I prefer Pillars of Eternity Deadfire to Baldur's Gate 3

[Vladale]

I just want Obsidian to know that I prefer Pillars of Eternity 2.

World building, lore, setting, immersion, atmosphere, ect.

But also dialogue choices, attitudes (aggressive, clever, ect), ect.

Only combat is superior in Larian's game.

Even exploration is better in Pillars of Eternity, because the game world feels like a world and not a tabletop board.

This is just my opinion and I just want Obsidian to know about it.

Love you, bye!

[SenSx]

I haven't touch BG3 yet, waiting for the definitive edition !

I'm just a little bit worried about the combats, I heard it was the weakest part of the game, and not as good as DoS 2 (BG3 plays close to the DoS games).

But if you say combat is superior than in PoE, I feel reassured, love PoE 2 class systems, really like combats as well, they can feel a bit chaotic sometimes but mostly when you don't master the system.

 

I agree that PoE games always have always beat the DoS games on the world building and immersion departements.

However I do find the companions superior in DoS and I think BG3 will be no exceptions.

The combat was also a bit better in DoS, but it's hard to compare...Hope BG3 combat will still be good.

 

[daven]

I haven't touched BG3 cos I refuse to on principle!

[Vorad]

Amen! BG3 story was decent, but UI sucks, combat is ok-ish but 5th ed system is garbage. I hope and wish Obsidian follows up with a new Pillars-like title!

Edited October 7 by Vorad

[yorname]

This happened to me twice now:

Reinstall BG3

After an hour at character creation screen, I realized how I've played most half-decent builds in less than a handful of playthroughs, and no the story is not worth it

Uninstall

[Silvaren]

I was bored by DOS1 vs DOS2, elemental gimmicks quickly become overused and besides of this system these games are hollow, every combat plays the same, only resistances force player to change tactics. I hated early acces of BG3 for playing too similar to DOS series. It was D:OS reskin with original sin mechanics contradicting D&D 5E ruleset. Goblins could score ciritical miss by rolling 1 on d20 and still manage to kill one of my characters, so there were instances when AC and saving throws did nothing. Everything was messed up. Larian Studios somehow fixed some parts of the game or completly changed its features and the release version was a blast. Bugs were and probably still are the biggest issue. Sometimes I noticed things like during an attack game displays animation, but combat log has no attack roll, so with animation nothing happened, action resource is used without any effect. The story is the worst part of BG3. Too many things was changed during development, even not so long prior official launch date. The story works fine when you are playing first time but even then it holds up until you start Act 3. If you replay the game, lots of plotholes came up to the point when key characters act completly nonsensical, the main goal become oposite to the main goal.

I completed BG3 five times in 5 months after launch, playing only on tactician and honour mode without any cheese tactics, just utilizing D&D ruleset and some synergy with gear. I can say my relation to this game is like a redemption arc. From terrible early access, which I hated, BG3 managed to become one of my favourite games.

But still, D&D 5E is too much simplified to be engaged in multiple playthroughs. Solasta did better job adapting the rules, especially with mod for multiclass. Possible build count in BG3 just quickly deplets. Ruleset is even more simplified than in p&p. The most OP things in 5E like Haste are even more powerful in BG3 (casting unlimited spells in a round, possibility to stack multiple action and bonus action and even exchange bonus action for action via illithid powers). BG3 is asymetric. Throug entire game only one enemy uses Haste by drinking single potion. Combat is just too easy even without any exploits and cheeses. Action economy is completly fracked up.

BG3 is great game, but it's also bad Baldur's Gate game. It has very little in common with original series. Even Siege of Dragonspear is better as succesor to Bhaalspawn saga. I played original BG for years, thousands of hours. I didn't like what Larian did with some returning characters, while some of them like Minsc & Jaheira are great in BG3. BG3 just plays different, feels different, has different structure which block access to some powerful items until act 3, so there is a lot less metaplaning for another playthrough than it was in BG1 & BG2.

Both Pillars of Eternity did better in that regard and for me PoE series is true BG successor with more interesting lore and even gameplay mechanics. I like Pathfinder games too, but they feel more like Neverwinter Nights series with more linear progression throug game world, full of invisible walls and constrains in structure with a lot of additional "tycoon" gameplay which I don't like in cRPG (yes, I know it can be turned off, but turning it off blocks some features like teleportation circles and supply of crafting items).

Edited October 18 by Silvaren

[yorname]

On 10/18/2024 at 3:42 PM, Silvaren said:

BG3 is great game, but it's also bad Baldur's Gate game. It has very little in common with original series. Even Siege of Dragonspear is better as succesor to Bhaalspawn saga. I played original BG for years, thousands of hours. I didn't like what Larian did with some returning characters, while some of them like Minsc & Jaheira are great in BG3. BG3 just plays different, feels different, has different structure which block access to some powerful items until act 3, so there is a lot less metaplaning for another playthrough than it was in BG1 & BG2.

DND lore is just so filled up with the superhero comic sh*t like world reboots, gods behaving like ordinary people, retcons... I don't have a good word for it.

I used to think it's WotC's fault, but after reading Greenwood's twitter about Bhaalspawn's story (ACtUaLly dead Bhaal could control every Bhaalspawn and made charname decide to give up his divine essence, thus making his return possible), it's clear the whole IP is not capable of producing anything other than garbage stories.

BG1&2's writting wasn't some masterpiece of humanity, but at least it focused on mortals, their motives and actions. BG3 just wanted to impress people with "OMG it's actually Jergal helping us" "OMG Shar just spoke to me" while the actual characters, especially villains are boring AF.

Edited October 25 by yorname

[Morrydwen]

I prefer Deadfire over Baldur's Gate 3, mainly because it features RTWP instead of TB, 2D instead of 3D and a more 'realistic' fantasy setting. Original Baldur's Gate was designed with RTWP and therefore POE is the actual spiritual successor.

Now BG 3 was way more financially successful because the audience consists mainly out of people who love cringe writing, bear sex, Shadowheart and rpgs as romance simulators. If BG3 was a real-time strategy game with all the aforementioned, it would still be very popular. The rpg elements are just the potatoes that do not constitute the 'meat' of the game.

[Vasvary5050]

In my opinion, Baldurs Gate 3 was a unique masterpiece, ... but Deadfire is by far the better game and world. I say BG3 was a master piece because in terms of its production values it was (in my opinion) S++++ tier. It had amazing visuals (gameplay graphics, cut scenes, motion capture) and top-tier voice acting. In terms of its combat, it was enjoyable, with a large pool of spells to choose from, and fun (but silly) spell interactions, all in the mode of Divinity Original Sin (which I know a lot of people love but personally I bounced off DOS), but I far prefer Deadfire's combat. I'm a big fan of the Forgotten Realms as a setting, and enjoyed BG3 (and BG1, BG2, IWD and IWD2) for that reason, but in terms of world and lore, I think Pillars is a masterpiece. For me the biggest negatives of BG3 is the fact that it's based on D&D ruleset (which I used to enjoy 20 years ago but now find outdated; Pathfinder rather than 5E is a much better evolution of the D&D ruleset in my opinion, but I prefer Deadfire even to Pathfinder). I also find Deadfire more interesting from the point of view of trying different builds. If Larian made another BG game or DLC (which I know they won't), I would buy it and play it, but what I really would love more than anything is a Pillars of Eternity 3, or more DLCs for Deadfire. (I'm looking forward to Avowed, but not excited for it in the same way as I would be a Pillars 3 game).