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: 8858453" data-attributes="member: 18">In BG3? An absolute ton, because of the way they've done the camerawork in a lot of the conversations, and because the camera is naturally closer-in than before! It's not an accident and I'm not "being random" or something lol.More than any other modern CRPG I can think of, except maybe Bioware, but I think it's actually more than any Dragon Age game. This is incredibly easy to see just playing through the start of the demo, even, and it continues throughout available act 1. There are a huge number of close-up reaction shots on the PC particularly, which is not something commonly seen in this kind of game, I think because it's easy to get wrong - and BG3 absolutely gets it wrong with terrible mime-like expressions be slapped on the PC's face at times.This frequent showing of the PC and reaction shots and so on is a design decision on Larian's part.And all the other games you list, they don't do that.Solasta - an appalling zero-style visual mess, and being cheap is no excuse, plenty of cheap games have tons of style - this is a game so profoundly visually bad even the basic colour choices are bad (the UI isn't too awful though). But you don't even have a central character, you have a party, who are amazingly badly written and say terrible clunky things, and everyone looks absolutely awful in every, sadly-frequent cutscene. It's just a disaster. Bringing that up to defend this is er... not helpful to your case lol.Owlcat's games use 2D artwork for conversations, instead of 3D art. You can supply your own. So yes it makes sense there. What's funny is, they have more options than Larian does! But the models aren't as high-poly for sure.Neither DOS game does the frequent showing of the PC thing. Their conversations take a similar approach to Owlcat's games, where you just see a fixed portrait for the character talking and stays zoomed out in a fixed position. It doesn't zoom in and use the 3D world like a Bioware game in a lot of them, whereas BG3 does.Cyberpunk 2077 is a first-person game (including in most or all cutscenes) and you can literally only see yourself in special mirrors (not even normal reflective surfaces, not even with ray-tracing reflections on), zoomed out whilst driving a vehicle (optionally) or in photo mode. Also your "they where a disaster in Cyberpunk 2077" comment is pretty strange. That's not some well-agreed opinion like "2077 was extremely buggy on release" would be. Of all the critiques of 2077, I've never heard that one before, and it doesn't make any sense to me, having played 2077 extensively. But the main issue is, you don't really see your character much at all, because the game is very dedicated to being first-person.So none of those make sense as comparison points. The comparison points that are actually are similar in presentation are Bioware's games, which do, imho, a considerably better job (for their era) with this.</blockquote>

Verification