• Blackmist@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    Maybe you’ve heard of a little indie gem by the name of Baldur’s Gate 3?

    Although personally I’d take more umbrage with the writing, dialogue, voice acting, and lack of mocap performance over the actual gameplay mechanics.

    Bethesda struck gold with Skyrim, but I don’t think they’ve moved past it.

    • dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      What I’m saying is that beyond the clunkiness of the CE, I don’t find the flow of gameplay in Skyrim or Fallout New Vegas to be any different than most RPGs, which is to say it’s not in my top 5 criticisms of Bethesda. What they did with Starfield looks kinda boring to me so I’m respectfully passing on it.

      I’ve yet to play BG3, but it’s absolutely on my horizon. Just picked up DOS2 and gonna give that a go first.

      • RGB3x3@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        I’ve played Starfield for 30 hours and I’ve played about 10 hours now of BG3.

        The difference is remarkable. As far as RPG goes, BG3 actually gives you a way to do the role-play part of RPG. You just have so much choice and your choices have consequences. For example, it turns out, someone died because I left an encounter that I wasn’t prepared for and that came back on me later when I found a guy that I should have had a quest line with.

        You have relationships, you can choose several ways to approach problems and quests, and the character building is huge. There’s real strategy to everything.

        Starfield is just so bland in comparison.

        (BTW, BG3 combat is real difficult early on, where I’ve had to save scum just to make it past some fights, but at lvl 3 it gets more manageable. Definitely take time to learn your party’s strengths and weaknesses.)