name will make that shit sell like hotcakes.

It's down to the developers ignoring what the game meant to players like myself. The saga was creating a persistant character in Faerun for me, for others a powergaming chapter to be followed by others and other characters. It's like the tone deafness they showed by not explaining what happened to certain pary members from BG1 - Yeslick departing without a word was the same a Bruenor departing in Salvatore's books for some players.

But yeah, call it BG3 if they want, and as Infinitron said - I'd prefer the saga stay as it is than retards try to take it over (further) - but it's because of the above reason that it's misleading to call it BG3 for fans like myself, in comparison to Fallout 1/2.

 

[Roguey]

Wouldn't the blame go at the feet of the people who created the problem in the first place by naming the game BG2 instead of something to do with bhaalspawn

They had to call it that, otherwise no one would know it was a sequel. Similar to how "No One Lives Forever" was supposed to be the James Bond-esque subtitle to "The Operative" but fewer people would have recognized "The Operative 2: New Subtitle" as a sequel.

The blame goes to those who decided to name the game after a specific place, either Feargus or Fargo. The original title was Iron Throne which is admittedly not a good one.

 

[onemananadhisdroid]

I don't love BGII for its writing. It was the sense of adventure, encounters and in my opinion, items were also good in the game.

I hear this, it's why I quite liked BG1 on that merit alone. After you play through it a few times you know where to go and a lot of the maps are basically point A to point B but I enjoy that down time to hear the ambiance and the various lines uttered by party members as you walk through forests and stuff with the occasional enemy encounter. It's strangely relaxing.

It's also designed more like a consistent world as opposed to a video game world that revolves purely around the player. "Downtimes" in games typically are a no-no, were so even back in the day. So games tend to be built more like amusement parks where around every corner, you for sure know you're going to eventually find something -- be it loot, a quest giver, anything. Whereas in BG1, even if you happen to hit on a shack in the wilderness, there may be nothing inside. Which also makes things all the less predictable when something actually happens. Nowadays in any game upon hitting a shack, you know there will be something for you inside. Everything build has that sole purpose.

It's apparent by the feedback Bioware got for their first RPG that you and me and everyone who likes such is in a minority though. Much of what's changed in BG2 can be interpreted as an exaggerated response to the critisicm back in the day. Then again, in itself BG1 is an accident by itself. It shouldn't have worked given the team's inexperience. Whilst at the same time it is that same inexperience that still makes the entire structure of the game stick out this much to this day.


Btw, the very first thing I did back on Daggerfall upon surfacing from the starting dungeon: Admiring the snow, the Music, and trying to walk (not fast travel) to the next town on the map -- and eventually succeeding. You and me buddy. You and me.

 

[Cael]

by that logic they should have called icewind dale games "baldurs gate: other side of the world" or torment "baldurs gate: into the planes" ?
cos like you said, set in same world (or setting) with a new story.

I didn't realize Icewind Dale and Planescape Torment were set in and around Baldur's Gate. Weird.

is baldurs gate 2 set in or around the city?

Pretty irrelevant. BG2 was the continuation of the story of the same protagonist. Since the first one was BG, there really isn't any choice but to call the second BG2 no matter where it is set.

Unless BG3 has the same protagonist and is the continuation of his story (pretty hard since the guy is far into the epic scale by the time the game ends), then it has no more right to call itself BG3 than IWD or PST.

 

[Mr. Hiver]

The particular angle of the BG game should be you are involved into a plot due to a very evil god, basically playing to fulfill its evil plan but with options on how to handle it, set against a very strong memorable antagonist in Forgotten realms setting.

Of course the name is used for marketing purposes since it still carries weight, but it shouldn't be a big problem to create such a story with less or more connections to the original events.
The problem lies in creating a good enough plot and a strong memorable villain.

 

[Barbarian]

ITT, they will follow the canon so the protagonist will be neither "Abdel" nor another Bhaalspawn. Pretty sure the antagonist will be reincarnated Bhall himself, or his soon to be reincarnated self. Pretty shitty deal for those incel fans of the original. I think it is quite possible that the game's beginning is set around Abdel's assassination. I think this is all a given because with no strong link/hook to the original bhaalspawn saga it would be a hard sell to call it "BG3".

Personally I don't care at all. If they do a competent D&D romp I will have a blast with it. It is something missing in the market for several years and the closest we got recently(Kingmaker) was a resounding success by all accounts.

 

[FreeKaner]

I really hope they don't do item level scaling/Diablo-lite loot like they did in OS2 or try to make all attributes viable no matter your class. Basically, I hope they don't Larian things up. Let D&D be D&D, keep it as faithful to the core rules as possible. I'm also hoping it's more low to mid level which is where a lot of the fun from D&D is had before you become a high level god. But that likely won't happen considering how much of an epic fantasy BG2 in particular became. But I can dream of a more grounded scenario.

I also hope that the scaling won't go from low level D&D to just killing dragons by mid-game. It is nonsensical to expect this from Larian but if they did turn-based low level D&D it could be great. Just BG1 but turn-based. I guess I am also stupid for hoping for this.

 

[Brzęczyszczykiewicz]

Then why call it Baldur's Gate? Larian + D&D is enough to attract attention, no need to drag a cadaver into this.

Larian yes, but D&D itself is more toxic than positive after years of shovelware.

 

[Barbarian]

It will be rtwp. No illusions about that.

 

[pomenitul]

If the game itself (pace its marketing tactics) doesn't play up BG's line of descent too forcefully, I could see it being at the very least playable. Whatever so-called optimism I can muster stops here.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

A re-telling of the BG story with Imoen as the main character

 

[DalekFlay]

It will be rtwp. No illusions about that.

Not if Larian and the publisher think being turn-based helped their sales over stuff like PoE.

 

[111111111]

I estimate (by various statistics like total revenue) that dos2 has sold around as much as pillars1 and deadfire combined.

Fairly certain that it will be turn based

 

[Alpan]

There is no indication that the game is going to be actually called Baldur's Gate III. Even the initial logo reference was named Baldur's Gate_Logo_III_retouched, which refers to the shape of the logo rather than the game title. As such, assumptions about how the new game will continue BG2 are misguided.