They have varied characters because different people like different things. "Characters you don't enjoy" aren't and shouldn't be a design goal. That's idiotic.
They have varied characters because different people like different things.
That’s what the writer is saying, though? She’s saying it’s good for games to have characters some people consider “bad,” because what’s “bad” Is different for everyone. It means a game has a well-rounded cast of characters.
“Bad” does have inherent value because one person’s “bad” Is another person’s “awesome.”
I think Gale is “bad” as she’s defining it because he’s boring and his squishy ass kept getting curb-stomped when I tried to use him. I also hate the way he tries to romance you and the incel vibes I got of him. But go on tumblr and folks just adore him and his romance. What makes him “bad” to me is a selling point to others. That’s what I think the writer is trying to say.
I think they are being a bit pretentious with their fun fact side note, as if playing a paladin and romancing shadowheart isn’t really compelling, and is fundamentally undeserving of being the most popular option for a first playthrough. Its especially weird to me that they like Karlach but dislike Wyll, because I feel like they are very similar.
It doesn’t matter who your bad companion is. […] But as long as you have one (and only one), you know you’re in for a great game.
That all aside, their conclusion is wrong anyways, because people are perfectly capable of liking the whole cast, and they probably would enjoy bg3 more if they also enjoyed Wyll. Having an ensemble cast means the writers maybe don’t have to worry too much about any particular character being hit or miss, those misses are allowances, not targets.
Having an ensemble cast means the writers maybe don’t have to worry too much about any particular character being hit or miss, those misses are allowances, not targets.
I don’t think the writer is talking about having characters people don’t like as what the game writers spoiled be aiming for, but that from the point of view as a player, if there’s a character you just to not like, it means the game is written well. Which to me makes sense, because you don’t care one way or the other about a character that’s not written well. For you to actually dislike a character, they’ve got to be well written because they feel like a person.
Wyll is bad for the reason I find so many companions bad in games like this. He’s good: too good. I felt the same way about Kaidan in Mass Effect, who is the archetype for these sorts of companions. They’re always very nice people on the surface, often driven by some military code that holds virtue and justice above everything. Then they have conversations mostly about bread or how clear water is, reveal some deep burden, and then keep on smiling throughout it. It’s supposed to be admirable. But it’s dull. It presents a character who has no flaws, and when faced with their greatest challenge, they simply smile and shrug.
It doesn’t seem like that’s how they feel, and this paragraph to me says the opposite. Their complaint about wyll is that he is (to them) unrealistically too good of a person. I don’t know about you, but I frequently actually dislike characters because they don’t seem like real people, which seems to be the article author’s position on Wyll.
More damning that they've been able to put into words exactly why I don't care for him. And notice that I did not say I disliked or hated him, I do not care about him enough to have something to hate about him. Which is a MUCH bigger problem, storywise. He's not unlikable, he's bland.
It's not even like he doesn't have the capability. He has a fair number of things the writers could have worked with. A semi-pampered noble forced to strike out on his own, who is very obviously trying to find absolution by making a name for himself as a hero he's questionably cut out to be? For all he bleeds idealism and dreams of being a protector, you have the option when you first meet to say you don't have the slightest idea who he is.
Don't tell me that doesn't have every hallmark to be just as compelling as anyone else in the group. But he's not. Somehow, a plot like that is easily outshone by Gale, whose whole thing is he did a Stupid one time and now his ex that he can't get over is being really mean to him. That's the basics of Gale's storyline. And it manages to be more interesting, mostly because he manages to feel several ways about it.
He doesn't have Astarion's complicated hatred for his own physical form. He doesn't have Karlach's recognizable PTSD response to the idea of slavery and life in Avernus, stopping at what feels like general disgust and annoyance. He does share Gale's overblown self-image and Shart/Lae'zel's hyper-devotion to a cause, but those are not traits that are ever drawn into question for him like theirs are. Whatever goes on with him, he seems to accept it with minimal self-blame.
The end result is a character that is, like the article says, a walking shrug. That he doesn't have to be only makes it more frustrating to experience. He has all the elements required to be just as compelling as the others, but instead he just stands there like the adventuring equivalent of a fat friend and the article spins this as necessary if we're to make all the others look good. To suggest it's even a contributing reason all the others look good.
The author seems to have misunderstood that the opposite of love is not hate. The opposite of love is apathy. I wish I disliked Wyll the way I used to hate Lae'zel, because it would have meant he struck me enough to at least form some sort of meaningful opinion about him. As it is, I simply don't even care enough to dislike him. He could be removed from my game and I don't think I would notice. They dropped the ball.
I wish she would have given any insight into why her wife loves Wyll as much as she does. It would have been invaluable to know the other side of it, even if the way she wrote off Astarion immediately and forever makes me suspect it's mostly a personality preference.
Whatever you place in a camp will stay in that camp. Meaning if you decorate the under dark camp and then go to any other area’s camp everything will just be in storage
Yep! I put a fancy chest by each person for stuff they’ll use or whatever and the only annoying bit is identifying which is which as we lay them out again.
So make sure you kill your companions in your main camp so you can watch their corpse forever. Don’t be a loser Durge and kill them in the Refectory camp.
Alfira is such a big one. I know it’s an easy choice because of her Weeping Dawn scene early on, but this girl has “Get in the Party” written all over her. Tragic backstory! Thirst for Adventure! She’s a Bard; I need a Bard!
I’m only to Moonrise Towers so far; there may be more I’ve yet to encounter. Wulbren was a big letdown, I’ve been looking for him since I accidentally flung his friend off a windmill. I was hoping to find a fun gnome inventor, instead, he’s just kind of a prick who doesn’t even care I helped all his friends in the Underdark!
You can actually recruit her into your party in act 1 if you’re playing as the Dark Urge! Just talk to her in the Druid grove and then long rest before progressing the tiefling quest line
Wulbren’s story is interesting and it’s slightly different depending on the windmill scene. I dislike Wulbren was a person but like him as a character and that our stories intersect but he has a completely different objective
All I care for is Mac support. Lovely it is there now. It is 18.00 at the moment where I live. Children will go to bed early and I will game away. Perfect start after a long week.
One thing that happened in my session is this: I somehow missed the coronation ceremony at Wyrm’s Fortress and went ahead to the lower city. Did a bunch of things, found the submarine, and encountered Gortash who was rather miffed. Retreated, did hours of companion quests, learned that funneling huge groups of enemies into narrow passages makes the combat a breeze (murder tribunal, house of grief, fucking Cazzador). Then I went to the ceremony and after leaving, all of Wyrm’s Fortress wants to cook my bacon, Gortash is even more miffed, but nobody bothers me in the lower city. Go figure …
Exact same thing happened to me. Could tell I fucked up at one point because they were mentioning that Wyll’s dad died off screen. This damn game is going to make me play it again isn’t it?!
yeah, he just kept asking forever in early access. and there were waaaay less magical items. i think this is one of those that kinda got a reputation from early access that didn’t hold as true after release. like shadowheart being cold and mean to you.
“Well, my day just got a little brighter.” Honestly, I love to hear that one every time it comes up, and I’m not even pursuing Shadowheart (my wife is).
Of course, nothing comes close to Karlach’s cute, flustered, “Oh, hi!” <3
I think the game is forgiving enough that you don’t have to limit yourself in your choice. There are enough healing potions that you don’t necessarily need a dedicated healer.
Fair point. I ended my second run through with sorcerer, ranger, wild shape druid, and fighter. I love the smashing power of the 2h fighter. I just don’t know how they’d handle fights meant for AoEs.
When I tried to huck them into the river (specifically the invisible fucker near the boat in the shoreline encounter) and it wouldn’t let me? You’re gawdamned right, I was ready to be pissed if I couldn’t do likewise into the lava. Instead? Karlach tossed every dwarf she should reach… and they actually recorded audio for lava-induced death. 🥹 (At least the actor did for the main dwarf dude, IIRC)
I was ready to be pissed if I couldn’t do likewise into the lava.
I feel like the careful design of encounters went out the window with Act 3. Twice this week I tried to use Telekinesis to throw someone and couldn’t because low railings were in the way. I’m also getting a ton more red lines when shoving people.
baldurs_gate_3
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.