|
On August 10 2023 09:34 M3t4PhYzX wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2023 19:57 Salazarz wrote:
I don't want to write an in depth review because I haven't even gotten out of act 1 yet, but at this point I honestly don't get what all the hype is about. People talking about 'new standard for crpgs' and stuff, yet it feels like the devs haven't learned anything at all from previous rpg games and pretty much just stuffed as many lines of voice-acted conversations as they could into the game and called it a day. There's virtually no interaction with your companions outside of the +/- opinions and the brief commentary about whatever quest you're doing now and then; they pretty much never say anything during encounters or dialogue which just feels like such a massive fail for a game with a budget as big as this that supposedly focused on interaction and reactive world.
Not only that, but it's just absolutely idiotic that only the character that initiated the dialogue / interaction is available to, well, talk or interact with whatever is going on. Like if my mean githyanki companion was the first to be spotted by some guy that wanted to talk, I have no option to tell her 'hey hold on, let me handle this', nope either the whole conversation is done by a gal with 8 charisma and no persuasion or I have to reload the game. Likewise early on in the game there's a wizard trapped inside some portal who needs a strong arm to pull him out -- you'd think after my little elven bard failed the strength check to do so I could ask the abovementioned githyanki to lend me her 17 str hand? Nope, she's just standing back watching without a care in the world. You're talking to some shifty guy who might be hiding something from you, but your most insightful character isn't the one having the conversation? Too bad, the other dude will never let you know that there's something off about the dude you're talking to. It's just mind-boggingly bad design.
Also, the constant dice rolls and skill checks that are shoved in your face are massively immersion breaking. You're walking through a forest, suddenly a 'perception check: failed!' pops up. Obviously there is a hidden treasure or a pathway nearby. Why are you being told that you failed the said perception check if you didn't spot it? Who knows. Or you're talking to a person who tells you something along the lines of, "I've got nothing to hide, I'm just a dude", suddenly an 'insight check: failed!' pops up. Obviously not just a dude, then. At this point you're either reloading until you pass the check, or move on with your life wondering what the guy is hiding -- but either way whatever surprise there might have been is already subverted. And these aren't one off things, it happens literally all the time.
And then there's the writing... I mean, it's serviceable, for the most part, I guess? People going 'FUCK YEAH!' in a fantasy RPG isn't exactly my cup of tea but whatever, that's mostly limited to one character so far, at least. But overall there isn't anything particularly outstanding, the main quest quickly went from 'this is maybe interesting' to 'jesus christ what a load of crap' imo meanwhile literally every single companion have tried to hit on me within what amounts to... 2 days of time spent travelling together, which is just ???... Like my cleric started telling me I'm the best person she's ever met and I've changed her life by the time we stopped to sleep for a night because like, I didn't let a mean druid feed a child to her snake and uhh, that's actually pretty much it? The tiefling gal is apparently madly in love with me even though I've literally never had her as part of my party and she is just sitting in the camp all day and I'm just confused at this point.
I don't know. I still plan on finishing the game eventually since it's not as if there are many CRPGs around, but the strongest feeling this game has evoked in me so far is, 'gosh how I miss Baldur's Gate 2.'
oh and yeah, that inventory system. in 2023. 10/10 masterpiece new standard in rpg gaming. HAHAHAHAHA. +1 to this, dude Also - I hate the combat system..
I like the game but +1.
Other annoying things:
Shield always gives +2 AC even when not equipped. Straight buff to ranged weapons which were already powerful in DnD. Could have just made it so you can only switch weapon + shield ONCE per turn for free. Also can't have more than one weapon equipped in hotbar which was a staple since BG1. Makes things either tedious or makes the situational weapons (mace of disruption, sunbringer says hi) much worse.
Can't move characters through each other (why, it's in the core rules?).
In general Larian should have tried to understand "less is more".
The good thing about BG and NWN was about choices, both in and outside combat. And keeping other things simple so you could make more choices.
BG3 just overload you on everything while adding a lot of unnecessary tedium. Like inventory management. In BG at least you couldn't pick up every piece of scrap and even if you could limited space (not weight!) made you choose. Maybe you don't need to pick up that dagger, it's not valuable either way...
Also why go to a skill roll for picking a lock. I know what my character has for bonus, I only care if it succeeds.
And the combat system is fine for me but it's slow (so you can only have 4 characters) and it's not challenging unless you play on hardest (and the fact that they call that "tactical" is a travesty if it's a play on the mod for BG2).
|
I am enjoying the game but as mentioned that dialogue system just plain stinks. Honestly feels downright silly that you have a party adventuring together trying to work towards some common goal but then whenever a dialogue is initiated all other members have to sit back and just watch the outcome play out(Besides occasionally throwing in quips at your handling of the situation).
I'll admit I have not played any tabletop DnD and I see a lot of people online arguing that this single character dialogue is 'the way DnD is meant to be played' but regardless it doesn't sit well with me. Frankly absurd that your party member/companion would just stand next to you awkwardly watching you fail at answering a question that they know the answer to. Maybe it is built this way due to it being DnD but quite a big miss-step imo and I hope some mods come out in the future that allow you to switch characters (Though ideally Larian would have implemented 'group' convos where any member that is nearby would have their options appear and have whoever you are talking with react to having someone interject in the conversation).
|
On August 10 2023 22:06 cha0 wrote:
I am enjoying the game but as mentioned that dialogue system just plain stinks. Honestly feels downright silly that you have a party adventuring together trying to work towards some common goal but then whenever a dialogue is initiated all other members have to sit back and just watch the outcome play out(Besides occasionally throwing in quips at your handling of the situation).
I'll admit I have not played any tabletop DnD and I see a lot of people online arguing that this single character dialogue is 'the way DnD is meant to be played' but regardless it doesn't sit well with me. Frankly absurd that your party member/companion would just stand next to you awkwardly watching you fail at answering a question that they know the answer to. Maybe it is built this way due to it being DnD but quite a big miss-step imo and I hope some mods come out in the future that allow you to switch characters (Though ideally Larian would have implemented 'group' convos where any member that is nearby would have their options appear and have whoever you are talking with react to having someone interject in the conversation).
I think you must have misread the comments about 'the way DnD is meant to be played.' In a tabletop DnD session, pretty much every conversation / encounter is a group affair where each party member is able to jump in whenever, and any skill checks will, for the most part, be done by everybody involved.
|
That sounds like a really weird decision. I like party based games more than single character ones. The fun is in planning a party that can cover as many bases as possible by having each character specialize in a few things.
I played Pathfinder: Kingmaker and Solasta recently and the constant skill checks annoyed me as well. Wasn't there an option in the old BG games where all skill check dice rolls outside combat are automatic 20s? Or was that in some other games from Black Isle or Obsidian?
|
On August 10 2023 23:55 andrewlt wrote:
That sounds like a really weird decision. I like party based games more than single character ones. The fun is in planning a party that can cover as many bases as possible by having each character specialize in a few things.
I played Pathfinder: Kingmaker and Solasta recently and the constant skill checks annoyed me as well. Wasn't there an option in the old BG games where all skill check dice rolls outside combat are automatic 20s? Or was that in some other games from Black Isle or Obsidian?
Technically, you can have characters specialize in different things... But if a conversation has checks for, say, history and deception while it's your wizard who has points in history and rogue that has points in deception then you're basically SOL.
|
Omg thats something that makes save scumming so much worse, you guys are right. No idea what's the thought behind doing it like it is now.
Ofc I knew it but I wasn't considering it.
|
I just experienced the romance weirdness myself. Ho boy. Playing in MP with 2 players and two companions. Going back to camp when "celebrations" were in order for achieving a first victory. Speak with Astorion, who we hadn't interacted with yet much. "I am so bored, i should have sex now." Okay. Walking over to Laezel, no iteraction with her prior: "I am very insulted, you chose not to sleep with me tonight." Okay. Talking to Gale, n ot in the group so far: "Hey, i want to show you something magical, but how about i throw 8 tons of innuendo on it so it sounds super dirty. Lets talk to Wyll. Actuslly in my party and probably most compatible with my decision so far. "I have problems, but i can't talk about thrm and i won't participate in the festivities. Another time. Okay, sensible. Talk to Shadowheart: You should totally fuck one of those guys, i don't know you yet enough to do that with you." Okay......
Like, this feels either super buggy or the worst writing of all time, jesus.
|
Game is fantastic. Much better than DOS2 which was already pretty strong. An established setting and a frame for Larian's wonkiness, as well as a proper ruleset and combat system did them A LOT of good.
* Yeah, inventory management sucks, I agree, biggest issue of the title, by far. Nothing that can't be fixed by patches though and they've already promised improvements soon.
* Sure, camera needs improving too. My second biggest annoyance but I can live with that.
Still, easy GOTY, having so much more fun than its likely contender, TotK.
BG2 will always be my favorite of the series, if only because the SCS mod makes the battle an absolute blast. But a worthy successor nonetheless and a must play for all CRPG lovers.
|
A lot of my criticism so far comes from how good the game actually is. The small bugs in the dialogue tree or some logical errors in the quests are only highlighted, because the game is so good. Suddenly you believe it is bad game design, that the druids don't help you defend the grove even though you saved their leader and showed their second in command the error of their ways...
|
On August 10 2023 22:06 cha0 wrote:
I am enjoying the game but as mentioned that dialogue system just plain stinks. Honestly feels downright silly that you have a party adventuring together trying to work towards some common goal but then whenever a dialogue is initiated all other members have to sit back and just watch the outcome play out(Besides occasionally throwing in quips at your handling of the situation).
I'll admit I have not played any tabletop DnD and I see a lot of people online arguing that this single character dialogue is 'the way DnD is meant to be played' but regardless it doesn't sit well with me. Frankly absurd that your party member/companion would just stand next to you awkwardly watching you fail at answering a question that they know the answer to. Maybe it is built this way due to it being DnD but quite a big miss-step imo and I hope some mods come out in the future that allow you to switch characters (Though ideally Larian would have implemented 'group' convos where any member that is nearby would have their options appear and have whoever you are talking with react to having someone interject in the conversation).
Uhm... The guy you initiate the talk with, is the one that does all the checks. So you can choose, just not on the fly mid conversation. Seems more realistic than a party of 4 guys talking to 1 guy and everyone just shouting at him once a question "tingles" their favorite stat. If a conversation is important to a character, you can usually "let him do the talking".
My first playtrough was with a Druid (lategame 18 Dex, 18 Wisdom, 12 Cha), there were so many Wisdom options/checks, that I absolutely never felt my character would need to be a Charisma guy.
I guess if your main guy is a pure Strenght/Dex/Con-Ape, this would feel diffrent but then again... Why do you play that if you don't want to play that?
Also, you should just roll with most failed checks, it's part of the fun... At least on your first playtrough.
|
On August 18 2023 20:48 Velr wrote:Show nested quote +On August 10 2023 22:06 cha0 wrote:
I am enjoying the game but as mentioned that dialogue system just plain stinks. Honestly feels downright silly that you have a party adventuring together trying to work towards some common goal but then whenever a dialogue is initiated all other members have to sit back and just watch the outcome play out(Besides occasionally throwing in quips at your handling of the situation).
I'll admit I have not played any tabletop DnD and I see a lot of people online arguing that this single character dialogue is 'the way DnD is meant to be played' but regardless it doesn't sit well with me. Frankly absurd that your party member/companion would just stand next to you awkwardly watching you fail at answering a question that they know the answer to. Maybe it is built this way due to it being DnD but quite a big miss-step imo and I hope some mods come out in the future that allow you to switch characters (Though ideally Larian would have implemented 'group' convos where any member that is nearby would have their options appear and have whoever you are talking with react to having someone interject in the conversation). Uhm... The guy you initiate the talk with, is the one that does all the checks. So you can choose, just not on the fly mid conversation. Seems more realistic than a party of 4 guys talking to 1 guy and everyone just shouting at him once a question "tingles" their favorite stat. If a conversation is important to a character, you can usually "let him do the talking". My first playtrough was with a Druid (lategame 18 Dex, 18 Wisdom, 12 Cha), there were so many Wisdom options/checks, that I absolutely never felt my character would need to be a Charisma guy. I guess if your main guy is a pure Strenght/Dex/Con-Ape, this would feel diffrent but then again... Why do you play that if you don't want to play that? Also, you should just roll with most failed checks, it's part of the fun... At least on your first playtrough.
Quite a few conversations activate on the closest character, sometimes from combat.
Also some checks are frequently skills or non conversation options.
One example.
You start a conversation with people trying to get into a burning building. There is a str check to kick in the door.
Why would my 8 str sorcerer take that check when the massive tiefling barbarian is litterally right next to her? Would never happen in real DnD.
Or when the game throws a religion check to examine a symbol and your cleric is next to you...
Or any number of equally retarded examples.
|
On August 16 2023 23:11 Merany wrote:
Still, easy GOTY, having so much more fun than its likely contender, TotK.
Bold words with Starfield releasing in two weeks ;-)
|
To me by far the biggest shortcoming of baldurs gate is the roleplay aspect when it comes to character design and customisation. The dialogues are alright to good for the most part, although all the interactions with your companions seem to boil down to either being a well adjusted human, or being an entitled prick that can't understand why this person you just recently met did not tell you their most troubling secrets right after exchanging names.
When it comes to making your characters yours, the game is really disappointing to me. Character customisation is limited when you venture out of the generic, and almost 0 effort things like offering mirrored versions of all hairstyles, tattoos or scars would have been appreciated. My biggest gripe is with the available equipment and armour though, as there are simply too few equipments I like the appearance off, they often feel very generic fantasy. And even fewer actually match class fantasies, which is a shame. And that is even without caring for stats, once you look for good gear you either have the most generic character design in mind, or you will inevitable lose the ability to make the character "yours" in looks. Especially in my coop campaign it has hurt my enjoyment immensely that our party doesn't look the part because the other players would have had to cripple themselves for that. This feels extremely weird as this is usually the easy part with the hard part of being able to act like your RPG fantasy being mostly well met here. As immersion breaking as it would be, I never wished more for a cosmetics slot, even more than in divinity2, and I pray that eventually there will be a mod doing exactly that rather than the half baked modding solutions we had in divinity2/have for bg3 right now.
There are also other gripes I have with gamemechanics, but those are just me despising the DnD system which larian has already done a great job at making palatable for me. So they are more of a personal preference. Another thing is the usual jankiness that comes with lots of NPCs and any sandbox related setting, those are just par for the course and I accept them as such.
Its a great and very solid game, but for me, the shortcomings in roleplay in an RPG really take it down a peg and keep it from being a true masterpiece, together with the writing and presentation feeling like they fall off noticeably after maybe halfway into the 2nd act. And I guess the "solid" part also falls off after that when it comes to stability. Great start, some flaws, didn't stick the landing. Overall a great experience.
|
On August 19 2023 15:21 Apom wrote:
Bold words with Starfield releasing in two weeks ;-)
That duel has been settled long ago for me  I watched 30 seconds of that stupid "shooter with spongy enemies" gameplay when they first showcased it and I knew it wasn't for me. (will probably play it anyway for everything else the game has to offer but 0 chance for GOTY in my book)
But back on topic! Regarding companions and skill check and dialogs, I don't know, doesn't bother me that much. Companions interject regularly (wish there were more of those though) and there's been quite a few instances of "let other NPC do the talking" which I liked. On the other hand, it's been extremely rare that conversation initiate on an NPC I did not choose, talking maybe twice in a 100h save.
Party based RPGs have been very, very player centric historically (BG1-2, Dragon Age) so that may be the reason I don't mind. The only game I can think of that did differently was Pillars of Eternity 2 but that came with another issue in that you generally have enough characters and skill points that you're able to cover all your bases and then, skill checks don't matter anymore.
Anyway, nearing the end of act II, cannot wait to visit Baldur's Gate and still enjoying my time immensely!
|
My main gripe is that Act 3 fell off a cliff in terms of polish. They had Act 1 in EA for years and it is quite clear that Act 3 wasn't lol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
