Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!
Options
Lessons from Baldur's Gate 3
Nerror
Member, Alpha One, Adventurer
What do you guys think can be learned and used from Baldur's Gate 3 in Ashes?
Obviously many features can't be directly transferred from a CRPG to a MMORPG, but I think some things can.
The attention to detail in the world and quests and dialogue is pretty amazing. The branching dialogue trees with real consequences are really good in and of themselves. Obviously we can't have the same level of different permanent consequences in an MMORPG, but I really hope Intrepid focuses on this so NPC dialogues are more than just slightly different flavors with the same outcome. BG3 is setting a new bar I think, and if Ashes can come even somewhat close to that, it would be amazing.
The world design is great, with all kinds of hidden things and areas, where you need to pay a little attention. Great for explorer types.
The ability to go dark-side. I am playing as The Dark Urge right now, and I don't think Ashes can or should go *that* dark, because holy... But I really enjoy the option to not just be a goody two-shoes character. Yeah, we are back to resettle Verra and kick the Ancients out, but maybe they really aren't all that bad. Maybe co-existence is possible? Or at least maybe they can be controlled and used. They can be a powerful tool for peace.
On the flipside, I think the Ashes character creator is going to be superior. For example, I think there are too few options to modify faces and bodies in BG3. So Ashes will have that going for itself.
Edit: Oh and please keep the thread spoiler-free.
Obviously many features can't be directly transferred from a CRPG to a MMORPG, but I think some things can.
The attention to detail in the world and quests and dialogue is pretty amazing. The branching dialogue trees with real consequences are really good in and of themselves. Obviously we can't have the same level of different permanent consequences in an MMORPG, but I really hope Intrepid focuses on this so NPC dialogues are more than just slightly different flavors with the same outcome. BG3 is setting a new bar I think, and if Ashes can come even somewhat close to that, it would be amazing.
The world design is great, with all kinds of hidden things and areas, where you need to pay a little attention. Great for explorer types.
The ability to go dark-side. I am playing as The Dark Urge right now, and I don't think Ashes can or should go *that* dark, because holy... But I really enjoy the option to not just be a goody two-shoes character. Yeah, we are back to resettle Verra and kick the Ancients out, but maybe they really aren't all that bad. Maybe co-existence is possible? Or at least maybe they can be controlled and used. They can be a powerful tool for peace.
On the flipside, I think the Ashes character creator is going to be superior. For example, I think there are too few options to modify faces and bodies in BG3. So Ashes will have that going for itself.
Edit: Oh and please keep the thread spoiler-free.
1
Comments
Right, that would translate poorly
Intrepid can take as much time as they want with Alpha 2 being live, people will play it when the game comes out, and if its good, it will succeed.
Ashes will be DOA without it.
Obviously, nobody has to do much hype pre-release to get RPG players to play a Baldur's Gate game.
Also... Ashes is a dynamic game that is open-ended rather than a static game or a game that ends.
I'm pretty sure the story for BG3 ends. Doesn't always end with the same conclusion, but it ends after 75-100 hours.
Randomass mmos published by Amazon got over a million players on their release. And mmorpgs are supposedly a sub-genre of the RPG umbrella, so logic would dictate that rpgs would get more players in it, especially when they're of better quality.
So, even while 650k players is huge, BG could still be called "niche".
This would be true if there wasn't a large number of MMORPG players who play them for reasons they would never pick up a regular RPG for.
If you know how to promote those elements as part of your MMORPG, it doesn't matter to some people how much 'RPG' is even there.
Just doing my usual pointless 'trying to stop derails of semantics that shift the discussion'.
I for example, am never going to touch BG3 due to the turn based-goofy-top-down-whatever type of combat it has. I realize that it's a great RPG and there's a lot of depth, but due to the combat system that's just so unfun, and unenjoyable to me, it's enough for me not to play the game.
Now I don't care if the game has THE best combat system out there, but it just has to be good enough in order to not drive a large number of players away.
And I'd say it is indeed a niche game, due to the turn-based combat system.
If it had a more action-style combat, it wouldn't be as niche, and I'd bet it would be even more popular.
It's a great game for those who like turn-based combat, and it is a success already in terms of that.
Except if they're wildly successful they're not niche? I'm just trying to figure out what if anything we're talking about here so I guess I'll try to address the topic more directly...
A game that has a good IP and hires skilled people and then isn't mismanaged in the first patch will appeal to its target audience.
Failure cases are:
1. A terrible IP OR a new IP in combination with any of the following -
2. Less skilled staff who are copying something else
3. Misunderstanding or mistargeting their audience.
3 can lead to a game that is popular with the audience it actually 'hits', particularly if the game is moddable or players can figure out a more fun way to play it than the intended.
2 is not a dealbreaker on its own, if you have an established IP and copy something good and do decently at the copying, you do fine as long as the thing you are copying appeals to your target audience.
2 + 3 fails because you copy something intending to appeal to an audience and don't understand the something enough to implement it in such a way that the audience targeting works.
What can Intrepid learn from this? Nothing. They have neither 2 nor 3 as issues so the fact that they are in the situation of 1 doesn't matter.
What can I learn from this? Nothing. My stuff has neither 2 nor 3 as issues and I work primarily on fixing/revitalizing previously successful IPs that someone broke when I make contributions to live/released games.
What can others learn from this? Baldur's Gate is nice for tacticians.
I can still RP in any genre without all of the other stuff.
And successful would also be relative.
What are the BG3 numbers like in comparison to other single-player RPGs?
-Racials giving importance of choice when making a character
-Multiple branching stories that may or may not be optional
-classes excelling in different things while lacking in others
Whether or not all of these would transfer well into an MMORPG is one thing, but so far they sound like things I would want if possible.
As I hate BG3 because it has nothing to do with BG1 and 2, I can only see the mistakes to be avoided for AOC.
- Don't trash the character creator
- Don't integrate mechanics with visible dice rolls
- Avoid mechanics that automatically interact with the environment (jumping, climbing, etc.), as they're old-fashioned and boring.
- Work on the scenario
And imo its sheer singular presence just goes to show how niche it is. The only other stand out from that list (lower on the list btw) is Crusader Kings and Stardew Valley. And DOS2 is at #42, so Larian jumped above their heads several-fold.
Half of the top10 is games from big studios that either came out with game-breaking bugs or had horrible anti-consumer practices, or both. ER, Valheim and Terraria are probably the "best" games on that list and 2 of those are indie, while ER is 7th game in the "series" from the same studio that literally created and perfected the formula of those kinds of games, but even it had performance issues on release.
But to keep this semi on topic, the list just goes to show that no matter how long you're making the game or how long people have "played" the game for - the release can still be super popular as long as the game is good. So I guess that's the main lesson of BG.
Also Larian has been blamed for several years for selling an unifinished early access. But Im fine with it. I would be ok to play AOC in early access with bugs and a low % of the full content to be a tester.
edit : sorry for answering to my own post, It's a mistake.
BG3 is ranked 7 for all time peak and it's been out for less than a week.
Good is subjective, but...
BG3 is a Baldur's Gate game. And it is a D20 game. And it is a D&D game.
So...it would have to have truly horrible gameplay for RPG players to choose not to play it.
I always thought of it as it being more "specialized" towards something, trying to appeal to a narrower potential audience, rather than to everyone.
RPGs are a niche within the gaming world, though a broad niche at that. BG3 is a niche game within the RPG genre, as it is a turn-based RPG.
Yes, BG really exploded in its popularity, cause it's an amazing game, but its design/mechanics are still quite niche under the rpg umbrella. Otherwise there'd be way more "d&d-like" games on that list.
@NiKr A reminder not to use Steam stats for games that don't come out only on Steam, or to compare them to such games depending, unless you are explicitly 'only caring about PC gamer sentiments'.
BG3 in particular is 'problematic' because it would eventually come on Console but wasn't simultaneous.
etc etc...
Again I'm not really saying you're wrong, I'm saying that your data isn't connected to your point.