Well, even without the bugs, no way anything they make next will have the same hype as BG3. Massive name recognition, big marketing, all the D&D hype over the past few years.
ETA: realized after the fact this had been previously stated, my bad!
2 Likes
I believe they said they want their next project to be smaller in scope and not take 6 years of development.
1 Like
Despite the fact that I will never ever play Baldur’s Gate 3, it is in my opinion the game of the generation thus far for one simple reason -
It’s a 35+ minute video but go to 4:50 to 8:30 and just watching this clip made me realize that 99% of games are just basic boring same shit, different game type well games. lol
The amount of things that you can do in that one clip in the Goblin Camp blows away 99% of games because games are so heavily scripted, preset, pre-determined to where everyone has the same damn experience.
Oh…and that clip is literally one single quest in act one out of the entire game.
If Baldur’s Gate 3 was real time action combat as opposed to turn based, I would have 100% bought and played it day one when it released on Xbox Series X. No doubt in my mind.
As much as im loving Starfield and it’s my own personal current game of the generation because you can have different outcomes than others as opposed to everyone having the same outcome, it’s nowhere close to that single quest let alone the entirety of Baldur’s Gate 3.
As far as the technical issues go, that’s only a problem when a game is bad or very disappointing or is nothing new, unique, original or innovative. Look at BOTW, definitely technical issues, look at Elden Ring at launch, better off playing the PS4 version on PS5 to get 60 FPS but look at what those games do and it’s at that point, you realize why certain games despite having technical issues will have that element simply overlooked because of what the game is doing/allows you do/accomplishes that again, 99% of games don’t come anywhere close to doing.
Of course, im someone that can look at a game in a general point of view. Even games I love like Mad Max (9.0/10 for me), I can look at and be like, yeah, it’s no better than a 7.0/10. It just isn’t. Or joke around and say Immortals Fenyx Rising is the BOTW killer which granted, for me it 100% is but in reality, it’s not even in the same stratosphere. lol
Just wanted to chime in here with that because I wish more games, especially those that I know I will actually play were like Baldur’s Gate 3 and allow me to do all this stuff that I perhaps out of millions of those who play it, I may in fact be the only person that did this or that a certain way that no one else did.
4 Likes
I’ll say it’s very easy to have rose tinted glasses on a game that you haven’t played. I’ve been playing it co-op in a group of 4 and have been having a great time but the game is not as perfect as people make it sound.
That said, i suggest trying it. Combat is only one (and not even the most important one) aspect of an RPG.
3 Likes
True but for me, as much as I love a lot of games (like Sony game or Ubisoft’s games), let’s be honest, you play one, you kinda played them all. Not literally but im sure you get what I mean. lol
I can’t try it because I have zero interest in the combat system and dice rolling, no thanks. lol
I can get through turn based games if it’s around 30 hours give or take but I know Baldur’s Gate 3 if you really want to do everything which in all honesty, I probably would want to would last at least a few hundred hours especially since I know the game isn’t exactly easy and thus, dying a lot would increase the play time and the combat encounters which for me would be a negative. Also, I don’t want to buy a game that im not 100% certain that I will ever beat.
Hell, I want to complete EVERY location in Starfield but don’t want to walk/boost pack my way to every location so I will wait for the buggy and that shit better be good and fast. lol
Anyway, back to Baldur’s Gate 3, for me personally, it’s all about the combat system. If im not into it, the game either won’t be played at all or if I do, it won’t last long. Perfect examples - Red Dead Redemption 2 - a few hours. Elden Ring/Baldur’s Gate 3/Zelda: TOTK - never played. BOTW - 20 hours and had enough.
And before you ask, im not going to play with others or any type of co-op. Hehe.
1 Like
Wrong thread!
Uf no… both Skyrim and Oblivion had way more bugs and worse performance, yet both games were ahead of it’s time, i’m still yet to find a game with such ambience this century, the Bethesda + Jeremy Soule combo, just like Squaresoft + Nobuo were something else.
Last thing they said was a game like BG3 was already big enough, that their next project wouldn’t dwarf it, i expect something like Divinity Original Sin 2, which was already very big and was made with a 80-100 developers team. Now, with 500 employees and just 2 projects, they could split with 300-350 of them focusing on their first project, which is big.
Just curious can you name some games you like combat from? specially games that are not combat focused like Doom or Souls ones?, i feel like combat specially in RPG games is normally trash nowadays, Cyberpunk, great game but i had to mod it to make it decent combat wise, and even then, it was just meh, same goes for Starfield with the bulelt sponges and poor AI, on TLOU you could feel how the combat is actually handcrafted, and even then, you can see how the game cheats you and it’s not a that great AI as some say, enemies moving or showing up depending on where you aim felt weird.
Instead, on games like BG3, Divinity or XCOM i feel the combat is handcrafted, and just like with the story, there are several ways to win the fights, you can play with the environment, with the items you are given, the spells, surfaces etc. There’s many more possibilities than in most AAA games nowadays, but these games also have to be played on their highest difficulties, or at least on “hard” modes, otherway it can be even more boring than realtimed combat games.
And 100% agree on the technical issues on giant games, when i look at Gears or TLOU, the technical aspect is very important, as they don’t really offer anything special outside of that, but with games from Larian, Bethesda, CDProjekt, From… i want these developers to focus and push the aspects the are best on. Their games last years, the technical part can be fixed after release anyways, when i look at Elder Scrolls 6 i don’t care about it’s animations or performance too much, but about how are they going to take the exploration and ambience to another level again.
2 Likes
I’ve played all three at their launch states, Oblivion and Skyrim on 360 and BG3 on PC (Might have been after the first hotfix? Can’t quite recall). BG3’s act 3 is 100% the worst thing in any of those games. It was New Vegas levels of broken, and even more in multiplayer. Literally had a game that took weeks to finish just bashing our heads against the wall in act 3 trying to get past glitches.
And act 3 is still in a rough state. Launch Skyrim was worlds better than current act 3 (except for the PS3 bug that literally killed the game with large saves)
2 Likes
Gears doesn’t offer anything special besides a great presentation? really? I love games that give the player choice and different ways to tackle things but you are comparing apples to oranges here. Personally I don’t want every game to be BG3 or Prey in terms of gameplay, linear 3rd person shooters with great mechanics like Gears, REmake 4 or Vanquish are great in their own way and offer me something that a RPG or an immersive sim can’t.
Also going by your logic Gears also has to be played on Insane to appreciate the weapon variety/balance, combat scenarios and gameplay mechanics. If you don’t like shooters that’s OK but that doesn’t make them inferior as a genre.
1 Like
Special wasn’t the best word choice, by special i mean something not seen yet, or taken to a new level or a higher step, i don’t mean that these games aren’t great outside of their technical side, but that’s very important too and a part of what makes these games great.
I’ve always been a fan of shooters, but i find the genre hasn’t evolved that much last 15 years, Halo 1 or 3 were masterpieces that actually did something special for example, the scenarios, vehicles, gameplay, AI was a step up versus what we were used to back in the 2000s. Lately i’m not finding shooters that have evolved that much in these sections, guess the focus nowadays is on the animations and graphics.
And yes games are normally better in higher difficulty levels, sadly on many games difficulty is all about enemies being more spongy, not missing shoots and their bullets dealing much more damage, sure, enemies can be more aggressive or take more cover too, but the main difference is on enemy HP, damage and accuracy.
Still, Halo for example can be enjoyable on lower difficulties because it has a great gameplay, this is not how i feel turn based games work, the fun in these games is that they make you think to beat enemies, not just simply run into them and attack, there’s no fun in that.
Also difficulty on BG3 matters in how enemies focus you or allies, on the equipment they have, the spells they have or even the new legendary actions from the bosses, it’s just not about you having less hp and enemies being tanky
Will bite my tongue as I’ve been pretty clear how annoying, slow and ponderous I found BG3, particularly how easy it is to miss things (especially if you fail a dice roll) and battles taking way too bloody long for how many there are.
It launched in Early Access on PC is the one thing to remember - so it was reasonably polished at full launch because it had been bug tested by users.
And I do think the MC score was affected by PC Gamer and others fawning over Larian and that it wasn’t on consoles, then the Sony bonus from it being on PS5 first - that plus it being an “adult” game with nudity and weird bear sex lol (which I suspect helped sales too lol).
Very glad it’s unlikely Obsidian would go near the series again - yes their history is turn based but nowadays they’ve mainly been doing real time and have been doing well, so going backwards and competing with Larian who are the media darlings right now would possibly be quite damaging.
In particular, PC Gamer has it in for Xbox studios and venerates Larian (Swen just has to blink and they report on it), so if Obsidian did BG4 they’d gladly savage them as would PS-leaning publications.
1 Like
Cyberpunk is still in my backlog so I can’t comment on that game but as far as Starfield goes, I love the combat but in fairness, I am playing it as a first person shooter. There is no stealth or melee combat in my play-through. Felt great at launch at 30FPS and feels even better now at 60FPS. On hard, the AI isn’t bad at all, the enemies will circle around me, rush me, shoot from a distance. The main thing is that I have really good weapons and especially with the Revenant, im literally shredding them to pieces. Also, I love the ship combat. As for them being sponges, it’s an RPG, all enemies should be sponges in RPG’s. Think back to the old NES/SNES days of turn based JRPG’s. Nearly every enemy was spongy because that’s what the games are and meant to be when it comes to enemy health.
As for other games in general, majority of Ubisoft’s games like AC Origins/Odyssey, Far Cry for the most part, Division 1 and 2 (with 2 being the best third person cover based shooter in my opinion), majority of Sony’s games like Horizon (so much you can do during combat), Spider Man games, God of War, Stellar Blade, etc., Outriders which the shooting feels great and the abilities are so much fun (Pyromancer baby!!!) or Dying Light 2 which in my opinion is the best melee combat in any first person game that I have ever played. Dishonored 2 would be second. DL 2 feels so fluid, responsive, brutal, impactful, just feels great to play.
Final Fantasy VII Rebirth is great combat wise, a very good amount of depth, feels great to play and mixes in turn based while keeping the game fast paced which is great for me because if a game is slow and boring especially combat wise, it won’t last long with me. Combat wise, games have to keep me engaged, entertained, hyped to see what’s next, etc. If the game doesn’t, again, it won’t last long.
Let me clarify, I don’t think the combat in Baldur’s Gate 3 is bad at all. In fact, from researching it seems like the combat system is great with deep mechanics and progression. It’s just that I don’t like turn based and dice rolls only adds another negative to it for me personally. The only turn based games that I have completed this generation were Gears Tactics and Miasma Chronicles. Both had good combat systems but they’re short games. Around 20-30 hours which I can tolerate but if they were 100+ or something, I never would have played either of them.
I know there’s a shit ton of possibilities with the combat. My friend who loves the game told me he would buy an empty chest, put it inside a bigger one and then do it again which is three chests in one and then drop it on enemies killing them pretty much instantly.
Exactly. Technical issues will always be overlooked if the game itself is literally a masterpiece because of what it does and accomplishes. Elden Ring/BOTW/TOTK/RDR 2/BG 3 aren’t 95+ rated games just for the hell of it. It’s because of what those games do and offer compared to the other 99% of games that are basically all the same shit.
1 Like
didn’t BG3 have like 2000 bug fixes in its first patch alone? I also remember lots of people complaining about their saves constantly deleting hours of progress
and the xbox version that released months later also did the same
1 Like
While the only Larian game I’ve played is divinity 2(tired 1 wasn’t for me), a lot of the points you made against the other games apply to it.
All enemies are sponges on the higher difficulty, the NPC cheat often(attacking through walls being one I hate), Larian gives them permanent abilities in the early game that even the final boss can’t use. Divinity 2 is a fun game, but imo it’s in noway better at combat that the other games you listed.
2 Likes
I had very few bugs in Baldur’s Gate 3. A couple of times I got stuck in dialogue and had to reload, no big deal (I save often, it’s not my first RPG). Act 3 went as smooth as the the other two, did not notice any difference performance wise?
Not sure what you guys are talking about tbh.
Crazy good game.
5 Likes
I had one (luckily early on) where I got no indicators for the main quest. Luckily was only like 5 or 6 hours in, but had to restart (or would have had to use guides the whole game lol). Might have put the game down ig I wasn’t playing it with friends.
1 Like
I haven’t played it, I’m just speaking on what many others encountered
The game was a mess for many people with tonnes of bugs, lets not rewrite history because its a good game
1 Like
It’s not rewriting history, I spent hundreds of hours in the game and did not encounter any of these issues.
I cannot comment on what others claim to have experienced.
2 Likes
I wasn’t really referring to you, more the guy above trying to pretend Skyrim launched worse when it absolutely didn’t
The general consensus of BG3 was it was a very buggy game otherwise it wouldn’t be needing 1000s of bug fixes in its first patch alone
One of the major discussions surrounding the game when it launched was why so many reviewers were seemingly ignoring the bugs when giving it nonstop 10s, maybe that’s because they didn’t encounter them, maybe its because it wasn’t enough to ruin the experience but it was being brought up for a reason, because the game was full of bugs for others
2 Likes
Maybe it helped that I played the Xbox version? I’m a console gamer for a reason.
As for the reviewers, I doubt many put the hundreds of hours in needed to experience the game properly so that probably played a part… Considering some of their track records I doubt much was played, understood or completed.
I would give it a very high score though, so they are not wrong about that.
2 Likes