Baldur's Gate 3 Twitter Tease

tunatime

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Messages
3,235
It's eaither going to be amazing or they know it sucks to put out that little info ......
 

Tengis

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Jun 11, 2003
Messages
4,865
Jesus lawd. I like, cant even. I havent been excited about a game being announced in a long time.
 

socK

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 25, 2004
Messages
3,747
Divinity 2 pretty much fucking ruled so I'm pretty sure they won't fuck this up

Hopefully
 

GhostCow

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
368
These guys can't even decide between rtwp or turn based. I don't have high hopes for this game. They'll probably go with turnbased, which I hate, and so far it looks like development is a clusterfuck
 

Delicieuxz

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
1,044
These guys can't even decide between rtwp or turn based. I don't have high hopes for this game. They'll probably go with turnbased, which I hate, and so far it looks like development is a clusterfuck
Baldur's Gate is not only an iconic RTwP series, but it is also the game that invented the genre. It would be sacrelige to turn it into a TB game. If Larian want to make a D:OS game, they should just do that. If they don't want to make a Baldur's Gate game, then they shouldn't. A BG III game with TB instead of RTwP would be GB in name only, exploiting its brand and fanbase to make a D:OS clone.

I think, and I hope, that Larian have a lot more integrity than to do that.
 

GhostCow

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
368
Baldur's Gate is not only an iconic RTwP series, but it is also the game that invented the genre. It would be sacrelige to turn it into a TB game. If Larian want to make a D:OS game, they should just do that. If they don't want to make a Baldur's Gate game, then they shouldn't. A BG III game with TB instead of RTwP would be GB in name only, exploiting its brand and fanbase to make a D:OS clone.

I think, and I hope, that Larian have a lot more integrity than to do that.
It's probably going to be BG in name only anyway. I think they are just using BG as marketing term. I doubt it'll continue the story or have anything to do with the bhaalspawn. I think in this case Baldur's Gate just means Forgotten Realms and maybe you'll see the city.
 

jfreund

Gawd
Joined
Sep 3, 2006
Messages
975
Baldur's Gate is not only an iconic RTwP series, but it is also the game that invented the genre. It would be sacrelige to turn it into a TB game. If Larian want to make a D:OS game, they should just do that. If they don't want to make a Baldur's Gate game, then they shouldn't. A BG III game with TB instead of RTwP would be GB in name only, exploiting its brand and fanbase to make a D:OS clone.

I think, and I hope, that Larian have a lot more integrity than to do that.
It happened to Fallout.
 

GhostCow

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
368
Eh, I don't define games by their playstyle. Fun is fun.

Do I dislike new fallout? Sure. Do I understand why ppl like it? Sure. I don't tell people "go play another game".
The difference is that game is already out. I don't want anyone memeing turn based into reality while BG3 is still in development. Nothing personal.
 

Axman

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
2,627
Everything I've read about this to-date says that it will be 5E. Although it was optional, BG and BGII (and IWD and PT) had turn-based modes and were turn-based even if you played in real-time.
 

GhostCow

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
368
Everything I've read about this to-date says that it will be 5E. Although it was optional, BG and BGII (and IWD and PT) had turn-based modes and were turn-based even if you played in real-time.
BG and BG2 did not have turn based modes. They had auto-pause options which isn't even close. They weren't turn based in the rtwp mode either. You had to wait a tick between actions and the characters would do a swing animation to fill the space in between but that's not the same as being turn based
 

PhaseNoise

2[H]4U
Joined
May 11, 2005
Messages
2,363
BG and BG2 did not have turn based modes. They had auto-pause options which isn't even close. They weren't turn based in the rtwp mode either. You had to wait a tick between actions and the characters would do a swing animation to fill the space in between but that's not the same as being turn based
I believe it was just meant to be based upon the ideas of the tabletop game. Fighters get X attacks per Round. Spells take a varying amount of time to cast.

I thought the real-time-with-pause worked very well. The only thing I didn't like was the pathfinding. My god. Those idiots would find a way to be blocked if they had to run across the map, borrow a chair, put it in their way, then take a little soujorn to explore Mayan ruins while 5 other people were screaming "You must gather your party before venturing forth".

If they make a game 8/10 of either game (or even the Icewind games) but improve pathfinding I will pay 120 bucks on the spot.
 

Falkentyne

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 19, 2000
Messages
1,592
Just as bad as the pathfinding were the AOE spell indicators which were NOT in the original releases. Blasting half your players with fireballs because you didn't know the range of the explosion was just so much fun...

I heard they were only added in the Enhanced Editions. A bit pointless if you already beat the original versions.
 

Aireoth

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
3,236
Baldur's Gate is not only an iconic RTwP series, but it is also the game that invented the genre. It would be sacrelige to turn it into a TB game. If Larian want to make a D:OS game, they should just do that. If they don't want to make a Baldur's Gate game, then they shouldn't. A BG III game with TB instead of RTwP would be GB in name only, exploiting its brand and fanbase to make a D:OS clone.

I think, and I hope, that Larian have a lot more integrity than to do that.
lol, thinking Baldur’s Gate is anything more than a shell of its former CRPG glory.

larian’s game will be great compared to the series ending note of Dark Alliance.
 
Last edited:

Axman

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
2,627
They had auto-pause options which isn't even close.
It exactly the same when you set the game to auto-pause at the end of every round.

The game was about as close as any of the D&D games came to the PNP rules with actions, movement, and combat taking place in rounds and turns. All of the spells with duration directly reference this.
 

GhostCow

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
368
It exactly the same when you set the game to auto-pause at the end of every round.

The game was about as close as any of the D&D games came to the PNP rules with actions, movement, and combat taking place in rounds and turns. All of the spells with duration directly reference this.
If everyone can take perform an action at the same time that's not turn based my guy. I started to say that would be phase based but it's not even phase based because enemies and PCs can take actions at the same time. It's based on the PnP rules and they got as close as they could but it's still a real time crpg. Having a cooldown between actions is not the same thing as being turn based. That's just how they translated the rules. You don't sit and count to 6 between actions when you're doing the pnp do you?

Rounds and ticks in BG are measurements of real time not actual turns.
 
Last edited:

Axman

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
2,627
If everyone can take perform an action at the same time that's not turn based my guy.
They don't happen at the same time, everything has a speed, with 10 .6-second ticks per 6-second round and 10 rounds per turn. Actions take place in order of initiative modified by their speed and magical effects.

You can see this in-game if you tell a character with multiple attacks per round by letting him attack, then move, then attack again; the next attack won't happen until the next round starts.
 

Delicieuxz

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
1,044
lol, thinking Baldur’s Gate is anything more than a shell of its former CRPG glory.

larian’s game will be great compared to the series ending note of Dark Alliance.
Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance is a spin-off series and not a part of the main Baldur's Gate series. Just like how Battlefield Bad Company is a spin-off series of the main Battlefield series.

Since Larian's game is Baldur's Gate III, it is continuing the main series and should remain true to the identity and characteristics of the main series, which vitally includes the RTwP combat system that was invented for the series.
 

GhostCow

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
368
They don't happen at the same time, everything has a speed, with 10 .6-second ticks per 6-second round and 10 rounds per turn. Actions take place in order of initiative modified by their speed and magical effects.

You can see this in-game if you tell a character with multiple attacks per round by letting him attack, then move, then attack again; the next attack won't happen until the next round starts.
I don't think you're understanding what I'm saying. Everyone on the field can take an action at the same time. That's not turn based. Yes you have to do things in sets of rounds but during that round everyone can do an action at the same time. Cooldowns between actions is not the same thing as turns.

If I paused the game and set two mages to cast magic missile they will both start casting and finish their spell at the same time after you unpause. In the context of a crpg turn based would mean one casts then the other.

Your not going to try to tell me that the temple of elemental evil or divinity original sin is the same system as BG are you? Those are turn based games.
 
Last edited:

Axman

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
2,627
It's still turn-based, it's that every increment of the turn in Baldur's Gate is much finer than in games like Final Fantasy Tactics where each character completes a full turn before continuing on to the next character. Even in the more traditional turn-based RPGs it's a common mechanic to have some actions take multiple turns to take effect, where other characters can take their turns before the longer action completes.

They're both turn-based, just on different scales.
 

GhostCow

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
368
You're arguing nitpicky semantics. Rtwp and turn based are two different things. That's why those terms exist. The point is that I don't want a game that plays like toee or d: os. I want something that plays like baldur's gate
 

PhaseNoise

2[H]4U
Joined
May 11, 2005
Messages
2,363
It's not turn based, it's quantized real-time. Things are broken down into time intervals for actions, but it flows together and all toons run simultaneously. This is quite different than D:OS, Gold Box games, XCom, etc which have each toon performing all its actions in one spurt, serially. Both are cool, but they are very different styles to play and manage.

The real point is whatever we call it, I think most would prefer BG3 play and feel more like BG1 and 2 than other titles. I like those other ones too, but am itching for more of the classic BG and Icewind style.
 

Aireoth

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
3,236
Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance is a spin-off series and not a part of the main Baldur's Gate series. Just like how Battlefield Bad Company is a spin-off series of the main Battlefield series.

Since Larian's game is Baldur's Gate III, it is continuing the main series and should remain true to the identity and characteristics of the main series, which vitally includes the RTwP combat system that was invented for the series.

Maybe I am just old, but they are going to make the game they are going to make, I will likely enjoy regardless of the combat system as Larian puts heart into their games.

The last Baldur’s Gate game was almost 20 years ago, I don’t expect a 2020/21 game to play like a late 90’s to 2000 game.
 

GhostCow

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 13, 2005
Messages
368
Maybe I am just old, but they are going to make the game they are going to make, I will likely enjoy regardless of the combat system as Larian puts heart into their games.

The last Baldur’s Gate game was almost 20 years ago, I don’t expect a 2020/21 game to play like a late 90’s to 2000 game.
You realize that Pillars of Eternity is the same kind of game and came out in 2015 right? There's a market for that type of gameplay. Graphics become outdated but gameplay never does.
 

NightReaver

[H]Lite
Joined
Apr 20, 2017
Messages
103
You realize that Pillars of Eternity is the same kind of game and came out in 2015 right? There's a market for that type of gameplay. Graphics become outdated but gameplay never does.
Yet PoE 2 brought in a turn based mode as an option that turned out to be very popular. BG, like PoE, is defined by story, setting, characters, etc as a RPG. Same thing with BG3. If by some chance it comes out as turn based instead of RTwP, I'd be willing to bet most people will not care one bit as long as the RPG elements are on point and the gameplay is smooth.

At the end of the day most ppl just want a fun game, as new Fallout showed. I understand, when FO3 came out, I decided to myself "That isn't Fallout". But I also realized that it doesn't matter what I think, so screw it. At least I can still go back and play FO2 whenever I want :D

Sorry, I know your posts aren't like this, but man you just gotta roll your eyes at the long winded rants on the Steam forums about "Oh if this isn't RTwP, it's gonna fail so hard!". When clearly history shows that a good game is rarely affected by gameplay shifts. As long as it's done in a fun way.



Who knows, maybe we'll get a PoE2 and get both systems as a choice :D
 

Comixbooks

Ignore Me
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Messages
14,443
I'm just happy this game is on Steam They could of showed a screenshot or something.
So maybe in Feburary they will show something I'll take anything they throw at us.
 

Axman

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
2,627
When clearly history shows that a good game is rarely affected by gameplay shifts. As long as it's done in a fun way.
That would be a huge mistake. There are two reasons BGIII needs to follow BG, in particular light of the EE remakes, in terms of gameplay.

First is that BG saved D&D, at least in video game form, by being true to the PNP rules while delivering a convincing enough real time experience. Without BG 3E wouldn't have been the success it was, and all of Hasbro/Wizards wouldn't exist the way it does today. D&D is in a slump following the disaterous 4E release. 4E was a continuation of D20, not a D&D game. 5E is what 4E should have been.

BGIII is supposed to be a 5E game and it needs to do the same for D&D to PNP gaming and video games what BG did 20 years ago. If the gameplay doesn't merge PNP and video game experiences then it won't be a success.

Secondly it has to be accessible and cross-platform. It needs to be simple enough to play on iOS as it is PC. While the original BG wasn't very resource-intensive, the series is now victim to the success of EE. A new game will have to be playable on all the devices the EE were ported to, and that means similar interfaces leading to an overlap in gameplay.

If BGIII diverges from this it will not be considered a real sequel nor will it have the same kind of cross-platform (including PNP) success that the original and EE games have had.
 

Comixbooks

Ignore Me
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Messages
14,443
I'm worried the game will have big Cartoon faces and graphics and gameplay just like Divinity OS 2.
 

mvmiller12

Gawd
Joined
Aug 7, 2011
Messages
927
I'm just happy this game is on Steam They could of showed a screenshot or something.
So maybe in Feburary they will show something I'll take anything they throw at us.
With Larian's track record of releasing games on GOG, I am VERY hopeful I'll be able to purchase it there.
 

mvmiller12

Gawd
Joined
Aug 7, 2011
Messages
927
That would be a huge mistake. There are two reasons BGIII needs to follow BG, in particular light of the EE remakes, in terms of gameplay.

First is that BG saved D&D, at least in video game form, by being true to the PNP rules while delivering a convincing enough real time experience. Without BG 3E wouldn't have been the success it was, and all of Hasbro/Wizards wouldn't exist the way it does today. D&D is in a slump following the disaterous 4E release. 4E was a continuation of D20, not a D&D game. 5E is what 4E should have been.

BGIII is supposed to be a 5E game and it needs to do the same for D&D to PNP gaming and video games what BG did 20 years ago. If the gameplay doesn't merge PNP and video game experiences then it won't be a success.

Secondly it has to be accessible and cross-platform. It needs to be simple enough to play on iOS as it is PC. While the original BG wasn't very resource-intensive, the series is now victim to the success of EE. A new game will have to be playable on all the devices the EE were ported to, and that means similar interfaces leading to an overlap in gameplay.

If BGIII diverges from this it will not be considered a real sequel nor will it have the same kind of cross-platform (including PNP) success that the original and EE games have had.
Perhaps I am mistaken, but by all accounts I have heard, 5E has been nothing but a huge success for Wizards of the Coast. I doubt either the success or failure of Baldur's Gate III will have any meaningful effect on the PnP RPG beyond the possible release of tie in modules. 5E seems to be doing so well, in fact, that Wizards has been hinting at updating and re-releasing some of the older, abandoned campaign settings (think Planescape and SpellJammer).
 

Axman

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
2,627
Perhaps I am mistaken, but by all accounts I have heard, 5E has been nothing but a huge success for Wizards of the Coast.
It's popular with D&D players but look at the amount of core content they've published since it was released compared to other editions. They aren't making splatbooks like they used to, and the only setting expansion was Eberron (which I'm happy about, it's very original). There are constant rumors about selling the brand off; I think Stranger Things did a lot to raise interest (2017 was a banner year for sales) but a game would both increase book sales (which margins are thin on) but also bring in a lot of licensing revenue.
 

Grimlaking

2[H]4U
Joined
May 9, 2006
Messages
3,123
It's popular with D&D players but look at the amount of core content they've published since it was released compared to other editions. They aren't making splatbooks like they used to, and the only setting expansion was Eberron (which I'm happy about, it's very original). There are constant rumors about selling the brand off; I think Stranger Things did a lot to raise interest (2017 was a banner year for sales) but a game would both increase book sales (which margins are thin on) but also bring in a lot of licensing revenue.
I'm not sure where you get margins are thin on books. Books have great margins but slow sell through. thats the trade off. And Gaming books generally have even BETTER margins and faster sell through. (Better than generic book releases by relatively normal authors. Great writers with anticipated books sell like crazy of course.)
 

Lakados

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 3, 2014
Messages
1,945
It's popular with D&D players but look at the amount of core content they've published since it was released compared to other editions. They aren't making splatbooks like they used to, and the only setting expansion was Eberron (which I'm happy about, it's very original). There are constant rumors about selling the brand off; I think Stranger Things did a lot to raise interest (2017 was a banner year for sales) but a game would both increase book sales (which margins are thin on) but also bring in a lot of licensing revenue.
5e is their most popular and profitable version yet.... they have been putting out monthly content for what 7 years at $3.99 a pop for the adventures guild and their cut from DM’s guild, plus all the tie ins with Rick and Mitty, Stranger Things, D&D Beyond, etc...
 
Top