solid game but overrated

[gnjrhdt]

i only can imagine how bad the mainstream games must be if this one is considered to be a pinacle of a modern rpg experience.

i mean its kinda brilliant in some aspects like the overall writing and voice acting ..
but mediocre at its best in others like loot-economy , scripting ..


its basicaly divinity 2

i dont see any real inovation there

in my opinion it gives you too much of everything and therefore failes to execute a lot

your choices dont matter much, party development is a joke, ..

and of course it looks too childish for a dark fantasy game

but thats only me -
so - no front to all the fans outthere

its still enjoyable

[Garath]

To me its like this

Imagine two chefs

So one is cooking for starving people and one is cooking for stuffed people, which chef do you think will be rated higher by the people eating?

After what diablo 4, was i think people were just happy the game had an actual story and wasnt filled with microtransactions, so people were happy it wasnt like other garbage CRPGs.

Is the game good, yes. Do i recommend buying it, absolutely. Is it a 10/10, no, at best its an 8/10. Game is more linear than a bloody straight line, gets boring fast and becomes repetitive. Oh and there really isnt any reason to play the game after beating it because any decisions you change wont make any difference to the ending.

And just to extra piss off the little Larian fanbois

Starfield is a buggy mess, lags like ♥♥♥♥ and has all kinds of audio issues, yet im having infinitely more fun than i ever did playing BG3, and can already tell this will be like FO4 and i will play and replay this game for years.

I have NO desire to play, let alone replay BG3. So for number of hours vs cost of game, Starfield will blow BG3 out of the water long term.

[Mr Fred]

Its pretty much an 80% title and the only category where I would put it highly is that its going to be the go to entry level crpg to recommend to beginners.

[Verde]

Check out either of the Pathfinder cRPGs or Pillars of Eternity 1 if you want a proper, modern cRPG experience with actual depth and a great narrative.

Baldur's Gate 3 is the Fortnite of cRPGs, flashy and appealing to the casual audiences.

[gnjrhdt]

Originally posted by Garath:

Is the game good, yes. Do i recommend buying it, absolutely. Is it a 10/10, no, at best its an 8/10. Game is more linear than a bloody straight line, gets boring fast and becomes repetitive. Oh and there really isnt any reason to play the game after beating it because any decisions you change wont make any difference to the ending.

i agree on that

solid 8 out of 10

i was thinking about a 7 (which ist still good in my opnion) but the coop mode makes it an 8 for me

[seandeven]

Decisions you change wont make any difference to the ending but will change who is in the ending with you. I keep seeing places where my choices matter but I'm rather observant.

This game will still will be played when people forget about yet another space game.

Best game of the year so far.... 8/10 for me.

[Abisha]

Originally posted by Garath:

To me its like this

Imagine two chefs

So one is cooking for starving people and one is cooking for stuffed people, which chef do you think will be rated higher by the people eating?

After what diablo 4, was i think people were just happy the game had an actual story and wasnt filled with microtransactions, so people were happy it wasnt like other garbage CRPGs.

Is the game good, yes. Do i recommend buying it, absolutely. Is it a 10/10, no, at best its an 8/10. Game is more linear than a bloody straight line, gets boring fast and becomes repetitive. Oh and there really isnt any reason to play the game after beating it because any decisions you change wont make any difference to the ending.

And just to extra piss off the little Larian fanbois

Starfield is a buggy mess, lags like ♥♥♥♥ and has all kinds of audio issues, yet im having infinitely more fun than i ever did playing BG3, and can already tell this will be like FO4 and i will play and replay this game for years.

I have NO desire to play, let alone replay BG3. So for number of hours vs cost of game, Starfield will blow BG3 out of the water long term.

agree starfield much more fun to play
the Mods already shows it's a lot more popular then BG3 is.

in a week time 1902 Mods being made 6 years 1302 mods being made.
yep Starfield will destroy BG3 on long term.

[gnjrhdt]

Originally posted by Verde:

Check out either of the Pathfinder cRPGs or Pillars of Eternity 1 if you want a proper, modern cRPG experience with actual depth and a great narrative.

Baldur's Gate 3 is the Fortnite of cRPGs, flashy and appealing to the casual audiences.

ok thx i ll consider to do so - jake is always convincing ;)

[Fringehunter7719]

Yeah, I more or less agree with this, if not quite the way I'd say it myself.

Parts of the game are really great. Production, sound, voice acting, lots of the script and story. But the basic combat design, almost complete lack of balancing, bugs and many other design choices make the game feel (to me, YMMV) a chore a not insignificant amount of play time keeping it well under a 10 for me as an overall experience.

8/10 feels about right. Good game, not more than that for me. I doubt I'll really remember it in a decade.

[Nightlistic]

I look at it like this. It's a game that has allowed me to put in a hundred plus hours into it so I got my money's worth. I care very little about GOTY award titles, or how high its rated because I gain nothing from either. If I personally can get the game time out of it that justifies the cost, and the escapism I want. Then its a good game to me. I will never understand people trying to argue one game is better than the other considering they gain nothing from it if they are not part of the actual development team that made the game, and earning a profit from it. No game is perfect, all games have their flaws, and bugs.

[Renegade]

Yeah it's a more ambitious Divinity at heart, which is no bad thing. Because a multiplayer narrative driven CRPG produced to this standard is always welcome. And as a single player experience it holds up very well, granting the player a lot more freedom of action than you would normally expect.

[Barden]

It's a great game, with an immense amount of playable content. Is it D&D? Sort of, more like Divinity Original Sin 2 with an infusion of D&D 5E.

[Abisha]

Originally posted by Momomo:

Originally posted by Abisha:

agree starfield much more fun to play
the Mods already shows it's a lot more popular then BG3 is.

in a week time 1902 Mods being made 6 years 1302 mods being made.
yep Starfield will destroy BG3 on long term.

BG3 = Niche genre
Starfield = Generic

Of course plebeians prefer a simple game where they can turn their brain off as everything is straightforward.

ah have you play with the outposts they brain pain to make it work
can't say about BG3

[Octopuses]

Gameplay is same as in Divinity 2 but the story is so much better in BG3. It's a 10/10 for me (just like Witcher 3 is for example).

[Abisha]

Originally posted by Momomo:

Originally posted by Abisha:

ah have you play with the outposts they brain pain to make it work
can't say about BG3

A lot of people ask about what Race, Background, Class, Abilities they need to pick during character creation.

In Starfield you just create whatever you want, shoot shoot, go in ship shoot shoot <Fast Travel> shoot shoot, talk and pick whatever choice as it doesn't matter > shoot shoot > build outpost with power grid > shoot shoot > ending doesn't matter > Grind hundreds of hours to unlock skill points.

Yeah that game definitely requires 200IQ to play.

ah have you even play BG3? race don't matter, background meh, class "Starfield have class's" abilities much more in starfield.

fact is outposts is at least 50% more complicated then this game all together.
o yea you can also create your own spaceship, guns, outpost components, chain of self sufficient production chains. etc.

but sure, it's only shot shot blah blah.

[Josephus]

"Overrated" "Kinda brilliant" Hmm. Moving on,

Folks can be "fanbois" or just fans of both...

For me, a fan of both, I am struggling with which to play.

BG3 is a masterwork. The acting and writing is above reproach. BG3 is Dungeons and Dragons. It was ALWAYS going to be fifth edition rules of D&D. All of the others, even Divinity are not D&D. When I was playing Divinity I was thinking "Man I wish this was official with 5E rules."

The big fight in Act One is what REALLY sold the combat system in BG3 to me. Twenty five participants, all over the place. I am casting surfaces, using verticality, managing choke points and hammering enemies with Official D&D AOE spells. The game handled it PERFECTLY. As an old tabletop DM, D&D fights do not scale well normally. I have dreamed of this since I was ten years old. Man I remember seeing Magic Missile for the first time in Early Access and just shivering with excitement. Yes BG3 like any software is far from perfect and whatever pet flaw folks want to flog is probably real. Still the best Computer D&D ever. Hey, if D&D doesn't rock you like this then cool.

Starfield is another major evolution from Bethesda. A true iceberg. This is a problem because you cannot see the scope of the game when you start, and because everything worth doing is locked behind skill points in Bethesda games, early gameplay is clunky. Veteran Bethesda players know this (but sometimes forget) but new players just think the game is bad. You are never told really anything and most games these days hand hold people much more.

With Skyrim, you could open the map (after revealing the whole thing) and see "the scope" of the world. Huge at the time. Exploring that world was wonderful. Starfield is WAY too big for that. Starfield increases the complexity of the Bethesda/Fallout gameplay loop by an order of magnitude. For example Starfield's starmap is the closest equivalent to the Skyrim overworld, and it has 120 stars. Procedural stuff aside each of those stars has hours of content and just plain old exploration and wandering potential. Just because what you like to do is not at every place does not mean there is nothing there to do or see. But wait, there's more.

Starfield is actually several games integrated using the same world instance. All Bethesda games have worked like this, but in Starfield the complexity has gotten to the point that they could be their own games:

Most obviously Ship Builder. I play on PC with controller and it works VERY well for me and is actually a great challenge to get what you want within the rules, and the ships look amazing. All the "here's my cool/funny ship" post are a good indicator. Could be its own game. There are car games where you build and fix but don't drive. However in Starfield you get to fly it and at higher skill levels it feels gooood. I love using thrusters to maneuver through asteroid fields and get close to the docking ring.

Digipicking. Love it, hate it, those puzzles can be good. If its easy for you congrats on the pattern and spacial skills. Could definitely be its own app. Get to work guys.

Outpost Builder. Lifted from Fallout and plussed up, this again is a self contained system that many people will spend hours positioning their plushie collection just right while watching credits roll in.

Then you have the Mass Effect ground combat, verticality, great physics, Explosive tanks... other stuff...

Space combat is dogfighting, and skill points unlock "actual "maneuverability." Seemingly a dumb "Shoot and don't die first" filler thing at the start, as you advance the depth reveals itself. Using boost to break locks, using thrusters to keep asteroids between you and targets while you pick them off one at a time, and finally systems targeting. This for me anyway is the heart. Disable and board. Always my goal and very hard to do. This could be it's own "Privateer" game, win fights with as little damage as possible to take prizes.

Finally you have the Bethesda RPG. Story, factions, quests. There are some really human stories. FInd a derelict ship, no great loot, just a body next to a computer with a story on it. Bethesda is good at that stuff, all funny jankyness that happens aside. I think anyone expecting the main story not to have the same major beats including the ending (with a range of player-choice driven variations) is expecting the developers to create several games in one. It is not practical for many reasons, the most obvious of which is money. If I have three totally different endings, NOT variations on the same ending, I mean like a different location, different big bad, everything, I am going to make another game and sell it for more money, and it will be better because tech improves.

TLDR: Get both. Both games are landmark achievements in their field, setting new standards, but can only be directly compared in the role playing component. ARPG versus CRPG. turn-based versus real-time. I think number ratings are useless for RPGs specifically. I don't have a better solution for potential buyers though. I wrote this because I do not want anyone to miss out on either game. As an old guy today really is gaming heaven.