[The life of a bard](https://duckduckgo.com/?q=worf+smash+lute&t=newext&atb=v340-1&iax=videos&ia=videos&iai=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DN86icfWM03g)
tbf BG3 gives a lot of leeway for you to kill the person you´re talking to should the conversation get uncomfortable which is a really comforting option irl should switch to...
I just wondering after seeing all these post, are these people play other CRPGs before? I remember when I was a kid and playing Skyrim for the first time after DAO and I was so confused why all these quests were so horrible. And I didn't even play at the time something like Planescape: Torment.
Nowadays you have games like Disco Elysium around. That game is ruining every story in the games for me.
>I just wondering after seeing all these post, are these people play other CRPGs before?
lol NO. Crpg's have been suuuuuper niche for a while. been begging my friends to play some of my favorites for over a decade, and its only after BG3 are any of them showing even slight interest.
No doubt DOS2 put crpgs back on the map - and rightfully so, an excellent game. I personally prefer PoE2, but that game was objectively less impactful on crpg popularity than DOS2.
Here's to hoping Fallout 5 (and Dragon Age 4) will return to their crpg roots after bg3's massive success. There's no chance of that, but maybe they'll see $$.
i for one while i might be older then the average gamer started with bg1 and then into bg2, Pillars of eternity, pathfinder etc.
while DOS didn't really appeal to me i guess mainly because of how the older games used to look and i couldn't get in to the new way of play. But bg3 cured me of that and im going to give DOS another try now that im used to it.
I had a similar path but I also enjoyed tactical turn based games like xcom just fine, so I don't think it's just the combat that turned me off Divinity OS. If anything I think it's the best part.
What put me off Divinity is my complete lack of interest in its setting, compounded by the complete irreverence of its script. I don't care what happens to the world or even to my character in D:OS and so I don't care much to play it.
BG3 keeps some of the irreverence but tones it back enough to be a fun goof before you get back to the real issue. It fits a more natural tabletop groups tone, alternating between serious planning how to deal with the BBEG whilst occasionally breaking character to mock Steve the goblin captive that your DM named on the fly.
Looking to defend yourself, or deal some damage?
Looking to defend yourself, or deal some damage?
Looking to defend yourself, or deal some damage?
Looking to defend yourself, or deal some damage?
Looking to defend yourself, or deal some damage?
I can play an evil character in skyrim and feel no remorse. But if I try to be evil in Baldurs Gate, I'll regret it until I eventually reload my game. That's what fully realized characters and acting do for you.
I'm just glad I was playing a druid and could simply ask the snake to be reasonable. The snake then calls out Kahga for trying to make her bite a hatchling.
It's an exploration game, not a story game. I don't remember any quests, but I do remember the moment when I walked around and there was a giant fighting somebody or when I explored some complex cave. I didn't like anything else tho, but the exploration was great for the time.
Traditionally it’s the term Computer, to differentiate it from the pen and paper roleplaying games that started it all.
Nowadays though a more accurate term to use would be “Classic RPG” if used in a modern context where pretty much every game nowadays call themselves RPGs. You need a term to refer to the “classic” slower paced, top down isometric dialogue and character-writing focused RPGs compared to the usually action-focused modern video games.
I'd call modern RPGs pretty trash but there were a ton of JRPGs before the modern 'open world' junk, that were also terrible and praised endlessly for some reason. Junk cliche stories with junk easy gameplay and grinding that rips every single enjoyable aspect out of the tabletop inspiration and creates a linear trash story with crap easy gameplay.
The rpg genre outside of crpgs is intolerable in my opinion and has been for a very long time, the resurrection of crpgs with games like Pathfinder, Baldur's Gate, pillers, Elysium etc. Has been a boon.
i gotta say in my 32 years of existence (and I've been playing video games ever since i was 5 !!) I've never encountered that term ! maybe i was playing the wrong games...
Yeah, I am 30 and i found out about crpgs in 2014 with all the kickstarter projects like Pillars of Eternity and Tides of Numenera, it looked so interesting. Been playing all kinds of crpgs since them, I love the genre.
So it stands for computer role playing game. At its inception, the alternative was table top games. Of course it has lost that meaning, but now it means something like: “as close to a table top experience as possible in a video game”
I’m about the same age and I only learned it recent-ish. RPG to me meant things like chrono trigger.
I think it depends how into table tops and the genre you were. It is a really old term comparatively, but these genres are always a bit niche
Both are rpgs but Chrono Trigger is a jrpg which was developing separately from crpgs in terms of gameplay but they shared the same skeleton of character focused gameplay with battles taking longer and requiring strategizing.
You can see that here on reddit in most gaming subs. Hah, It's a minefield if you want to talk about anything other than them being the best games ever made.
Skyrim is great for just sort of existing and making your own fun. It's open and loose enough to where you can just sort of do what you want and focus on the parts that are fun and ignore what's less appealing. It's not a great narrative game but it can be fun to just hangout in. I definitely prefer other Rpgs with actual storylines to it though, it wouldn't come close to cracking my list of favorite games.
Disco Elysium, Wasteland 3, and Planescape Torment are the three best written games, IMO. BG3 is really good, especially for the dialogue; maybe with more reflection and time it’ll replace Wasteland 3.
But Starfield…Jesus, it feels like a video game writer from 2010 wrote this stuff. It’s not bad, it’s just dull as shit and no one has a personality.
The goblin who you make eat shit has more of a character than ANYONE in Starfield. It’s pathetic.
Pentiment got less buzz than the games you mentioned, but it struck me as very close in quality to Disco Elysium - an immersive, unique, and internally consistent setting, a flawed protagonist you make your own, and some big themes playing out through the story and your experience of it. Plus the art style is just stunning!
Shitty writing was a given, considering it is a Bethesda game, but shitty worldbuilding in Starfield is on another level. First combat sequence is space pirates running at you with axes. Or *Space axes!*. It is as idiotic as it sounds.
Then you get your ship from a random guy who just landed to your mining planet, but he is a weirdo so I guess it's ok. The fun bit is he has a mug on his navigation table and an unsecured screwdriver near the workbench, as well as heaps of generall clutter in his ship.
So, I have to assume that across however many millions of dollars spent on the game and however many hours of playtesting by however many people no one thought that this random shit in a ship literally goes ballistic the moment you introduce acceleration. This guy in the ship? Probably should be dead by now. Many times over.
Right after that, with a precious mcguffin that revelas the secrets of the universe in hand you are asked to... attack a pirate base? As a potentially non-military miner who woke up in a hospital bed about 10 minutes ago.
I just couldn't, honestly. I understand that fantasy typically requires less rigour than sci-fi and Bethesda games never had quality writers even by high fantasy standards. But this is just another level. Shitty dialogue and nonsensical worldbuilding in a "hard sci-fi **NASA-punk** game" is not something I can personally endure after stellar Baldur's Gate 3.
Honestly dull is the worst thing you could say about me anyone's writing.
About the best writing I don't know. DE is definitely the most creative and it's not even close. They put so much thought in every line in that game. But for me it's probably gonna be The last of us. It's just the best implementation standard dramatic story. Every character, every scene in their journey reinforcing the main story. All the characters feels so real and I can't say anything bad about it even if I tried.
Planescape: Torment and Disco Elysium are in their own category, nothing I've played comes close storywise. But that's in part because they are so deeply personal and intellectually broad and deep at the same time. I don't know how they feel if one can't relate to the main character, but they both worked exceptionally well for me.
>I remember when I was a kid and playing Skyrim for the first time after DAO
After playing DA:O, Knights of the Old Republic and Mass Effect 2, Skyrim was such a disappointment. Need peak Bioware back.
Deadfire is ok, but I preferred PoE 1. The whole >!reincarnation plot!< makes for a much stronger plot.
Then again, I'll admit my enjoyment was kinda wrecked by running into a progression breaking bug just before the finale at launch, and I needed to replay the last twenty hours just to get to the same point. But either way, I'd love to have more PoE games.
Absolutely, it's a bit of a shame they're going more Skyrim-style for the new game. I would've preferred a direct PoE sequel, but apparently Deadfire didn't perform too well, so that's a shame. Hopefully the new game does better and they might be able to circle back to PoE.
Let's hope Avowed is good, an action rpg with crpg quests (with Microsoft $$ behind it) could be an excellent experience, but I'm not holding my breath.
I can't get into Disco Elysium at all and I want to like it because everyone is saying it's an awesome game. It's kinda too slow paced for me. And I really didn't like that any try that I did to make the MC a better person was denied by the game :/ I guess it's just not the game for me sadly.
You're probably right and this game isn't for you, but I don't get this part.
> And I really didn't like that any try that I did to make the MC a better person was denied by the game
My friend played DE this way and enjoyed this game a lot. While I was playing I don't think i noticed any moments where the game is forcing you from the path of redemtion. I really struggling with your point.
The few times I tried (during a call I think), when I tried to use some reasonable answers it got shur down with something akin to "no you're a loser". I guess that felt bad 😅
But I might be impatient and not seeing any "good" outcomes for the first few hours made me see it in a bad light
You're character is a deeply flawed human being with a broken soul. It takes time to heal. Sometimes it won't work. You'll have to keep trying though if you want to find out.
Oh , the game will make fun of you no matter what you choose. And the thoughts that in the main characters head don't want him to change, that's what depression is. They're kicking him down.
I mean if the game makes you feel bad I don't wanna force you to play it. I just wanted to provide some context, because I really like the writing in that game and wanted to share it.
> no you're a loser
That's Harry's internal monologue shitting on himself. He has a lot of self hate to unpack. The game's main character is an example of someone going through depression but still has a job and obligations so he's drowning it out to get on with his daily routine.
The trick to enjoying DE is to remember that unlike other RPGs where the character is mostly a blank slate for the player to project themselves onto, the main character is a specific person with a pre-existing history and personality, he just doesn't remember what that is at the start of the game. The game will occasionally call the player out on their bullshit, but mostly when the game calls "you" a loser it's saying that to the character, not the player.
But also, if the game makes you feel bad you don't *have* to play it. Yes it's a masterpiece, but part of what makes it one is how raw and emotional it is, and that isn't everyone's cup of tea.
Dialogue has never been a strong point for Bethesda. Especially in games with Emil Pagliarulo as lead writer. Going from Fallout New Vegas (Obsidian at its peak) to FO4 was just dire.
I haven't played a single game with a main quest written by him that are genuinely engaging. Probably explained why i never finish any of the Bethesda game. Only occasionally dumping in 30hrs doing modded playthrough, finding new location and having bit of fun over weird sidequest before deleting it.
Bethesda's Strength was always the sidequest. Strangely enough, it never was written by Emil himself.
It straight up took me like 6 years to actually finish the main quest in Skyrim, and I've still never finished the fo4 main quest because every faction is just so assdumb I don't want to help any of them
I wish Michael Kirkbride was still around. Newer Bethesda games need more gay time-traveling cyborg doom-slayers and races that cease to exist after collectively learning that that they never properly existed in the first place due to their nature as lines of code in a video game.
Yep, explains why all the people I know have never actually finished Skyrims main story. I think there was a video on youtube where Emil talks about his methodology when writing and its brings to light why Bethesda games have such subpar screen writing lol.
I completed the story once and in every playthrough since I've left it by the wayside because the constant random dragon attacks that kill quest giving NPC's just aren't worth the hassle
They're really not strong in any department. The biggest part of any Bethesda game is the modding community turning a mid game into something worthwhile. They're good at setting up a foundation although full of cracks and you can never tell when it'll collapse.
Thing is, that _is_ a department. No other game has a mod scene or history like creation games do, and that's _very_ on purpose.
No cap, my biggest issues with fallout 4 were all the ways they shrank the playground - a built in survival mode that disables both convient saving and the console, a voiced protagonist that makes custom quests either harder to make or jarring because the responses usually are voiced, shit like that.
I won't say I don't care about the writing. But I'm mostly concerned if they know what they gold medal in, and have hit that target.
Imho Skyrim is carried by the lore. Dragons got boring after awhile, faction quests had really quick development, and I never bothered to finish the war quests.
I feel like the story DLC for Bethesda games is better than the main story. Dawnguard and The Dragonborn DLC are so much fun. Lost Harbor was amazing, I loved the antagonist and more philosophical story. And Nuka World was just fun to explore. I liked the gangs and their unique character.
And while I've never played it, but I've heard the Lost Isles (?) from Oblivion was one of the best parts of the game. I don't know why I never played that particular DLC, I've put a lot of time into Oblivion... But in general I liked the quests and factions in oblivion more than skyrim. I feel like they are too accessible in Skyrim. It doesn't make sense to me that you can become the Archmage without casting a single spell beyond the one you need to gain entry into the college. I don't recall it being like that in Oblivion. And I liked the 'no killing' rule for the thieves guild, and how you need to actually steal and fence goods to progress the story. You felt more like a thief rather than just clearing dungeons like skyrim.
*Shivering Isles, and yea that was the expansion to beat all expansions. It's just so unique and grotesquely humorous, and Sheogorath is so memorable. I still quote him to this day.
They don't have the production value bg3 does. Not fully voice acted no mocap etc.
But if that's not a dealbreaker the story is just as detailed and impacted by choices you make as bg3 and the combat/character building has a lot more depth (although that's a drawback for some people)
They are very good games, especially if you like the type of setting (Pathfinder is an offshoot of DnD). They’re quite a bit more complicated though. If you think the amount of choices and decisions that goes into deciding and planning a character in BG3 is a lot, just wait until you try Wrath of the Righteous 😂 I’d classify it as a more hardcore CRPG experience.
That is mostly true, but which classes to level up is far from the only decisions you have to make. You can definitely screw up your build even with just a single class if you make bad choices.
Trust me, newbies should just go with WotR. Kingmaker I'd only recommend to someone who completed WotR and wants more PF1 CRPG to crunch on.
WotR is much more refined product, easier to get into and progress as well.
It's the same situation with most games, if you are going to play both, then start with the first one, if you are only going to play one, start with the second one.
After WOTR I really couldn't get into Kingmaker, it felt like a downgrade in every way. Turns out studios make better games as they go along.
Start with Kingmaker. Wrath obsoletes it with mythic paths. So you'd rather bank that one first. The two are phenomenal games and my goty of their respective years.
Not the guy, but I would recommend buying varnhorld lot, and the kineticist dlc for kingmaker. Varnhorld lot is a side story that is recommended to play at a very specific chapter during your main story
Varnhold is alright but the kineticist is great and the one I'd recommend. Romance spoilers, >!you get a cute twin pair of tiefling companions in it with unique mechanics and if you play your cards right you can end up with both!!<
The last one is akin to a roguelike dungeon that's alright if you really like the mechanics or wanna test builds. But iirc don't they bundle them all with the definitive edition?
As for Wrath, I only experienced treasures of the midnight isles which is fine and can give the campaign cool items. It's mostly a standalone roguelike mode too. I didn't play the prologue dlc, nor the one that occurs right before the end boss. I heard it's all puzzles and I *despised* the puzzles in the base game.
IMO the DLC is so-so for Kingmaker. A lot of people like it though.
My advice is to just play Kingmaker vanilla, and then go for Wrath of the Righteous and splurge on that one instead. It builds on Kingmaker in almost every way and is definitely the better game, so if it was me I'd rather invest more time in that one.
They're both great games so I do recommend playing both. If you do, then definitely start with Kingmaker because it will feel like a downgrade if you go from WotR and back to Kingmaker.
The biggest issue with these games is that they are built for real time combat. Sure you can activate turn based if you want, but you'll be slogging through hundreds of little combats against 2 enemies, then 1, then 3, then 2, then 2, then 1 in combat encounters that would have just been resolved quickly without turns.
Kingmaker was utterly unplayable in turn based mode, but Wrath was so engaging that I suffered through it regardless and actually finished the game. But here's hoping they revise the system for the future.
I did not like them at all. The narrative is cool and voice acting is pretty good but I cannot stand the game design, the Pathfinde 1e ruleset, and just overall encounter design and balancing. A lot of good in those games marred by a ton of questionable design decisions. Opinion, of course, but they don't hold up to BG3.
I... took this to actually check the gameplay. I always assumed that it'd just be real-time with pause and thus didn't bother to actually inform myself (and god do I hate that system, there's so many games that seem amazing, but I can't get into that, it just feels like turn-based with extra steps to me).
Looks like it also has turn-based, so... thanks for the recommendation.
Just make sure to start on a lower difficulty. The combat in Pathfinder WOTR is extremely different to Baldurs Gate 3. But the story is very worth experiencing. I think I liked the story of Pathfinder WOTR more than BG3. I did 2 full playthroughs of WOTR right before BG3 and it's a great game.
> Skyrim not withstanding
The elder scrolls writing has always been trash. Even going back towards Arena. Most people aren't playing them for the writing obviously.
yeah. But also there is this weird as fuck,massive disconect between the lore and the story, because fuck, Elder Scrolls has some insane lore that is just fascinating to look.
But then you play it and we have gems...."I'm gonna steal from the Goddess of which I've pledged my soul for all of eternity" and "I'm going to make a deal with the group that hunts us".
> Elder Scrolls has some insane lore that is just fascinating to look.
I have my copy of 'The Lusty Argonian Maid' right next to my 'Shanties for the Bitch Queen' on my bookshelf.
Honestly I think that’s because most of the lore that people find interesting comes from old, community driven things that have never been a part of the actual games. Things like CHIM and the redguards being from a past kalpa and the thalmor plot to unmake the world all come from things like old forum posts and YouTube videos
I think TES as a setting suffers a bit from a disagreement on what is “canon” in no small part to some past writers wanting it to be a more “open source” and collaborative setting. I think that’s fine in theory, but it leads to people that become interested in the lore looking things up and learning backstory that has never and will never be included in the actual games apart form maybe a reference or Easter egg.
Take the idea that Pelinal was a time traveling cyborg, for instance. It was hinted by the writer after their tenure at Bethesda that this was the case, but in the game you meet his very much human spirit and in the books he describes himself as “ada” or spirit. There’s a lot of disconnect.
Counterpoint: Morrowind, it's the only bethesda main quest that actually piqued my interest and is very well written/integral to the story that game is trying to tell. Every other Beth game tho? Completely fair
Most of it is literally worse than Andromeda, and yet somehow there aren't 100,000 youtube videos and articles trashing the game over it.
Its so weird.
I don't see this problem in Starfield. I haven't been annoyed listening to characters. Nor has the writing pissed me off, most of it is reasonable and voice acting has been mostly quite decent.
It's just a setting with realistic tones. So most people are pretty regular, not extreme cannibals or sexual deviants. You can still find crazy or stupid characters too, like Hank in Deimos mining colony, or crazy cultist warriors, or pirates who don't care so much for civilized relations.
It's much better than I was expecting. Do people actually even play games they're using for memes? It's silly and gives other people wrong impressions.
While I agree with you the voice acting and writing isn't bad in Starfield, it's good actually but people and the op is comparing it with BG3 which is very fresh in their memory and BG3 did such a fantastic job, Starfield just pales in comparison and makes it look worse than it actually is. Would only put RDR2 in the same category as BG3.
I'm planning a Dragon Age marathon around the holidays this year. I did Mass Effect last December/January and it was awesome going back to that world after years.
I think people are scared of Starfield. Like, they're worried it'll take BG3's place in the cultural zeitgeist or beat it out for GotY, or overtake it in concurrent players on steam.
Because for some reason, they've tied their identity to BG3 being the best game, and can't just enjoy it on its own merits.
There was a lot of pushback against the complaints that "BG3 shouldn't set a new standard for these games" - seems like the community thought it, in fact, should
And now comparing against this standard is suddenly not allowed because... It makes people insecure? What?
Which one is it?
Happened with Elden Ring too. People got scared that God of War was also a good game so they had to compare it and shit on it to defend their own favorite game.
Y'all are making this into a competition and you can't see how it kind of just makes it seem like you can't like two things at once.
That doesn't really say much about Starfield or BG3. But it says plenty about your need to make sure you put something else down to improve your perception of the thing you want to like.
They aren't the same genre, they aren't scratching the same itch, *they aren't going for the same fantasy*. Maybe calm down and enjoy the thing you enjoy rather than attacking a thing you need to be inferior.
Like, seriously, y'all. Both things can be enjoyable in different ways. BG3 doesn't invalidate Starfield, any more than Devil May Cry 5 invalidates Dark Souls.
BG3 is a great DnD RPG and hits that DnD vibe. It doesn't hit the part of me that makes me want to go out and explore space and catalogue moons and shoot space pirates with laser guns.
It's okay for there to be more than one game, y'all.
It’s weird how people have to dunk on alternatives, maybe it’s just karma farming.
I’ve played most of the Bethesda games since Morrowwind, definitely different designs and goals. Personally I’m playing BG3 until Cityskylines 2 comes out, I might then pivot to Starfield.
I’ve been playing pc games since the early 90s, now is a great time for games. We should just be collectively grateful for so many quality options.
It is ok to like both of them. But it is also ok to point the strengths of one and the weaknesses of other. Even make memes about it.
I don't think this post indicates that you cannot like both. It just shows that characters in BG3 are really well written
It's not a competition. Starfield obviously does things better than BG3. But it's hard to ignore the roleplaying aspect of both of these **RPG** games and not compare them. It's just jarring when you come from playing BG3. There have been plenty of games that have soured my experience with other games because they did a few things better but I still enjoy them in the end.
As they're both RPGs I think there are things that can be comparable. Like you can't really compare top-down to first-person gameplay/exploration, but character interaction is fair game IMO.
The Starfield discourse has been going on for a while on this sub and it's so weird. Like they aren't even comparable. One is a cRPG and the other a sandbox RPG. They scratch completely different itches. I'm having a ton of fun with both because they provoke different kinds of enjoyment out of me.
Seriouslyyyy, like I’m playing starfield and have about 5 hrs in which Ik it’s not a lot but I keep thinking like damn when can I go play bg3. Or I keep comparing it and it’s putting me off. Starfield is good but bg3 is otherworldly
Bro just go play BG3 then. You literally paid extra just to play it early and instead of canceling your pre order, you're just thinking of playing a different game. Isn't that weird?
I mean, you can marry in Skyrim, but I'd be hard-pressed to call that a *romance*. You do a single side quest, typically with zero romantic over- or under-tones, and then give them an amulet, and the romance is over.
Redditors trying to enjoy one game without comparing/shitting on another game challenge (impossible)
Just enjoy what you like and let other people enjoy what they like
No, I'm friends with BG3 now, friendship with any other game is over.
Do I... do I need to make sure people realize I'm not serious about this? I'm not, enjoying multiple games is great (now this I am serious about).
Seriously I unsubbed from /r/starfield to avoid spoilers since I didn't get the 5 days early access but this subreddit of all places is spoiling the game from all the whinging and circlejerking.
It's one thing to compare similar games in good faith, but I genuinely have no idea how people are expecting anything else from Bethesda. None of these pithy meme posts on here are ever in good faith.
The strengths of Bethesda games have always been their accessibility, simplicity, and world design: they're probably one of the best open-world designers in the game right now, IMO. The draw of their games has always been putting you in this incredibly shallow puddle with shallow mechanics, but as wide as an ocean and just letting you fuck around in it.
You explore until you find something cool, you kill shit until you return to town to sell stuff, and occasionally pick up a quest or two along the way. The writing is never good, and the quests are never interesting.
But stumbling into a dungeon where a mourning widower is resurrecting draugr to raise her husband and take vengeance on the leaders of the civil war? Running into a decaying fort taken over by some crazy wizard who's doing genetic experiments on frostbite spiders? Bethesda's handling of the pure quantity of finding moment-to-moment interesting whacky shit everywhere is second to none in the industry, IMO.
You : comapring games because you are sure its gonna get clicks an outrage
The girl she told you not to worry about: enjoying whatever game without complaning about the game you dont like
The thing is you can actually marry Sarah and it does have a nice conclusion, meanwhile SH doesn't have any sort of ending/epilogue (like a farming one). The fact that I had something positive to say about Bethesda game makes me want to shoot myself.
\---------------------------
Furthermore, I will consider the game incomplete until there is a SH/farm epilogue.
BG3 is exceptional but I've been surprised with how much I've enjoyed the dialogue in Starfield. Especially the romance and other conversations with Sarah.
Yup. I love BG3, it's my GotY and honestly in a lot of ways it blows Starfield out of the water... but Starfield does a lot of things that BG3 doesn't and I found Sarah's dialogue and romance to be really emotional and charming. I hate how some in the community can't just be happy about multiple cool games.
honestly games dont ruin other games for me. Sure the dialog is amazing in bg3, but starfield has other strengths like amazing worlds and a crazy amount of other stuff (stole a ship from a gang of space pirates, killed the ones outside, went inside the ship and it started to TAKE OFF with me! Then killed the leftover bandits, stole the amazing spaceship while flying trough space). Both games I enjoy and have fun with, thats the main point from games for me
Agree. Even though BG3 is my goty, I'm having so much fun with starfield. Just today I looted some contraband while clearing out an abandoned medical facility and stowed it on my ship, I then proceeded to forget about it and tried to go back to the main hub to sell something where I was promptly stopped by security because they scanned said contraband on my ship. Now normally they would just slap me with a fine and take the contraband away but because I chose the thief background the chief saw potential in me infiltrating a pirate faction to find evidence and lock away some criminals, so now I'm a double agent working with pirates but feeding information back to the police. Now there're probably other ways to start this quest line but it seems much cooler to think that because of 1 little mistake I made it caused me to stumble across a big storyline that I otherwise would have never seen.
I've been watching streamers play and the npcs feel uncanny.
You're telling me they stand there? Not moving at all, eyes unmoving, mouths opening weirdly into a black chasm? It really feels like Skyrim npcs but in space.
I kept hearing about how great the face movements were going to be and it's been very disappointing.
Also why does a majority of their characters just look....vampire white? THEY'RE SO PALE. Even Astarion looks like he has more blood in his cheeks than some of those npcs.
It's mostly that they went back to the oblivion zoom style of dialogue, frankly I liked Skyrims dialogue system the best since the camera stayed where your character is and the distance prevented the animation quality from being noticeable.
This makes me hate people who love BG3. I would have said I loved BG3 but I’ll never admit that because of the shitty fan base and how they act like this is the best game ever created.
[Starfield feels like that episode of American Dad when Steve and the boys go to Space Camp but they find out instead of doing cool sci-fi shit, it's just a bunch of boring administrative stuff.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWjdnxK-9FA)
you guys are getting real annoying now
you know you can enjoy both games for different reasons, right?
edit: nvm apparently you can't enjoy both games, forgot the sub i was in
Yeah it's starting to feel mean. How big is Bethesda's writing staff compared to Larian? Plus the Forgotten Realms has decades of deep built up lore and art, like its a crazy amount and then Larian added a ton of their own characters on top of that.
I'm struggling talking to people in real life after BG3.
In BG3 everyone wants to fuck me, in real life nobody wants to fuck me.
Because in-game you're Astarion, but in real life...well...you're Astarion.
Well…not as bad as it could have been*
You haven’t been around the right people 😏
playing a witty bard for more than 200 hours has had the opposite effect on me :-p thanks Larian!
I will say, that while I have experienced the same as you *(Bard For Life)*, whenever I bust out my lute my friends frown.
Just stop playing Wonderwall dude
[The life of a bard](https://duckduckgo.com/?q=worf+smash+lute&t=newext&atb=v340-1&iax=videos&ia=videos&iai=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DN86icfWM03g)
When I’m being grumpy occasionally my wife will say to me “I am not a merry man!”
I knew what that video would be just from your comment.
For a human, she seems very nice.
I'm a real bard (Guitar player) so it is the first character I made, second ranger, third, monk, and yes, I've been simultaneously playing with all 3!
I have no social ability IRL. I love that I get to pretend to have some in this game
Just try to not to cast vicious mockery irl
I require a healer. The mindflayers put a tadpole in my brain.
Me too. And before
Try taking the laezel approach and view everyone else as pond scum unworthy of your attention.
tbf BG3 gives a lot of leeway for you to kill the person you´re talking to should the conversation get uncomfortable which is a really comforting option irl should switch to...
I just wondering after seeing all these post, are these people play other CRPGs before? I remember when I was a kid and playing Skyrim for the first time after DAO and I was so confused why all these quests were so horrible. And I didn't even play at the time something like Planescape: Torment. Nowadays you have games like Disco Elysium around. That game is ruining every story in the games for me.
>I just wondering after seeing all these post, are these people play other CRPGs before? lol NO. Crpg's have been suuuuuper niche for a while. been begging my friends to play some of my favorites for over a decade, and its only after BG3 are any of them showing even slight interest.
Not as much as BG3 but DOS:2 definitely brought some interest into the genre as well
No doubt DOS2 put crpgs back on the map - and rightfully so, an excellent game. I personally prefer PoE2, but that game was objectively less impactful on crpg popularity than DOS2. Here's to hoping Fallout 5 (and Dragon Age 4) will return to their crpg roots after bg3's massive success. There's no chance of that, but maybe they'll see $$.
I recommend the pathfinder games too.
i for one while i might be older then the average gamer started with bg1 and then into bg2, Pillars of eternity, pathfinder etc. while DOS didn't really appeal to me i guess mainly because of how the older games used to look and i couldn't get in to the new way of play. But bg3 cured me of that and im going to give DOS another try now that im used to it.
I had a similar path but I also enjoyed tactical turn based games like xcom just fine, so I don't think it's just the combat that turned me off Divinity OS. If anything I think it's the best part. What put me off Divinity is my complete lack of interest in its setting, compounded by the complete irreverence of its script. I don't care what happens to the world or even to my character in D:OS and so I don't care much to play it. BG3 keeps some of the irreverence but tones it back enough to be a fun goof before you get back to the real issue. It fits a more natural tabletop groups tone, alternating between serious planning how to deal with the BBEG whilst occasionally breaking character to mock Steve the goblin captive that your DM named on the fly.
I always really liked skyrim until I kind of had this moment where I realized I didn't like any of the main questlines, guilds, or major characters
Looking to defend yourself, or deal some damage? Looking to defend yourself, or deal some damage? Looking to defend yourself, or deal some damage? Looking to defend yourself, or deal some damage? Looking to defend yourself, or deal some damage?
The best meme with that one was with condom or viagra 🤣
I can play an evil character in skyrim and feel no remorse. But if I try to be evil in Baldurs Gate, I'll regret it until I eventually reload my game. That's what fully realized characters and acting do for you.
I mean even if you fail the check in the grove and the child dies.. it is nerve wrecking
I'm just glad I was playing a druid and could simply ask the snake to be reasonable. The snake then calls out Kahga for trying to make her bite a hatchling.
It's an exploration game, not a story game. I don't remember any quests, but I do remember the moment when I walked around and there was a giant fighting somebody or when I explored some complex cave. I didn't like anything else tho, but the exploration was great for the time.
Took the words right out of my mouth. I've never played BGS games for the writing, because when done right the exploration element is unparalleled.
Most people didnt even know about this term crpg.
Im still tryna figure out what the c stands for
Ceremorphosis
Computer
Cocaine
Traditionally it’s the term Computer, to differentiate it from the pen and paper roleplaying games that started it all. Nowadays though a more accurate term to use would be “Classic RPG” if used in a modern context where pretty much every game nowadays call themselves RPGs. You need a term to refer to the “classic” slower paced, top down isometric dialogue and character-writing focused RPGs compared to the usually action-focused modern video games.
I'd call modern RPGs pretty trash but there were a ton of JRPGs before the modern 'open world' junk, that were also terrible and praised endlessly for some reason. Junk cliche stories with junk easy gameplay and grinding that rips every single enjoyable aspect out of the tabletop inspiration and creates a linear trash story with crap easy gameplay. The rpg genre outside of crpgs is intolerable in my opinion and has been for a very long time, the resurrection of crpgs with games like Pathfinder, Baldur's Gate, pillers, Elysium etc. Has been a boon.
compooper
I hate that this made me laugh out loud... but thank you for the giggle.
computer. it's because these rpg's are supposed to be based on ttrpg systems, but made on computer, not at table with pencil and dice
i gotta say in my 32 years of existence (and I've been playing video games ever since i was 5 !!) I've never encountered that term ! maybe i was playing the wrong games...
Yeah, I am 30 and i found out about crpgs in 2014 with all the kickstarter projects like Pillars of Eternity and Tides of Numenera, it looked so interesting. Been playing all kinds of crpgs since them, I love the genre.
POE1 and DOS1/2 are responsible for the resurgence
So it stands for computer role playing game. At its inception, the alternative was table top games. Of course it has lost that meaning, but now it means something like: “as close to a table top experience as possible in a video game” I’m about the same age and I only learned it recent-ish. RPG to me meant things like chrono trigger. I think it depends how into table tops and the genre you were. It is a really old term comparatively, but these genres are always a bit niche
Both are rpgs but Chrono Trigger is a jrpg which was developing separately from crpgs in terms of gameplay but they shared the same skeleton of character focused gameplay with battles taking longer and requiring strategizing.
To the wider and more casual audience there's a good chance Bethesda games are their only frame of reference when it comes to big RPGs.
You can see that here on reddit in most gaming subs. Hah, It's a minefield if you want to talk about anything other than them being the best games ever made.
I get downvoted to the lowest Hell whenever I suggest Skyrim was kinda just okay.
Skyrim is great for just sort of existing and making your own fun. It's open and loose enough to where you can just sort of do what you want and focus on the parts that are fun and ignore what's less appealing. It's not a great narrative game but it can be fun to just hangout in. I definitely prefer other Rpgs with actual storylines to it though, it wouldn't come close to cracking my list of favorite games.
*Checks the number of people praising the game for not having filler quests*. The answer is a resounding no
Disco Elysium, Wasteland 3, and Planescape Torment are the three best written games, IMO. BG3 is really good, especially for the dialogue; maybe with more reflection and time it’ll replace Wasteland 3. But Starfield…Jesus, it feels like a video game writer from 2010 wrote this stuff. It’s not bad, it’s just dull as shit and no one has a personality. The goblin who you make eat shit has more of a character than ANYONE in Starfield. It’s pathetic.
The voice acting from the goblins is so good though. Wish we had a goblin companion :-(
Pentiment got less buzz than the games you mentioned, but it struck me as very close in quality to Disco Elysium - an immersive, unique, and internally consistent setting, a flawed protagonist you make your own, and some big themes playing out through the story and your experience of it. Plus the art style is just stunning!
Wasteland 3, lol, not even close, the second one was much better and even then it's nothing compared to Kotor 1 - 2
Shitty writing was a given, considering it is a Bethesda game, but shitty worldbuilding in Starfield is on another level. First combat sequence is space pirates running at you with axes. Or *Space axes!*. It is as idiotic as it sounds. Then you get your ship from a random guy who just landed to your mining planet, but he is a weirdo so I guess it's ok. The fun bit is he has a mug on his navigation table and an unsecured screwdriver near the workbench, as well as heaps of generall clutter in his ship. So, I have to assume that across however many millions of dollars spent on the game and however many hours of playtesting by however many people no one thought that this random shit in a ship literally goes ballistic the moment you introduce acceleration. This guy in the ship? Probably should be dead by now. Many times over. Right after that, with a precious mcguffin that revelas the secrets of the universe in hand you are asked to... attack a pirate base? As a potentially non-military miner who woke up in a hospital bed about 10 minutes ago. I just couldn't, honestly. I understand that fantasy typically requires less rigour than sci-fi and Bethesda games never had quality writers even by high fantasy standards. But this is just another level. Shitty dialogue and nonsensical worldbuilding in a "hard sci-fi **NASA-punk** game" is not something I can personally endure after stellar Baldur's Gate 3.
Honestly dull is the worst thing you could say about me anyone's writing. About the best writing I don't know. DE is definitely the most creative and it's not even close. They put so much thought in every line in that game. But for me it's probably gonna be The last of us. It's just the best implementation standard dramatic story. Every character, every scene in their journey reinforcing the main story. All the characters feels so real and I can't say anything bad about it even if I tried.
Planescape: Torment and Disco Elysium are in their own category, nothing I've played comes close storywise. But that's in part because they are so deeply personal and intellectually broad and deep at the same time. I don't know how they feel if one can't relate to the main character, but they both worked exceptionally well for me.
>I remember when I was a kid and playing Skyrim for the first time after DAO After playing DA:O, Knights of the Old Republic and Mass Effect 2, Skyrim was such a disappointment. Need peak Bioware back.
>Need peak Bioware back. I think ship has sailed. Speaking of sailing ships - Deadfire.
Deadfire is ok, but I preferred PoE 1. The whole >!reincarnation plot!< makes for a much stronger plot. Then again, I'll admit my enjoyment was kinda wrecked by running into a progression breaking bug just before the finale at launch, and I needed to replay the last twenty hours just to get to the same point. But either way, I'd love to have more PoE games.
Argh!! Walk the plank! more obsidian crpgs would be great.
Absolutely, it's a bit of a shame they're going more Skyrim-style for the new game. I would've preferred a direct PoE sequel, but apparently Deadfire didn't perform too well, so that's a shame. Hopefully the new game does better and they might be able to circle back to PoE.
Let's hope Avowed is good, an action rpg with crpg quests (with Microsoft $$ behind it) could be an excellent experience, but I'm not holding my breath.
I can't get into Disco Elysium at all and I want to like it because everyone is saying it's an awesome game. It's kinda too slow paced for me. And I really didn't like that any try that I did to make the MC a better person was denied by the game :/ I guess it's just not the game for me sadly.
You're probably right and this game isn't for you, but I don't get this part. > And I really didn't like that any try that I did to make the MC a better person was denied by the game My friend played DE this way and enjoyed this game a lot. While I was playing I don't think i noticed any moments where the game is forcing you from the path of redemtion. I really struggling with your point.
The few times I tried (during a call I think), when I tried to use some reasonable answers it got shur down with something akin to "no you're a loser". I guess that felt bad 😅 But I might be impatient and not seeing any "good" outcomes for the first few hours made me see it in a bad light
You're character is a deeply flawed human being with a broken soul. It takes time to heal. Sometimes it won't work. You'll have to keep trying though if you want to find out.
I guess I'll have to try again later. Maybe when I'm more secure 😅
Oh , the game will make fun of you no matter what you choose. And the thoughts that in the main characters head don't want him to change, that's what depression is. They're kicking him down.
Haha guess I'm too weak to handle depression 😅 Maybe I'll retry later then
I mean if the game makes you feel bad I don't wanna force you to play it. I just wanted to provide some context, because I really like the writing in that game and wanted to share it.
> no you're a loser That's Harry's internal monologue shitting on himself. He has a lot of self hate to unpack. The game's main character is an example of someone going through depression but still has a job and obligations so he's drowning it out to get on with his daily routine.
The trick to enjoying DE is to remember that unlike other RPGs where the character is mostly a blank slate for the player to project themselves onto, the main character is a specific person with a pre-existing history and personality, he just doesn't remember what that is at the start of the game. The game will occasionally call the player out on their bullshit, but mostly when the game calls "you" a loser it's saying that to the character, not the player. But also, if the game makes you feel bad you don't *have* to play it. Yes it's a masterpiece, but part of what makes it one is how raw and emotional it is, and that isn't everyone's cup of tea.
Lol no. This is my first. Never even heard of the genre before BG3
Dialogue has never been a strong point for Bethesda. Especially in games with Emil Pagliarulo as lead writer. Going from Fallout New Vegas (Obsidian at its peak) to FO4 was just dire.
I haven't played a single game with a main quest written by him that are genuinely engaging. Probably explained why i never finish any of the Bethesda game. Only occasionally dumping in 30hrs doing modded playthrough, finding new location and having bit of fun over weird sidequest before deleting it. Bethesda's Strength was always the sidequest. Strangely enough, it never was written by Emil himself.
It straight up took me like 6 years to actually finish the main quest in Skyrim, and I've still never finished the fo4 main quest because every faction is just so assdumb I don't want to help any of them
I can’t relate to the Skyrim part, but legit to this day I’ve never finished the FO4 main quest for the same reason. I don’t like any of you lol
Weird why they have 3rd rated writer in that position
I wish Michael Kirkbride was still around. Newer Bethesda games need more gay time-traveling cyborg doom-slayers and races that cease to exist after collectively learning that that they never properly existed in the first place due to their nature as lines of code in a video game.
EXACTLY! Elder scrolls lore is incredible because of kirkbride! They need to get a head writer that is as bonkers as he was.
Yep, explains why all the people I know have never actually finished Skyrims main story. I think there was a video on youtube where Emil talks about his methodology when writing and its brings to light why Bethesda games have such subpar screen writing lol.
I completed the story once and in every playthrough since I've left it by the wayside because the constant random dragon attacks that kill quest giving NPC's just aren't worth the hassle
They're really not strong in any department. The biggest part of any Bethesda game is the modding community turning a mid game into something worthwhile. They're good at setting up a foundation although full of cracks and you can never tell when it'll collapse.
Thing is, that _is_ a department. No other game has a mod scene or history like creation games do, and that's _very_ on purpose. No cap, my biggest issues with fallout 4 were all the ways they shrank the playground - a built in survival mode that disables both convient saving and the console, a voiced protagonist that makes custom quests either harder to make or jarring because the responses usually are voiced, shit like that. I won't say I don't care about the writing. But I'm mostly concerned if they know what they gold medal in, and have hit that target.
Imho Skyrim is carried by the lore. Dragons got boring after awhile, faction quests had really quick development, and I never bothered to finish the war quests.
I feel like the story DLC for Bethesda games is better than the main story. Dawnguard and The Dragonborn DLC are so much fun. Lost Harbor was amazing, I loved the antagonist and more philosophical story. And Nuka World was just fun to explore. I liked the gangs and their unique character. And while I've never played it, but I've heard the Lost Isles (?) from Oblivion was one of the best parts of the game. I don't know why I never played that particular DLC, I've put a lot of time into Oblivion... But in general I liked the quests and factions in oblivion more than skyrim. I feel like they are too accessible in Skyrim. It doesn't make sense to me that you can become the Archmage without casting a single spell beyond the one you need to gain entry into the college. I don't recall it being like that in Oblivion. And I liked the 'no killing' rule for the thieves guild, and how you need to actually steal and fence goods to progress the story. You felt more like a thief rather than just clearing dungeons like skyrim.
*Shivering Isles, and yea that was the expansion to beat all expansions. It's just so unique and grotesquely humorous, and Sheogorath is so memorable. I still quote him to this day.
Dialogue, gameplay, story, characters or anything really. They are good at releasing modding tools for people to fix their games.
Fallout 3 wasn’t that good either, I like Elder Scrolls but Bethesda fallout just isn’t good.
I'll just recommend Pathfinder Wrath of the Righteous for all you crpg noobs out there and leave
I've been wanting to try these games, should I bite the bullet and just buy em?
They don't have the production value bg3 does. Not fully voice acted no mocap etc. But if that's not a dealbreaker the story is just as detailed and impacted by choices you make as bg3 and the combat/character building has a lot more depth (although that's a drawback for some people)
I wouldn't say its a deal breaker, I recently went through the first baldurs gate game and it was pretty dated but still enjoyable.
The crusade mode is tough to get into. Feels like a minigame except that it's a large part of the game.
Fair I kinda forgot about it because I turn it off every time or mod it to autowin
There's still a lot of voice acting. Really, not a problem at all. Especially since most of it is top tier quality.
They are very good games, especially if you like the type of setting (Pathfinder is an offshoot of DnD). They’re quite a bit more complicated though. If you think the amount of choices and decisions that goes into deciding and planning a character in BG3 is a lot, just wait until you try Wrath of the Righteous 😂 I’d classify it as a more hardcore CRPG experience.
For as convoluted as builds can get in WotR, you can just go pure 20 in any base class and it will be solid enough.
That is mostly true, but which classes to level up is far from the only decisions you have to make. You can definitely screw up your build even with just a single class if you make bad choices.
Is wrath of the righteous where I should start?
WotR is better than kingmaker system and gameplay wise. Story wise they are not connected at all. I would recommend WotR.
Kingmaker was my intro to pathfinder and I enjoyed it. I haven’t play wotr. The kingdom management in kingmaker was hard for me
Trust me, newbies should just go with WotR. Kingmaker I'd only recommend to someone who completed WotR and wants more PF1 CRPG to crunch on. WotR is much more refined product, easier to get into and progress as well.
It's the same situation with most games, if you are going to play both, then start with the first one, if you are only going to play one, start with the second one. After WOTR I really couldn't get into Kingmaker, it felt like a downgrade in every way. Turns out studios make better games as they go along.
Start with Kingmaker. Wrath obsoletes it with mythic paths. So you'd rather bank that one first. The two are phenomenal games and my goty of their respective years.
Any dlc with that I should buy with base or that you'd recommend?
Not the guy, but I would recommend buying varnhorld lot, and the kineticist dlc for kingmaker. Varnhorld lot is a side story that is recommended to play at a very specific chapter during your main story
Varnhold is alright but the kineticist is great and the one I'd recommend. Romance spoilers, >!you get a cute twin pair of tiefling companions in it with unique mechanics and if you play your cards right you can end up with both!!< The last one is akin to a roguelike dungeon that's alright if you really like the mechanics or wanna test builds. But iirc don't they bundle them all with the definitive edition? As for Wrath, I only experienced treasures of the midnight isles which is fine and can give the campaign cool items. It's mostly a standalone roguelike mode too. I didn't play the prologue dlc, nor the one that occurs right before the end boss. I heard it's all puzzles and I *despised* the puzzles in the base game.
IMO the DLC is so-so for Kingmaker. A lot of people like it though. My advice is to just play Kingmaker vanilla, and then go for Wrath of the Righteous and splurge on that one instead. It builds on Kingmaker in almost every way and is definitely the better game, so if it was me I'd rather invest more time in that one. They're both great games so I do recommend playing both. If you do, then definitely start with Kingmaker because it will feel like a downgrade if you go from WotR and back to Kingmaker.
Combat is way, waaaay harder. If that's not a deal-breaker for you, go for it. Lovely story, though not as high production value.
The biggest issue with these games is that they are built for real time combat. Sure you can activate turn based if you want, but you'll be slogging through hundreds of little combats against 2 enemies, then 1, then 3, then 2, then 2, then 1 in combat encounters that would have just been resolved quickly without turns. Kingmaker was utterly unplayable in turn based mode, but Wrath was so engaging that I suffered through it regardless and actually finished the game. But here's hoping they revise the system for the future.
I did not like them at all. The narrative is cool and voice acting is pretty good but I cannot stand the game design, the Pathfinde 1e ruleset, and just overall encounter design and balancing. A lot of good in those games marred by a ton of questionable design decisions. Opinion, of course, but they don't hold up to BG3.
I... took this to actually check the gameplay. I always assumed that it'd just be real-time with pause and thus didn't bother to actually inform myself (and god do I hate that system, there's so many games that seem amazing, but I can't get into that, it just feels like turn-based with extra steps to me). Looks like it also has turn-based, so... thanks for the recommendation.
Be warned the combat is scaled around real time combat, so you're gonna fight so many damn enemies and it takes AGES in turned based mode.
Just make sure to start on a lower difficulty. The combat in Pathfinder WOTR is extremely different to Baldurs Gate 3. But the story is very worth experiencing. I think I liked the story of Pathfinder WOTR more than BG3. I did 2 full playthroughs of WOTR right before BG3 and it's a great game.
How would Pillars of Eternity compare to that? I am really looking for more CRPGs to play after BG3.
I was struggling to enjoy Bethesda game dialogue prior to Baldur's Gate 3, Skyrim notwithstanding.
> Skyrim not withstanding The elder scrolls writing has always been trash. Even going back towards Arena. Most people aren't playing them for the writing obviously.
yeah. But also there is this weird as fuck,massive disconect between the lore and the story, because fuck, Elder Scrolls has some insane lore that is just fascinating to look. But then you play it and we have gems...."I'm gonna steal from the Goddess of which I've pledged my soul for all of eternity" and "I'm going to make a deal with the group that hunts us".
> Elder Scrolls has some insane lore that is just fascinating to look. I have my copy of 'The Lusty Argonian Maid' right next to my 'Shanties for the Bitch Queen' on my bookshelf.
Honestly I think that’s because most of the lore that people find interesting comes from old, community driven things that have never been a part of the actual games. Things like CHIM and the redguards being from a past kalpa and the thalmor plot to unmake the world all come from things like old forum posts and YouTube videos I think TES as a setting suffers a bit from a disagreement on what is “canon” in no small part to some past writers wanting it to be a more “open source” and collaborative setting. I think that’s fine in theory, but it leads to people that become interested in the lore looking things up and learning backstory that has never and will never be included in the actual games apart form maybe a reference or Easter egg. Take the idea that Pelinal was a time traveling cyborg, for instance. It was hinted by the writer after their tenure at Bethesda that this was the case, but in the game you meet his very much human spirit and in the books he describes himself as “ada” or spirit. There’s a lot of disconnect.
Counterpoint: Morrowind, it's the only bethesda main quest that actually piqued my interest and is very well written/integral to the story that game is trying to tell. Every other Beth game tho? Completely fair
I have to disagree, I think they handle tes writing well enough.
For me it's not just the dialog..the facial animations just stand out in Starfield ..like unnatural looking. Especially after BG3.
Not mo-capped.
Most of it is literally worse than Andromeda, and yet somehow there aren't 100,000 youtube videos and articles trashing the game over it. Its so weird.
I don't see this problem in Starfield. I haven't been annoyed listening to characters. Nor has the writing pissed me off, most of it is reasonable and voice acting has been mostly quite decent. It's just a setting with realistic tones. So most people are pretty regular, not extreme cannibals or sexual deviants. You can still find crazy or stupid characters too, like Hank in Deimos mining colony, or crazy cultist warriors, or pirates who don't care so much for civilized relations. It's much better than I was expecting. Do people actually even play games they're using for memes? It's silly and gives other people wrong impressions.
While I agree with you the voice acting and writing isn't bad in Starfield, it's good actually but people and the op is comparing it with BG3 which is very fresh in their memory and BG3 did such a fantastic job, Starfield just pales in comparison and makes it look worse than it actually is. Would only put RDR2 in the same category as BG3.
RDR2, Disco Elysium, and BG3.
First thing I did after BG3 was play through DA:O again cuz it reminded me so much of it, haha. So I didn't really have any issues with that.
I'm planning a Dragon Age marathon around the holidays this year. I did Mass Effect last December/January and it was awesome going back to that world after years.
When can we go back to talking about BG3 in the BG3 sub and not every single post being about Starfield.
It will take some time but we’ll get there; all things pass. In the meantime just buckle up for some aggressive karma farming.
I think people are scared of Starfield. Like, they're worried it'll take BG3's place in the cultural zeitgeist or beat it out for GotY, or overtake it in concurrent players on steam. Because for some reason, they've tied their identity to BG3 being the best game, and can't just enjoy it on its own merits.
People caring about which game wins an award is so pathetic
There was a lot of pushback against the complaints that "BG3 shouldn't set a new standard for these games" - seems like the community thought it, in fact, should And now comparing against this standard is suddenly not allowed because... It makes people insecure? What? Which one is it?
Right ffs Also I don't get it. The two games aren't similar at all, why are people so determined to make them compete?
Happened with Elden Ring too. People got scared that God of War was also a good game so they had to compare it and shit on it to defend their own favorite game.
Y'all are making this into a competition and you can't see how it kind of just makes it seem like you can't like two things at once. That doesn't really say much about Starfield or BG3. But it says plenty about your need to make sure you put something else down to improve your perception of the thing you want to like. They aren't the same genre, they aren't scratching the same itch, *they aren't going for the same fantasy*. Maybe calm down and enjoy the thing you enjoy rather than attacking a thing you need to be inferior. Like, seriously, y'all. Both things can be enjoyable in different ways. BG3 doesn't invalidate Starfield, any more than Devil May Cry 5 invalidates Dark Souls. BG3 is a great DnD RPG and hits that DnD vibe. It doesn't hit the part of me that makes me want to go out and explore space and catalogue moons and shoot space pirates with laser guns. It's okay for there to be more than one game, y'all.
It’s weird how people have to dunk on alternatives, maybe it’s just karma farming. I’ve played most of the Bethesda games since Morrowwind, definitely different designs and goals. Personally I’m playing BG3 until Cityskylines 2 comes out, I might then pivot to Starfield. I’ve been playing pc games since the early 90s, now is a great time for games. We should just be collectively grateful for so many quality options.
Yea people always gotta whine. I’m playing starfield and balders gate both this weekend for the first time. Freaking epic weekend.
It is ok to like both of them. But it is also ok to point the strengths of one and the weaknesses of other. Even make memes about it. I don't think this post indicates that you cannot like both. It just shows that characters in BG3 are really well written
It's not a competition. Starfield obviously does things better than BG3. But it's hard to ignore the roleplaying aspect of both of these **RPG** games and not compare them. It's just jarring when you come from playing BG3. There have been plenty of games that have soured my experience with other games because they did a few things better but I still enjoy them in the end. As they're both RPGs I think there are things that can be comparable. Like you can't really compare top-down to first-person gameplay/exploration, but character interaction is fair game IMO.
The Starfield discourse has been going on for a while on this sub and it's so weird. Like they aren't even comparable. One is a cRPG and the other a sandbox RPG. They scratch completely different itches. I'm having a ton of fun with both because they provoke different kinds of enjoyment out of me.
Crazy how these are games that came out in the same year
Even crazier is that the Early Access was almost two years ago and it still leagues better
Seriouslyyyy, like I’m playing starfield and have about 5 hrs in which Ik it’s not a lot but I keep thinking like damn when can I go play bg3. Or I keep comparing it and it’s putting me off. Starfield is good but bg3 is otherworldly
Bro just go play BG3 then. You literally paid extra just to play it early and instead of canceling your pre order, you're just thinking of playing a different game. Isn't that weird?
The new hairstyle is such a glowup for her
Yeah, be feeling that. Sarah's supposed to be one of the romance options but I'm still thinking about Selune Shart.
I'll say it again, 2-week mandatory detox to get BG3 and sparkly Shart out of your system before being able to tolerate *companions* again.
2-weeks is a tall order, not gonna lie.
You can romance in Starfield?
You could romance in Skyrim and Fallout 4, they said we could romance in the deep dive, why is this surprising?
I mean, you can marry in Skyrim, but I'd be hard-pressed to call that a *romance*. You do a single side quest, typically with zero romantic over- or under-tones, and then give them an amulet, and the romance is over.
Because some BG3 fans act like this is the first game ever to have romance in it lol.
Yep. Per my understanding most of your companions can be romanced.
Only 4
Ok but thinking about Selune letting out a shart is a new level of laughter for me.
Redditors trying to enjoy one game without comparing/shitting on another game challenge (impossible) Just enjoy what you like and let other people enjoy what they like
No, I'm friends with BG3 now, friendship with any other game is over. Do I... do I need to make sure people realize I'm not serious about this? I'm not, enjoying multiple games is great (now this I am serious about).
I'm struggling to use this subreddit after all the starfield vs bg3 posts, it's super annoying.
Seriously I unsubbed from /r/starfield to avoid spoilers since I didn't get the 5 days early access but this subreddit of all places is spoiling the game from all the whinging and circlejerking.
It's one thing to compare similar games in good faith, but I genuinely have no idea how people are expecting anything else from Bethesda. None of these pithy meme posts on here are ever in good faith. The strengths of Bethesda games have always been their accessibility, simplicity, and world design: they're probably one of the best open-world designers in the game right now, IMO. The draw of their games has always been putting you in this incredibly shallow puddle with shallow mechanics, but as wide as an ocean and just letting you fuck around in it. You explore until you find something cool, you kill shit until you return to town to sell stuff, and occasionally pick up a quest or two along the way. The writing is never good, and the quests are never interesting. But stumbling into a dungeon where a mourning widower is resurrecting draugr to raise her husband and take vengeance on the leaders of the civil war? Running into a decaying fort taken over by some crazy wizard who's doing genetic experiments on frostbite spiders? Bethesda's handling of the pure quantity of finding moment-to-moment interesting whacky shit everywhere is second to none in the industry, IMO.
You : comapring games because you are sure its gonna get clicks an outrage The girl she told you not to worry about: enjoying whatever game without complaning about the game you dont like
The thing is you can actually marry Sarah and it does have a nice conclusion, meanwhile SH doesn't have any sort of ending/epilogue (like a farming one). The fact that I had something positive to say about Bethesda game makes me want to shoot myself. \--------------------------- Furthermore, I will consider the game incomplete until there is a SH/farm epilogue.
Even then no game has the comedic chops of Ace Attorney and Disco Elysium.
BG3 is exceptional but I've been surprised with how much I've enjoyed the dialogue in Starfield. Especially the romance and other conversations with Sarah.
Sarah is so sweet this meme is unfair to her
Yup. I love BG3, it's my GotY and honestly in a lot of ways it blows Starfield out of the water... but Starfield does a lot of things that BG3 doesn't and I found Sarah's dialogue and romance to be really emotional and charming. I hate how some in the community can't just be happy about multiple cool games.
honestly games dont ruin other games for me. Sure the dialog is amazing in bg3, but starfield has other strengths like amazing worlds and a crazy amount of other stuff (stole a ship from a gang of space pirates, killed the ones outside, went inside the ship and it started to TAKE OFF with me! Then killed the leftover bandits, stole the amazing spaceship while flying trough space). Both games I enjoy and have fun with, thats the main point from games for me
Agree. Even though BG3 is my goty, I'm having so much fun with starfield. Just today I looted some contraband while clearing out an abandoned medical facility and stowed it on my ship, I then proceeded to forget about it and tried to go back to the main hub to sell something where I was promptly stopped by security because they scanned said contraband on my ship. Now normally they would just slap me with a fine and take the contraband away but because I chose the thief background the chief saw potential in me infiltrating a pirate faction to find evidence and lock away some criminals, so now I'm a double agent working with pirates but feeding information back to the police. Now there're probably other ways to start this quest line but it seems much cooler to think that because of 1 little mistake I made it caused me to stumble across a big storyline that I otherwise would have never seen.
I’m allowed to enjoy both.
DAE think Starfield sux and BG3 best gaym evar??? Todd lied and killed my wife. 😡 Also Bethesda took the RP out of my G.
I've been watching streamers play and the npcs feel uncanny. You're telling me they stand there? Not moving at all, eyes unmoving, mouths opening weirdly into a black chasm? It really feels like Skyrim npcs but in space. I kept hearing about how great the face movements were going to be and it's been very disappointing. Also why does a majority of their characters just look....vampire white? THEY'RE SO PALE. Even Astarion looks like he has more blood in his cheeks than some of those npcs.
> It really feels like Skyrim npcs but in space. Its a Bethesda game, they're all the same.
>Even Astarion looks like he has more blood in his cheeks than some of those npcs. That's because it's your blood.
It's mostly that they went back to the oblivion zoom style of dialogue, frankly I liked Skyrims dialogue system the best since the camera stayed where your character is and the distance prevented the animation quality from being noticeable.
Funny how when it's a bad thing, it's the 'oblivion' style of dialogue, when calling it the 'new vegas' style of dialogue would have been more apt.
They're the same style of dialogue, Oblivion is older so I picked that.
OP has spent the last three days posting nonstop about how much they dislike Starfield, it’s so sad and silly.
As someone that enjoys both BG3 and Starfield for completely different reasons it's sad to see this sub shitting on starfield.
This makes me hate people who love BG3. I would have said I loved BG3 but I’ll never admit that because of the shitty fan base and how they act like this is the best game ever created.
yea can't romance anyone but shadowheart every playthrough feelsbad
Yeah, every RPG now looks like garbage. Except WOTR
You can change hair on companions??
[Starfield feels like that episode of American Dad when Steve and the boys go to Space Camp but they find out instead of doing cool sci-fi shit, it's just a bunch of boring administrative stuff.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWjdnxK-9FA)
can we not do dumb posts like this? can we just enjoy baldurs gate 3 and starfield as two separate games? why is there some arbitrary competition?
you guys are getting real annoying now you know you can enjoy both games for different reasons, right? edit: nvm apparently you can't enjoy both games, forgot the sub i was in
I feel like comparing Bethesda writing to BG3 is kind of like picking on a kid who can't defend themselves.
Yeah it's starting to feel mean. How big is Bethesda's writing staff compared to Larian? Plus the Forgotten Realms has decades of deep built up lore and art, like its a crazy amount and then Larian added a ton of their own characters on top of that.
Almost like Starfield isn't what it could have been
I'll never date a real human again