Baldur's Gate 3

[Ag3ma]

Anyways, I find this article confused or disingenuous. They totally forget to mention that the initiating tweet went on to gasslight people by pretending that the raised standard would be applied to indie games. It wouldn't.

Of course you hate the article: it's not just disagreeing with your view but also telling you that you've been suckered, and no-one likes to feel like they're the fool.

I think that article is right on the button to note the gross misrepresentation of what these other devs are saying and thinking in order to manufacture this controversy. It's all crafted to play on the nature of fandom and simmering gamer resentments over big publishers, lazy or rushed productions, etc. to fabricate clickbait outrage.

And bluntly, your argument make no sense anyway. A load of you are in this file cheering the new raising of standards and expectations for cRPGs due to BG3. Well, wake the fuck up buddy: that's literally saying all those other games, including indy games, now look relatively worse. Worse games means lower sales.

Indie games sell less because they are relatively primitive. Some players won't go near games that don't have the latest GFX-torching graphics, or lack other forms of stuff (gameplay elements, easy UI, etc.) that gamers have become used to and expect. BG1, in its day a peak of gaming, sold millions of copies. Games made to that 20-year-old standard today sell in the tens-hundreds of thousands. That's the way it goes, otherwise we'd all still be playing games no more complex than 1980s tech.

 

[BrawlMan]

Kinda late here but I was busy yesterday.


Anyways, I find this article confused or disingenuous. They totally forget to mention that the initiating tweet went on to gasslight people by pretending that the raised standard would be applied to indie games. It wouldn't. To imply that it would is a lie and manipulative. It bakes in an excuse for lazy devs. Instead of treating the game as an ideal to strive for to whatever capacity you are equipped, it paints it as an impossibility straight out of the gate.


The things people want are the long dev times, the lack of microtransactions and the love and care being put in over profit. Not the 400 person team, popular IP and tons of funding letting them voice 2 tv series worth of dialogue.

But the tweet treats this fact as if it is not there and goes on to dispute something nobody was saying to generate a climate of gamers being unreasonable. Is it that absurd to ask exactly why one would do that if not on the behest of AAA studios who by all accounts should be putting out similar content? Or are we to believe the tweeter is so delusional as to believe a good segment of the community would expect his 5 man team to put out BG-tier content?

Everything you just said is wrong, full of crap, and you know it. IGN once again fucked up and made things worse for everyone and the entire gaming landscape. Not my fault you got duped, and I won't hear anything else otherwise. The fact you are way off base doesn't surprise me in the slightest, because you have done this more than once, even with non-gaming related topics. Next time, actually read and understand the article, and not throw a fit, because the article and Sterling proved you wrong?

BTW...

Median indie game earnings on Steam barely exceed $1,000 lifetime | Game World Observer

It is unlikely that every indie developer expects their game to generate millions of dollars. However, the median lifetime earnings on Steam might not be enough to even stay in this industry and make another project.

gameworldobserver.com

.

Of course you hate the article: it's not just disagreeing with your view but also telling you that you've been suckered, and no-one likes to feel like they're the fool.

I think that article is right on the button to note the gross misrepresentation of what these other devs are saying and thinking in order to manufacture this controversy. It's all crafted to play on the nature of fandom and simmering gamer resentments over big publishers, lazy or rushed productions, etc. to fabricate clickbait outrage.

And bluntly, your argument make no sense anyway. A load of you are in this file cheering the new raising of standards and expectations for cRPGs due to BG3. Well, wake the fuck up buddy: that's literally saying all those other games, including indy games, now look relatively worse. Worse games means lower sales.

Indie games sell less because they are relatively primitive. Some players won't go near games that don't have the latest GFX-torching graphics, or lack other forms of stuff (gameplay elements, easy UI, etc.) that gamers have become used to and expect. BG1, in its day a peak of gaming, sold millions of copies. Games made to that 20-year-old standard today sell in the tens-hundreds of thousands. That's the way it goes, otherwise we'd all still be playing games no more complex than 1980s tech.

Took the words right out of my mouth. Thank you.

 

[Dreiko]

Of course you hate the article: it's not just disagreeing with your view but also telling you that you've been suckered, and no-one likes to feel like they're the fool.

I think that article is right on the button to note the gross misrepresentation of what these other devs are saying and thinking in order to manufacture this controversy. It's all crafted to play on the nature of fandom and simmering gamer resentments over big publishers, lazy or rushed productions, etc. to fabricate clickbait outrage.

And bluntly, your argument make no sense anyway. A load of you are in this file cheering the new raising of standards and expectations for cRPGs due to BG3. Well, wake the fuck up buddy: that's literally saying all those other games, including indy games, now look relatively worse. Worse games means lower sales.

Indie games sell less because they are relatively primitive. Some players won't go near games that don't have the latest GFX-torching graphics, or lack other forms of stuff (gameplay elements, easy UI, etc.) that gamers have become used to and expect. BG1, in its day a peak of gaming, sold millions of copies. Games made to that 20-year-old standard today sell in the tens-hundreds of thousands. That's the way it goes, otherwise we'd all still be playing games no more complex than 1980s tech.

No, I think the article itself misrepresents the actual objections PEOPLE had, by focusing on YOUTUBERS and applying their words to the broader community. The actual people weren't saying the same things the youtubers were. And it is those people that came first in this situation. You do not get to rewrite history and paint people with the bursh of what the youtubers said when they were reacting to this situation before even seeing anything on youtube in the first place.


I play tons of AA games and older stuff, stuff with less focus on expensive graphics in favor of a more hand-drawn artistic style. Hell I still play tons of pixel art stuff too. So the notion that I somehow see these games as primitive or inferior to AAA content is inherently offensive and 100% inaccurate. They're totally their own category and only an idiot would compare them to AAA games.


Obviously when a new game comes out that had the benefit of advanced technology working in its favor, it's gonna make older stuff look a bit worse in comparison. That is not unique to this situation. That's just a thing. Pretending it didn't used to happen and only just now started happening is also gasslighting.

There's nothing wrong with celebrating a new game being better at things than other games. To jump to the defense of other things as if they need it is suspect. It betrays weakness. The normal response is to just acknowledge reality and have faith that when your next game comes out in the future that also benefits from this progress you can hold your head high. Literally nobody who is taken seriously by anyone bemoaned older games for not looking like games made with cutting edge technology, and to pretend they do is laying the ground for future excuse-making so that you won't have to be held responsible for your game just sucking.

Everything you just said is wrong, full of crap, and you know it. IGN once again fucked up and made things worse for everyone and the entire gaming landscape. Not my fault you got duped, and I won't hear anything else otherwise. The fact you are way off base doesn't surprise me in the slightest, because you have done this more than once, even with non-gaming related topics. Next time, actually read and understand the article, and not throw a fit, because the article and Sterling proved you wrong?

IGN came into the picture after this situation had been weeks old and nobody was talking about it any longer. They didn't do anything of relevance. At best it was a summary. This had already run its course weeks before and people just didn't know about it. Don't blame others for your ignorance.

Even the CEO of Larian said that every game coming out is a new standard and he wishes more games like BG3 get made cause he would wanna play them, and it kinda ended there as far as the argument goes. Everyone who came after this feels totally irrelevant and just reflexively doing their anti-gamer grift from back in the GG days.

 

[sXeth]

From the second article:


From the first:



Larian pitched BG3 to WOTC and then later WOTC came back with the same pitch.

They, and I very specifically quote this, "pitched for".
They had an idea that they "pitched for" Baldurs Gate 3, they did not pitch the project of "Baldurs Gate 3" (the pitch was presumably the random mind flayer invasion, which still is kind of weird, but WotC doesn't care about the brand actually being a sequel (See also those wacky Gauntlet esque console games they put out in the mid 2000s).

Then

"
So when you pitched it to them, did you pitch an idea or did you just say "I'd love to make BG3"?

Heh. I had a lot of arrogance, if you want. I said, "Look, we're the company to do this - look what we just did. You should give it to us."
"

Again, "were the company to do this" and "you should give it to us" (as opposed to anyone else who may have been being considered) not "we had this a great idea" or something similar. More language of someone submitting a resume for a position rather then cold calling a company up for a non-existent position.

In simple basic practical terms, you also don't get very far (particularly as a studio that had narrowly avoided bankruptcy and was still relying on kickstarters) spending resources on making phantom pitches for opportunities that may not even exist. And there's also all the "Enhanced Edition Remasters" and the literal D&D movie, and accompany adventure module that WotC also put out in the same cycle of time, they were pretty clearly all in on trying to get their brand pushed.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As far as the allegedly raised bar goes, Larians probably gonna be the ones who actually get smacked in the head with it before anyone else. Even assuming they get the same financial backing (and another relatively unspoiled nostalgia brand to market) on whatever the next project is, they're now stuck in CDPR's hellscape trying to follow their metaphorical Witcher 3, where the hype cycle will probably burn them at the stake if it even just meets the "good" standards.

It probably won't do much to the "mainstream" because high numbers aside, those high numbers are actually a niche. There are a *ridiculous* number of people in the world and online. I've done this math before for a discussion on "influencers", and a million views diesn't even a municipal election in a single major city, for instance. Nevermind reflect a dominant opinion on any kind of international scale. A million paying and satisfied customers is certainly enough to run a business on, but its nowhere near a "paradigm shift" to borrow some buzzwords on a major scale.

 

[BrawlMan]

IGN came into the picture after this situation had been weeks old and nobody was talking about it any longer. They didn't do anything of relevance. At best it was a summary.

As much as I love that statement about IGN not being relevant, they were relevant in this case. They still screwed up and caused the discourse and unfortunately, it did spread. Let's not downplay it. I know The Escapist has had some garbage or bad takes before with some of their articles, but this is not one of them. They've been pretty factual and backed up their own evidence.

Don't blame others for your ignorance.

No, that would be you. You've been ignorant and intentionally oblivious far more times than you care to count. Whatever makes you sleep at night.

Even the CEO of Larian said that every game coming out is a new standard and he wishes more games like BG3 get made cause he would wanna play them, and it kinda ended there as far as the argument goes. Everyone who came after this feels totally irrelevant and just reflexively doing their anti-gamer grift from back in the GG days.

There is nothing wrong with that. I never said it was a problem. I agree to an extent. If every AAA game matched the quality of Baldur's Gate 3, then we would be in heaven right now. Many games of the AAA space should be of way better quality, but we all know most of the publishers and executives at top don't give a rat's ass. Or they would do something worse with that long development cycle and over stress their workers and waste everyone's time even more. This is why I prefer most mid budget games or Indie Games in general.

"Everyone" is not totally irrelevant to the situation before, during, or afterward. you sure as hell don't get to make that decision and nobody put you in charge. The only ones I consider irrelevant are those who act like they know everything, or are just trying to add fuel to the fire, because they're either trolls or angry grifters (who consider themselves TRUE GAMERZ) with nothing better to do with their lives. Speaking of grifters, I haven't heard too many anti-gaming grifters on the subject, so I don't know where the hell you're getting that from.

So how about you do yourself a favor? Just be happy you got the game you wanted and more so, and enjoy it. Stop getting upset, because somebody found out the actual truth and you got duped and fell into the grift hype machine otherwise.

 

[FakeSympathy]

Alright, in an attempt to bring us back to talk about the game itself before things get more messy:

I am enjoying Act 3 so far. The city of Baldur's gate is actually a lot more fascinating that I'd imagined, and I can't wait to see how this all ends. I do think the big threat reveal at the end of act 2 did come out of nowhere. And everyone in my party is reaching the final chapters in their subplots

But as much as I love this game and DOS2, there's one thing I've come to realize; I'd hate to play actual sessions of tabletop RPG.

Here, I can focus on how I want to form my party, decide how their subplots go, who gets to do what attack, where they go, and who they befriend and antagonize. I feel like in an actual tabletop session, I have to constantly consult with my group actual players on what to do, and also to roll for just about anything. In both BG3 and DOS2, things go much faster.

I can play when I want and how much I want, without need to coordinate and schedule best time for everyone involved. Not to mention I can always reload a save if I feel I made a terrible decision.

 

[BrawlMan]

​

 

[Gordon_4]

Alright, in an attempt to bring us back to talk about the game itself before things get more messy:

I am enjoying Act 3 so far. The city of Baldur's gate is actually a lot more fascinating that I'd imagined, and I can't wait to see how this all ends. I do think the big threat reveal at the end of act 2 did come out of nowhere. And everyone in my party is reaching the final chapters in their subplots

But as much as I love this game and DOS2, there's one thing I've come to realize; I'd hate to play actual sessions of tabletop RPG.

Here, I can focus on how I want to form my party, decide how their subplots go, who gets to do what attack, where they go, and who they befriend and antagonize. I feel like in an actual tabletop session, I have to constantly consult with my group actual players on what to do, and also to roll for just about anything. In both BG3 and DOS2, things go much faster.

I can play when I want and how much I want, without need to coordinate and schedule best time for everyone involved. Not to mention I can always reload a save if I feel I made a terrible decision.

Generally, starting gear is either handed out by the GM based on character level and class and usually it should be enough to handle the first four to ten sessions, progression depending. And good players are generally good at making sure they have the best kind of gear for their class and role out of the loot they get.

The hard part of tabletop sessions is dealing with party members who’ve decided that chaotic neutral translates to ‘asshole’ and making deliberately inflammatory decisions with NPCs to try and force combat and fuck with the GM.

 

[FakeSympathy]

Generally, starting gear is either handed out by the GM based on character level and class and usually it should be enough to handle the first four to ten sessions, progression depending. And good players are generally good at making sure they have the best kind of gear for their class and role out of the loot they get.

The hard part of tabletop sessions is dealing with party members who’ve decided that chaotic neutral translates to ‘asshole’ and making deliberately inflammatory decisions with NPCs to try and force combat and fuck with the GM.

Okay, I can definitely see the gear issue being resolved, but I'm pretty sure I'd get bored if I were to participate on the real session; I have a terrible attention spam and from a few sessions that I saw on Matt Mercer's channel, I would not be able to keep up with all the details from the DM, the character sheet numbers, what spells that I have, etc.

Also, BG3 being a video game and everything is visualized definitely helps me enjoy the experience. Someone could describe me what the city of Baldur's Gate looks like and it's hard for me to get a mental image.

 

[chozo_hybrid]

​

My god Simmons and Steve were a bit insufferable in this. "Without a ton of incentive or crazy twists, I start losing interest after a while" he know's there's a primary story right? It's not a literal sandbox with no end goal. Yes you can change bits and stuff, but unlike the jrpg's he likes, you actually get to make choices. And Steve doesn't even know what D&D is, starts mentioning some card game or something lol. At least Max acknowledges it looks cool, but he wants nothing to do with it.

 

[chozo_hybrid]

Okay, I can definitely see the gear issue being resolved, but I'm pretty sure I'd get bored if I were to participate on the real session; I have a terrible attention spam and from a few sessions that I saw on Matt Mercer's channel, I would not be able to keep up with all the details from the DM, the character sheet numbers, what spells that I have, etc.

Also, BG3 being a video game and everything is visualized definitely helps me enjoy the experience. Someone could describe me what the city of Baldur's Gate looks like and it's hard for me to get a mental image.

It's different when you're in the thick of it with a good group of people, you'll be surprised how invested you can get, but at the end of the day, if the tabletop stuff is not for you, I totally get that.

 

[Ag3ma]

I play tons of AA games and older stuff, stuff with less focus on expensive graphics in favor of a more hand-drawn artistic style. Hell I still play tons of pixel art stuff too. So the notion that I somehow see these games as primitive or inferior to AAA content is inherently offensive and 100% inaccurate. They're totally their own category and only an idiot would compare them to AAA games.

I don't give a shit what you think and what you play, or your whiny claims of victimhood.

Firstly, obviously indie games can be compared to AA/AAA. Anyone who says there is some magic shield that means Queen's Wish, Encased or Black Geyser can't be compared to BG3 or Pathfinder: WotR, and aren't potentially competing for the same gamer time and money, is just delusional.

Secondly, it's not about you, which you'd have noticed had you read properly. I am talking precisely about those sorts of players who see two games of similar style, and ditch the one which necessarily has inferior graphics or other elements because it was made on a fraction of the budget. And this really is a lot of why indy games sell less well. Deal with it.

 

[sXeth]

Okay, I can definitely see the gear issue being resolved, but I'm pretty sure I'd get bored if I were to participate on the real session; I have a terrible attention spam and from a few sessions that I saw on Matt Mercer's channel, I would not be able to keep up with all the details from the DM, the character sheet numbers, what spells that I have, etc.

Also, BG3 being a video game and everything is visualized definitely helps me enjoy the experience. Someone could describe me what the city of Baldur's Gate looks like and it's hard for me to get a mental image.

Besides others notes, it can also vary a lot depending on your DM. Some DMs (and players) are whats ermed "rules lawyers" and every action must be an established skill from the book and rolled, and so on. Others can be a lot more free form.

Like if I DM and you sneak up to a dude whos unaware, I'm going to just say you can knock him out, and not bother trying to figure out the damage rolls for a rolling pin, or grapple checks, and whether you have sneak attack and roll to hit and bla bla bla.

A funny example of recent notei n the D&D movie is a very creative and unique sequence involving a Druid wildshaping, which most people just saw as a highlight, but there were also a bunch of people whining that yes, its impossible to change that many times without a rest (or being epic level (effectively gods) characters.

 

[BrawlMan]

My god Simmons and Steve were a bit insufferable in this.

More than a bit, but I can see what you mean. Steve at least considers Man of Steel a good movie. Simmons with the ol' "Man of Steel has no stakes and is a live-action DBZ movie!". Max doesn't care much for MoS, but he understands why people like the movie, and never insulted them for it. Simmons and Steve both have contentious opinons and staks, but the former can get off base and extremely bias, while the latter fails in either backing up his arguement entirely, or gets irate over dumb things, that it becomes hilarious and entertaining, usually, but not always. Steve is the same man that cannot pronounce Ryu's name properly, and keeps saying that it's "RAI-YU". Which we all know is bullshit and keeps trying to gaslight (and failing) into thinking it is true.

"Without a ton of incentive or crazy twists, I start losing interest after a while" he know's there's a primary story right? It's not a literal sandbox with no end goal. Yes you can change bits and stuff, but unlike the jrpg's he likes, you actually get to make choices. And Steve doesn't even know what D&D is, starts mentioning some card game or something lol. At least Max acknowledges it looks cool, but he wants nothing to do with it.

Which goes to show you know way more D&D than Steve's dumb ass. I am not into BG3, and already discussed this, but I can see the appeal. Knowing my brother, he's already playing right now.

 

[thebobmaster]

Still stuck in the goblin camp. I have been hit on by one party member, though. Lae'zel

 

[Baffle]

In your face Shadowheart! In. Your. Face.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Kinda late here but I was busy yesterday.


Anyways, I find this article confused or disingenuous. They totally forget to mention that the initiating tweet went on to gasslight people by pretending that the raised standard would be applied to indie games. It wouldn't. To imply that it would is a lie and manipulative. It bakes in an excuse for lazy devs. Instead of treating the game as an ideal to strive for to whatever capacity you are equipped, it paints it as an impossibility straight out of the gate.


The things people want are the long dev times, the lack of microtransactions and the love and care being put in over profit. Not the 400 person team, popular IP and tons of funding letting them voice 2 tv series worth of dialogue.

But the tweet treats this fact as if it is not there and goes on to dispute something nobody was saying to generate a climate of gamers being unreasonable. Is it that absurd to ask exactly why one would do that if not on the behest of AAA studios who by all accounts should be putting out similar content? Or are we to believe the tweeter is so delusional as to believe a good segment of the community would expect his 5 man team to put out BG-tier content?

That article is so cringe.

Of course you hate the article: it's not just disagreeing with your view but also telling you that you've been suckered, and no-one likes to feel like they're the fool.

I think that article is right on the button to note the gross misrepresentation of what these other devs are saying and thinking in order to manufacture this controversy. It's all crafted to play on the nature of fandom and simmering gamer resentments over big publishers, lazy or rushed productions, etc. to fabricate clickbait outrage.

And bluntly, your argument make no sense anyway. A load of you are in this file cheering the new raising of standards and expectations for cRPGs due to BG3. Well, wake the fuck up buddy: that's literally saying all those other games, including indy games, now look relatively worse. Worse games means lower sales.

Indie games sell less because they are relatively primitive. Some players won't go near games that don't have the latest GFX-torching graphics, or lack other forms of stuff (gameplay elements, easy UI, etc.) that gamers have become used to and expect. BG1, in its day a peak of gaming, sold millions of copies. Games made to that 20-year-old standard today sell in the tens-hundreds of thousands. That's the way it goes, otherwise we'd all still be playing games no more complex than 1980s tech.

Seriously... Literally like every known gaming channel is making fun of these developer comments. The vast majority are disagreeing with your view and you're the one trying to gaslight us into thinking our view is the minority. You know why I don't buy any AAA games? Because I know they are garbage, yet I'm the one being suckered? People complained about loot boxes forever and I never did because no game that was actually good had loot boxes so I couldn't give 2 shits about them. I'm somehow the one being suckered? I never bought any of those games, never bought a single loot box.

Indie games are not primitive. Indies are actually the ones doing the hard work and innovating. It's why I have say Shadows of Doubt on my wishlist and completely uninterested in Starfield (Bethesda game gonna Bethesda, been there done that). It's why I bought and played Disco Elysium day of release. It's why I bought Gamedec and not Cyberpunk. The scope of something like Diablo 4 or Witcher 3 is far far far lower than BG3 or Disco Elysium. Diablo 4/Witcher 3 is the primitive game if we're talking actual game complexity that doesn't involved graphics. One of the biggest games of the year is a remake of a nearly 20-year old game that made only minor changes to the actual gameplay and many find the original game still better; that's AAA gaming in a nutshell, making the same game but just better looking.

 

[Bartholen]

15 hours in. Cleared the refugee section, and had an evening with Shadowheart, even though I'm aiming for my character to stick his dick in crazy, aka Lae'zel. Yeah, the game's every bit as sublime as everyone says it is, yeeting people off of high places is especially fun. But I still can't help escape the feeling that my enjoyment is being dampened a bit by two factors.

For one, it's very similar to Divinity: Original Sin 2 in a lot of ways, and not all of them positive. That's overall not a bad thing, but it just doesn't give much of a feeling that I'm playing something new or different. That's mostly on me though: I have hundreds of hours in both D:OS 2 and Dungeons and Dragons itself, so no matter what, this game was going to feel familiar. But were it not for the zoom-ins during dialogues I'd very easily forget I wasn't playing D:OS2.

For two, I just got big time into Total War, which I'd never played before. But due to disk space running out (I have a rather small hard drive) I had to uninstall TWW2 to get BG3 in, so I feel kind of cheated out of an experience. Tonally TWW2 is much more grim and weighty, and my preferences in fantasy always lean towards the darker stuff. As such BG3's bright presentation and fairly lighthearted and whimsical proceedings (at least in comparison to Warhammer) just don't match the kind of vibe I was getting into with Total Warhammer. I'd racked up about 40 hours in that in less than two weeks, so I was pretty immersed in that atmosphere. I'm sure I'll get used to it though.

For my final thought, can we please introduce some more accents into fantasy media than "posh upper class Oxford graduate" or "gruff/jovial cockney"? I get that it's useful shorthand, but by god there's a wealth of different accents on the British Isles alone that would give so much more variety to characters. It legit feels distracting that everyone regardless of age, gender or even species seems to hail from the exact same region.

 

[Zykon TheLich]

In your face Shadowheart! In. Your. Face.

Given what I've read about BG3, I have to ask; what, exactly, is going in Shadowheart's face?

For my final thought, can we please introduce some more accents into fantasy media than "posh upper class Oxford graduate" or "gruff/jovial cockney"? I get that it's useful shorthand, but by god there's a wealth of different accents on the British Isles alone that would give so much more variety to characters. It legit feels distracting that everyone regardless of age, gender or even species seems to hail from the exact same region.

They do put in Scottish or Yorkshire/generic northern for dwarves sometimes.

 

[Baffle]

Given what I've read about BG3, I have to ask; what, exactly, is going in Shadowheart's face?

Dual-wield paladin, so first it was the Blood of Lathander then it was Phalar Aluve with a big ol' holy smite on it.