I invite anyone to tell me what connects this game to the originals
- the plot is basically the same as the first game and the second game combined and mixed with some new elements to make it unique and is set 100 years or so after the events of the second game.
- The city itself
- all the recurring characters, including the villains
- The play style
- the setting
The only thing that doesn’t connect them is the rule edition, and you’re not the same protagonist. BG1 and 2 used AD&D2e. BG3 uses 5e.
I’m not sure why everyone exalts larian as some master story writer now when everything they’ve done has merely been passable. It doesn’t matter how similar the story is if it’s told like shit.
Yes, they did manage to include the city of Baldur’s Gate, I’m impressed.
Recurring characters would be a treat if the game didn’t suck in all other respects.
The play style? Wtf? Where’s the real time combat, 6 party system, single open map, etc. Play style couldn’t be anymore different.
I’m not sure how much the setting has changed since 2E but Larian’s Faerun feels nothing like the original games.
If you think the story is told like shit, I gotta know what stories and games you actually like. Because it ain’t BG1 and 2.
The forgotten realms lore has changed tremendously, dude. WOTC is going absolutely crazy with retcons and changes lately. Where have you been? Like the entire pantheon of Gods from even 3.5e is totally different. There has been a huge cataclysmic event that almost destroyed magic for a second time (the first being the Netherese empire’s destruction; Karsus’ Folly) and much of the landscape too. It’s practically a different world. This stuff isn’t Larian’s fault. It’s literally Wizard’s fault.
Also: BG1 and 2 didn’t have a single map. They did have a world map screen that connected all the actual maps, but it didn’t really mean anything. It was basically what the fast travel screen is now. 🙄