Why are BG1/2 Fans mad?

[󠀡]

I didn't play BG1/2 but I watched a lets play and my friend had the game. The original games looked pretty cool although dated. I played Dark Alliance (the one with Drizzt) and it was a fun game, although nothing like BG1/2.

BG3 doesn't give me the feeling of being in the setting of BG1/2 but I get the feeling of being in a 5e campaign and that is fine for me. It's the best DnD video game I have ever played and IMO still seems better than BG1/2 in that it's updated to today's standards of quality.

I could imagine BG1/2 would be great games in this engine.

Having been a fan of Diablo 1/2 I can understand being let down by BG3 not being what you expected but this game does not compare to how bad Diablo 3 was. I have no complaints so far about BG3 because it reminds me so much of a 5e campaign.

And everyone complaining that is Divinity... I don't even know why you are here. If you don't like it, don't play it; or instead of just saying "Wah wah, this game is just like that game!" make a coherent complaint and elaborate what it is you were expecting!

I just really want to know, What were you expecting from BG3? What did you want to see? What do you expect to see in the Release version of BG3? What do you want to change about BG3 from it's current state in EA?

[Targonis]

One thing that stands out about BG3 is that you do not have the choice of who you want in your party. If you want to play good in the original BG and BG2, you have your choice of good and neutral companions, and you can tell the evil ones to go away. If you want to play evil, you can fill your party with evil or neutral party members.

So, want to play good in BG3....your party is NOT going to be good. You don't have nearly enough choice in who you will adventure with. That sets a tone, and if you really want to play good, your party members won't like it.

[Quickill]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Underprivileged White Male:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von wirednight:

LOL... maybe you should update your DnD game to 5e if you're going to talk trash about this game.

1) level cap of ten will have you fighting Deva's solo in DnD 5e. In a party of 4 you'll be fighting adult dragons.
2) okay can't argue with your here.
3) DnD 5e party default is 4. I'm sure Larian didn't complain that they'd have to reprogram their engine, but DnD 5e party size is 4.
4) There is an alignment system, they just don't stamp it on your forehead like you want it to be. If you can't tell what alignment Lae'zel is withing 5 minutes of meeting her, you need help.
5) Um... the classes are DnD. Straight from the DnD 5e PHB. You can actually go point by point and see the 95% similiarites. The other 5% is changed because it simply doesn't work in a computer game. Hell they dont' really work in PnP either.
6) Also false. It is different from the PNB, but in conversations, if you put the mouse over the "class/skill" brown/gold text box you'll see the modifiers. The difference is instead of adding to the dice rolls, they take them away from the DC. Basically the same thing, but if you really want to get bad about algerbra be my guest.
7)Um... what the heck are you talking about. Elves get their bonuses to attributes, the Fae bonuses and weapon bonuses. Tieflings get theirs... humans get theirs... This is just a total lie. And where is the Tag system you speak of?

Basically other then point 2... you're either 2 decades behind... or totally lying out of your teeth.

5th Edition is like D&D for Dummies.

Then don't play a 5th edition game. For me I liked 3rd ed. and 3.5. Had no reason to update. Then I played 5th edition and I don't want to go back. 3rd and especially 3.5 was too bogged down with bonuses and rules that sapped the fun out of the game. 5th Edition flows very nicely.

[Underprivileged White Male]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von desrtfox071:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von 2ez:

on one hand I understand it but, Larian was very upfront about where they were going with this. If they had expectations outside of that then that's unfair to the developer . I will say I'm enjoying this EA. I wanted changes and I got them .

Yeah. Even baby tantrums aren't cute, but when full grown "men" do it, you have to wonder where they failed at life.

When grown men think someone having a different opinion about a video game means they "failed at life" it really makes you wonder if they have one.

[Hobocop]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Underprivileged White Male:

So they made it an ARPG... because more people prefer ARPGs... and you are wondering why people are pissed? Kind of answered your own question.

20 years ago when they were new and shiny, yes.

Not so much anymore. The market is already saturated with ARPGs and RTS games have gone nowhere for a good while. Current year argument and all that.

[󠀡]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Underprivileged White Male:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ravenwolf:

Baldur's Gate (is a city in on the Sword Coast) is a D&D campaign setting made into a video game using AD&D rules but instead of having turn based (for whatever reason) has RTwP because the developers wanted to match the success of Diablo 1.

Diablo 1 was originally supposed to be turn based but they had more fun playing it in real time and then came the boom of ARPG games.

Baldur's Gate was supposed to be turn based as all tabletop rpg games are turn based but they wanted that sweet ARPG money so they made it real time but the complexity of AD&D required the option to pause to play.

So they made it an ARPG... because more people prefer ARPGs... and you are wondering why people are pissed? Kind of answered your own question.

I wouldn't necessarily agree that more people perfer ARPGs. If that were true then Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance would be the more popular game. It was literally the ARPG version of Baldur's Gate. There are many people who say that game is not a "Baldur's Gate" game.

[󠀡]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von allynborland:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Underprivileged White Male:

5th Edition is like D&D for Dummies.

Then don't play a 5th edition game. For me I liked 3rd ed. and 3.5. Had no reason to update. Then I played 5th edition and I don't want to go back. 3rd and especially 3.5 was too bogged down with bonuses and rules that sapped the fun out of the game. 5th Edition flows very nicely.

I really like combining what I like from 3.5e with what I like from 5e

[Underprivileged White Male]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ravenwolf:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Underprivileged White Male:

So they made it an ARPG... because more people prefer ARPGs... and you are wondering why people are pissed? Kind of answered your own question.

I wouldn't necessarily agree that more people perfer ARPGs. If that were true then Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance would be the more popular game. It was literally the ARPG version of Baldur's Gate. There are many people who say that game is not a "Baldur's Gate" game.

Care to start comparing sales numbers between real time games and turn based ones?

[Quickill]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Underprivileged White Male:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ravenwolf:

A lot of what you are complaining about maybe explained at Release later in the story. Also, maybe the writing isn't so good.

This is 5e rules and it being soft capped at 16 isn't a big deal, just keeps your character at reasonable power level. You get a +2 until level 5th level where it will be +3 and +4 at 9th level. You can look up the bonuses in the 5e PBH based on class.

Also, you can acquire more skills during downtime but typically your skill proficiency is based on class. Bard and Ranger gets 3 and Rogue gets 4; plus any from background.

A lot of the complaints seem to be about this being an early access game and we don't know whats in the full game.

Well unless they drop the turn-based thing calling it BG3 is just bullcrap.

Screw that. The not turn based idea, was exactly my most hated part of the original BG games. D&D IS turn based, and ALL, EVERY ONE, of games based in it, SHOULD be turn based. Plus, as others point out. BG1&2 WERE turn based. They just kept the turns flowing, and added the pause feature, to give you time to take your turns. That made the turn based combat more confusing than anything else.

[󠀡]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Underprivileged White Male:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ravenwolf:

I wouldn't necessarily agree that more people perfer ARPGs. If that were true then Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance would be the more popular game. It was literally the ARPG version of Baldur's Gate. There are many people who say that game is not a "Baldur's Gate" game.

Care to start comparing sales numbers between real time games and turn based ones?

Baldur's Gate 1 - 2 million
Baldur's Gate 2 - 2 million
Baldur's Gate:DE - 1 million

[Underprivileged White Male]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von allynborland:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Underprivileged White Male:

Well unless they drop the turn-based thing calling it BG3 is just bullcrap.

Screw that. The not turn based idea, was exactly my most hated part of the original BG games. D&D IS turn based, and ALL, EVERY ONE, of games based in it, SHOULD be turn based.

Again I don't give a rats ass about D&D outside of reading the Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance books and playing the BG games, IWD games, and Neverwinter Nights.

If turn-based was so great then people would remember Temple of Elemental Evil as being a great game. You hear about BG a lot... ToEE not so much.

[Underprivileged White Male]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Ravenwolf:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Underprivileged White Male:

Care to start comparing sales numbers between real time games and turn based ones?

Baldur's Gate 1 - 2 million
Baldur's Gate 2 - 2 million
Baldur's Gate:DE - 1 million

Grats on listing 3 real time games?
Now compare those to Temple of Elemental Evil.

[Freely]

A studio such as Obsidian would've developed a "Proper" Baldur's Gate, one that would appease the majority of fans of the first two games. They likely would have decided upon RTwP /w TB as the alternative option, much like Pillars of Eternity 2. The game would have been more similar to Pillars, which is a love letter to Baldur's, Icewind Dale, etc..

Personally? I'm more than happy to see Larian pick up BG even though it's way too similar when compared to D:OS 2 - Not exactly a problem, far more accessible than Infinity Engine inspired games. My only criticism (besides bugs, glitches, performance, janky nature of cutscenes) is that BG3 feels more like a conversion mod to adopt 5e ruleset.

Hoping, more or less, that over the course of Early Access as it leads to launch that the game forms it's own identity.

Oh, and hopefully far more appealing companions, as well. So far? Wyll, Gale and the Githy are all that's interesting. The other two are throwaway.

[Ultrazen]

No matter how good your game is, it will never compete with someone's nostalgic memory of a game they played when they were a kid. It's less a function of the game, than your ability to be much more immersed in something when you were younger.

Suspension of disbelief is something that grows harder to achieve the older you get, you can never really fix that with a game.

[wirednight]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Underprivileged White Male:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von allynborland:

Screw that. The not turn based idea, was exactly my most hated part of the original BG games. D&D IS turn based, and ALL, EVERY ONE, of games based in it, SHOULD be turn based.

Again I don't give a rats ass about D&D outside of reading the Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance books and playing the BG games, IWD games, and Neverwinter Nights.

If turn-based was so great then people would remember Temple of Elemental Evil as being a great game. You hear about BG a lot... ToEE not so much.

Dude when people talk about Baldur's Gate I have never, ever, heard them say "this is a great game because the combat rocks". I hear them talk about party interaction, the story, theory craft on character builds, but not once on how great combat is. Hell go over to the Beamdog forums, until BG3 came out, not a single post on this is the greatest combat ever.

So just get over it and go back to the 90s. You're flannels are calling, they need to be washed.

[Quickill]

Ursprünglich geschrieben von Underprivileged White Male:

Ursprünglich geschrieben von allynborland:

Screw that. The not turn based idea, was exactly my most hated part of the original BG games. D&D IS turn based, and ALL, EVERY ONE, of games based in it, SHOULD be turn based.

Again I don't give a rats ass about D&D outside of reading the Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance books and playing the BG games, IWD games, and Neverwinter Nights.

If turn-based was so great then people would remember Temple of Elemental Evil as being a great game. You hear about BG a lot... ToEE not so much.

As I said, Joe Dirte, Then DONT PLAY IT.