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.
It's really not the team size, but rather the management that comes with it.
The devs aren't the problem 99% of the time.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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...
"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
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.
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.
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.
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 can't remember who it was. A famous actor, anyway. They were talking about what's happened with movies. There's nothing in the middle.
It's either $100m+ or less than $3m. Either it gets a big producer and they pump so much money into it that it must be safe because it can't lose money. Or is a small producer doing it for the love, but a small budget doesn't go very far. The risky narratives done well would be funded somewhere between the two extremes but it's just not how it's done anymore.
In a strange way, to get more money in for the riskier productions, we need to get the money out of Hollywood. Can't see it happening, myself.
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.
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?
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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
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!
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.
These people are just coping and lying via social media. Baulder’s Gate 3, while Budget undisclosed, was surely made for less than what some of the richest companies in the industry spend on shit game products like Modern Warfare 2 or Assassins Creed games which have quarter of a billion dollars budgets or better.
Latina put this game into early access at full price and ate shit for it. I’ve been playing it for years already, first on Stadia (where it was already excellent, just clearly unfinished).
Tangent, I’m sick of these knuckleheads talking about Larian as if they aren’t a western gaming company based out of Belgium and employing Europeans and others. They know the anti-sino sentiment is politically strong which is why they point to minority shareholdings by Tencent and label Larian an eastern company.
Epic has a bigger claim to being a non-Western gaming company since Tencent owns almost half of them by itself.
These particular devs are apparently either astroturfing messages with political undertones for their employers, chronically online and in desperate need of some Tumblr therapy, or have a conservative’s guilty conscience and are projecting their inadequacy onto everyone else.
budget undisclosed
surely made for less than...
You admit to not knowing and then go ahead and just make shit up anyways lol.
It's fair to criticize games we know have huge budgets for being buggy, unfinished at launch, having bad monetization schemes, etc. But let's not pretend like BG3 was created by 1 guy in a basement either.
You mention a quarter billion dollar budget, but only a handful of games have had development budgets officially confirmed to be that high: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_expensive_video_games_to_develop
Even the unofficial figures don't get that high, with RDR2 at $170 million. And looking at these games... I haven't played them all, but judging off community reactions and review scores it seems like a mix of boom (TLOU2, HFW, RDR2) and bust (Cyberpunk, Star Citizen).
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.
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.
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”.
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?
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.
I can’t find developers doing this.
This entire story was started by game developers on social media (Twitter) complaining about consumer expectations in the wake of Baldur's Gate 3.
Try actually reading what the developers are saying. Most are saying that they can't make good games because the suits won't let them. They keep fucking over and chasing off the most experienced and visionary people, force teams to chase trends instead of concentrating on one type of game and never give them enough time.
From all that I've seen it's more like they are trying to dismiss the success that Larian has found by saying that they are a special case which is nothing but smoke and mirrors. Larian did hard work and are being rewarded for it.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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)
this "dev" are really dumb.
"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..
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).
Tencent owns 30% of Larian iirc, so most likely from them
Owned, unless you have proof they still do.
Edit: Looked it up a bit, the shares are 70% Sven and wife, 30% Tencent. Honestly not too bad considering at the time those shares were sold, Larian was almost bankrupt.
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
you mean they got the D&D license for free?
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?
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 hear tell that the “bro” is on the dev team, so he may know a thing or two.
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.
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.
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 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.
