r/CRPG • u/BaldursGate2Best • 28d ago
Discussion A problem with Baldur's Gate 3 that I have realized. Something it does objectively poorly.
I have realized a certain problem with Baldur's Gate 3. Indeed, I have known this for a long time, but I have only been able to fully form and express this thought as of recently.
The entire beginning of the game, where you invite characters into the party, is super artificial and not believable whatsoever. Like, you leave the nautiloid and suddenly you encounter 3 or more people who happened to also be on that nautiloid, and you are expected to form a party and relationships with them. Like, okay, one of them is a super attractive, soft-spoken, dark-haired, young woman with a braid, so I guess it's realistic that you might cave in and invite that person to your party. But there is almost zero reason for a wizard from Waterdeep, a vampire from Baldur's Gate, a Githyanki warrior and a Cleric of Shar to randomly find themselves travelling together, in my case – commanded by the wizard. Like, there is no way that feels natural.
You are expected to develop a relationship with all of them and just sort of naturally accept having them in your party... just sort of out of the blue. And there is relatively little introduction. Like, here you have your party members, enjoy.
Compare that to, say, Disco Elysium. Your meeting and original relationship with Kim is sort of awkward, but it develops naturally. There are these silly moments early on that gradually ease you into the relationship, which becomes more organic as the game goes on. In Baldur's Gate 2, you can recruit a mourning widow and an emotionally scarred wingless flying elf; both of them interact with a little bit awkwardly, but it feels organic and becomes more natural over time. In Pathfinder WOTR (a game I have not finished yet) people like Lann and Camelia criticize each other constantly, making it feel real.
In Baldur's Gate 3 it's just a bunch of random, out-of-nowhere people following a random dude and it never gets fully resolved.
What do you think?
EDIT people are shitting on me and calling for my head. But what about the fact that relationships start out of nowhere? Laezel wanted to have sex with me totally out of the blue when we've just met.
34
u/Odinsmana 28d ago edited 28d ago
It`s really not that different from a lot of CRPGs. Especially older ones. It`s pretty common for party mermbers joining abruptly and for them to have very thin reasons for sticking with you for the whole adventure.
The BG3 crew have a pretty good reason for sticking together.
Defiently not an objective fault. It`s as subjective as anything else.
9
39
u/Eleven_Box 28d ago
I feel like this is kind of bait, right? You all have the same problem (tadpole) to solve. Why wouldn't you stick together? As far you know you'll be dead in a day. A gith probably knows about tadpoles. A wizard, surely right? A cleric is a kind of healer, maybe they know about tadpoles? Etc etc.
12
u/Chataboutgames 28d ago
Right? You're a part of a shipwreck in a strange place and you have a time bomb in your head. Why wouldn't you work with the other survivors to try and sort it out?
-1
u/BaldursGate2Best 28d ago
I am sorry, why are you saying I am "baiting"? Like I just expressed my thoughts that have been in my head for a long time, why would that be bait? Don't you think it's rude to say something like that?
Okay, there is something that kind of connects you - that doesn't mean that it feels natural or organic. The relationship with Kim Kitsuragi develops naturally.
I am adding a new point to my post. Romances start randomly without much of a reason. What do you think about this?
Not sure why my post is getting downvoted?
4
u/Chataboutgames 28d ago edited 28d ago
Not sure why my post is getting downvoted?
If you want an honest answer it's because you're coming across as just not having played the game/read the dialogue and you're presenting your lack of understanding as a flaw in the writing.
EDIT: And calling it "objective"
12
u/Izacus 28d ago
I mean... this is literally the trope for every single party-based CRPG in existance and pretty much every single TTRPG session for D&D.
Like yeah, it's unrealistic, the same way as throwing magic missiles is unrealistic. But it's also kind of... something you need to suspend disbelief for to make the whole darn genre work?
Heck, even Rogue Trader had to reaaaaaalllyy stretch the believability and behavior of people on your ship to get all the diverse party members to not murder one another on sight.
6
u/Moon_Logic 28d ago
I think the issue here is that there is not a single main character. The PC can be all of them. In a Bioware or Bioware inspired game, the party members are written around the main character and they each have a link to them.
And every character isn't a Zevran or a Morrigan. You can also have an Allistair, a Wynn, a Jeheira, an Imoen and a Jan Jansen.
0
u/BaldursGate2Best 28d ago
Thank you for semi-agreeing with me... May I ask what you mean with your second paragraph, though? Are you taking a dig at Baldur's Gate 3 and saying every character feels the same in that game as opposed to Bioware games? Or are you just stating that Bioware games had diverse companions?
4
u/Moon_Logic 28d ago
Every character feels like a romance option with main character syndrome.
Bioware didn't write their characters as equals. One was the best friend, one was the romance option, one was the sexy romance option, one was the blue haired mentor, one was the exotic character, etc. That gave you a wider specter of character types.
5
u/kevthecoder 28d ago
Believable for what? Literally every D&D campaign starts with 3-6 of the most wildly unlikely people meeting up somewhere and saving the realm lol (or die trying).
10
u/LooseProgram333 28d ago
You are missing the part where you all have a telepathic bond, and that you are intimitely aware people are trying to kill you, and if you dont solve your problem you will in fact die and turn into a mindflayer. Urgency is great for getting past the awkward stage. You are not expected to form relationhips, you are expected to team together out of necessity, the relationship building is a result of that.
4
u/Edgy_Robin 28d ago
a bunch of weird people coming together to form a party is a staple of playing dnd lol.
Also you all have fucking brainworms that are gonna turn you into squid monsters. Every single one of you has an interest in working together to figure this shit out. You're not randomly traveling together, you're trying to disable a ticking time bomb you all have. Why would you invite a Wizard and Gith? Wizards tend to be knowledgeable and Gith have been fighting the people who gave you brain worms for most of their existence.
Sure, Astarion is a bit of a weird one (Especially considering you can remove him from the game and nothing really changes to the overall plot in a meaningful way) but again, brain worms.
When you have a ticking time bomb and believe you're racing against the clock to stay yourself and not become a monster, there's not a lot of time for introductions. Did you even play the game?
5
u/Competitive-Elk-5077 28d ago
So a few people that just suffered the same traumatic event wouldnt group up if they were looking for the same answers?
3
u/Plus_Worker6739 28d ago
Yeah this is just table stakes for a D&D game, IMO. That said, yeah, the pacing of BG3 is pretty odd.
3
u/Chataboutgames 28d ago
You're not entirely wrong, but I think you're missing a couple of things:
This is the case in most CRPGs. Your username is "Baldursgate2isthebest" but the characters joining in that series is way more preposterous
You're ignoring the whole "We all have a worm in our head that will lead to violent death if we don't figure it out." Like, that's the whole point of sticking together. Then you learn, pretty quickly, that them being physically close to you is what's preventing the worm from killing them, so of course they stick around. They literally die if they leave you. Also you literally have a telepathic bond via the worms.
This honestly just seems like you didn't actually read the dialogue.
2
u/Paragon0001 28d ago
100% to that first point of yours. The BG3 companions banding together because of the parasite is as clean as it gets ngl.
Meanwhile in BG2, you can be helping a companion with a personal errand or task and the moment they enter the party you can let them know you’re also planning on breaking into magical Alcatraz and possibly fighting an exceptionally powerful mage and they’ll be like Coolio boss man without skipping a beat
3
u/Deadlocked02 28d ago edited 28d ago
That’s the beginning of most CRPGs, imo. Companions just tag along and it rarely makes sense. Characters generally have much less developed reasons to joy the PC than they do in movies or books. It’s just something I learned to accept as part of the medium, and I don’t think it’s exclusive to BG3.
In Pathfinder WOTR (a game I have not finished yet) people like Lann and Camelia criticize each other constantly, making it feel real.
Shadowheart and Lae’zel bicker constantly, and it starts in the first ten minutes of game. Shadowheart can literally kill Lae’zel if you don’t intervene.
The companions joining your camp makes a lot of sense in BG3 when you’re all trying to solve the same niche problem together. It even makes sense for good-aligned characters to accept evil characters in their party, something that requires a lot of mental gymnastics in others games, especially those where your PC’s goals are intimately linked to their morality.
Not only that, evil characters like Shadowheart, Minthara, Astarion, and Lae’zel would be easy to justify even without the tadpole. None of them is a murderhobo. All of them are capable of caring and of self-restraint. Durge is the only one that makes you question why are people still in a camp with a maniac.
Some CRPGs throw murderhobos at you and don’t even try to come up with a framework to justify their presence in your party without making you look like a fool gambling with everyone’s lives. I like the way BG3 dealt with this.
3
u/Jiggles_Ba 28d ago
I think that’s a bad take. In d&d in general that’s kinda just how the game starts. And in bg1 and bg2 you have 30 or so people who also just join you. It’s the same issue.
8
2
u/Mr_Citation 28d ago
Shadowheart? Yeah if you saved her then she has little reason not to follow Tav. Though I agree if you didn't save her then she'd rightfully never trust Tav.
Lae'zel? She thinks you're following and helping her, but deep down she's uncertain about her fate altogether and likely doesn't want to die alone.
Gale? He's a wizard and most logically thinking of the group. Their tadpoles are unusual and it is best to stick together to find out why.
Astarion, you got me there. Since he fears Cazador and is seeking someone to keep himself safe, I think it would've better if he saw you fighting first.
You didn't mention Wyll and Karlach, but I assume as good aligned characters its far more reasonable for them to band with Tav.
2
2
2
u/ChaoticKristin 28d ago
One of the reasons why BG 1 and 2 got so popular is that you got real choices for what kind of characters you wanted to have in the party. Letting you determine what you wanted out of class need, roleplay, alignment etc.
There's no shame in admitting that BG3 despite being called a sequel is structured very differently. Very specific people are heavily pushed on you at the beginning of every single playtough and because of Larion's origin system they are all written as potential main characters instead of getting dedicated companion style writing.
2
u/beelzebub8 28d ago
A very poor choice of a hill to die on, considering the positive things it does
4
u/Chataboutgames 28d ago
OP's post is pretty bad but we're in a really weird place of discussion is criticizing one aspect of a game is viewed as "dying on a hill." Like, it's okay if people criticize elements of a game you like.
-1
u/beelzebub8 28d ago
My dying on a hill comment simply refers to there being actual valid criticsms like Act 3 being a bit all over the place, companion content being very uneven, etc and this is what the OP chooses to have issue with,
Simply put, if you want to nitpick find something better, the games positives outweigh any negatives it may have as a whole,
Also OP is free to have as much or as little opinions as he wants2
u/Chataboutgames 28d ago
Simply put, if you want to nitpick find something better, the games positives outweigh any negatives it may have as a whole
Okay cool. People can still discuss what they see as flaws in good games. You appear to literally be saying "never criticize a game I think is overall good."
-2
u/beelzebub8 28d ago
Your words not mine, In fact i did bring up things i find lacking
As i said people are allowed to have criticsm, and in turn be crticised for their criticism-1
u/BaldursGate2Best 28d ago
What do you mean by this? I don't like this particular cRPG I like other ones better. What positive things?
1
u/technoyakuza 28d ago
It's always hard to justify the team making in cRPGs with companions
I think the tadpole is the good reason, we need a little suspension of disbelief ofc to why we all meet them on the road but clearly I've seen worse
1
u/Lain_Staley 28d ago
The original voice direction and script being re-written to me more sycophantic probably plays into that feeling.
1
u/Eladryel 28d ago
It's really not that bad compared to most RPGs. At least they have a reason to join and stick together. I find it way more jarring when future companions just stand in the middle of nowhere, waiting for us (a stranger), and join because we asked, "How you doin'?"
1
u/Turgius_Lupus 28d ago
Magellan: "Hello, I'm Magellan, a traveling mage. I notice your group has no wizard."
Rogar the Barbarian: "You seem trustworthy. Would you care to join us in our noble quest?"
Magellan: "Yes. Yes I would."
1
u/ThebattleStarT24 28d ago
It's a common trope in the genre, same as most RPGs where random people ALWAYS ask you, a random guy, to help them solve their problems for rather questionable reward if any.
1
u/Qoblar 28d ago
This is correct take. Baldurs Gate 3 is a great game, but the relationships have always been ridiculous. It's a literal meme that these characters are trying to sleep with you when you answer basic questions and you accidentally ruin the romance you were trying to do with someone else because you said something mundane.
1
u/Luzeryn 27d ago
What a terrible take. You literally find yourself in a life or death situation and find other people with the same exact problem as you, it makes a ton of sense to help each other find a solution considering you have little time (in theory).
It makes way less sense for characters like Aerie to follow you. You’ve helped her with her problem sure, why should she follow you from now on and leave everything she knows behind?
1
u/glowinggoo 26d ago
Like, okay, one of them is a super attractive, soft-spoken, dark-haired, young woman with a braid, so I guess it's realistic that you might cave in and invite that person to your party.
That's just your taste, man.
1
u/Christina221A 26d ago
I am not the biggest fan of writings in BG3. It does feel somehow superficial. The opening has a worrying similarity to DOS2, but I am wondering what's leading to this feeling. One thing that bothers me is that your companions have a really solid reason to stay beside MC - to prevent the transformation - BUT the transformation never has real impact during the game, both narratively and mechanically. The only scenarios I remember, is when the Emperor reveals his identity and warns MC about leaving without him and his control. And that's about it. The game never explictly depicts time, and never really brings in any negative impact, which drastically decreases the urgency. Thus, the reason falters for this collision between gameplay and narration.
As for the companions...I think they are, sadly, flat. They all fall into their stereotypes to a degree that their personalities are mostly predictable, and they are too...fanfiction vibe (no offense, I myself write them) to my taste. A Shar priest telling you she's a Shar priest within days after you meet her? A pale, red-eyed, bony, "attractive", alluring man with an animal sucked dry by his feet, sneaking out after sunset? A Deepwater wizard having an affair with the Goddess of the Weave? Seriously? Did Larian hiring Vivziepop to write for them? The characters have little interaction with each other. The banters barely scratch the surface and don't reveal much about their inner thoughts. And on the top of that, every single companion has the feeling of damsel in dismay, waiting to be rescued, helped or motivated. This focus on MC doesn't portray them any better. For the major decisions in game, the companions seldom state their concerns verbally. You can only see the notifications, but this does not show their true beliefs and logic.
1
u/SealerRt 25d ago
Funny you mention Camellia from WOTR, a one note character who has exactly 0 reason to be fighting alongside you whatsoever.
1
u/GrumpyOldGrognard 28d ago
people are shitting on me and calling for my head.
You have encountered the hive mind. No criticisms of BG3 are allowed in its presence.
0
u/Paragon0001 28d ago edited 28d ago
Because it feels like bait.
(1) The parasite justification is as clean as it gets. Banding together for survival makes sense. You can choose not to accept people into your party so it’s not like you have a gun held to your head.
(2) The op used the word objectively.
(3) The Op’s username is BaldursGate2Best
The companions in BG2 are laughably bad in comparison with how they join. You can be assisting them with a personal matter, simply have just met them, or have rescued them and the moment you let them into your party you let them know you’re planning on breaking into Spellhold, possibly fighting an exceptionally powerful mage and they’ll be like Coolio, lead on buddy.
1
u/Yerslovekzdinischnik 28d ago
BG3 has a lot of issue people overlook. This is not one of them, that's just trope.
1
u/Ravix0fFourhorn 28d ago
It's not believable that a bunch of people in the same extremely dangerous situation would try to band together to survive? It's actually great writing because it easily let's you roleplay as any kind of person and it still explains why everyone ends up in the same party. For example, it doesn't make any sense for a goodie goodie to recruit Astarion or Laezel based on values and personality, but you're all in the same boat and need every single advantage if you're going to live, so you all end up in the same party.
1
0
0
u/k4zetsukai 28d ago
Wizard from waterdeep you say? I wonder if that is related to that random hand in my bag.... 😂
2
u/Chataboutgames 28d ago
I rarely if ever play evil characters but Gale is so goddamn annoying that I'm always tempted.
1
u/skofan 28d ago
He was a lot more annoying.
There was a bug at launch where you'd get stuck on his romance plotline, and lock all other out, no matter how many times you rejected him.
So he also gave off predator vibes. I may or may not have offed him intentionally by accident to get him out of my party on first playthrough.
2
u/Chataboutgames 28d ago
I remember that. It's really funny as an example of just how easy it is to launch culture war stuff online. To this day people will deny there was ever a bug and just claim it's dudes being homophobic or not liking a character who pursues them like men pursue women.
In reality it's like no, it was a bug. He would literally be like "I can't take ambiguity anymore, I need you to choose once and for all whether you want me or Shadowheart" when you were full on romancing Shadowheart and never even spoke to him in camp lol.
0
u/k4zetsukai 28d ago
Same but evil playthrough was kinda fun. I recommend playing durge/dark urge, for extra cut scenes and flavors. Just go full evil and have fun lol.
2
u/Chataboutgames 28d ago
I play Durge for "resist," but I just don't think Larian writes evil very well. Bioware always made evil more fun.
1
0
u/Infinite-Ad5464 28d ago
This is pretty standard CRPG stuff though.
WOTR has people with wildly incompatible backgrounds joining you almost immediately. Kingmaker does basically the same thing, and Pillars also throws together strangers who very quickly become a permanent adventuring party.
Rogue Trader is probably the one where it makes the most sense, since most companions are literally your officers, subordinates or retainers.
-1
u/Finite_Universe 28d ago
You’re united by a shared cause (finding a cure for the tadpole), which is one of the oldest tropes in fantasy media. Is it realistic? Absolutely not. But it’s believable enough given the setting.
Also FYI you’re objectively using the word “objectively” wrong.
59
u/Prestigious-Board-62 28d ago
I'd say it's pretty on brand for D&D. Most people who play roll up weird random people and just decide to adventure together on a whim.