"Baldur’s Gate 3 is Causing Some Developers to Panic"

Users who are viewing this thread

Mate, the words that you yourself are putting in your own mouth are a bit salty, especially for a moderator, do you not consider ?
Sorry if I came across too aggressive. Looking back, it was a bit strong.

Well, are you impressed by how Larian " delivered " on Act 2 and Act 3 ?
I mean as an honest, professional, quality product, critique?
See my anecdote in the post above. I had about a dozen crashes throughout acts 2 and 3, but one cause was seemingly fixed via hotfix and the other was addressed by reducing my frame limiter from 144 to 72. I also had a minor bug in the final sequence of companion dialogs at the end of the game, but it was known by the time I encountered it and a workaround had been discovered. The only bug I noticed which affected my progression through the game in a way I couldn't easily fix was a missing NPC in act 2, who also makes an appearance in act 3 so it merely delayed a quest rather than locking me out of it. My experience, of course, isn't universal, and I'm sure there are a multitude of other problems affecting the experiences of others. I've yet to see any of my friends abandon the game because of bugs, though, and most of them have made it into or out of act 2 by now.

Full disclosure, I did have some visual bugs in scripted cinematics where a character didn't render or camera angles in dialogs weren't appropriately adjusted for characters of non-standard height (either large body types or small races like dwarf/gnome/halfling). Camera angles and animations involving multiple characters can get a little wonky if the characters are of drastically different height or are standing on uneven terrain as well. Those are a bit immersion breaking and do detract from the experience a bit.

That's it for bugs and performance. For other aspects of quality, there's a fair bit that I've noticed myself, watching others play, and talking to my friends about their runs. It's long, but the issues aren't straight-forward.

Narratively it's a clear improvement over DOS2's predictable trope parade (and comparisons to DOS1 aren't really fair IMO because of the humorous and silly nature of DOS1). Is it the most compelling and exciting story ever in a video game? No, and it still has a few tropes throughout. I can see why some people feel act 3's story is rushed (more on that below), but I've also observed a trend with a few of my friends and in comments across YouTube of people totally skipping an entire part of act 2 by accident. The game makes no effort to hold your hand or guide you along "preferred" paths, but it does inform you--directly or indirectly--about what will advance the main story.
There is one particular location in act 2 where an NPC gives you a side quest which also happens to put you into a dungeon that advances the main quest. If you haven't gone to the big name-dropped location of act 2 yet as many NPCs advise you to do, or if you haven't completed certain other encounters in the vicinity in specific ways, then you won't know that this dungeon advances the main quest. It is unfortunately placed somewhat between the "hub" location of act 2 and the big name-drop location, so it's easy to stumble upon it, and the natural instinct of an exploring player is to go in. This is only reinforced by the NPC outside giving you a reason to go in.
What I think is happening in a lot of cases where people complain about the story feeling rushed is that they're inadvertently skipping a lot of side objectives, or they don't realize they're connected. Act 3 in particular is where a lot of side quests intermingle with the two forks of the main quest. Completing these side quests gives you extra information or advantages in the big set-piece act 3 encounters, but they are technically optional. Whereas act 2 has more indirect information about what's going to advance the main story, the path to victory in act 3 is clear and can be pursued immediately but connections to side objectives are not as obvious. They both have pacing problems, but on different ends of the spectrum.

It's very easy to accidentally advance acts 2 and 3 beyond the point of no return, and it is very easy to think there is more to act 3 after you complete the two main story objectives. The problem in act 2 I described in the spoiler above, and the problem in act 3 is you know from the very beginning what to do, but if you weren't paying particular attention to previous dialogs then you can easily miss the fact that completing these two objectives will trigger the finale sequence. It is also the case that some side objectives simply will not be spoken about because of how you resolved situations in previous acts.
There is a gnome you meet before the middle of act 1 who you can rescue or kill. If you rescue him, you find him again later in that same act, where his survival is not guaranteed. If he survives here, then depending on how you've treated him he may tell you about what he plans to do in act 2. Depending on whether or not you help him and if the core character of his quest line survives, then you can meet them again in act 3 where you ultimately learn about a side quest that will remove the toughest enemies in an act 3 boss fight other than the boss. There are multiple points of failure in this progression, any of which can preclude you from learning about this in the most direct way. If you fail at any point, then you have to do the mental math yourself, or be a diligent explorer and stumble into it. This, I feel, is an excellent example, because in every YouTube video I've seen which shows parts of act 3 where these enemies would be present the presenter is almost always fighting them, meaning they didn't do this side quest.
All in all, the game doesn't funnel you into certain pathways, so it is entirely possible to skip significant content. Players who aren't inclined to explore every inch of the map will absolutely miss quite a bit, and even those who do will still potentially miss out on certain things because of how they resolve various situations.

I still see absolutely no justification for declaring it a scam, though, as perfection is an impossible standard and one that they never set for themselves, or which any reasonable person should set for them. Coming from other quality examples of the genre like Owlcat's Pathfinder: Wrath of the Righteous and Obsidian's Pillars of Eternity, it was a stellar experience from start to finish and the few stability issues I did encounter were quickly fixed by myself or Larian.
 
Last edited:
Sorry if I came across too aggressive. Looking back, it was a bit strong.


See my anecdote in the post above. I had about a dozen crashes throughout acts 2 and 3, but one cause was seemingly fixed via hotfix and the other was addressed by reducing my frame limiter from 144 to 72. I also had a minor bug in the final sequence of companion dialogs at the end of the game, but it was known by the time I encountered it and a workaround had been discovered. The only bug I noticed which affected my progression through the game in a way I couldn't easily fix was a missing NPC in act 2, who also makes an appearance in act 3 so it merely delayed a quest rather than locking me out of it. My experience, of course, isn't universal, and I'm sure there are a multitude of other problems affecting the experiences of others. I've yet to see any of my friends abandon the game because of bugs, though, and most of them have made it into or out of act 2 by now.

Full disclosure, I did have some visual bugs in scripted cinematics where a character didn't render or camera angles in dialogs weren't appropriately adjusted for characters of non-standard height (either large body types or small races like dwarf/gnome/halfling). Camera angles and animations involving multiple characters can get a little wonky if the characters are of drastically different height or are standing on uneven terrain as well. Those are a bit immersion breaking and do detract from the experience a bit.

That's it for bugs and performance. For other aspects of quality, there's a fair bit that I've noticed myself, watching others play, and talking to my friends about their runs. It's long, but the issues aren't straight-forward.

........................
Thanks.
Good post.
It will be interesting to see the ways in which the announced Big Patch 1 and then Big Patch 2 improve the game ( after already 4 hotfixes ), and their timing, along with any further " completing " work down the track ............ right up to the inevitable " Definitive Edition " ( at last, the game as it was / is meant to be played, as a piece of work - but just now, at launch, is not that time; this industry practice makes me a sceptic, that, in this case, not until 2025, say, might we actually get what we pay for .......... and until then, is it not a scam ? ).
 
Last edited:
Yeah figures that there's some exaggeration, thanks for detailing it for me. I've seen some people saying that they had less than 30 fps in act 3, that the quest trigger broke and it triggered the ending scene, or some quests didn't complete/led to nowhere, but it's hard to understand exactly how many people are affected by these.
FPS performance issues/crashes, I tend to ignore, I have no idea how other people set their PC/hardware. All I can say is that I have a mid-tier PC, 2080S GPU with hardware from ~2019 time roughly (relatively high-end then). Max settings, it occasionally stutters entering busy areas, but maintains back to 55-60 FPS which is fine for this type of low-action game (not a shooter game or whatever).
I'm curious about why BG3 specifically is treated this way as if it saved the video game industry singlehandedly, I would argue that ToTK is better suited to this "mantle" (but it's possible that I'm being unknowingly contrarian because BG3 is the famous thing now). Similarly, I never understood the amount of praise Witcher 3 got despite playing it a lot and really liking it several years after its release (so it was better optimized and far less buggy).
Mainly in light of the recent games that got relatively bad backsplash (mainly the D4 stuff just the weeks prior). How many games can you genuinely say have been release in some 9/10 or even 10/10 state as of late? Where many games are probably barely above average 6 or 7; always with the caveat too 'maybe 1-2 years from now it'll be 8 or 9 at least'. Add whatever bad taste where even as a 6/10 game, you still get shoved in the face with cosmetics, battlepass, seasons, roadmap bs, etc...BG3 is 'complete', it's got flaws for sure, but I paid $70 for a AAA game, I'm actually getting an AAA game; regardless whatever subjective $/hour argument people come up with as always.
 
Are you really endorsing studios releasing games that do not work as intended, that the paying player experiences as a " WIP ", that hopefully comes good with some " Definitive Edition " a year or more later ?
Games like Bannerlord, and, for sure, right now, Baldur's Gate 3 ( just peruse Larian's own BG3 forum for the widespread disillusionment setting in now - and these are / were the fans, saying they are putting it aside midgame ......... ).
The question is simple - why launch your supposedly lovingly - crafted baby, your " vision ", prematurely?
Why choose to go off half - cocked?
Cynically taking truckloads of customers' money for your product when you know inside and out it does not ( yet ... maybe one day it might ..... ) work properly could well be a scam in my book.
Those that say BG3 is perfect with no flaws or the 'Absolute' best game out there are overexaggerating. It's a very good game - made seemingly greater because the bar has been so low the last couple of years (and coming off the relative/recent disappointment from D4).
Majority are just about getting to Act 3 around now, and the general feedback (without going into details) is that it wasn't as good as Act 1 or 2. Then all the speculations/datamining start with the general idea/thought being that they maybe cut content last minute (ie. no Baldur's Gate in Baldur's Gate) that affected quite a few quest chains that did remain; leaving some weird interactions/plot holes. Much like a great TV show getting cut a season too soon; some plot holes end up incomplete or feel unfulfilled; but not like GoT with the latter seasons and generally poor reviews of how that turned out.
 
Mainly in light of the recent games that got relatively bad backsplash (mainly the D4 stuff just the weeks prior). How many games can you genuinely say have been release in some 9/10 or even 10/10 state as of late? Where many games are probably barely above average 6 or 7; always with the caveat too 'maybe 1-2 years from now it'll be 8 or 9 at least'. Add whatever bad taste where even as a 6/10 game, you still get shoved in the face with cosmetics, battlepass, seasons, roadmap bs, etc...BG3 is 'complete', it's got flaws for sure, but I paid $70 for a AAA game, I'm actually getting an AAA game; regardless whatever subjective $/hour argument people come up with as always.
The failure of Diablo 4 is actually a great point, that makes a lot of sense. Not to make light of your other points, but a very good release of a "sequel" to a widely beloved franchise (Baldur's Gate) after a recent "failed" release of a sequel to another widely beloved franchise (Diablo) makes it shine even more.

There probably are several AAA games which released recently that people rate 9/10 or higher, as it's mostly subjective. TOTK, GOW Ragnarok, Jedi Survivor & Hogwarts Legacy have been called "masterpieces", as have more niche AAA games like Fire Emblem: Engage (I'm guessing a game series with I think 17 or entries is probably AAA), but I'm not fully sure if any of them have any microtransactions or not. But I have not played any of these games nor BG3, so I have no opinion on which game is the most deserving of this praise, I was just curious why BG3 recieved it.
 
(ie. no Baldur's Gate in Baldur's Gate)
I think it actually is there (at least, there's a waypoint outside of a large, well-guarded gate which is labelled "Baldur's Gate") but the game specifically warns you against going through it. I never tried, but I could load up a save just before the final sequence and look if you want. I kept one for experimenting with respecs.
 
There probably are several AAA games which released recently that people rate 9/10 or higher, as it's mostly subjective. TOTK, GOW Ragnarok, Jedi Survivor & Hogwarts Legacy have been called "masterpieces", as have more niche AAA games like Fire Emblem: Engage (I'm guessing a game series with I think 17 or entries is probably AAA), but I'm not fully sure if any of them have any microtransactions or not. But I have not played any of these games nor BG3, so I have no opinion on which game is the most deserving of this praise, I was just curious why BG3 recieved it.
Marketing, either by BG3, media, or others. A lot of it stemmed from that statement from Larian about not having microtransactions or whatever around release; with the game itself backing up the quality/statement. Pretty sure CP77 said similar things to hype up the game, but the game itself didn't really back that up - so it fell flat. It's all relative.
IMO, with the games you mentioned, they all sort of fall under that similar 'action/3rd person camera' type game (summarily); those games are great themselves, but it is a crowded genre.
 
Marketing, either by BG3, media, or others. A lot of it stemmed from that statement from Larian about not having microtransactions or whatever around release; with the game itself backing up the quality/statement. Pretty sure CP77 said similar things to hype up the game, but the game itself didn't really back that up - so it fell flat. It's all relative.
IMO, with the games you mentioned, they all sort of fall under that similar 'action/3rd person camera' type game (summarily); those games are great themselves, but it is a crowded genre.
True, all good points. Also marketing academics should really analyze the word of mouth - influencer/social media marketing strategies used by BG3's team.
 
is that not a scam ?
No, that's not a scam.

A scam would be selling you the Definitive Edition and then turning around to add in a bunch of content to sell the Ultimate Edition. Or telling you that there was going to be a follow-on Director's Cut but then not providing it.
True, all good points. Also marketing academics should really analyze the word of mouth - influencer/social media marketing strategies used by BG3's team.
That is bog standard in the games industry at this point; you can pay for social media pushes as part of your marketing package.
 
"i like multiplayer therefore everyone likes multiplayer"
well no

I started playing Elite: Dangerous where you can't really have a single player experience, although you can opt to play solo. You still get ruined immersion when encountering systems first mapped by xx_milfhunter69_xx. I don't want to see any of that.
There's a lot to say for a playing experience crafted by professionals and not ruined by randoms.
When I walk down the street I see things I dont want to see. I just deal with it. You should try the same in the MP games you play.
 
I'm curious about why BG3 specifically is treated this way as if it saved the video game industry singlehandedly, I would argue that ToTK is better suited to this "mantle" (but it's possible that I'm being unknowingly contrarian because BG3 is the famous thing now). Similarly, I never understood the amount of praise Witcher 3 got despite playing it a lot and really liking it several years after its release (so it was better optimized and far less buggy).
Its a social media meme, you can see this in any game community right now. 'THE GAME INDUSTRY IS TERRIFIED OF LARIAN ' emoji filled takes directly imported from the most annoying person you can imagine on YouTube.

Its funny people are contrasting it favorably to Star Citizen because the hype generated by probably paid YouTubers is the exact reason millions of people were convinced it would be an alternate space reality and had whales dropping thousands of dollars on space yachts for it.

What bearing does this have on Bannerlord or its development? It was 'complete' as most games anymore on release, it just was and isn't very good. Personally, I was a BG1&2 fan, so I purchased BG3, but I don't really enjoy much about it, it's also full of bugs and crashes for me, the game seems to get worse the further in I go. I suppose I should be spamming these terrible videos in BG3 communities so Larian can show those crooks at Larian how it's done.
 
When I walk down the street I see things I dont want to see. I just deal with it. You should try the same in the MP games you play
No, I don't need to tolerate randoms. Games should give me tools to exclude their crap. This is not walking down a street, but entertainment I paid for.
 
Pretty subjective the whole AAA or now theres even an AAAA category (COD types). Also how many employees are developers- like Ive heard Star Citizen has 1100 employees but only 90 of them are programmers. Plus alot has to do with how big the publisher is behind them as well as how integrated they are with that publisher.
 
Yeah, what is and isn't considered AAA is subjective. AAA doesn't even have an agreed upon definition to my knowledge, but it usually means large budget or large number of employees, which are highly correlated with each other anyways.

I consider an AAA game/studio to have had at least 250 employees at some point during development (includes non-dev staff like marketing) because 250 is beeg number and also a round number.
 
When I walk down the street I see things I dont want to see. I just deal with it. You should try the same in the MP games you play.
There is a huge difference between breaking your immersion and going against your sensibilities.

Bafoons in MMOs do both, not just the latter. My immersion of a city street isn’t broken by the city street as everything is in reality.
 
The reason I still ply Bannerlord is because it is not like most games these days that cram microtransactions down your throat.
Yes... I saw Bannerlord on sale, then purposefully waited until after the sale and bought it for full price :iamamoron:

When I see games with "in-app purchases" I just say: hard pass. Not for me. 🤢🤮
 
Back
Top Bottom