Basically the title. Why are so many gaming content creators bashing other modern games and praising this particular title? Is it because it is a proper offline RPG? Or is it because there’s no “greedy” subscription or play-to-win?
Basically the title. Why are so many gaming content creators bashing other modern games and praising this particular title? Is it because it is a proper offline RPG? Or is it because there’s no “greedy” subscription or play-to-win?
It’s a large rpg game with everything an rpg game has to have to be attractive and immersive but without forced bullshit. Note how Larian’s previous games were also praised even without the context of “modern games”. The studio is good at what they do so the game is good… and it doesn’t break the previously successful formula, down to keeping local multiplayer - yes, it’s an AAA game which lets two people play with a single copy. Would someone think of the shareholders?! Hopefully not and an essential aspect of rpg - actually playing with other people in a shared fiction - is there.
Besides contrasting it with greedy monetisation BG3 needs to be compared with its precedessors (Divinity games and Baldur’s Gate 1 and 2) and it passes the tests with flying colors from what I read. Then we can compare to other big single-player rpgs like Pathfinder and again BG3 doesn’t disappoint.
That Larian did not over-monetise the game is really just cherry on top and I didn’t even play the thing yet.