Posted August 08, 2023
Apparently BG3 popularity has far exceeded Larian's expectations: https://www.pcgamer.com/larians-boss-worried-baldurs-gate-3-had-peaked-in-early-access-so-its-massive-800k-concurrent-player-launch-was-way-way-beyond-expectations/
I'm glad their hard work has paid off so well.
I'm surprised they based their expectations so heavily on DOS1 and 2. Besides having turn based combat and a narrator, they're worlds apart IMHO. I ignored BG3 for almost 6 years precisely because I wasn't a great fan of the previous games but I'm glad I was recently swayed by the hype and watching a bit of a youtube EA playthrough. I'm still very much in Act I but I'm very impressed so far. I hope they maintain the quality throughout.
Story, dialogue, characters, quests: rivals the best of Mass effect, Dragon Age, Witcher. I have that struggle that good role playing presents: should I choose the choice that will fit my character or do I choose the option that I'm most curious about.
Lore: much more interesting than DOS but also the tongue-in-cheek tone of DOS doesn't appeal to me. Granted, BG3 has the decades legacy of DnD behind it but in my uninformed opinion, they've done a really good job with the source material, similar to Witcher.
Quest design and exploration: DOS1 and 2 maps felt claustrophobic and progress seemed heavily gated by party level. BG3 regions seem more free and open. Only playing on Balanced difficulty but I generally feel like I can explore naturally without being channelled down a specific sequence. Yes, sometimes I need to avoid some difficult encounters or try again with different tactics but it seems like level differences aren't as big a factor as DOS. Maybe that's the positive legacy of the DnD mechanics at play or I was really terrible at DOS mechanics, which I was.
Reactivity: the game seems to react nicely to my race, class and ability choices. Not always perfect - a certain Zariel Tiefling companion had no reactivity for my Zariel Tiefling PC and sometimes I have the impression that multiple choices lead to the same response because the dialogue doesn't quite flow seamlessly - but enjoyable more often than not and I can forgive the odd omission here and there due to the sheer scope and complexity of the game.
Immersive sim: there seems to be a large number of systemic ways to approach situations that rivals the likes of Prey, the best immersive sim I've previously played to date. I'm discovering new things all the time.
Tactical combat: I had trouble getting to grips with DOS1 and DOS2 but BG3 is easier to understand for me. Helps that I had some prior DnD knowledge but I also think class based systems are easier. Classless systems make it way too easy to create gimped builds, although I acknowledge for skilled players, classless systems allow for ultimate build flexibility. Larian has done a pretty good job of explaining mechanics in the UI too. The ability to scout and ambush is more reminiscent of Mutant Year Zero than DOS and makes exploration much more approachable. I also find the DnD abilities and spells more interesting than DOS, albeit DOS2 Polymorph skills are cool. DOS2 armor is annoying. Having said that, spell slot and concentration management in DnD takes some getting used to.
Utility spells: loving the use of utility spells outside of combat. Pillars of eternity had none of that. PoE was otherwise great.
Character creator: amount of choices and possibilities is impressive. Spent far, far to much time in it before even starting the game.
Camera: much, much improved over DOS. Exploration is more enjoyable because I can see further into the distance. Horizon could be lower when zoomed in the most but still way better than DOS.
Graphics and Animation: Textures look really nice, especially character textures. Character animations during dialogue rival the best of ME, DA and Witcher, maybe being more realistic even to my eye in terms of their mannerisms and facial animations. The graphical tone of DOS didn't appeal to me but BG3, whilst being recognizable as Larian style, has a somewhat more grounded look to it IMHO. This wasn't clear to me from youtube but it looks much better in reality.
Scope: Act 1's region seems huge with lots to discover, albeit my play style is probably more on the slow/completionist side.
I'm glad their hard work has paid off so well.
I'm surprised they based their expectations so heavily on DOS1 and 2. Besides having turn based combat and a narrator, they're worlds apart IMHO. I ignored BG3 for almost 6 years precisely because I wasn't a great fan of the previous games but I'm glad I was recently swayed by the hype and watching a bit of a youtube EA playthrough. I'm still very much in Act I but I'm very impressed so far. I hope they maintain the quality throughout.
Story, dialogue, characters, quests: rivals the best of Mass effect, Dragon Age, Witcher. I have that struggle that good role playing presents: should I choose the choice that will fit my character or do I choose the option that I'm most curious about.
Lore: much more interesting than DOS but also the tongue-in-cheek tone of DOS doesn't appeal to me. Granted, BG3 has the decades legacy of DnD behind it but in my uninformed opinion, they've done a really good job with the source material, similar to Witcher.
Quest design and exploration: DOS1 and 2 maps felt claustrophobic and progress seemed heavily gated by party level. BG3 regions seem more free and open. Only playing on Balanced difficulty but I generally feel like I can explore naturally without being channelled down a specific sequence. Yes, sometimes I need to avoid some difficult encounters or try again with different tactics but it seems like level differences aren't as big a factor as DOS. Maybe that's the positive legacy of the DnD mechanics at play or I was really terrible at DOS mechanics, which I was.
Reactivity: the game seems to react nicely to my race, class and ability choices. Not always perfect - a certain Zariel Tiefling companion had no reactivity for my Zariel Tiefling PC and sometimes I have the impression that multiple choices lead to the same response because the dialogue doesn't quite flow seamlessly - but enjoyable more often than not and I can forgive the odd omission here and there due to the sheer scope and complexity of the game.
Immersive sim: there seems to be a large number of systemic ways to approach situations that rivals the likes of Prey, the best immersive sim I've previously played to date. I'm discovering new things all the time.
Tactical combat: I had trouble getting to grips with DOS1 and DOS2 but BG3 is easier to understand for me. Helps that I had some prior DnD knowledge but I also think class based systems are easier. Classless systems make it way too easy to create gimped builds, although I acknowledge for skilled players, classless systems allow for ultimate build flexibility. Larian has done a pretty good job of explaining mechanics in the UI too. The ability to scout and ambush is more reminiscent of Mutant Year Zero than DOS and makes exploration much more approachable. I also find the DnD abilities and spells more interesting than DOS, albeit DOS2 Polymorph skills are cool. DOS2 armor is annoying. Having said that, spell slot and concentration management in DnD takes some getting used to.
Utility spells: loving the use of utility spells outside of combat. Pillars of eternity had none of that. PoE was otherwise great.
Character creator: amount of choices and possibilities is impressive. Spent far, far to much time in it before even starting the game.
Camera: much, much improved over DOS. Exploration is more enjoyable because I can see further into the distance. Horizon could be lower when zoomed in the most but still way better than DOS.
Graphics and Animation: Textures look really nice, especially character textures. Character animations during dialogue rival the best of ME, DA and Witcher, maybe being more realistic even to my eye in terms of their mannerisms and facial animations. The graphical tone of DOS didn't appeal to me but BG3, whilst being recognizable as Larian style, has a somewhat more grounded look to it IMHO. This wasn't clear to me from youtube but it looks much better in reality.
Scope: Act 1's region seems huge with lots to discover, albeit my play style is probably more on the slow/completionist side.