>>3769112
>BG3 has better world
Do you mean the background lore of the campaign setting, or the in-game world to explore? I dislike how densely packed Larian makes everything, every two feet you stumble across something, and you can plainly see sharp lines of color changes separating every zone. It all feels artificial and inorganic, like a theme park.
>higher production value
Obviously, I don’t think anyone will disagree
>and more immersive story telling
I personally found bg3 to be one the most immersion-breaking RPGs that I can think of. My suspension of disbelief was gradually eroded and destroyed as I went through the game, and by act 3 I was simply finishing it to see how bad it got. The story is insanely railroaded and dismissive of player choice to the point of teleporting you in cutscenes if you don’t do what the devs want. Try to not recruit Shadowheart. Or go attack the Absolutes army camp in act 2. (I found out on my second playthrough that you can sit there and lob fireballs at the enemies there and nothing happens. Such immersion, such systems)
>better itemization and loot system
Also disagree. Bg1 and bg2 had iconic items people still remember 25+ years later, bg3 floods you with gimmicky sets that stack charges of shit like an MMO.
>better combat
Combat is the exact same. Less granular even since you generally only have one action and one bonus action, as opposed to multiple APs with varying costs.
>better character progression and build variety
I disagree, 5th ed is the most dumbed down and worst edition of DnD, explicitly designed for casuals, women, and non-whites. Feats are an optional rule and most are inferior to simple stat increases, which they compete with. Racial stat modifiers were removed because they make people feel bad. The “build variety” is just stupid dips which are always a retarded concept.

Back | Go to board

Board:

/vrpg/

Thread:

>we have Baldur's Gate 3 at home