Baldurs Gate 3 Is So Good!... So Why Am I Disappointed?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 окт 2024
- Baldurs gate might be the best DND game ever made... so why am I disappointed?
.....
⚠️This Channel Is Supported By Logitech G and ASTRO⚠️
🔹 Logitech G - www.logitechg....
🔹 ASTRO - www.astrogamin...
.....
SOCIAL MEDIA & OTHER LINKS
🔹 Discord - / discord
🔹 Twitter - / billyeatworld
🔹 Twitch - / billyeatworld
🔹 Steam - billyeatworld
.....
Recorded on PC w/ NVIDIA Shadowplay
![Eminem - Temporary (feat. Skylar Grey) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ZaK9Wi5ho0o/mqdefault.jpg)
The camera is also crime against humanity, and no real time day/night cycle despite computer D&D games having the privilege of that 'feature' since the 90's.....
I'm glad I saw this vid. I thought I was crazy for not liking BG3. Turns out I'm not alone.
Felt the same way, and I loved bg 1 and 2
@@timjacobsen253 I think because 3 is basically just Divinity and not Baldurs gate
I agere. But stil kinda dissapointet, i wanted a bg 🤪
He DID like BG3, though. He just didn't feel it was true to the original games' core. Me though... I fucking hate it. Most of it, at least. The writing is shit (compared to well received literature). The gameplay, while fun at times, is clumsy af. The art, while pleasant when taken as a whole is frankly sub-par when looked at closely, particularly compared with other games. I cannot see where Divinity: Original Sin (shit title btw) ends and BG3 begins. I'm happy that Larian made the game they always wanted to make. I'm happy that most people seem to enjoy it, but I'm not happy that this game is being touted as the new gold standard. If developers see this as the bar they have to reach, then woe unto all who want something better.
I fully support it. After the release of BG3, I felt wrong. Because everyone I know likes the game, but I don’t.
I finally buckled down and bought BG3 (as a huge BG fan), and though I enjoyed it... it fell flat over time for me. All it made me want to do is re-install the old games and play them again, for the first time in like 5 years. And I'm loving them so much more.
Yup, sadly the first act is the best the game gets and even then it's pretty mid, because it's literally just the starting island of Divinity Original Sin 2 with slightly different plot. Entertaining enough, but not enough to play it for 100+ hours, especially if you played DOS2 prior.
The combat is only challenging for the first... 5 or so levels (because you have almost no equipment and few options when it comes to spells and abilities) and once you're past that you can quite easily steam roll through every encounter (unless you decided to make it hard on yourself and your team is full of wizards or other casters that have to long rest after every fight).
Personally with 3 melees (Battlemaster Tav, Eldritch Knight Lae'Zel and Berserker Karlach) and a... cheerleader (since the default build on Shart is only somewhat good at healing and health pots drop so often it's faster to just throw them at people instead of using healing spells... and as a melee she's not doing jack) I steamrolled through the entirety of Act 2.
The story is at best mediocre and usually just fanfic-levels of bad and the cRPG elements are as important as they are in about any other "RPG" game, i.e. your character's build is the pinnacle of role-playing. Between bugs locking you out of some interaction/alternative ways of completing quests and "obviously correct" choices (i.e. garbage like the "Goblins vs Grove" questline where not siding with the Grove literally just removes content without replacing it with anything except for changing like... two dialogue lines that don't actually matter).
I hope Wayward Realms will end up better, but who knows when it will even be released.
@@LecherousLizard I'm putting a lot of hope in Wayward Realms. Also, I think BG3 would have been significantly better if it just had nothing to do with the old games. The story was decent enough to stand on its own merits. I put 80 hours into BG3 and really tried to stick with it... and I just can't. Not now anyway. I'll probably try again in a few months, but I suspect it'll just get me in the mood for the old games again. Which is fine by me.
@@nicholasrova3698 Nah, I reckon a significant chunk of people wouldn't bother if "Baldur's Gate" wasn't in the title. And... it honestly has nothing to do with the previous Baldur's Gate games. Beyond the usual DnD things, about the only things that somehow reference older games are completely inconsequential in the grand scheme of things, like, I only know that Jaheira was a companion in one (or both?) of the previous games. I'm pretty sure she doesn't even have a dialogue to explain why she even exists in BG3.
And as I mentioned, I'm unable to see the story as anything better than "mediocre" and that's before accounting for the fact the game is completely linear with two endings that you pick 5 minutes before the credits roll. It took Larian like half a year to add a proper ending sequence (which is entirely about companions) all the while they were vehemently trying to bullshit people the game was finished on release. And as I heard they are STILL adding endings.
Honestly I'm still perplexed why BG3 got so popular, but that's a recurring theme lately.
For example Hogwarts Legacy is an absolute bottom of the barrel, but it's also sold in the millions, likely on the brand name alone.
@@LecherousLizard It got popular because it was a decent game unburdened by micro transactions in a dry spell of games. Also, most people didn't play pass the first chapter (me included) to notice that it gets worse on a technical level. Story-wise I guess is more subjective, and I'd say so far it is rather average, but not terrible.
Also, if you played the old games you'd notice the connections more... and they're dumb. The game could still be called BG3, but maybe have some kind of subtitle to differentiate it, like Illithid Saga or something. The old BG aspects were poorly done 'member berries that didn't add to the story and shredded the old games lore (which were better in my opinion), though much of that was already done by WotC prior to BG3.
@@nicholasrova3698 They absolutely shredded Sarevok, Viconia, the lore around Bhaalspawn and Gorion's Ward, the Dead Three, some parts of the Illithid lore... The game might be good on a gameplay point of view(at least for a bit), but the writing and the disgusting treatment of the legacy characters is really sickening.
Soon as i saw it was Larian developing this game, i already prepared to butchering of stuff(cause they already don't care about their own characters and lore being consistent... imagine how many fucks they give about someone else's), and the moment Viconia was leaked, i also knew she'd be one of the biggest victims.
One of the most overrated games of all time as far as I'm concerned. The biggest insult is it's a sequel in name only, using the BG name for sales clout. It really has nothing to do with the originals, and is nowhere near as good, even if taken as as standalone game.
As for the 'combat,' it's very telling that Larian cut the encounters down to about a quarter of the Divinity Original Sin games. Even they know it's boring, but being the one trick ponies they are, don't know how to do anything else. The slow combat is also the main reason BG '3' seems to have lots of content, it slows progress to a crawl. Now compare it to BG2, much faster combat, but takes about 300 hours to complete if you're a completionist. Now that's content!
I also disagree that this is as faithful as possible to a tabletop representation of D&D, it's far closer to just a plain reskin of DOS, the combat mechanics in BG '3' are practically identical to DOS2's, except BG3 has a dice animation....Let's call a spade, a spade, BG '3' is a reskin of DOS.
And I haven't even mentioned the narratively disjointed, and technical mess that is the obviously rushed out the door, Act 3.....Then there' all those city areas Larian were bragging about just two weeks from release which disappeared from the game, no explanation given.
As I predicted months ago, Larian have abandoned D&D. Not only that but they abandoned their supposed most successful game ever BG3 as well.....Doesn't quite fit with the narrative put out there by the fanboys and 'journalists,' does it.....
Yeah, the founder of Larian was talking about the ability to explore Avernus or the entire Baldur's Gate like 2 or 3 weeks before the game was released and what do we get in the game?
You don't get to visit Avernus at all, except for Raphael's house and Baldur's Gate is limited to a single district out of, like, 10 of them. They even had the audacity to put the panorama of the entire city as the first thing you see when you boot up the game.
Like, seriously?
@@LecherousLizard The reason for their audacity, is there are fanboys who actually claim the 'city' in BG so called 3 is bigger than anything in any other game...FFS the cities in the classics over 20 years ago were bigger, let alone the cities in the likes of Witcher 3. These same fanboys also claim Larian haven't abandoned BG '3' despite Larian themselves stating unequivocally that they have abandoned it. I came across another such fanboy today. What need have Larian to be honest or even partially acknowledge reality, when their rabid defenders are so disconnected from reality?
@@Lonewanderer30 Ha, don't get me even started on how rabid opposition I've faced when I complained on BG3's le subreddit about the braindead easy combat even on Tactician difficulty.
Get a load of this: Not only people outright accused me of not playing the game, they couldn't even believe you aren't supposed to lose the fight in the inn in Act 2 (where the Flaming-sth paladin dude wants to kidnap the cleric that maintains the barrier). I genuinely had to restart the fight 3 times trying to lose on purpose to see the "what if", because the paladin dude kept triggering opportunity attacks from my team chasing after the cleric girl Benny Hill style. The gargoyles died in two hits tops on Tactician and they couldn't kill literally anybody in the inn, so when I wanted, I wiped the entire room in two rounds.
The Larian fanboys are bless by not a single thought in their head, I swear.
@@LecherousLizard how tf is the city even functional with demon worshippers, murderers, cultists, demigods, dragons, greater undead, deadly fey and more roaming the streets everywhere so openly?
Acts one and two were genuinely excellent, but the third act is a narrative and technical mess.
I'm shocked more people aren't talking about the obvious drop in quality in the last portion of the game.
Mostly shills that never even finished it. Played around in character editor a few hours. Played for 10 minutes then made another character. Rinse. Repeat. Casuals don't have the attention span for RPGs like this. Which is exactly why Bioware followed a masterpiece like DAO with Dragon age 2 and Inquisition that turned into fast paced arcadey trash.
Also why this genre is so niche and all the people hopping on the "Greatest game ever" bandwagon don't even know about most of the other games like it. They have no experience with the genre so they have nothing but casual and mobile trash to compare it too. So they think its better than it actually is.
@sicknsaneofficial8646 I agree in general but I have to be a Dragon Age 2 defender, because despite the downgrade in traditional rpg things like the myriad of choices Origins presents, it has a much better story than Origins. Or at least, to me it does. This is probably just a personal thing where I'm not really interested in save the world type stories in rpgs and I find Origin's story to be cliche and really boring. I like the more personal character driven story of 2. Origins focuses on introducing the world and darkspawn, but darkspawn are just LOTR orcs. They're mindless bad guys with the only mildly interesting fact about them being broodmothers. All the good content in Origins has nothing to do with the actual main story. Things like Connor and the demon, the mages tower, dwarven culture, those are cool. Whereas Dragon Age 2 is almost entirely about mages and Qunari, two of the most interesting parts of the lore. And they tie most quests into that dynamic, making them more interesting as a result.
I can't speak to Inquisition, I played it for like 10 hours and thought it was shit. Another save the world against cliche bad guy crap with no saving grace I could find in that short time. At least Origins had enough to keep me invested.
To be fair to Origins it's fantastic, I just have a huge soft spot for DA2 even as someone who certainly is not a casual rpg fan. It has some serious issues, but the stuff I care about is done well.
Not to mention I just despise combat in 90% of rpgs including Origins, so I rather welcomed that particular change.
This game is disappointing because it's not Baldur's Gate 3, it's Divinity 3. Not even close in quality to the other two Baldur's Gate games.
BG 3 is far from Div 2.
Should have been a dark aliance 3
@noobnoob6900
Not really that close in quality to a lot of other CRPGs either.
Stop crying special kiddo. No one cares, you are wrong. 🥲
Just bought and it feels more like an original sin sequel.
One thing I have to note, going by the comments in this thread: Larian/BG3 fans are some of the most toxic I've seen lately. You've made a very articulate video about a personal opinion and good part of comments are either ridicule, insults or (at best) copy-paste arguments which you've already covered in your video, so here they are repeated, again.
Same on Twitter if you say you don’t like it you’re bombarded
@@greenvendetta88 I don’t even „not like it”, it’s a pretty good game, but with a fair share of issues big and small and speaking about them is forbidden unless you want to get bombarded to hell.
Stuff like people getting blasted by fans for claiming the evil route has less content than the good one only for Larian to admit that a bug prevented 2/3rds of Minthara’s dialogue from triggering…
@@greenvendetta88 It happens every time people try to boast a game as being "THE ULTIMATE AAA TREASURE THAT EA GAMES WOULD HATE TO MAKE" or some bullshit like that. It's the same thing that happened with Elden Ring
1st time?
@@dusathemaid exactly, even Elden Ring had issues like copypaste bosses, dogshit delyaed and spam attacks from bosses making you dodge for 10 minutes straight to figure the boss out, too many useless weapons, bad hitboxes, unbalanced fights (like OG Radahn fight, dude was just impossible without cheese or being a dodge god)
For me the disappointment was bc I see the formula.
In theory BG3 is a homage on old school BioWare and I loved BioWare on their peak.
I loved Kotor or Dragon Age.
DA:O was a project orientated on Baldurs Gate but for me DA O have the „better“ lore.
So I played BG3 and realized it is a homage on BioWare, yes. But it makes nothing new. It is bigger and you need more time for a run to complete it but this is no plus for me to need 100 hours +. It was a sweatspot for me to end a run in ~30 hours.
For me it is just more of the same and I played a lot of the same so I get tired.
Also the Characters are not so well written like BioWare did.
It’s like to watch Star Wars Episode 7 After watching episode 4.
All of the soul of the original games is lost and replaced with a generic and boring experience. The mechanics are an improvement, especially the co-op and turn based. But my issues are with the visuals, story, characters, world building and wrighting.
bg2 is such a distant memory for me, its almost a full motion video in my head. my mind has completely updated it to cinematics
You should play the enhanced edition... its really good still today. And lots of mods out there.
This video echoes my sentiments exactly. Veteran BG1/BG2 player and love those games dearly, and I had to really push myself to get into BG3's gameplay. The slow pace of the game just isn't engaging enough for me. Couple that with the metric crap ton of content the game has, means that my progress is a grind.
Also inb4 git gud, I've never died a single time as it's pretty easy to create an insanely powerful party in this game (playing on Tactician). Difficulty isn't the issue, just the time it takes to do anything and the pacing is what keeps me from getting engaged. In fact, my party is so OP that I end most fights in 3 turns or less just so I can speed up progress in the game. But alas, it still feels like a chore.
I had the hype so high for this game that I can only blame myself and pack mentality for the disappointment this game delivered me.
I wonder what kind of crazy game you imagined if this can disappoint you?
I imagined a finished game @@NneonNTJ
@@musclemommyenjoyer the game is 70 hours long, wdym finished game, and if you're talking about the popping or bugs, most of them are gone for me on ps5, are you sure you didn't download an old patch or pirated the game?
What game are you playing then?@@musclemommyenjoyer
@@NneonNTJ its such slug fest and clunky controls, dialogs and story make me cringe.
i feel the same. and i hate the artwork. it just feel like a divinity game. not a baldur's gate.
the armor looks bad likee shit a kindergartener would think is functional, too much combat, specific "build" items instead of unique fun ones, not enough dialogue and options (checks should only exist if you pick it in the dialogue.. otherwise you can just concinve someone by just being honest or reasoning well enough for them to listen to you), magic items everywhere, spells changed too much, railroaded story, limited options, bad romance, degenerate companions and so many other problems
baldur's gate 3 is a pity product with all sorts shortcoming that eclipsed its potential. i can tell you why it's the issue:
1. you can't multi-select party , that make interaction outside of combat obnoxious, like real time trap.
2. dumb AI , this is beyond dumb, really. AI always control your party to go past your selected character, frequently ended up blowing the traps or aggro the enemy ,despite the traps has been spotted ,your AI some how addicted to touch the traps lol.
3. unchangeable command in certain situation , like when accidently touch to attack something like barrel. congratulations , your gonna watch your character going one big round to blow themselves up without any option to cancel it.
4. can't manual target the free area with a lot of interactable objects , your pointer will drawn to the interactable objects unlike the game like wrath of the righteous give you full control to anywhere you pointed, this make AOE spell placement obnoxious.
5. ability check is stuck to the selected character ability instead of auto-check on a party member with the best proficient ability , this render a lot of ability check in event or conversation pointless.
6. lack accessibility of auto-pause. can't auto pause when traps spotted and watched the whole party stepped on the traps? or unable to pause when accidently click on something that shouldn't, like stealing. how stupid the design is that? yes you can hotkey switch to turn-based mode but it's not responsive to begin with. sometimes worked and sometimes isn't.
7. laughable and shallow ruleset with DOS decoration. easily the worst of DnD ruleset i've encountered so far ,it's not even properly follow the ruleset. added the cheap thingy like barrel/pushing or all sorts interactable traps. i have cheating the fight more than i properly strategize my approach. limited and concealing class build , you wouldn't know what you're gonna build unless you keep on respec in any subclass at higher level. yeah it give casual noobie player a lot of relieve but same time they alos make the DnD experience bland and waste of time.
8. limited progression because of the 'nerf'. lmao , they limited player to only 12 maximum level because of scaring player becoming too OP. BS
9. bugged computer AI, like NPC visual cone. from a lot of situation you'll get spotted even when you didn't exposed in NPC visual cone during stealing in TURN-BASED mode.
10. obnoxious RNG , almost unfavored most of the time. in combat you're gonna do a lot of reload because enemy one shot you when they're literally have only 1 HP left. basically you're gonna miss a LOT especially when using spell or special skill. you're gonna rely on a lot of skill that don't need attack roll like AOE spell.
11. unlikeable companion and cringe romance event, most of the companion is evil oriented and sometimes the romance came in so sudden and out of place, with cringy dialogue. yikes
12. underbaked ACT 2 and ACT 3 and companion quest. it's been proven by a lot of review and discussion at steam. companion quest is painfully obvious being rushed in ACT2 , especially ACT 3. main story in late act is utter underbaked and ignored , all attention has been put on the exploration and side activity. hence the bland ending. and underdeveloped baldur's gate city , i don't know what to say anymore , i'm sure CDPR can do much better job if they have such budget and man power in these 6 years.
13. at last , BUG,BUG and BUG. this game is SOOO buggy at times. character doesn't follow and stuck to the environment. quick load from save file and realized the dialogue option didn't shown properly. crash from load game. pickpocketing and unable to get away because pointer is not working. certain quest is bugged and can't complete it. player don't properly pick up the item when item is actually retrievable. and the cringy camera angle when there's high ground and low ground involved.
THESE was MOST of the reviewer didn't mention , i can't call this is masterpiece. it taste like shit for sometime.
there's also good thing in the game.
1. branching dialogue choice with a lot of different consequences
2. full voice dialogue with very good VA.
3. cinematics kind of interaction , bringing the CRPG immersion to another level.
4. realistic model and handcrafted environment. best CPRG visual so far.
5. exploration and non-linear quest design. it's feel natural.
conclusion: it's ABSOLUTELY not as flawless as majority of the review mentioned. it's all hype train and all casual player that can't handle the first combat in RTwP game. they love easy game so they love it regardless DnD or not. it's a shame this has to be the worst DnD mechanic i've encountered so far . i don't care how good it sound or looks. for a hardcore CRPG enthusiast, this is an insult to the baldur's gate brand.
Totally agree. Also, I hate that you can miss content so easily if you:
1. Failed an ability check
2. Sequence break quests without knowing if you walked into the wrong area/start another quest.
3. Just picking the wrong choices because it's not entirely obvious most of the time.
As someone who loves to maximize content and min-max my playthrough, it's a horrible time. I find myself reloading each interaction with literally anyone to see if things could have gone differently, I understand that it isn't made to be play this way but I'm not going to miss out weapons/free abilities that I would otherwise have.
Baldur's Gate 3 is a great game but it's not a 10/10 game for me like Elden Ring was. 8/10 is my rating because while I enjoy the game, there's just so many annoying things that exist in the game. I honestly feel that people overhype the game too much.
@@kaidestinyz Number 2 is especially egregious because even very very early int he game taking a few steps to the left instead of the right with no idea one is favorable over the other can make you miss things like entire questlines or getting a companion for hours.
This makes me wonder what games you DO like.
Also fun fact, the RNG is rigged in your favor unless you disable that in the settings but ppl still complain about it 🤣
@@raevenrises7595 enable the fixer DOES NOT help the RNG problem entirely, system still kinda cheat their way when you have upper hand to fail you or finish you when you're in low health. i'm simple, i love RTwP in baldur's gate, it meant to be in this way originally. sadly larian came out too many excuses to removed the RTwP mechanic and yet didn't excel in usual DnD system. they just don't really know how to make a proper table top game. owlcat easily surpass them, they just don't have the budget to make a AAA table top game.
@@caxshen omg dude. The dice are not rigged against you. You're just wrong about that. It's a common human fallacy, look it up, no shame but get your facts right.
I totally agree, and it's one of the reasons I was so disappointed in BG3 despite it being a good standalone game. If it was just called "Forgotten Realms: Rebirth" or something, we would not be having this conversation.
Unfortunately Larian seemed like they never really understood or respected what defined BG games. Even a senior game designer and main combat designer openly hated the Real Time system, calling it a "mess" that he "didn't like at all", while also stating that his memory of BG2 was "very, very vague" - not a great look for someone with a large role in designing a supposed sequel. Instead, Larian continuously emphasized the fact that BG were D&D games (read any of their interviews over the development of BG3, and it becomes clear that they use BG and D&D interchangeably), so simply making a new D&D simulator in the BG universe was good enough for the sequel.
But BG never even tried simulate the pen-and-paper, tabletop experience, making Larian's emphasis of BG = D&D even more incorrect. BG1/2 adopted the Real Time with Pause system *because* it recognized that computers do not have the same limitations that in-person D&D has, and it is much more immersive and realistic than to force turn-based combat. Similary, dice rolls were hidden and narration was absent, unlike Larian's BG3.
So even if we reduce BG games to being simply good video game adaptions of D&D (ignoring all the things that actually defined BG games to me, like the immersive maps, narrative style, tone, rich cast of characters...), Larian's approach to implementing D&D was directly counter to the decisions made for BG1/2.
I agree i dont hate it but it definitely lacks that spark that balders gate 2 had that thing that draws you in. I find that it just feels tedious alot of the time
in bg1 and 2 there were actual fun magic items instead of "Build" items, and the scaling made sense. you are not messing with wolves til lvl 2-3 nor ogres
I'm not enjoying this game. Wasted $70. Overhyped. Way too difficult, even on easy mode. 25 hours in. I'm totally done. Hit a wall in Act 2 and I can't progress. The biggest draw for me was that there weren't any in game purchases. It's just sad that the game fought me every step of the way. I wanted to like this game.
Same. There's a difference between difficult and "at the whims of the RNG" and the fanbase doesn't seem to understand that. When I've done everything right and smart but get wiped in two turns because the crappy dice system decided my entire party critical missed EVERY ATTACK in a row that's just bad game design. Don't even get me started on how much you can miss just because you didn't a) read the developers minds what to do in what order or b) once again got hosed by the RNG on a skill check.
I only have bad rolle that ends in combat😅 so bad completely kills the fun. The game is okay, but its more original sin 3 than Baldurs gate.
Lol being too easy is my main complaint about this game. I'm doing honor mode and it's still a cakewalk
I get not liking the game to each their own but I don’t really get these criticisms. Like explorer mode wasn’t hard. Literally the only games I’ve played are Sims and a mobile dress up gatcha game. Granted I do have a bit of familiarity with dungeons and dragons but that didn’t magically make me good at the game. I didn’t really get the mechanics so I pretty much was just casting the same skills over and over again or hitting things with my sword. If you got to act 2 in just 25 hours it sounds to me like you were doing pretty good to me. I wouldn’t have been able to make that much progress. Maybe you were under leveled when you got at act 2.
Not having in game purchases is nice, this game replaced my time playing my gatcha game and probably ended up saving money on the one time purchase.
@@ironwolf56 You can stack the odds in your favor so much in almost every battle that I really don't understand how the game was too difficult to you. There isn't a single battle that can't be won pretty easily with a little planning and preparation. You know, like actually drinking those haste potions in difficult encounters. If your battle strategy is "run into the middle of the room and get gang-raped" then I guess the game is difficult, but come on! That thing on your shoulders is called a head. Use the damn thing.
Ive played Baldurs gate 3 and thought nearly every problem finished with killing someone you couldnt sort it peacefully or leave them too it which should have been an option as it wasnt my problem. it wasnt arelaxing game and i know dnd grew up with it. So i uninstalled shame
It's a good choose your own adventure book in digital format, where choices matter less the further you go.
It's a poor videogame gameplay experience.
They chose one of the worst versions of D&D to emulate.
Everything is so hard RNG you can ask a ton of people how many times they quit mid actions to restart stuff, or pick locks.
It's clearly made to appeal to the new coomer-gooner generation. The story is ok. The voice acting ranges wildly.
There's 0 chance of any TTRG company ever giving license rights over to a video game unless the game will be made using the latest ruleset, it helps to push sales of physical product and onboard people into playing pen and paper. That said, a 3.5ed conversion mod for BG3 would be dope.
I have to agree with the worst version of D&D part; D&D editions were never great to 1:1 (or close to it) port over to a CRPG anyway but 5th edition is the worst of them. It's very much a more narrative "wing it at the table" system and the flattened power curve and swinginess of a D20 roll does not make for a good video gaming experience.
@@txflood2519 That's just not true; there have been many D&D games, even some in the past couple years, that didn't use the native ruleset but changed things a lot for a CRPG type experience.
Yeah, same. Loved BG2 and tried to get into BG3 but for the same reason pointed out, I just couldn't.
Hey... This doesnt look like ArmA 3...
War games are on the back burner for awhile :)
@@oranschuett8535 Armed Assault 3
I wish you were right. That this game allowed for the roleplay BG1 and 2 didn't. But no, it is 99% combat with a few token choices here and there.
All in all, a year later, it's an insanely overrated game that doesn't redefine or challenge anything really... to say that it somehow changed the industry or redefined the rpg genre is a huge overstatement. And the devs will never add anything like a real time combat mode because they won't do it in principle - there was an interview with one of Larian's designers prior to the game release, where he said that real time combat is "messy" and "niche", and the turn-based combat system isn't. And I doubt the modders would be able to fix it anyway.
One of my gripes with this game is that on the 3rd or 4th play through, since you already know all the fights and who is hostile and who isn’t, you have a much better advantage by knowing to attack them first as it gives a huge advantage in combat unless you have really high initiative, whereas on your first play through you don’t necessarily know to sneak up on potential enemies and when combat starts they usually attack first and devastate your party. So basically it feels kind of cheap attacking them first as your not really “supposed” to know how it goes and it feels too easy that way if that makes sense.
I'm not really quick enough for the combat in the previous games, so I was hoping the turn based combat would be nice.
Unfortunately, Larian doesn't actually understand what makes games good, so "combat" in this game is actually a series of surprise attacks that require you to load your previous save and play differently than you normally would.
Started on PS5 and feel just like you, I so wish there was a real time combat options
i just wish it wasnt so buggy ive had a lot of issues with crashing on the new patch even tho it ran fine on the patch before...
Do note that 17k ending PERMUTATIONS isn't a lot. It's literally what you get when your endings account for 14 two-state variables (for example, whenever you met an NPC or not) or 9 triple-state variables (for example, doing a quest, not doing the quest or killing the quest giver).
For reference Fallout New Vegas had a quadrillion ending permutations, because there were 27 ending slides, some of which had as many as 15-state variables.
Basically compared to New Vegas, BG3 ain't any more of an RPG than Fallout Tactics was.
@@LecherousLizard I 100% agree, but also there are very, very few games that compare favorably to New Vegas. That's is kind of a difficult bar to reach. Though I suppose that's what people are claiming, that BG3 is a 10/10 game. IMO it's good, but closer to a 7 or 8.
I'd compare BG3 more to older bioware titles in terms of choices, but even then it doesn't stack up. Especially in the writing department.
@@deaj8450 My point is that it's a "cRPG" where your choices matter about as much OR LESS as they do in non-RPG games like the aforementioned Fallout Tactics, which has more main endings than BG3 (Tactics has 4 and BG3 has only 2) and one of them requires you to not throw away certain items you can pick up in the second half of the game, while two endings depend entirely on whenever your karma was positive or negative (i.e. if you killed friendly civilians and such).
In BG 3 everything beyond those two endings are companion endings, some of which are so badly written, that if I was ever to play the game again, I'd outright kill the companions in question during theor first meeting to save myself from watching that garbage again.
Personally, I think you're being too generous with that "7 or 8"/10.
The combat is mind-numbingly boring (and I don't mean "hard" or "challenging", it's that EASY, even on the highest difficulty), the aforementioned cRPG element is almost completely missing, the writing is as good as Shadowheart's haircut: It's not, and the number of various bugs and performance issues I've experience rivals that of what last-gen console players said about the release day Cyberpunk 2077.
It's a solid 5/10 at best, unless you want to use the likes of, I dunno, Star Wars Outlaws as the "average", so yeah, it could be a 7 or 8 then, but we'd need to expand the scale from 10 to 20 to fit all the actually good games in.
@@LecherousLizard No need for the rant when I agree with you, but I understand. Though maybe I read your tone wrong, it's easy to do online. This game pissed me off. I say 7 or 8 trying to be more objective, but my personal feelings are more just frustration with the whole experience.
Personally in regards to combat, I vehemently hate crpg combat in almost every crpg I have played, so I can't really comment on that part of the game. It'd be unfair regardless because I hate it, I grew up on different types of games. I didn't find it easy at all, but I am utter garbage at dnd combat (probably because of my mentioned hatred).
All I care about in these games is story and choices, and like I said I agree. Your choices are mostly meaningless with few exceptions. I was simply pointing out that New Vegas isn't a kind comparison to almost any game.
Today, a game like Outlaws is indeed average. Over the whole of gaming existence, no, but modern standards are unfortunately that bad imo.
I honestly didn't have any bugs, but I really don't give a shit about bugs in regards to my personal feelings about a game.
The only bright spot of the entire game for me was Lae'zel, even if she fell victim to the too horny too quick writing style. So I suppose I disagree on the companion front, since it was the only thing that made me finish the game.
@@deaj8450 Regarding Lae'Zel, I didn't mean ALL companions. For example Karlach's ending is, like, I dunno, a really bad and, unironically, cringe-y Duke Nukem reference or something? And your character is an accessory in it, if Wyll is alive. Just seeing that ending almost made me drop the game right there, because it's so ridiculous.
I grew up playing cRPGs, so I'm saying it from this perspective:
BG3's combat is a dumbed down version of DOS2 combat, which was an absolute garbage, in that to get a "reasonably entertaining" fight, you'd have to flip-flop between the lowest and highest difficulty every combat encounter, because the armor system in that game both forced and punished you for specializing in physical or magical damage.
i.e. a mage would generally deal magic damage and have anti-magic shield while a fighter (or rogue, or archer, etc.) would deal physical armor and have physical armor, so you'd want a fighter attack a mage and mage to attack a fighter, which works fine on paper, but in practice the AI would completely bee-line the person on your team they'd deal most damage to, so if you set the difficulty too high, you'd get oneshot on the first round. Or if the enemies were one type of damage (for example 4 mages), then you'd oneshot them even on the highest difficulty if your team had two fighters, while your mage would do absolutely NOTHING, because you can't debuff enemies as long as they have the type of defence that matches your skill type.
In BG3 they got rid of this garbage armor/shield system, but didn't really change anything else about combat beyond somewhat loosely adapting DnD 5e rules, so every encounter is the type of encounter where you can pretty much oneshot everything, if you aren't completely braindead about your characters' builds.
As for the bugs, I mean, sure most of the time the bugs were of the "ha ha" types, except I outright had to replay the entire Githyanki Creche, because the save just... deleted itself, when I booted the game up the next day.
Or that I had to consistently restart the game every 2 or so hours, because the memory leak (that Larian knew about day 1 of early access, i.e. 3 years before the game was released) was so bad the game was stuttering like a Diesel in the winter, while dropping half the frames, for example, I'd start playing at ~120FPS and end at ~60FPS with frame drops down to like 10.
Plus it outright crashed a bunch of times.
But I guess that's the price for never experiencing a single bug or performance issue in day 1 version of Cyberpunk 2077.
@@LecherousLizard The memory leak explains my horrendous performance in act 3, I thought maybe my computer was starting to get outdated considering I built it a decade ago. Glad to find that out.
Don't get me wrong, I've played a decent number of crpgs as an adult now, but still I'll never understand the appeal of the combat.
I tried Dos2, got off the first island. Had no motivation to do anything because I didn't like the plot, so I quit. I definitely agree BG3 was more tolerable and interesting than the combat there from the little I experienced.
I didn't like most of the companions. Wyll especially. Agreed on the Karlach ending. I think Lae'zel and Minthara were my only actual bright spots in the game, definitely the only reasons I dragged myself through act 3. I hated the ending in general. Honestly starting at the Shar temple in act 2 I really began despising my time with the game, for many reasons. The choice between Emperor and Orpheus giving you a game over in act 2 but then being fine in act 3 was my "I'm done with this game" moment. Just a total player choice railroad until the game decides to let you participate in the story.
I just got into Baldur's Gate 3, and I like it so far. Still in Act 1 though. But I can see where you are coming from, I would be disappointed too.
5:00 THANK YOU! This is what makes BG3 worse than the games I usually play. I like games like Might & Magic 6, 7, and 8, Knights of the Old Republic 1 AND 2, Dragon Age Origins, and Dragon Age 2. They are real-time action RPGs that pause when combat starts with the option to pause to give new commands as needed, none of this turn-based stuff. Now, Granted, I do play combat in Might & Magic 6, 7, and 8 in turn-based mode, but only because it's easier, it is not forced on me though, I can play it in real time if I wish. But with this being a DND game, it has to be turn-based. I do enjoy Divinity Original Sin 2 a lot. That game also has turn-based combat, but I think combat in that game flows better. The only forced turn-based games I enjoy is Heroes of Might & Magic 2 and 3. Those masterpieces were turn-based and you know what? that's ok.
Try the recent Jagged Alliance 3 if you enjoy the setting. It's a lot more fun than BG3
Thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you.
THANK YOU.
Imho you are right to be critical but you are wrong about the reasons. What made BG 1 and 2 so great was how combat, exploration and story fit together making it something bigger and better. BG3 is an incredible long list of separate features that do not turn in to a great gaming experience. I guess a lot has to do with writing and pacing that are subpar if compated witb the original but imho that has always been the case with Larian games.
👇 Except nobody claimed Zelda: BOTW was a sequel, unlike the Larian's false claims of BGS being a sequel. 🙄 I'm so glad they'll never get near the Baldur's Gate franchise again, unfortunately they shouldn't have been allowed near it at all. All this praise they got, just for being woke.
Dawm if you remember playing the first baldurs gate, you have a way better memory than me lol, i played baldurs gate 1 20 years ago.. i know i liked it but i dont remember a dawm of it exept that it was an isometric rpg a bit like ultima. To me BG3 is awsome. the turn base combat dont bother me and i was reluctant at first because im more of a 3rd person action rpg gamer but i fanally fint the combat in bg 3 very good and more strategic that i tought.
I never enjoyed the *Divinity* games besides that one time I co-op played them with a friend and I was drunk. A turn-based-combat has never been my favourite thing in games. So one can guess what I think of the BG3.
What I applaud of BG3 is the “vision to have it be as random as possible”. The game itself however seems the same as reading a _visual novel_ with a dice and simplified 3D mechanics. It is same as reading a story one can involve themselves in. A typical *DnD*
As much as I enjoy the ability for a gamer to influence the story they scroll through, I do not enjoy the *DnD* way of it. I enjoy *NetHack*
I've been raised on games like Fallout 1, Arcanum, Vampire the Masquerade, KOTOR, Fallout Tactics, etc. and the turn based aspect isn't even a problem.
The combat is piss poor easy to the point you can use basic attacks to get through most encounters. The writing is pretty bad and the game, despite all the jingles, is very linear and not much different from something like Mass Effect, where the ending itself is basically identical as in ME3 - you pick the ending 5 minutes before the credits roll and if you did some bonus objectives before, you get one different ending.
@@LecherousLizard Yeah, I also enjoyed Arcanum back in the day. Dune. KOTOR was not _a cup of tea_ for me. I also liked quite a few of the old Final Fantasy games (at least: 3, 6, 7, 8,..). So there are many times I've also enjoyed _casual_ turn based combat.
I’d actually really wish to play a modern graphics game with NetHack “world play style”. There are quite a few games overall with a similar mechanic (I think somewhat _Lethal Company_ even), but the idea could (example) be *Elden Ring* but one can at least do as much with everything as was possible in NetHack.
Hey dude, I really like bg3 but I like hearing dissenting opinions because Im crazy. Your thoughts are really well put together. Cant argue with you since I have never played a baldurs gate game before. I wanted DOS3 when I picked this up so I am very happy. Great video keep up the good work.
i scrolled down to say the same thing lol. i played bg:da2 at least, and i can see his point, but i still prefer it this way. having an option to switch between them woulldddd be dope. i keep thinking... maybe a mod at some point? haha
Original baldurs gate was like an open world single player game which they filled with amusing tropes. The combat being able to go at the pace you liked was a feature of the originals. The only addition that makes bg3 appealing is environment interaction.
Turn based does make multiplayer easier, but it's so slow
It’s hard for me so I’m trying to talk, sneak, pay and stealth my way through until I level up. For some reason I seem to end up in combat regardless. Trying to minimise combat so I can ease into the learning curve.
Lot of running away and leaving quests half done as I’m getting crushed at the moment.
just do throwing builds or monk/rogue mix, with 1 portent wizard that has lucky
I have been so hyped for BG3 and admittedly I haven't played it myself yet. I'm 34 and grew up playing all the original pc d&d rpgs, BG1 and 2, neverwinter nights and nwn2. I absolutely loved those games as a teenager. When Pillars of eternity came out I was so excited, and even though it was a completely different rule set and lore etc the game played amazing and felt familiar, it was easy to get into. I have also been continually playing the enhanced editions of BG1 and 2 since they came out, I usually do a play through every winter, I just love those games.
I've watched a ton of reviews and reaction videos of BG3 which have all been wildly positive. But this video is one that strikes a chord with me because I have had almost the same exact worries from watching other playthroughs of bg3. I don't really see this as a spiritual successor to the earlier infinity games, I think that naming it something new would've made more sense and left the legacy of the BG games alone, especially when beam dog had done such an awesome job revamping the enhanced editions already.
Also as much as I want to jump into this game I'm pretty apprehensive due to the turn based nature of it, which is one of the other reasons I'm not super thrilled with it carrying the BG namesake. The turn based system, while yes true to table top d&d just seems super super slow and clunky for an otherwise live action video game. I never played Larians other games for the same reason, I prefer the faster paced real time with pause.
Lastly I hate illithids 😂 I know this doesn't really have to do with the game and it's reception but I have always hated how disgusting mind flayers are ever since I first encountered (and slaughtered) them in BG2. Man they suck.
I'd love to see some new infinity engine games.
The slow combat made BG3 incredibly exhausting to play, I'll agree on that 100%. It also did add to the epic feeling though, so I'm a little torn on the subject.
how this is different than mass effect ? multiple companoons , story branching , light and dark path
Try Solasta Crown of the Magister. It's way more D&D that BG3 is.
I think both camps have a significant number of disappointed fans, since it stripped away much of the tabletop's essence and it simultaneously doesnt feel like a BG game.
Funny, but isn't turn based older than action games ? So that would make turn based "outdated"? love bot tho, and wouldn't call either style outdated, though ofc would have preferred for bg3 to be truer to the roots
lol are that warmup and then you criticise exactly the wrong things, amateur reviewer..... turn based combat is fun, see DOS2, but bg3 combat is somewhat boring cause very very repetitive and too narrow in what is how effective.
I played the dark alliance stuff, and that’s why I was looking forward to this., but it can get hard. I’m enjoying it. But man some stuff Is gets hard and you have to use your environment. Nothing too negative, the story is cool, just hate that everyone is hitting on you and probably you did? I’m like why are they hitting on me and why are these the questions. I loves the first mass effect games because it was what you did related to a character, but already I like what… cool game and I’m trying to finish and it has a lot of hours. But some stuff I get lost but keep playing because of the story. It’s a good game, but it does get annoying. I’ll finish the game and probably not play it again, it cool they added the dnd stuff, but it gets old. It’s cool, but for me, i hoped for something else. They did something cool here, but not for me really… I, playing it to find out the whole story, but after i dont care.
Have to correct my last comment baldurs gate 3 is a great game but hard once i learned how to play loved it.
I really wish games would lean more towards the FF7Remake style combat. Like I know this is not that type of game but still I just find myself dreading combat situations because I just sit there trying to take out what I can only to run out of moves or health and the momentum and fun just goes away for me and I end up deciding to stop playing. Where as with ff7 it still has that turn based mechanic but it was a lot more action focused than anything else
@@joshuadownes9449 Agreed, absolutely the coolest combat system I've seen. It's so good it should be basically copied and iterated on by so many future games. Though technically, FF7Remake combat is just Rogue Galaxy combat for the modern age. I'm kind of amazed that RG isn't brought up more for that reason, but I guess it wasn't very well known.
I get WHY it’s good and I love Larian for creating a game with no micro transactions and all that, but the game just honestly isn’t THAT good. I’m a veteran D&D TTRP player/DM so I thought I could go in this and be pretty well off with my knowledge but I was SO wrong.
The boss fights are excruciating to play and are ridiculous hard. No challenge hard, just screw you I’m gonna send 20 AOE spells at your 4 player party hard. It may be a game based on D&D but it is not D&D. Not to mention the bugs and janky controls. Most of the time when I did lose it was from stupid misclicks or I would get stuck somewhere.
the original have fast pace than BG3 because it's real-time tatics such as Shadow Tactics which I love a lot but in Shadow's case, there're not much kind of actions & has a lot of alure skill which still good with real-time tatics. Infact to me, I feel the original similar to Diablo which I'm soooo bad at that kind of game. If BG3 use the same gameplay to original's, I must pause the game all time. But I can understand when the original's fans don't like BG3, it's understandable. Still for me, I'm glad that BG3's changes help me have a good game to play
Meh. I think it's ok. I think it's this successful for 3 reasons. AAA. Brand recognition. DnD movie came out and generated interest.
It's a good adaption and I see why casual gamers love it. But the closest we've ever had? Nah. They took some liberties with the gameplay. The closest to tabletop ever made was modded Temple of Elemental Evil. Hands down. Honestly even Pathfinder on turn based mode was closer than this. But TOEE is old and modern gamers don't know it and Pathfinder even though it's essentially DND 3.5 didn't benefit from the AAA budget or Brand recognition but it's arguably better.
10 out of 10 masterpiece - HELL YEAH!
Wow, I'm dazzled by how low are plot and character writing standards are among fellow gamers nowadays.
Jon Irenicus has way much more depth and way better writing than all antagonists of BG3 combined, especially since they are given only 5 minutes of screen time which is the most basic plot/character/writing design flaw anyone can make. But who cares, it's 10 out of 10, right?
How about Neverwinter Nights 2 Mask of Betrayer? Vampire the Masquerade from Troika games? KOTOR 2 with way better plot writing, where one character Kreia absolutely demolishes whatever Larian can come up with nowadays, huh?
Fallout New Vegas with Joshua Graham the Burned man, Bioware Baldur's gate 2 where only just Viconia romance had more romance dialogue than the entire romances of ALL CHARACTER of Baldur's Gate 3? Look what Larian have done with her, absolutely disgusting! May I remind you, the great old Bioware made 17 companions in BG2, seventeen Karl ! Here you barely have 6-7 of them in your camp, half of them are boring and generic as heck.
Gameplay 9/10, it's super fun to play, especially with your friends.
Studio ethics 4/10, since the game is finished only 75%. Sven said that he moved on to another game. That's it, he made hundreds of millions of $ and doesn't even want to finish the game, though he promised the Upper City to be given upon release.
Story 3/10. Boring, generic, reminds me of Mass Effect 3.
That's the reality, and you won't like it since the truth hurts. Yes, compared to a waste of breath called Blizzard or modern Bioware it's a masterpiece. But compared to true games of old times, it fails miserably.
I wish Larian would finish the game, but since after ACT 1 had more than 5 different biomes and act 2 is a straight corridor and act 3 is just a choky cluster**** - I doubt it.
shadowheart always misses hits
I love the older Baldurs Gate games, but I can't get into BG3.
Same bs with diablo1 n 2 then d3 comes out eveyones like tf is thus fruity bs? Then d4 is the crowned turd of d4 franchise and a dieing dream and years of anticipation and high hopes jsut to get fucked and ruined 20 years of a awesome goal with passionate artists with a dream to create the best game ever made..ruined by woke liberal bs and trying to please eveyone
Turn base is awesome.
since when ?
@@DaniPt98since the invention of rpg
100% agree, If title has "Baldur's gate" in it , it should have similar recognizable gameplay. Still all I see is turn based slugfest Divinity Original Sin 3.0 with absurd woke "diversity" content. This VDVL video summarizes BG3 gameplay really good - ruclips.net/video/3GK2sRr1Kac/видео.html
that was a huge mistake to have turn based combat, it's so slow, it's almost a chore
But i don't agree with you on BG3 being best dnd game, I mean how can that be said after the 3rd act and ME3 style endings
Solasta does combat way better than BG3 does and it is far more balanced. BG3 is about 90% save scumming and cheesing fights. Also... a game based on D&D playing like a game based on D&D should is your complaint? Sort of weird my man. Also... lol at the "tech didn't exist" bullshit. Turn based combat in video games has been around for a very long time.
One of the big problems is, especially in the current (5th) edition, D&D works fine on the tabletop (even then not great IMO but fine) but doesn't translate well to a video game without a DM to fudge things and push things along when need be.
Wow. You must have never watched an episode of Star Trek.
The game is overrated. It is so boring I am not even downloading the free version.
As a tabletop player, who never really cared much for the Real Time with Pause, I am glad they made it more like tabletop. I am sure that it's not for everyone, but definitely suits my tastes better.
as a rational player you would notice the game is per turns not because they want to make a table top experience, but because they are too incompetent to pull off a realtime with pause like neverwinter nights or a switchable setting like x-com apocalypse, their ai and engine must be so stupid it cant handle a decent ai if they could make one at real timing, also been playing bg3 recently and the writting is whack the story is all over the place and sounds like a pre teen that never played dnd in forgotten realms trying to dm a session so good luck enjoying an inferior product.
@@derlon858 For someone who clearly doesn't like it... You sure bitch about it a lot instead of just putting it down and walking away.
Yeah turn-based isn't one of the problems I have with it, it's mostly other things. A fast forward turn button could be nice in some cases though.
Based
they called god of war ragnarock god of war even if it did not felt like god of war at all.
I disagree with you.
You say it doesn't capture the essence of BG 1 and 2, but at the same time acknowledge that BG 1 and 2 were attempts at making a DnD CRPG.
So I rather think it did capture the essence of BG 1 and 2, just not the part that you like.
The main thing I always disliked about BG 1 and 2 is how it failed to capture enough of DnD and instead threw you into an IMO awkward real-time combat system, neither ARPG nor DnD, but a stressful, clunky hybrid that always felt too "action-focused" to enjoy as tactical combat (because a split second of not clicking pause fast enough already made a huge difference) but at the same time not proper action enough to enjoy it like a true real-time combat game.
So yeah, I can understand why fans of the older BG don't like it but I can't agree that it doesn't capture the essence.
agree with this take. the combat style in those games was garbage and had nothing to do with d&d - it was awkward, as you said.
Your comment is wrong bg3 doesn't capture the essence of bg and thats coming from someone who first game i played were the remasters of the two games
BG2 was focused on story, big detailed world and quests. You could put any combat type in that game, even first person shooter. It would still be the best crpg. how can anyone play bg2 or any Bioware game for combat lol
Well bg2 was fun becsuse u got rewarded wuth good char party building to the point where u could turn on a.i for lets say ur arccher or bersekr with a 2hander to just cleave eveything and clink n drag all attack button saved hours of clicking individually over and over agian...bg3 dead ass is so fuckn slow i cant play it..not to mention the sleep system vrs bg1 n 2 jsut feels bad.. makes me want to never play a caster in bg3 .
persoanaly I not a rpg game enjoyer.
I guess Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel or Beethoven's Ninth Stmphony aren't what everyone is looking for either...but they're still MASTERPIECES...just like BG3.
I respect that you want it to closer match the originals, but It would be an immense amount of work to modify this game to go from turn-based to real-time. Forget the logistics of programming it.... the performance hit alone would blow up everyone's PC if 20 different spells were all going off at the same time. People are already complaining about performance in Act 3 in the game.
The fact is, they have one of the biggest game successes of 2023. It wouldn't result in any significant extra sales. With the same amount of time/effort, they could just make add-on content and probably make 100x more money.
I get where you're coming from and I actually don't tend to like turn based, but I think your complaint about it being not similar to BG1 and 2 to be bizarre. Things change.
Same. I generally bounce off both crpg and tacticsl rpg games. This is the exception for me.
Because it should have been a dark alliance title . Honestly wished they went more of a elden ring type play style but still a enjoyable game .
I recommend Neverwinter Nights enhanced edition. I thought in 2020 I would agree with you, but now after 102 hours, I do not. DnD is turnbased, and BG3 is dnd game. BG2 combat was, while fun, also messy, frantic and very chaotic. Diablo series is in some ways a spiritual spin-off to original Baldur's Gates, so maybe Diablo 2 Resurrected or Diablo 4 suits you better?
Honestly I much prefer turn-based combat. I think they balanced it by having fewer, longer encounters, so it didn't feel heavier in combat to me. My problem with it is the writing. I could not care about the story when I was repulsed by all the characters I knew I would have to endure for the duration. Uninstalled so fast, but I pre-ordered it 3 years ago so I couldn't get a refund. Lesson learned. But dang was I excited for this game.
I respect your opinion and critique. But....i like BG3 better than 1 and 2 :p lol
agreed. BG1 and 2 were good for their time but they are dated. Tried playing 2 again and I just can't. If others still find enjoyment in them, have at it.
Baldur's Gate 3 did well not because it is very good good, which it still is. However, it did very well because it is morally superior to most games regarding its develpment, delivery, and content. Feature complete, no micro transactions etc. It was rewarded for this when in reality this is simply what should be expected from games. It isn't a Baldur's Gate game to me. Still good, but not Baldur's Gate.
It’s like being mad at Zelda: BOTW because It plays differently than Zelda: A Link To The Past while still being called a Zelda game. Lol weird take.
Baldurs gate 1 and 2 would have been 100x better if Diablo hadnt set the standard that RPGs should be real time. Those games are held back so much by the terrible combat that has aged really poorly.
It's nice to see turn based coming back. Not to mention actual choices and. consequences in RPGs - that was never BG's strong suit before this entry.
I don't think implementing RTWP is a good idea, the game was designed and balanced for turnbased combat. You would have to redesign every encounter for RTWP, and that seems like a huge waste of resources to me.
That said as a fan of the old BG games I never loved the combat, the only thing I liked about it was that trash combat encounters would be over faster, with my own preferences well implemented turnbased over RTWP, but RTWP if the combat is going to be trashed.
As for disappointment, I think because I'm a gaming veteran I managed my expectations differently. When I heard it was Larian making the game I thought "D&D reskin of Divinity", I'll try to enjoy it for what it is. Same as when Bethesda was making Fallout 3 and I thought "Oblivion with guns".
Fallout 3 was great. Of course,it reintroduced me to gaming after about a 15 year hiatus, and first Fallout game I ever played. It will always be special to me.
@@williammoyle1655for fans of the originals, fallout 3 will always be the greatest disappointment in all of gaming history. 😞
@raevenrises7595 I don't really understand that. Hell, it was nominated game of the year it was released! I liked Fallout 3 a LOT more than I did New Vegas that so many, in hindsight, think is so "great." It certainly didn't get many accolades when it was released. 🤷♂️
I am puzzled about what the hype is about, more the "nature" of the hype? Probably I am a victim of the RUclips algorithm but I keep getting I Hate Video Games Companies videos recommended to me, Baldur's Gate 3 being used as a reason for hating video games companies. Oh well the hype is working out for the Baldur's Gate 3 studio, good on them.
At least I understand the bear reference now...
I’ll admit I haven’t played any Baldur’s Gate game, but as someone who likes their RPGs in real time (diablo, classic WoW) I just can’t justify dropping $100+ AUD to try BG3 knowing it’s a slow turn based game. Honestly, BG2 looks way more exciting in terms of gameplay.
BG3 is a very serious DND game
good joke 😀
Then dnd fucking sucks. The worst part of this game is dnd related
@@mr.j410dont play it then🤷 its not a flaw when its within its literal genre
So basically you're disapointed that they called it BG3?
Weird take ngl
Tell me the name of a game series you really like. Then, 25 years from now, imagine that somebody (totally unrelated to the original producers of the series you just chose) makes a new game for that series, but basically completely unrelated to the series itself (except the genre, obviously) ... Is it still a weird take to you?
@@gypruzzcaccamo6586 Yes, absolutely.
@@gypruzzcaccamo6586 Agreed. My biggest issue IS that it's a Balder's Gate game. It never should have been. They could have called it Forgotten Realms Questing Time, Sword Coast Adventures, or anything else, but they chose to call it Balder's Gate 3, and slather a thin coat of DnD on an Original Sin body. I like the game, but Balder's Gate it is not.
@@nicholasrova3698 It was fine to call it Baldur's Gate, just not "3". Do it like the old "Dark Alliance" series, call it something like "New Saga", "Illithid Saga", "Mindflayer Saga", "New Menace", "New Baldur's Gate", whatever really, but not "3". Any old BG fan worth its salt knows that BG3 already existed, and it's called "Throne of Bhaal".
@@gypruzzcaccamo6586 Yep. The originals had a very conclusive ending. You either became a god or stayed a mortal and rode off into the sunset. The end. Whether Larian really liked the old ones or not, it was dumb to call this one BG3.
BG3...a game made and based on the DnD 5E the "current" version of DnD which is turned-based. Why would they go RTWP, because a game made 20 years ago? the game is meant to translate the Table-Top experience which is Turn-Based to PC/Digital space. Criticizing a game based what its not trying to do...is like saying a MOBA is bad because it doesn't have a deep story telling in game.
Well, maybe they could've not call it Baldur's Gate then, if they're *not* trying to do a game that plays like it? You do realize they could just call it "Dungeons & Dragons" and be done with it, if they wanted a "current" version of it? There were many other IPs within the wider D&D franchise and a new one wouldn't hurt. Probably wouldn't sell as much, too.
@@aleksanderolbrych9157 most people didn't even know what Baldurs Gate was before this game... What are you talking about?
@@danvoman074 You're kinda showing your youth here. Gamers in their teens and 20s, maybe not, but Baldur's Gate was an extremely popular and famous series in the late 90s/2000s
It's not the game, it's you. Work on that?
Prefer RTWP combat to turn based? Cool, to each his own. I can’t disagree on a matter of personal taste. But I can disagree when you say BG3 doesn’t capture the “essence” of Baldur’s Gate. That might be true if RTWP combat was “of the essence” of Baldur’s Gate. But I don’t think it is. I think the characters, the dialogue, the D&D-based systems, stats & lore, the spirit of grand adventure and the story beats are more “essential” than the RTWP mechanic. On those counts I think Larian did a fantastic job.
Same! For me the Essence is Toril. Being truly grounded in Fearun and the realms and leaning into those sixty years of lore. This gane feels alive. Every encounter is fully realized. And failure actually gets rewarded because its not a simple pass / fail. You get to play how you want.
It does not capture the essence of BG1 nor 2... but its still is a really really good game.
BG2 had much much more immersion than bg3 for example. And without top notch graphs/animations.
Neither the music, the art style, the exploration nor the storytelling capture almost anything of the original games nor do they even try. There's much more to BG than just "D&D RPG" (there's been many other D&D RPGs) or RTwP, and BG3 didn't bother to emulate any of that, sans some fanservice characters and story references - Which could easily happen in a game with a completely different title.
@@aleksanderolbrych9157 The music in bg3 is not bad tho... BG2 has some very good ones, BG3 too has many good ones.
@@japetoxto me bg1&2 are one of the few ost where I like every single track
Your dissapointed so you can get contrarian hype. Hasbro didnt fund this. Larian Paid to license it themselves out of love and spent six years working on this. Your implying they just tacked on a franchise. Baldurs gate 2 is 23 years old. D&D is 60. You personally dislike the game. You have every right. But catering to you wouldnt be true to this game or the achievement that has it rated as highly as it is.
Uhh D&D is not 60 years old. It's not even quite 50 years old yet (next year though) but if you count Chainmail it's just over 50.
@ironwolf56 i guess I just used 68 and the birth of gencon and rounded upbut forgot it had prior wargaming focus and D&D followed years later
You either like it or not thats it dont cry 😂
Not a correct opinion sorry
I think this attitude more than anything else is turning me off this game. It's one of those games that has developed a fanbase around it of bitter, toxic people that come at others like rabid animals if they dare have anything but showering praise for the game.
@@ironwolf56 having a opinion withough even trying something , also some people have different taste
plus bg3 is more like divinity improved in bg3 world , than a real bg3, its a great game , but wanted the same bg2 you need to bring black isle back
this is a horrible opinion on this game lol
You probably didn't even watch the video. He said it's the best DnD game, he's ever played but the worst Baldur's gate game.
Definitely one of the best I have played in a while. Slower paced turn based combat doesn’t really dampen my experience. I actually welcome it because all the challenging factors in combat make you actually think and plan instead of a messy fast paced encounter where I can’t really pre plan or strategize while I’m in heat of battle plus extra play time can’t go wrong with that more bang for your buck.