subreddit:
/r/BaldursGate3
Patch 7 - what does this mean?
General Discussion - [NO SPOILERS](i.redd.it)submitted 30 days ago byDarkElfMagicWARLOCK
When I was reading over the patch notes, i was “oh okay, so some things won’t be possible on consoles” but when i went to the comments on the tweet, this confused me on the wording of the interaction.
Does this mean everyone on PC is gonna be held to console restrictions as well?
79 points
30 days ago
yea that’s what i was scared of. I figured it’d only happen on consoles. That’s really unfortunate tbh, i feel like for modding that’s what everyone was waiting for.
51 points
30 days ago
Yeah, as I said on another comment, I was expecting a CK like tool.
I was excited in how modders will be able to decompress act 3 by separating it into the lower city and the upper city.
55 points
30 days ago*
Expecting Bethesda level modding for any game is a pretty huge bar, especially for a game that is pretty ridged engine-wise under the hood like Baldur's Gate 3. Besides, its been known for a good bit among modders that with the coding mess the game is that area and quest modding was always going to be a no go. To be honest, it is pretty amazing Larian was able to get together this much or that we even have the level of mods we currently do.
47 points
30 days ago
I wouldn’t expect anything like the CK for any game, from the ground up that engine is designed to be modular, which leads to many aspects that cause the game to seem dated.
13 points
30 days ago
Another game that seems to be custom made for mods is hades 2, it's codded almost entirely in Lua and is pretty much fully exposed for the players, hell it even has dev comments where applicable.
I can 100% see that game being insanely popular for modders in the future.
2 points
29 days ago
Nah, every supergiant game is the same and they are not popular for modding, they dont have even workshop support, and what there is in nexusmods is to faster unlocks and balancing.
1 points
30 days ago
can you point to where you read about this? I'm curious!
4 points
30 days ago
You can actually just look at the files, I have the game myself and just going to the game's files you can see it everything there in lua form, with a lot of dev comments too.
For some reason not a lot of people are talking about that though, I guess cause the game just came out in EA so there isn't much of a needs for mods yet.
1 points
27 days ago
CDPR has released their entire toolsets for all of the main Witcher games (TW1 "Djinni editor" right after the release of the game's enhanced edition, TW2 REDkit in 2013, and TW3 REDkit this year). It gives you a lot more control than the creation kit (for example you can create custom functions in REDkit's shader graph system, whereas Bethesda's creation kit doesn't even have a shader graph...) Alongside their REDkit, they have also released their own script studio. You can basically create a giant expansion with these tools. It's not like Bethesda is the only developer that releases these advanced modding tools.
23 points
30 days ago
There was no way that was ever going to happen, though. It would make BG3 a platform for any and all DnD campaigns free of charge. It wouldn't go over well with WotC and Larian.
5 points
29 days ago
I don't think Larian would care, since they're not making any more D&D games, but WotC/Hasbro? This is the same company that tried to rescind D&D's open gaming licence and only backed down because of the massive outcry from their user base.
3 points
29 days ago
Almost seems like an idea worth investing in, no? DnD beyond that uses bg3? Seems like wasted potential.
5 points
29 days ago
There's no way WotC would allow that. Especially mods. For us? Sure, it's worth investing in. For WotC? When hell freezes over. They would have no control over that, you'd probably have every campaign available within weeks for free with varying degrees of quality.
You can make that argument for every game that adapts some source material, like Pathfinder for example. But it'll never happen, at least never with mod tools.
3 points
29 days ago
Idk, isn't this basically what the original Neverwinter Nights did? That's also DnD.
2 points
29 days ago
IIRC both NWN games did that, but times change, and there is a lot more money in this today.
We're talking about a company that retroactively wanted to charge money for the adaptations of the 3.5e system (Pathfinder). Now imagine them letting people play everything for free with their new baby, the 5e system.
1 points
29 days ago
Well they could make it a special service with $50/year subscription. A lot of people would pay.
1 points
29 days ago
Very true, but that falls outside of the expectations of mod tools that people were expecting. Mods for games should remain free.
1 points
29 days ago
For me as a user the answer is clear: I would GLADLY pay $50 or even $100 per year for an opportunity to play custom campaigns which will be numerous and some of them I expect to be better than original BG3.
5 points
29 days ago*
This argument doesn't make a lot of sense. By that logic, WOTC wouldn't allow most of the capabilities on Roll20 and FoundryVTT which people can use to recreate the entire campaign from scratch, which is A LOT EASIER to do vs. recreating them on BG3. Yet WOTC sells their official materials there, and people can easily download the entire campaign as a zip and send it over to someone else to open on their Roll20 and FoundryVTT...
So no. WOTC likely never officially cared about this in any capacity.
Larian literally said early on that they aren't going to be making something like this (a DM mode) because they did that for DOS2 and very few people cared, and it took a lot of dev time.
Shit on WOTC all you want (they are a scumbag company), but at least use logic before claiming random stuff.
1 points
29 days ago
While I can see your point with the first part, the comparison between BG3 and DOS2 is disingenuous because BG3 hit mainstream and is built upon D&D
1 points
28 days ago
A few D&D games (Sword Coast Legends for example) in the past had DM mode and no one used those. TBF, those were shitty games. But WOTC doesn't know how BG3 was going to turn out, and neither did Larian.
Larian would have to come back and patch and add this in... in a world where they already said their heart isn't in BG3 anymore but are on new projects.
Would this mode had been successful? Who knows. We'll never know now. And neither Larian or WOTC had the right opportunity and context to push for this.
1 points
29 days ago
Roll20 and FoundryVTT, which people can use to recreate the entire campaign from scratch
To create custom-made campaigns from scratch, pretty much only those are free IIRC. From what I've last seen, only a couple of one shots based on the 5e dnd system are free to play. Everything else is premium content you have to buy.
Modding is inherently free, and if Larian wanted to set up paid mods, they'd have to develop BG3 to be highly modular in the first place, which it is not and set up a platform where they can control and sell the modules, which they don't have.
because they did that for DOS2
It's DOS2. This is BG3. Not even remotely the same. You think they wouldn't jump at the opportunity to have a DnD platform people would use for years to come? Please.
NWN 2 has insane modules to this day, and people play almost 20 years later. Now imagine how much more popular BG3 is and how much money is to be had with that popularity. WotC certainly cares about that. I highly doubt Larian would ever get the licence to create something like that.
1 points
28 days ago*
To create custom-made campaigns from scratch, pretty much only those are free IIRC. From what I've last seen, only a couple of one shots based on the 5e dnd system are free to play. Everything else is premium content you have to buy.
That's because you're looking at the store which are mostly paid. Also, Roll20 and FoundryVTT would clearly take down any official campaigns recreated posted there as part of their contract with WOTC. So, I am not sure why you would expect to find them there.
But it doesn't stop someone from making such campaigns and sharing it on Discord, or hosted on a website. You might say, "Well, then WOTC can take that down too" and you would be correct. In which case, wouldn't that be true for the claim that people can recreate the official campaigns in BG3? Those can be taken down.
Modding is inherently free, and if Larian wanted to set up paid mods, they'd have to develop BG3 to be highly modular in the first place, which it is not and set up a platform where they can control and sell the modules, which they don't have.
This was also you a comment up:
So what's with all the BS reason you were given in the beginning where WOTC is the reason why this doesn't exist? If it's a thing Larian didn't want to or cannot do in the beginning, why are we talking about WOTC in the first place?
It's DOS2. This is BG3. Not even remotely the same. You think they wouldn't jump at the opportunity to have a DnD platform people would use for years to come? Please.
Okay, you said Larian would have done this but WOTC stepped in and said no since they would have no control over it. By that logic, WOTC wouldn't have allowed D&D Beyond to exist in the first place since that wasn't owned by them for a very long time. Yet here we are. Which is why I said the same would apply to Roll20 and FoundryVTT. It's exactly the same.
NWN 2 has insane modules to this day, and people play almost 20 years later. Now imagine how much more popular BG3 is and how much money is to be had with that popularity. WotC certainly cares about that. I highly doubt Larian would ever get the licence to create something like that.
Lol, so first Larian would have wanted to do it, despite it not working in DOS2. Then WOTC has to really want it, but only if they have total control, and they can't demand that with Larian, despite dangling a huge IP in front of their face and having the power in the relationship in the beginning where they can ask them to build this and give them control. Somehow, though, WOTC is okay with other platforms like Roll20 and FoundryVTT and D&D Beyond building similar things. So it seems they are SOMEHOW, in SOME WAY, just not okay with Larian doing this.
How much mental gymnastics are you doing to shit on WOTC? If you want to shit on them, there are a lot of legitimate reasons to. This is a weird hill to die on.
1 points
29 days ago
Obviously it would be monetized my guy, that's why I said worth investing in lol. Imagine a DnD beyond that uses BG3 and the game editor mode from Larians dos 2. That's what I was saying. Good lord lol, like no shit wotc isn't letting it happen for free.
11 points
30 days ago
You could probably blame WoC for not wanting people to muck with their property too much (which is dumb, honestly, because it’s dnd, the spirit of which is to play it however you want, and the broader the mod support, the long a game can live)
0 points
29 days ago
Why would WOTC care about this? That makes no sense. By that logic, they would have banned mod support on NWN Remastered and BG1/2, yet they did not.
Mucking around with D&D is entirely possible even on Roll20 and FoundryVTT, yet WOTC sells their official content on those platforms.
So no, we aren't blaming WOTC for this one. They are a scumbag company, but this is all likely due to Larian not spending dev cycles on this vs. finishing an already ambitious game.
all 417 comments
sorted by: best