Thread: Baldurs Gate 3

  1. #1201
    I never managed to finish bg2 my party couldn't do the multiple rounds of combat at the end of tob without resting my main was a ranger that couldn't really do anything to the boss because iirc you needed +6's to actually hit at all. and I think I had +5s bow/arrows. pretty sure most of my dudes were level 30 but I just couldn't make it through that much combat without a spell reset even spamming spell breach and using alsorts of things to push it.

    suffice to say I enjoyed bg2 I didn't like the mind flayer portion of the game that much, It seemed like they would be a prominent part of bg3 I just remember going through the areas with them was a save/load fest. random one shots from mind blast. I'm sure you could do something to prevent your dudes getting one tapped by them but its been a while since I went through it. I have the extended from gog so I really should try and actually finish it one day. its just a long game going through amn and then into tob.
    Last edited by Heathy; 2020-06-29 at 08:49 PM.

  2. #1202
    Quote Originally Posted by Makabreska View Post
    Eh, I never liked all those BG1 empty locations with 1-2 points of interest each.
    Yeah I figured it wouldn't be the popular consensus, I just felt it made the world seem bigger and more explorable.

    Also 1-2 points of interest is a bit of an understatement except for maybe one or two of them.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathy View Post
    I didn't like the mind flayer portion of the game that much, It seemed like they would be a prominent part of bg3 I just remember going through the areas with them was a save/load fest. random one shots from mind blast. I'm sure you could do something to prevent your dudes getting one tapped by them but its been a while since I went through it. I have the extended from gog so I really should try and actually finish it one day. its just a long game going through amn and then into tob.
    OR stack everything on one hero who was immmune and hope he could solo their entire group of Illithid. I agree with you it was kinda ugh.
    Quote Originally Posted by Shalcker View Post
    Posting here is primarily a way to strengthen your own viewpoint against common counter-arguments.

  3. #1203
    Quote Originally Posted by Makabreska View Post
    So, Final Fantasy series should have ended with it's first game, by that logic? Or, closer to home, first Neverwinter Night's?
    Yeah, generally if you call something "Final", thats where it should end... but that argument's been made plenty of times on the internet over the decades. There's absolutely no cohesion between any of the Neverwinter games, though, which is why the majority of them aren't even numbered sequels.

    I honestly believe that at least 90% of the people hyped about BG3 would be equally hyped by whatever it was called, so long as it was being done by Larian Studios.

  4. #1204
    Quote Originally Posted by Halicia View Post
    I honestly believe that at least 90% of the people hyped about BG3 would be equally hyped by whatever it was called, so long as it was being done by Larian Studios.
    I'm not so sure about that, and neither, I guess, are the money people behind all this.

    Personally, me and my circle of friends were only peripherally aware of Larian; but we were all super into BG back in the day. That name sure got us curious. DOS 1 or 2 didn't. I never had a desire to play either of those (and still don't), but I am STILL playing BG2 regularly and have been for nearly two decades.

    The Baldur's Gate series is iconic in video game history, especially in RPGs. It's one of the most recognizable names. While Larian is... okay, one of the many many studios out there, most of which people won't even remember the name of. Heck even for BG, people may remember BioWare because it blew up, but the majority of people who played BG probably couldn't tell you that Black Isle was involved, or how they were involved, or even remember that name.

    There's a reason they chose this name for the game: it has huge pull on its own.

  5. #1205
    Quote Originally Posted by Biomega View Post
    I'm not so sure about that, and neither, I guess, are the money people behind all this.

    Personally, me and my circle of friends were only peripherally aware of Larian; but we were all super into BG back in the day. That name sure got us curious. DOS 1 or 2 didn't. I never had a desire to play either of those (and still don't), but I am STILL playing BG2 regularly and have been for nearly two decades.

    The Baldur's Gate series is iconic in video game history, especially in RPGs. It's one of the most recognizable names. While Larian is... okay, one of the many many studios out there, most of which people won't even remember the name of. Heck even for BG, people may remember BioWare because it blew up, but the majority of people who played BG probably couldn't tell you that Black Isle was involved, or how they were involved, or even remember that name.

    There's a reason they chose this name for the game: it has huge pull on its own.
    I think you're in the minority of hardcore BG2 fans that were clamoring for a style of game to stay like that though. Larian has nailed 2 games in a row in Divinity and done very customer friendly things when they remaster that the upgraded games were free to those people.

    Baldur's Gate has name recognition mostly for the first game and just D&D/Forgotten Realms people in general. Bg2 is so old now (20 years) that sure it has 'name recognition' and nostalgia attached to it but Larian has produced two very damn good games in much more recent history. I got hyped BECAUSE Larian is behind this not because it is the Baldur's Gate name and I'm plenty old enough to remember the fun of multi-CD switching BG1.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Halicia View Post
    I honestly believe that at least 90% of the people hyped about BG3 would be equally hyped by whatever it was called, so long as it was being done by Larian Studios.
    They could call it "Frolicking in the Forgotten Realms with some characters you will recognize" instead of BG3 and I'd still be just as hyped because Larian is working on it.

  6. #1206
    Quote Originally Posted by Kyanion View Post
    I think you're in the minority of hardcore BG2 fans that were clamoring for a style of game to stay like that though. Larian has nailed 2 games in a row in Divinity and done very customer friendly things when they remaster that the upgraded games were free to those people.
    I said nothing about what kind of game I wanted from BG3. I'm only saying that the Baldur's Gate name has a draw that's magnitudes greater than the name Larian Studios. And that to claim "90%" of people hyped because they heard the name Baldur's Gate would also have been hyped about any new Larian game seems just blatantly overblown. That's all. I'm not saying anything about what game I would or would not like to see under the BG name.

    (And if you must know, I personally wouldn't want to see a BG3 at all. Let iconic franchises rest. Try hard to create NEW iconic franchises. I'm so over the reboot/rehash/reimagine/redo/recylce/reuse/reXXXX bullshit that's been all the entertainment industry seems to be able to do lately.)

  7. #1207
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Biomega View Post
    I said nothing about what kind of game I wanted from BG3. I'm only saying that the Baldur's Gate name has a draw that's magnitudes greater than the name Larian Studios.
    Frankly, this is basically nonsense and a projection of your own disconnect from modern gaming. In the first couple months after release, Divinity: OS 2 sold over a million copies. By end of November, 2017.

    Baldur's Gate 2, by comparison, did not break 200,000 copies sold. That's by end of December, 2000.

    Both games released in mid-September, so if anything, that's weighted to favor BG2.

    By an objective measure, Divinity: OS 2 was a bigger hit on release than BG 2.

    The same was largely true of the first for each series as well.

    The Baldur's Gate games picked up a lot of love over the years, and outperformed low expectations in general. But Divinity has the same kind of legs, and Divinity: OS 2 has gotten massive accolades from pretty much everyone.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Biomega View Post
    (And if you must know, I personally wouldn't want to see a BG3 at all. Let iconic franchises rest. Try hard to create NEW iconic franchises. I'm so over the reboot/rehash/reimagine/redo/recylce/reuse/reXXXX bullshit that's been all the entertainment industry seems to be able to do lately.)
    This isn't a reboot. It's a fresh saga in the same setting/timeline, a century or more on from the original games, with all the history packed into that time frame informing how things have changed. It's literally exactly that kind of "new story" you're claiming nobody tries to make any more.


  8. #1208
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Frankly, this is basically nonsense and a projection of your own disconnect from modern gaming. In the first couple months after release, Divinity: OS 2 sold over a million copies. By end of November, 2017.

    Baldur's Gate 2, by comparison, did not break 200,000 copies sold. That's by end of December, 2000.

    Both games released in mid-September, so if anything, that's weighted to favor BG2.

    By an objective measure, Divinity: OS 2 was a bigger hit on release than BG 2.
    That's a very flawed argument because it doesn't account for total market size. If a product sells 100 copies in a market of 500 customers, it's HUGELY more successful in that market than a product that sells 100,000 copies in a market of 50 million customers.

    In terms of name recognition, I could not believe even for an instant that "Larian Studios" is more widely recognized than "Baldur's Gate", and to claim so seems preposterous in my eyes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    This isn't a reboot. It's a fresh saga in the same setting/timeline, a century or more on from the original games, with all the history packed into that time frame informing how things have changed. It's literally exactly that kind of "new story" you're claiming nobody tries to make any more.
    It may not be a reboot, but it is a REsomething - or they wouldn't have gone with the Baldur's Gate name.

  9. #1209
    Quote Originally Posted by Biomega View Post
    I said nothing about what kind of game I wanted from BG3. I'm only saying that the Baldur's Gate name has a draw that's magnitudes greater than the name Larian Studios. And that to claim "90%" of people hyped because they heard the name Baldur's Gate would also have been hyped about any new Larian game seems just blatantly overblown. That's all. I'm not saying anything about what game I would or would not like to see under the BG name.

    (And if you must know, I personally wouldn't want to see a BG3 at all. Let iconic franchises rest. Try hard to create NEW iconic franchises. I'm so over the reboot/rehash/reimagine/redo/recylce/reuse/reXXXX bullshit that's been all the entertainment industry seems to be able to do lately.)
    It is overblown in either direction I think. And yeah I'd be fine if it wasn't called Baldur's Gate, but to move the story in the current era of Forgotten Realms isn't all bad. Normally I'm anti reboot or cash in on a name, but with D&D and the Realms I do like seeing some continuity. But this isn't a remaster or remake, it is a sequel set well over a hundred years in the future because the timeline of Bg1/Bg2 were long ago in the Realms.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Biomega View Post
    In terms of name recognition, I could not believe even for an instant that "Larian Studios" is more widely recognized than "Baldur's Gate", and to claim so seems preposterous in my eyes.
    I mean you can view it that way all you like, sure people over 20+ years have been playing Baldur's Gate or heard of it, but Divinity has millions of plays too. And really does it MATTER which has more recognition? It is putting together a franchise people can relate to and the name of a company that has done well in this genre of gaming. I think it is a good fit and I'm looking forward to it.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Biomega View Post
    It may not be a reboot, but it is a REsomething - or they wouldn't have gone with the Baldur's Gate name.
    ReSequel? Is that a thing?

  10. #1210
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Biomega View Post
    That's a very flawed argument because it doesn't account for total market size. If a product sells 100 copies in a market of 500 customers, it's HUGELY more successful in that market than a product that sells 100,000 copies in a market of 50 million customers.
    And that counter only applies if you presume every niche of the gaming market expanded at the same rate. Is there really any evidence that isometric RPGs are a much bigger market today than in 2000? Other than, y'know, Larian's much greater sales of Divinity as compared to the Baldur's Gate games?

    Yes, the market is bigger, and when Baldur's Gate came out, it was appealing to a small niche market. It was successful within that niche, but so is the Divinity series today.

    In terms of name recognition, I could not believe even for an instant that "Larian Studios" is more widely recognized than "Baldur's Gate", and to claim so seems preposterous in my eyes.
    I mean, you're comparing a studio's name to their biggest product.

    You seem to be forgetting that, in 2000, Bioware was a tiny developer that nobody knew about. Baldur's Gate was their second game, and the first was Shattered Steel, which wasn't really a trend-setter and didn't sell enough to warrant the planned sequel. The reason we know Bioware as a developer is the Baldur's Gate series. That's what they made their name on. And nobody thought, at the start, that it was going to be a big deal. It vastly outperformed expectations.

    And Divinity: OS 2 is Larian's BG 2. It performed amazingly well. It's highly regarded by both fans and critics, winning multiple major awards or nominations for the same. This isn't some rando little studio, like Bioware was, who'd never made an RPG like this. This is a studio at the absolute top of their game in the specific niche subgenre of isometric fantasy CRPGs. For which they've won accolades not just on game design but also writing.

    Who the heck else would WotC tap to make a new Baldur's Gate game?

    Edit: I'd also like to point out if you say "Bioware, duh", I'm gonna point at Mass Effect 3's ending and Mass Effect: Andromeda and Anthem and ask you what about those properties makes you think Bioware would A> not fuck it up completely and B> have any interest in a relatively niche genre project?

    It may not be a reboot, but it is a REsomething - or they wouldn't have gone with the Baldur's Gate name.
    It's Dungeons and Dragons. It's all been iterating on the original game as crafted by Gygax. They're going to be pulling in a lot of content from myriad sources regardless of the title, so why complain when the title and setting are part of that? It's not like they're ignoring the prior games; their events directly contribute to the story, as they've said. It's set around Baldur's Gate specifically, unlike BG2, frankly. I really don't see any reason to not use the title.
    Last edited by Endus; 2020-07-01 at 02:09 AM.


  11. #1211
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    And that counter only applies if you presume every niche of the gaming market expanded at the same rate. Is there really any evidence that isometric RPGs are a much bigger market today than in 2000? Other than, y'know, Larian's much greater sales of Divinity as compared to the Baldur's Gate games?
    It doesn't need to expand at the same rate, greater works too; and it doesn't need to just be isometric RPGs, particularly when looking at time periods with far less genre diversity. But either way, sales figures aren't the only metric for name recognition; not even a very good one, probably. I know tons of franchises I've never invested a single cent into. In fact, I probably recognize way MORE franchises than there are franchises I've ever been a customer of (and thus contributed to sales).

    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    I mean, you're comparing a studio's name to their biggest product.

    You seem to be forgetting that, in 2000, Bioware was a tiny developer that nobody knew about. Baldur's Gate was their second game, and the first was Shattered Steel, which wasn't really a trend-setter and didn't sell enough to warrant the planned sequel. The reason we know Bioware as a developer is the Baldur's Gate series. That's what they made their name on. And nobody thought, at the start, that it was going to be a big deal. It vastly outperformed expectations.

    And Divinity: OS 2 is Larian's BG 2. It performed amazingly well. It's highly regarded by both fans and critics, winning multiple major awards or nominations for the same. This isn't some rando little studio, like Bioware was, who'd never made an RPG like this. This is a studio at the absolute top of their game in the specific niche subgenre of isometric fantasy CRPGs. For which they've won accolades not just on game design but also writing.
    Not sure how that matters. Time alone has spread the BG name with amazing persistence. It's called iconic for a reason. I'm not denigrating Larian's achievement, or saying that BioWare was somehow a household name when BG came out. That's not even part of the point I was making. All I'm saying is that more people will recognize the name Baldur's Gate than they will the name Larian Studios, and by a far bigger margin than 10%.

    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Who the heck else would WotC tap to make a new Baldur's Gate game?

    Edit: I'd also like to point out if you say "Bioware, duh", I'm gonna point at Mass Effect 3's ending and Mass Effect: Andromeda and Anthem and ask you what about those properties makes you think Bioware would A> not fuck it up completely and B> have any interest in a relatively niche genre project?
    Not sure how any of that is relevant to my point, feels very odd to bring that up. Are you suggesting I'm not aware of BioWare's history? And if so, why?

    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    It's Dungeons and Dragons. It's all been iterating on the original game as crafted by Gygax. They're going to be pulling in a lot of content from myriad sources regardless of the title, so why complain when the title and setting are part of that? It's not like they're ignoring the prior games; their events directly contribute to the story, as they've said. It's set around Baldur's Gate specifically, unlike BG2, frankly. I really don't see any reason to not use the title.
    I don't see a reason not to use the title either, from a producer's perspective. Of course you'd run with the best-selling name you can, as long as it's even remotely justifiable (and that doesn't mean it's necessarily ONLY remotely related).

    But that's sort of making my point for me. Baldur's Gate is a name with huge recognition value.

  12. #1212
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Biomega View Post
    I don't see a reason not to use the title either, from a producer's perspective.
    You realize this is commissioned by WotC, right?

    WotC approached Larian with the offer. It's WotC's idea to make another Baldur's Gate. Not Larian's.


  13. #1213
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    You realize this is commissioned by WotC, right?

    WotC approached Larian with the offer. It's WotC's idea to make another Baldur's Gate. Not Larian's.
    And how does that matter? Obviously Larian (being both developer and publisher) thought it was a good idea to use a highly recognized name like Baldur's Gate on a product they're making. And why wouldn't they.

    Again, I'm not disagreeing at all that it makes total sense to use the name where you can in any way justify it - in terms of a business decision.

    Will it make lore/fantasy sense for die-hard BG fans? Too early to tell, for me personally anyway. Until I see how it ties in with the previous games I can't really say if it makes sense to call it BG (business aside) or if it's just Divinity: Forgotten Realms and the BG connection was tacked on to cash in on the recognition.

  14. #1214
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Biomega View Post
    Will it make lore/fantasy sense for die-hard BG fans? Too early to tell, for me personally anyway. Until I see how it ties in with the previous games I can't really say if it makes sense to call it BG (business aside) or if it's just Divinity: Forgotten Realms and the BG connection was tacked on to cash in on the recognition.
    By the same token, questioning their ability to do so, or suggesting Larian is in any way just cashing in on something, that's just inflammatory slander that you're basically admitting to making up based on absolutely nothing.


  15. #1215
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    By the same token, questioning their ability to do so, or suggesting Larian is in any way just cashing in on something, that's just inflammatory slander that you're basically admitting to making up based on absolutely nothing.
    I'm not sure how "I will have to wait to see whether it makes sense or whether they're cashing in on it" amounts to "inflammatory slander". Maybe our definitions of that are just too far apart. I thought it was a reasonable position to say "wait and see", apparently not.

  16. #1216
    They literally said it involves baldurs gate, characters from there and is tied directly to the plot of it, the plot is obviously bigger scope than just the one city.

    Its like yall are saying amazing spiderman isnt REALLY spiderman cus its not made by marvel or that homecoming isnt spiderman cus its not made by sony .

    Its called baldurs gate cus its part of the story . Just cus it uses a highly successful combat format they think is better doesnt change that anymore than the dungeon crawler makes baldurs gate dark alliance not bg.

    It sounds like yall are either gatekeeping so you can pretend parts of the franchise u dont like arent canon or part of the franchise, or just looking for an excuse to trash the devs

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Halicia View Post
    Yeah, generally if you call something "Final", thats where it should end... but that argument's been made plenty of times on the internet over the decades. There's absolutely no cohesion between any of the Neverwinter games, though, which is why the majority of them aren't even numbered sequels.

    I honestly believe that at least 90% of the people hyped about BG3 would be equally hyped by whatever it was called, so long as it was being done by Larian Studios.
    There. Thats the gatekeeping right there. New fans arent lesser than old fans and as such if a franchise makes a Thing thats more appealing to new fans than old fans there is nothing wrong with that. I was confused when bg3 was announced cus i thought it was the dungeon crawler games. Had no idea there was an rpg like that before dragon age. Im hyped for it cus it looks like a fun game with customizability and social interaction with my favorite gsme system. And my feelings arent any less legitimate just cus i never played or even hurd of 1 and 2

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Biomega View Post
    That's a very flawed argument because it doesn't account for total market size. If a product sells 100 copies in a market of 500 customers, it's HUGELY more successful in that market than a product that sells 100,000 copies in a market of 50 million customers.

    In terms of name recognition, I could not believe even for an instant that "Larian Studios" is more widely recognized than "Baldur's Gate", and to claim so seems preposterous in my eyes.


    It may not be a reboot, but it is a REsomething - or they wouldn't have gone with the Baldur's Gate name.
    I mean i think u underestimate how much bigger a million is than 200k. Isnt the economy worse. Unless there are over 5 times as many ppl buying games, and earths population hasnt quintuples, then its an objective fact that in that metric divinity did better.

    And do you have an actual reason to think bg has a bigger fanbase? Like "the number of times the tag is used on ao3" cus you are just presenting your feelings as fact at this point

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Biomega View Post
    It doesn't need to expand at the same rate, greater works too; and it doesn't need to just be isometric RPGs, particularly when looking at time periods with far less genre diversity. But either way, sales figures aren't the only metric for name recognition; not even a very good one, probably. I know tons of franchises I've never invested a single cent into. In fact, I probably recognize way MORE franchises than there are franchises I've ever been a customer of (and thus contributed to sales).


    Not sure how that matters. Time alone has spread the BG name with amazing persistence. It's called iconic for a reason. I'm not denigrating Larian's achievement, or saying that BioWare was somehow a household name when BG came out. That's not even part of the point I was making. All I'm saying is that more people will recognize the name Baldur's Gate than they will the name Larian Studios, and by a far bigger margin than 10%.


    Not sure how any of that is relevant to my point, feels very odd to bring that up. Are you suggesting I'm not aware of BioWare's history? And if so, why?


    I don't see a reason not to use the title either, from a producer's perspective. Of course you'd run with the best-selling name you can, as long as it's even remotely justifiable (and that doesn't mean it's necessarily ONLY remotely related).

    But that's sort of making my point for me. Baldur's Gate is a name with huge recognition value.
    Sorry u cant do that.

    They brought up actual numbers NEVER saying that was proof, just evidence. You say its not the only way to measure and then go no alternatives that support your idea. By all means bring up an actual reason to think that bg is that much more popular
    Romance doesnt detract from a story. Its a Genre, like horror or comedy or adventure. The game was ruined when we got Horror in drustvar or nazmir. It wasnt ruined when we had funny quests. So if you think a little man on man love ruins the game, then yes you are either a homophobe or just a spoil sport that goes "ewww kissing is yucky" like a baby. Furthermore, if a character has never expressed interest in any gender, then its not proof they are straight. straight people are not the default

  17. #1217
    Quote Originally Posted by tristannarutofan View Post
    By all means bring up an actual reason to think that bg is that much more popular
    I am not saying that, and have never said that. I'm talking about name recognition value, nothing else. There may be certain correlations with popularity involved in that, but that's a very complex web to untangle so I'm not even attempting to do that; and it's beside the point in any event.

  18. #1218
    Moderator Northern Goblin's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Cumbria, England
    Posts
    15,960
    Saying the Baldur's Gate franchise should have ended at the conclusion of the Bhaalspawn arc is like saying once you hang Onyxia's head in Stormwind you can never go back.

    Both are giant sprawling cities that are the focus point of so many different quests and story arcs.
    Ex-Mod. Technically retired, they just won't let me quit.

  19. #1219
    The Unstoppable Force Arrashi's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Land of human potential (and non-toxic masculinity)
    Posts
    23,003
    Quote Originally Posted by AeneasBK View Post
    OR stack everything on one hero who was immmune and hope he could solo their entire group of Illithid. I agree with you it was kinda ugh.
    Or just summon mordekein sword (or whatever its called) since nothing in illithid areas can actually damage it.

  20. #1220
    Moderator Northern Goblin's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Cumbria, England
    Posts
    15,960
    Quote Originally Posted by Arrashi View Post
    Or just summon mordekein sword (or whatever its called) since nothing in illithid areas can actually damage it.
    Almost as cheese as off screen Cloudkill stacking.
    Ex-Mod. Technically retired, they just won't let me quit.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •