Why does this game get the amount of hate that it does?

[Zapp Brannigan]

Im sure its not a huge crowd that actually hates the game but for some reason when i look up this game on various forums I do end up seeing alot of negative comments about this game in particular. I freaking love this game myself. Like easily one of my most favourite RPGs of all time. And ive played Divinity 2 and Baldurs gate 3 and most of the classic rpgs. Morrowind is my favourite of all time.

[Janthis]

Originally posted by pete3great:

There are a great number of people who think that if they're bad at a game, the game itself must be bad.

That's just the typical fanboy response. In truth, the game is overcomplicated, catering to powergamers and Pathfinder experts, has annoying difficulty spikes and BS design, and parts that some people find tedious/boring (the crusade and kingdom management). It's not bad, but not great either. It could have been better with tighter focus and some different design choices.

[Cortex_Reaver]

Originally posted by Johnny_B_80:

Originally posted by pete3great:

There are a great number of people who think that if they're bad at a game, the game itself must be bad.

That's just the typical fanboy response. In truth, the game is overcomplicated, catering to powergamers and Pathfinder experts, has annoying difficulty spikes and BS design,

That's a real RPG right there. A rare gem In an industry that caters entirely to the casual gamer.

[Nordil(Hun)]

Originally posted by Vertigo:

Originally posted by Shadow:

"Shallow" is an understatement. They read the little arrow on the HUD compass, then they read 0/10 rat tails, 1/10 rat tails, 2/10 rat tails, etc. You're asking way too much if you expect them to read more than that. :Owlcat_tongue:

I think some people on here pat themselves on the back a little too much.

As much as I like Wrath, it is not the Citizen Kane of gaming. The writing is inconsistent across characters (ex: they could never make up their mind with Soseil), the game was a buggy mess at launch, and the game is now more stable after over a year of development. This game will be a cult classic at best in years to come.

I am sure older generations would look down on us for needing a bunch of images on a screen when they had to rely on their imagination. And lets be realistic, the writing of most modern CRPGs isn't that deep or profound. There are a few classics out there with some depth (like PS:T and some of Bioware's works), but most tell a decent story with some interesting characters.

I think you misunderstood us.
I am an older generation even though i am not even 40.
And i acknowledge Wrath is not a masterpiece, it could have been with a bit of work.
But BG3 is definetly not the masterpiece many claim it to be, it is a slightly above average game.
It is very hard to even debate about it because most of the time you are shut down, if you explain what for instance is an issue for you with the logical consistency with a character, the game, a story you do not get any reply (as in replying to your brought up points), but you get dissed, accused and so on. There are a few discussion i am not even touching.:)

You can be a bit forgiving to a story, if it is well delivered, its sets a great atmosphere, it draws you in. WoTR does this more than BG3.

Also there is a saying in my language, "if it is not your shirt, don't put it on".:)
As in i did not mean what i wrote about you for example, but there are sadly folks out like there, and their numbers are increasing who are PROUD to not read, or not even able to. To not even be able to write appropriately. They are proud to not even be able to do basic math. And the issue is they are for a while now the role models(celebs) and it is no wonder many folks started to imitate their behaviour.

(My cousin has 3 children she is raising them alone as her husband died when she was pregnant with the third, i am trying a lot to steer the kids to learn and read:P)

[Wirewing]

I didn't find a difficulty spike at all. Each chapter gets slightly more difficult. It is a theorycrafter's dream of a game with consistent enough rules and specific enough builds. Don't listen to these Math of Exile players saying it's difficult.

It's just that you can make a bad build. That said, you can still get through the game with a bad build, as there are potions and other items to help you out.

If you don't want to use potions or worry about your build, there are several difficulty sliders that make the game a complete cakewalk.

If you fail with the lowest difficulty slider version, maybe take up another hobby fr

[Vertigo]

Originally posted by Nordil(Hun):

I think you misunderstood us.
I am an older generation even though i am not even 40.
And i acknowledge Wrath is not a masterpiece, it could have been with a bit of work.
But BG3 is definetly not the masterpiece many claim it to be, it is a slightly above average game.
It is very hard to even debate about it because most of the time you are shut down, if you explain what for instance is an issue for you with the logical consistency with a character, the game, a story you do not get any reply (as in replying to your brought up points), but you get dissed, accused and so on. There are a few discussion i am not even touching.:)

You can be a bit forgiving to a story, if it is well delivered, its sets a great atmosphere, it draws you in. WoTR does this more than BG3.

Let me be clear I like both wrath and BG3, but I will be the first to say I think it is overrated. It was a good game, but I think many of the complaints made regarding some of the design choices and use of 5e are valid. I simply roll my eyes when people act like the only reason people do not like WotR was that it was too complex for them.

I am not saying video games cannot be entertaining or tell interesting stories. That said, I have found few games (let alone CRPGs) that I find to be extremely deep. This is not to say they cannot tackle complex and difficult subjects.

If people like BG3 more than WotR, I shrug. It's an opinion. If people think Wrath is a timeless classic, it's still an opinion. Person A isn't wrong for thinking BG3 is the best game ever seeing as it is a personal preference and not a factual statement. I feel the same when people talk about BG3 as though it was the biggest piece of garbage that somehow won game of the year. The problem is not that people have opinions, but that they cannot distinguish between their preferences and facts.

Originally posted by Nordil(Hun):

Also there is a saying in my language, "if it is not your shirt, don't put it on".:)
As in i did not mean what i wrote about you for example, but there are sadly folks out like there, and their numbers are increasing who are PROUD to not read, or not even able to. To not even be able to write appropriately. They are proud to not even be able to do basic math. And the issue is they are for a while now the role models(celebs) and it is no wonder many folks started to imitate their behaviour.

(My cousin has 3 children she is raising them alone as her husband died when she was pregnant with the third, i am trying a lot to steer the kids to learn and read:P)

And I 100% agree there is a subset of society that embraces anti intellectuallism. It is a real issue that I see made worse by things like reality TV.

It goes back to my early point: there are plenty of valid problems with Wrath. I think some on here are quick to dismiss the majority of criticisms as though people are too dumb to understand the game. It simply reeks of fanboyism (and yes, I am aware I am giving an opinion here). And this is coming from someone with almost 400 hours into Wrath. I wouldn't have put that much time in if I did not enjoy the game.

[Realm Walker]

It's a game about story telling and heavily customizable character creation, not about jumping in and shooting fire on the left and smashing skulls on the right. It is for those bored by shallow worldbuilding and the same handfull of classes.

[Illuminary]

Originally posted by pete3great:

There are a great number of people who think that if they're bad at a game, the game itself must be bad.

Shoe can be on the other foot in that case as well, you don't get to have an opinion but someone else can't.

Just because you're interested and competent with building characters, doesn't make this a good game. It's mid at best, you need a high attention span to deal with the build, skills, and gear that is stuffed into this game. It's got ugly early 2000s visuals, not narrated causing people to have to real through pages of dialogue when they just want to play, and combat is convoluted and boring.

See...all kinds of people can have opinions.

[pete3great]

Originally posted by Illuminary:

tl;dr: I hate this game because I have to read.

[Njall]

Eh, lots of reason to dislike the game (and this coming from someone that's actually liking it quite a bit ATM, but still...)

First, the balance is all over the place. Neither Pathfinder nor D&D 3.5 routinely dropped level-appropriate challenges that required the whole party to be buffed through the roof just to have a decent chance at hitting. On the contrary, both assumed your first iterative attacks in the round would hit on a 2+ at higher levels. There are various problems with the way Owlcat decided to increase the difficulty in order to take into account the increased party size compared to the adventure path, but, mainly, forcing players, especially new players, to sift through a plethora of different kind of bonuses and classes just to be effective doesn't really make for a pleasant experience. Collecting every different type of bonus under the sun in order to hit something isn't particularly funny, doesn't require clever thinking, it's just third-grade math and tedious research, unless you're familiar with PF. If you have to scale up an encounter in 3.5 or PF, you have to increase the number of enemies involved. Buffing the monsters' defenses through the roof isn't really a great idea, as combat is still resolved by rolling d20s, and you risk ending up with unhittable opponents, which, ultimately, make combats longer and more tedious rather than more tense.

Second, combat, combat, combat. There's tons of it. I don't really mind, 'cause I'm both familiar with the tabletop and like hitting stuff on the face, but still, every zone is stuffed with enemies. What's more, most combats in a given zone are pretty much the same encounter with pretty much the same stuff, except repeated ad nauseum. If you aren't particularly fond of the combat system, you'll end up hating the game on account of there being so much unavoidable combat.

Third, the crusade. If you don't like it, it will stick like a sore thumb. You're often forced to stop doing interesting stuff with your party just to avoid losing your armies' action for the day. Again, it doesn't really bother me, but I can understand how one could find it really annoying real quick.

[BoxingBud]

Most complaints I see are spyware related, I shell the hell out of any of that and vpn to boot so not only do I not care, I can feed false info too if I want, it's just a bunk way to be with software, it's not ethical and its' easy to ♥♥♥♥ around with anyway, so it shouldn't happen. The game itself is great!

[Janthis]

Originally posted by Njall:

Eh, lots of reason to dislike the game (and this coming from someone that's actually liking it quite a bit ATM, but still...)

First, the balance is all over the place. Neither Pathfinder nor D&D 3.5 routinely dropped level-appropriate challenges that required the whole party to be buffed through the roof just to have a decent chance at hitting. On the contrary, both assumed your first iterative attacks in the round would hit on a 2+ at higher levels. There are various problems with the way Owlcat decided to increase the difficulty in order to take into account the increased party size compared to the adventure path, but, mainly, forcing players, especially new players, to sift through a plethora of different kind of bonuses and classes just to be effective doesn't really make for a pleasant experience. Collecting every different type of bonus under the sun in order to hit something isn't particularly funny, doesn't require clever thinking, it's just third-grade math and tedious research, unless you're familiar with PF. If you have to scale up an encounter in 3.5 or PF, you have to increase the number of enemies involved. Buffing the monsters' defenses through the roof isn't really a great idea, as combat is still resolved by rolling d20s, and you risk ending up with unhittable opponents, which, ultimately, make combats longer and more tedious rather than more tense.

Second, combat, combat, combat. There's tons of it. I don't really mind, 'cause I'm both familiar with the tabletop and like hitting stuff on the face, but still, every zone is stuffed with enemies. What's more, most combats in a given zone are pretty much the same encounter with pretty much the same stuff, except repeated ad nauseum. If you aren't particularly fond of the combat system, you'll end up hating the game on account of there being so much unavoidable combat.

Third, the crusade. If you don't like it, it will stick like a sore thumb. You're often forced to stop doing interesting stuff with your party just to avoid losing your armies' action for the day. Again, it doesn't really bother me, but I can understand how one could find it really annoying real quick.

All of this is true, but the final nail for me was related to the secret ending. I had fulfilled all the requirements (using a guide for some of them because come on), but then I had to assault the final boss on a certain date, which was 4 months away, and had nothing else to do until then. This meant I had to click "skip day" for 4 months while dealing with kingdom events and playing whack-a-mole with demon armies in the meantime. I just had enough at that point, quit and watched the ending on Youtube. It's just a lot of questionable design decisions, imo.

[Triple G]

Originally posted by Realm Walker:

It's a game about story telling and heavily customizable character creation, not about jumping in and shooting fire on the left and smashing skulls on the right. It is for those bored by shallow worldbuilding and the same handfull of classes.

I mean for that there are a few too many encounters on each map. You go 2m, next encounter, etc. It feels like shooting fire left and right, smashing skulls, while here somehow half of them are like major encounters, and after 3-6 You´re out of spells, and healing, so You need to rest the few low level spells one has in the early game. And the character creation is about min maxing 100% with little room for roleplay if You don´t like reloading the game very much. I don´t like having pets on every member - at best no pet at all, and i like to play 1 class, or maybe a prestige class for roleplay. But in this game everyone needs to be a monk, with any pet class, and dips here and there. Anything else is not specced right for the game, when it´s about either hitting and dominating, or not hitting and losing. Other games with only 6 classes have much more variety in their builds. But i like the diversity nonetheless, and i know i´m stupid, because i don´t play the game as it´s designed. Which is either 100% min maxing or story difficulty. Like the guy said above - rather more enemies than those who need special buffs to even survive the fight - on a regular basis, not only for some end of the act or other special bosses...

But anyways - topic:

I like the game, also liked kingmaker - but i absolutely dislike the combat system with he hit or miss, or in other words: either be completely OP, or total crap - because damage is usually always the same. RNG is strong in this game (and kingmaker) - You can play the same encounter 2 times, and be wiped in the first round, or win in 5 rounds without taking a hit - while doing 100% the same thing. Best thing is when Your frontline can only be hit on a 20, and gets wiped in the first round, because there are 6 critical hits. Or Your guys only need to roll a 5 to hit, but the guy with his 8 attacks managed to not hit anything for 4 rounds, because he rolls below 5, 32 times in a row. (which is not exaggerated, i had that - it seems the RNG thing likes to roll certain numbers in a row) Also nice to have no taunt, and then the AI ignores the tank, but goes for the main character - and in turn based it means insta death, when she´s surrounded by 6 guys with 5 attacks, with no way to heal her in between...

Here the encounters seem a bit off. I´m new to this game, and in the chapel the actual end fight was the easiest (as it took me by surprise and i was unbuffed, but won without taking damage), but i needed to reload certain other encounters on the map like 100 times combined, when i just wanted to discover the rest of the map. Like 5 h on that map, and then You have some tavern in which the people want to tell You something for 5h straight, which i don´t do, so i click continue after a while, because i won´t read that all. One could mix it better.

It´s also the only game in which i save after every single fight, because of the RNG factor.

It can be tedious i guess, which could explain the "hate" - and You need to know the numbers, and need to have passed 1st grade maths to count to 100, with addition, while You need to know how to get there...

[Nosferatu]

Originally posted by Triple G:

Originally posted by Realm Walker:

It's a game about story telling and heavily customizable character creation, not about jumping in and shooting fire on the left and smashing skulls on the right. It is for those bored by shallow worldbuilding and the same handfull of classes.

I mean for that there are a few too many encounters on each map. You go 2m, next encounter, etc. It feels like shooting fire left and right, smashing skulls, while here somehow half of them are like major encounters, and after 3-6 You´re out of spells, and healing, so You need to rest the few low level spells one has in the early game. And the character creation is about min maxing 100% with little room for roleplay if You don´t like reloading the game very much. I don´t like having pets on every member - at best no pet at all, and i like to play 1 class, or maybe a prestige class for roleplay. But in this game everyone needs to be a monk, with any pet class, and dips here and there. Anything else is not specced right for the game, when it´s about either hitting and dominating, or not hitting and losing. Other games with only 6 classes have much more variety in their builds. But i like the diversity nonetheless, and i know i´m stupid, because i don´t play the game as it´s designed. Which is either 100% min maxing or story difficulty. Like the guy said above - rather more enemies than those who need special buffs to even survive the fight - on a regular basis, not only for some end of the act or other special bosses...

But anyways - topic:

I like the game, also liked kingmaker - but i absolutely dislike the combat system with he hit or miss, or in other words: either be completely OP, or total crap - because damage is usually always the same. RNG is strong in this game (and kingmaker) - You can play the same encounter 2 times, and be wiped in the first round, or win in 5 rounds without taking a hit - while doing 100% the same thing. Best thing is when Your frontline can only be hit on a 20, and gets wiped in the first round, because there are 6 critical hits. Or Your guys only need to roll a 5 to hit, but the guy with his 8 attacks managed to not hit anything for 4 rounds, because he rolls below 5, 32 times in a row. (which is not exaggerated, i had that - it seems the RNG thing likes to roll certain numbers in a row) Also nice to have no taunt, and then the AI ignores the tank, but goes for the main character - and in turn based it means insta death, when she´s surrounded by 6 guys with 5 attacks, with no way to heal her in between...

Here the encounters seem a bit off. I´m new to this game, and in the chapel the actual end fight was the easiest (as it took me by surprise and i was unbuffed, but won without taking damage), but i needed to reload certain other encounters on the map like 100 times combined, when i just wanted to discover the rest of the map. Like 5 h on that map, and then You have some tavern in which the people want to tell You something for 5h straight, which i don´t do, so i click continue after a while, because i won´t read that all. One could mix it better.

It´s also the only game in which i save after every single fight, because of the RNG factor.

It can be tedious i guess, which could explain the "hate" - and You need to know the numbers, and need to have passed 1st grade maths to count to 100, with addition, while You need to know how to get there...

That kind of minmaxing is only necessary if you play on harder difficulties, though. I'm playing on Core, and while pure RP builds probably wouldn't work, single classes with no pets and no dump stats definitely work just fine.

[Triple G]

Originally posted by Nosferatu:

That kind of minmaxing is only necessary if you play on harder difficulties, though. I'm playing on Core, and while pure RP builds probably wouldn't work, single classes with no pets and no dump stats definitely work just fine.

Just fine is something else, but this is how i play in this game as well, and kingmaker. It was good enough to play through it...

But nonetheless it´s different if You hit on a 2, and get hit on a 20, than if these were like 10. Less reload. And You need death ward, because here in this game every second enemy has ability or level drain, which gets quite expensive. While usually late game You have so many spells and synergies, that the individual builds don´t matter much. While here You also have these who dominate people, so You also need protect evil, which only lasts 1 minute. I mean i play blind, as it´s my first playthrough - it´s obviously different when i play through it a second time and know what´s happening, and when i need what. But as for now - as far as game flow goes, imho kingmaker did it a bit better - even if i dislike the combat system in general. It´s somehow not right if the best "tank" is not the heavy armor and shield guy, but anyone with mirror image, as it´s about taking hits...

Also i played Kingmaker in real time - and here i give turn based a try as i think it fits better, but that the AI focuses the main character so often is somehow a big downside - even more so when there are many encounters with multiple waves and spawns, which all go for her, and she´s not a tank, even if decent as crusader cleric. If i had done my first playthrough like in kingmaker with a Halfling knife master, i would have restarted already...

And i´m unsure if there need to be like 5 major encounters on one map - and so many minor and medium ones on top of it.

[BoxingBud]

Also I think while sure you could get complicated and build an uber top tier op character just following standard guides and some intuition should get you through a normal level single player campaign. Like your strength based fighter IS going to do fine! (for example. the same can be said for many classes) EDIT: Sorry this would be in reference to any who decry the complicated character building and creation, you gotta point, but standard vanilla stuff also works and anyone with vanilla tastes will be fine. They shouldn't take this critique.