Personal computing discussed
NovusBogus wrote:I'm pretty stoked. Larian is definitely the right choice, they're one of only four game developers that I trust to appropriately handle a big-story RPG.
Regarding the game rules, prepare your mind for flaying: it'll be D&D 5th edition with any and all deviations that Larian wants to make. I have no familiarity with 5th ed. or even 2.5 beyond what was in the earlier games, but enthusiasts tell me that it's watered down. Personally I don't care since I mainly want the big story, don't consider any of the various d20 based video games to have had particularly stable game mechanics, and am confident that whatever Larian does will make sense as a PC video game based on their track record. The Pathfinder franchise is purportedly(tm) a fork of one of the older D&D rule sets so the hardcore crowd may want to be looking there.
Gamespot interviewed their founder, who went into some more details: https://www.gamespot.com/articles/baldu ... ent_page=1
He's definitely got the right idea. Baldur's Gate was a big deal for its time, but RPGs have advanced considerably in the last ten years--and Larian's been a big part of that. I'm hoping for something as big and expansive as Witcher 3, and if they've more than doubled their development staff that's a real possibility.
sweatshopking wrote:Four studios? I'm down to two: Larian and cd projekt. Nobody else makes an RPG that's nearly as good as these two companies, including Bethesda or bioware imo
This one is apparently larger than dos2 and dos2 was huge. I hope the keep the humour and charm that their own worlds have.
druidcent wrote:
As an old fart who's played many different versions on D&D, 2.5ed was extremely fiddly with the rules, and high level characters were definitely gods.. 3rd (and 3.5) edition was mainstream for so long, and was extremely complicated and not really designed for mass market.. (great for nerds/geeks and all the jokes). 4th ed threw out the book, and tried to remake MMORPGs into table top form (miniatures were almost required)... 5th Edition harks back to 2nd ed days in terms of role-playing crunch, but streamlining down fiddly bits and the mess of interactions that were 2.5 and 3rd edition.
My biggest worry (and I'm excited),
..is that 5th ed doesn't lend itself well to a computerized DM... one of the things I love about 5th edition is that the DM has a lot of control over the story, and is can adapt to the players choices.. (i.e. my group has taken published adventures so far off the rails, that our DM is basically running a home-brew campaign at this point).
Captain Ned wrote:Jeez, I gave up after AD&D added (i.e. stole from Gamma World) psionics. Yeah, I'm old.
CScottG wrote:druidcent wrote:
As an old fart who's played many different versions on D&D, 2.5ed was extremely fiddly with the rules, and high level characters were definitely gods.. 3rd (and 3.5) edition was mainstream for so long, and was extremely complicated and not really designed for mass market.. (great for nerds/geeks and all the jokes). 4th ed threw out the book, and tried to remake MMORPGs into table top form (miniatures were almost required)... 5th Edition harks back to 2nd ed days in terms of role-playing crunch, but streamlining down fiddly bits and the mess of interactions that were 2.5 and 3rd edition.
My biggest worry (and I'm excited),
..is that 5th ed doesn't lend itself well to a computerized DM... one of the things I love about 5th edition is that the DM has a lot of control over the story, and is can adapt to the players choices.. (i.e. my group has taken published adventures so far off the rails, that our DM is basically running a home-brew campaign at this point).
-sweet, now I'm feeling good about it again.
..and then you go and let me down there at the end.. WHY DID YOU DO THAT TO ME?
SecretMaster wrote:Super stoked to hear the news, but I also am fully expecting this to be a Baldur's Gate "in name only" title. All the new attempts at recreating the isometric + dialogue magic of Baldur's Gate have fallen flat IMO (looking at you Pillar's of Eternity). I'm excited to see what Larian does with it, but I don't expect it to play/feel like a classic BioWare title.
pauldavis wrote:Well to each their own, but I loved Pillars if Eternity, enjoyed its story and characters much more than Divinity's. Divinity's game-play is great but overall I preferred darker tone of Pillars.Of course, Obsidian is busy with Outer Worlds now, but I have faith in them D I think they could make a great game too.
CScottG wrote:..hmm, posing as True Neutral ..but deep down: Chaotic Evil?
Krogoth wrote:BG1 and BG2 pretty much play like a normal 2nd D&D campaign with some extra bells and whistles. Party wipes are on the par until your characters get around 8th and 9th level. Respect the icosahedron.
Buub wrote:Krogoth wrote:BG1 and BG2 pretty much play like a normal 2nd D&D campaign with some extra bells and whistles. Party wipes are on the par until your characters get around 8th and 9th level. Respect the icosahedron.
Yes, but it's the characters and the story that really make it special. "Go for the eyes, Boo! Go for the eyes!"
Pharad wrote:Great news but the big question is, should those, that did not play the first and second Baldur's Gate (myself included) play them before the third one comes out? To be fair these games are pretty old and I heard, can be difficult to get into.