Baldur's Gate 3
- Thread starter Old_Hunter_77
- Start date
It is with much regret that I haul Gale around on my miserable travels because I simply cannot be bothered to give all his stuff to someone less awful, like that owlbear that killed me.
At least compare apples to apples instead of oranges, Obsidian has 323 employees (vs Larian at 434 and Bioware at 611 from the same source)
I didn't realize Larian was founded that long ago. Though, which developer has the more successful RPG history Larian or Obsidian/Bioware? Easily both Obsidian and Bioware have a better game library and it's not even close.
Why can't Obsidian or Bioware make something similar to BG3? You do realize Larian made the game without funding from a AAA publisher like Obsidian and Bioware have worked with/works with. One of the posts said that Larian got that WOTC funding to help make BG3 and Larian replied back with "what funding?" because they had to pay for the license (vs getting money).
When was I shitting on Obsidian? I was shitting on the thing said by the Obsidian dev, not the company. I overall like Obsidian, though they tend to make games just outside my interest sphere like I'm not at all interested in the Pillars games for example (even though they are rather close to Divinity/BG3 in similarity) and The Outer Worlds was pretty disappointing in the role-playing aspect. I was super hyped about Alpha Protocol but it came out and got pretty bad reviews so I never played it.
Saying that BG3 can't be made by other devs, is an anomaly, and shouldn't be the standard is an asinine statement (see Disco Elysium). The reason I don't play many video game RPGs is because something like BG3 was ALREADY MY STANDARD. Most video game RPGs aren't even RPGs according to me because barely any of them have a primary focus on actual role-playing. It's funny that everyone was calling Mass Effect a shooter with RPG elements trying to say it wasn't really an RPG but ME may have focused more on role-playing than any other RPG from that era. I play an RPG for the role-playing. And integrating actual role-playing into a video game is hard vs making a game like say Diablo is a lot easier from a game complexity standpoint. Witcher 3 as well is a rather simple game (a lot of work went into making it look good and the writing, but the actual game systems were pretty basic).
Larian as far as I know funded the game completely on their own without any publisher capital (obviously since they have none) or any other capital infusions from anyone else. They funded the game by making money on past game profits.
Why not? Larian funded the game themselves by running a profitable company. Many RPG companies definitely have put together a more successful library of games like Obsidian, Bethesda, Bioware.
You're only taking CNN/MSNBC over FOX because you like their narrative more and has nothing to do with their journalistic quality. Local news is as corrupt as cable news, it's all owned by the same company basically.
Larian first pitched BG3 to WOTC in 2014. Right after DOS 1 was released. WOTC thought back then that Larian wasn't experienced enough to handle a project like that. Then few years later WOTC saw DOS2 and contacted Larian asking if they still were interested.
Baldur's Gate 3 PS5 Publishing Rights Snagged by Spike Chunsoft in Japan
And there'll be a physical release
www.pushsquare.com
Larian rolls back Baldur's Gate 3 Hotfix 4 due to crashes
Larian Studios has rolled back last night's Baldur's Gate 3 Hotfix 4 due to new crashes. The developer shared the news …
www.eurogamer.net
Baldur's Gate 3 on PS5: release date, file size, preorder, and early access | Digital Trends
After a short delay, Baldur's Gate 3 is about to come to PS5 consoles. Here's all the preload, file size, and preorder information you need to be ready to go.
www.google.com
Divinity Original Sin II has almost certainly outsold everything Obsidian has made since New Vegas and the financial rough ride precipitated by Deadfire selling poorly definitely helped push them towards being acquired by Microsoft. Larian have managed to remain independent and continuously make bigger and better games since Divinity: Original Sin. Their consistent profitability makes them an outlier in the modern CRPG scene, a big one. However much like their contemporaries they're probably only one failed title away from needing a corporate bailout. You can lose a *lot* of money as a midsize developer.
I pray that these guys and gals stay in business for a long as possible. I mean I have much interest in the game, but these are all clearly talented people that care about the work they are doing. What sucks about many midsize developers. All it takes is one or two failures and that's it. Either shut down or be bought out by somebody bigger.
Has anyone hit act 3 yet? I am now hearing/seeing references to more and more bugs there but it's being swept aside in favor of the Future of All Good Gaming hype cycle. Is it really bad, over-exaggerated, or just normal new release minor bug stuff?
For example I was listening to Breakout last night (that and the recent Sterling video breakdown this stupid DISCOURSE around it pretty well) and Nick is a huge fan but mentioned that act 3 has bugs and he might just wait for patches before continuing. I mean, that sounds pretty serious, and if it is so bad and others are experiencing that, it should be a bigger part of the conversation and reviews, right?
For example I was listening to Breakout last night (that and the recent Sterling video breakdown this stupid DISCOURSE around it pretty well) and Nick is a huge fan but mentioned that act 3 has bugs and he might just wait for patches before continuing. I mean, that sounds pretty serious, and if it is so bad and others are experiencing that, it should be a bigger part of the conversation and reviews, right?
After the hype dies down, maybe people will look at the bigger picture a bit closer. But the game itself seems to be impressive enough that these bugs are a minor caveat. I posted a DF tech review earlier here that I haven’t had time to watch yet, but perhaps they touch on that.
LARIAN GROUP HOLDINGS LIMITED Overview | Company information - IE.GlobalDatabase.com
LARIAN GROUP HOLDINGS LIMITED is located at 17A NEW BRIDE STREET, Ireland and is a Private limited company (Ltd.) company. The company began trading on 27 September 2018 and has 4 employees. LARIAN GROUP HOLDINGS LIMITED’s status is Active. The company is registered with the registration number...
Check out the last investor. If accurate they own about 30% of Larian Group’s shares. Pretty significant chunk.
Found from this discussion on the topic -
Larian Studio & Tencent?
Just read a report that Tencent owns 30% of Larian Studio now? Haven’t heard any announcment on the matter. Is this recent?
forums.larian.com
There is an update on the way, or possibly already out that is to address these late game issues. The reason why a lot of people aren't talking about it, is because they aren't in Act 3 yet. I mean I'm reach into the 40+ hour mark and I'm still in Act 1 so...that shit is a LONG time. And supposed Act 1 is the smallest act so like....I dunno how this game is beatable tbh.
And here's a fun Polygon article gleefully hurling herself into BG3 discourse
www.polygon.com
Personally, the idea of save scumming as part of playing a video game sounds miserable. How is this fun for anybody?!
But if the "right" way to play is to not save scum and accept consequences, why do so many people play it "wrong?" But then conventional gamer wisdom is "there is no wrong way to play, play how you like etc."
I'm having fun with this game I'm not playing lol
It’s time to accept save scumming as the best way to play RPGs
Even before Baldur’s Gate 3, I’ve always F5-ed my way through RPGs — particularly in Bethesda RPGs like Skyrim and narrative-driven ones like Disco Elysium.
Personally, the idea of save scumming as part of playing a video game sounds miserable. How is this fun for anybody?!
But if the "right" way to play is to not save scum and accept consequences, why do so many people play it "wrong?" But then conventional gamer wisdom is "there is no wrong way to play, play how you like etc."
I'm having fun with this game I'm not playing lol
If that many bugs are present in the game I’d be save scumming as much as possible. It’s one thing to have to live with in-game choice consequences but another entirely when some glitch happens that fucks up hours of progress that perhaps could never be duplicated. It’s why I’ll always be a fan of persistent saving like the Souls games have, but without bonfire-esque resets that probably isn’t possible in a game like BG3.And here's a fun Polygon article gleefully hurling herself into BG3 discourse
It’s time to accept save scumming as the best way to play RPGs
Even before Baldur’s Gate 3, I’ve always F5-ed my way through RPGs — particularly in Bethesda RPGs like Skyrim and narrative-driven ones like Disco Elysium.
Personally, the idea of save scumming as part of playing a video game sounds miserable. How is this fun for anybody?!
But if the "right" way to play is to not save scum and accept consequences, why do so many people play it "wrong?" But then conventional gamer wisdom is "there is no wrong way to play, play how you like etc."
I'm having fun with this game I'm not playing lol
She is literally saying nothing new nor special about saves scumming. I don't hate save scumming myself, but I do use it when it's needed or just to save some time. When somebody legitimately buys a copy of the game, or pirates, let that person play however they want. It's their copy, they can do whatever the hell they want.And here's a fun Polygon article gleefully hurling herself into BG3 discourse
It’s time to accept save scumming as the best way to play RPGs
Even before Baldur’s Gate 3, I’ve always F5-ed my way through RPGs — particularly in Bethesda RPGs like Skyrim and narrative-driven ones like Disco Elysium.
Personally, the idea of save scumming as part of playing a video game sounds miserable. How is this fun for anybody?!
But if the "right" way to play is to not save scum and accept consequences, why do so many people play it "wrong?" But then conventional gamer wisdom is "there is no wrong way to play, play how you like etc."
I'm having fun with this game I'm not playing lol
Last edited:
Agreed, as long as it's a single player game.
As an update, at the goblin camp, trying to find the druid. I know where the map says he is, but I can't get to that spot. As in, I legitimately see nothing at the elevation and point the map is showing me. Freed a bard, though. I like Shadowheart. Lae'zel is firmly in "I tolerate you only because you might be able to help us" territory. Asterion, I likey. Gale, I haven't interacted enough with, but leaning towards liking him.
ETA: Oh, and I adopted Scratch, because DOGGIE!
Double ETA: Aaand thanks to that rollback, or something, my last few autosaves and my manual save are no longer compatible. Almost two hours of progress gone.
Final ETA: After re-verifying my files through Steam, and a scare where they had me re-agree to the EULA, compatability fixed, back on track.
Last edited:
Baldur's Gate 3 New Standards Controversy Explained - The Escapist
Here's a breakdown of the origin and evolution of the "developer are panicking" controversy surrounding Baldur’s Gate 3.
www.escapistmagazine.com
Waiting for the day this whole shitshow is christened as Balder’s Gate Gate or something.Baldur's Gate 3 New Standards Controversy Explained - The Escapist
Here's a breakdown of the origin and evolution of the "developer are panicking" controversy surrounding Baldur’s Gate 3.
Alright so I think I'm going to just do my impressions post now, figuring it's going to take me several more weeks to get through the game proper and after 47 hours I think i've got enough of a handle on the game to toss my opinions out there.
Bottom line this game is fantastic in almost every way, but more importantly it's fantastic for what it seeks to emulate. That being a D&D campaign with a bunch of characters that have backstories that have very little to do with the "main" plot. Just like a real tabletop group, you always have players with backstories that don't make a lot of sense with the plot thread the DM is trying to weave. The best example of this is Gale, who's character story involves some kind of magical curse that requires him to consume a magic item every so often. It's got very little to do with the current plot arch of which we are trying to find a way to remove a fucking mindflayer tadpole out of our skull. Or Wyll, who's been tasked to kill a demon who's got the potential to reap destruction across the Sword Coast..only for her to be awesome and join your party.
Furthermore to that is the time I've spend also doing a playthrough with a friend, and it showcases that D&D thing where the party never does the thing the DM predicts, always following a random thread instead of what the main goal actually was in the first place. One time he had planned to take care of the goblin camp and save the druid grove, instead got distracted by the old potion lady being accosted by a couple men, which ultimately led us to her cabin in the wood where we beat the shit out of the old lady (who's not an old lady). The fact that the game had basically a whole D&D session waiting for us to stumble across on the side is a triumph of what they put together here.
The sheer detail is staggering to be quite honest. Characters have voice lines for the race you are playing even. My friend is playing a drow in our co-op playthrough and since my solo run is much further than he is, I've let him be the face of the group and characters treat him with worry just for being a drow. EVEN the fucking animals all have conversations if you can cast speak with animals. It is nuts. Just nuts.
While the feeling of the D&D 5e is on display here there are a few instances in which it sort of fails to hold up. For example it's impossible to fail picking a lock, because even if the dice don't cooperate you can retry all you want whereas in a normal game a DM might break the lock or magically do something to prevent that from happening. Also there are no social restrictions on the rest of the table's time, so if you want to get really tedious by stealing everything not nailed down or investigate pointless corners you can do that. As a result the pacing of the actual game itself can be hurt if you have no self control in that regard. Which leads me to the other point of having too much to poke and pick at. Too many little pointless baubles of bullshit to look at and fuck with mean that trying to be through in an area is annoying but also can lead to burn out in later areas of the game.
Does anybody else do this? Where you start a game being super explorative, or hype focused on trying to do every quest and loot every chest, but then by the mid to late game you're like, "OMG just be over already!?" It's happened to me on a lot of games I've tried to 100% and i fear that over potential to poke at a bunch of nothing can lead to that later in BG3 especially when you're 150 hours deep and ready to see the credits.
There are also come issues with spells especially cantrips that don't let you cast them outside of combat when you should be able to. Things like Mage Hand can only be cast once outside of combat per long rest, when that isn't how cantrips work. So I don't really understand why that's an issue. Mostly though the issues are simply limited to being a video game and unlike D&D IRL where the imagination is the limit, there are only so many things the game can have in them. Luckily those limits are quite wide for being a video game for sure.
Overall the game itself is impressive, the companions aren't all great but they are all at least interesting, the main driving force for now is a good driving force with plenty of potential outcomes, and the sheer scope of everything they've included here is staggering.
I said it earlier in the thread but Baldur's Gate 3 is going to a hard game to beat for GOTY.
Bottom line this game is fantastic in almost every way, but more importantly it's fantastic for what it seeks to emulate. That being a D&D campaign with a bunch of characters that have backstories that have very little to do with the "main" plot. Just like a real tabletop group, you always have players with backstories that don't make a lot of sense with the plot thread the DM is trying to weave. The best example of this is Gale, who's character story involves some kind of magical curse that requires him to consume a magic item every so often. It's got very little to do with the current plot arch of which we are trying to find a way to remove a fucking mindflayer tadpole out of our skull. Or Wyll, who's been tasked to kill a demon who's got the potential to reap destruction across the Sword Coast..only for her to be awesome and join your party.
Furthermore to that is the time I've spend also doing a playthrough with a friend, and it showcases that D&D thing where the party never does the thing the DM predicts, always following a random thread instead of what the main goal actually was in the first place. One time he had planned to take care of the goblin camp and save the druid grove, instead got distracted by the old potion lady being accosted by a couple men, which ultimately led us to her cabin in the wood where we beat the shit out of the old lady (who's not an old lady). The fact that the game had basically a whole D&D session waiting for us to stumble across on the side is a triumph of what they put together here.
The sheer detail is staggering to be quite honest. Characters have voice lines for the race you are playing even. My friend is playing a drow in our co-op playthrough and since my solo run is much further than he is, I've let him be the face of the group and characters treat him with worry just for being a drow. EVEN the fucking animals all have conversations if you can cast speak with animals. It is nuts. Just nuts.
While the feeling of the D&D 5e is on display here there are a few instances in which it sort of fails to hold up. For example it's impossible to fail picking a lock, because even if the dice don't cooperate you can retry all you want whereas in a normal game a DM might break the lock or magically do something to prevent that from happening. Also there are no social restrictions on the rest of the table's time, so if you want to get really tedious by stealing everything not nailed down or investigate pointless corners you can do that. As a result the pacing of the actual game itself can be hurt if you have no self control in that regard. Which leads me to the other point of having too much to poke and pick at. Too many little pointless baubles of bullshit to look at and fuck with mean that trying to be through in an area is annoying but also can lead to burn out in later areas of the game.
Does anybody else do this? Where you start a game being super explorative, or hype focused on trying to do every quest and loot every chest, but then by the mid to late game you're like, "OMG just be over already!?" It's happened to me on a lot of games I've tried to 100% and i fear that over potential to poke at a bunch of nothing can lead to that later in BG3 especially when you're 150 hours deep and ready to see the credits.
There are also come issues with spells especially cantrips that don't let you cast them outside of combat when you should be able to. Things like Mage Hand can only be cast once outside of combat per long rest, when that isn't how cantrips work. So I don't really understand why that's an issue. Mostly though the issues are simply limited to being a video game and unlike D&D IRL where the imagination is the limit, there are only so many things the game can have in them. Luckily those limits are quite wide for being a video game for sure.
Overall the game itself is impressive, the companions aren't all great but they are all at least interesting, the main driving force for now is a good driving force with plenty of potential outcomes, and the sheer scope of everything they've included here is staggering.
I said it earlier in the thread but Baldur's Gate 3 is going to a hard game to beat for GOTY.
Glad you're enjoying it u/CriticalGaming
Is the co-op game you're playing splitscreen? How does that look?
Re: the combat, some of the stuff I'm seeing is about how hard it is in beginning, do you think that's the game or is it folks that aren't used to D&D trying to learn both D&D and this game and being overwhelmed?
Is the co-op game you're playing splitscreen? How does that look?
Re: the combat, some of the stuff I'm seeing is about how hard it is in beginning, do you think that's the game or is it folks that aren't used to D&D trying to learn both D&D and this game and being overwhelmed?
No we are playing via internet, so full screen each.
Neither, it's a problem with how D&D works in general.
Level 1-3 character in D&D tend to be very very fragile, meaning the early portions of the campaign are always the most dicey. But as player's level up and their toolkits get put together, the power dynamic shifts more and more into the player's favor. To the point where the party can develop the potential to break reality itself. There is a reason why most official D&D campaign books stop the players at level 11, because at level 13 players get access to 7th level spells which makes shit really go insane and nevermind how godly you are at level 20. Level 20 players are basically unkillable.
So it's just kind of the way D&D works, and while it sounds badly balanced it's actually intended to be that way. When the players first start out they are supposed to be nobodies, just wannabe heroes trying to make a buck and save some kittens or whatever. But as they develop not only wealth, but gear and praise with the world around them, their power and fame grows until they are heroes of the universe. It's the RPG trope of starts as kids battling rabid dogs until they band together to kill God at the end.