this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2023
39 points (100.0% liked)
PC Gaming
10 readers
1 users here now
Discuss Games, Hardware and News on PC Gaming **Discord** https://discord.gg/4bxJgkY **Mastodon** https://cupoftea.social **Donate** https://ko-fi.com/cupofteasocial **Wiki** https://www.pcgamingwiki.com
founded 1 year ago
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
And it shouldn't be. Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 are amazing games that pioneered or popularized many things we've come to expect in modern RPGs, but they're also 20+ years old. If Bioware's Baldur's Gate was released today, it wouldn't be revolutionary. It would be an excellently made throwback to how RPGs used to be.
BG3 isn't made by the same studio, let alone the same people. Their admiration of what they're building upon is clear as a sunny day, though. So let this carry on the spirit of what was and be the foundation of something new.
If it’s nothing like them, that does make me wonder why it’s named as the third in the series instead of something different entirely like the game itself is.
Most likely? Nostalgia and familiarity. We'll probably never know if the decision to make it Baldur's Gate 3 was WotC/Hasbro's or Larian's.
There's precedent, though. Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance had less of a connection to Bioware's BG than this one does.
Sure, Dark Alliance has almost nothing to do with the BG CRPGs other than the setting. But it also wasn’t named as a direct sequel to them, either.
And I get the corporate reasons for it. But I think those reasons are stupid if the game actually has nothing to do with the games it’s supposed to be a direct sequel to.
That was beautiful. It perfectly represents how I feel about newer Assassin's Creed games, to be honest. Excited for Mirage to return the series to its roots, though.