I'm not feeling it. It's not giving me that BG/Forgotten Realms vibe.

The way it zooms up close during conversations is very Dragon Age.

Even the promotional images are trying to evoke D:OS (see attachment).

Original Sin 2 is a great game, but it feels shameless to copy it to this extent when making BG3.

Hm, I wonder what Baldur's Gate 3 would have looked like if done by Piranha Bytes (not really). ;D

I'll copy paste what I had written in an other topic

BG3 is everything Bioware wanted for BG2 but couldn't.

It is true 5th edition D&D with every skill included. As far as I know, it is the first "true" implementation of a D&D ruleset. That's one of the main reasons I am so excited and hopeful about the game.

Why do people think this is not a true Baldur's Gate game? Are they seeing something I don't? Or are they forgetting that most of BG series doesn't even happen in the Baldur's Gate city? What were they expecting? I am asking this sincerely.

On the other hand, I am seeing a true Baldur's Gate setting here. A very good mixture of BG1 and BG2. The exploration system seems very similar to BG1. The cinematic reminds me of BG2. Being captured, escaping for your life and fighting to survive for "something" that's inside you seems like a true reincarnation of the Baldur's Gate series.

If real time vs Turned based is a problem, well, D&D is and have always been turned based. Real time usually made things a lot complicated and sometimes very ugly. Have you ever played BG multiplayer? It is not even remotely what you can call a D&D experience. And I am saying that as a die hard fan of BG series (especially 1) I can easily see how Larian's way of staying true to the source and keeping it Turned based will make multiplayer sessions so much fun.

Oh? They've said this?

Yes. Swen said that everything in the presentation was straight out of the D&D rule book and mentioned most of them including Athletics, Acrobatics and Nature.

I am also excited that BG3 allows us to do things that a normal D&D party would do. Like dipping your arrow in fire, throwing something, anything at somewhere (or someone) or even throwing someone else out of a cliff.

BTW, DnDBeyond is a nice website to familiarize yourself with the 5th Edition.

Character Builder
Basic Rules

EDIT: Fixed the Basic Rules URL

Makes me think of the discussions for skills when Wasteland 2 was being made, between those who thought that more skills would be better (myself included) and others who thought that the skill list needed to be smaller to avoid unbalance. Also it goes back to the discussion about abstraction; in Pillars of Eternity for example, they had this abstract choose-your-own-adventure style book interface for the skills (to avoid having to animate all that stuff), but here in this game they are going for a very literal up-close-and-realistic approach, meaning that every time you use your Athletics skill to climb a wall or swimm across a river - they'll need to animate it. But who knows it does look the game has a large budget.

They are indeed aiming high. My guess is that they want the game to be the next Neverwinter Nights, be alive in persistent worlds. Such reality would mean mods and worlds with thousands of hours of gameplay.

The 5th edition is a lot different than 2nd, 3rd and 4th editions. It is simpler and after the initial learning phase, pretty straightforward. So I hope the implementation of all the skills won't be much of a problem.

I vehemently disagree in the case of ME1, but not on DA2. Was it a perfect adaptation of everything that embodies everyone's idea of what an "RPG" means and should contain? No. But it was a far sight better than what we got with ME2/3. From a design perspective, sure, it could have been more cohesive, but until someone actually releases a full blow space/sci-fi RPG with deep customization, dialogue, stories, mechanics and systems, it's about the best we have.

ME2 and 3 were created for short attention span action fans who hijacked the game I feel like ME should have and could have been. I won't call the second and third entries trash, but I could tell the writing was on the wall from the first moment I booted up ME 2.

I realize I sound butthurt. I am. I'm a massive fan of all things sci-fi/cyberpunk/Shadowrun/space/exploration, and grew up around things like Star Control, Starflight, Sentinel Worlds, Hard Nova, and other RPG/Adventure hybrid games. The first ME felt like it was trying to recapture some of the Sentinel Worlds/Starflight magic with modern technology, and I hoped that was their intended direction. Unfortunately, once the game mainstreamed, they went in every direction I DIDN'T want, especially after the EA acquisition.

As for DA:O? I liked it. A lot more than the soulless stuff Bioware has been putting out lately, but you could tell there was going to be problems from the immersion wrecking NPCs selling DLC in camp, or the preorder stuff shoved into it.

I could probably write several more paragraphs about how disappointed I am/have been with Bioware and especially ME, but frankly, ME 1 is more of an RPG than anything Bioware's put out for years now.

I wish they went with a more darker tone regarding the art style. Nevertheless still looking forward to the game.

So... 100-hour games were made for people with a short attention span?
But I get it, you don't like action/adventure games and they changed it from "RPG light" after the first game.
Don't you think it's a bit judgemental when calling the people enjoying it to have a "short attention span"? Ok, you admitted the "butthurt" thing...

I liked the RTwP in the old Baldur's Gate games, I think I would've liked it if that would still be an option in BG3. But it isn't; and even if I didn't care for Turn Based (I like both, as I said before), I'm not going to insult people for it.

Get off my lawn! Mass Effect is just like a pretentious version of Space Invaders.

Really depends on how we define "RPG," which is always a highway straight to endless debate. ME1 is definitely a hybrid though, and a shooter a lot of the time. ME2 just feels like less of an RPG because the shooting is better and the RPG mechanics are simplified. I'd say all three are a mix though, and I don't really get people thinking ME1 is "a real RPG."

Dragon Age Origins was great. DA2's main issue was being rushed, and the crappy encounter design, spawning enemies and reused areas are all a result of that. Give them another 6 months and work on those three things specifically and the game would have been great, IMO.

Dragon Age Inquisition is much more what people say ME2 and 3 are, in my opinion. It changes to pretty much all action RPG, and uses MMO design, which changes what Dragon Age "is" completely. It's a much more different game than ME2 is compared to ME1.