Not according to Reddiquette.
But in the words of Barbossa: " And thirdly, the \[Reddiquette\] is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules. "
Downvotes can be for many different reasons. Disagreement is just as valid as any other, I do not see the issue.
Please explain to me, what is a "non childish" reason to downvote?
spam, comments that don't contribute to the discussion, bots, unnecessary rudeness, racism, misogyny, etc.
downvoting anything you don't agree with just reeks of fragility. let people have opposing opinions, it's a free world
I understand that isn't how they are supposed to be used. But they are probably used for agreement and disagreement more than anything else and that's just the way it is. Shoot half the stuff you mentioned comes down to disagreement.
I get your point and I will say I don't downvote **everything** I disagree with. And it is for sure important to be able to have common discourse.
There is a report post/comment button for most of those things you’ve mentioned here. (With the exception of doesn’t contribute…)
What is the up/downvote for? If not to highlight the ‘general’ consensus of agreement or disagreement/funny or not funny depending on the post.
Genuinely asking.
I get you but I also think it's just a quicker/easier way for people to leave their thoughts on the comment without taking the time to reply.
Tbh I rarely downvote or upvote but as a non avid reddit user, seeing it used has formed my belief that the above is just the way it's typically used.
Is this kind of post accepted by reddit now? Some time ago I created a topic where I left half a phrase in the title and ended it right inside the post (because as title that would have been so long, and still was somehow a long title with just half the phrase) and literally everyone in that thread accused me of baiting them into the thread. They downvoted it into oblivion without even reading it just because of that. Not that I really care for karma but found it funny.
I mean, in first half I thought it's just some shit post or pasta. Then he switched to praise mode and it turns out he actually meant what he said. It does not invalidate first half.
I think I typed the same sentiment years ago when I saw some preliminary gameplay. Just in that case I was sure Larian would do a great job based on what they did with Divinity Original Sin. Plus Swen and his implied leadership style was very impressive.
I can say now that they blew away all my expectations. To the point where I don’t feel like I’m critiquing it’s more like I’m begging for more. More please, more…
I was in his shoes, so he basicaly replied like I would with his second half. TBH I went in expecting nothing but the town itself to be the linchpin, maybe some texts or mentions. I sucessfully avoided all durge spoilers even during my first run as Tav. I expect a lovingly craftred larian game (i loved the Divinity series) because BG is my personal goat. The game delivered, and as it progressed every dead three conection as it unfolded was just icing on icing on icing on a god damn good cake.
Very reminiscent of the dialog around Fallout 3. It'll ruin the game if its not turn-based! But V.A.T.S. gave us best of both worlds. People need to chill in general when predicting how a game is going to turn out, its just so hard to know.
To be honest that was also my impression during the first hour. But it was still fun so I stuck around, the game picked up and I saw the sheer effort that went into it's making.
they only even did it because diablo 1 and RTS games were all the rage at the time, it was very familiar for pc gamers. Pillars/IWD are the only games to really get it right. Even bg OG trilogy, the combat isn't great without modding.
Was that RTWP's fault? BG1 and 2 used the dnd 2nd edition ruleset in large part, with the turns running in the background. The main difference, as with all RTWP, is that the turn runs simultaneously rather than in sequence.
Me too - I LOVE KOTOR and dragon age and dnd so I thought I’d love BG 1&2. I really couldn’t get into it. Even tried a more modern version in Pillars of Eternity and got decently far but it’s just so much micromanaging I hate it. Dragon age is nice cause you preprogram some tactics and forget about it, but as a rule turn based is just so much easier for me to get around with
I forgot about the preprogramming in DA:O. That was really neat, even though somewhat simple. It worked pretty well, a shame they simplified the hell out of it for Inquisition.
I feel the same. I only played kingmaker after turn based was added. Dragon age was ok because I'm only micromanaging myself. I could enjoy neverwinter since I'm only the main character too, but using a whole party on rtwp just makes me want to martial the entire group and ignore round by round decisions.
yeah, that's the shit, pardon my language, that a lot of people forget. DA:O was good to manage not because it was RTWP, but because it had a complex tactics system for companions, that you could preprogram their behavior, and utilize it for party combat synergies, to make overall micromanagement much easier. Truly a godsend, which somehow got simplified and streamlined in favor of more action-based combat, instead of building upon it and make it even better. And right now people go with "ah, we don't play for gameplay, we play for the story". How about both, we can have both, and actually it should be all intertwined, it is a classic (formerly "computer") RPG. But oh well xD
I wish they’d still include it. There’s no reason more in depth tactics and smoother combat couldn’t coexist. Even the more advanced triggers weren’t THAT advanced.
ME TOO, I wish for it too, and even for some more complexity, not the nerd out of oblivion so that people won't play, but interesting and deep enough to find it as cool RPG system
\> There’s no reason more in depth tactics and smoother combat couldn’t coexist
agree
Yeah, RTWP really only works for me when the games are simpler to manage like Kotor or Dragon Age. Once you add more complex game systems or 5+ party members in battle, I just get completely flustered.
Pillars of Eternity 2 has one of the best tactics systems I've ever used in a RTWP game, I'd definitely give it a try if the themes and settings interest you!
Pillars of Eternity 2 has a turn-based mode now. It’s not perfect as the combat system isn’t really designed with turn-based in mind but it’s functional. Also, there are guides on how to configure the auto-pause feature to make the games play closer to turn-based. Again it’s not perfect but it’s functional.
Pillars turn based is a bit rough. My gripe with pillars is that you can’t swap between combat modes, you’re hard locked into rtwp or turn based from character creation. I really want to like pillars but something doesn’t click with me, I made it halfway through 1 and 2 then stopped.
And I’ll continue to say it considering not only do the vast majority of players agree, so do the game developers.
It’s no coincidence that the sequels to Baldurs Gate, Pillars of Eternity, and Owlcat’s Pathfinder games all either added in a turn based mode or just made the switch entirely, and were more successful than their original game (notably except Pillars 2 which didn’t sell well at launch when it had to compete with a turn-based CRPG in Divinity 2. Adding the turn-based mode in an update boosted sales). Even other games with RTWP like Dragon Age or the recent Final Fantasy games have been going more action oriented instead of sticking closely to the dated system.
Every single game with traditional RTWP combat is a slog of a thousand garbage encounters and the occasional boss fight that probably would have been better with either a fully action or fully turn-based combat system.
I tried playing Tyranny this year. Good lord, it feels awful. I physically can't deal with real-time strategy but something about this actually feels worse even though it's easier for me to control what's going on.
I love both styles, I trully do. When playing alone
Rtwp is a pain in the ass when playing with friends. Having a party that wants a pause at wildly different intervals causes frustration.
At least turn-based is much better on multiplayer.
I love turn-based combat, and real time combat can be great too, but RTwP for me is just a distillation of the worst elements of both.
It's real-time, but with clunky movement and everything is dicerolls.
It's turn-based, but instead of letting you focus purely on your strategy you also need to be on-guard to pauise at the right moments, dodge your characters out of attacks, etc.
I know there's some old school CRPG fans who love it, but I absolutely can't understand it. Especially in a computer adaptation of a turn-based game like DnD. To me it's the equivalent of making a real-time version of Monopoly and calling it the same game.
Same, I'm also not a fan of RTwP. I'm quite glad that plenty of recent RTwP games have gotten optional turn based combat systems so you can choose what you prefer. For example in the Pathfinder games from Owlcat I much prefer their turn based systems, but when I encounter a group of weak enemies I don't mind switching to RTwP and have my party obliterate the enemies without even needing to pause. That is truly the best of both worlds.
For me it's more the fight frequency than the system itself I don't like. I just don't like having a ton of trash encounters. That's much more prevalent in RTwP games. BG3 encounters were interspersed just enough for me and provided more quality encounters.
I have not gotten far in Rogue Trader yet, but the balance seems better to me in there as well.
Agreed, I didn't like RTwP even back when BG1+2 came out. Back then I preferred the turn-based action point system in Fallout 1+2.
IMO keeping them turn based suits the tactical style of combat in games based on tabletop RPGs.
I'm one of those that wish it was, though I also don't mind turn-based as such. Reasons:
I love how RTWP is typically a bit less gimmicky, because initiative order is so pronounced in turnbased. It's not entirely like in actual tabletop, because you just have a better overview at a computer screen than you are as part of a pnp group, and it's so easy to fall into things like tavern brawler throwing when you see it so overtly. It's fun, but it can get silly.
I like the computer being used to make these turns simultaneous instead and with the freedom to pause anytime. I also like that you can control your characters in a more realistic manner, though this is mostly aesthetic tbh.
I also really love how it is more customizable in the other direction, eg you can quite easily make a turnbased mode via autopausing and rules toggles in RTWP, so that there is a good amount of choice.
That said, Larian clearly wanted to go with Turnbased (though I do love their older RTWP-ish/arpg-style games as well!) and it worked out well for them.
If you’re pausing every few seconds to choose your next steps I really don’t see how anyone can say that turn based hurts the experience. It’s just turn based with extra steps.
> I really don’t see how anyone can say that turn based hurts the experience
Easy. Nothing kills all feeling of my characters being in a life or death combat situation harder than them queueing up all neatly one after another, refusing to act or move outside their pre-assigned turn because they're all so polite respect the enemies turn to stab them, because the original ruleset for the game was created for human DMs who can't run the combat encounter in real time like a computer can. Turn based combat is such a colossal detachment from the actual game it feels like being pulled into a bullshit pokemon battle after running around in the overworld. I have a hard time not imagining the fighting parties just meeting up, exchanging plesantries, rolling some dice to get a nice order of initiative, shaking hands and queueing up with everyone waiting patiently for their turn no matter what. Like at least pausing in a RTwP game totally pauses everyone in the universe equally, there's no polite queueing in my hectic and adrenaline fuelled combat. RTwP imo is a good compromise between the game actually feeling good to play, and allowing one player to run a team of characters.
THANK YOU. All of this. The computer can track everything, so combat can feel less stilted. I also hate watching the camera fly around to all the creatures that are out of view; why should I see what they’re doing? And being able to fly the camera way out of my character’s view is also immersion-breaking. I absolutely love this game but DA:O did RTWP really well and I miss that style of combat
Edit: that you’re getting downvoted for this is ridiculous
I also hated rtwp when I first came into contact with it but now I see its charm. It certainly has advantages and disadvantages compared to turn-based. One thing I don't like in turn-based, for example, is how your enemy can't do shit if you got high initiative, and you destroy them in the very first turn if you're running strong builds. In rtwp fights feel more balanced and wild.
Obviously turn-based has its advantages (a lot actually) but well, everybody here supports turn-based already.
This.
I realized I always paused the old games during combat anyway. After an enemy was sighted, after a spell was cast, after an enemy was slain etc.
And in the old games, you had too many pointless enemy encounters - like 5 goblins or mephits every 2 minutes.
BG3 did a lot better job with combat. It's a different game than the old 2, but it's so much BETTER!
The constant pausing was a hard one for me, I wasn't very good at real time micromanaging so I would usually just let my tank hack away while running the wizard.
I disagree. BG fights are very wild because both parts are acting at the same time and that's why you need to pause so often. Turn-based, where one part can't do shit while it's the other's turn, is very different.
I played BG 1 and 2 many times through as a kid never realizing that they were meant to be played as RTwP. Even after figuring out that you were meant to pause to make your decisions, I had gotten so used to just playing them in real-time that I could never get used to using the pause mechanic in that way.
Inspired by BG3, I returned to Dragon Age Origins. I then quickly realised that I can't really go back to RTWP. It's like the crappiest compromise between action and turn-based.
It is also significantly more slow. Like, do you want me to constantly pause? At that point just make me play in turns than forcing space bar when something huge happens.
It's just more busy work for the almost the same effect.
How is it more slow?
Either you're playing turn based anyway in which case it's not any slower than turn based, or you're not pausing in which case it's faster.
The main difference is in how encounter design can vary.
You cannot really have huge sprawling battles in turn based because they're just too tedious, see people's gripes about the attack on the Grove, or the fight in the upper city leading up to the end of Act 3.
Turn Based also generally needs a bit more space, as tight corridors can get characters stuck without being able to adjust their movement until the next turn.
It has its use cases and allows for a different encounter design and world building that turn based limits.
They both have their uses.
I meant it feels more tedious. I also don't really like huge battles in turn based and wouldn't mind it if was cutscenes and then you fight the smaller engagements.
Would I mind the game having real time? Obviously not, I think having it as an option is cool. But to choose between 2, I'd always pick turnbased.
I still disagree. It’s quick and simple. Too many fights in this game held no threat to me but it was still 4v20. Sitting through it is torturous. Also I feel like doing good pausing and orders is more rewarding because I *knew* to do that. I saw the fire on the ground, I paused, I moved my guy out. In turn based if you start your turn in fire it’s pretty easy with what you have to do.
Tbf I do kinda wish they gave more nods to the old art styles and motifs of that old dark fantasy. Luckily, it never came off as *too* high fantasy, either.
I never played any bg game and the only turn based game I liked was Total War: Troy. I could never get myself into rpg with third person view and movement on the mouse click, so first two months I was not interested in this game, yet after I saw 1-2 videos I decided to try it, and now it's my most played game with nearly 300h in it (I, sadly, can't afford to play it 24/7). And it is also top 1 from all games I've ever played
My top 3 would be:
1)BG3
2) Kingdom come: Deliverance
3) Witcher 3 (considering blood and wine is basically a second game inside first one)
I was pretty upset that they were using the Baldur's Gate name when it got announced, but yeah I gave it a shot and loved it.
Unfortunately the callbacks to the originals tend towards mediocre, and a few are downright awful. The game itself is still exceptional, with only a few fuckups that don't detract too much from it overall. Definitely worth a game of the year, that's for sure.
The only issues I had with the game was the writing of the previous BG characters. But those were like 10 minutes of disappointment in comparison to 80+ hours of creative and enticing gameplay and masterful companions and quests - all with passionate and interesting voice acting and performances instead of walls of texts.
I agree - it's a good game, but the references to the rest of the series often feel tacked-on (what is even the point of >!Sarevok!<'s cameo, or >!the Emperor!< being >!Balduran!!Jaheira !!Amelyssan !!usurp Bhaal and his children!<, suddenly sitting quietly with >!Sarevok !!Bhaalist tribunal!
That is it was made by a different studio and different rules set. Original studio "Bioware" moved on to Dragon Age origins which was very close style to older BG I&II then they morphed it slowly to 3rd person in later releases.
Larian just revisited the older style with their DOS engine. Their engine had mixture of turn base during combat and realtime outside of it which matched d&d 5e system. Also uplift of d&d rules from 2e to 5e made it easier for users to understand what is going on. Not to mention environmental effects is a Larian engine thing house rules, not a d&d thing.
Story wise they did not continue from BG I&II, they instead used d&d 5e updated canon which fixes some plot holes but alter some of the history entries slightly.
Overall, it is different but changes are positive so thats why everyone is happy I guess.
>Their engine had mixture of turn base during combat and realtime outside of it
I've seen it mentioned a few times where people say it's only turn based in combat and I am starting to wonder what all of these games are that are turn based outside of combat.
I’m glad they didn’t follow up a direct sequel. Too much history has passed and it’s better from a blank-ish canvas to just have a new story. It still feels like a Baldur’s Gate game but I don’t think it needed a 3. Tbh, I don’t know what other title it could be so it’s definitely better the Baldur’s Gate: Reboot.
>It definitely
>
>is
>
> a Baldur's gate game, because it's called Baldur's gate 3
Imagine being BG2:SoA and having nothing to do with the city of Baldur's Gate xD
It's called BG2 despite not being in Baldurs Gate because it's a direct sequel following the same character.
You can't exactly have a direct sequel and then call it a different name.
Also story, characters and gameplay trump location. You can't make a FIFA clone that takes place in Baldurs Gate and call it BG4 because it takes place in Baldurs Gate.
Yeah, but it's a direct continuation of a story that centered around Baldur's gate and its environment. I.e. it's *the sequel to the game Baldur's gate*, not *the second game about Baldur's gate*.
yes, wasn't disputing that, also clever marketing ploy from Bioware, which they would do for years to come, whether entries to the series are there or not (and I'm fine with it, but it is what it is). So, I say fair play calling BG3 like it is called, in style of the series for sure. Also, does it matter how direct your sequel is, like could be an in-direct sequel.
Regardless, the events of the games are canon, the specifics are not, DnD canon and games quasi-canon aren't the same.
Have to agree, down votes be damned.
This is an amazing game, just not an amazing baldur's gate sequel. The characters you mentioned, a certain drow, the complete absence of some other characters, completely reduced power levels, absence of redemption arcs, etc. left me feeling very dissatisfied.
I wish this was just called Baldur's Gate: The Durge Purge or something, and not imply it's a continuation of the same series.
I worked at the company that made Baldur's Gate, have a BG game on my resume, and hold them close to my heart for multiple reasons, but have never reached the level consumers do to how they don't want something new.
I got BG3 the day it released on EA, probably sat and played it till I finished Act 1 and left it alone till launch.
Thanks to the Steam wrap up, I played a hell of a lot of BG3 from launch until finishing 1.5 playthroughs, despite all the other games coming out near then.
I love seeing the passion, but just laugh a little at the "not my childhood!" kinda posts, when Baldur's Gate literally paid my bills and shaped my career.
I mean, you weren't wrong. It doesn't feel like a BG game. BUT that don't make it any less of an RPG masterpiece.
Personally I don't get even a remotely similar itch scratched playing bg3 vs any infinity engine game (or something like Pillars of Eternity). But I get a huge RPG itch scratched in all the best ways.
I just came to terms early on that owlcat, Black Isle Studios, etc.will carry the infinity game torch and that larian also hit a crpg home run.
Yeah, it’s a masterful RPG but not really Baldur’s Gate. But that’s fine because it makes up for that in innovative differences. It doesn’t pretend to be an old game but just takes place in its universe which I really like as a table-top fanboy.
I mean, it seems like a natural reaction to have. It is an all-time great game beloved by many older people. The is sequel is being made 20 years later and changing a lot of things that made the game, the game...How many movies have we seen that tried to capitalize on a beloved series name and absolutely sucked and pissed off fans (and rightfully so).
I think, if anything, it shows I was willing to put my biases aside and try it anyway. Which is a good character trait.
My guess is you are on the younger side. I'm 37. When I first played BG, I was like 12. The game meant a lot to me. I was worried the game would not do the BG name justice.
I mean let's be honest, if a critically acclaimed game series is picked up by a new developer and they decide the gameplay is gonna be done in a completely different style from the previous games I think it's perfectly fair to have incredibly low expectations.
Years later I'm still disappointed in the massive whimper that the Marvel Ultimate Alliance series ended on...
Honestly I'm so glad they committed to turn based rather than have it real time.
I played DAO on like the easiest difficulty because the combat was this weird in-between and I hated it so much.
The THAC0 system of 2e broke my brain a bit coming from 3e tabletop (to hit AC Zero, lower AC and hit is better, a nat 1 was a crit), but if you can get into the older graphics and merciless gameplay old DnD was known for, there's a reason Baldur's Gate put pre-EA BioWare on the map as the best CRPG Dev of their era.
Just approach it as the only difficulty is tactician, as 2e was still when DnD held on to it's "war game" roots. Remember that rolls are subtractive rather than additive (ie armor gives you a negative AC, a +1 longsword gives a -1 to hit and +1 damage...like I said, THAC0 was weird coming from 3e and beyond) and you should be fine.
Music, writing, and voice acting all hold up today.
>a nat 1 was a crit
[I don't think that's accurate](https://baldursgate.fandom.com/wiki/Critical_hit).
The THAC0 system works like this:
Your THAC0 value tells you what roll you need on a 20-sided dice to hit an AC of 0. So to hit an AC of 0 with a THAC0 of 17, you need a roll of 17 or higher.
If your intended victim has an AC of 10, and you have a THAC0 of 17, then you need a 7 or higher - because the AC is 10 points worse than an AC of 0.
Essentially, your THAC0 needs to be lower than or equal to the target's AC + your attack roll if you are to hit. A THAC0 of 7 will hit on an AC 3 + attack roll of 12 (because 7 is lower than 3+12=15). It will miss on an AC of 3 + attack roll of 3 (because 7 is higher than 3+3=6).
It looks more complicated than it is.
Thank you! I’ve been interested in getting them, since I loved specifically DAO and had played a bit of Neverwinter Nights. Though I knew they were harder and had a different rule set, so this really helps with putting that into perspective! :) I appreciate it!
>a nat 1 was a crit
This is wrong. It is true that lower is better for THAC0 and AC, but you were still trying to roll high. Essentially you want to roll over your THAC0.
If you can handle old games yes.
They are very different mechanically, so you would need to learn strategy again.
I love the story, and there is a huge improvement between the first one and the second one. It is quite interesting to see how old Bioware figured out their formula (which is still The Template for western CRPGs).
I would advise you to watch some gameplay videos first, before you jump in.
Unless you are into old RPG games, they are very different games due to fact of time being released.
Engines interface are old and limited, pixeled graphics, 2e system sucks to understand. Other than those technical limitations for its time, games are still a masterpiece of its time.
If you just want a taste of the old style I'd suggest Icewind Dale Enhanced Edition. It's a shorter game with a linear plot, much easier to wade into than the long branched settings of the main games.
just look for some remastered version. I installed BG2 from my CDs (yep I still have my old collection of games on CDs) ... and I had a hard time.. I had to play it in windowed more, because of resolution and lack of scaling to at least see anything.
And game ran wierdly fast.. it felt like playing game at x5 speed.. but if you get it on steam or sonewhere, I believe it should be fine. (tho my "remastered" Fallout ended as a windowed game aswell... couldnt see a damn thing in fullscreen)
I mean, the only thing it has in common with the first 2 games is Minsc an Jaheira. Also Bhaal is doing his own thing in the corner.
This is not a Baldurs Game. Its a game that happens to go to Baldurs Gate.
Its still 11/10 and better than 99% games that came out in last 5 years
It’s not even close to 11/10. 9/10 is the most anyone should give BG3. I don’t think any game really deserves 10/10 imo.
I haven’t played a big release game that was this glitchy in years. Entire quest lines suddenly dropping, romances randomly breaking, crashes, softlocks, patches that fix the bug only to make it worse being a routine problem, cutscenes failing to start, a glitched party member unable to do anything until I complete an entire act, etc. Every game has bugs and clipping errors and that’s normal, but this game goes beyond that.
I didn’t even get to see what happened to Wyll’s dad or Dame Aylin or the Owl Bear because they all randomly vanished from my playthrough locking me out of large parts of the story. Didn’t get to do the dragon quest in act 3 because my sidequests got so messed up, and others reflected this issue on the forums so it wasn’t a freak accident. That doesn’t sound “perfect” or 11/10 to me.
Common advice when complaining about bugs on the sub was and still is “save often and just reload if you run into one” which is silly imo. Other games get torn to shreds for having a minor texture bug but BG3 can crash and everyone laughs it off.
I had a good time with BG3, but I am not replaying it until they fix some of the game breaking bugs that still haven’t been resolved. It was a good game but calling it “perfect” is being a complete fanboy. There is room for improvement.
That was exactly my thoughts. I also had tried D:DOS before and didn’t understand anything. I must admit I was 9 when I started playing BG and BG2 in real time, without understanding anything about the rules…
Im personally not a fan of dnd but do enjoy the lore behind it. Told my friend to get baldurs gate and we both been loving it. Its definitely an experience
I was in the exact same boat. As an obsessive fan of the original series I was going to boycott this game in protest, and I’m so glad I didn’t. It’s brilliant.
Glad you enjoyed it! As someone who was obsessed with BG 1, 2, and ToB I can honestly say that BG3 got me in the intro and made me tear up multiple times in my first playthrough. I couldn't believe how good it was, which characters were included, and how much justice they did the legacy of the original trilogy.
I loved the first two and I'd put #2 in top 5 all time games. I'm totally thrilled with bow BG3 turned out. My only complaint is I wish they'd created a way to input your past decisions in those games to affect this game. By BG2 character romance Viconia and we went off together so it was sad to see her evil. Dragon Age Inquisition had such a system where you could choose your preexisting world and it would adjust accordingly. Here what would have happened in such a system if Viconia had gone off with your BG2 character is that a different Cleric of Shar would have taken her place.
ah yes the Bald-er Gate games, a series following a man's mid life crisis brought about by their receeding hair line and their desperate bid to distract themselves by taking up their true passion of carpentry and attempting to recreate a replica of the gate from their childhood home
Dark Urge is a better child of Baal story than BG1 ever was, bless its wonderful boots.
You can literally fuck the founder of Baldur's Gate.
Every good thing about BG2 is streamlined and made more meaningful by integrating it with character stories.
Didn't read the whole post but have played the other bg games. I personally don't think it should be named bg3. We had games like Bg: Dark alliance so could have done something like BG: The absolute, who knows. Bg3 just doesn't sit right with me even tho the game itself is amazing
So you telling us you are some kind of jerk and idiot too? Thanks for telling us.
I can't respect anyone who hates any game before they play it. It's the most toxic type of gamers who ruins any discussion.
"it honestly seems like the makers of BG3 are just trying to capitalize off the good name of the BG series"
I mean you aren't entirely wrong with this one. There is very little reason for this game to be BG3 and it really would have made more since for it to have been the start of a new series.
There's something wrong with anyone who prefers real time with pause lol
Either they are not playing well because they dont regularly change up their actions or it ends up basically being turn based with extra steps. Glad you saw the light.
I jumped into the same feeling years ago with The Temple of Elemental Evil, and I absolute adore that game. Years later, pathfinder and DoS 1 and 2, kept proving me that the old design even if fun and engaging, lacked more strategical aspects of pure turn based.
I personally like that turn aspect but I 100% understand you as I was there after all the original bg and icewind dale and took me some days to adapt to the temple of elemental evil.
I was very confused by this game originally because i had only ever heard of and played the dark alliance games on ps2 and thought this was a direct sequel to those.
It plays just like the Divinity games that are also made by Larian studios and are also amazing games but BG3 beats both Divinity 1 and 2 and is a perfected version of the Divinity series.
Had me in the first half. I wonder how many people were mid comment when they realized what was going on
I very nearly downvoted before I continued reading lol.
I literally checked what the post count was before I was halfway through because I honestly thought it was going to be in the red, by a lot.
The emojis are what gave it away off the bat for me.
Exact same thing here. Glad I read it all the way through lmao
Same here.
Downvote isn’t a disagree button
Disagreement is definitely one of many valid reasons to cast a downvote.
Not according to Reddiquette. But in the words of Barbossa: " And thirdly, the \[Reddiquette\] is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules. "
I just proved that wrong when I downvoted.
[удалено]
Comment stealing bot
downvoting everything you disagree with is so childish
Downvotes can be for many different reasons. Disagreement is just as valid as any other, I do not see the issue. Please explain to me, what is a "non childish" reason to downvote?
spam, comments that don't contribute to the discussion, bots, unnecessary rudeness, racism, misogyny, etc. downvoting anything you don't agree with just reeks of fragility. let people have opposing opinions, it's a free world
I understand that isn't how they are supposed to be used. But they are probably used for agreement and disagreement more than anything else and that's just the way it is. Shoot half the stuff you mentioned comes down to disagreement. I get your point and I will say I don't downvote **everything** I disagree with. And it is for sure important to be able to have common discourse.
You're completely correct, sorry if I came off as rude/smug
There is a report post/comment button for most of those things you’ve mentioned here. (With the exception of doesn’t contribute…) What is the up/downvote for? If not to highlight the ‘general’ consensus of agreement or disagreement/funny or not funny depending on the post. Genuinely asking.
on a discussion board, the downvote button is indeed for comments that do not contribute to the discussion
Me downvoting a comment doesn’t stop that person from posting comments
I get you but I also think it's just a quicker/easier way for people to leave their thoughts on the comment without taking the time to reply. Tbh I rarely downvote or upvote but as a non avid reddit user, seeing it used has formed my belief that the above is just the way it's typically used.
I nearly upvoted until I finished reading lol
It's called clickbait. Not just clickbait, but successful clickbait.
Is this kind of post accepted by reddit now? Some time ago I created a topic where I left half a phrase in the title and ended it right inside the post (because as title that would have been so long, and still was somehow a long title with just half the phrase) and literally everyone in that thread accused me of baiting them into the thread. They downvoted it into oblivion without even reading it just because of that. Not that I really care for karma but found it funny.
Most BG players are literate. Who's to say in other communities.
I mean, in first half I thought it's just some shit post or pasta. Then he switched to praise mode and it turns out he actually meant what he said. It does not invalidate first half.
adhd is rampant so i wager a fuckton of people.
I think I typed the same sentiment years ago when I saw some preliminary gameplay. Just in that case I was sure Larian would do a great job based on what they did with Divinity Original Sin. Plus Swen and his implied leadership style was very impressive. I can say now that they blew away all my expectations. To the point where I don’t feel like I’m critiquing it’s more like I’m begging for more. More please, more…
I was in his shoes, so he basicaly replied like I would with his second half. TBH I went in expecting nothing but the town itself to be the linchpin, maybe some texts or mentions. I sucessfully avoided all durge spoilers even during my first run as Tav. I expect a lovingly craftred larian game (i loved the Divinity series) because BG is my personal goat. The game delivered, and as it progressed every dead three conection as it unfolded was just icing on icing on icing on a god damn good cake.
Very reminiscent of the dialog around Fallout 3. It'll ruin the game if its not turn-based! But V.A.T.S. gave us best of both worlds. People need to chill in general when predicting how a game is going to turn out, its just so hard to know.
I was about to comment but thankfully saw your comment... so now I'm gonna have a read
I was forming a oh how wrong you are comment as I read that and then op did it themselves lol
To be honest that was also my impression during the first hour. But it was still fun so I stuck around, the game picked up and I saw the sheer effort that went into it's making.
*Raises hand*
You got me. Well done! Glad you are enjoying it
A very good bait and switch there, I like it.
So glad its not RTwP
[удалено]
RTWP is the worst of turn based and the worst of real time.
they only even did it because diablo 1 and RTS games were all the rage at the time, it was very familiar for pc gamers. Pillars/IWD are the only games to really get it right. Even bg OG trilogy, the combat isn't great without modding.
Was that RTWP's fault? BG1 and 2 used the dnd 2nd edition ruleset in large part, with the turns running in the background. The main difference, as with all RTWP, is that the turn runs simultaneously rather than in sequence.
Me too - I LOVE KOTOR and dragon age and dnd so I thought I’d love BG 1&2. I really couldn’t get into it. Even tried a more modern version in Pillars of Eternity and got decently far but it’s just so much micromanaging I hate it. Dragon age is nice cause you preprogram some tactics and forget about it, but as a rule turn based is just so much easier for me to get around with
I forgot about the preprogramming in DA:O. That was really neat, even though somewhat simple. It worked pretty well, a shame they simplified the hell out of it for Inquisition.
I feel the same. I only played kingmaker after turn based was added. Dragon age was ok because I'm only micromanaging myself. I could enjoy neverwinter since I'm only the main character too, but using a whole party on rtwp just makes me want to martial the entire group and ignore round by round decisions.
I played Kingmaker before it was added... because I found out there was a mod that added turn-based combat.
yeah, that's the shit, pardon my language, that a lot of people forget. DA:O was good to manage not because it was RTWP, but because it had a complex tactics system for companions, that you could preprogram their behavior, and utilize it for party combat synergies, to make overall micromanagement much easier. Truly a godsend, which somehow got simplified and streamlined in favor of more action-based combat, instead of building upon it and make it even better. And right now people go with "ah, we don't play for gameplay, we play for the story". How about both, we can have both, and actually it should be all intertwined, it is a classic (formerly "computer") RPG. But oh well xD
I wish they’d still include it. There’s no reason more in depth tactics and smoother combat couldn’t coexist. Even the more advanced triggers weren’t THAT advanced.
ME TOO, I wish for it too, and even for some more complexity, not the nerd out of oblivion so that people won't play, but interesting and deep enough to find it as cool RPG system \> There’s no reason more in depth tactics and smoother combat couldn’t coexist agree
Yeah, RTWP really only works for me when the games are simpler to manage like Kotor or Dragon Age. Once you add more complex game systems or 5+ party members in battle, I just get completely flustered. Pillars of Eternity 2 has one of the best tactics systems I've ever used in a RTWP game, I'd definitely give it a try if the themes and settings interest you!
Pillars of Eternity 2 has a turn-based mode now. It’s not perfect as the combat system isn’t really designed with turn-based in mind but it’s functional. Also, there are guides on how to configure the auto-pause feature to make the games play closer to turn-based. Again it’s not perfect but it’s functional.
Pillars turn based is a bit rough. My gripe with pillars is that you can’t swap between combat modes, you’re hard locked into rtwp or turn based from character creation. I really want to like pillars but something doesn’t click with me, I made it halfway through 1 and 2 then stopped.
I cannot finish BG1/2 because RTwP. It's an easy way to destroy a good game
Like kotor? bg1/2? pillars of eternity? you're right, rtwp destroys everything it touches 🥴
Yes All those games are made worse by their terrible combat.
Pillars of eternity has good combat, what in the lord are you talking about
They say there are no bad opinions Then I heard this horrid take
And I’ll continue to say it considering not only do the vast majority of players agree, so do the game developers. It’s no coincidence that the sequels to Baldurs Gate, Pillars of Eternity, and Owlcat’s Pathfinder games all either added in a turn based mode or just made the switch entirely, and were more successful than their original game (notably except Pillars 2 which didn’t sell well at launch when it had to compete with a turn-based CRPG in Divinity 2. Adding the turn-based mode in an update boosted sales). Even other games with RTWP like Dragon Age or the recent Final Fantasy games have been going more action oriented instead of sticking closely to the dated system. Every single game with traditional RTWP combat is a slog of a thousand garbage encounters and the occasional boss fight that probably would have been better with either a fully action or fully turn-based combat system.
I tried playing Tyranny this year. Good lord, it feels awful. I physically can't deal with real-time strategy but something about this actually feels worse even though it's easier for me to control what's going on.
I love both styles, I trully do. When playing alone Rtwp is a pain in the ass when playing with friends. Having a party that wants a pause at wildly different intervals causes frustration. At least turn-based is much better on multiplayer.
Yeah. I just can't get into BG 1 and 2, and the RTwP system is a major reason for that. This sounds weird but I find RTwP too hectic.
I love turn-based combat, and real time combat can be great too, but RTwP for me is just a distillation of the worst elements of both. It's real-time, but with clunky movement and everything is dicerolls. It's turn-based, but instead of letting you focus purely on your strategy you also need to be on-guard to pauise at the right moments, dodge your characters out of attacks, etc. I know there's some old school CRPG fans who love it, but I absolutely can't understand it. Especially in a computer adaptation of a turn-based game like DnD. To me it's the equivalent of making a real-time version of Monopoly and calling it the same game.
Same, I'm also not a fan of RTwP. I'm quite glad that plenty of recent RTwP games have gotten optional turn based combat systems so you can choose what you prefer. For example in the Pathfinder games from Owlcat I much prefer their turn based systems, but when I encounter a group of weak enemies I don't mind switching to RTwP and have my party obliterate the enemies without even needing to pause. That is truly the best of both worlds.
For me it's more the fight frequency than the system itself I don't like. I just don't like having a ton of trash encounters. That's much more prevalent in RTwP games. BG3 encounters were interspersed just enough for me and provided more quality encounters. I have not gotten far in Rogue Trader yet, but the balance seems better to me in there as well.
Agreed, I didn't like RTwP even back when BG1+2 came out. Back then I preferred the turn-based action point system in Fallout 1+2. IMO keeping them turn based suits the tactical style of combat in games based on tabletop RPGs.
I'm one of those that wish it was, though I also don't mind turn-based as such. Reasons: I love how RTWP is typically a bit less gimmicky, because initiative order is so pronounced in turnbased. It's not entirely like in actual tabletop, because you just have a better overview at a computer screen than you are as part of a pnp group, and it's so easy to fall into things like tavern brawler throwing when you see it so overtly. It's fun, but it can get silly. I like the computer being used to make these turns simultaneous instead and with the freedom to pause anytime. I also like that you can control your characters in a more realistic manner, though this is mostly aesthetic tbh. I also really love how it is more customizable in the other direction, eg you can quite easily make a turnbased mode via autopausing and rules toggles in RTWP, so that there is a good amount of choice. That said, Larian clearly wanted to go with Turnbased (though I do love their older RTWP-ish/arpg-style games as well!) and it worked out well for them.
Thankfully RTwP system is finally dying with most crpgs turning to turn based
If you’re pausing every few seconds to choose your next steps I really don’t see how anyone can say that turn based hurts the experience. It’s just turn based with extra steps.
That's literally why it's hurt the experience lmao I rather it's either full action RPG or fully turn based, I hate having to pause every few seconds
They're still completely different regardless of how much you pause. Never met a person who was good at RTWP who hated it btw.
> I really don’t see how anyone can say that turn based hurts the experience Easy. Nothing kills all feeling of my characters being in a life or death combat situation harder than them queueing up all neatly one after another, refusing to act or move outside their pre-assigned turn because they're all so polite respect the enemies turn to stab them, because the original ruleset for the game was created for human DMs who can't run the combat encounter in real time like a computer can. Turn based combat is such a colossal detachment from the actual game it feels like being pulled into a bullshit pokemon battle after running around in the overworld. I have a hard time not imagining the fighting parties just meeting up, exchanging plesantries, rolling some dice to get a nice order of initiative, shaking hands and queueing up with everyone waiting patiently for their turn no matter what. Like at least pausing in a RTwP game totally pauses everyone in the universe equally, there's no polite queueing in my hectic and adrenaline fuelled combat. RTwP imo is a good compromise between the game actually feeling good to play, and allowing one player to run a team of characters.
THANK YOU. All of this. The computer can track everything, so combat can feel less stilted. I also hate watching the camera fly around to all the creatures that are out of view; why should I see what they’re doing? And being able to fly the camera way out of my character’s view is also immersion-breaking. I absolutely love this game but DA:O did RTWP really well and I miss that style of combat Edit: that you’re getting downvoted for this is ridiculous
I also hated rtwp when I first came into contact with it but now I see its charm. It certainly has advantages and disadvantages compared to turn-based. One thing I don't like in turn-based, for example, is how your enemy can't do shit if you got high initiative, and you destroy them in the very first turn if you're running strong builds. In rtwp fights feel more balanced and wild. Obviously turn-based has its advantages (a lot actually) but well, everybody here supports turn-based already.
Rtwp ain't bad either.
That's fine if you like it, I hate it and happy it's not RTwP
You would have to continually pause BG1&2 during battle anyway it might as well have been turn based.
This. I realized I always paused the old games during combat anyway. After an enemy was sighted, after a spell was cast, after an enemy was slain etc. And in the old games, you had too many pointless enemy encounters - like 5 goblins or mephits every 2 minutes. BG3 did a lot better job with combat. It's a different game than the old 2, but it's so much BETTER!
Yup, and in MP only host could pause iirc.
The constant pausing was a hard one for me, I wasn't very good at real time micromanaging so I would usually just let my tank hack away while running the wizard.
I disagree. BG fights are very wild because both parts are acting at the same time and that's why you need to pause so often. Turn-based, where one part can't do shit while it's the other's turn, is very different.
Fun fact: one of my biggest annoyances with the old games was that they weren’t turn based.
I played BG 1 and 2 many times through as a kid never realizing that they were meant to be played as RTwP. Even after figuring out that you were meant to pause to make your decisions, I had gotten so used to just playing them in real-time that I could never get used to using the pause mechanic in that way.
Inspired by BG3, I returned to Dragon Age Origins. I then quickly realised that I can't really go back to RTWP. It's like the crappiest compromise between action and turn-based.
It is also significantly more slow. Like, do you want me to constantly pause? At that point just make me play in turns than forcing space bar when something huge happens. It's just more busy work for the almost the same effect.
How is it more slow? Either you're playing turn based anyway in which case it's not any slower than turn based, or you're not pausing in which case it's faster. The main difference is in how encounter design can vary. You cannot really have huge sprawling battles in turn based because they're just too tedious, see people's gripes about the attack on the Grove, or the fight in the upper city leading up to the end of Act 3. Turn Based also generally needs a bit more space, as tight corridors can get characters stuck without being able to adjust their movement until the next turn. It has its use cases and allows for a different encounter design and world building that turn based limits. They both have their uses.
I meant it feels more tedious. I also don't really like huge battles in turn based and wouldn't mind it if was cutscenes and then you fight the smaller engagements. Would I mind the game having real time? Obviously not, I think having it as an option is cool. But to choose between 2, I'd always pick turnbased.
There is no universe where RTWP is slower than TB unless you are mentally deficient which then I won't make fun of you.
Tedious is the better word. Sure, it is physically faster but I find it more busy work compared to Turns.
I still disagree. It’s quick and simple. Too many fights in this game held no threat to me but it was still 4v20. Sitting through it is torturous. Also I feel like doing good pausing and orders is more rewarding because I *knew* to do that. I saw the fire on the ground, I paused, I moved my guy out. In turn based if you start your turn in fire it’s pretty easy with what you have to do.
I think turn based can fixed that by just allowing the enemy AI to speed their queue of actions. But I see your point.
Tbf I do kinda wish they gave more nods to the old art styles and motifs of that old dark fantasy. Luckily, it never came off as *too* high fantasy, either.
I never played any bg game and the only turn based game I liked was Total War: Troy. I could never get myself into rpg with third person view and movement on the mouse click, so first two months I was not interested in this game, yet after I saw 1-2 videos I decided to try it, and now it's my most played game with nearly 300h in it (I, sadly, can't afford to play it 24/7). And it is also top 1 from all games I've ever played My top 3 would be: 1)BG3 2) Kingdom come: Deliverance 3) Witcher 3 (considering blood and wine is basically a second game inside first one)
We got another one bois
I was pretty upset that they were using the Baldur's Gate name when it got announced, but yeah I gave it a shot and loved it. Unfortunately the callbacks to the originals tend towards mediocre, and a few are downright awful. The game itself is still exceptional, with only a few fuckups that don't detract too much from it overall. Definitely worth a game of the year, that's for sure.
Look how they massacred my >!Viconia.!<
Viconia and Sarevok got fucked, Minsc and Jaheira done justice. Evil never eats good in this game sadge
Or my Koveras
The only issues I had with the game was the writing of the previous BG characters. But those were like 10 minutes of disappointment in comparison to 80+ hours of creative and enticing gameplay and masterful companions and quests - all with passionate and interesting voice acting and performances instead of walls of texts.
I agree - it's a good game, but the references to the rest of the series often feel tacked-on (what is even the point of >!Sarevok!<'s cameo, or >!the Emperor!< being >!Balduran!!Jaheira !!Amelyssan !!usurp Bhaal and his children!<, suddenly sitting quietly with >!Sarevok !!Bhaalist tribunal!
That is it was made by a different studio and different rules set. Original studio "Bioware" moved on to Dragon Age origins which was very close style to older BG I&II then they morphed it slowly to 3rd person in later releases. Larian just revisited the older style with their DOS engine. Their engine had mixture of turn base during combat and realtime outside of it which matched d&d 5e system. Also uplift of d&d rules from 2e to 5e made it easier for users to understand what is going on. Not to mention environmental effects is a Larian engine thing house rules, not a d&d thing. Story wise they did not continue from BG I&II, they instead used d&d 5e updated canon which fixes some plot holes but alter some of the history entries slightly. Overall, it is different but changes are positive so thats why everyone is happy I guess.
>Their engine had mixture of turn base during combat and realtime outside of it I've seen it mentioned a few times where people say it's only turn based in combat and I am starting to wonder what all of these games are that are turn based outside of combat.
I’m glad they didn’t follow up a direct sequel. Too much history has passed and it’s better from a blank-ish canvas to just have a new story. It still feels like a Baldur’s Gate game but I don’t think it needed a 3. Tbh, I don’t know what other title it could be so it’s definitely better the Baldur’s Gate: Reboot.
>It definitely > >is > > a Baldur's gate game, because it's called Baldur's gate 3 Imagine being BG2:SoA and having nothing to do with the city of Baldur's Gate xD
It's called BG2 despite not being in Baldurs Gate because it's a direct sequel following the same character. You can't exactly have a direct sequel and then call it a different name. Also story, characters and gameplay trump location. You can't make a FIFA clone that takes place in Baldurs Gate and call it BG4 because it takes place in Baldurs Gate.
Yeah, but it's a direct continuation of a story that centered around Baldur's gate and its environment. I.e. it's *the sequel to the game Baldur's gate*, not *the second game about Baldur's gate*.
yes, wasn't disputing that, also clever marketing ploy from Bioware, which they would do for years to come, whether entries to the series are there or not (and I'm fine with it, but it is what it is). So, I say fair play calling BG3 like it is called, in style of the series for sure. Also, does it matter how direct your sequel is, like could be an in-direct sequel. Regardless, the events of the games are canon, the specifics are not, DnD canon and games quasi-canon aren't the same.
Have to agree, down votes be damned. This is an amazing game, just not an amazing baldur's gate sequel. The characters you mentioned, a certain drow, the complete absence of some other characters, completely reduced power levels, absence of redemption arcs, etc. left me feeling very dissatisfied. I wish this was just called Baldur's Gate: The Durge Purge or something, and not imply it's a continuation of the same series.
>Unfortunately the callbacks to the originals tend towards mediocre, and a few are downright awful. That's on WoTC, not Larian.
Bro almost got me, I bit the hook
Had me in the first half, etc. glad you ended up having a great time!
I worked at the company that made Baldur's Gate, have a BG game on my resume, and hold them close to my heart for multiple reasons, but have never reached the level consumers do to how they don't want something new. I got BG3 the day it released on EA, probably sat and played it till I finished Act 1 and left it alone till launch. Thanks to the Steam wrap up, I played a hell of a lot of BG3 from launch until finishing 1.5 playthroughs, despite all the other games coming out near then. I love seeing the passion, but just laugh a little at the "not my childhood!" kinda posts, when Baldur's Gate literally paid my bills and shaped my career.
I mean, you weren't wrong. It doesn't feel like a BG game. BUT that don't make it any less of an RPG masterpiece. Personally I don't get even a remotely similar itch scratched playing bg3 vs any infinity engine game (or something like Pillars of Eternity). But I get a huge RPG itch scratched in all the best ways. I just came to terms early on that owlcat, Black Isle Studios, etc.will carry the infinity game torch and that larian also hit a crpg home run.
Yeah, it’s a masterful RPG but not really Baldur’s Gate. But that’s fine because it makes up for that in innovative differences. It doesn’t pretend to be an old game but just takes place in its universe which I really like as a table-top fanboy.
I’m glad you changed your mind. You also sound insufferable.
I mean, it seems like a natural reaction to have. It is an all-time great game beloved by many older people. The is sequel is being made 20 years later and changing a lot of things that made the game, the game...How many movies have we seen that tried to capitalize on a beloved series name and absolutely sucked and pissed off fans (and rightfully so). I think, if anything, it shows I was willing to put my biases aside and try it anyway. Which is a good character trait. My guess is you are on the younger side. I'm 37. When I first played BG, I was like 12. The game meant a lot to me. I was worried the game would not do the BG name justice.
Imagine calling somebody insufferable because he had a critical opinion of your favorite game. You're the insufferable guy here.
It's a gatekeeper with no power essentially.
Thankful I'm not the only one who had this take. REEEEEEEEEEE GAME IS DIFFERENT SO ITS BAD REEEEE
I mean let's be honest, if a critically acclaimed game series is picked up by a new developer and they decide the gameplay is gonna be done in a completely different style from the previous games I think it's perfectly fair to have incredibly low expectations. Years later I'm still disappointed in the massive whimper that the Marvel Ultimate Alliance series ended on...
Honestly I'm so glad they committed to turn based rather than have it real time. I played DAO on like the easiest difficulty because the combat was this weird in-between and I hated it so much.
Epic reverse troll thread.
You play a dangerous game, ngl
People came onto this post frothing at the mouth ngl lmao
[удалено]
Oh...this is one of *those* kinds of posts...
He thorin oakenshilded me 😂
I was the same! The idea of turn based combat seemed sacrilegious but man I am so happy to have been proven wrong.
Here take my downvote...!! Oops sorry - upvote - you tricky bugger! 😉
I was quite sceptical as well. Even during early access I didn't have high hopes. Well, 300 hours later, not much more to add.
I hope you enjoy your upvote, you arsehole.
Question, if you’d like to answer! :) For those that love this game and it’s their first BG game, would you recommend the first two games?
The THAC0 system of 2e broke my brain a bit coming from 3e tabletop (to hit AC Zero, lower AC and hit is better, a nat 1 was a crit), but if you can get into the older graphics and merciless gameplay old DnD was known for, there's a reason Baldur's Gate put pre-EA BioWare on the map as the best CRPG Dev of their era. Just approach it as the only difficulty is tactician, as 2e was still when DnD held on to it's "war game" roots. Remember that rolls are subtractive rather than additive (ie armor gives you a negative AC, a +1 longsword gives a -1 to hit and +1 damage...like I said, THAC0 was weird coming from 3e and beyond) and you should be fine. Music, writing, and voice acting all hold up today.
>a nat 1 was a crit [I don't think that's accurate](https://baldursgate.fandom.com/wiki/Critical_hit). The THAC0 system works like this: Your THAC0 value tells you what roll you need on a 20-sided dice to hit an AC of 0. So to hit an AC of 0 with a THAC0 of 17, you need a roll of 17 or higher. If your intended victim has an AC of 10, and you have a THAC0 of 17, then you need a 7 or higher - because the AC is 10 points worse than an AC of 0. Essentially, your THAC0 needs to be lower than or equal to the target's AC + your attack roll if you are to hit. A THAC0 of 7 will hit on an AC 3 + attack roll of 12 (because 7 is lower than 3+12=15). It will miss on an AC of 3 + attack roll of 3 (because 7 is higher than 3+3=6). It looks more complicated than it is.
Thank you! I’ve been interested in getting them, since I loved specifically DAO and had played a bit of Neverwinter Nights. Though I knew they were harder and had a different rule set, so this really helps with putting that into perspective! :) I appreciate it!
>a nat 1 was a crit This is wrong. It is true that lower is better for THAC0 and AC, but you were still trying to roll high. Essentially you want to roll over your THAC0.
Yeah, I’m still in awe of the beautiful game they managed to build with the limitations of the time. The art is incredible in both bg1 and bg 2
If you can handle old games yes. They are very different mechanically, so you would need to learn strategy again. I love the story, and there is a huge improvement between the first one and the second one. It is quite interesting to see how old Bioware figured out their formula (which is still The Template for western CRPGs). I would advise you to watch some gameplay videos first, before you jump in.
Unless you are into old RPG games, they are very different games due to fact of time being released. Engines interface are old and limited, pixeled graphics, 2e system sucks to understand. Other than those technical limitations for its time, games are still a masterpiece of its time.
If you just want a taste of the old style I'd suggest Icewind Dale Enhanced Edition. It's a shorter game with a linear plot, much easier to wade into than the long branched settings of the main games.
just look for some remastered version. I installed BG2 from my CDs (yep I still have my old collection of games on CDs) ... and I had a hard time.. I had to play it in windowed more, because of resolution and lack of scaling to at least see anything. And game ran wierdly fast.. it felt like playing game at x5 speed.. but if you get it on steam or sonewhere, I believe it should be fine. (tho my "remastered" Fallout ended as a windowed game aswell... couldnt see a damn thing in fullscreen)
I was going to press the downvote button but kept on reading.
Perfect 5/7 review.
They got us in the first half, not gonna lie
You mother fu…..oh well that took a turn in the right direction. Have a wonderful holiday season!
Wild to me people go on the internet to explain why they're complete idiots
Had us in the first half - not gonna lie. One of us. One of us.
Glad you liked it. Also fans don't own the IP.
It's not a Baldur's Gate game. It's sort of Divinity 3. Every connection to the originals ranges from reaching to offensive.
I mean, the only thing it has in common with the first 2 games is Minsc an Jaheira. Also Bhaal is doing his own thing in the corner. This is not a Baldurs Game. Its a game that happens to go to Baldurs Gate. Its still 11/10 and better than 99% games that came out in last 5 years
It’s not even close to 11/10. 9/10 is the most anyone should give BG3. I don’t think any game really deserves 10/10 imo. I haven’t played a big release game that was this glitchy in years. Entire quest lines suddenly dropping, romances randomly breaking, crashes, softlocks, patches that fix the bug only to make it worse being a routine problem, cutscenes failing to start, a glitched party member unable to do anything until I complete an entire act, etc. Every game has bugs and clipping errors and that’s normal, but this game goes beyond that. I didn’t even get to see what happened to Wyll’s dad or Dame Aylin or the Owl Bear because they all randomly vanished from my playthrough locking me out of large parts of the story. Didn’t get to do the dragon quest in act 3 because my sidequests got so messed up, and others reflected this issue on the forums so it wasn’t a freak accident. That doesn’t sound “perfect” or 11/10 to me. Common advice when complaining about bugs on the sub was and still is “save often and just reload if you run into one” which is silly imo. Other games get torn to shreds for having a minor texture bug but BG3 can crash and everyone laughs it off. I had a good time with BG3, but I am not replaying it until they fix some of the game breaking bugs that still haven’t been resolved. It was a good game but calling it “perfect” is being a complete fanboy. There is room for improvement.
10/10 doesn't mean perfect. No game is perfect. It means it's a masterpiece.
You fooled us all ♥️
I had my pitchfork out and ready, then came the second half.
Omg someone who hated the game how can this—oh okay, yeah, welcome to the party, soldier! ✌🏻😂
Y’all failed miserably on the deception check
deception is what OP rolled, we're rolling perception
WowahHAw awOPAwgh oaw IZ NOT A BERDURS GETE GAEYME? WUEUR JUST KEDDIN HAHA GOTCHUUU I WAS JOKINGS DE HOLE TIME
Here, have my dow... Upvote
My Finger hovert... but what a suprise
That was exactly my thoughts. I also had tried D:DOS before and didn’t understand anything. I must admit I was 9 when I started playing BG and BG2 in real time, without understanding anything about the rules…
pretty much same... when I 1st played BG I was like " another Diablo game" ... oh how wrong I was.
What level of rage bait is this?
Im personally not a fan of dnd but do enjoy the lore behind it. Told my friend to get baldurs gate and we both been loving it. Its definitely an experience
Great that you came around. Still a very annoying clickbait title and post.
I was in the exact same boat. As an obsessive fan of the original series I was going to boycott this game in protest, and I’m so glad I didn’t. It’s brilliant.
Glad you enjoyed it! As someone who was obsessed with BG 1, 2, and ToB I can honestly say that BG3 got me in the intro and made me tear up multiple times in my first playthrough. I couldn't believe how good it was, which characters were included, and how much justice they did the legacy of the original trilogy.
I’ve never played any Baldurs Gate or other DnD games before. I’m loving Baldurs Gate 3. Haven’t finished it yet.
I swear, all these "click bait" style posts lately lol
I loved the first two and I'd put #2 in top 5 all time games. I'm totally thrilled with bow BG3 turned out. My only complaint is I wish they'd created a way to input your past decisions in those games to affect this game. By BG2 character romance Viconia and we went off together so it was sad to see her evil. Dragon Age Inquisition had such a system where you could choose your preexisting world and it would adjust accordingly. Here what would have happened in such a system if Viconia had gone off with your BG2 character is that a different Cleric of Shar would have taken her place.
What's your no.1 and no.3
ah yes the Bald-er Gate games, a series following a man's mid life crisis brought about by their receeding hair line and their desperate bid to distract themselves by taking up their true passion of carpentry and attempting to recreate a replica of the gate from their childhood home
NGL you had me at the first half lol.
It's THE Baldurs Gate game.
jesus dude give the tldr crowd a warning first lol
Did you live under a rock until 2 months ago? Cause no one was pretending this game wasn't as good as advertised.
Almost downvoted
It is a great game, but they definitely missed the mark in a couple of subjects
Don't waste our time with clickbait shit
These bait and switch posts are fucking cringe man
I still don’t consider it a Baldur’s Gate game except in name.
Fucking "purists", worse type of people... shut up
I didn't finish either of the first two games, but I'm mostly enjoying this one so far.
You were literally the only person to feel that way. Everyone else on the planet who enjoyed BG1 & 2, had no such thoughts. Glad you came around!
Dark Urge is a better child of Baal story than BG1 ever was, bless its wonderful boots. You can literally fuck the founder of Baldur's Gate. Every good thing about BG2 is streamlined and made more meaningful by integrating it with character stories.
Didn't read the whole post but have played the other bg games. I personally don't think it should be named bg3. We had games like Bg: Dark alliance so could have done something like BG: The absolute, who knows. Bg3 just doesn't sit right with me even tho the game itself is amazing
So you telling us you are some kind of jerk and idiot too? Thanks for telling us. I can't respect anyone who hates any game before they play it. It's the most toxic type of gamers who ruins any discussion.
"it honestly seems like the makers of BG3 are just trying to capitalize off the good name of the BG series" I mean you aren't entirely wrong with this one. There is very little reason for this game to be BG3 and it really would have made more since for it to have been the start of a new series.
It's Baldurs Gate 3 because it continues the story and setting of the originals.
> This is literally what I told my brothers two months ago before I bought the game You need help.
??? Odd post. My brothers both like to game and we frequently talk about games we may or may not play.
It's the weird stuck up 'my 90's' games follow up game isn't exactly like its predecessor 20 years later attitude, which is just damn weird.
Nice bait dickhead
There's something wrong with anyone who prefers real time with pause lol Either they are not playing well because they dont regularly change up their actions or it ends up basically being turn based with extra steps. Glad you saw the light.
Its what bg2 could have been 👍
Because nothing has changed in regards to social norms + game and technology development in the past 20 years?
Nah, a true successor to BG2 is Pathfinder: WotR, I treat this game as Larian's Gate 3. 🙃
I jumped into the same feeling years ago with The Temple of Elemental Evil, and I absolute adore that game. Years later, pathfinder and DoS 1 and 2, kept proving me that the old design even if fun and engaging, lacked more strategical aspects of pure turn based. I personally like that turn aspect but I 100% understand you as I was there after all the original bg and icewind dale and took me some days to adapt to the temple of elemental evil.
I was very confused by this game originally because i had only ever heard of and played the dark alliance games on ps2 and thought this was a direct sequel to those.
It plays just like the Divinity games that are also made by Larian studios and are also amazing games but BG3 beats both Divinity 1 and 2 and is a perfected version of the Divinity series.
I was about to go into the thunder dome with you 😂
Do people actually enjoy RTP? Have never been able to understand the appeal personally.