Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 9058759" data-attributes="member: 18">I don't think anyone is. The writing in those is very different (more "melodrama-centric"), and, at this point, definitely inferior. It's also extremely sparse compared to BG3.However BG1/2 are slightly more locked into the Forgotten Realms setting, tonally and in terms of lore, than Act 1 of BG3 is. We shall see re: Act 2 & Act 3, hopefully Act 1 was Larian learning.BG3 is better than 98% of WotC adventures by a very long margin, I'd say. To be fair, though, it's a fundamentally different approach, and involves a vastly larger amount of better-directed effort being put in.At the start of EA and for some time, the writing and event design for BG3 was very similar to DOS2. However over time, thanks to Larian being pelted with feedback and actually listening, that's changed considerably, and for the better.Owlcat has had some issues with their writing where they've had some really well-done characters (Daeran, for example), but a lot of either very bland or shallowly obnoxious ones. Probably the very worst writing in either is Jubilost in PF:KM, where not only is he obnoxious and very exposition-y and not much else (albeit calming down slightly later on), but much worse, the PC is artificially written to be a total stooge/moron when talking to him (regardless of INT/CHA, ranks in Diplomancy, and so on), and he's allowed to verbally push the PC around despite having no power over them. It's bizarre, the literary equivalent of forcing PC to take a dive in boxing. To be fair to them, when they did a similarly obnoxious know-it-all character in Wrath of the Righteous (Nenio), Owlcat made sure to include plenty of ways to snark them, and checks to know the answers to their questions, and so on. So they do learn.I daresay the graphics thing will only remain true until DA4 comes out (probably next year), because the last DA was 2015. And combat-wise it's silly to compare. One is a series with RtwP with fairly tight balance (DA2/DAI - DA:O has much looser balance to be fair), the other is turn-based and a sort of slightly buffed 5E (so very loose balance by comparison). "Collect the crystals"-type was a DAI-specific aberration too, not representative of the series.However it does seem like we have significantly more room to change the story generally than any DA game, if what can happen in Act 1 is reflected in later acts, anyway.The only place it slightly falls behind DA as a series is that the writing of the non-companion characters isn't nearly as convincing as DA, at least in Act 1. The companion characters are extremely well-done, even at this point, with only one act. It's hard to put a finger on the issue with the non-companions, but I think a lot of it comes down to, once you're actually in conversation with them, them often seeming too PC-centric in their interests/motivations, and often with very simplistic and not entirely believable motivations. Hopefully the Jason Isaacs and JK Simmons characters will help with this - and it might just be that because Act 1 is about gathering companions, that's why pretty much anyone with more depth than a puddle is a companion.</blockquote>

Verification