Why devs consider Baldur’s Gate 3 anomaly, not new standard for RPG genre

[Era of not Yakuza]

So, I wasn't even following the release of this game, but recent news got me extremely interested. It seems like it's going to be an amazing game, and these testimonials from the developers only add to my hype.

What sparked the Baldur's Gate 3 debate?

This all started with a Twitter thread by Strange Scaffold* head Xalavier Nelson Jr. (*the studio is best known for Space Warlord Organ Trading Simulator and the upcoming Max Payne-like shooter El Paso, Elsewhere).

He cited several things that separate Baldur's Gate 3 from most RPGs in the market:

• Long development cycle that started back in 2017;
• Two previous games, Divinity: Original Sin and Original Sin II, "worth of tech and institutional knowledge to draw from";
• Successful Early Access period lasting three years that provided Larian with community feedback, bug hunting, and cash flow;
• Huge team of over 400 developers across seven offices;
• The license for one of the largest entertainment IPs (Dungeons & Dragons).

That's why Nelson Jr. is concerned that Baldur's Gate 3 could be considered a "raised standard" to the entire genre and applied even to teams that didn't have the resources, tools, and experience that Larian did.

How did other developers react to this take on Baldur's Gate 3?

Nelson Jr.'s thread went viral, with many developers from AAA companies and indie studios stepping in to support the main point.

For example, Grimlore Games (SpellForce 3) senior narrative designer Rebecca Harwick noted that while she expects Baldur's Gate 3 to be a once-in-lifetime RPG, she hopes "no one expects a 10, 20, 40-person team to make one."

View: https://twitter.com/thelintspeed/status/1678122139918934017

Insomniac Games design manager Ryan McCabe urged others not to use a singular game to set expectations for everyone developing RPGs because it "isn't useful and instead foolhardy."

Obsidian Entertainment design director Josh Sawyer noted that "having the foundation set and the funding to build things on your own terms is invaluable." This is not about downplaying talented people working on BG3, but about acknowledging this case is atypical for the games industry.

View: https://twitter.com/jesawyer/status/1677919203225903104

The article showcases some other statements from game developers, it's worth taking a look.

Why devs consider Baldur’s Gate 3 anomaly, not new standard for RPG genre: “It’s Rockstar-level nonsense for scope” | Game World Observer

A few weeks prior to its launch, Baldur’s Gate 3 looks like one of the most promising RPGs in recent memory. However, some devs are urging players not to rate all other games in the genre by such a high standard, appealing to Larian Studios’ unique combination of vast experience and resources.

gameworldobserver.com

People who are following the early access of the game, is it really that good? Oh my god. It's been a while since I felt so excited about a game!

 

[DaciaJC]

Eh, as a fan of RPGs I'm more than happy to see the standard being raised, that's what propels the genre as a whole forward. Obviously not every upcoming game will measure up, and that's fine; but just as The Witcher 3's well-written characters and side quests and Dark Souls' incorporation of environmental storytelling and use of challenge as a motivator had widespread positive influences across the genre, so too hopefully will Baldur's Gate 3 similarly inspire developers. I'm not sure why they would be fearful of it being used as a measuring stick, it's not like it's the first large-scale RPG with good production values that we've ever seen.

 

[Mike Rambo]

I definitely think people who think it should be the new standard are deluded, ain't nothing else gonna go this crazy for a while

 

[Niosai]

I get that it's not always financially/technically feasible to make something with such a large scope, but I don't think "lower your expectations and don't hold any other games to a high standard" is necessarily the best message either.

 

[camjwils]

I mean, I think most people are going to understand that Larian is in a special position here to make the most expensive and ambitious CRPG anyone's ever made before. Like, I'm not expecting Owlcat's next game to match BG3 in production value

 

[LordGorchnik]

I get the message. As a player though that doesn't mean I dont want to see the genre continously have its standards raised. Thats a bad message to send. However, that being said the level of detail in current cRPGs that are out now have been fantastic to play through and I don't expect all the others to try and pull a BG3 for all the other games that are either currently out there or in development.

The Pathfinder games are fantastic and Owlcat is working on a cRPG set in a Warhammer 40k Rogue Trader setting
BG3 is about to hit
The Underrail sequel is in development and every new screenshot of that I see makes my mouth water.

It's a good time for cRPGs.

 

[Charsace]

Most games aren't going to have the type of flow charts this has and for good reason. The people behind this have been making RPGs on PC and consoles for over a decade to build up to making this.

 

[Katbobo]

Yeah, it seems like it's going to be the RDR2 equivalent for CRPGs. I'm greatly looking forward to it, but absolutely no way this can be the standard. Though it makes me so curious what Larian does next, they've been getting better with each game and it's thrilling.

 

[Cantaim]

I definitely think people who think it should be the new standard are deluded, ain't nothing else gonna go this crazy for a while

Click to shrink...

Yea there are a lot of circumstances that let the studio knock it out of the park that most other devs won't be able to meet.

 

[Starlatine]

Eh, as a fan of RPGs I'm more than happy to see the standard being raised, that's what propels the genre as a whole forward.

Click to shrink...

if youre a fan of rpgs you dont want the standards to be BG3 because most companies wont be able to reach it and the entire genre will die

 

[TheThirstyPrisoner]

This is such a ridiculous discussion to really even be having. Like "no slight against Larian" for literally raising the bar? They built toward this bit by bit. It is like saying we shouldn't expect other musicians to be the Beatles because they spent all that time in Hamburg honing their craft and they were able to devote their lives to it. Like, duh. That's what we do as creators. Nobody is saying every new RPG is going to have to be to the level of BG3, but if no lessons are learned whatsoever, then it would be very disappointing. Even Larian themselves have been working to recreate the magic of Ultima VII—a game that came out over 30 years ago.

To me it comes off as preemptive damage control for future games that are business as usual rather than pushing the bar in any meaningful ways.

 

[LossAversion]

What does he want Larian to do, make a worse game?

lol, I'm kidding but I don't know who is going to hold small indie teams to the standard of a large and storied studio?

 

[Aeana]

I understand the message, but the tone of some of them is really bizarre to me. Larian went through a lot of trials to reach this point, almost had to close on more than one occasion, and they have certainly earned it. Some of them come off like they were handed some sort of success because of the license or something.

 

[HStallion]

Most people aren't expecting every third person shooter to be as amazingly detailed and finely created as The Last of Us 2 or every open world game to be as in depth and alive as RDR2. I don't think people will suddenly expect every CRPG to be as well made as BG3.

 

[Starlatine]

Nobody is saying every new RPG is going to have to be to the level of BG3

Click to shrink...

Actually plenty are, including retroactively complaining that older games didnt do what BG3 did (saw a couple of critiques that "kingmaker and wotr are not as reactive as BG3" in this very own forum). And when the game releases and people get enamoured with it, its only going to get worse

What does he want Larian to do, make a worse game?

lol, I'm kidding but I don't know who is going to hold small indie teams to the standard of a large and storied studio?

Click to shrink...

People still think and talk about Larian like they are a small studio.

 

[DaciaJC]

if youre a fan of rpgs you dont want the standards to be BG3 because most companies wont be able to reach it and the entire genre will die

Click to shrink...

That's ... rather dramatic. No, the genre won't die if other companies strive for a higher standard, unless BG3 ends up being so blisteringly good that nobody ever buys another RPG again.

 

[Starlatine]

That's ... rather dramatic. No, the genre won't die if other companies strive for a higher standard, unless BG3 ends up being so blisteringly good that nobody ever buys another RPG again.

Click to shrink...

I'm pretty sure nobody is doing a crpg wanting it to be crap and have low standards. But its one thing to want and its another to have 400+ employees, enough resources to keep yourself alive for 3 years of Early Access and the backing of one of the biggest brands in RPG to make a 300h game with full reactivity 170h of movies and whatever Larian was gloating about

 

[texhnolyze]

Just don't overthink these discussions and simply see them as a huge compliment to Larian.

 

[Quinton]

I understand the message, but the tone of some of them is really bizarre to me. Larian went through a lot of trials to reach this point, almost had to close on more than one occasion, and they have certainly earned it. Some of them come off like they were handed some sort of success because of the license or something.

Click to shrink...

Bingo yeah.

 

[Nida]

Are we going to have this same conversation when Starfield comes out?

 

[Gjallarsean]

I'm not sure why they would be fearful of it being used as a measuring stick, it's not like it's the first large-scale RPG with good production values that we've ever seen.

Click to shrink...

It's because each prior "measuring stick" game ends up being used as a cudgel by gamers, AKA, the most fucking toxic people on the damn planet. I've lost track of how many times I've heard someone say "The Witcher 3 did feature x all the way back in 2015, why haven't you done it too/gotten it right? Gah, devs are so lazy and incompetent."

Appreciate when we get a new game that really executes at a high level and all, but when people start treating it as the "standard" that should be met, all that it results in is a cesspool of toxicity for devs to wade through.

 

[TheFurizzlyBear]

Are we going to have this same conversation when Starfield comes out?

Click to shrink...

Not really needed since its been had many times before about Bethesda RPGs. Everyone acknowledges at this point that a Bethesda-style RPG is tough to make and that no one else really is expected to attempt despite how successful they are for Bethesda.

 

[Oski]

While technically true, one might ask why other studios who make crpg didn't make similar choices:

• Do what they know, instead of switching genres and tech to follow trends for each new game.
• Create an open and positive relationship with their audience and potential customers, by not treating them badly or lying to them every single week (or day).
• Use that positive relationship to have, if needed, long early access development, and using said community to gather feedbacks and ideas and bugs. Instead of ranting about the difficulty of a rolling working build, and constantly both ignoring and belittling customers.
• Stay away from hyper inflated geographic locations where the cost of a single dev is through the roof.
• Be ambitious and accept the difficulty of working with an established IP, which mean lots of constraints, lots of people you have to massage or abide to, and money drained from your future profits.
  It's not like there is a lack of very strong IP waiting for top quality rpg. Star Wars and MCU are absolutely in demand, and now LOTR too, if one can muster the fatigue of these franchises. But there are other IP that can do what CDP did with the old Cyberpunk 2020 tabletop rpg game. What about Shadowrun? Or in other mediums, what about The Expanse? Or Nine Princes in Amber? Or Song of Ice and Fire? And the list goes on for quite a while...

I'm not diminishing the work done by Larian, or saying they are perfect saints. But at a high level, this is not rocket science. This is what some random gamers and medias have been saying for one to two decades now, pretty consistently.

And some gamedevs have been saying for longer than that... I remember seeing a GDC talk from, close to decade ago maybe, where the core of the message was: the most important quality of a studio, is how many games have they shipped together. Keeping an experienced team who has worked together is worth any new budget, any engine, any shiny rockstar name of a writer or designer. It's not new, nor is it secret.

And sure, the actual implementation of that high level strategy is complicated, and hard work. But guess what, that's why studio manager (officer, director, president, whatever the exact term is in that country for that type of company) tend to be paid more, and in a way why their job exist at all.

So while, indeed, it's not reasonable to expect a 40 devs team to be able to do a Baldur's Gate 3 clone, it's also probably unreasonable for said team to sell a $60 game, with further overmonetisation. And maybe that same team would do better if they put a greater % of their workforce on design and writing... maybe the audience can accept a smaller indie game not have that level of graphical festival, but do expect a good game underneath whether it's a team of 3, 30, or 300. Unless the game is free (and probably even then), expecting a good game at a reasonable price is not an unreasonable position.

I don't remember Larian spending a lot of time and PR effort to say "oh, we're not Microsoft, we're not Nintendo, we're not Bethesda, we're not Bioware, you can't compare our products to theirs, you have to understand we can't compete with them". No. They found their niche (the one a lot of gamers were asking for, and were either ignored or shat over by all big publishers) and they did the work. And then, they did it again.

So I would absolutely expect Avowed and the next Dragon Age to be better than Baldur's Gate 3, with better design and writing, better product value with more content for a lower price. After all, according to gamedevs, if we can't ask smaller crpg to be like BG3, we can't ask BG3 to be as good or as meaty as big blockbusters made by Electronic Arts and Microsoft Xbox, can't we now? Right?

obviously satitrical, I absolutely expect the next Dragon Age to be at best very meh paint by the numbers, and Avowed to have both issues and some lack of ambition, and not on the level of what at least now appear BG3 to be at. But, we'll see, I'll certainly be glad if I'm wrong.

So, yes, technically true. But the more interesting question is, why is that true, and why some people preemptively think it will apply to their games, outside of those with just a much smaller budget?

Edit: actually, I disagree. It very well be the new quality standard of roleplaying videogames (assuming it's as good as it appears to be, of course).

Of course much smaller teams with much smaller budgets will not meet that standard. That's fine, nobody serious will expect them to. And that's why their products will be cheaper, and more lean and agile and able to fit some sub-genre niche for example.

Nobody expect Battlebit to meet the standard of assets quality and quantity, and rendering prowess, of Call of Duty. You don't see Battlebit team spending time convincing people of that.

But otherwise, why should it not be the new quality standard? Why should Dune not be the standard for difficult to adapt novels and scifi grand epic? Why should Song of ice and fire should not have been the standard for fantasy novels? Should space opera movies in the late 1970s or early 80s be rewarded with our money if they don't meet the Star Wars new standard?

Assuming BG3 is good, I think it should be the new quality standard of the genre. Give to devs something to aspire to, or reject and go in a totally different way with their own creative chops.

It should raise the standard. That's what new videogames with big budgets are supposed to do, aren't they?

 

[Atom]

It would be like looking at Hollow Knight and wondering why isn't every metroidvania 40 hours and $15.

Which unfortunately I've seen expressed as an actual option too many times.

 

[Gjallarsean]

I understand the message, but the tone of some of them is really bizarre to me. Larian went through a lot of trials to reach this point, almost had to close on more than one occasion, and they have certainly earned it. Some of them come off like they were handed some sort of success because of the license or something.

Click to shrink...

I really don't know how this is what you pull from this. Every one of those Twitter threads acknowledges that it's a tremendous thing that Larian is creating, while simultaneously acknowledging that they got here primarily because they are a large developer that has a decade of experience working in the genre, using a specialized toolset and just have a ton of institutional knowledge built up. And on top of that, yeah, they've got a popular IP as well.

It's all just saying to not hold smaller developers with less experience to the same standard, because that is exactly what gamers fucking do all the time, and it results in nonstop harassment and driving talented people out of the industry.

 

[Alek]

While I do appreciate the point, I think this is the type of thing that AI will be able to help developers solve, in the near future. Making these types of games more common. Obviously there's a lot that developers would need to solve to get there, but an AI can theoretically compute all of the various interactions between mechanics and relationships between characters and artifacts in ways that humans likely cannot. Both in relation to testing these types of games to help ensure they are playable, but also content creation.

On the one hand, the potential for that is quite exciting, but obviously I'm not unaware of the ethical issues and other implications. Nonetheless, I personally think 'once in a lifetime' is a stretch here. If I were to guess, you will see many more complex games than Baldurs Gate within the next 20 years.

 

[disparate]

It's probably for the best, I'd rather BioWare and Obsidian don't pivot to making games that play like tabletop games, I'd rather keep tabletop stuff as irl tabletop.

 

[Starlatine]

After all, according to gamedevs, if we can't ask smaller crpg to be like BG3, we can't ask BG3 to be as good or as meaty as big blockbusters made by Electronic Arts and Microsoft Xbox, can't we now? Right?

Click to shrink...

Nobody asked BG3 to be like Dragon Age and Microsoft Xbox(?) rpgs. Whats your point again?

 

[7thFloor]

I was wondering when we'd have a thread about this considering a few notable devs chimed in about this

People who are following the early access of the game, is it really that good? Oh my god. It's been a while since I felt so excited about a game!

Click to shrink...

Yes, it's really that good

 

[DaciaJC]

I'm pretty sure nobody is doing a crpg wanting it to be crap and have low standards. But its one thing to want and its another to have 400+ employees, enough resources to keep yourself alive for 3 years of Early Access and the backing of one of the biggest brands in RPG to make a 300h game with full reactivity 170h of movies and whatever Larian was gloating about

Click to shrink...

Well, yeah, I think most people are sensible enough to understand not every studio has equitable access to resources. You mentioned above that some people posted complaints about WotR not being reactive compared to BG3, which sounds silly on the surface but may well end up having an upshot: Owlcat or other devs might look at that feedback and decide, "Hey, it seems like a lot of players really appreciated this aspect of BG3, let's see if maybe we can work on that in our next title."

 

[Saucycarpdog]

Anyone who thinks BG3 will be the standard for CRPG genre going forward is dumb.

Like saying RDR2 sets the standard for open world games.

Not every dev has a massive budget or tons of resources to spare, especially when that's not the direction they want to take their game.

 

[disparate]

Nobody asked BG3 to be like Dragon Age and Microsoft Xbox(?) rpgs. Whats your point again?

Click to shrink...

I asked for BG3 to take WASD movement from Dragon Age tbf.

 

[Starlatine]

You mentioned above that some people posted complaints about WotR not being reactive compared to BG3, which sounds silly on the surface but may well end up having an upshot: Owlcat or other devs might look at that feedback and decide, "Hey, it seems like a lot of players really appreciated this aspect of BG3, let's see if maybe we can work on that in our next title."

Click to shrink...

Or they might look at their own finances, know they cant survive and pay all their staff without releasing a title for three years, know they cant push the scope with them barely having over 150 employees, try to keep doing what they did so well all these years (the pathfinder games) and still get slapped with 6/10s and angry gamer schtick because "lol pathfinder so lame it didnt even have a 20 hour intro movie and i couldnt even fuck a bear like in BG3 shit game"

 

[Derbel McDillet]

if youre a fan of rpgs you dont want the standards to be BG3 because most companies wont be able to reach it and the entire genre will die

Click to shrink...

That's a fast escalation.

 

[bottledfox]

Why worry so much? Other CRPG devs will still find ways to succeed by offering their own unique features and stories. I've played BG3 in early access, and while it's cool, there are some ways I don't expect it to raise the bar, especially in the writing department.

 

[Stormblessed]

People comparing a game as large as this to small team games are just misinformed. I don't go into indie/AA games with the same expectations as huge AAA titles

 

[arglebargle]

if youre a fan of rpgs you dont want the standards to be BG3 because most companies wont be able to reach it and the entire genre will die

Click to shrink...

Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp, Or what's a heaven for?

 

[Captain of Outer Space]

I don't know why any reasonable person would expect indies to be at the level that Larian's been building up to over the past 15 years.

Were there these kinds of concerns around Tears of the Kingdom?

 

[Ailanthium]

Not every single-player narrative game is going to be Uncharted or The Last of Us, either. While there will always be folks who make unfair comparisons to games with wildly different scopes and budgets, I feel like part of the reason this is coming up is because the genre's been in a bit of a weird state for... several years, now.

 

[LorentzFactor]

this is a very strange discussion to have and I'm genuinely curious who the devs are even responding to. Is it just preemptive? Were devs also trying to make this message when BotW came out? Like I get Larian is a very successful indie studio but I don't think that really matters when critiquing or talking about the influence of a game.

 

[420blzUP]

This is silly. Since when is boundary pushing something bad?
Maybe Nintendo should stop making Mario so fun to control? That's totally unfair to Gex!
Or how about Gamefreak stops making Pokemon so irresistible cute?

Larian already raised the bar back in 2014 with the original Divinity Original Sin. They created the most interesting, reactive and complex RPG to date with a couple of dozen people on a shoestring budget.
How about the industry tries to at least reach that level of awesomeness? I would gladly pay 60€ for a sci-fi Larian like rpg with the same production levels as DOS.
Larian became THE motherfucking Larian! when they stopped chasing Diablo or chasing Oblivion. They became the imo BEST rpg studio by doing their own stuff and getting better at it with every new game released. Maybe the devs should be inspired by that?

"Sony is paying Larian to Fuck XBox over!", "Larian promotes bestiality!", "Larian makes their games too good!" - I've never seen so many garbage takes surrounding a game before.

 

[Kujumz]

…interesting marketing

 

[HStallion]

The topic is in general is just about shitty gamers with insane expectations on top of a lack of knowledge about how games are made. Its nothing new.

 

[writhingcorpse897]

The fewer RPGs of this scale being turn based, the better.

 

[Flame Champion]

Why worry so much? Other CRPG devs will still find ways to succeed by offering their own unique features and stories. I've played BG3 in early access, and while it's cool, there are some ways I don't expect it to raise the bar, especially in the writing department.

Click to shrink...

Yeah I'm not really sure where this convo is even coming from. I'm still looking forward to BG3 due to the gameplay, but things like the writing, characters, etc really aren't much better than the other Larian stuff. So if anything the fact that the game has such a large amount of cutscenes is a negative to me.

 

[Deleted member 95442]

This is such a ridiculous discussion to really even be having. Like "no slight against Larian" for literally raising the bar? They built toward this bit by bit. It is like saying we shouldn't expect other musicians to be the Beatles because they spent all that time in Hamburg honing their craft and they were able to devote their lives to it. Like, duh. That's what we do as creators. Nobody is saying every new RPG is going to have to be to the level of BG3, but if no lessons are learned whatsoever, then it would be very disappointing. Even Larian themselves have been working to recreate the magic of Ultima VII—a game that came out over 30 years ago.

To me it comes off as preemptive damage control for future games that are business as usual rather than pushing the bar in any meaningful ways.

Click to shrink...

Its even more troubling coming from first party studios.

 

[aerts1js]

The fewer RPGs of this scale being turn based, the better.

Click to shrink...

because…?

 

[Oski]

Nobody asked BG3 to be like Dragon Age and Microsoft Xbox(?) rpgs. Whats your point again?

Click to shrink...

My point is part of their arguments are right, but other parts are either wrong or leave unsaid critical aspects of it.

For example, Josh Sawyer (which I usually tend to agree with) said Larian is atypical, and the whole previous arguments are great (i.e. we can't compare, doesn't raise the quality standard, etc.) Well, Larian did twice their own rpg IP, with their own novel funding, before moving to Baldur's Gate. Guess what, Obsidian also did twice their own rpg IP, with their own novel funding. And they did it with more industry contact, name recognition, and veterans personnel.

Obsidian was in a better position to do even better. And that was before Xbox ownership, support and money. Unless Avowed is sold at a reduced price, it's absolutely normal to judge that game with the potentially new raised quality bar.

 

[DaciaJC]

Or they might look at their own finances, know they cant survive and pay all their staff without releasing a title for three years, know they cant push the scope with them barely having over 150 employees, try to keep doing what they did so well all these years (the pathfinder games) and still get slapped with 6/10s and angry gamer schtick because "lol pathfinder so lame it didnt even have a 20 hour intro movie and i couldnt even fuck a bear like in BG3 shit game"

Click to shrink...

You truly believe that would form a large part of the discourse? I think you're sorely mistaken. Did Jedi: Survivor under-perform and get slammed because "lol star wars so lame it didn't even have a 100 hour massive open world and no four arm waifu like Ranni shit game"?

 

[BossAttack]

I never thought this...