安裝 Steam
登入
|
語言
簡體中文
日本語(日文)
한국어(韓文)
ไทย(泰文)
Български(保加利亞文)
Čeština(捷克文)
Dansk(丹麥文)
Deutsch(德文)
English(英文)
Español - España(西班牙文 - 西班牙)
Español - Latinoamérica(西班牙文 - 拉丁美洲)
Ελληνικά(希臘文)
Français(法文)
Italiano(義大利文)
Bahasa Indonesia(印尼語)
Magyar(匈牙利文)
Nederlands(荷蘭文)
Norsk(挪威文)
Polski(波蘭文)
Português(葡萄牙文 - 葡萄牙)
Português - Brasil(葡萄牙文 - 巴西)
Română(羅馬尼亞文)
Русский(俄文)
Suomi(芬蘭文)
Svenska(瑞典文)
Türkçe(土耳其文)
tiếng Việt(越南文)
Українська(烏克蘭文)
回報翻譯問題
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I really like combining what I like from 3.5e with what I like from 5e
Care to start comparing sales numbers between real time games and turn based ones?
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.
Baldur's Gate 1 - 2 million
Baldur's Gate 2 - 2 million
Baldur's Gate:DE - 1 million
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.
Grats on listing 3 real time games?
Now compare those to Temple of Elemental Evil.
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.
Suspension of disbelief is something that grows harder to achieve the older you get, you can never really fix that with a game.
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.
As I said, Joe Dirte, Then DONT PLAY IT.