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.
I mean trials in absentia are super common, including in Western democracies. If you're confident you can prosecute but unable to detain the defendant, then you can still try them without them being physically present.
I might just buy this at full price even though I don’t have any intention of playing it any time soon, just to show support for a game studio that is still doing it right.
It might be, but what would that change about the story? Unless Larian is paying other studios to say that they're panicking (which I doubt, for a million reasons), then I'm not so sure there's any difference to the situation.
Sites like IGN must follow gaming trends to survive. BG3 is a huge release and I've been seeing this story everywhere for weeks, increasing in frequency.
... proceeds with another yearly installment of game X that could have been released as DLC, but instead built it as "a new game", selling at 1 cent per bug.
Sorry fella, currently banned from Reddit in 1 day, and currently I’m also experimenting with marketing and blogging, so pardon me. Give me some feedback, I will greatly appreciate it
Oh Kotaku. What kind of questions are those. If one dlc is the only thing included then no, nothing from the other dlc will be included. Why would you expect any change in graphics, it’s a port. And it’s a port that has to work on the Switch.
Definitely agree about the price though. I probably would buy it for $30. Fifty is way too much.
I definitely gotta admit, this is one of the most impressive parts of the game to me.
Having played the original Baldurs Gate and Baldurs Gate 2 by BioWare, its really kind of amazing the depth they’ve given this game, which is arguably very inspired by what was done with Dragon Age Origins (follow ups maybe not so much).
Except it really is like playing the two original games, just with the ability to get a super close up look at your party, as well as as a high-level overview of the gaming space.
So far, the game does a stellar job of providing a truly cinematic experience during dialogue exchanges. One of the more recent RPGs that people claimed “set the bar” was Witcher 3, and it had a lot of people gesticulating from the waist up for the most part. So much of the game is so fully detailed, and yet has reasonable system requirements compared to current PC specs. It really is a stunning achievement, and a near perfect follow up to the classics.
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....
gaming
Najnowsze
Magazyn ze zdalnego serwera może być niekompletny. Zobacz więcej na oryginalnej instancji.