Uhh.. today's AAA studios have THOUSANDS of employees, hundreds of millions of dollars in budgets, and huge IPs on which to draw. Elder Scrolls, Fallout, Assassin's Creed, Diablo, Warcraft, Mass Effect, Dragon Age... these studios have VASTLY larger resources than Larian. Like, an order of magnitude larger. This is gaslighting and whining. I'm not having it. Do better, AAA devs. Do a lot better.
That's why their games suck. Smaller teams and budgets make better products.
Well I wouldn’t say that exactly. GTA 5 had a huge budget and a huge team and it’s objectively a better product if you compare the two (which is only to say they’re both great games but the bigger budget game has and does more).
It’s a matter of the motivations of the developers and their financial backers. If your goal is to make an ok game that maximizes profit focused mechanics, most of these AAA developers are hitting the mark perfectly. If your focus is to make a good game like it seemed to be with the BG devs, they absolutely hit the mark and are being rewarded for it.
This is just a reminder to an industry that is trying to tell us that pay to win mechanics are the standard that they do not in fact get to dictate what those standards are. We do. If a game is shit people will abandon it even if you poured millions into that product. The recent battlefield game is a prime example of this. Even something as guaranteed as a new battlefield game isn’t enough to overcome a shitty leadership team emphasizing the wrong things. The community bailed on their product and they’ll never get them back. All those millions in guaranteed revenue are gone forever.
GTA 5 does not look like a better product to me.
GTA V story mode was an excellent game, but it’s hard to realistically say a game from one genre is better than another, apples and oranges and all that.
GTA V’s online multiplayer, however, at this point is such a shitstain that I think it alone is enough to make the distinction clear.
but it’s hard to realistically say a game from one genre is better than another, apples and oranges and all that.
I agree.
It is. But only in so far as the content and scope of the game far surpasses anything a smaller developer could ever hope to accomplish. You may prefer one over the other, totally fine, but objectively speaking you get way more out of gta 5 content and scope wise than bg3.
As others point out gta online is a dumpster fire but it’s still massive and allows you to do endless amounts of things, racing, heists, owning property, running businesses, etc.
More content doesn't mean better, especially when that content isn't the kind that I find enjoyable.
This is just a reminder to an industry that is trying to tell us that pay to win mechanics are the standard that they do not in fact get to dictate what those standards are. We do.
Quoting for emphasis. We control the purse, we have the voting power of the wallet.
Not AAA devs, they're doing what they can. The problem is with the AAA CEOs
💯
When I read 'AAA devs' in this context I see it as 'AAA game development companies' not programers and artists working in them.
Not AAA devs, they’re doing what they can.
Blaming consumers, in this instance. You could well be right that the problem is internal but in that case that's where it needs to solved. Or if they want to get the support of consumers, be honest with their reasoning. Crying that the expectations of consumers are too high doesn't help at all. It just makes them seem out of touch with reality.
Blaming consumers
No, blaming CEOs and the c-suites
The Divinity games are some of my favorites ever made. It makes me giddy that BG3 is doing so well to embarrass big companies 😂
This is partly why I ponied up full price.
I want more games from Larian.
I bought the game 4 times.
Twice for me, and a copy for 2 of my friends.
Pretty cool seeing one of them log a ton of hours in it after working. Like, I gave them that happiness :')
They're scared. There's no excuse anymore. And people have become aware of it.
Elder Scrolls, Fallout, Assassin’s Creed, Diablo, Warcraft, Mass Effect, Dragon Age… these studios have VASTLY larger resources than Larian.
I wouldn't be surprised if the team that worked on Skyrim was significantly smaller than the Larian team that worked on BG3.
Perhaps? But Skyrim is also 12 years old. Whatever team is working in Elder Scrolls 6 is certainly not smaller than Larian's.
Skyrim had under 100 employees.
IMO the most important distinction is a game that puts play experience first vs profit.
I have no problem if games reached this via a similar model that Larian used here (lots of experienced staff, pre-built systems, 6 years of development, 3 years of expertly done early-access with a highly engaged player base) but they're not going to. They're going to implement more crunch, more abuse, more destruction of the few people who want to work in games in order to get there. And that's where I have the issue.
I want shorter games, with worse graphics, made by people who get paid more to do less. Because that's what's needed to make truly great games. People who are passionate, not burning themselves out just to barely make deadlines, make great games.
Sir... Socialism is already ruining this nation.and you are daring to propose communism?!
Sorry, I'm neurodivergent. Can't tell if this is sarcasm.
I'm not the person you're responding to, but the post looks sarcastic to me. Have a good day!
Not the person who said it, but yes, it's sarcasm
I want shorter games, with worse graphics, made by people who get paid more to do less.
Honestly that's an excellent summary.
Don't get me wrong BG3 is probably one of the best games I've ever played and I eventually want BG4 or whatever expansion/spin-off/sequel they want to make. However I waited 23 years between BG2 and BG3, I don't want to wait that long again, but I can wait.
But to your point I want good games. I don't need 100+ hour adventures. In general I don't want 100+ hour adventures. Those should be rare. I want games that I can finish (at a casual pace) in a weekend or two.
Portal 1? Braid? Both are short puzzle games that are absolutely fantastic.
Stanley Parable? Gone Home? Excellent story games. You can beat them in about as much time as it takes to watch a movie.
It's disappointing that AAA studios don't recognize this. I don't want a bloated game that takes 300 hours to experience most of it. I don't want a giant map. I want a good game. I want a small map filled with life, not a large one with soulless procedurally generated dungeons.
I'm just putting it out there that I have finished almost 3 different playthroughs and I would 300% purchase DLC.
If the initial game is a full game and satisfactorily so, I would gladly fork over more money for additional content.
DLC is not inherently bad. It's just the way most companies have done it is.
What's particularly notable about this well above average gaming year is that the clearly top two games so far aren't using state-of-the-art graphics.
Given how messy PC gaming has been lately, with a recent history of GPU shortages followed by an underwhelming new generation and some very poor game optimization, I wouldn't mind seeing a trend of game development slowing down on graphics tech for a bit.
We have to go back!
But also legitimately. Like remember how good games would get near the end of a console's lifecycle? Then a new console generation would drop and the games would look sharp, but also a bit wonky, until enough years has past, and thennn... another new console generation would drop, and the constraints would disappear again. Always too soon, I thought - just as the games were getting truly good again!
Heh, yes, I still have fond memories of the late 16-bit generation and early fifth-gen games that didn't get on board the 3D bandwagon. Sprite-based games started to look mighty sexy until everyone decided that untextured polygons were the way to go for a while. 😑
Always preferred Duke 3D to Quake. The later is way more sophisticated from the technical standpoint (though Build does allow some neat tricks) but Duke is just so vibrant and fun. Destructible environment, original weapons, large enemy variety and proper bosses... Meanwhile Quake is just... brown.
Educate a pleeb here, I've been out of the gaming loop. What's the notable exceptions of great games this year and what two that are not state-of-the-art graphics do you mean?
This thread's on Baldur's Gate 3, that's one of them. I should have specified the other of the two most highly-rated games this year; it's The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom. Both games are more or less running last-gen graphics tech and are ahead of the pack on review scores. Zelda looks good for a Switch game, though.
You could probably ask a dozen gaming enthusiasts and get a dozen different answers on why this year has been exceptional. I'd say it's because we have a lot of big releases from venerable franchises arriving all in the same year (Baldur's Gate is one, plus Diablo, Final Fantasy, Harry Potter, Resident Evil, Star Wars, Street Fighter). There are hits from new IPs like Cassette Beasts, Dave the Diver, Hi-Fi Rush, and maybe Starfield in a few weeks if it's not a disaster.
It's a nice mix of old and new worlds and plenty of surprises. On top of all that, it's only August. I think there's a sense that the industry is starting to leave the pandemic behind, too.
I don't think demanding quality games is inherently at odds with wanting studios to not abuse their workers. What we really should support is broad labor protections and labor unions for developers. Because clearly the AAA studios don't need the excuse of high demand for features from gamers in order to abuse their people since they have been doing that for years while churning out trash titles.
Completely agreed. The issue is that gamers™ aggressively advocate for better quality, and do not care about workplace abuse or worse products with more features. This creates the current feedback loop we have where games that are longer, have flashier features, and aren't finished at launch.
Labor unions and protections would be excellent, but isn't something that I, a non-game developer, can do much to advance, besides avocation.
and do not care about workplace abuse
I think the recent ActiBlizz situation proves that one incorrect.
Not saying that 100% of Gamers care, just saying it's not 0% of Gamers who care.
Selling a good product that people want is a hate crime against the tech industry
The most favorable reading I can give to the "don't expect this to be the new standard" lines is that BG3 Is special. It is an exceptional piece of art within the genre, and it will be difficult or impossible for other studios to replicate its appeal. Like, you can say that readers really enjoy The Hobbit, or The Expanse, or A Visit from the Goon Squad, but you shouldn't expect them to be the new standard. Few fantasy books since 1937 have been as good as The Hobbit, although a lot of them have imitated its characteristics.
Viewed that way, they're absolutely right. We're going to continue to get a bunch of buggy, derivative crap, and we'll keep paying for it because...what else are you going to do? Play Skyrim for the 47th time? 23rd run through Elden Ring?
I dont think I agree. Gaming darlings tend to be immitated, and I'm honestly here for it. Dark Souls led to a bunch of mostly shifty knock-offs with some gems. Same with Skyrim, Minecraft, Mario, Diablo, Stardew Valley, etc. I love turn-based strategy games, immersive sims, and narrative games, so I hope this inspires all sorts of knock-offs, but you're probably right that it will be rare in AAA unless the indie knockoffs sell great for a few years.
Why are they getting so much attention for it?
Nintendo does the same with BoTW and ToTK. Long dev cycles that releases a functional game without micro-transactions.
FromSoft does the same with most of their games. Where people actually beg them to release DLCs.
But no... it's Larion they seem to go after.
Nintendo is huge. FromSoft has their own cult. But Larion? What's can they blame there? Nothing. Most big studios that bitch about this is larger than Larion. Maybe because they are more scared that if Larion can do it. There's no excuse anymore.
Most of the Sony exclusives are the same. God of War, Spiderman, Ghost of Tsushima.
Just solid AAA single player games, no nickel and dime bullshit.
Every F2P model is predatory as fuck, and relies on taking advantage of whales over a prolonged period.
...but I paid full price for D4 and still got a half baked game with an invasive in-game shop.
Not to victim blame, but if you looked at everything Blizzard have done over the last 10 years, and thought "maybe this one will be different" then perhaps the problem is you.
Not to X, but...
[Proceeds to X]
[Proceeds to X]
Sometimes, if the subject is important enough, you just have to X.
Sure but don't lead by saying you are not going to do x.
I don't think this comment really deserved this discourse, it seems pretty clearly tongue in cheek to me.
Not everything needs to be so dire.
Don't forget the battle passes.
Ironically I'm less concerned with battle passes as long as they don't sell power. The actual mtx itself doesn't bother me, I've easily spent hundreds in path of exile. But I prefer to enjoy the game first, and then at some point decide that I want to support the devs, and then maybe I buy something.
Yeah it blows my mind how much I've spent on league supporter kits as well. Not sure if it is because I enjoy the game or I respect the business model.
I'm not against battle passes, but there are plenty of examples of how they fall under the predatory monetization category. Not selling power is hardly a justification that they aren't unethical.
I realized I had overdone it when two weeks in they were going to send me a free hoodie shipped from a different continent.
At least I ran out of things to buy there.
Dota 2 did it really well, it was and still is an amazing game, and you couldn't pay to get any gameplay advantage.
I sank a lot of money into it just to support such system.
I think it's due to the little guy making a huge wave that other people don't feel they're "allowed" to make. These other devs work on "AAA" companies working on big name titles from studios everyone has heard of so. But now a small, indie studio comes along with a grand slam and they don't like it kind of makes them look bad by comparison. Showing you can release a big complex game without it being an absolute buggy mess, doesn't need microtransactions, doesn't need to sell millions of copies to be considered a success, and isn't just a copy paste of the previous game with a handful of modifications made to slap a new "FOR SALE" label on it...
But now a small, indie studio comes along with a grand slam and they don’t like it kind of makes them look bad by comparison.
Larian is similar in size, if not significantly larger, than Bethesda when they made Skyrim.
Less established though. I'd say that Larian wasn't on most gamers' radar until Divinity Orginal Sin 2.
I think the "problem" for those people is that the game broke out of its bubble. nintendo, from soft and also larion up until now all had their own bubble of fans. Larion broke that mold and even people who have nothing to do with the genre celebrate it.
Critical mass has been achieved.
I agree with you, thing is: Nintendo produces Nintendo exclusives, so it doesn't affect the gaming space as much as other games might
I personally think this is because gaming journalism isn't real journalism. They don't actually care, they just want clicks and perceived relevancy when people repost their tweets to reddit
"They don’t actually care, they just want clicks and perceived relevancy when people repost their tweets to reddit"
Kinda sounds like real media to me then lol they all suck if they're major corporate media.
A lot of journalists do care, but they also have a job to do and a boss that tells them which articles to write.
Like I don't care about whatever business my company is competing in, but I'll keep working for them because they pay me.
but I’ll keep working for them because they pay me.
That's just it, you can move to a different company that has a better working situation in environment. You just have to be a brave enough to fight the inertia that keeps you where you're at.
And in fact, if you want your salary to steadily increase over your career, you're supposed to move from company to company every couple of years.
Yeah I'm thankful to have got that advice pretty early in my career. Generally get itchy feet around 3 years now.
There was plenty of distaste for Elden Ring when it came out -- devs at Ubisoft I believe ridiculed how the UI wasn't informative and such.
I think AAA studios are terrified because they're seeing just how much consumers value quality over quantity and MTX bullshit. Games that should be in self contained bubbles are now hitting mainstream and becoming absurdly popular.
Lmao Ubisoft of all folks should shut the fuck up about UI, they are literally the source of the meme about cluttered and overly complicated UI. If Ubisoft is complaining about a UI I have to automatically assume it is a good UI.
Also, if AAA developers have been paying attention for the last decade, they would know that consumers have valued quality and shown disdain for MTX since MTX started becoming pervasive. MTX overall can generate a lot of revenue, but it isnt sustainable, hence why there is always some sort of FOMO characteristic included with the MTX system, making things limited time and constantly shovelling low effort "new content" to fill out the MTX system.
They've been working for almost a generation now on changing the mindset of gamers as to what they should expect from a game, and here comes a really good game from a little known studio doing exactly what games used to expect before the mind changing was attempted.
The lesson here is you can trust most big Japanese publishers/developers and it's the opposite for American/European ones. Christ, Death Stranding was almost ruined by all the "subtle" product placements they put
Kojima got away with his product placement in mgs3 because nobody in the west knew calorie mate was a real product lol.
Would it be so bad if games didn't have insane budgets? Most of my favorite games from the past decade are from small studios operating on pizza and hope.
BG3 did have a pretty huge budget though. I would totally be fine if games took notes from BG3 but reduced scope a lot. Bioware used to make games similar to BG, but they stopped and now make garbage. The idea other studios can't make similar games is wrong. They can't make games this big usually though without publishers telling them they need to include microtransactions and other bullshit.
BioWare didn’t just make games similar to Baldur’s Gate, they created Baldur’s Gate.
Yep, you're right. I didn't realize they were a studio at that point. Yeah, they have no reason to complain about new expectations. They could have created BG3 if they had kept doing what they were known for, but EA and the money were too good...
Wasn't that Black Isle? Or had they already evolved into their future downfall? It's been a hot minute since I've last looked at BG credits.
Black Isle was the publisher, Bioware developed the game. Baldurs Gate lead to BG2, which lead to Neverwinter Nights, which lead to Knights of the Old Republic.
which lead to Knights of the Old Republic
Which lead to Mass Effect, don't forget
True, but IMO the link wasn't nearly as strong between KotoR and ME as any of the previous games in the link which were all clearly D&D based systems. ME1 had a lot in common with KotoR but there were some major deviations too as they moved away from the table top standard.
TIL Baldurs gate is the reason i hated the ending to ME3.
Kind of! Though if we are being entirely honest, the real thing to blame is the head writer being replaced and the dev time cut by almost a year.
Personally would have enjoyed it more if they went with the Biotics/Dark Energy that Drew Karpyshyn had put down groundwork for, rather than the AI subplot that Mac Walters hastily slapped together for ME3 that directly contradicted ME1 threads and subplots.
Lower budgets would probably be better. High budgets mean high risk, developers and publishers try to minimize that risk and you get bland games that try to cater to too many tastes. Movies suffer from the same problem. They get budgets in the hundreds of millions and you wonder what they spent it all for.
High budgets are killing the film industry. In the case of gaming, it plays a factor, but greed is probably the main issue. Most big budget AAA games in the past made large amounts of money even if they didn’t have universal appeal. Because companies realised that they could make large amounts of money off loot boxes, microtransactions, cash shops and battle passes, they started trying to funnel players into games, mainly so that players would buy things. That’s one of the main reasons the AAA industry is getting worse: games need to appeal to as many as possible, while coming out as fast as possible, all so that players will buy the overpriced in-game items endlessly shoved in players’ faces.
I love me some good AAA games and want them to stick around. But I think it would be much better if they were a bit fewer and further between, and the big studios shift to more regular AA games, and give their devs chances to do some more oddball stuff with even lower budgets. More expiremntation and risky projects can only enrich the industry.
You never know what those experiments can lead too. There will be a lot of failures however someone is going to look at the failure and realize what needs to be need to be tweaked.
Yep. The final fantsay series was a bunch of lads in an attic. Now those lads are legends.. with a fantasic legacy. Yet I'm still waiting for ES5 and GTA 6..
from small studios operating on pizza and hope.
And that's how it started.
You could give studios unlimited budgets and they'd still complain they don't have enough time / money to get things right. The rhetoric is that "games are just so complex nowadays" and that justifies their 4/5/6 year development periods.
I'm not seeing the complexity that warrants that type of long development period. The visual fidelity on some games is impressive, but is it actually worth that 5 year dev time?
Imagine whining about how people prefer to play good games that work on launch.
From what I gather, there is a real fear in develper spaces that executives will take the wrong lessons from BG3. They will want the same scope, choice, narrative, & mechanics but through crunch, shutting down smaller projects, & homogenized visual & narrative focus. IE all the shiny bits without the time, work culture, & creativity that came with creating BE3. It isn't developers just being pissy this is their way of trying to stop their idiot boss from ruining their current project or making massive projects without enough time or staff.
That's because these executives don't care about learning. They want examples that they can use to rationalize their shitty decisions.
They want money and everything else is ammo to use in that pursuit.
So the answer is for the ones who make nice things because of a nice system they have to just stop because the other crabs can't get out of the bucket. Maybe their beef should be with their idiot boss, not with the guys who do the work.
Whatever happened to companies learning from other's successes instead of trying to keep others down?
The above post isn't saying that Larian or other devs shouldn't make games like BG3. It's saying that we shouldn't expect the massive amount of content and options in BG3 for every game
My bad, I have interpreted it as apologetic for the people yelling at Larian for 'ruining it' for everyone.
I agree that we should not expect this sort of quality from everything, after all Gauss' curve applies universally and this is quite far from the mean as I see it. We would just maybe like... less shite.
But it's not like Larian are the first to raise the bar. I remember the days when Blizzard was an awesome company. Then I remember Bethesda being awesome. Now it's Larian on the spotlight. I may not have followed the news back when the others were good, but I don't remember such attitudes around as mentioned in the original post, to basically discredit instead of leaving it alone.
I mean, we didn't have nearly as much social media back then and a 24/7 news cycle that causes random tweets to be blown up into IGN articles. I think the initial tweet was just a random thought that got spun way out of proportion
It isn’t developers just being pissy this is their way of trying to stop their idiot boss from ruining their current project or making massive projects without enough time or staff.
Unions.
Also releasing on PC first is practically unheard of. It's usually the afterthought platform if it gets a release at all.
Yeah, to the OP in the posted tweet... I did put a lot of thought into it. If a game that's just $60 can do this, then all new games are measured against it. Go compete. If your business model is outdated, convince your investors to change or be downgraded to B tier game dev.
Don't come me, the consumer, complaining about your poor ability to hedge business markets. You saw BG3 in early access for 3 years, you knew it was coming.
Complaining about it having funding.... AAA.... lol. Thats the fucking point of AAA. Big fucking budget.
AAA companies: Makes bad game and releases apology promising to make good games now
Also AAA companies: We are not capable of making good games, stop expecting to much.
Remember fellow gamers, you hold the power of the purse, you get the final vote with your wallet.
If some studio head or developer manager tries to tell you that you have to accept micro transactions and such, just say no thank you, and move on.
There are plenty of other games from other good studios out there for you to give your hard-earned money to.
Dont say no thank you, give them the middle finger and tell everyone to not buy it
Dont say no thank you, give them the middle finger
You could also do both, for that slightly comedic type of reply. Keep them guessing.
New expectations? Lol. These were always the expectations!
That's what I don't get. These are expectations that I've had for years. The indie space has kinda proven that creativity will take a game a hell of a lot farther than cash ever will. With few exceptions I simply don't buy AAA games anymore because honestly I just don't expect the same level of effort will be put into making them.
How does it go?
I want smaller games, with lower quality graphics. Made by happier developers who are paid more to work less. And I'm not kidding!
I mean we can have large games with detailed graphics and have employees treated well. We just need to accept 10+ year timelines for releases on big games which I'm ok with as long as we get quality results and the team is treated well.
I follow star citizen though so I could be the weird one here lol
And then you need someone to foot the bill for all that. Preferrably ahead of time.
That's kinda how lucky Star Citizen got, but that's not a business model you can replicate a second time.
That's a valid point. As long as there's a publisher and investors we're more than likely never going to see what I suggested, I kinda forgot star citizen is what it is because it's funded by us.
It's always the same crunch time for employees and rushed buggy products to feed the investors from "AAA" corps. Hope we can push for some positive change :/
I can't understand why crunch time has become so normalised. There's no other software development project where constantly failing to plan for the needed time requirement would be accepted. Crunch is a sign of bad project management, it isn't normal.
But when it works, when that day comes, we’ll make a hell of a lot of money for the shareholders! Isn’t that nice?
At some point, people figured out that during a couple of weeks of mad rush right before a deadline, if you've got committed, well-rested employees who know they're going to get a rest afterwards, they tend to be much more productive than they normally are. Some bad managers only paid attention to part of that, and determined that eighty hour weeks are more than twice as productive as forty hour ones, and intentionally started inducing crunch. They somehow didn't notice that the third week of crunch is only about as productive as a regular week, and after that, it's way less productive as everyone's exhausted. Combine this with the fact that people with management knowledge tend to flee from the games industry rather than to it, and you end up with the software engineering industry's least effective managers running things with easily debunked dogma.
The main differences with Star Citizen are that it's
Funded in advance
Funded by people who have no say in how the product/company should work
Massively overfunded
This means, CIG has no pressure to ship soon or even at all (if the project fails, they have no liability). They also have nobody telling them what to with the money. They have already made their profit.
I am not knocking CIG for this situation, but if you put it like this, it's easy to see why for each CIG out there, there are tens of thousands of games on crowdfunding sites that either
Failed to raise funds
Failed to get a decent company/legal structure running with the money they raised
Failed to actually ever deliver anything in an usable state
Are just pure scams
So as a general business model rather than just an insane stroke of luck, I don't think this is a good option.
A business model that only earns money after release (like the classic publisher-funded development model) is bad for the obvious cash-grabby and buggy reasons, but at least it consistently delivers games. Contrary to the "earn money before you start development" model that is enabled by crowdfunding, which in general does not deliver games.
In my (not very educated) opinion, early access is probably the best middle ground. You start off with little initial funding required, but by the time you turn to the crowd, you already have a working prototype and company structure. That makes it much more likely for the game to eventually be released in a full version. This option obviously comes with its own downsides as well, but many of my favourite games have been small studios or even individuals who use early acces to fund development.
Dreaming of riding an army of unicorns to battle.
Does this include Hollow Knight? Because I want more of that. I can't wait for Silksong!
Hollow Knight is the definition of "Rockstar-level nonsense for scope"
I can't believe the large majority of it was made by two people. I have 70 hours in that game and still have a couple things I haven't beaten yet.
Also cannot wait for Silksong!
Here’s my thing: I don’t necessarily care what sort of game you make, I just want it to be feature-complete and technically solid (I.e. mostly bug-free). Whether that’s a small indie game or a massive AAA game, those two things should be true.
I think what most people find frustrating is that the in-game store is the most well developed part of most AAA releases nowadays, which often ship riddled with bugs.
BG3 has still been riddled with bugs for me and since it doesn't have MTX or a store or anything, it feels kinda worse. At least I know why the crap riddled with MTX is rife with issues; what is BG3's excuse?
I probably wouldn't mind the bugs so much if the whole game was shit. But the game is fucking awesome. I just want to play it without being frustrated by technical issues. 😩
I'm hoping that by the time the PS5 version launches, it'll be much smoother.
I actually agree with you. People praise BG3 as if it were the most perfect 10/10 video game in existence. Its far from it. It is riddled with bugs reaching from minor to game breaking. The best example is the very first few seconds of the game. The first thing the players are likely to interact with is the tadpole pool after awekening on the ship.
::: spoiler Minor spoiler
It explodes, knocking you back and causing damage.
:::
As someone who made a few characters and played the intro section a lot, the animation is often times bugged and confusing. And thats the first interaction a player has with the game.
A few seconds later you stand in front of a door. Usually the door opens and you can go through. But sometimes the opening animation doesn't play. This happened on my very first time playing and I couldn't figure out where to go, because my first instinct wasn't to clip through the closed door. Things like this are absolutely unacceptable in the tutorial area.
Even though they already have full controller support it is very clear why the console release is delayed. The console player base is expected to be a lot more casual and unless they iron out all the confusing bugs they run the risk of people being frustrated and dropping the game.
And then there are other major things.
Why is there no native option for 3rd person WASD movement even though it is fully implemented for controllers?
Why does only the controller get a search area function but the keyboard doesn't?
Why is there no camera sensitivity for controllers?
Why are there no deadzone settings for controller joysticks?
Why is there a 1 second delay on movement when using a controller?
Why can't I set the text size below 64px when using a controller?
Why in a game that has been in early access for so long and a world full of magic can't we change our characters appearance post creation? (I know it's announced but why just now?)
Why do we not have advanced difficulty settings? (I'd love the enemies to be smart like "tactitian" but not be unhittable bullet sponges.)
Why is every adult character so goddamn hot in this game? I need my blood in my brain.
Why can we select a player voice, if the player isn't voiced beyond some minor quips?
Why isn't there a random name generator for your character?
Why can't I shift + click multiple items or containers to queue them up for pickup or search?
Why do container windows open on top of each other or other inventory windows?
Why can't I rename containers in my inventory?
Why can't I filter out or hide wares in my inventory?
Why can't I sort or filter items during trading or in the party view?
Why do containers always open in a 5x2 grid instead of trying to fit all the items without scrolling?
Why can I skip the rolling animation but not the success-continue animation?
etc.
I know I'm nitpicking here, but for a game that is as highly praised as this, I expect it also to nail all those minor things that other games have already figured out already (some of which were even their own older titles). Especially because it was Early Access and they had a lot of user feedback. I see it times and times again that studios apparently throw out all their previous knowledge of videogames and seemingly start from scratch on every title, making small stupid mistakes that could have been easily avoided. It's like the research process for video mechanics and UI never consists of actually looking at other games.
So for me, it's a very pretty game, its a beautifully sounding game and even a very fun game. But nowhere near a 10/10. It's a 7/10 game. Fix the bugs to bump it up to 8/10 implement some QoL for 9/10 and release modding tools so the community can make it a 10/10.
Why is everyone so damn hot?
I can't say for anyone else, but Karlach is hot because of that infernal engine she has for a heart. :P
Why can't I sort or filter items during trading or in the party view?
You can on a controller. Press in the left stick. The fact the UI between a controller and the M&KB is so completely different and you get dumb differences like this is another amateur hour move. I've played entirely on controller, but from talking to other people and seeing my sister play on her laptop, the M&KB interface is garbage and offers for fewer options far some damn reason.
I know I’m nitpicking here, but for a game that is as highly praised as this, I expect it also to nail all those minor things that other games have already figured out already
You realize that smaller companies have to do triage and prioritize what they're working on, yes? Take bugs/enhancements in a certain order? And usually the major things get taken care of first before the minor things are.
Also, some of the things you ask for, they may just not agree with you as being needed in the game.
Have you submitted that list to them for their consideration, directly (Github, etc.)?
Edit: typo
Stupid question, but have you been letting Steam do game updates?
Unless you've changed the default settings, you have to let Steam do updates while not playing any games through Steam. By default it won't do any updates in the background.
Yes, everything updates automatically. I've gotten all the updates so far. Only a few of the changes made in any of them actually affected me. Most of the things I've experienced have yet to be addressed.
Most of the things I’ve experienced have yet to be addressed.
I was going to reply humorously with a comment along the lines of you should be moving from a technical to a spiritual solution, an exorcism perhaps, but I don't want to kick somebody when they're down, for the sake of comedy.
Wizards of the coast paid $0 to fund this game, that's why it says Larian in the publisher field on Steam and not WoTC or Hasbro.
Although they probably got some good sweet Nvidia dollars.
I think that one (HUGE) part of BG3's success is that it was in Early Access for, what, 2-3 years? During which it grew a dedicated modding scene, received a metric fuck-ton of feedback, and regularly dropped large content patches. This wasn't an average dev cycle, and I think it shows. In some ways, the Dev. Feedback and interactivity reminded me a lot of the way Warframe does dev interactions.
Yeah, I agree with that similarity to Warframe's level of developer interaction.
Sure, in the past they've been slower to respond to feedback about problems, and often times old things have fallen out of relevance because something else just outright does the same thing, and more, but better.
But as it is now, DE really seems to be prioritizing listening to feedback, almost exponentially so, and as an example, bringing things up to par with what they should be at the current level of the game, a concept that much more rarely got the implementation it deserved in years before.
And warframe has been rewarded with a practically methusalian lifespan for a game in its genre, I hope we see the same for baldurs gate 3 with a similar level of ongoing support and improvement.
Honestly, this kind of pleading from the other AAA developers is just making them look pathetic. Yes, it's reasonable not to expect BG3 for every AAA games, but it's not because of time and money, but simply because developers are just not always going to make lightning strike twice. But these devs have plenty of time and money and they look terrible in comparison to a dev that took it's time to make sure it was well polished before release.
Exactly. Every new game doesn't have to be an instant classic that breaks new ground. But they should be functional, playable, and have enough polish to be considered finished. That doesn't necessarily mean bug free, but we all know what a finished game looks like, and what one doesn't.
The worst one I've ever personally played was the Lego Hobbit game. My wife and I used to line up kamikaze shots and play Lego games, figuring a child and a drunk adult were about the same level. The game stops when Smaug flies out of the mountain. Roll credits. I guess the last movie did so poorly that they never bothered making the rest of the game.
For ages, AAA games were classed as such by brand recognition, not by quality. Inevitably, they devolved into being just a platform to sell microtransactions. The shareholders want their dividents and the CEO needs a new yacht with coke and hookers.
It's too easy to exploit the dopamine rush playing the new, official installment of a well-known series. Even if it's terrible, the customers get their joy by ranting about how trash the game is and how they hope the next one will be better. BG3 being an actual game does not change anything and will not reset expectations.
That's sad because TT's games were quite good, I think they hit their apex at Lego Marvel Superheroes 1. Awesome open world, a ton of characters, and lots of exploration in addition to the normal level quests.
The one thing that Shawn forgot to say is "Larian's boardrooms aren't filled with people who don't play video games!!"
It's mostly owned by Sven, who is obviously very passionate about video games, storytelling, and tactical rpgs.
It is exactly what I except going forward because, as that moron mentioned this is a fucking AAA game, not a Indy game.
AAA games developers absolutely have those resources and even more, so yes, they should have all of that.
Maybe we need to update the nomenclature. Software with loot boxes, pay to win mechanics, predatory gameplay loops, and storefront-first design should now be called “casinos”. They should have disclaimers about gambling and addiction in their load screen, have age restrictions, and should be forced to institute limits on what can be spent in a certain time frame.
Feature-complete software with zero storefronts of any kind would be allowed to brand themselves as “games”.
Better idea: just make that shit illegal.
That’ll happen when pigs fly.
Hell, when customers actually learn to have some self respect for themselves.
I guess pigs fly in Belgium and Netherlands
Fair but let me make a vain attempt to save face: Did that actually make an impact in the industry, given they’re small countries with not much customers.
It's not always about making a big impact. Sometimes you just need to set an example.
Not really for now, most games usually just skip releasing in banned countries. But let's hope EU will adopt this in near future
Oohh. I like this. I've been bothered by the rise of gambling in different packaging in the world over the last decade. We really should be acknowledging that gambling is different from gaming, separating them meaningfully. Are toy department shelves still full of child gambling reandom toy bullshit too? I haven't had reason or opportunity to pay attention to that for a few years.
I’m not sure about toys, but watching my son grow up with app stores has made me very aware of how so called “games” have been monetizing our children makes me want some real legislation and restrictions on what is legal to market to children. The “idle” category of games is just egregious. They’re a flimsy and thin veneer of game painted over a bank machine. AAA is not much better - they just have more complicated routes take your money.
Well Shawn. How about this is the new standard for AAA games and if you can't reach it than you are a AA studio at most.
Even more ironic. Larian started BG3 6 years ago, or when they were still arguably AA studio.
We should make sure to label games exactly like this. Beta at release? Depending on microtransactions? -> It's an AA game at most, no matter the production costs.
Who the f is Shawn, wtf is evolve? Why is every shitty game dev crying that other people make good games, without shame? Oh that's right, based on their releases, they have no shame.
He didn't have anyone's attention and he craves attention and now he has lots of attention, so I guess everything is coming up Milhouse as far as Shawn is concerned.
Who are these people? Seems like some randos if you ask me.
Those developers trying to shit on Larian need to cry and seethe more. Terribly incompetent people who can't create good games themselves, why not trying taking notes instead?
Keep up the great work Larian.
The devs are mostly not the problem with the state of AAA games today, it's the people telling them what to do in order to maximise profits.
Same as with most problems we face as a species, really.
But I was told every individual ruthlessly and insatiably acting solely out of greed for personal gain — regardless of ethics, morality, or empathy — was the greatest, most efficient, bestest, freedomest thing to have ever existed?
Why would corporate sociopaths lie? What could they po$$ibly have to gain?
Capitalism is the worst form of economics.
Except for all of the other ones that have been tried.
Those developers trying to shit on Larian need to cry and seethe more.
I can't find developers doing this. Seems like a mostly made up concern by overly sensitive people looking to be angry about something.
The picture in the OP is PR for a publishing company. There are many other accounts of people who work in the industry who are angry/jealous of Larian. You're probably just not looking in the right places.
This is the bad take management wants you to have.
Who in management exactly? As far as I know Larian is not responsible for the tweets aside from just making a good game.
I'm not talking about Larian, I'm talking about the studios who want to keep cranking out suppisedly AAA games that are little more than creatively bankrupt, dressed up vending machines.
Yeah, in that case I totally agree. It's just ineptitude shouting at excellence.
People have been saying this game is exciting because of the lack of mtx, but it seems to me that any big rpg gets a lot of attention. Eldan Ring got similar praise last year. Bioware was making these kinds of games fairly consistently about a decade ago and then stopped to make shit like Anthem. It's a design decision not a budget problem.
Microtransactions come with specific challenges. Specifically, you have to give the players a reason to pay them, and that's usually done by making the game purpously worse for those who don't pay.
Or the other trend these days, Wich is to remove content from the base game and sell it as dlc or just money-gate it even if it's on the base disk/release.
"these days" that's been going on for over a decade
Yeah, but some of us oldies still remember the before times when we just had 35 Sims 2 expansions.
I don't necessarily believe this to be universal. I've played plenty of games with cosmetic mtx that I can absolutely play without the desire or need to spend money.
Hear that Gamefreak, owner of the highest-grossing media franchise of all times?
They learned their lesson though. They don't need to put on any effort and people will still buy it.
I know and I fucking hate it. I was one of the fanboys defending them even through the first SwSh trailers, but the more they showed stuff the more it was clear it wasn’t the franchise I used to love anymore.
The next great Pokemon game won't be by Gamefreak, and it won't be called Pokemon. But your kids will love it.
Man I hope the next great Pokémon (even if it’s not pokémon) doesn’t take until I have kids to come out. I heard good stuff about Coromon but I’m not sure if it’s genuinely great or “great for an indie”.
Why are people pretending baulders gate is the only high selling game with no microtransactions as of late? Off the top of my head Elden Ring and Tears of the Kingdom both released in the last year or so, no microtransactions or dlc as of now.
They’re not. Most of the videos and articles I’ve read specifically mention Elden Ring and TotK as other examples.
I have a large backlog of games to play before I even think about buying anything new, but is this even a good game? Serious question because I know there has been a huge amount of press on it, but haven't watched any reviews yet (on purpose because I hate spoilers and don't want to be tempted with a new purchase yet).
Yes. Yes it is. Excellent story so far. Gameplay is the best of DnD mixed with the best part of Divinity Original Sin 2. Difficulty is maybe a bit harsh the first few levels when an encounter with a bad initiative can take you out before its your turn. It looks graphically good and runs fine on older graphic cards. The companions have interesting backstories and related quests.
I havent tested it in co-op yet.
I have encountered a few bugs: Actors missing in cutscenes. Money-stacks getting corrupted. The ugly pre-order clothes just disappearing after a patch. But nothing serious.
Co-op is excellent. Drop in/drop out works flawlessly, no lag. It even has LAN options in the year of our lord 2023. One issue is that a player can start an encounter without the others and people can miss out on story. All in all highly recommended.
Co-op is legit, only had a stuttering issue that we all experienced in a certain area. But we reloaded the save and it worked fine again
It looks graphically good and runs fine on older graphic cards.
Yes, but not older processors, apparently, as I found out. I sure as hell never expected a CRPG to be the first game that screams at me to get a better one.
It uses DND 5e as the underlying rules set. I hate DND 5e. It's a garbage system full of old bad ideas, and it has such tremendous brand awareness it sucks all the air out of the hobby space.
Baldur's Gate 3 is still an extremely good game in spite of all that.
That sounds promising, because like you I really really really do not like the DnD system. But to hear that the game is decent in spite of that makes me curious about trying it soon, TYVM. :)
Controlling 4 digital 5e characters in rapid succession feels very different from controlling 1 character in a tabletop setting. Idk if it's better or worse this way, but (to me) they're pretty distinct experiences so it's worth at least trying
Do you like old school CRPGs?
Do you like tabletop/pen and paper RPGs?
Do you have one to 3 friends to play with?
If the answer is yes to 2 of those, then I highly recommend it.
I'm not too fond of CRPGs and I'm hooked on this game.
It oozes excellent workmanship and appreciation for the genre/source material which makes it hard to resist.
It's alright.
Have you played Divinity: Original Sin 2? Because it's literally just that game with a D&D skin on it. If you liked D:OS2, or you're really into D&D/Forgotten Realms, then it's fine. If you were frustrated by certain things in D:OS2, they're probably not fixed here.
I have not played that game. In fact I haven't heard of it before.
I'm about halfway(?) and if the quality keeps up, this is going to be my favorite game of all time, beating out Elden Ring and Outer Wilds.
That's high praise!
If you approach it with a standard videogame attitude (get the strongest weapons and most powerful skills, steal everything that is worth good money and so on), then it is a solid game.
If you approach it as a simulated tabletop rpg game, it is fantastic. You can experiment with all sorts of things. For example: in one fight I was outnumbered and cornered in a small room, with enemies coming from outside. I pulled some furniture in front of the door to block the passage, threw some oil on the ground in the other side and lit it with a torch, then hid my characters behind the walls out of any projectile's path until I could fully heal them.
Unlike other games those weren't things that the devs put there specifically for this fight. There was no button prompt suggesting the furniture could be moved or anything like that. They just put a bunch of stuff in the world that can be interacted with in many ways depending on what sort of skill you have and leave it up to you to find a way to use them, or not. You can still min-max your stats and ignore all that. You won't even know you're missing anything.
Honestly I'd recommend watching someone play it to get an idea of if you like it. Steam also has the option to let you "borrow" someone's account so I'm sure if you have friends playing this you could ask. That's what I did and enjoyed it so much I ended up buying it.
If it doesn't immediately spark the interest to buy it, go ahead and wait for it to go on sale. It sounds like you may have buyers' remorse if it ends up not being your thing and you pay full price.
I NEVER pay full price! But if I hear of a game that sounds interesting I'll throw it on my wishlist and maybe buy it when it goes on sale.
That's the spirit!
Haven't played it, but been reading/watching a lot of reviews. Seems like they got a lot right and a few things wrong, still some early bugs but not nearly the amount that most releases have, some people complain about length (very long playthroughs might drag out for some, especially the slow combat). But I suspect many people will love or hate this game based on whether they like turn based combat.
I bought the game early access a couple years ago. The reason they got so few things wrong is they actually listened to community feedback from the early access. They made a lot of minor changes on things (from what I saw most of that was to make the game feel more like DND)
"what funding?"is a dumb question. all companies have funding. especially software. very few companies legit started in a basement and progressed to international status relying purely on profit and loss sheets.
It is not when replying to the comment. There was no funding for being a dnd game. They are simply lying for their point.
Just as an FYI, the user who posted "what funding?" Works for Larian; director of publishing.
The OP intimated they received funding from WotC to make the game. They didn't.
you are ignorant.. you don't understand what he's talking about.. they are both talking about VC funding.. that means Venture Capital, which you did not know.. for some reason you are here being ignorant and loud about something you do not understand..
You ain't wrong but why so smug?
Learn some tact if you are actually looking to educate people
maybe it's important, but i appreciate your feedback.. it's good for the discussion..
Larian recieved debt funding to found in 2009, late stage VC in 2011 (presumably to offset loan repayments), recieved ongoing support from Arkafund VC and has crowd funded every year 2013–2019. Tencent bought 3006 shares for 30% stake in either 2020 or '21 (not sure exact date).
this "dev" are really dumb.
you mean they got the D&D license for free?
Tencent owns 30% of Larian iirc, so most likely from them
Owned, unless you have proof they still do.
Love seeing you edit your comment and correct yourself/validate the other user's statement. Breathe of fresh air from the toxic doubling-down 99% of the time on reddit.
Interesting I didn't know that, how long have they owned 30%?
This post is a bit reminiscent of r/gamercirclejerk but at least your comment taught me something new and salvaged it
Time to kneel down and pray to our future Chinese Overlords, for they are everywhere and everything.
nah their demographics are doomed
Why?
Because they're having less babies than is needed to maintain or grow their population
2.1 babies/woman is about what's needed to maintain a population, China was at 1.09 last year
Some religious extremists try to argue abortion is bad, but really it's bad when we cut a person up into 1/10ths. Strangely silent, hmmm.
Chopping up babies has biblical precedent
their 1 Child per family policy for decades has left them with a gigantic pile of elderly and not nearly enough working age people to support them. not to mention the young people have no training on how to support their infrastructure or manufacturing tools.
I’ve also heard that they abort mostly female fetuses compared to male fetuses. Don’t know why, culture or something, but could also be a lie.
because if you can only have 1 child to support the family in the future you need to have the one that gets educated and paid. it went on for decades. if you search youtube for the word 'china' theres countless recent explanations of the various ways they are collapsing.
This doesn't even mention the gender ration disparity either that is going to hit even harder as well for them. China is gonna have even more issues in the next few decades
Birth rates falling way below replacement levels, AFAIK. Last number I heard was 1.09 or something
He should've stayed on VACATION, imho
If devs actually think all 800k active players + the ones who pirated it all play DND, then they have another guess coming. Most of them probably have never touched a Handbook
And they're staring to have Battle Passes have multiple tiers of cost such as in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 and NBA 2K24. What's next? Multiple battle passes at once like in the free to play Monster Legends? In $69.99 priced games? Where the battle passes cost at least $19.99 per month?
What funding?
Uh... Didn't WOTC commission and pay for the game? I read that they went to Larian, not the other way around.
Not correct Larian reached out to WOTC coast first to try get the licence after Divinity Original Sin but were turned down because they felt that they were too new. Was only after DOS2 that they got the license.
New? They’ve been around since the 90s. Original Sin was like the 5th or 6th Divinity game.
"what funding?" Bro you're kidding right?
They made a D&D video game. The most popular and successful board game ever made. They had BUCKETS of funding from wizards of the Coast for this. They also had a massive studio with more than 400 people working on it.
James Stephanie Sterling did a fantastic video about Baldur's Gate 3. Essentially, everything came together in just the right way for this game to be made. It's not responsible to call this the new standard in the same world where we vilify overwork and 'crunch-time', but that's not to say you shouldn't expect more from game developers. You absolutely should. But you should do so reasonably.
Other triple A devs have massive funding, a giant staff and other unlimited resources and they still can't make a game devoid of microtransactions or bugs. Are you stunned?
I hear tell that the “bro” is on the dev team, so he may know a thing or two.
They had BUCKETS of funding from wizards of the Coast for this. They also had a massive studio with more than 400 people working on it.
They had the IP; they did not receive a single cent from WotC. They funded the game with money from their previous games, and in fact, they paid WotC for the IP.
I'm pretty sure EA and Activision-Blizzard have similar or bigger budgets for their AAA games and they either make shit or microtransactions-filled games.
2K is huge and they always make NBA2K decent/good but full of terrible microtransactions
I'm no financial expert so maybe I'm mistaken in some figure, but the bottom line is WotC is not the only big (and growing) company, so this are nothing but excuses.
Ok, but what does that have to do with addressing the dude who claims the game had no funding implying it had a small budget when it didn't?
He's not saying anything about the MTX or lack thereof; he's calling out the idiot saying BG3 had no funding.
What does my answer have to do with that? I'm answering the post that I actually commented on, which says the game is great because:
They had BUCKETS of funding from wizards of the Coast
I'm saying others also have similar or bigger amounts of money and don't make a game like this.
I find it sad that if you make a decent game now you are praised. It's not that good. That's just how low the bar is now.
Now if they'd just make it an actual game rather than a story-heavy romp that should have been a movie instead. BG has always aspired to be a Western version of a JRPG, and it's terrible.
I don't celebrate mediocrity.
Is it actually mediocre tho?
Just ignore the day 1 DLC.
You consider DLC a microtransaction?
Edit: Maybe I'm just too old, but I thought microtransactions were something you get prompted to purchase while playing the game. Is that no longer the case?
Microtransactions are 'small' purchases made in a game (or via some kind of store that allows you to buy stuff to be used inside of a game).
DLC is any additional downloadable content that is not included with the game (so something like a day 1 patch wouldn't be considered DLC, I'd say).
All microtransations are DLC, but not all DLC are microtransactions, generally (before someone comes along with some kind of physical microtransaction or something I guess)
I personally just view microtransations as anything that isn't 'playable content'. So buying a mount from an in-game store would be a microtransaction, while buying an expansion wouldn't be. Map packs kind of blur the line in this instance, because one could argue that they're essentially 'world cosmetics', but its a hard and fast rule and not something I'd try to enforce as a law, ya know?
It's clear that there are multiple different definitions that people have for "microtransactions". I think it's safe to assume that larian has a definition similar to mine. No time in the game that I've noticed did I get prompted to buy the DLC. In fact, I didn't buy it; it seems early access people got it for free.
What day 1 DLC? The Deluxe edition cosmetic stuff?
That's called a micro transaction, yes.
That's a courtesy for people who didn't pre-order but want the dice cosmetic. It was originally a pre-order exclusive but they changed it when asked to.
"no additional purchases" their words, not mine.
This is a really stupid hill to die on my man
they're the one making the claims, not me.
But you are the one tilting at this windmill.
Just clarifying what you meant. I thought I missed something. DLC to my mind is like... an extra race or somthing a bit more relevant than purely cosmetic stuff. Not going to argue semantics here, fair enough to call that a micro transaction and it's certainly DLC.
"no additional purchases" their words, not mine.
I'm not even disagreeing with you and that quote didn't show up anywhere in this thread? But alright, you do you.
the developers made the claim.
Even excluding the cosmetics, this DLC includes the soundtrack. I haven't purchased it myself (yet), but I'd imagine that a soundtrack to a game with over 200 hours of cinematic would be rather extensive (again, I have not seen it, so I don't know). Even if it's only 30 to 40 minutes of music, at $10, that's at least on par with the cost of most albums anywhere else. I feel it's got to be more than only 30ish minutes of music, though, so, for the album alone the price seems legit.
Just to add more information about the sound track, it is 43 tracks in both MP3 and WAV formats. The runtime of those 43 tracks is 2:26:57.
What one of those items prevents you from having enjoyment in the game? You just start with a lil cool cosmetic cape. It's not a battle pass.
It's the soundtrack and some DSO2 cosmetics that everyone who bought the game during early access got for free. They're selling it to everyone else for $10.
Technically it's DLC, not MTX as MTX almost always entails individual purchases of items, usually in-game. It's more of a Collector's Edition than anything. That no one seems to care about, even the people who detest predatory practices.
There are items with in game power in that bundle.
Do you mean the Mask of the Shapeshifter? That allows, once per long rest, to change appearance to another random character. Effectively a Disguise Self cast.
There's also the dagger that's 4-7 weapon. But I replaced that before I even dealt with the goblin camp. There's so many magic items I wasn't worried about it.
The biggest coup is the hat and cape. They offer no bonuses but they look so fly I'm probably never taking them off.
Uhh.. today's AAA studios have THOUSANDS of employees, hundreds of millions of dollars in budgets, and huge IPs on which to draw. Elder Scrolls, Fallout, Assassin's Creed, Diablo, Warcraft, Mass Effect, Dragon Age... these studios have VASTLY larger resources than Larian. Like, an order of magnitude larger. This is gaslighting and whining. I'm not having it. Do better, AAA devs. Do a lot better.
That's why their games suck. Smaller teams and budgets make better products.
Well I wouldn’t say that exactly. GTA 5 had a huge budget and a huge team and it’s objectively a better product if you compare the two (which is only to say they’re both great games but the bigger budget game has and does more).
It’s a matter of the motivations of the developers and their financial backers. If your goal is to make an ok game that maximizes profit focused mechanics, most of these AAA developers are hitting the mark perfectly. If your focus is to make a good game like it seemed to be with the BG devs, they absolutely hit the mark and are being rewarded for it.
This is just a reminder to an industry that is trying to tell us that pay to win mechanics are the standard that they do not in fact get to dictate what those standards are. We do. If a game is shit people will abandon it even if you poured millions into that product. The recent battlefield game is a prime example of this. Even something as guaranteed as a new battlefield game isn’t enough to overcome a shitty leadership team emphasizing the wrong things. The community bailed on their product and they’ll never get them back. All those millions in guaranteed revenue are gone forever.
GTA 5 does not look like a better product to me.
GTA V story mode was an excellent game, but it’s hard to realistically say a game from one genre is better than another, apples and oranges and all that.
GTA V’s online multiplayer, however, at this point is such a shitstain that I think it alone is enough to make the distinction clear.
I agree.
It is. But only in so far as the content and scope of the game far surpasses anything a smaller developer could ever hope to accomplish. You may prefer one over the other, totally fine, but objectively speaking you get way more out of gta 5 content and scope wise than bg3.
As others point out gta online is a dumpster fire but it’s still massive and allows you to do endless amounts of things, racing, heists, owning property, running businesses, etc.
More content doesn't mean better, especially when that content isn't the kind that I find enjoyable.
Quoting for emphasis. We control the purse, we have the voting power of the wallet.
Not AAA devs, they're doing what they can. The problem is with the AAA CEOs
💯
When I read 'AAA devs' in this context I see it as 'AAA game development companies' not programers and artists working in them.
Blaming consumers, in this instance. You could well be right that the problem is internal but in that case that's where it needs to solved. Or if they want to get the support of consumers, be honest with their reasoning. Crying that the expectations of consumers are too high doesn't help at all. It just makes them seem out of touch with reality.
No, blaming CEOs and the c-suites
The Divinity games are some of my favorites ever made. It makes me giddy that BG3 is doing so well to embarrass big companies 😂
This is partly why I ponied up full price.
I want more games from Larian.
I bought the game 4 times.
Twice for me, and a copy for 2 of my friends.
Pretty cool seeing one of them log a ton of hours in it after working. Like, I gave them that happiness :')
They're scared. There's no excuse anymore. And people have become aware of it.
I wouldn't be surprised if the team that worked on Skyrim was significantly smaller than the Larian team that worked on BG3.
Perhaps? But Skyrim is also 12 years old. Whatever team is working in Elder Scrolls 6 is certainly not smaller than Larian's.
Skyrim had under 100 employees.
IMO the most important distinction is a game that puts play experience first vs profit.
I have no problem if games reached this via a similar model that Larian used here (lots of experienced staff, pre-built systems, 6 years of development, 3 years of expertly done early-access with a highly engaged player base) but they're not going to. They're going to implement more crunch, more abuse, more destruction of the few people who want to work in games in order to get there. And that's where I have the issue.
I want shorter games, with worse graphics, made by people who get paid more to do less. Because that's what's needed to make truly great games. People who are passionate, not burning themselves out just to barely make deadlines, make great games.
Sir... Socialism is already ruining this nation.and you are daring to propose communism?!
Sorry, I'm neurodivergent. Can't tell if this is sarcasm.
I'm not the person you're responding to, but the post looks sarcastic to me. Have a good day!
Not the person who said it, but yes, it's sarcasm
Honestly that's an excellent summary.
Don't get me wrong BG3 is probably one of the best games I've ever played and I eventually want BG4 or whatever expansion/spin-off/sequel they want to make. However I waited 23 years between BG2 and BG3, I don't want to wait that long again, but I can wait.
But to your point I want good games. I don't need 100+ hour adventures. In general I don't want 100+ hour adventures. Those should be rare. I want games that I can finish (at a casual pace) in a weekend or two.
Portal 1? Braid? Both are short puzzle games that are absolutely fantastic.
Stanley Parable? Gone Home? Excellent story games. You can beat them in about as much time as it takes to watch a movie.
It's disappointing that AAA studios don't recognize this. I don't want a bloated game that takes 300 hours to experience most of it. I don't want a giant map. I want a good game. I want a small map filled with life, not a large one with soulless procedurally generated dungeons.
I'm just putting it out there that I have finished almost 3 different playthroughs and I would 300% purchase DLC.
If the initial game is a full game and satisfactorily so, I would gladly fork over more money for additional content.
DLC is not inherently bad. It's just the way most companies have done it is.
What's particularly notable about this well above average gaming year is that the clearly top two games so far aren't using state-of-the-art graphics.
Given how messy PC gaming has been lately, with a recent history of GPU shortages followed by an underwhelming new generation and some very poor game optimization, I wouldn't mind seeing a trend of game development slowing down on graphics tech for a bit.
We have to go back!
But also legitimately. Like remember how good games would get near the end of a console's lifecycle? Then a new console generation would drop and the games would look sharp, but also a bit wonky, until enough years has past, and thennn... another new console generation would drop, and the constraints would disappear again. Always too soon, I thought - just as the games were getting truly good again!
Heh, yes, I still have fond memories of the late 16-bit generation and early fifth-gen games that didn't get on board the 3D bandwagon. Sprite-based games started to look mighty sexy until everyone decided that untextured polygons were the way to go for a while. 😑
Always preferred Duke 3D to Quake. The later is way more sophisticated from the technical standpoint (though Build does allow some neat tricks) but Duke is just so vibrant and fun. Destructible environment, original weapons, large enemy variety and proper bosses... Meanwhile Quake is just... brown.
Educate a pleeb here, I've been out of the gaming loop. What's the notable exceptions of great games this year and what two that are not state-of-the-art graphics do you mean?
This thread's on Baldur's Gate 3, that's one of them. I should have specified the other of the two most highly-rated games this year; it's The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom. Both games are more or less running last-gen graphics tech and are ahead of the pack on review scores. Zelda looks good for a Switch game, though.
You could probably ask a dozen gaming enthusiasts and get a dozen different answers on why this year has been exceptional. I'd say it's because we have a lot of big releases from venerable franchises arriving all in the same year (Baldur's Gate is one, plus Diablo, Final Fantasy, Harry Potter, Resident Evil, Star Wars, Street Fighter). There are hits from new IPs like Cassette Beasts, Dave the Diver, Hi-Fi Rush, and maybe Starfield in a few weeks if it's not a disaster.
It's a nice mix of old and new worlds and plenty of surprises. On top of all that, it's only August. I think there's a sense that the industry is starting to leave the pandemic behind, too.
I don't think demanding quality games is inherently at odds with wanting studios to not abuse their workers. What we really should support is broad labor protections and labor unions for developers. Because clearly the AAA studios don't need the excuse of high demand for features from gamers in order to abuse their people since they have been doing that for years while churning out trash titles.
Completely agreed. The issue is that gamers™ aggressively advocate for better quality, and do not care about workplace abuse or worse products with more features. This creates the current feedback loop we have where games that are longer, have flashier features, and aren't finished at launch.
Labor unions and protections would be excellent, but isn't something that I, a non-game developer, can do much to advance, besides avocation.
I think the recent ActiBlizz situation proves that one incorrect.
Not saying that 100% of Gamers care, just saying it's not 0% of Gamers who care.
Selling a good product that people want is a hate crime against the tech industry
The most favorable reading I can give to the "don't expect this to be the new standard" lines is that BG3 Is special. It is an exceptional piece of art within the genre, and it will be difficult or impossible for other studios to replicate its appeal. Like, you can say that readers really enjoy The Hobbit, or The Expanse, or A Visit from the Goon Squad, but you shouldn't expect them to be the new standard. Few fantasy books since 1937 have been as good as The Hobbit, although a lot of them have imitated its characteristics.
Viewed that way, they're absolutely right. We're going to continue to get a bunch of buggy, derivative crap, and we'll keep paying for it because...what else are you going to do? Play Skyrim for the 47th time? 23rd run through Elden Ring?
I dont think I agree. Gaming darlings tend to be immitated, and I'm honestly here for it. Dark Souls led to a bunch of mostly shifty knock-offs with some gems. Same with Skyrim, Minecraft, Mario, Diablo, Stardew Valley, etc. I love turn-based strategy games, immersive sims, and narrative games, so I hope this inspires all sorts of knock-offs, but you're probably right that it will be rare in AAA unless the indie knockoffs sell great for a few years.
Why are they getting so much attention for it?
Nintendo does the same with BoTW and ToTK. Long dev cycles that releases a functional game without micro-transactions.
FromSoft does the same with most of their games. Where people actually beg them to release DLCs.
But no... it's Larion they seem to go after.
Nintendo is huge. FromSoft has their own cult. But Larion? What's can they blame there? Nothing. Most big studios that bitch about this is larger than Larion. Maybe because they are more scared that if Larion can do it. There's no excuse anymore.
Most of the Sony exclusives are the same. God of War, Spiderman, Ghost of Tsushima.
Just solid AAA single player games, no nickel and dime bullshit.
Every F2P model is predatory as fuck, and relies on taking advantage of whales over a prolonged period.
...but I paid full price for D4 and still got a half baked game with an invasive in-game shop.
Not to victim blame, but if you looked at everything Blizzard have done over the last 10 years, and thought "maybe this one will be different" then perhaps the problem is you.
Not to X, but...
[Proceeds to X]
Sometimes, if the subject is important enough, you just have to X.
Sure but don't lead by saying you are not going to do x.
I don't think this comment really deserved this discourse, it seems pretty clearly tongue in cheek to me.
Not everything needs to be so dire.
Don't forget the battle passes.
Ironically I'm less concerned with battle passes as long as they don't sell power. The actual mtx itself doesn't bother me, I've easily spent hundreds in path of exile. But I prefer to enjoy the game first, and then at some point decide that I want to support the devs, and then maybe I buy something.
Yeah it blows my mind how much I've spent on league supporter kits as well. Not sure if it is because I enjoy the game or I respect the business model.
I'm not against battle passes, but there are plenty of examples of how they fall under the predatory monetization category. Not selling power is hardly a justification that they aren't unethical.
I realized I had overdone it when two weeks in they were going to send me a free hoodie shipped from a different continent.
At least I ran out of things to buy there.
Dota 2 did it really well, it was and still is an amazing game, and you couldn't pay to get any gameplay advantage.
I sank a lot of money into it just to support such system.
I think it's due to the little guy making a huge wave that other people don't feel they're "allowed" to make. These other devs work on "AAA" companies working on big name titles from studios everyone has heard of so. But now a small, indie studio comes along with a grand slam and they don't like it kind of makes them look bad by comparison. Showing you can release a big complex game without it being an absolute buggy mess, doesn't need microtransactions, doesn't need to sell millions of copies to be considered a success, and isn't just a copy paste of the previous game with a handful of modifications made to slap a new "FOR SALE" label on it...
Larian is similar in size, if not significantly larger, than Bethesda when they made Skyrim.
Less established though. I'd say that Larian wasn't on most gamers' radar until Divinity Orginal Sin 2.
"AAA" in price tag only.
(Content may vary. Please purchase premium battle pass to see more details.)
You're not referring to Larion as a small indie studio right? They are not a small indie studio.
I think the "problem" for those people is that the game broke out of its bubble. nintendo, from soft and also larion up until now all had their own bubble of fans. Larion broke that mold and even people who have nothing to do with the genre celebrate it.
Critical mass has been achieved.
I agree with you, thing is: Nintendo produces Nintendo exclusives, so it doesn't affect the gaming space as much as other games might
I personally think this is because gaming journalism isn't real journalism. They don't actually care, they just want clicks and perceived relevancy when people repost their tweets to reddit
"They don’t actually care, they just want clicks and perceived relevancy when people repost their tweets to reddit"
Kinda sounds like real media to me then lol they all suck if they're major corporate media.
A lot of journalists do care, but they also have a job to do and a boss that tells them which articles to write.
Like I don't care about whatever business my company is competing in, but I'll keep working for them because they pay me.
That's just it, you can move to a different company that has a better working situation in environment. You just have to be a brave enough to fight the inertia that keeps you where you're at.
And in fact, if you want your salary to steadily increase over your career, you're supposed to move from company to company every couple of years.
Yeah I'm thankful to have got that advice pretty early in my career. Generally get itchy feet around 3 years now.
There was plenty of distaste for Elden Ring when it came out -- devs at Ubisoft I believe ridiculed how the UI wasn't informative and such.
I think AAA studios are terrified because they're seeing just how much consumers value quality over quantity and MTX bullshit. Games that should be in self contained bubbles are now hitting mainstream and becoming absurdly popular.
Lmao Ubisoft of all folks should shut the fuck up about UI, they are literally the source of the meme about cluttered and overly complicated UI. If Ubisoft is complaining about a UI I have to automatically assume it is a good UI.
Also, if AAA developers have been paying attention for the last decade, they would know that consumers have valued quality and shown disdain for MTX since MTX started becoming pervasive. MTX overall can generate a lot of revenue, but it isnt sustainable, hence why there is always some sort of FOMO characteristic included with the MTX system, making things limited time and constantly shovelling low effort "new content" to fill out the MTX system.
They've been working for almost a generation now on changing the mindset of gamers as to what they should expect from a game, and here comes a really good game from a little known studio doing exactly what games used to expect before the mind changing was attempted.
The lesson here is you can trust most big Japanese publishers/developers and it's the opposite for American/European ones. Christ, Death Stranding was almost ruined by all the "subtle" product placements they put
Kojima got away with his product placement in mgs3 because nobody in the west knew calorie mate was a real product lol.
Would it be so bad if games didn't have insane budgets? Most of my favorite games from the past decade are from small studios operating on pizza and hope.
BG3 did have a pretty huge budget though. I would totally be fine if games took notes from BG3 but reduced scope a lot. Bioware used to make games similar to BG, but they stopped and now make garbage. The idea other studios can't make similar games is wrong. They can't make games this big usually though without publishers telling them they need to include microtransactions and other bullshit.
BioWare didn’t just make games similar to Baldur’s Gate, they created Baldur’s Gate.
Yep, you're right. I didn't realize they were a studio at that point. Yeah, they have no reason to complain about new expectations. They could have created BG3 if they had kept doing what they were known for, but EA and the money were too good...
Wasn't that Black Isle? Or had they already evolved into their future downfall? It's been a hot minute since I've last looked at BG credits.
Black Isle was the publisher, Bioware developed the game. Baldurs Gate lead to BG2, which lead to Neverwinter Nights, which lead to Knights of the Old Republic.
Which lead to Mass Effect, don't forget
True, but IMO the link wasn't nearly as strong between KotoR and ME as any of the previous games in the link which were all clearly D&D based systems. ME1 had a lot in common with KotoR but there were some major deviations too as they moved away from the table top standard.
TIL Baldurs gate is the reason i hated the ending to ME3.
Kind of! Though if we are being entirely honest, the real thing to blame is the head writer being replaced and the dev time cut by almost a year.
Personally would have enjoyed it more if they went with the Biotics/Dark Energy that Drew Karpyshyn had put down groundwork for, rather than the AI subplot that Mac Walters hastily slapped together for ME3 that directly contradicted ME1 threads and subplots.
Lower budgets would probably be better. High budgets mean high risk, developers and publishers try to minimize that risk and you get bland games that try to cater to too many tastes. Movies suffer from the same problem. They get budgets in the hundreds of millions and you wonder what they spent it all for.
High budgets are killing the film industry. In the case of gaming, it plays a factor, but greed is probably the main issue. Most big budget AAA games in the past made large amounts of money even if they didn’t have universal appeal. Because companies realised that they could make large amounts of money off loot boxes, microtransactions, cash shops and battle passes, they started trying to funnel players into games, mainly so that players would buy things. That’s one of the main reasons the AAA industry is getting worse: games need to appeal to as many as possible, while coming out as fast as possible, all so that players will buy the overpriced in-game items endlessly shoved in players’ faces.
I love me some good AAA games and want them to stick around. But I think it would be much better if they were a bit fewer and further between, and the big studios shift to more regular AA games, and give their devs chances to do some more oddball stuff with even lower budgets. More expiremntation and risky projects can only enrich the industry.
You never know what those experiments can lead too. There will be a lot of failures however someone is going to look at the failure and realize what needs to be need to be tweaked.
Yep. The final fantsay series was a bunch of lads in an attic. Now those lads are legends.. with a fantasic legacy. Yet I'm still waiting for ES5 and GTA 6..
And that's how it started.
You could give studios unlimited budgets and they'd still complain they don't have enough time / money to get things right. The rhetoric is that "games are just so complex nowadays" and that justifies their 4/5/6 year development periods.
I'm not seeing the complexity that warrants that type of long development period. The visual fidelity on some games is impressive, but is it actually worth that 5 year dev time?
Imagine whining about how people prefer to play good games that work on launch.
From what I gather, there is a real fear in develper spaces that executives will take the wrong lessons from BG3. They will want the same scope, choice, narrative, & mechanics but through crunch, shutting down smaller projects, & homogenized visual & narrative focus. IE all the shiny bits without the time, work culture, & creativity that came with creating BE3. It isn't developers just being pissy this is their way of trying to stop their idiot boss from ruining their current project or making massive projects without enough time or staff.
That's because these executives don't care about learning. They want examples that they can use to rationalize their shitty decisions.
They want money and everything else is ammo to use in that pursuit.
So the answer is for the ones who make nice things because of a nice system they have to just stop because the other crabs can't get out of the bucket. Maybe their beef should be with their idiot boss, not with the guys who do the work.
Whatever happened to companies learning from other's successes instead of trying to keep others down?
The above post isn't saying that Larian or other devs shouldn't make games like BG3. It's saying that we shouldn't expect the massive amount of content and options in BG3 for every game
My bad, I have interpreted it as apologetic for the people yelling at Larian for 'ruining it' for everyone.
I agree that we should not expect this sort of quality from everything, after all Gauss' curve applies universally and this is quite far from the mean as I see it. We would just maybe like... less shite.
But it's not like Larian are the first to raise the bar. I remember the days when Blizzard was an awesome company. Then I remember Bethesda being awesome. Now it's Larian on the spotlight. I may not have followed the news back when the others were good, but I don't remember such attitudes around as mentioned in the original post, to basically discredit instead of leaving it alone.
I mean, we didn't have nearly as much social media back then and a 24/7 news cycle that causes random tweets to be blown up into IGN articles. I think the initial tweet was just a random thought that got spun way out of proportion
Unions.
Also releasing on PC first is practically unheard of. It's usually the afterthought platform if it gets a release at all.
Yeah, to the OP in the posted tweet... I did put a lot of thought into it. If a game that's just $60 can do this, then all new games are measured against it. Go compete. If your business model is outdated, convince your investors to change or be downgraded to B tier game dev.
Don't come me, the consumer, complaining about your poor ability to hedge business markets. You saw BG3 in early access for 3 years, you knew it was coming.
Complaining about it having funding.... AAA.... lol. Thats the fucking point of AAA. Big fucking budget.
Yeah, don't expect funding for AAA games!
Wait...
To the contrary, they had to pay to have the IP
AAA companies: Makes bad game and releases apology promising to make good games now
Also AAA companies: We are not capable of making good games, stop expecting to much.
Remember fellow gamers, you hold the power of the purse, you get the final vote with your wallet.
If some studio head or developer manager tries to tell you that you have to accept micro transactions and such, just say no thank you, and move on.
There are plenty of other games from other good studios out there for you to give your hard-earned money to.
Dont say no thank you, give them the middle finger and tell everyone to not buy it
You could also do both, for that slightly comedic type of reply. Keep them guessing.
New expectations? Lol. These were always the expectations!
That's what I don't get. These are expectations that I've had for years. The indie space has kinda proven that creativity will take a game a hell of a lot farther than cash ever will. With few exceptions I simply don't buy AAA games anymore because honestly I just don't expect the same level of effort will be put into making them.
How does it go?
I want smaller games, with lower quality graphics. Made by happier developers who are paid more to work less. And I'm not kidding!
I mean we can have large games with detailed graphics and have employees treated well. We just need to accept 10+ year timelines for releases on big games which I'm ok with as long as we get quality results and the team is treated well.
I follow star citizen though so I could be the weird one here lol
And then you need someone to foot the bill for all that. Preferrably ahead of time.
That's kinda how lucky Star Citizen got, but that's not a business model you can replicate a second time.
That's a valid point. As long as there's a publisher and investors we're more than likely never going to see what I suggested, I kinda forgot star citizen is what it is because it's funded by us.
It's always the same crunch time for employees and rushed buggy products to feed the investors from "AAA" corps. Hope we can push for some positive change :/
I can't understand why crunch time has become so normalised. There's no other software development project where constantly failing to plan for the needed time requirement would be accepted. Crunch is a sign of bad project management, it isn't normal.
But when it works, when that day comes, we’ll make a hell of a lot of money for the shareholders! Isn’t that nice?
At some point, people figured out that during a couple of weeks of mad rush right before a deadline, if you've got committed, well-rested employees who know they're going to get a rest afterwards, they tend to be much more productive than they normally are. Some bad managers only paid attention to part of that, and determined that eighty hour weeks are more than twice as productive as forty hour ones, and intentionally started inducing crunch. They somehow didn't notice that the third week of crunch is only about as productive as a regular week, and after that, it's way less productive as everyone's exhausted. Combine this with the fact that people with management knowledge tend to flee from the games industry rather than to it, and you end up with the software engineering industry's least effective managers running things with easily debunked dogma.
The main differences with Star Citizen are that it's
This means, CIG has no pressure to ship soon or even at all (if the project fails, they have no liability). They also have nobody telling them what to with the money. They have already made their profit.
I am not knocking CIG for this situation, but if you put it like this, it's easy to see why for each CIG out there, there are tens of thousands of games on crowdfunding sites that either
So as a general business model rather than just an insane stroke of luck, I don't think this is a good option.
A business model that only earns money after release (like the classic publisher-funded development model) is bad for the obvious cash-grabby and buggy reasons, but at least it consistently delivers games. Contrary to the "earn money before you start development" model that is enabled by crowdfunding, which in general does not deliver games.
In my (not very educated) opinion, early access is probably the best middle ground. You start off with little initial funding required, but by the time you turn to the crowd, you already have a working prototype and company structure. That makes it much more likely for the game to eventually be released in a full version. This option obviously comes with its own downsides as well, but many of my favourite games have been small studios or even individuals who use early acces to fund development.
Dreaming of riding an army of unicorns to battle.
Does this include Hollow Knight? Because I want more of that. I can't wait for Silksong!
Hollow Knight is the definition of "Rockstar-level nonsense for scope"
I can't believe the large majority of it was made by two people. I have 70 hours in that game and still have a couple things I haven't beaten yet.
Also cannot wait for Silksong!
Here’s my thing: I don’t necessarily care what sort of game you make, I just want it to be feature-complete and technically solid (I.e. mostly bug-free). Whether that’s a small indie game or a massive AAA game, those two things should be true.
I think what most people find frustrating is that the in-game store is the most well developed part of most AAA releases nowadays, which often ship riddled with bugs.
BG3 has still been riddled with bugs for me and since it doesn't have MTX or a store or anything, it feels kinda worse. At least I know why the crap riddled with MTX is rife with issues; what is BG3's excuse?
I probably wouldn't mind the bugs so much if the whole game was shit. But the game is fucking awesome. I just want to play it without being frustrated by technical issues. 😩
I'm hoping that by the time the PS5 version launches, it'll be much smoother.
I actually agree with you. People praise BG3 as if it were the most perfect 10/10 video game in existence. Its far from it. It is riddled with bugs reaching from minor to game breaking. The best example is the very first few seconds of the game. The first thing the players are likely to interact with is the tadpole pool after awekening on the ship. ::: spoiler Minor spoiler It explodes, knocking you back and causing damage. :::
As someone who made a few characters and played the intro section a lot, the animation is often times bugged and confusing. And thats the first interaction a player has with the game.
A few seconds later you stand in front of a door. Usually the door opens and you can go through. But sometimes the opening animation doesn't play. This happened on my very first time playing and I couldn't figure out where to go, because my first instinct wasn't to clip through the closed door. Things like this are absolutely unacceptable in the tutorial area.
Even though they already have full controller support it is very clear why the console release is delayed. The console player base is expected to be a lot more casual and unless they iron out all the confusing bugs they run the risk of people being frustrated and dropping the game.
And then there are other major things.
I know I'm nitpicking here, but for a game that is as highly praised as this, I expect it also to nail all those minor things that other games have already figured out already (some of which were even their own older titles). Especially because it was Early Access and they had a lot of user feedback. I see it times and times again that studios apparently throw out all their previous knowledge of videogames and seemingly start from scratch on every title, making small stupid mistakes that could have been easily avoided. It's like the research process for video mechanics and UI never consists of actually looking at other games.
So for me, it's a very pretty game, its a beautifully sounding game and even a very fun game. But nowhere near a 10/10. It's a 7/10 game. Fix the bugs to bump it up to 8/10 implement some QoL for 9/10 and release modding tools so the community can make it a 10/10.
I can't say for anyone else, but Karlach is hot because of that infernal engine she has for a heart. :P
You can on a controller. Press in the left stick. The fact the UI between a controller and the M&KB is so completely different and you get dumb differences like this is another amateur hour move. I've played entirely on controller, but from talking to other people and seeing my sister play on her laptop, the M&KB interface is garbage and offers for fewer options far some damn reason.
You realize that smaller companies have to do triage and prioritize what they're working on, yes? Take bugs/enhancements in a certain order? And usually the major things get taken care of first before the minor things are.
Also, some of the things you ask for, they may just not agree with you as being needed in the game.
Have you submitted that list to them for their consideration, directly (Github, etc.)?
Edit: typo
Stupid question, but have you been letting Steam do game updates?
Unless you've changed the default settings, you have to let Steam do updates while not playing any games through Steam. By default it won't do any updates in the background.
Yes, everything updates automatically. I've gotten all the updates so far. Only a few of the changes made in any of them actually affected me. Most of the things I've experienced have yet to be addressed.
I was going to reply humorously with a comment along the lines of you should be moving from a technical to a spiritual solution, an exorcism perhaps, but I don't want to kick somebody when they're down, for the sake of comedy.
Cry some more, corpos.
Wizards of the coast paid $0 to fund this game, that's why it says Larian in the publisher field on Steam and not WoTC or Hasbro.
Although they probably got some good sweet Nvidia dollars.
I think that one (HUGE) part of BG3's success is that it was in Early Access for, what, 2-3 years? During which it grew a dedicated modding scene, received a metric fuck-ton of feedback, and regularly dropped large content patches. This wasn't an average dev cycle, and I think it shows. In some ways, the Dev. Feedback and interactivity reminded me a lot of the way Warframe does dev interactions.
Yeah, I agree with that similarity to Warframe's level of developer interaction.
Sure, in the past they've been slower to respond to feedback about problems, and often times old things have fallen out of relevance because something else just outright does the same thing, and more, but better.
But as it is now, DE really seems to be prioritizing listening to feedback, almost exponentially so, and as an example, bringing things up to par with what they should be at the current level of the game, a concept that much more rarely got the implementation it deserved in years before.
And warframe has been rewarded with a practically methusalian lifespan for a game in its genre, I hope we see the same for baldurs gate 3 with a similar level of ongoing support and improvement.
Honestly, this kind of pleading from the other AAA developers is just making them look pathetic. Yes, it's reasonable not to expect BG3 for every AAA games, but it's not because of time and money, but simply because developers are just not always going to make lightning strike twice. But these devs have plenty of time and money and they look terrible in comparison to a dev that took it's time to make sure it was well polished before release.
Exactly. Every new game doesn't have to be an instant classic that breaks new ground. But they should be functional, playable, and have enough polish to be considered finished. That doesn't necessarily mean bug free, but we all know what a finished game looks like, and what one doesn't.
The worst one I've ever personally played was the Lego Hobbit game. My wife and I used to line up kamikaze shots and play Lego games, figuring a child and a drunk adult were about the same level. The game stops when Smaug flies out of the mountain. Roll credits. I guess the last movie did so poorly that they never bothered making the rest of the game.
For ages, AAA games were classed as such by brand recognition, not by quality. Inevitably, they devolved into being just a platform to sell microtransactions. The shareholders want their dividents and the CEO needs a new yacht with coke and hookers.
It's too easy to exploit the dopamine rush playing the new, official installment of a well-known series. Even if it's terrible, the customers get their joy by ranting about how trash the game is and how they hope the next one will be better. BG3 being an actual game does not change anything and will not reset expectations.
That's sad because TT's games were quite good, I think they hit their apex at Lego Marvel Superheroes 1. Awesome open world, a ton of characters, and lots of exploration in addition to the normal level quests.
The one thing that Shawn forgot to say is "Larian's boardrooms aren't filled with people who don't play video games!!"
It's mostly owned by Sven, who is obviously very passionate about video games, storytelling, and tactical rpgs.
It is exactly what I except going forward because, as that moron mentioned this is a fucking AAA game, not a Indy game.
AAA games developers absolutely have those resources and even more, so yes, they should have all of that.
Maybe we need to update the nomenclature. Software with loot boxes, pay to win mechanics, predatory gameplay loops, and storefront-first design should now be called “casinos”. They should have disclaimers about gambling and addiction in their load screen, have age restrictions, and should be forced to institute limits on what can be spent in a certain time frame. Feature-complete software with zero storefronts of any kind would be allowed to brand themselves as “games”.
Better idea: just make that shit illegal.
That’ll happen when pigs fly.
Hell, when customers actually learn to have some self respect for themselves.
I guess pigs fly in Belgium and Netherlands
Fair but let me make a vain attempt to save face: Did that actually make an impact in the industry, given they’re small countries with not much customers.
It's not always about making a big impact. Sometimes you just need to set an example.
Not really for now, most games usually just skip releasing in banned countries. But let's hope EU will adopt this in near future
Oohh. I like this. I've been bothered by the rise of gambling in different packaging in the world over the last decade. We really should be acknowledging that gambling is different from gaming, separating them meaningfully. Are toy department shelves still full of child gambling reandom toy bullshit too? I haven't had reason or opportunity to pay attention to that for a few years.
I’m not sure about toys, but watching my son grow up with app stores has made me very aware of how so called “games” have been monetizing our children makes me want some real legislation and restrictions on what is legal to market to children. The “idle” category of games is just egregious. They’re a flimsy and thin veneer of game painted over a bank machine. AAA is not much better - they just have more complicated routes take your money.
Well Shawn. How about this is the new standard for AAA games and if you can't reach it than you are a AA studio at most.
Even more ironic. Larian started BG3 6 years ago, or when they were still arguably AA studio.
We should make sure to label games exactly like this. Beta at release? Depending on microtransactions? -> It's an AA game at most, no matter the production costs.
Who the f is Shawn, wtf is evolve? Why is every shitty game dev crying that other people make good games, without shame? Oh that's right, based on their releases, they have no shame.
He didn't have anyone's attention and he craves attention and now he has lots of attention, so I guess everything is coming up Milhouse as far as Shawn is concerned.
Who are these people? Seems like some randos if you ask me.
Those developers trying to shit on Larian need to cry and seethe more. Terribly incompetent people who can't create good games themselves, why not trying taking notes instead?
Keep up the great work Larian.
The devs are mostly not the problem with the state of AAA games today, it's the people telling them what to do in order to maximise profits.
Same as with most problems we face as a species, really.
But I was told every individual ruthlessly and insatiably acting solely out of greed for personal gain — regardless of ethics, morality, or empathy — was the greatest, most efficient, bestest, freedomest thing to have ever existed?
Why would corporate sociopaths lie? What could they po$$ibly have to gain?
Capitalism is the worst form of economics.
Except for all of the other ones that have been tried.
I can't find developers doing this. Seems like a mostly made up concern by overly sensitive people looking to be angry about something.
The picture in the OP is PR for a publishing company. There are many other accounts of people who work in the industry who are angry/jealous of Larian. You're probably just not looking in the right places.
This entire story was started by game developers on social media (Twitter) complaining about consumer expectations in the wake of Baldur's Gate 3.
This is the bad take management wants you to have.
Who in management exactly? As far as I know Larian is not responsible for the tweets aside from just making a good game.
I'm not talking about Larian, I'm talking about the studios who want to keep cranking out suppisedly AAA games that are little more than creatively bankrupt, dressed up vending machines.
Yeah, in that case I totally agree. It's just ineptitude shouting at excellence.
People have been saying this game is exciting because of the lack of mtx, but it seems to me that any big rpg gets a lot of attention. Eldan Ring got similar praise last year. Bioware was making these kinds of games fairly consistently about a decade ago and then stopped to make shit like Anthem. It's a design decision not a budget problem.
Microtransactions come with specific challenges. Specifically, you have to give the players a reason to pay them, and that's usually done by making the game purpously worse for those who don't pay.
Or the other trend these days, Wich is to remove content from the base game and sell it as dlc or just money-gate it even if it's on the base disk/release.
"these days" that's been going on for over a decade
Yeah, but some of us oldies still remember the before times when we just had 35 Sims 2 expansions.
I don't necessarily believe this to be universal. I've played plenty of games with cosmetic mtx that I can absolutely play without the desire or need to spend money.
Hear that Gamefreak, owner of the highest-grossing media franchise of all times?
They learned their lesson though. They don't need to put on any effort and people will still buy it.
I know and I fucking hate it. I was one of the fanboys defending them even through the first SwSh trailers, but the more they showed stuff the more it was clear it wasn’t the franchise I used to love anymore.
The next great Pokemon game won't be by Gamefreak, and it won't be called Pokemon. But your kids will love it.
Man I hope the next great Pokémon (even if it’s not pokémon) doesn’t take until I have kids to come out. I heard good stuff about Coromon but I’m not sure if it’s genuinely great or “great for an indie”.
Why are people pretending baulders gate is the only high selling game with no microtransactions as of late? Off the top of my head Elden Ring and Tears of the Kingdom both released in the last year or so, no microtransactions or dlc as of now.
They’re not. Most of the videos and articles I’ve read specifically mention Elden Ring and TotK as other examples.
I have a large backlog of games to play before I even think about buying anything new, but is this even a good game? Serious question because I know there has been a huge amount of press on it, but haven't watched any reviews yet (on purpose because I hate spoilers and don't want to be tempted with a new purchase yet).
Yes. Yes it is. Excellent story so far. Gameplay is the best of DnD mixed with the best part of Divinity Original Sin 2. Difficulty is maybe a bit harsh the first few levels when an encounter with a bad initiative can take you out before its your turn. It looks graphically good and runs fine on older graphic cards. The companions have interesting backstories and related quests.
I havent tested it in co-op yet.
I have encountered a few bugs: Actors missing in cutscenes. Money-stacks getting corrupted. The ugly pre-order clothes just disappearing after a patch. But nothing serious.
Co-op is excellent. Drop in/drop out works flawlessly, no lag. It even has LAN options in the year of our lord 2023. One issue is that a player can start an encounter without the others and people can miss out on story. All in all highly recommended.
Co-op is legit, only had a stuttering issue that we all experienced in a certain area. But we reloaded the save and it worked fine again
Yes, but not older processors, apparently, as I found out. I sure as hell never expected a CRPG to be the first game that screams at me to get a better one.
It uses DND 5e as the underlying rules set. I hate DND 5e. It's a garbage system full of old bad ideas, and it has such tremendous brand awareness it sucks all the air out of the hobby space.
Baldur's Gate 3 is still an extremely good game in spite of all that.
That sounds promising, because like you I really really really do not like the DnD system. But to hear that the game is decent in spite of that makes me curious about trying it soon, TYVM. :)
Controlling 4 digital 5e characters in rapid succession feels very different from controlling 1 character in a tabletop setting. Idk if it's better or worse this way, but (to me) they're pretty distinct experiences so it's worth at least trying
Do you like old school CRPGs?
Do you like tabletop/pen and paper RPGs?
Do you have one to 3 friends to play with?
If the answer is yes to 2 of those, then I highly recommend it.
I'm not too fond of CRPGs and I'm hooked on this game. It oozes excellent workmanship and appreciation for the genre/source material which makes it hard to resist.
It's alright.
Have you played Divinity: Original Sin 2? Because it's literally just that game with a D&D skin on it. If you liked D:OS2, or you're really into D&D/Forgotten Realms, then it's fine. If you were frustrated by certain things in D:OS2, they're probably not fixed here.
I have not played that game. In fact I haven't heard of it before.
I'm about halfway(?) and if the quality keeps up, this is going to be my favorite game of all time, beating out Elden Ring and Outer Wilds.
That's high praise!
If you approach it with a standard videogame attitude (get the strongest weapons and most powerful skills, steal everything that is worth good money and so on), then it is a solid game.
If you approach it as a simulated tabletop rpg game, it is fantastic. You can experiment with all sorts of things. For example: in one fight I was outnumbered and cornered in a small room, with enemies coming from outside. I pulled some furniture in front of the door to block the passage, threw some oil on the ground in the other side and lit it with a torch, then hid my characters behind the walls out of any projectile's path until I could fully heal them.
Unlike other games those weren't things that the devs put there specifically for this fight. There was no button prompt suggesting the furniture could be moved or anything like that. They just put a bunch of stuff in the world that can be interacted with in many ways depending on what sort of skill you have and leave it up to you to find a way to use them, or not. You can still min-max your stats and ignore all that. You won't even know you're missing anything.
Honestly I'd recommend watching someone play it to get an idea of if you like it. Steam also has the option to let you "borrow" someone's account so I'm sure if you have friends playing this you could ask. That's what I did and enjoyed it so much I ended up buying it.
If it doesn't immediately spark the interest to buy it, go ahead and wait for it to go on sale. It sounds like you may have buyers' remorse if it ends up not being your thing and you pay full price.
I NEVER pay full price! But if I hear of a game that sounds interesting I'll throw it on my wishlist and maybe buy it when it goes on sale.
That's the spirit!
Haven't played it, but been reading/watching a lot of reviews. Seems like they got a lot right and a few things wrong, still some early bugs but not nearly the amount that most releases have, some people complain about length (very long playthroughs might drag out for some, especially the slow combat). But I suspect many people will love or hate this game based on whether they like turn based combat.
I bought the game early access a couple years ago. The reason they got so few things wrong is they actually listened to community feedback from the early access. They made a lot of minor changes on things (from what I saw most of that was to make the game feel more like DND)
"what funding?"is a dumb question. all companies have funding. especially software. very few companies legit started in a basement and progressed to international status relying purely on profit and loss sheets.
It is not when replying to the comment. There was no funding for being a dnd game. They are simply lying for their point.
Just as an FYI, the user who posted "what funding?" Works for Larian; director of publishing.
The OP intimated they received funding from WotC to make the game. They didn't.
you are ignorant.. you don't understand what he's talking about.. they are both talking about VC funding.. that means Venture Capital, which you did not know.. for some reason you are here being ignorant and loud about something you do not understand..
You ain't wrong but why so smug?
Learn some tact if you are actually looking to educate people
maybe it's important, but i appreciate your feedback.. it's good for the discussion..
Larian recieved debt funding to found in 2009, late stage VC in 2011 (presumably to offset loan repayments), recieved ongoing support from Arkafund VC and has crowd funded every year 2013–2019. Tencent bought 3006 shares for 30% stake in either 2020 or '21 (not sure exact date).
this "dev" are really dumb.
you mean they got the D&D license for free?
Tencent owns 30% of Larian iirc, so most likely from them
Owned, unless you have proof they still do.
Love seeing you edit your comment and correct yourself/validate the other user's statement. Breathe of fresh air from the toxic doubling-down 99% of the time on reddit.
Interesting I didn't know that, how long have they owned 30%?
This post is a bit reminiscent of r/gamercirclejerk but at least your comment taught me something new and salvaged it
Not sure, at least since 2020 https://twitter.com/GamerTrader1/status/1431899588324175873
Well someone posted a screenshot on Twitter so it must be true...
Okay but an actual source?
Or is this a "trust me bro" thing
https://ie.globaldatabase.com/company/larian-group-holdings-limited#div_shareholders
☝️ This guy Sources!
A source on Lemmy? Don't be ridiculous!
Time to kneel down and pray to our future Chinese Overlords, for they are everywhere and everything.
nah their demographics are doomed
Why?
Because they're having less babies than is needed to maintain or grow their population
2.1 babies/woman is about what's needed to maintain a population, China was at 1.09 last year
Some religious extremists try to argue abortion is bad, but really it's bad when we cut a person up into 1/10ths. Strangely silent, hmmm.
Chopping up babies has biblical precedent
their 1 Child per family policy for decades has left them with a gigantic pile of elderly and not nearly enough working age people to support them. not to mention the young people have no training on how to support their infrastructure or manufacturing tools.
I’ve also heard that they abort mostly female fetuses compared to male fetuses. Don’t know why, culture or something, but could also be a lie.
because if you can only have 1 child to support the family in the future you need to have the one that gets educated and paid. it went on for decades. if you search youtube for the word 'china' theres countless recent explanations of the various ways they are collapsing.
This doesn't even mention the gender ration disparity either that is going to hit even harder as well for them. China is gonna have even more issues in the next few decades
Birth rates falling way below replacement levels, AFAIK. Last number I heard was 1.09 or something
He should've stayed on VACATION, imho
If devs actually think all 800k active players + the ones who pirated it all play DND, then they have another guess coming. Most of them probably have never touched a Handbook
And they're staring to have Battle Passes have multiple tiers of cost such as in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 and NBA 2K24. What's next? Multiple battle passes at once like in the free to play Monster Legends? In $69.99 priced games? Where the battle passes cost at least $19.99 per month?
Uh... Didn't WOTC commission and pay for the game? I read that they went to Larian, not the other way around.
Not correct Larian reached out to WOTC coast first to try get the licence after Divinity Original Sin but were turned down because they felt that they were too new. Was only after DOS2 that they got the license.
New? They’ve been around since the 90s. Original Sin was like the 5th or 6th Divinity game.
"what funding?" Bro you're kidding right?
They made a D&D video game. The most popular and successful board game ever made. They had BUCKETS of funding from wizards of the Coast for this. They also had a massive studio with more than 400 people working on it.
James Stephanie Sterling did a fantastic video about Baldur's Gate 3. Essentially, everything came together in just the right way for this game to be made. It's not responsible to call this the new standard in the same world where we vilify overwork and 'crunch-time', but that's not to say you shouldn't expect more from game developers. You absolutely should. But you should do so reasonably.
Other triple A devs have massive funding, a giant staff and other unlimited resources and they still can't make a game devoid of microtransactions or bugs. Are you stunned?
I hear tell that the “bro” is on the dev team, so he may know a thing or two.
They had the IP; they did not receive a single cent from WotC. They funded the game with money from their previous games, and in fact, they paid WotC for the IP.
I'm pretty sure EA and Activision-Blizzard have similar or bigger budgets for their AAA games and they either make shit or microtransactions-filled games.
2K is huge and they always make NBA2K decent/good but full of terrible microtransactions
Nintendo is huge and look at Pokemon Scarlet and Violet.
Reportedly, Wizards of the coast made around 1.3billion in revenue, while EA made around 7billion, and Activision-Blizzard made around 1.5billion.
I'm no financial expert so maybe I'm mistaken in some figure, but the bottom line is WotC is not the only big (and growing) company, so this are nothing but excuses.
Ok, but what does that have to do with addressing the dude who claims the game had no funding implying it had a small budget when it didn't?
He's not saying anything about the MTX or lack thereof; he's calling out the idiot saying BG3 had no funding.
What does my answer have to do with that? I'm answering the post that I actually commented on, which says the game is great because:
I'm saying others also have similar or bigger amounts of money and don't make a game like this.
I find it sad that if you make a decent game now you are praised. It's not that good. That's just how low the bar is now.
Now if they'd just make it an actual game rather than a story-heavy romp that should have been a movie instead. BG has always aspired to be a Western version of a JRPG, and it's terrible.
I don't celebrate mediocrity.
Is it actually mediocre tho?
Just ignore the day 1 DLC.
You consider DLC a microtransaction?
Edit: Maybe I'm just too old, but I thought microtransactions were something you get prompted to purchase while playing the game. Is that no longer the case?
Microtransactions are 'small' purchases made in a game (or via some kind of store that allows you to buy stuff to be used inside of a game).
DLC is any additional downloadable content that is not included with the game (so something like a day 1 patch wouldn't be considered DLC, I'd say).
All microtransations are DLC, but not all DLC are microtransactions, generally (before someone comes along with some kind of physical microtransaction or something I guess)
I personally just view microtransations as anything that isn't 'playable content'. So buying a mount from an in-game store would be a microtransaction, while buying an expansion wouldn't be. Map packs kind of blur the line in this instance, because one could argue that they're essentially 'world cosmetics', but its a hard and fast rule and not something I'd try to enforce as a law, ya know?
It's clear that there are multiple different definitions that people have for "microtransactions". I think it's safe to assume that larian has a definition similar to mine. No time in the game that I've noticed did I get prompted to buy the DLC. In fact, I didn't buy it; it seems early access people got it for free.
What day 1 DLC? The Deluxe edition cosmetic stuff?
That's called a micro transaction, yes.
That's a courtesy for people who didn't pre-order but want the dice cosmetic. It was originally a pre-order exclusive but they changed it when asked to.
"no additional purchases" their words, not mine.
This is a really stupid hill to die on my man
they're the one making the claims, not me.
But you are the one tilting at this windmill.
Just clarifying what you meant. I thought I missed something. DLC to my mind is like... an extra race or somthing a bit more relevant than purely cosmetic stuff. Not going to argue semantics here, fair enough to call that a micro transaction and it's certainly DLC.
"no additional purchases" their words, not mine.
I'm not even disagreeing with you and that quote didn't show up anywhere in this thread? But alright, you do you.
the developers made the claim.
Even excluding the cosmetics, this DLC includes the soundtrack. I haven't purchased it myself (yet), but I'd imagine that a soundtrack to a game with over 200 hours of cinematic would be rather extensive (again, I have not seen it, so I don't know). Even if it's only 30 to 40 minutes of music, at $10, that's at least on par with the cost of most albums anywhere else. I feel it's got to be more than only 30ish minutes of music, though, so, for the album alone the price seems legit.
Just to add more information about the sound track, it is 43 tracks in both MP3 and WAV formats. The runtime of those 43 tracks is 2:26:57.
What one of those items prevents you from having enjoyment in the game? You just start with a lil cool cosmetic cape. It's not a battle pass.
It's the soundtrack and some DSO2 cosmetics that everyone who bought the game during early access got for free. They're selling it to everyone else for $10.
Technically it's DLC, not MTX as MTX almost always entails individual purchases of items, usually in-game. It's more of a Collector's Edition than anything. That no one seems to care about, even the people who detest predatory practices.
There are items with in game power in that bundle.
Do you mean the Mask of the Shapeshifter? That allows, once per long rest, to change appearance to another random character. Effectively a Disguise Self cast.
There's also the dagger that's 4-7 weapon. But I replaced that before I even dealt with the goblin camp. There's so many magic items I wasn't worried about it.
The biggest coup is the hat and cape. They offer no bonuses but they look so fly I'm probably never taking them off.