the games master (or dungeon master) has long been one of the most fascinating roles one can play in any game - be it video, table, or sport. a blend of one-person theatre, moderation, improvisational comedy, and game design, with the emphasis on these roles and others besides shifting from person to person, from table to table, it's a truly unique position, and it's perhaps the key thing that makes computer role-playing fundamentally different from tabletop role-playing, even if you're still playing with friends. when a game is your dungeon master, it becomes non-negotiable, unwavering, utterly fastidious, and miserly in its rule-keeping. this is not always a problem if the rules are strong enough - i'm not especially interested in playing a game of Go with a referee who's cool with me eating the opponent's pieces when they aren't looking, except maybe as a one-off - but when the rules are not strong enough, it leaves me craving the human hand of a DM who will gently massage the systems behind the scenes to ensure everyone involved is having fun. and in Fifth Edition, the rules are, assuredly, not Strong Enough.

Fifth Edition Dungeons & Dragons is, bluntly, a poor TTRPG that demands a level of simulationist interest that would bore a 40K player (quick question, has anyone who has ever played 5E ever gave a shit about the carry weight of currency? did you even know that the gold you're carrying around has a weight that you're supposed to manage?) as support to a tactical game that is as shallow as it is torturously prolonged, capped by a social game that is functionally nonexistent. D&D is content to coast by on its cultural ubiquity and the fact that almost all of its player base barely even really knows that other TTRPGs exist, sailing the seas of mediocrity on a boat that starts to sink if you set foot in it for more than a few minutes. it is possible to play wonderful games in D&D, but I have yet to hear of - or be part of - one that was wonderful because it was D&D - rather, they are invariably good in spite of D&D, and always require some degree of selective memory or active rejection over many of the game's outrageously numerous rules.

given this perspective, it's perhaps not surprising that i am not enormously enthused by larian studios' Baldur's Gate III, a game that attempts to faithfully adapt the 5E rules to the broad framework of the studio's last game, Divinity: Original Sin II. but even with that in mind, i find myself genuinely shocked at how unbelievably boring BG3 is.

as the soothsayers on the mount foretold would occur the instant Larian proudly announced their design intentions, marrying 5th Edition Dungeons & Dragons to Divinity Original Sin 2's combat completely hamstrings the latter: the genuinely expressive and reactive toolkit of that game is filtered through a dull interpretation of the most stock spells of 5E, making this less a game of setting up a simple rube goldberg machine to defeat an encounter, and more about tediously playing out the motions of early-game dnd in a world your imagination cannot penetrate.

here's the trick to being a DM: let the players do the hard work. if they come up with a crazy scheme that you never imagined that just might work... who's to say it can't? you and the players are telling this story together, after all. if they want to say what happens next, let them. if they ask if there is a chandelier to swing on, say yes. constraining yourself to a number of set solutions you devise and hope the players find is only making the game less interesting for everyone involved. when the world exists only in your heads, it expands at the speed of thought. anything is possible.

while baldur's gate 3 is a more permissible dungeon master than some games, it remains a prisoner of the imaginations of it's designer. and this is hardly a fair critique to make of a video game, i know...except when it's playing with a ruleset explicitly designed with a lackadaisical, easygoing dungeon master in mind. damning as it might be to say, the easiest way to see the failings of 5E as a set of rules is to play by them, and BG3 offers you no choice but to do so, but without even some crucial features like Ready Actions that narrow it's tactical space even more. original sin 2 nobly wrestled with this thanks to an expansive spell set mostly based on reactions and creating situations, and one wherein you could be doing powerful things very quickly. 5E has so little of this, by comparison, especially in the miserable early levels. all you have is some of the weakest tactical combat in table gaming. and explosive red barrels, of course.

the designers are clearly aware of the reduced capability for the player to interact with the environment, and have accordingly given most major encounters one big object to interact with and defeat enemies with, be it one of the aforementioned red barrels, or a giant rock suspended by a rope above where two men are standing, etcetera. this is, definitionally, reactivity in action, i suppose, but is about as intellectually engaging as putting square pegs in square holes: there's a reason we don't hold a party for every first-person shooter with an explosive barrel in it, why are we holding a party for this one?

it certainly can't be the early-game writing. while certainly I'm gratified that BG3 is less outwardly annoying and in-poor-taste as Divinity 2's edgelord parade, it's seemingly forgotten to replace it with much of anything. BG3's player character must surely be one of the most boring in the entire genre, with nary a hint of personality escaping their suffocatingly matter-of-fact dialogue options, that only on occasion dare to be so bold as to allow the player to be...slightly rude or sarcastic. there's never going to be a CRPG that allows for as much reactivity and input as a dungeon master of flesh and blood, but even within those expectations, BG3 falls utterly flat. so much of the appeal of this genre, to me, is in creating a guy that you can rotate around in your head. but baldur's gate 3 is the kind of DM that is only interested in a PC for the Numbers on their character sheet: the actual Character of the Player Character ceases to be once you complete their creation, and let them loose from your imagination into the confining reality of BG3's world.

(incidentally, BG3 joins CyberPunk 2077 in the prestigious world of 'Games With Character Creators That Give Me Chaser Vibes' with their insistence on embodying transness exclusively via mixing-and-matching voice and genitals on a series of binary traditionally attractive male or female body types. i genuinely appreciate the ability to play as a non-binary character: i don't appreciate the unavoidably fetishistic nature of prioritizing genital customization over any actual input on everyday trans presentation, like binders, top surgery, or even an androgynous voice or two)

with only a solid day's of gameplay under my belt, i can't in good conscience claim to have the full scope of the game's companions, i can at least say that the first impressions they make fall within tiresome cliches we've all had our fill of, i think. or have we? have you?

this is my conundrum with baldur's gate 3. i truly do not think the game is remarkable in any meaningful way: it is not awful but it is a very bog-standard CRPG with a little more messing with the set dressing than is typical for the genre. it is narratively, and mechanically, rote. i have only spent a few hours with it, and already, i am tired of it. just as i am tired of dungeons & dragons.

but maybe you aren't. maybe you haven't played baldur's gate 1 or 2, maybe you haven't played darklands or torment, maybe you haven't played arcanum or underrail. maybe you haven't played pillars of eternity or tyranny. maybe you're someone who got into D&D via Critical Role's explosion, someone who has never played a CRPG quite like this before, and are being introduced to an entire sub-genre with the first true 5E-based CRPG. maybe you still think jokes about Bards fucking Dragons are really funny. i say this with true sincerity (well, maybe not the last one, which was a little mean, and for which i apologize): i am genuinely delighted, on some level, to see a CRPG get this popular. while i truly cannot explain the swathes of industry veterans giving into astonishment on a scale undreamed of with this game, i also know that d&d is much, much bigger than it was when i was first enthralled by dragon age: origins, a game with a similarly rote plot, and still captured by heart and imagination, and that if this is your introduction to the magic of CRPGs, i can see why you give into astonishment. because crpgs can be astonishing.

but i would like for it, and D&D as a whole, to remain an introduction, to not consume the entire conception of the hobby, as D&D has. i am sincerely and genuinely disappointed with the total lack of apprehension the wider critical scene of games has for BG3, given its connection to Wizards of the Coast, a deeply evil company that, just today, admitted to using AI art in the latest D&D sourcebook. i am uninterested in contributing to the breathless hype of an IP owned by a company uninterested in the basic humanity of art and it's creation. not when there are so many other games out there.

you can stay in plato's cave, for a while. you can stay there forever if you want, dungeon crawling up and down the sword coast. but you can also leave that cave, and come into my other cave, slightly next door, where i can tell you about blades in the dark and pentiment. they're really very very cool.

as for me? i turned the game off when i reached a point whereupon, after noticing an obvious trap, i snuck around the skeletons lying in wait to attack and reached the treasure...whereupon the treasure chest spoke to me and told me to fuck off until i had killed the skeletons. fuck off, BG3. why should i bother trying to navigate your encounters creatively when you're going to just say that it doesn't work like that? I've played with dungeon masters like this before, and they aren't good ones. they're the kind of ones who wonder why they can't seem to hold a group together for more than a couple of sessions.

maybe i'll return to BG3, but if i do, it'll only be in multiplayer. with friends, and possibly a drink or two. but if me and three friends are committing to a possible 120-hour RPG...why not just take it a little bit further and just play some actual Tabletop? Why not play something that isn't Dungeons & Dragons? Why not play with a dungeon master that won't be such a spoilsport?

Brilliant game, it's a lot of fun. For sure the DnD dice roll system is a love or hate kinda situation, I personally enjoy it but it can be annoying at times, mostly during combat. This game is hard, even on balanced difficulty, and it's a very fun challenge. This game will kick your ass constantly and make you think in different ways to approach combat, use consumables and crafting to their full effect.

Honestly, most of what I have for this game is praise. It's huge and ambitious, well polished for its size, and a lot of fun. There's so much detail to just about everything you can think of.

But I can't play it, why? The characters. The party members are seriously unbearable. Their dialogue I can only compare to that of a parody. There is far too much inspiration from modern DnD stories, it really felt like the writing team watched some DnD streams and went with that for the characters.
They're horrific, offering marvel-tier one-liners, constantly having pointless banter. Then there's also the extremely awkward 'romance'. Every party member will just throw themselves at you and find any moment they can to flirt, even if it wasn't relevant to your response. It's very cringe.
There's also the issue of every character being someone special. There's no down-to-earth adventurer here, you're all people with a destiny, a history, set powers and unique circumstances. It's like if several 'chosen ones' all accidentally met.

Overall though, the game is fantastic and Larian have really out done themselves. I simply can't play it because the party members are all so unbearable. If you're looking for a classic DnD experience or even Baldur's Gate experience, you won't find it here.

Eu nunca tinha entrado de cabeça no mundos dos CRPG mais tradicionais como Disco Elysium ou Divinity (ambos só testei), sempre achei que não era pra mim, mas a euforia por Baldur's Gate 3 me fez ficar de olho, tava preocupado de fazer uma burrada mas resolvi comprá-lo e foi uma decisão bem acertada.
BG3 é um RPG na sua mais pura definição, eu pessoalmente nunca joguei tanto DeD mas o que eu joguei você sente no game, é uma história inicial simples mas que tem personagens bem diferentes com carisma que tem backstory interessante e missões pra cada jornada dos personagens. Como o game funciona pra mim é uma coisa de doido, como um personagem que tá com você pode se virar contra ti por outros objetivos e realmente ir embora, você ir enfrentar um inimigo antes dele fazer algo maior e isso impactar a história com cutscenes diferentes e um final distinto é louco e inacreditável, isso é fantástico.
O gameplay é ótimo, um RPG que é necessário muito cuidado e com muitas opções e possibilidades, usar itens pra ficar invisível e ignorar certos inimigos que podem ser muito desafiadores pro seu nível porque Baldur's Gate 3 está longe de ser fácil, fiz um final no modo explorador e ainda foi desafiador pra caramba, ok que não sou nenhum grande jogador principalmente de RPG mas tomei bastante porrada kkkk. As dungeons são insanas, bem grandes mas não enjoativas com puzzles simples que ás vezes me deixou preso por eu ser meio lerdo. As missões secundárias também bem grandes e com personagens próprios e histórias diferentes.
A trilha é ótima, principalmente a de batalha e de certas localizações.
Os gráficos são ótimos, não aproveitei ao máximo por ter um PC bem razoável, longe de nova geração mas quem tem uma máquina forte deve ter um visual bem agradável.
De negativo que tive foi alguns turnos os inimigos e aliados não controláveis demoravam pra atacar/agir, o mapa muda dependendo da região que você está, gostaria que fosse apenas um grande mapa, a inteligência artificial dá umas burradas e tive alguns glitches e bugs
Se vale a pena? Tudo depende se você curte o gênero, pessoalmente nunca achei que ficaria dias viciado como fiquei nesse jogo, procure gameplays e impressões diferentes, ou espere uma promoção pra não pesar tanto, eu curti muito e valeu cada centavo. É provavelmente a minha grande surpresa desse ano e facilmente um dos melhores jogos de 2023.
Eu zerei com 41 horas mas foi um final antes do ato 3 e bem extremo, aí continuei jogando pra fazer outro final mas acabei ficando perdido e perdendo bastante pros inimigos, aí bateu a preguiça/estresse e resolvi dá uma parada pra focar em outros games, aí terminei no total com 56 horas.

I wasn't really expecting much when I went into this game. I played Divinity Sin and even a bit of Dragon Age, so I was expecting something similar. I hated Divinity Sin mainly because I found it very difficult to control, since they don't have full controller support.

I was surprised at how mesmerizing the plot and game of Baldur's Gate 3 is. This is my first Baldur's Gate game, and right from the start, the graphics alone sucked me in. I think I spent a long time on my character creation screen.

If there's one thing I want to complain about, it is that for certain quests, I found it very difficult to find the exact location or how to solve the puzzles if I didn't refer to a guide.

Overall, one of the better games I've played this year, and I do like how there is a morality system in this game.

Far too early to speak on this with any authority, but some early thoughts:

• As with Divinity: Original Sin 2 the potential for roleplay immediately crumbles if not playing as an origin character. Especially damning since they are all locked into a specific class and race except for the Dark Urge.

• Dialogue options being marked by skill checks and background tags deflates them. It would be more fitting for certain options to have the checks/tags but not convey this to the player until it is time to roll. If I see an option tied to my one-of-like-six background choices, I effectively have to pick it so I can get Inspiration. As for the checks, I can prep the face of the party with Guidance, Charm Person, Friends, what have you. Which itself leads into...

• Despite being a four-member party game, the other three characters might as well not exist for the purposes of dialogue. If you're lucky you'll see one of the origin characters milling about in the background of a conversation, but the person/people I'm playing with are forced to listen and suggest options. So just like with real 5E, it's best to have one person do all the talking since only one person can anyways, further displacing non-faces from the story they are meant to be involved in.

• Origin characters all talk like they're YouTubers, falling into a pillow at the end of a sentence, a permanent vocal sneer tainting each word (except for Gale). There is no space for subtlety in their characterisation either, their MacGuffins and driving purposes laid so bare like the Hello Neighbour devs trying to get MatPat's attention.

• Without a DM to actually intervene, to interpret the players' wishes, anything requiring interpretation is simply gone. Nearly every spell that isn't a very simple effect or damage dealer? Absent. This leaves players with options for what colour of damage they want to do, or what one specific action they might like to take. Creativity spawning from these bounds is incidental, not intentional.

• The worst part of 5E, its combat, is not improved in the slightest here, and if anything is actively worse. One of the great benefits of the tabletop setting is that the numbers are obfuscated. Statblocks need not be adhered to. Players typically don't know the raw numbers of a creature's health or saves unless they clue in through what rolls succeed for saves, or keep a mental tally of damage done before the DM says they are bloodied. The DM has the option of disclosing information, but here the player is forced to know everything. Every resistance. Every hit point. Every stat point. Every ability. Combat cannot be creative as a result because the whole of its confines are known the entire time. You even know the percentage chance you have to hit every spell and attack. It makes it all hideously boring.

• If spells are going to be one and done boring nothingburgers, the least Larian could have done was not have some of them, like Speak with the Dead, be tied to a cutscene that tells me a corpse has nothing to say. I get it, the random goblin body I found probably isn't a font of lore, but do you need to take me into a scripted sequence of my character making a concerned face with their fingers to their temple as I am told for the eighteenth time that it has nothing for me.

• When spells are being learned, there is no indication as to which are rituals and which are not, nor are there options to sort or filter choices. With so few choices maybe it doesn't matter.

• Despite a bevy of supplementary sourcebooks giving players countless options for their characters, you're stuck with primarily the base text. Perhaps it would be unrealistic to wish for every subclass, every spell, every feat, but not knowing this narrow scope beforehand meant my hopes for, for example, a College of Glamour Bard or a Hexblade Warlock were dashed. Without the spells that make those subclasses interesting, however, I suppose they might as well be absent.

• The 'creative solutions' of stacking boxes to climb a wall or shooting a rope holding a rock over someone's head are not creative, they are blatantly intended and serve only to make the player feel smart for being coerced by the devs into a course of action.

• The folks eager to praise Larian for not including DLC seem to have missed the Digital Deluxe upgrade that gives you cosmetics and tangible benefits in the form of the Adventurer's Pouch.

• As touched upon by others, the devs are clearly more invested in giving players the option to make chicks with dicks and dudes with pussies than they are in actual gender representation. This binarism only exacerbates how gendered the characters are. With no body options besides "Femme, Masc, Big Femme, Big Masc" and whether you're shaven and/or circumcised, the inclusion of a Non-Binary option becomes laughable if not insulting. Gender is expressed and experienced in countless ways, but here it comes down to your tits (or lack thereof) and your gonads. No androgynous voice options. No breast sizes. No binders. No gaffs. No packing. The only ways for me to convey to fellow players that my character is anything besides male or female are my outright expression of my gender, to strip myself bare, or hope the incongruity between my femme physique and masc voice impart some notion of gender queering. Maybe this is great for binary trans men and women, but as a non-binary person it comes across as a half-measure that seeks to highlight my exclusion from this world. More cynically, this, alongside Cyberpunk 2077 read as fetishistic, seeing the trans body as something for sexual gratification, rather than just that, a body.

I'll keep playing it, but damn if my eyes aren't drifting towards playing a real CRPG for the first time.

I completed the game on Tactician difficulty today, and while it's a good game, I can't say it's great. Larian Studios is truly impressed with its creation of an immersive and highly interactive DND world, complemented by excellent voice acting and well-developed characters. Without a doubt, it stands out as the best entry for players new to the CRPG genre.

While it's a good game, I must admit that it falls short of being the best in its genre. This isn't entirely Larian's fault(and mostly not), but rather a consequence of the DND 5e rule set the game is based on. After Act 1, the combat becomes quite dull, with little incentive to control your enemies or build magic defense layers due to the concentration mechanics and their limited effects. The resistance mechanics, where damage is halved when resisted, are also problematic, effectively doubling the HP of many enemies and turning them into sponges. (and Larian gave tons of enemies physical resistance in Tactician difficulty) The combat encounters are well-designed in ACT 1 but diminished rapidly afterward, due to the higher levels of 5E gameplay becoming monotonous, as the most effective strategy is often using normal attacks to hit your enemies, I finished the game like a breeze with these strat but it's far from fun and engaging.

While Larian's efforts are commendable, the game does have some drawbacks beyond the 5E rule set. The main story is just alright and somewhat boring, more like a forgettable Hollywood summer action movie with no thought-provoking events, idea conflicts, or philosophical dialogue. This lack of depth makes the game so much weaker when compared to classic CRPGs like the old Infinity games(including its predecessor BG2/TOB), VTMB, FNV, KotOR2, or Disco Elysium. Although the characters are likable and interesting, they can also come across as bland and occasionally cringy(I won’t allow Gale’s backstory if he is my PC). Overall, the game feels more like a mimic of a tabletop RPG with an ordinary story module, a competent Dungeon Master, and a group of just alright players.

Larian definitely deserves the praise they got, but also really needs to work on combat and overall RPG system and story/character writing.

Oh and optimal-wise the game runs well but it crashes when some bosses die/use certain skills, maybe it is my AMD gpu being AMD gpu.

There's a lot to say about this game, simply because of its scale. It's easily the most ambitious CRPG out there and I will definitely be doing another playthrough to see what I missed on my first.

The game looks fantastic and I enjoyed the story more than I thought I would going in. That being said, the writing is inconsistent in quality, especially for the companions, where many just amount to the annoying marvel-quip type. The game in general is also too horny, with companions throwing themselves at the player from the very start in tandem with questionable "romance" dialogue. Thankfully the companion quests themselves are for the most part intriguing and well realised.

A final criticism is the character creator. It is woefully stripped down and genuinely baffling that the devs let you customise most everything except your character's face.

Overall, my opinion on the game is still positive, despite the issues listed above. It's impressive in its ambition, varied in its setting and encounter variety and will no doubt be more fun in a co-op or full party session. Hopefully the success of BG3 inspires greater interest in CRPGs and more games like it (though ideally not ones based off 5e).

This had two jobs:
1) Be a good brand ambassador to Dungeons & Dragons, a brand more mainstream than ever with both nostalgic older fans and eager young new ones
2) Be a good AAA CRPG

I'm "only" 20 hours in (why do I keep picking up huge-ass games?) but it's really damn impressive how successful BG3 seems to be at those two things. Larian have constructed a better video game adaptation of DnD combat than I personally would have thought possible—and they did it by being including tons of granular, edge-casey, smart-alec-player bullshit (as well as a few smart exclusions, I'm sure). It's also pretty difficult by default, which I think it needs to be to show off the system's complexity and the fun tricks it allows for.

Skill checks out of combat are a mixed bag. Thinking cynically about the game as a Dungeons & Dragons (TM) product I think they're a smart inclusion (they clearly relish putting a big icosahedron on the screen as much as possible) and if you gotta have them I think they're implemented well enough here. But I suspect they're going to be the biggest cause of save-scumming because they're mechanically completely uninteresting. Both tabletop and computer RPGs have, for a really long time at this point, embraced the idea of "failing forward" on random skill checks—the idea that failing a roll may not be ideal but it will still be interesting, and potentially more interesting (Disco Elysium is probably the current king of this concept in the CRPG space). Baldur's Gate doesn't, and basically can't do this. The scope of the game is already way too big to allow for it. The most mechanically beneficial AND most narratively interesting result for any given roll is succeeding it, so a failure (which is always possible at no fault of the player's when they roll a 1) just feels bad every time. Still, their existence allows for different player character builds to feel truly distinct from each other outside of combat as well as in it, and that's worth something.

Last thing I'll comment on is the narrative style and writing. Putting on my cynical Wizards of the Coast hat again, I think they nailed the assignment. They're CLEARLY influenced by the style of banter in actual play podcasts, which is a "for better or worse" situation but exactly the audience I'd expect them to try to expand to. I read a review on here complaining about how all the party members are too special boy/girl, destiny lightening rod-types and that's a perfectly reasonable thing to dislike... but also, if you've ever played DnD, you know everyone wants to play that character. You always end up with four different unrelated chosen ones. You couldn't be more true to the source material by replicating that.

That all having been said I got something like 70 more hours of this to go so who knows if I'll still have any of these opinions by the time I'm done.