Видео

Fuck it

Use chalk and make a circle dedicated to Gro-goroth. Unlocks his first tier abilities for you, one of which is necromancy. Then get a soul orb and use the Hexen table in Donnovan's House.

Planescape:Torment was my no1. until BG3 came out. Imagine if Larian did A Torment Sequel!!

@@sesimie I would be so thrilled for that to happen!

I find it a very bizarre response to tell someone "Don't play this video game" simply on the basis of one very small aspect that wasn't my entire discussion based around but was simply an observation and yes, complaint, that I didn't need to see a die graphic my entire playthrough (as in, all of it could have just been automated). I too have partaken in years long D&D campaigns and invested literally tens of thousands of hours into other D&D gaming paraphernalia, so I don't see how my words would be any less legitimate than another's. The lore of the game in relation to the previous games as I mentioned is indeed, very passing and virtually non-existent. Any clear references towards the previous titles or any lore it involves is only loosely demonstrated near the halfway point of the game and then only slightly expanded into during the end portion of it as well. Between all of that there is no mention of any of the key plot events of the previous titles which is why I questioned and stated the game had no real need to be called Baldur's Gate 3 at all. It could have carried any other title relating to the D&D world at large but that I remark it was simply a move of marketing to try and cash in on people, new and old, that desired something to carry on the title of an old franchise. All that occurred in the game didn't (and really doesn't short of The Dark Urge as I described) have anything to do with the first two titles. I think in due to it's popularity, a large portion of it was simply because of the namesake it held. Also in determination of popularity prescribing whether the game is successful or warranting praise or not, determining that by exclaiming it had a bunch of people playing it at one point is a bad metric to measure by. Many games have had many players at one point or another during their lives and I think we would also agree that not every game that is vastly popular is actually always good by default. In fact that tends to be a very common point of contention in many critiques that overwhelming majority selection does not outright determine quality of a product, just that it inherently suggests it. I've played many games, small ones and large ones, both in scale and in user acceptance. One is not immune in retrospect to the other. I also present this video as more of my feelings towards the game rather than any professional critique. Yes I do criticize a lot of parts of the game, I even throw out suggestions on how I think some of it should have been handled. But I'm not going out there insulting other people for playing it - I even admit that the gameplay mechanics of the game itself over it's story is very fun and interactive to do stuff with. I most certainly invested my time into the game what with beating it and then further completing it on Honor Mode just to demonstrate that I take the game as seriously as I would anything else I write about. I also can't care what awards a game gets. To me that does not denote it's quality or promise. Many games go unsung and warrant more attention, but they don't get it, despite their effect on people and their status within gaming communities. I consider those sorts of accolades to be very mainstream and satisfy only surface level viewers. "Oh wow this game got two hundred awards it has to be the absolute definition of a perfect game." Is a very shallow viewpoint for anyone to present about a topic, whether they do or do not understand the subject. You can grade it's quality by your own merits and not someone else's. BG3 did not set a standard really. In fact it did the opposite. It fell in line with the others. It utilized the Early Access model (a model that has received absurd amounts of critique and backlash as well) because the developers were not confident in what they were producing that they required playerbase input to guide it's construction. That shows a level of commitment to the playerbase yes, but also a lack of confidence in their own decision making that they needed constant outside input during construction of the project. The game "officially" came out August 2023 but was in Early Access development 3 years before that. Not the least of all which was the influx of capital required to complete it which was given by the playerbase for an unfinished product at the time then. Is this really the "standard" we want to set for other games? We want unfinished games that don't guarantee their completion or success, that don't carry strong leadership and rely upon masses giving direction over their own visions and ideas? It's one thing to be involved - It's another to be governed by it. And also despite what everyone says, it has DLC. There is content you pay extra and download. It was marketed all over the game. So I don't get why everyone says it doesn't have anything like that, it does. You can see it right on the store page. I didn't say it was a bad game. I said it was disappointing. I played it for a long time over other titles. Doesn't mean it's perfect because of that.

@@Skelni you have a lot to say and unlike others I do read walls of text. you need to vent. Vent! but people will respond as is the nature of public comments. Liking a game is subjective. BG3 is not a perfect game, but people love it for many reasons, so expect some smoke.

It's not even that ambitious. It's following route of many games set before it and isn't deviating very much off of it. It works. It's not amazing though. I do give note that mechanically the game is good. And as for technical limitations, there isn't really any, it's only in it's scope that things could be limited. If I was ragging on it's technical side I'd be saying things like, oh why can't I create my own spells or some such - But that's not an issue and I never say it is. The "adventure" itself is limiting. Your choices in the story lead up to very little change or impact throughout the whole game. Many situations are forced upon you and you have little interaction with how things will actually turn out (same locations every playthrough, same course of events, very little influence on what transpires) and you're subsequently made to play along with little independent narrative of how to handle things. You can ignore something, play along with it's expected quest, or kill the participants. It's never anything different. I can think of much more satisfying interactions in other games (Planescape Torment. Fallout New Vegas. Disco Elysium) where my choices actually do resonate and determine differences in the environment. Here I get to choose whether some group of tieflings are dead or alive. And it means nothing in the end. I get pushed along the same route regardless of what I did. also it's a video game. half of it doesn't "happen in your head". it's all on the screen.

@@Skelni if you say bg3 isn’t ambitious, you are delusional. The graphics are phenomenal. The devs went above and beyond what I expected in most if not all areas. There are many unique models for just about anything in game. There is an animation for each of your Druid’s beast forms to sit in chairs and lie down in beds for christs sake. Not ambitious enough for you? None of this is done lazily either. You saying that bg3 is not ambitious tells me either your standards are wayy too high, or you’re from the future. There are many instances of your choice affecting the story. Whether you ally with the absolute or not, for one. Many interesting interactions that followers will have with locations. Astarion in cazadors palace for instance. If you play rpgs, and don’t form a story in your head, I think this type of game might not be for you. You’re supposed to use your imagination. Think about what your characters backstory is. That’s a core part of dnd. You also mentioned you don’t like dice rolls. With all of this being said, why are you playing a game based off of dnd? It seems like it’s not your thing. Seriously man. Your expectations are sky high, and you are bound to be disappointed by anything you play. Honestly I think that you noticed negative stuff does better on RUclips, and tried to cash in on that a little bit. I genuinely hope you find a niche or something you are good at, but this video seriously rubbed me the wrong way. If you think you can do better, go and do it. This game took a years of hard work from almost 500 people. For you to sit there and say that it’s not ambitious enough, or didn’t give you enough options is seriously ridiculous, and even a little entitled.

I haven't played Outlands since last October

@Skelni thank God there is hope for u yet my dude. Most toxic shit on planet earth is that game.

big skill issue

It's definitely an interesting game. It's also a problem with #early access games, cause it could be so radically different and now whatever I've had to say on the matter basically, doesn't matter anymore.

cuz im not cool enough

@@Skelni damn, people really missing out!

Yeah, bullet hell can describe it pretty good.

*pots and pans*