Baldur's Gate Why do YOU hate Baldur's Gate 3?

[Lyric Suite]

with the most generic atmosphere

Stop right there you criminal scum. The atmosphere is one of the best things the game had going for it, which was partially spoiled by Bioware themselves with all their "modern" jokes in the game.

You try hard faggots who think standard fantasy is bad because you've been brainwashed into thinking only grim dark is gud don't understand what made fantasy actually attractive in the first place, and why modern fantasy is such incredible shit.

Traditional fantasy was attractive because of the nostalgia people have for the world of tradition and myth. That is why everybody obsesses with medieval Europe, because even with the Renaissance we are already too close to modern times. Even with all their superficiality and attempts at humor Bioware managed to create an environment that felt actually lived, and if you want a more serious take, look at Icewind Dale (the portraits in particular, but also the tone and even the writing, which was better than a game meant to be about combat probably deserved to have), or Diablo. Modern fantasy games don't have any sense of awe and mystery to them, no call back to a more mythological age, no attempt to make the magic feel special even within the world itself. It's just constant in your face pew pew. Look at this shit it almost feels like something out of a mobile game:

F A N T A S Y amrite?

People say WoW is to blame for this but even WoW had a lot of atmosphere and sense of wonder, despite the shit art style that probably ruined a lot of fantasy games thereafter. Fantasy has become too common place, the more generic the more fantastical it is. Baldur's Gate 2 itself felt already excessive as they basically threw everything and then something in it, but that's common place now. Look this game, which starts off with Illithids right off the bat (meanwhile BG1 started you off Candlekeep lmao, but then Bioware was obviously following Fellowship of the Ring with BG1). Fantasy is no longer a nostalgic call back to a more mysterious age in European history, it's a commercial genre, with tropes and cliches that have nothing enduring about them. It's like with capeshit movies.

 

[Erebus]

I hate it for the same reason I hate all the remakes, reboots and franchises vomited by Hollywood during the past 10 years. It's a soulless cash grab relying entirely on name recognition and blind nostalgia.

 

[HarveyBirdman]

with the most generic atmosphere

Stop right there you criminal scum. The atmosphere is one of the best things the game had going for it, which was partially spoiled by Bioware themselves with all their "modern" jokes in the game.

You try hard faggots who think standard fantasy is bad because you've been brainwashed into thinking only grim dark is gud don't understand what made fantasy actually attractive in the first place, and why modern fantasy is such incredible shit.

Traditional fantasy was attractive because of the nostalgia people have for the world of tradition and myth. That is why everybody obsesses with medieval Europe, because even with the Renaissance we are already too close to modern times. Even with all their superficiality and attempts at humor Bioware managed to create an environment that felt actually lived, and if you want a more serious take, look at Icewind Dale (the portraits in particular, but also the tone and even the writing, which was better than a game meant to be about combat probably deserved to have), or Diablo. Modern fantasy games don't have any sense of awe and mystery to them, no call back to a more mythological age, no attempt to make the magic feel special even within the world itself. It's just constant in your face pew pew. Look at this shit it almost feels like something out of a mobile game:

F A N T A S Y amrite?

People say WoW is to blame for this but even WoW had a lot of atmosphere and sense of wonder, despite the shit art style that probably ruined a lot of fantasy games thereafter. Fantasy has become too common place, the more generic the more fantastical it is. Baldur's Gate 2 itself felt already excessive as they basically threw everything and then something in it, but that's common place now. Look this game, which starts off with Illithids right off the bat (meanwhile BG1 started you off Candlekeep lmao, but then Bioware was obviously following Fellowship of the Ring with BG1). Fantasy is no longer a nostalgic call back to a more mysterious age in European history, it's a commercial genre, with tropes and cliches that have nothing enduring about them. It's like with capeshit movies.

I never said anything about grimdark. Rather, I prefer traditional stories with traditional archetypes.

Baldur's Gate is generic trash because it's generic trash, not because it isn't an edgefest. Nothing about the story is interesting. Nothing about your character is interesting. Nothing about any of the NPCs is interesting. None of the moving parts interact in an interesting way. The pretty painted landscapes are nice though.

BG became popular because it was the best adaptation of a D&D ruleset we had ever seen up to that point, and the epic scale tricked us into expecting something cooler than it really was. Today it runs off the fumes of its own farts.

Compare BG to Divine Divinity. Both are similarly generic, stupid stories. But to me, the world in DD feels much more alive.
BG railroads you from inn to inn and quest to quest from the outset. I felt like I was acting out story rather than guiding it.
In DD, you start off with practically no information and have to figure out your quest on your own. You end up going inn to inn, but it feels more organic. DD probably has fewer options for actually doing stuff, but the way you approach the main quest feels less heavy handed. That sense of agency makes the generic setting one worth exploring (at least until the last half of DD, which objectively sucks ass).

 

[Lyric Suite]

I guess i misunderstood. People often criticize the series for the setting, for being too Lord of the Rings/Forgotten Realms, which to me is not the issue. The issue is more that Bioware always had that annoying Bethesda quality to them, even though they weren't as incompetent as Bethesda, especially on the technical side of things.

Wasn't Divine Divinity a clone of Diablo 2 though? That's the impression i got then, of a low rent Diablo clone. Is it actually a full fledged RPG?

 

[DJOGamer PT]

you've been brainwashed into thinking only grim dark is gud

What exactly is the problem with Dark Fantasy?

 

[Lyric Suite]

you've been brainwashed into thinking only grim dark is gud

What exactly is the problem with Dark Fantasy?

Nothing. I'm arguing against the idea only dark fantasy is good and standard fantasy is always invariably shit. Some people out there actually believe that, all though i'm guessing it's more that standard fantasy is so common people go knee jerk contrarian against it.

 

[KeighnMcDeath]

I can't say I hate it until I play it.

 

[GentlemanCthulhu]

"It won't be another Divinity: Original Sin in Baldur's Gate skin." - Swen Vincke
And so far its turning out to be just that.
- Similar TB combat
- Similar graphical fidelity/presentation
- Larian's goofy flare

Would be my reasons for hating pre-emptively.

But i'll hold back my hatred until i play it and confirm whether it's actually shit.

 

[Lyric Suite]

Best to just pretend it isn't called Baldur's Gate and roll with whatever they give us. So far all i can tell is that the writing and dialogue system are SHIT but everything else just seems to be a standard DOS entry.

 

[Dishonoredbr]

*You tell to your gentlmen of Codex forum of your particular dislike of Larian's writting and how Baldur's Gate 3 looks more like Divinity OS 2.5. A game that you heavly disliked in the past*

 

[Raghar]

The problem with this game is that it's not Baldur's Gate 3. Everything else is besides the point really.

And it's not a question of caring so much about the BG series, it's more a matter of principle. What they did is just so profoundly cynical is almost amusing in a way.

I wouldn't call it cynical, I'd call it stupid.

 

[Lyric Suite]

The problem with this game is that it's not Baldur's Gate 3. Everything else is besides the point really.

And it's not a question of caring so much about the BG series, it's more a matter of principle. What they did is just so profoundly cynical is almost amusing in a way.

I wouldn't call it cynical, I'd call it stupid.

I wouldn't call it stupid. They were given the licence because of the commercial success of the DOS games. It was logical for them to make it exactly like those games, because why should they give a fuck about Baldur's Gate, and why change the formula that led them to success?

So i understand it from a business point of view, it still feels like a con though. If they had been more honest they might have simply said they were going to make a game in the "Baldur's Gate universe" but no, they call it BG3, raise a ton of expectation and then lol not really it's DOS2 again. THAT'S the only reason anyone was upset this whole debate about real time vs turn based was a big red herring. People only bitched about the game not being in real time because they actually expected BG3.

 

[Drowed]

I mean, if Larian was calling this game Divinity: Original Sin 3 I would be buying it all the same, and would be equally satisfied. I totally agree that using the name Baldur's Gate was an unnecessary punch in the gut for the fans of the series.

But I think it's that kind of situation where you just can't say no - if the intellectual property owner comes to you and says, "hey my old chap, do you want to make the next game of this mega-famous IP and win free press and probably reach an even bigger audience?" It's hard to imagine a scenario where any minimally rational company owner would say no to that. And it's not as if Larian has experience in RTWP games, at least AFAIK. In a way, it makes perfect sense that they maintain the base of turn-based mechanics and interaction with the environment that they have been developing for about 7 years. Better to try to do your best within what you already know how to do (even if some say they don't know how to do it, but that's another matter) than try to do something completely new and fail miserably.

The best scenario would be if Larian had never received this offer in the first place, I guess. But the question that remains is, if it was certain that Baldur's Gate franchise would be revived, to who would you give it to, then? To the 'New' Bioware? InXile? Or maybe even Obsidian? Or maybe we'll go crazy for good and give it to Bethesda, after all? I mean, if the return of IP was inevitable, I don't see many better scenarios than the current one, to be honest.

 

[Serious_Business]

Yeah, to be fair I'm not sure which other big crpg company would be qualified to do this. Obsidian I suppose, but after PoE they probably are creatively bankrupt regarding these types of games. The real creative option would have to give it to Ziets, as he had a really cool thematic idea for a Baldur's Gate sequel, but I suppose cool ideas aren't enough to have something functional. Larian is certainly going to deliver on that front, and yes asking them to do something entirely new would have been a mistake. If anything BG2 (for those who think so) was great because the devs didn't have to work on the engine, they could just focus on content, the aesthetics and tweak the systems. In fact, any game that is building an engine from scratch will be tentative at best ; sometimes it can work, but with crpgs it's not often the best design scenario.

 

[Harthwain]

The best scenario would be if Larian had never received this offer in the first place, I guess. But the question that remains is, if it was certain that Baldur's Gate franchise would be revived, to who would you give it to, then?

Yeah, to be fair I'm not sure which other big crpg company would be qualified to do this.

Owlcat Games? Not sure how big they are though.

 

[V_K]

I couldn't care less about BG, but having played through some DOS2, I'll be joining the haters. DnD rules would have fixed most of the problems of DOS, but DOS2 is unsalvageable. The engine is a disaster, and Larian somehow managed to make level design even worse than in their previous games.

 

[Gargaune]

The best scenario would be if Larian had never received this offer in the first place, I guess. But the question that remains is, if it was certain that Baldur's Gate franchise would be revived, to who would you give it to, then?

Yeah, to be fair I'm not sure which other big crpg company would be qualified to do this.

Owlcat Games? Not sure how big they are though.

They've already made the most faithful BG succesor of the lot. Give 'em a few more hands and a budget larger than sixteen rubles and a bottle of Smirnoff, and yeah, could see them pulling something off. Probably not the sort of Cinematic Experience™ WotC are after, though.

 

[Lyric Suite]

For the record, how did WotC get the licence for a sequel to the game? I'm guessing Bioware using their ip to make their game makes them entitled to own their franchise? Does it mean WotC also owns Icewind Dale, NWN etc?

 

[Drowed]

Owlcat Games? Not sure how big they are though.

You're right, but as far as I know, Owlcat only reached its current level of fame after Kingmaker (2018). By the time Larian received the proposal to produce Baldur's Gate 3, they had not yet "proven to the world" what they were capable of. But in a purely hypothetical scenario I fully agree, this would be the best option by far.

 

[Gargaune]

For the record, how did WotC get the licence for a sequel to the game? I'm guessing Bioware using their ip to make their game makes them entitled to own their franchise? Does it mean WotC also owns Icewind Dale, NWN etc?

To the extent that TSR/WotC licensed D&D to Interplay and BioWare for BG, I imagine the franchise rights stayed with them, neither the system nor the setting were BioWare's original IP. I think I recall Trent Oster describing the rights for existing D&D games as being "complicated", particularly with regard to the Gold Box games, but new products are likely entirely in Hasbro's pocket as WotC's owners.

I just had a quick look at the US Trademarks office and found two live listings for Baldur's Gate (amid a bunch of other derived entries), both of which show BioWare as the original registrant and WotC as the last listed owner. Interestingly, Baldur's Gate: Throne of Bhaal is categorised as dead and lists Interplay. Icewind Dale pops up two entries, a dead one for Atari and a live one for WotC. Make of that what you will, it's not my field of expertise.

I've also discovered that the US Trademarks office is too cheap to slap an SSL certificate on their database lookup. It's been an illuminating exercise.

 

[HarveyBirdman]

Wasn't Divine Divinity a clone of Diablo 2 though? That's the impression i got then, of a low rent Diablo clone. Is it actually a full fledged RPG?

Yeah its combat is a not-so-great Diablo clone, but the game is a full fledged RPG. Class systems, leveling up and investing in perks, open overworld and dungeons similar to BG, reputation system, can barter with any NPC, guilds (limited functionality), tetris inventory, C&C -- lots of RPG stuff. Also a kick ass soundtrack. Pretty fun first half of the game, but combat gets repetitive and then the second half is a slog.

 

[Guvide]

Wasn't Divine Divinity a clone of Diablo 2 though? That's the impression i got then, of a low rent Diablo clone. Is it actually a full fledged RPG?

Yeah its combat is a not-so-great Diablo clone, but the game is a full fledged RPG. Class systems, leveling up and investing in perks, open overworld and dungeons similar to BG, reputation system, can barter with any NPC, guilds (limited functionality), tetris inventory, C&C -- lots of RPG stuff. Also a kick ass soundtrack. Pretty fun first half of the game, but combat gets repetitive and then the second half is a slog.

There is also some environment interactivity. The game was inspired mostly by Ultima 7, and it was supposed to have a turn based combat system, but back then Diablo was in vogue so they had to refurbish it to make it look more like that game. It has the same aesthetic as Diablo 2 and even uses an identical looking font! In contrast to D:OS, DD is actually a very well written game. I don't know what happened between Divinity 2 and D:OS, but the writing quality suddenly plummeted to the ground. The previous titles also had lots of humour but it wasn't the le wacky lol so random xd zoomer type of "humour" that their newest games have.

 

[NJClaw]

The problem with this game is that it's not Baldur's Gate 3. Everything else is besides the point really.

And this is incredibly appropriate, considering that the original Baldur's Gate 3 wasn't going to be Baldur's Gate 3.

The engine is a disaster

N-NANI!? What do you mean? Their engine probably is the best one among all recent CRPGs.

 

[V_K]

The engine is a disaster

N-NANI!? What do you mean? Their engine probably is the best one among all recent CRPGs.

Technical aspects. Camera, viewport, controls, optimization. It nears the NWN2 levels of unwieldy. It apparently also has memory usage issues forcing them to cramp all the content into tiny square maps.
All this wasn't that much of an issue in DOS1 because it was flat and designed with a fixed camera angle in mind. But in DOS2 they designed for rotating camera and also shoved nonsensical vertical structures everywhere. Combine that with cramping, and there wasn't a moment in the game where I wasn't battling the camera.

 

[Saxon1974]

I voted for #1 but for a couple of reasons already mentioned.

1. I don't like the 3d camera, never can get it to look right angle wise..
2. I don't like how everything is blocked into large areas that are level controlled. I liked how divine divinity was wide open from the start. I hear BG3 will be like the OS games.
3. OS atmosphere just doesn't live up to DD.

One plus though is TB Combat much better than in DD.