They don’t care about the quality as long as it’s passable most of these people are underpaid anyway. AAA setting the bar lower and lower is nothing new.
I think it’ll ship, because EA has probably sunk a lot into it already. But there will also be a huge amount of pressure for it to make a shitload of money so it’ll most likely release half-finished and loaded with microtransaction nonsense.
Then there will most likely be a backlash like there was with Anthem and possibly Bioware will limp along for a bit, maybe become a support studio for someone else for a while, but I don’t really see them making another big game after this, at least in their current form.
There was talk of a new Mass Effect game IIRC but that could really be made by any of EA’s studios, it’s not like anyone who made the originals special will still be at Bioware anyway.
I’m a AAA game dev who worked on a game at EA for 4 years (plus 2 years of pre-production I was not involved with).
They cancelled the game a couple months before we were supposed to launch. Everyone at the studio got laid off. They had sunk literally millions into the game, but when they decided to change their minds there was nothing we could do to stop them. We literally had a working game that never went to players.
This is not exclusive to EA, either. Disney Interactive pulled this a couple times as well. There’s an open-world Iron Man game which was largely complete but never saw the light of day (even though it was really fun!) because Disney decided they didn’t like movie tie-ins one day.
There was a Pirates of the Caribbean game that was also nearly finished when it got cancelled. The assets/code got sold to Ubisoft and the game was reworked into Assassin’s Creed: Black Flag.
Moral of the story: never assume your game is safe until you see it on shelves.
Black Flag without the real-world stuff would have been great. I need to see if there’s a good pirate game out there. I played Sid Meir’s Pirates! or whatever it was called, but a 3D pirate game like Sea of Thieves, but single player… hmm.
So as someone who is an avid fan of Bg1 and bg2, but having never played divinity games because of kinda lack of interest, is bg3 worthy or not? I don’t want to get disappointed.
I had played some post-bg rpgs like dragon age: origins, but it felt like meh and I did not complete it.
I can’t do much to answer your original question but you could always try it and refund it within the 2 hour period steam allows.
Sure, you won’t be able to get the full experience but in that time you should be able to get a basic feel for the game and some characters which could let you form your own opinion.
Steam can be pretty loose with the period too within reason. I only returned a game once, it was the Outer Worlds and I put like 4 hours into it. I explained to them that at that point it was clear that choices didn't have the big impact I thought they would and I felt deceived.
It’s a great game by all measures, but it really feels more like a sequel to the last two Divinity games rather than the Baldur’s Gate series. The only thing it really has in common with the old games is the setting, a few recurring characters, and the fact that it’s based on D&D. Otherwise, they are about as different as CRPGs can get.
If you want a spiritual successor to the old infinity engine games, look at the two Pillars of Eternity games and the two Pathfinder games.
I have had one of the pathfinders games gifted to me, but not tried yet. I guess I should give it a go after I finish up with (totally unrelated) Monster Train.
Pillars of eternity was fucking incredible. They absolutely nailed that old bioware vibe, something I’m certain the cranial leakage Larian employs is incapable of.
I never played BG1 or BG2 or any of the Divinity games. I have played DND a lot. This feels like medieval fantasy Fallout 1 & 2 with AAA flourishes. I really like it. It’s very unforgiving. There are a lot of creative ways to finish quests. You can miss entire bits of the game based on choices. There’s a character you literally cannot recruit based on your morality choices, and with them entire subplots. The game is DEEP
Baldur’s Gate 2 is one of my favourite games of all time, and I was extremely worried and sceptical that BG3 could live up to the hype and the name of the franchise.
To the first point, it definitely has. The game is fantastic, deep, fun and absorbing, with gorgeous environments, interesting nooks, crannies and dungeons to explore and lots of fun making custom multiclass combos for your character.
It does a good job of creating a facsimile of playing Pen-and-Paper D&D with an abundance of skill checks and visible Dice Rolls, and if you decide to roll with your failures instead of save-scumming it has lots of different permutations for events and decisions can have serious consequences.
When it comes to how it relates to the previous games, I’m at the end of Act 2 and have yet to discover a real reason for this game to be called “Baldur’s Gate 3”. So far it has been entirely standalone, narratively. There might still be connections further down the road, however.
The real difference is in the writing. If what you love about the old Baldur’s Gates were the characters and the writing and you want and expect more of that then you will be disappointed. First of all, this game takes place 100 years after BG2 so expect very few familiar faces. The one returning character I’ve encountered so far has not felt particularly recognisable, either. It’s a damn good game, but it definitely feels like an unmistakably Larian game, and not a Baldur’s Gate game, writing wise. It particularly comes through in the companions.
As someone who adores the old games, I still recommend trying it as I’m having a lot of fun with it, but you might want to pretend it’s called “Divinity: Faerun” and not Baldur’s Gate 3 to enjoy it fully.
I love BG series since I’m young (started playing bg1 when I was 14, and I was still playing this year). While BG3 is different in many respect, it is honourable to the franchise IMO.
The game is different obviously, because 20 years have passed. Beamdog made a remaster is what you want is the original game. And BG3 shares a lot with divinity original sin, mostly because it’s the same engine running it. It’s not real time with pause, you have far more interactions with the environment, far more possibilities while exploring the world, and the world is far more reactive to what you’re doing.
IMO BG3 is better than bg2 in almost every respect.
The companions relationships are deeper, and they still have their own personalities, they’re not just following you like in almost all bioware games post BG. There can be very dramatic moment with them.
The rest of the game has a lot to do with what made BG good games. And there was a lot to it.
An important part was the dnd fantasy world and rules. They are updated to 5e, and it’s still dnd, no other game than a dnd franchise would have that.
Most other aspect were already there in Dos2 though: exploration, character and group building, itemization, open world and big side adventures. All that is there and it is the quality of BG. The freedom to do anything the way you like is also there and better than with BG, because the engine allows so much more.
The tactical aspect is also there. The only difference, as I said, is turn based instead of real time with pause. If you’re OK with that, I cannot see how you wouldn’t be happy with BG3, except for some nostalgia that would prevent you from liking anything new. IMO BG3 is factually a better bg2.
Lastly, the story. I’m not that far, and I haven’t seen many connections with bg1 and 2 stories yet. There are references. And the story happens around and in Baldur’s gate (unlike Baldur’s gate 2 btw).
I loved BG2 and it was one of my favourite games ever for a very long time. Though when I read the old BG sub on Reddit it seems people there disliked everything I loved and hyperfocused on things I just considered part of the vehicle to deliver an amazing story that allowed so much freedom and depth that made you feel emotional and connected. I had tried to replay BG2 but the mechanics are so, so outdated now and distracting.
BG3 over delivers on the choice depth, story and connection but does so with an updated, fun and much better engine with much more mechanics.
It needs the same treatment as Big Picture and now Remote Play have gotten even on Windows, too. It’s clunky and really kinda shit. It still uses the old Big Picture UI as a base. And I don’t mean the one recently upgraded from; I mean the one before that.
I can’t imagine any single one of the developers responsible for Overwatch 2 thinking: “OH yeah this is going to be uhmazing everyone is going to love this now…” rather they MUST OF THINKING》 “I wonder when my supervisor will walk away from my workspace so I can send my resume out to those 3 other studios I started work dialogue with…I gotta get the heck outta here before everyone plays this steaming hot tiger tutty of a game, sigh they never listen to the devs… man am I gonna miss Overwatch 1…”
I used to play Q2 competitively, so I’m a little opinionated:
Not all games are eSports-ready, nor do they need to be.
Why: eSports need to be fair. Everyone has to start at the same place, and the majority, if not all of the performance has to come from player skill.
E.g: Imagine modern football where certain players running on the field could just randomly teleport or fly, but most can’t.
Class-based (hero arena, etc) shooters are inherently unequal in the same way, because that’s the point of classes (e.g: Heavy having more HP than Scout, Spy being able to cloak and so on).
If you’re about to make the argument that “TF2/OW/LOL/WTFBBQ” requires plenty of skill despite the abilities/imbalance: save it.
There’s an enormous gulf between what the audience and casual players + enthusiasts perceive as being inside of an eSport and what’s actually going on mechanically on the top-level.
Players optimize and engineer the fun out of a game.
eSports players/pros engineer the game out of the game.
Very strange argument. It seems like you’re bad at those games and created some elaborate theory to rationalize it. Class based games require just as much, if not more, skill than non-class based games. As the number of classes increases, the total amount of knowledge required and variety of techniques available also tends to increase.
Professional players do optimize the fun out of a game, but that’s totally unrelated to the point you were trying to make.
games
Ważne
Magazyn ze zdalnego serwera może być niekompletny. Zobacz więcej na oryginalnej instancji.