Think most people are more interested in what Larian is cooking up, the IP barely matters.
Yeah anyone apart from Larian making BG4 is basically fucked. Maybe if they wait 5-10 years and a studio with an established brand comes in, but that isn't what's going to happen.
Prior to BG3 I held BG1&2 somewhere in the top 5 games of all time. BG3 had an impossible bar to meet and they not only met it, but far surpassed it.
I'm genuinely sad at whatever BG4 releases as. It's like someone who loved Diablo 1&2 looking at Diablo 3&4. Diablo 3 was a shell of Diablo 2 and I literally just had to check if Diablo 4 was a released game. Maybe it's fun to someone, but I've completely checked out of the series.
So here's to BG4, BG:TCG, & BG:Mobile, shells of the greatness that came before them.
Oblivion Obsidian is the only other company that can hold expectations currently
Obsidian's last open world game, The Outer Worlds, was best described as "whelming"
Thanks for the chuckle, this comment helped brighten my day a little!
Exactly. This headline read as "Interested investors want to throw money at someone because BG3 did so well and then demand they release a half finished product so they can meet their quarterly financial date."
I think people are sort of over wotc ever since the OGL fiasco, plus milking mtg for all it's worth. This is probably a result.
You'd be surprised how many people don't know about that or think everything is fine now.
Everything will be fine when all the new RPGs in the works over the OGL drama come out. Ain't critical role making an rpg or something? I hate critical role but I'm eager for them to get all the critical role fans playing a different system than D&D. More excited about the mcdm rpg personally
They basically made 5e that uses 2d10 and feats on cards with a not-great partial success system. So I wouldn't get too excited.
So far we have a lot of "totally not 5e" RPGs
Haha yeah sounds about right. Matt Mercer doesn't understand D&D and it shows. But is it at least decent enough for the CR fans to give it a go?
Well the ones you need to win over are the DMs and there's not really any DM-side improvements as far as I'm aware, it's basically just worth it if you like their setting.
I've seen plenty of situations where a DM wanted to run a different system but the players thought that sounded too hard and they only want to play what they know. In my experience, it's usually the players you need to convince. The DM is the member of the friend group who is the most open to putting in effort to begin with. The players are the lazy ones and therefore the most resistant to change.
True, but you need someone to buy in first and there's no real reason for the DM to buy-in outside of the setting. If the DM doesn't buy in you don't even get to the stage of pitching it to the players.
That said it is an easy pitch to the players since you can straight convert characters across.
That's not how IP holders think. Their ego ruins our fun.
I think Paizo would be a good collab. Personally I'd love to see Larian do something with Starfinder.
Starfinder'd be cool, but Larian has been firmly in Fantasy for a good 10-15 years at least now, so I'd be more confident for Pathfinder than Starfinder
I'm in the opposite group. I don't care for Larian's games (though I wish them the best) and I was very let down when they made the latest Baldur's Gate.
Don't think people should downvote you for this opinion, especially with you even being respectful about it.
I had a good time with BG3 (though I'm less high on it than most people), but at the end of the day it's clearly a Larian-game. If you didn't like the Divinity series you probably won't enjoy BG3, and if you had hoped for a BG 1&2 feel, you would probably be a bit let down.
One thing I appreciate between BG3 and their Original Sin series is that the latter games felt like turn based Splatoon whereas the former has much less surface spam barrelmancy (though it is still present)
I know what you mean - and combat in D:OS2 would often devolve into pure silliness - but at the same time their proprietary systems also had more play and more interesting wrinkles to them than the 5E they were shackled to in BG3. I can't decide which I think is better really.
I found the surface interactions to be really cool, and I think overall I like divinity 2's combat more. That being said, all the jumping/pushing stuff from BG3 is amazing and I would love to see that added to s future divinity game.
Not sure why you're being down voted, it's a reasonable opinion to have if you don't like their games. I feel the same about the originals. I tried them and respect them a lot, but they're just not for me.
BG3 has insane fanboys who don't accept any criticism of it. It makes it difficult to review games any more
I think a fair few people have tied their identity to products so they feel like it's a personal attack to not agree or not like something they like.
The triumph of modern marketing. The company is my friend and the product is my child.
Picturing someone downvoting this makes me giggle. I guess people don’t like getting read that hard lmao
That's a tale as old as time, whether it is heritage, nations, religions or products people tie their identity to.
Think most people are more interested in what Larian is cooking up, the IP barely matters.
Yeah anyone apart from Larian making BG4 is basically fucked. Maybe if they wait 5-10 years and a studio with an established brand comes in, but that isn't what's going to happen.
Prior to BG3 I held BG1&2 somewhere in the top 5 games of all time. BG3 had an impossible bar to meet and they not only met it, but far surpassed it.
I'm genuinely sad at whatever BG4 releases as. It's like someone who loved Diablo 1&2 looking at Diablo 3&4. Diablo 3 was a shell of Diablo 2 and I literally just had to check if Diablo 4 was a released game. Maybe it's fun to someone, but I've completely checked out of the series.
So here's to BG4, BG:TCG, & BG:Mobile, shells of the greatness that came before them.
OblivionObsidian is the only other company that can hold expectations currentlyObsidian's last open world game, The Outer Worlds, was best described as "whelming"
Thanks for the chuckle, this comment helped brighten my day a little!
Obsidian hasn't made a good game in like 15 years dude. They're a has-been. I doubt they even have any of the same staff.
Who?
Lol, pretty sure they meant Obsidian.
Yep. I could say it was autocorrect but more likely my brain was just not working .
The last obsidian game I played, Tyranny, turns to absolute crap halfway through
I loved Diablo 2
fuck what they've done
Exactly. This headline read as "Interested investors want to throw money at someone because BG3 did so well and then demand they release a half finished product so they can meet their quarterly financial date."
I think people are sort of over wotc ever since the OGL fiasco, plus milking mtg for all it's worth. This is probably a result.
You'd be surprised how many people don't know about that or think everything is fine now.
Everything will be fine when all the new RPGs in the works over the OGL drama come out. Ain't critical role making an rpg or something? I hate critical role but I'm eager for them to get all the critical role fans playing a different system than D&D. More excited about the mcdm rpg personally
They basically made 5e that uses 2d10 and feats on cards with a not-great partial success system. So I wouldn't get too excited.
So far we have a lot of "totally not 5e" RPGs
Haha yeah sounds about right. Matt Mercer doesn't understand D&D and it shows. But is it at least decent enough for the CR fans to give it a go?
Well the ones you need to win over are the DMs and there's not really any DM-side improvements as far as I'm aware, it's basically just worth it if you like their setting.
I've seen plenty of situations where a DM wanted to run a different system but the players thought that sounded too hard and they only want to play what they know. In my experience, it's usually the players you need to convince. The DM is the member of the friend group who is the most open to putting in effort to begin with. The players are the lazy ones and therefore the most resistant to change.
True, but you need someone to buy in first and there's no real reason for the DM to buy-in outside of the setting. If the DM doesn't buy in you don't even get to the stage of pitching it to the players.
That said it is an easy pitch to the players since you can straight convert characters across.
That's not how IP holders think. Their ego ruins our fun.
I think Paizo would be a good collab. Personally I'd love to see Larian do something with Starfinder.
Starfinder'd be cool, but Larian has been firmly in Fantasy for a good 10-15 years at least now, so I'd be more confident for Pathfinder than Starfinder
I'm in the opposite group. I don't care for Larian's games (though I wish them the best) and I was very let down when they made the latest Baldur's Gate.
Don't think people should downvote you for this opinion, especially with you even being respectful about it.
I had a good time with BG3 (though I'm less high on it than most people), but at the end of the day it's clearly a Larian-game. If you didn't like the Divinity series you probably won't enjoy BG3, and if you had hoped for a BG 1&2 feel, you would probably be a bit let down.
One thing I appreciate between BG3 and their Original Sin series is that the latter games felt like turn based Splatoon whereas the former has much less surface spam barrelmancy (though it is still present)
I know what you mean - and combat in D:OS2 would often devolve into pure silliness - but at the same time their proprietary systems also had more play and more interesting wrinkles to them than the 5E they were shackled to in BG3. I can't decide which I think is better really.
I found the surface interactions to be really cool, and I think overall I like divinity 2's combat more. That being said, all the jumping/pushing stuff from BG3 is amazing and I would love to see that added to s future divinity game.
Not sure why you're being down voted, it's a reasonable opinion to have if you don't like their games. I feel the same about the originals. I tried them and respect them a lot, but they're just not for me.
BG3 has insane fanboys who don't accept any criticism of it. It makes it difficult to review games any more
I think a fair few people have tied their identity to products so they feel like it's a personal attack to not agree or not like something they like.
The triumph of modern marketing. The company is my friend and the product is my child.
Picturing someone downvoting this makes me giggle. I guess people don’t like getting read that hard lmao
That's a tale as old as time, whether it is heritage, nations, religions or products people tie their identity to.
Just curious, what was the let down(s) for you? I feel like they were pretty transparent about what the game was gonna be through the whole dev cycle
I simply do not like how Larian handles combat encounters or their reliance on environmental damage/restrictions that are always against the player.
That's fair, unless you do some wacky stuff they do rely a lot on forcing environmental interactions, if you don't want fights to drag.