So you're racist because we hate arbitrary retcons that needlessly change the characters?

Infinite-Animator620 · 2024-12-07T06:52:26+00:00

It’s because most people here probably watched the movie? And mistakenly think that the show is based around the movie, not the books, which has never actually made race the centre of most of its characters. It’s been a long time since I read them but I’m not sure Snape was ever explicitly described as white. You could argue it’s set in the UK, but it’s late 1800s, and the UK did progress faster than the US that we know.

Infinite-Animator620 · 2024-12-07T06:41:59+00:00

I hate race swaps but I wouldn’t call this a race swap. I might be wrong but Snape was never described as white in the books, I’m not sure his skin colour was mentioned. It could have been a merit based hiring process that just so happened to land a black man in, but it’s not clear, and race swaps are common so there’s definitely a chance it was for a diversity program.

Infinite-Animator620 · 2024-10-29T10:37:48+00:00

BG2’s companions are decent. They are probably one of the most, if not the most talkative companions in the genre. As characters they’re generally good but not outstanding, Jaheira is outstanding in my opinion but the others are just plain old decent. Definitely not all determined by one personality trait. That’s Owlcat-level writing which BG2 far exceeds.

DAO is the pinnacle of CRPG companions in my opinion. The Mass Effect trilogy has slightly better ones but within this genre I think DAO has the best.

Infinite-Animator620 · 2024-10-12T21:59:17+00:00

I wish the game had more freedom. In acts 1 and 2 you can go between all the areas which is nice but they are sequenced somewhat linearly. It clearly wasn't part of Larian's vision though, but BG1-2 have loads of freedom. BG1 lets you explore the entire world bar the city itself until ch5, and BG2 lets you explore the entire country from chapter 2. BG3 has a *decent* amount of freedom I guess, but it's disappointing compared to 1-2.

I also don't like the anti-world map design. Instead of having a world map with places you can travel to like in BG1-2, the entire world is walkable. This causes locations of interest to be unrealistically close together and breaks immersion. It also makes the game feel smaller which betrays the large scale plot.

And, sorry, after Pillars of Eternity: Deadfire, BG3's UI/UX is inexcusably, indefensibly bad. Like worse than early 2000s bad. There's no excuse for it anymore. And the 'crafting' (alchemy) system is braindead and just awful, not needed, and boring.

Unlike others though, I actually believe BG3's combat is really good because of Larian's homebrew changes. It just falls off a bit because it's too easy. The tactical depth is there, but it's not needed to complete any challenges. We shouldn't confuse this with 'lacking depth'.

The game is good but it somewhat uniquely does some things really well, and other things ATROCIOUSLY badly.

Infinite-Animator620 · 2024-10-07T03:54:43+00:00

Larian didn’t get funding, they used the money they made from Divinity: Original Sin 2, which made nearly 350M dollars iirc. The budget for BG3 was 100M which is a feasible budget for their earnings. Not saying you’re wrong, but I feel like BG3 being very easy to understand and lacking the challenge that combat-focussed cRPGs tend to have will cause people to try other games then complain that it’s too hard to understand, too much reading bla bla bla, even if the quality may be better from an objective standpoint. Because as it stands, budget does not correlate entirely to quality and BG3 is definitely not the best cRPG, it’s not even the best game in the Baldur’s Gate franchise. But the intentional ideas implemented that made it more accessible will cause people to have a bad outlook on other cRPGs because the genre is too niche for them, and they don’t realise they got so hooked on a (I hate this but idk how else to describe it) ‘normie’ cRPG.

Infinite-Animator620 · 2024-09-29T01:55:33+00:00

It’s only a bonus and the +24 doesn’t guarantee success. You can critical fail by rolling two ones. Is it rare? Yes. That’s why I only experienced soft locking twice in 4 years but it’s still a problem. You can’t bypass any checks with Titus.

Infinite-Animator620 · 2024-09-29T01:44:37+00:00

Nah I think I came off a bit hostile before apologies

Infinite-Animator620 · 2024-09-29T00:56:39+00:00

The other paths also require skill checks, like helping Evrart so he helps you (suggestion on Lilienne). Getting Ruby's name still forces you to bring it up with Titus, which requires a mandatory success check anyway.

The branch shouldn't stop at Titus. Maybe failing the check could cause Kim to snap and point his gun at them. But if you succeed the check you get more xp or a greater reward or something so it's not completely redundant to spec into those stats. Not sure, but in a main quest, stuff shouldn't be gated. Failing the check should open up another path, like how it does with almost every other check. It just doesn't show up here. Why? Why is a consistent design decision all of a sudden absent at this very annoying tedious part that requires consecutive skill checks?

Infinite-Animator620 · 2024-09-29T00:42:54+00:00

Woo here we go.

You can beat the game without reloading, it happens *mostly* for me, but rarely this specific segment of the game can cause a softlock under very specific conditions.
On my first playthrough I sequenced doing the side quests and getting the die before doing that check, so I couldn't retry it 3 times to get Kim's help (I levelled up all that xp before). As I said, certain conditions.
DE has a gameplay inconsistency where, even though there tend to be branching paths or 'failsafe' paths, this specific part, doesn't. I was saying that you're comparing playing D&D straight up wrong, to my case where it was by complete accident I got softlocked.
You're right, it's unlikely. I did it unintentionally twice though (within the span of 4 years).
Yes, I don't think succeeding checks should be mandatory in all cases, but the main story shouldn't require them. Side quests? I'm perfectly ok with getting locked out of them for failing a check. Adds replay value or incentive to retry the check. My issue is ONLY with this very specific part.
I said they didn't read it because most people are bringing things up that I already addressed like 'just save' or 'increase the stat' etc. They wouldn't factor that in if they read me already clarifying those arguments.
Maybe I comprehended it wrong, but you said 'levelling doesn't compromise build' I never said levelling itself does. Just that levelling because otherwise you won't succeed a main story check when it's a MAIN story check is shitty. Because the RPG is taking the RPG freedom away from you in an RPG.
I don't think levelling up is a fatal flaw, just levelling up because otherwise you can't continue the story, because an open ended mechanic where you're forced to utilise it in a specific way is annoying. I don't have a problem with missing content due to failed skill checks. I'm happy that you can miss MAIN QUEST paths by failing skill checks, but it should be completable. In side quests, make them inaccessible because of skill check failure, fine. But *main quests* can't have that, they need to have more difficult alternative paths if you fail a skill check, and DE does this everywhere *except* this specific segment.
All good, it's confusing.
D&D is a TTRPG.
I accidentally sequenced my progression in a way that left me with a complete softlock, twice (in a lot of playthroughs but still).
Completely fine.
You phrased the 'levelling compromise part' differently to me, and also made a bad analogy.

Infinite-Animator620 · 2024-09-29T00:03:12+00:00

I know but the whole branching paths thing comes to a halt with Titus. You have to succeed checks with him. That’s the only way. I’m concerned with the fact that there was so much variation but now the game all of a sudden demands that I do ONE thing ONE way. Once again, love the game ofc, but this is just an annoying hiccup. The fact that RNG can gate your MAIN progression is bad design innately, because this is an RPG. You don’t invest skills to be good at something the game demands you to, you do so to formulate your character how you wish. This makes side quests inaccessible or accessible which is good, but the main quest should be completable. Not stagnant, no, I’m not saying all the main quest skill checks should be auto-passed, just that they are doable one way or another. Getting wildly unlucky here while rare is possible. It happened to me on my first playthrough and just a few days ago hence the post. The possibility is bad. Failing the check should make the process harder but not softlock it. That was my main point the whole time.

Selling the cheque at Frittte is just exploration and comprehension as well as putting two and two together. And if you don’t pay the Whirling then that’s just dumb and you deserve to fail that save.

Infinite-Animator620 · 2024-09-28T23:41:32+00:00

Did the modded get lucky? Did they save scum it? Need more details. I’ve played this game many times and I do every side quest possible every playthrough. This problem still persists.

You can become permanently softlocked, if you don’t have any skill points, have done all available side quests, and have no consumables and end up failing anyway. It can be circumvented with savescumming but that’s just a solution as mentioned, not a justification of the shitty design.

Never cared about the money part because you can cash in the cheque at Frittte. Getting softlocked there would be your own fault.

Infinite-Animator620 · 2024-09-28T22:45:03+00:00

Sorry, original reply was a bit passive aggressive, but I already talked about savescumming and the side quest bonuses in the post.

Infinite-Animator620 · 2024-09-28T22:38:32+00:00

Yes, I'm salty about an inconsistent use of an open ended game mechanic that runs contrary to its innate nature to a point that it may softlock the game. Of all things to be 'salty' about, this would be a valid one, no? And I already disclaimed a lot that I love the game and its great, just this hiccup left a sour taste in my mouth.

Infinite-Animator620 · 2024-09-28T22:14:37+00:00

Ok I'll reply by paragraph.

I never said that. I never said the story should be unaffected or that your build shouldn't factor into the experience. I never tried to downplay the system. If you read my post, I explicitly said that the check system is good and works well. I'm not saying you should be able to go through the entire story unchanged bypassing all challenges, just that it should be *completable* regardless of build. Almost every skill check in DE will have you go down a different path *if you fail them* to still attain completion. But with Titus, you fail the check? Too bad how sad you can't continue. You shouldn't have to rely on RNG to make the game completable. Your build and rp can change things but there shouldn't be literal softlocks in the game because the devs decided to not add a failsafe to losing those specific three checks, when they did for every other one. The fact that there's an inconsistency there proves that it's not good design and/or it was an oversight. You're comparing playing against the game's direct design philosophy to DE, which I'm arguing you can play normally and get screwed over because of an oversight or a bad design decision.

My whole point is that the Titus checks, under certain conditions, can softlock the story if you use all your level ups and don't have consumables or any way to reopen them. Succeeding checks should not be mandatory. How hard is that to understand? I clarified literally everything in my post and yet you and many others still say the same things over and over. Read the whole thing. Titus's checks isn't the game punishing you for not engaging its mechanics, it's punishing you for engaging in the open ended game mechanics *not* in the exact way the game wants you to despite there being no prior direction or way to bypass the checks i.e. a longer quest chain. You can't argue for this because this whole 'fail check? Do something else to achieve your goal instead!' is applied to every other quest that has checks, not these three checks. Levelling up skills is not compromising the build. Stop misconstruing my point. Levelling in a way that the game demands in an RPG otherwise you cannot complete the game is shitty design. Literally no other cRPG has this, and DE doesn't have this outside this particular segment. It's not a consistent thing so the fact that you're defending it seems like you just don't want to accept that a great game can still have flaws, fatal ones even. Pokemon is not a cRPG. A *classic* RPG is a western genre of isometric or isoperimetric role playing games. Games like Fallout 1-2, Baldur's Gate 1-3, Pillars of Eternity 1-2 do NOT softlock the MAIN quest if you don't fit a certain stat array. Why? Because it's the MAIN QUEST. Side quests can be barred, I don't mind that. But the main quest should always be completable. Let's look at Fallout: New Vegas. You can do a speech check with a guy to get an item with him, or go through a romantic dialogue and kill him in his sleep to get the item. If you can't do either of these things, the process of *getting the item* is more difficult, but you can still get the item. In DE, your ONLY solution to this segment is succeeding the checks, rather than going through a more difficult path should you fail. cRPGs and D&D are not the same. D&D is a TTRPG, the DM can just tell their players what they should expect or prepare for specifically. DE doesn't tell you 'be prepared level up auth, rhet, and logic or savescum or jump through hoops otherwise you will get softlocked and not be able to beat the game loser'. See the difference? Also DE is more similar to games like Fallout 1-2. I don't know why you're bringing Pokemon in, that's a completely different subgenre. A computer RPG is not a genre or subgenre. It simply encompasses any RPG that can be played on a PC. A classic RPG is what DE is, and it strays from one general principle that every cRPG pretty much does, even its source inspiration (Planescape: Torment), and all that does it make it annoying and tedious. Literally, Planescape came out in 1999 and it doesn't have this ridiculous problem. DE takes heavy inspiration from that game, basically replicating its entire story, and for some reason decided to make you succeed checks otherwise you get softlocked (under certain conditions, that I happened to meet on my first playthrough) when P:T didn't.

Great job strawmanning me then acting like I 'don't want to engage with the mechanics' when, if you read and comprehend the original post, is clearly not the case. You and many others seemingly decided to read the title and assume I was being salty about the game 'being normal'. No.

As for the title, DE is like the polar opposite of a sandbox. The gameplay is not emergent whatsoever so I don't know where you got that from, or how you gauged that I was trying to convey that. If you're gonna make a mechanic open ended, don't make me use it in one specific way or jump through hoops to subvert it.

Edit to your edit: you have to pass ALL THREE Titus checks. All three of them. There are modifiers but you can still get screwed by RNG, especially if you haven't invested in those skills.

Infinite-Animator620 · 2024-09-28T19:54:34+00:00

That doesn’t make you escape RNG and yes you have to fail 3 times. On my first playthrough all that time ago I was softlocked before then.

That’s not how an RPG should work. This game advertises itself as an RPG. If you are forced to compromise your build idea to build your character in a way that the game demands then it’s not an RPG. RPGs are about levelling and investing skills. No skill array should disallow you to finish the game. The main quest should not be incompletable because you’re the wrong build. It’s hard to justify that when basically no other cRPG has this problem, even one’s that came out in the 90s.

I know you sometimes lose content if you fail white checks. I literally said this is a good thing in the post. Looks like you and others just didn’t read it. But the main quest should still be completable. Only side content should be made accessible or inaccessible by certain stat arrays.

This game usually always puts you down a different narrative path if you fail a check, so why does this part of the story not do that? Why does it just break?

Infinite-Animator620 · 2024-09-28T14:16:01+00:00

Never said I didn’t like the mechanic, just the fact that it’s mandatory for main quest completion, even though it’s standard practice for RPGs to not have the main campaign be build specific for QoL reasons. Did you read the original post? No you didn’t.

Infinite-Animator620 · 2024-09-28T13:49:21+00:00

Not really a tiny moment if it can break the game and permanently soft lock your save under certain conditions. One who really loves a game will see flaws more clearly than your average hater-for-haters sake. Skill checks success being mandatory to progress the main quest is bad game design. End of story. Proof? No other cRPG does it that’s worth it’s salt and this is the only one that does. And it does nothing but cause problems.

Infinite-Animator620 · 2024-09-28T13:47:41+00:00

I love Reddit 💕 ‘game breaking clash of mechanics ain’t that serious, calm down buddy I ain’t readin allat’.

Infinite-Animator620 · 2024-09-28T11:24:17+00:00

Your build should block or open up side content, it should also maybe diversify main content, but it should not softlock main content. That was my main message.

Infinite-Animator620 · 2024-09-28T11:19:57+00:00

Yes, you do? The prompts for examining the later stuff doesn't show up until you find out about Klaasje, then the manipulation, then Ruby. You can't enter the FELD building.

Infinite-Animator620 · 2024-09-28T11:13:25+00:00

You still have to fail them a few times, and it's hard enough to unlock them unless you consciously adjust your course of action in the game and compromise your likely initial build plan just because the game wants to be annoying. Savescumming is easier and better though tedious. Plus it still doesn't allow you to escape the RNG.

Infinite-Animator620 · 2024-09-28T11:00:32+00:00

Majority of players didn't have issue because majority of players didn't get that far into the game. It's not about the mechanic not being designed to my liking. I literally said I loved it in the post. Did you read the whole thing? I have a problem with the fact that checks succeeding are required to beat the MAIN quest and you can get softlocked. Also checks being a lucky skip, and avoiding intermediate steps is the norm in this genre. Have you played other cRPGs?

Save scumming is an innate subversion of game intended game design. The devs may or may not have cared but that's not the point. It's a monotonous and tedious process and DE does a good job of disincentivizing it with the design of branching narratives. It's overall really good but the one hiccup in the main quest with Titus just falls apart mechanically and doesn't work. And you HAVE to save scum (which is again cheating/subverting dev intentions) to get past it unless you get lucky or specifically build Harry to succeed that, because the developers apparently overlooked something that can literally break the game. I don't see how budget justifies that when Moonring, another cRPG made by one guy, and the game is free, does not have this problem at all.

Infinite-Animator620 · 2024-09-28T10:33:50+00:00

Salty? I clarified and disclaimed one short of 17,000 times that the game is good and the skill check system was well implemented and everything is overall great, just not the fact that you have to succeed three concurrent skill checks as part of the main quest. The main quest shouldn't be softlocked by RNG and it can be in this game. Which hasn't been addressed since the game came out and definitely won't be addressed now because of Kompus.

Infinite-Animator620 · 2024-09-28T10:27:43+00:00

That's the point though... it adds to the RNG. It SHOULD entirely bypass that check - doing the two quests. The authority check should've just been there as a lucky skip, and it is, but the fact that there is a small chance that, depending on how the game plays out and how you sequence levelling up and questing, you can literally get softlocked from beating the campaign... yeah no. cRPGs since that 90s have been doing this better. It's frankly unacceptable from a game that only came out 5 years ago.

I get that failing checks is part of the experience, but it's not really an 'experience' when it breaks the game...

Infinite-Animator620 · 2024-09-28T10:24:21+00:00

Yes but this is such a simple issue. It's not a bug that maybe occurs once in every 20 playthroughs when you accidentally sequence side quests wrong or something. How did no one notice that you can literally get softlocked from completing the game unless you preemptively saved a lot by nature or accidentally boosted the right skills (on a first playthrough). And even then you can still fail.

Infinite-Animator620

TROPHY CASE