Larian have definitively sold-out and turned into a hack developer

[Turbo Nozomix]

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2020-02-27-baldurs-gate-3-interview

The choices that we made are ours. Why did we go for turn-based instead of real-time with pause? Because D&D to us is a turn-based game and we're really good - or we have become really good - with turn-based combat. So that, I think, is one of our strengths, and trying out real-time with pause for now, just because the originals were that? It's a big risk. Because the team would have to think completely differently, our combat would be completely different. And we didn't really feel good about that. Normally we do try out a lot. Normally we try out a lot before we make a decision, but with real-time with pause and turn-based we didn't, we just said "Okay it's just gonna be turn-based."

So, Larian is really just using the "Baldur's Gate" name as a husk to fill with a D&D D:OS2 clone, exclusively for the purpose of sales (that's what the "it's a big risk" remark refers to). It's a cash-grab.

BTW, TB games have on average been performing worse than RTwP games. And Larian's D:OS2 didn't come close to the amount of sales RTwP legend Dragon Age: Origins did. So, really, there is only a single big hit TB game while RTwP games are on average performing better.

Wasteland Remastered and Torment: Numenera tanked in sales and are unpopular. More people own Pillars of Eternity on Steam than own Wasteland 2 on Steam. When PoE 2 had TB added to it, its sales didn't improve at all and its Steam user rating didn't increase by even a single percentage-point. Pathfinder: Kingmaker is currently more popular than any TB game outside of Divinity: Original Sin 2. And Dragon Age: Origins (3.2 million copies sold in 3 months) greatly outsold Divinity: Original Sin 2 (1 million copies sold in 2.5 months).

So, TB games are not particularly popular and they have a higher failure-rate than RTwP games. It is only D:OS2 which has been a big hit in the TB genre.

Larian have become superstitious slaves in the wake of the success of D:OS2 and traded their integrity for the comfort and sales of an echo chamber of D:OS2 fans. So, there is literally no justification to using the "Baldur's Gate" name, when Larian's upcoming D&D RPG has as much in common with the Baldur's Gate series as


The definition of a Hack[www.dictionary.com]:

1. a person, as an artist or writer, who exploits, for money, his or her creative ability or training in the production of dull, unimaginative, and trite work; one who produces banal and mediocre work in the hope of gaining commercial success in the arts:
As a painter, he was little more than a hack.

2. a professional who renounces or surrenders individual independence, integrity, belief, etc., in return for money or other reward in the performance of a task normally thought of as involving a strong personal commitment:

Larian's "Baldur's Gate 3" has not even the faintest tiniest shred of relation to the Baldur's Gate series in character, experience, or gameplay and yet they're exploiting the name with a D:OS2 clone set in D&D for the purpose of the money doing so can make them. Larian have sold-out and literally become a hack developer for the sake of monetary gain.



At 3:35 in this video, Swen says that they chose to put the DOS formula in a game with the Baldur's Gate name because the BG name will increase their reach and hopefully result in Baldur's Gate fans playing Larian's DOS games:

https://youtu.be/kGnGOnzlC4s?t=214

... so, the chance to do that, and to bring what basically is our RPG identity to Baldur's Gate as a franchise was an opportunity too good to resist. And so, what it will do for us... uh, what we think it will do for us is it's going to show a larger segment of people, because I think Baldur's Gate 3 will reach more people than Divinity will have done... it will show a larger segment of the population what our RPGs feel like and hopefully bring them to play our other games also.

Larian's goal is to just make a DOS game under a more popular brand to boost the popularity of the DOS brand. Their next game after "BG3" is probably going to be "DOS3" (DOS4).

It is a cash-grab.

[zero]

Originally posted by Turbo Nozomix:

Originally posted by zero:

except you simply aren't the one who decides if they are continuing a story or not, neither am i, they are, it is dishonest to pretend that your perception on the matter is the objective truth.

when it comes down to it, the series contiunes the story of BG, having refences and callbacks, to the past 2 in the series(because the story contiunes with them canon), as they stated during the reveal/interview.

you may not like it, thats fine! everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but a series contiunes regardless.

No, I'm not who decides what Larian's actions will be. And Larian doesn't decide that they're continuing the story of BG by saying they are without actually doing so. And Larian have said they aren't continuing the story of BG and so there shouldn't even be a debate over this.

You're conflating Baldur's Gate the city with Baldur's Gate the series. I'm not talking about the city, I'm talking about the series. Larian are not continuing the story of the Baldur's Gate series.

except, larian does decide theya re continuing the story by making the sequel, that is, literally, how sequels work. they said they weren't re-opening the baal story, you are (half) correct there, but that is not the same thing as the overarching story, which you of course know, and are being dishonest about.

a series does not need to always revolve around the smae topic (IE, the sorc stone in harry potter), it can move from topic to topic and create multiple other stories, while still residing inside the overarching story of BG.

you can say they're not until you are red in the face, but like we agreed upon, neither me or you decide upon that, they do, and considering the third game in the series is coming out, that means the story contiunes, which is proven (to no surprise), when you are capable to call back to the events that happend in the priror games.

[Eguzky]

Originally posted by Turbo Nozomix:

Originally posted by zero:

except you simply aren't the one who decides if they are continuing a story or not, neither am i, they are, it is dishonest to pretend that your perception on the matter is the objective truth.

when it comes down to it, the series contiunes the story of BG, having refences and callbacks, to the past 2 in the series(because the story contiunes with them canon), as they stated during the reveal/interview.

you may not like it, thats fine! everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but a series contiunes regardless.

No, I'm not who decides what Larian's actions will be. And Larian doesn't decide that they're continuing the story of BG by saying they are without actually doing so. And Larian have said they aren't continuing the story of BG and so there shouldn't even be a debate over this.

You're conflating Baldur's Gate the city with Baldur's Gate the series. I'm not talking about the city, I'm talking about the series. Larian are not continuing the story of the Baldur's Gate series.

Just going to say..You know that a game can be in the Baldur's gate universe without having locations or characters from the previous games?
Fantastic Beasts is in the Harry Potter universe. It does not have Potter, Malfoy, or anyone (until movie 2)..Does that mean it's not a Harry Potter movie?

It can be a BG game without having to lift things from previous BG titles..

[Dixon Sider]

The OP quote reads like Larian is scared to take any risks. This game is meant to be nice, easy, and safe. Not BG3

[Turbo Nozomix]

Originally posted by Beardpick:

Originally posted by Turbo Nozomix:

Black Isle's BG3 was also going to continue the trademark gameplay as BG1 and BG2. So that was it's connection. Black Isle was also who created the Baldur's Gate series, so they are the ones who know how it relates and would imbue their next game in that series with the styles that make it clear that it's still the same series.

So you are moving the goalpost away from:

Originally posted by Turbo Nozomix:

Larian's "BG3" doesn't continue the story of the Baldur's Gate series in any way. It's telling a totally separate story in Forgotten Realms.

And giving them a pass because they were going to keep the RTwP gameplay?

lol, man, that is one epic display of hypocrisy and double-standard on your part.

Uh, you're going to want to think about that some more. So, where's the goalpost moving, the hypocrisy, and the double-standard there?

You're showing once again that you are a dishonest person and not attentive to what you read.

I didn't say that Larian's game isn't a Baldur's Gate exclusively because it doesn't continue the story of the Baldur's Gate series. You argued that it could be continuing an over-arching narrative, and I pointed out that it's a completely separate story. I didn't say that's specifically what makes it not a Baldur's Gate series game. In fact, I said something very different, that it's the fact that no aspect of Larian's D&D game bears semblance to the Baldur's Gate series that it's not actually a Baldur's Gate series game.

I don't know what Black Isle's BG3 was going to be like, other than that it was to carry on the gameplay style of BG1 and BG2.

So, are you simply being dishonest in that post, or are you really just unable to understand the things you read - in which case, why do you keep posting your ignorant assertions about things you haven't understood?

[Turbo Nozomix]

Originally posted by Beardpick:

Originally posted by Eguzky:

Can we get this closed? It's nothing but name calling and 'You're wrong!' "No, U!"

Keeping Turbo contained in this thread is the only thing keeping him from spawning 10+ more threads each one complaining about about an aspect of the game the he has erroneously decided is not "BG" enough to be in BG3.

I already wasn't posting in other threads. Heck, if not for this thread's activity, I wouldn't even be on Steam right now. But maybe I should post on other threads.

BTW, your idea works on you just the same, so you just testified that you're owning yourself. There's a trend here - one of you not thinking through what you say.

[zero]

Originally posted by qhristoff:

oh look, beardpick, zero, sogreth, and eisberg - trolling and derailing awell written post they disagree with

ironically, we're discussing the topic, whereas your post adds nothing, 10/10 job

[Beardpick]

Originally posted by Turbo Nozomix:

]

Uh, you're going to want to think about that some more. So, where's the goalpost moving, the hypocrisy, and the double-standard there?

You're showing once again that you are a dishonest person and not attentive to what you read.

I didn't say that Larian's game isn't a Baldur's Gate exclusively because it doesn't continue the story of the Baldur's Gate series. You argued that it could be continuing an over-arching narrative, and I pointed out that it's a completely separate story. I didn't say that's specifically what makes it not a Baldur's Gate series game. In fact, I said something very different, that it's the fact that no aspect of Larian's D&D game bears semblance to the Baldur's Gate series that it's not actually a Baldur's Gate series game.

I don't know what Black Isle's BG3 was going to be like, other than that it was to carry on the gameplay style of BG1 and BG2.

So, are you simply being dishonest in that post, or are you really just unable to understand the things you read - in which case, why do you keep posting your ignorant assertions about things you haven't understood?

Did you actually forget what you posted, or are you just trying to backpedal out at this point?

You can read all about what Black Hound was going to be here.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baldur%27s_Gate_III:_The_Black_Hound

New game engine
New story
New rules
New characters
New location
No callbacks to BG, but callbacks to Icewind Dale

But that would be fine to call "Baldur's Gate" because they were leaving in the RTwP combat, which of course is your true issue with Larian creating Baldur's Gate 3.

[Midnight]

From a gameplay perspective BG3 looks nothing like DoS2.

- No armor system.
- No "everything is on cursed fire 100% of the time".
- No freeform character building.
- No crafting that I've seen so far.
- No skill books.

I suppose origins made it in, but that is also DnD5 feature.

Actually, BG3 seems to solve a lot of the issues I had with DoS2. I'm excited for BG3 precisely because the ruleset prevents Larian from putting things like the armor system in. The rest way very good, the egregious stuff is out. It's a complete win.

[Turbo Nozomix]

Originally posted by zero:

Originally posted by Turbo Nozomix:

No, I'm not who decides what Larian's actions will be. And Larian doesn't decide that they're continuing the story of BG by saying they are without actually doing so. And Larian have said they aren't continuing the story of BG and so there shouldn't even be a debate over this.

You're conflating Baldur's Gate the city with Baldur's Gate the series. I'm not talking about the city, I'm talking about the series. Larian are not continuing the story of the Baldur's Gate series.

except, larian does decide theya re continuing the story by making the sequel, that is, literally, how sequels work. they said they weren't re-opening the baal story, you are (half) correct there, but that is not the same thing as the overarching story, which you of course know, and are being dishonest about.

a series does not need to always revolve around the smae topic (IE, the sorc stone in harry potter), it can move from topic to topic and create multiple other stories, while still residing inside the overarching story of BG.

you can say they're not until you are red in the face, but like we agreed upon, neither me or you decide upon that, they do, and considering the third game in the series is coming out, that means the story contiunes, which is proven (to no surprise), when you are capable to call back to the events that happend in the priror games.

No, that isn't how sequels work. Sequels work by actually continuing a story, not by 'deciding' you're continuing a story and then not continuing the story.

Larian have said they are not continuing the story of BG 1 and 2.

Larian's "BG3" takes place after BG2 (as in hundreds of years later) and is a sequel to Descent Into Avernus (which doesn't related to Baldur's Gate 1 and 2):
https://youtu.be/wjnv1nxA-rA?t=92

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ju12JNh8gJs&feature=youtu.be&t=138
Swen explains that there are tons of Forgotten Realms stories involving the city Baldur's Gate and that their "BG3" isn't related to the previous ones except Descent Into Avernus, which is the prequel to Larian's D&D game.

Around 6:40, Swen also states that BG1 and BG2 are closed chapters that they aren't revisiting.

[zero]

Originally posted by qhristoff:

Originally posted by zero:

ironically, we're discussing the topic, whereas your post adds nothing, 10/10 job

unironically, you are wholesale derailing the thread with empty tangential reasoning that only amounts to "but the setting"

this gamr is a divinity clone, and no amount of your willingness ignore facts can change that.

you guys are literally refuting definitions of words because they prove you wrong.

not really much of a divinity clone when they have talked about how closely they are working with wizzy coast to help design the game, which is shown during the reveal, they follow the 5e rules closely (aside from init? not sure what that's about), and that shows a true attempt to make a great BG game by working with its owners that closely.

you can consider it a clone of your fav game if you like! whatever makes you happy! but opinions aren't objective truths, what is true is only really is shown are said in the interviews, which both have shown the effort they put in to respect the rules of the game, as well as sticking to the FR setting and BG series history.

[marv]

I am going to buy Baldur's Gate 3 made by Larian Studios.

[Turbo Nozomix]

Originally posted by zero:

Originally posted by qhristoff:

oh look, beardpick, zero, sogreth, and eisberg - trolling and derailing awell written post they disagree with

ironically, we're discussing the topic, whereas your post adds nothing, 10/10 job

You are discussing the topic, which is appreciated. But sogreth and eisberg are only trolling, as seems to be all they ever do anytime they post someplace.

[zero]

Originally posted by Turbo Nozomix:

Originally posted by zero:

except, larian does decide theya re continuing the story by making the sequel, that is, literally, how sequels work. they said they weren't re-opening the baal story, you are (half) correct there, but that is not the same thing as the overarching story, which you of course know, and are being dishonest about.

a series does not need to always revolve around the smae topic (IE, the sorc stone in harry potter), it can move from topic to topic and create multiple other stories, while still residing inside the overarching story of BG.

you can say they're not until you are red in the face, but like we agreed upon, neither me or you decide upon that, they do, and considering the third game in the series is coming out, that means the story contiunes, which is proven (to no surprise), when you are capable to call back to the events that happend in the priror games.

No, that isn't how sequels work. Sequels work by actually continuing a story, not by 'deciding' you're continuing a story and then not continuing the story.

so i guess book 2 of HP isn't a sequel cause it didn't contiune the sorc stone story?

obviously that isn't the case, but i'd love to know your reasoning for that argument, if your willing to give it.

[Beardpick]

Originally posted by qhristoff:

this gamr is a divinity clone, and no amount of your willingness ignore facts can change that.

Graphically, Baldur’s Gate III looks incredible. What was your philosophy with regard to the graphic style you wanted to present?

We didn’t want people to say this is just Original Sin with different characters. There’s about 20-30% of the Original Sin engine left and we rewrote so many systems and so many things.

The renderer has become much more realistic. We support photogrammetry right now. There are realistic textures you can zoom in on endlessly but it’ll still look like a rock or tree or sand. We want to make it realistic so you believe in the story and characters. We want their personalities to become real so the interactions and the relationships between you and your companions mean something to you.
https://www.geek.com/games/return-of-the-king-an-interview-with-baldurs-gate-iii-producer-david-walgrave-1819466/

You try so hard, but just a little Googling before you post, would help you so much.

[zero]

Originally posted by qhristoff:

Originally posted by zero:

so i guess book 2 of HP isn't a sequel cause it didn't contiune the sorc stone story?

obviously that isn't the case, but i'd love to know your reasoning for that argument, if your willing to give it.

strawman

literally not a strawman to ask people why they don't consider it a sequel, when i have explained that an overarching story can still be achieved even if a story doesn't contiune its smaller stories.

good try though.