This is going to be the worst Baldurs Gate

[FB_Destroyer_Rebecca]

ever.
If the release is postponed to 2023 you know they are having difficulties and that it is bad.

[Freak4Leeks]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย MacGoad:

Underdark is a great name – it’s evocative, it’s not literal-minded whatsoever. There’s no melodrama in the word choice.

Grymforge is melodramatic, and it’s very hard to believe any mature species would choose something so on-the-nose. It’s childish.

Snr Dark dwarf: ‘Yeah, we’ve created the most advanced machines in all the land. But we have to name the place too. I’d be looking towards our philosophers and poets for guidance here, by the way.’

Other dwarf: ‘Well, I’d just be calling it grim. Sure isn’t that what it is lads? Look around ya. Grim AF, it is.’

Snr Dark dwarf: ‘I mean, my six year old kid felt the same way. He hasn’t developed any complex sensory appreciation of word choice.”

Other dwarf: ‘Bugger that! It’s grim looking and it’s a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ forge. Sure what else would ya be calling it?’

Literal: taking words in their usual or most basic sense without metaphor or exaggeration.

Under Dark is quite LITERALLY literally-minded: It's Under and it's dark... i dunno what i need to add.

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย MacGoad:

Yeah, I’d disagree with that. Plus, the most boring part about them? They’re all ‘special’. That’s a red flag right there. Ie – they don’t trust these characters to be nobodies making their way up – they have to pile on the ‘specialness’ to make them seem cool.

red flag and boring for you maybe, but it's good to have something to delve into and mystery to a character, it's also good for when you want to play them as origin stories.

But obviously your opinion so i won't argue with you to much on the subject.

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย MacGoad:

Wow, you think Thief wasn’t a masterpiece and Larian is comparable?

Ok, that made me lol all right.

Thief was genius – no question. And of course Levine went on to become one of the most respected game designers/writers in the industry, even if you, personally – whoever you are – don’t believe it.

To paraphrase Beckett, Levine has more talent in his little finger than Larian has in all of their cack-handed writing staff.

i never compared to thief to Larian also... what does that mean one is a game, one is a company.

Eh... i question, good game for sure. To be fair it has been a while since i played a series, but the fact i never felt the need to play it again and i don't remember much probably speaks to my uninterest in it. However I respect your opinion - whoever you are.

[Beta Ray Shill]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Freak4Leeks:

Literal: taking words in their usual or most basic sense without metaphor or exaggeration.

Under Dark is quite LITERALLY literally-minded: It's Under and it's dark... i dunno what i need to add.

It’s not though, but as you kinda hinted – we’re not on the same page.

Underdark – personally, I love it: it doesn’t say it’s ‘grim’, for example. Grim/grym is a hit-you-over-the-head word choice.

Under could mean anything and has no negative connotations. Nor does dark, unless you’re paranoid.

Both just spark up your imagination as to what they mean and – at least in my case – to this day it still makes me think.

Grymforge – yeah, we’re going to a ‘grim forge’: anyone excited yet?

It’s childish. If you want a logical explanation, I suppose it’s because it’s really specific. Grim + forge = we’re going to a grim forge.

Under + dark = could mean anything. It sparks your imagination.

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Freak4Leeks:

i never compared to thief to Larian also... what does that mean one is a game, one is a company./quote]

You wrote I ‘must have played a completely different game’ re: my comment about Thief. IMO, you insinuated that it’s tripe.

Nah. It’s genius, that’s what I said. The writing, voice acting, wit and inventiveness, the design, everything – it was perfectly brilliant stuff.

Larian does not have the writerly talent to do what Thief did with character, world-building etc.

They just have great artists and great gameplay designers. That’s not enough to make a masterpiece.

[Quillithe]

Comparing to Thief is a little awkward just because I feel it's easier to do that sort of thing better in immersive sims with a low word count and story length and character count.

Thief gets to use all sorts of setting/immersion advantages that are harder to pull off, and its whole plot is very minimalist by rpg standards. Plus you're going to get a lot more character development when the game is first person and there's almost exclusively a single character that gets developed.

[Beta Ray Shill]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Quillithe:

Comparing to Thief is a little awkward just because I feel it's easier to do that sort of thing better in immersive sims with a low word count and story length and character count.

Thief gets to use all sorts of setting/immersion advantages that are harder to pull off, and its whole plot is very minimalist by rpg standards. Plus you're going to get a lot more character development when the game is first person and there's almost exclusively a single character that gets developed.

Why do you need a big elaborate plot? That’s not difficult to make – it’s only mechanical. Look at Da Vinci Code – plot central. Did you feel anything for the characters?

Plot is easy. It’s simple-minded stuff and robotic. Far more difficult is emulating personalities and their various quirks and contradictions.

Thief had brilliant characters. Garrett was a perfect creation, and his over-confidence was his undoing in many memorable scenes (Constantine reveals himself).

The art and horror – I remember that to this day: yes, I believe they were geniuses at their craft.

Karras then in Thief 2 – the lisping Claudius – was like nothing you’ll ever witness again in all the cliché growling villains that modern fantasy-games seem to cling to.

BG3 has nothing on this level of originality – they have no interesting villain, just ‘The Absolute’.

Yeah, great.

All of Act 1 passes and you still don’t even know ‘The Absolute’s’ motive. I suppose to take over the world, or destroy all that is good?

Thief was just another level of brilliant. The artwork for the cut-scenes: evocative, disturbing, un-showy.

Just look at what we have now: BG3, Divinity series (lol), DA series (at least we all seem to agree it’s crap)…and so on.

Death thrash has a nice authentic grit to its story-telling. But above all others is Hollow Knight: a masterclass of animation, game design and ingenious world-building. It never says what it’s about: it’s ‘show don’t tell’ distilled. The gamer needs to figure it all out, and the pieces they gave you were the stuff of art.

We won’t get that with BG3, because they’re aiming for Hollywood with the story – and they’ve too many chefs at any rate.

[SilentFall]

Certain user kept flooding the first months of this forum with posts like this and now appears to be in love with the game. maybe that will happen to you

[kishkumen]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย GinzoXI:

Certain user kept flooding the first months of this forum with posts like this and now appears to be in love with the game. maybe that will happen to you

Why does it appear that way? because they shut up? they are long gone. The BG3 forum is like twitter: only the radicals are left over jumping every different opinion about the game design and the early access to get their safe space clean again..

[Freak4Leeks]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย kishkumen:

Why does it appear that way? because they shut up? they are long gone. The BG3 forum is like twitter: only the radicals are left over jumping every different opinion about the game design and the early access to get their safe space clean again..

actually, it's just steam forums in general and reddit and any other gaming forum or forums in general because humans are humans, go to FNV discussions and criticize their game in anyway, i dare you. They'll rip your throat out.

[Quillithe]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย MacGoad:

Death thrash has a nice authentic grit to its story-telling. But above all others is Hollow Knight: a masterclass of animation, game design and ingenious world-building. It never says what it’s about: it’s ‘show don’t tell’ distilled. The gamer needs to figure it all out, and the pieces they gave you were the stuff of art.

I admittedly played through all of Hollow Knight and it looked pretty, but I don't think I ever managed to really care what it was about. But that's just me.

Anyway I feel like a better comparison would be another crpg. Personally BG3 doesn't hold up too badly in that category because by their nature they can't tell quite a gripping a personal tale as easily. Thief can tell a linear story focused on a small number of characters. Hollow Knight can do things with setting and feel that are harder to do in a more mainstream crpg.

I'd still put it in the 'okay' category there. It's no Planescape: Torment - which also had 'special' characters but did a much better job with them imo. And I'd give BG2 the edge from what I've seen so far. I'll probably feel like I did with D:OS2 - I wouldn't recommend the game for the plot but it was alright as an element of the whole.

EDIT: Actually I guess it might end up below a bunch of crpgs for plot - Deadfire, Arcanum, Fallout 1/2, Underrail. But it's better than some in my opinion certainly - Solasta, Kingmaker, Wasteland 2, etc. Anyway, TLDR is could be better, don't hate it myself.

[Panic Fire]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย MacGoad:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Freak4Leeks:

As for how you feel about naming conventions... you know we are talking about DnD right? that is present through out. "Underdark" "pirate Isles". They aren't doing anything that isn't below DnD as a whole.

Underdark is a great name – it’s evocative, it’s not literal-minded whatsoever. There’s no melodrama in the word choice.

Grymforge is melodramatic, and it’s very hard to believe any mature species would choose something so on-the-nose. It’s childish.

Snr Dark dwarf: ‘Yeah, we’ve created the most advanced machines in all the land. But we have to name the place too. I’d be looking towards our philosophers and poets for guidance here, by the way.’

Other dwarf: ‘Well, I’d just be calling it grim. Sure isn’t that what it is lads? Look around ya. Grim AF, it is.’

Snr Dark dwarf: ‘I mean, my six year old kid felt the same way. He hasn’t developed any complex sensory appreciation of word choice.”

Other dwarf: ‘Bugger that! It’s grim looking and it’s a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ forge. Sure what else would ya be calling it?’

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Freak4Leeks:

Actually a fair few of the "monster encounters" you can talk to most of the goblins, animals etc. So i dunno what you mean, you can talk your way out of alot of situations.

I said if you read the ‘monster entries’ on the forgotten realms wiki (or whatever it is), they are very well written. Surprisingly so, in fact. Every creature from the beholder to the spectators, to take my example, have complex personalities and quirks. I wasn’t remotely talking about ‘talking your way out of encounters’.

I’m talking about character development – and actually all of these DnD monsters have really excellently written personas. Pretty much all of them. I was quite thrown off by how much depth they have! Tonnes of brilliant ‘little details’ that are a sign of massive writerly talent. Clever, surprising twists in how they behave and think.

Some of it is quite extraordinary. That’s what Larian isn’t doing – a spectator, for example, just attacks you like a basic monster. But read
this entry[forgottenrealms.fandom.com] on their ‘behaviour’ – very well thought out!

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Freak4Leeks:

subjective i guess, so i can't comment to much on this, but some of companions i would say show that larian can indeed do characters that are very ambiguous in what they want.

Yeah, I’d disagree with that. Plus, the most boring part about them? They’re all ‘special’. That’s a red flag right there. Ie – they don’t trust these characters to be nobodies making their way up – they have to pile on the ‘specialness’ to make them seem cool.

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Freak4Leeks:

i.. must have played a completely different game...

Wow, you think Thief wasn’t a masterpiece and Larian is comparable?

Ok, that made me lol all right.

Thief was genius – no question. And of course Levine went on to become one of the most respected game designers/writers in the industry, even if you, personally – whoever you are – don’t believe it.

To paraphrase Beckett, Levine has more talent in his little finger than Larian has in all of their cack-handed writing staff.

Gauntlgrym was a dwarven city, the capital of Delzoun...... Grym has nothing to do with the word GRIM. Grymforge is a reference to this city and the book by the same name by R.A. Salvatore.

[Beta Ray Shill]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Quillithe:

Hollow Knight and it looked pretty, but I don't think I ever managed to really care what it was about. But that's just me.

Obviously didn’t finish the game then.

It’s more than ‘pretty’. The combat is perfection – and I really would not be a fan of 2D combat.

The story is absolutely amazing, plus the music is outstanding. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2m_j6Ziz3vQ

You didn’t play it enough if you don’t think it’s a masterpiece of storytelling, art and game design – it’s the full thing.

Simply put, David Warner brought BG2 to a new level – but it was always going to be a cool game. Everyone had that slightly ‘archaic’ way of speaking that made it seem all the more believable for a fantasy setting.

You had the actually sexy Viconia, who reads like my curren g/f – she’s that believable haha.

I loved the art design, the imagination in the various scenarios - Haer'Dalis and his ‘troupe’?
Plus the cambions in BG2 looked scary. I always shat bricks when I fought them – level drain on top. Now we’ve got pretty boy commander zhalk – I heard he doesn’t go into battle without some moisturiser.

I think it’ll be a great game when it’s done. It just won’t be BG2 great.

I hate the generic Absolute thingy. The illithids were scary in BG2 – they’re campy, ‘clicky-finger’ theatrical in BG3 (cinematic).

They have the best talent in terms of game design and art design – they have the most average talent in terms of story-telling.

BG2 will always be a better game. They had fun with the writing from the start – Larian just wants to smother you with ‘epic’ dragons etc and hope you don’t notice there’s nothing else much happening beneath the hood.

[Beta Ray Shill]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Panic Fire:

Gauntlgrym was a dwarven city, the capital of Delzoun...... Grym has nothing to do with the word GRIM. Grymforge is a reference to this city and the book by the same name by R.A. Salvatore.

Lol, yeah grym is related to ‘grim’.

That’s why it’s a crap name.

Anyway, this is why I go out with a solicitor – she’s very logical haha…

[Coldhands]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Quillithe:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Coldhands:

If you say so. I'm going to wait for, at the very least, a look at the game itself before I decide to write it off.
After Origins' extremely bland, brown and gray art direction though, I'll take a little flash a color for sure.

Origins came out at what I consider the low point of gaming history - back when everything was gritty and grim and 'realistic'. I just got reminded of the absolutely silly default blood settings where you just got completely coated in toxic darkspawn blood at all times and had conversations without bothering to ever wipe it off.

Yeah, I feel like we got a lot of games in the 360/PS3 era that looked a lot like a Zack Snyder movie. Sometimes it worked, but in Dragon Age Origins it didn't. I remember being super disappointed that Denerim, this capital city, was just a bunch of dirt and 1-2 story wood buildings. Like, you'd see the travel map in town, and it looked like a large, complex city ... and then you'd load into an area and it didn't look much different than Lothering or Red Cliff.

[Quillithe]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย MacGoad:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Panic Fire:

Gauntlgrym was a dwarven city, the capital of Delzoun...... Grym has nothing to do with the word GRIM. Grymforge is a reference to this city and the book by the same name by R.A. Salvatore.

Lol, yeah grym is related to ‘grim’.

That’s why it’s a crap name.

Anyway, this is why I go out with a solicitor – she’s very logical haha…

I think his point was that you need to take the naming up with D&D here, not BG3.

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย MacGoad:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Quillithe:

Hollow Knight and it looked pretty, but I don't think I ever managed to really care what it was about. But that's just me.

Obviously didn’t finish the game then.

It’s more than ‘pretty’. The combat is perfection – and I really would not be a fan of 2D combat.

The story is absolutely amazing, plus the music is outstanding. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2m_j6Ziz3vQ

You didn’t play it enough if you don’t think it’s a masterpiece of storytelling, art and game design – it’s the full thing.

Yeah, I know a lot of people loved it more than I did. It was very good at ambiance. Felt very dark souls derivative to me in setting and plot though, personally.

Admittedly I didn't do the dlc or the 'real' final boss because I was pretty done with it by that point.

Anyway - it's really not on topic because again, having a minimalist plot like that just doesn't work as well in what people expect from crpgs. Most of the plot already happened before the game begins and not much happens after, really - it's just you piecing together what did happen. Which doesn't work well when players are expecting decisions, dialogue, and agency.

[Beta Ray Shill]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Quillithe:

I think his point was that you need to take the naming up with D&D here, not BG3.

‘He’ already identified herself as a ‘she’ a few posts up.

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Quillithe:

Yeah, I know a lot of people loved it more than I did. It was very good at ambiance. Felt very dark souls derivative to me in setting and plot though, personally.

No, you didn’t play the full game by the sounds of it.

The game design, the story, art and music were all genius.

I’m playing Tunic now – the Zelda-thing. It’s good, it has ‘charm’ but not hollow knight charm.

These dudes were obsessed with perfection even then.

Silksong was supposed to be released 2 years ago – that’s the last time we had a trailer too for it.

They gone full radio silence.

They don’t care about making money or being the next best thing. They sold hollow knight for 5 quid and dropped non-stop unbelievable DLC.

What exactly are you holding up as the ‘meca’ of gaming? Planescape?

You already identified its issues. I wouldn’t diss it, but it doesn’t hold up.

You’re wrong about ‘minimalistic’ plot – of course you’re wrong. Chrono Trigger?

And anyway, all the best literature in the world (Man Booker winners) don’t have any ‘plot’ whatsoever.

Again, it’s harder to emulate character complexity/contradictions than it is to make plot.

What do you want anyway? All these cardboard cut-outs that have a ‘big plot’ related to the Absolute, who is going to be *really really* evil and enslave all of mankind. And the illithids are all about that too?

Boring AF.

Yawn, yawn.

Give me hollow knight. Give me thief.

You dudes keep wondering who the Absolute is. Send me the postcard. Was she evil?

No way.

[DCRWrites]

It's an interesting question, and I'm not really sure how to answer it. For what it's worth I doubt I'll be playing it 20 years after release the way I was with the first two, but I'll also be in the near vicinity of 80 come 2043. In some ways it's clearly better, in other ways I don't think it's as good. I'll wait for the final product to decide.