Baldur's Gate 3

[Anon]

Lets see here... i inspect Steam Achievments and i can see that 52% got past act 1, then 39.3% got past act 2...... and 20.7% have finished the game (act 3) How in the fucking hell did this game get goty? i have to search for Achievments bcus they are hidden.

20% reaching late game is a pretty great stat for any game tbh, especially one as long as BG3

CP2077 — 37%
Elden Ring — 39.8%

BG3 has a completion rate lower than Wasteland 3(23.6%). The only 'major' RPG I can think of that BG3 has a significantly higher completion rate than is Dumpsterfire(17.6%).

I said games that have similar scope to BG3.

DOS 2 has only 11% completion for example.

Btw BG3 is a recent game, hit the masses and that'll obviously lower completions, and still isn't even finished yet, and there are tons of people waiting for definitive edition to finish the game. So that data is still skewed.

[rusty_shackleford]

I said games that have similar scope to BG3.

So… Elden Ring?
AC Odyssey has similar length as BG3, and yes it's as much of an RPG as e.g., Witcher 3. 34% completion rate.

BG3 has an extremely low completion rate compared to similarly high profile titles. Any other position is pure cope.

[Anon]

I said games that have similar scope to BG3.

So… Elden Ring?
AC Odyssey has similar length as BG3, and yes it's as much of an RPG as e.g., Witcher 3. 34% completion rate.

BG3 has an extremely low completion rate compared to similarly high profile titles. Any other position is pure cope.

Elden Ring and Witcher are more analogous to theme park MMOs than an isometrical immersive sim like BG3.

But I'll concede that your point is fair. I'd wait 1 more year, which by then the definitive edition will have been released, to consolidate my opinion more.

[Lhynn]

This stats show its a bad game

It shows it has a bad third act, thats what it shows. I wonder if anybody in the thread has mentioned that before...

[Shillitron]

That elongated body represents ghost town so well.. it's so fucking long and never ends.

The shitty scribbled half-done drawing of the head represents the half finished city they couldn't be fucked to complete.

[rusty_shackleford]

That elongated body represents ghost town so well.. it's so fucking long and never ends.

There's also just nothing there.

[BLofbr]

Pillars oF Eternity feels more like Baldurs gate than Bg3, i get a fkking castle(Stronghold), same as you did in BG2

BG3 is a Divinity Shit Copy that has nothing to do with Baldurs gate. Why do Companies like to LIE to their Most important long DND fans lol.

Still i wonder who the game was made for anyway? the 1-2%? The Tranny kingdom?

[Anon]

Only 17% of the players reached last act in pillars of eternity btw

[rusty_shackleford]

Only 17% of the players reached last act in pillars of eternity btw

Another game known for an atrocious last act.

[BLofbr]

Hmm

Why did Lobotomy and mental asylums get banned? We really need it today.

Like race insitutes.

[BLofbr]

Only 17% of the players reached last act in pillars of eternity btw

Another game known for an atrocious last act.

Looks like ill not be playing Pillows of (((Eternity))) then, i hate games with Stupid endings.

I miss games like Dark Alliance 1 and 2, where it was cool, and you wanted more of it.

[Anon]

Only 17% of the players reached last act in pillars of eternity btw

Another game known for an atrocious last act.

DOS 2 has 20% of the players reaching last act

[Rand]

Only 17% of the players reached last act in pillars of eternity btw

Another game known for an atrocious last act.

Looks like ill not be playing Pillows of (((Eternity))) then, i hate games with Stupid endings.

I miss games like Dark Alliance 1 and 2, where it was cool, and you wanted more of it.

Apparently the add-on "The White March" is very good and redeems the game after a poor original ending.

[Rand]

Only 17% of the players reached last act in pillars of eternity btw

Another game known for an atrocious last act.

DOS 2 has 20% of the players reaching last act

DOS2 requires tactics and strategy to fight the tougher battles as the game progresses.
That 20% matches the general mid-low IQ I see commonly, even in gaming.

[rusty_shackleford]

Only 17% of the players reached last act in pillars of eternity btw

Another game known for an atrocious last act.

DOS 2 has 20% of the players reaching last act

DOS2's final act wasn't even completed when it first released. Yes, a lot of RPGs are very weak in their latter half, developers know they need to pour resources into first impressions.
Another example: Kingmaker, the game wasn't able to be completed when it released, completely broken.

[Shillitron]

DOS2's final act wasn't even completed when it first released. Yes, a lot of RPGs are very weak in their latter half, developers know they need to pour resources into first impressions.

Larian seems to do this excessively.

Most games aren't made Start > Finish. For example with Obsidian their policy is to make the middle game content first. Sawyer explained that it lets them improve the start and finish with the skills they learned doing the middle sections as far as level design and asset pipelines go.

Most big RPG's do this I think, they story board out most of the game, figure out the big locations etc and make the game sections in parallel. They might vertical slice first but that generally is not the tutorial level, it's mid-point where they can exercise all game mechanics.

-

Larian really feels like they "make it up as they go along".

Every starting area is on some beach, they spend years making amazing Act 1's .. then Swen realizes they need to ship the fucking thing and it's a race to the finish line.

D:OS1
D:OS2
BG3

All these games have very enjoyable act 1's and by the time you get to act 3 your asking yourself "wait what the fuck happened - is this shit even done?"

[BLofbr]

DOS2's final act wasn't even completed when it first released. Yes, a lot of RPGs are very weak in their latter half, developers know they need to pour resources into first impressions.

Larian seems to do this excessively.

Most games aren't made Start > Finish. For example with Obsidian their policy is to make the middle game content first. Sawyer explained that it lets them improve the start and finish with the skills they learned doing the middle sections as far as level design and asset pipelines go.

Most big RPG's do this I think, they story board out most of the game, figure out the big locations etc and make the game sections in parallel. They might vertical slice first but that generally is not the tutorial level, it's mid-point where they can exercise all game mechanics.

-

Larian really feels like they "make it up as they go along".

Every starting area is on some beach, they spend years making amazing Act 1's .. then Swen realizes they need to ship the fucking thing and it's a race to the finish line.

D:OS1
D:OS2
BG3

All these games have very enjoyable act 1's and by the time you get to act 3 your asking yourself "wait what the fuck happened - is this shit even done?"

Ironicly Larian maybe needs a vacation from game development and move to some beach city, they maybe miss the sea.

If 3 off their own games start with a beach prologue..shouldnt that be reported as bad story writing?

[Anon]

Another game known for an atrocious last act.

DOS 2 has 20% of the players reaching last act

DOS2's final act wasn't even completed when it first released. Yes, a lot of RPGs are very weak in their latter half, developers know they need to pour resources into first impressions.
Another example: Kingmaker, the game wasn't able to be completed when it released, completely broken.

I agree with this take. I only disagree that BG3 has some especially low completion as has been argued.

[Rand]

Wat?
https://mmo-population.com/ has lost their minds.

[BLofbr]

Wat?
https://mmo-population.com/ has lost their minds.

Yup its targetted propaganda now

[Anon]

Wat?
https://mmo-population.com/ has lost their minds.

This site has always been utter shit.

[Anon]

DOS2's final act wasn't even completed when it first released. Yes, a lot of RPGs are very weak in their latter half, developers know they need to pour resources into first impressions.

Larian seems to do this excessively.

Most games aren't made Start > Finish. For example with Obsidian their policy is to make the middle game content first. Sawyer explained that it lets them improve the start and finish with the skills they learned doing the middle sections as far as level design and asset pipelines go.

Most big RPG's do this I think, they story board out most of the game, figure out the big locations etc and make the game sections in parallel. They might vertical slice first but that generally is not the tutorial level, it's mid-point where they can exercise all game mechanics.

-

Larian really feels like they "make it up as they go along".

Every starting area is on some beach, they spend years making amazing Act 1's .. then Swen realizes they need to ship the fucking thing and it's a race to the finish line.

D:OS1
D:OS2
BG3

All these games have very enjoyable act 1's and by the time you get to act 3 your asking yourself "wait what the fuck happened - is this shit even done?"

That's a great point that I never thought about. Most RPGs tend to peak at mid game. Larian RPGs peak at start then starts falling as games progress.

[Faceless_Sentinel]

I like the fact that nobody discuss game story, side quests, characters besides companions, locations, game situations, gameplay, skill combination, non-obvious ways of dealing with some problem and how game react to this. If any discussion starts anywhere, it always about how game is pozzed. It's just pathetic.

[Oyster Sauce]

I like the fact that nobody discuss game story, side quests, characters besides companions, locations, game situations, gameplay, skill combination, non-obvious ways of dealing with some problem. If any discussion starts anywhere, it always about how game is pozzed. It's just pathetic.

I really appreciate that they designed so many unique enemies that only show up for a single encounter.

[Anon]

I like the fact that nobody discuss game story, side quests, characters besides companions, locations, game situations, gameplay, skill combination, non-obvious ways of dealing with some problem. If any discussion starts anywhere, it always about how game is pozzed. It's just pathetic.

There are plenty of such discussions in reddit. This forum doesn't appreciate discussing BG3 game mechanics in depth and I wish we did, I agree with you.

[Faceless_Sentinel]

I like the fact that nobody discuss game story, side quests, characters besides companions, locations, game situations, gameplay, skill combination, non-obvious ways of dealing with some problem. If any discussion starts anywhere, it always about how game is pozzed. It's just pathetic.

There are plenty of such discussions in reddit. This forum doesn't appreciate discussing BG3 game mechanics in depth and I wish we did, I agree with you.

But what to discuss?

[Faceless_Sentinel]

I like the fact that nobody discuss game story, side quests, characters besides companions, locations, game situations, gameplay, skill combination, non-obvious ways of dealing with some problem. If any discussion starts anywhere, it always about how game is pozzed. It's just pathetic.

I really appreciate that they designed so many unique enemies that only show up for a single encounter.

Can you give example?

[Rand]

I like the fact that nobody discuss game story, side quests, characters besides companions, locations, game situations, gameplay, skill combination, non-obvious ways of dealing with some problem and how game react to this. If any discussion starts anywhere, it always about how game is pozzed. It's just pathetic.

We tend to reiterate on the discussion at hand.
I am certain that if you start an interesting thread on one or more of these topics, especially beginning with a good or stupid opinion, you will find quite a few joining in.

[Faceless_Sentinel]

I like the fact that nobody discuss game story, side quests, characters besides companions, locations, game situations, gameplay, skill combination, non-obvious ways of dealing with some problem. If any discussion starts anywhere, it always about how game is pozzed. It's just pathetic.

There are plenty of such discussions in reddit. This forum doesn't appreciate discussing BG3 game mechanics in depth and I wish we did, I agree with you.

I was very annoyed that you can kill 2 goblin leaders without triggering all camp in hostility, but you can't do it with leader, even if you destroy all drums in the battle arena. This is just stupid.

[Anon]

Both Minthara and Gut you kill in a private room though, while the assault against Ragzlin happens in public.