Baldur’s Gate 3 isn’t the first successful attempt to marry cinematic aspirations with the traditional branching narratives and simulationist world-building of CRPGs. 2009’s Dragon Age: Origins had a very similar mission statement, offering a spiritual successor to BioWare’s earlier Baldur’s Gate titles long before Larian took us back to the titular city (and its surrounding areas).

  • Jordan Lund@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I don’t get the constant comparisons to Dragon Age: Origins… it was a terrible game! Bad graphics, bad animations, a terrible cliched storyline where every beat was telegraphed and predictible… I still feel ripped off and it’s been 14 years ago now.

    It’s like nobody ever played GOOD fantasy RPGs, like the Gold Box games from SSI or Ultima, or Bard’s Tale, or Wizardry?

    • emptyother@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      The most important thing, which DA:O shares with Mass Effect, is that it gives the player an illusion that choices matter. That dopamine effect, together with a good but mostly linear story, and interesting companion characters, is a recipe for success with many people, like me. I mostly only play it once, rarely replay, so the illusion of choice isnt as easily ruined.

      And companions is a big comparable thing between DA:O and BG3. Larian has really focused on that in this game, so of course it would make people compare it to DA.

    • Renacles@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t get it either, I liked the main plot in DA:O but most of the game is dealing with some big side quests that have next to nothing to do with it.

      I don’t remember having many big decisions either, a few characters might die but it doesn’t really matter in the end.