Nobody really expects RPG's to be as big and deep as BG3, they just want a complete game that works without shitty microtransactions everywhere and always online for no reason. Plus, having interesting characters and storylines, quests that can be solved in more than one way, and gameplay that's actually formed by taking player feedback and listening to it is what people reacted well to, among other things. Baldur's Gate 3 doesn't even have Denuvo!
If there's one thing that I hope competitors learn from Larian and BG3, it's that respecting your players and giving them what they want leads to success. Similar to Elden Ring and from software, like that video mentioned. Now compare BG3 to Diablo 4 and Immortal, or the upcoming Starfield and you'll see why people love it. It's not about specs or scope, it's about designing a game to be actually FUN.
It's not about specs or scope, it's about designing a game to be actually FUN.
This is the key point that these publishers and studios are trying to avoid.
How much of most AAA budgets are spent on designing microtransaction psychologically manipulative money sinks (dark designs)?
How much of most AAA budgets are spent on creating addiction in the player-base so that they keep playing the game (and spending money)?
How much of most AAA budgets are spent on bullshit DLC (not actual new content)?
How much of most AAA budgets are spent on bullshit to satisfy shareholders?
How much of most AAA budgets are spent on shit the devs don't want, but executives do?
How much of most AAA budgets are spent on bullshit padding for marketing purposes?
How much of most AAA budgets are spent on bullshit DRM?
And keep in mind, by budgets here, I mean both the dollar amount AND time spent by devs that could be spent elsewhere (which is part of the dollar amount since salaries, but I wanted to make it clear that time spent is also important).
Some of the absolute best games in the industry have literally none of that, and people still want to play and buy them years after release because gasp they're actually fun, but these publishers and devs don't want to compare to those, because they WANT the industry to be a bunch of "GAAS" bullshit that's basically a vacuum pushed into people's wallets, cause hey, if it worked for Candy Crush....
To summarize the actual tweets/comments/etc that these videos (there are multiple) are panicking about.
Smaller studios aren't going to be able to replicate the scale and complexity of BG3. So people shouldn't be using BG3 as the bar to compare future titles/RPGs from other studios going forward. Larian is comparable in size (or even larger) to Bethesda when they released Skyrim, and no one has been able to compete directly with Skyrim either.
Not all games and RPGs need to be as complex and long as BG3. Expecting open-ended, 100 hour-long RPGs for every future game/RPG isn't realistic. Not all games require that scope, it's rare to get such a budget for this type of game, and even if you did, most companies won't be able to replicate the game in a meaningful way. Just like how companies other than Rockstar would struggle to replicate the scale of games like GTA and RDR.
There, I've summarized multiple 20 min videos. Just without all the hand-waving and drama.
Amazing game, and one of those “video games as art” that is often overlooked. The gameplay itself is nothing to write home about, but the narrative would not have been nearly as powerful if it wasn’t completely interactive.
Maybe we could get some young, impressionable, IDF kids to play that white phosphorous sequence so they can learn what it feels like in a video game without having to actually murder countless civilians.
What a great video! I was afraid going in that it would have some “forced” new opinion on the game to be relevant, but it was actually super important and interesting.
I have avoided spoilers for this game, as I’ve been meaning to get to it. I’m worried that isn’t gonna happen, and wonder if I will get the same experience others talk about from watching it
Not quite. But it probably also depends on how you play the game to some extent. If you approach it like CoD and let the story take you, you’ll probably have a good experience. If you go in thinking you can figure it out or outsmart it, you probably will and it won’t be as good.
I’m gonna be that person and say that if you haven’t made the effort to play a 12 year old game by now, you never will. Not belittling your effort to avoid spoilers though.
My friend, I still go back and beat NES games I never played before. Age doesn’t make a difference to me, it just isn’t high on the priority list
It isn’t super difficult to avoid, the game doesn’t come up super often. Typically when it does people want others to experience it blind and try not to spoil much
No, watching a gameplay won’t give you the same experience. Keep avoiding spoilers, it is really best experienced blind, although knowing there is something to experience might weaken it.
I’ve always known there is something to experience. Have a general idea from context clues as well, just nothing specific or certain. Maybe one day I will get to it. I’ll just jeep doing what I’m doing for now. Thank you for your response
youtube.com
Gorące