Fun with a friend, but I don't think I would have finished it if I was playing solo. I found the story uninteresting and the combat was fine etc. etc.

Played for the first time since 2012. While the game is charming, as a puzzle game it is quite lacking, never really using its concepts in any interesting ways (though flying around stays pretty fun). The first third and final third of the game are, puzzle-wise too simple. The middle third is the only section where you'll do some interesting things, but the puzzles here are puzzles that would have been introductory in a better puzzle game. Maybe Portal is more focused on atmosphere and it does this well. The last third (the escape) is pretty cool (though the puzzles aren't) in that way, though, because it's 100% a linear game it doesn't really feel like you're breaking out and more like you're following your predestined path (which you are, so maybe that's a stupid complaints). The advanced chambers are slightly more complex but still not that good. Anyway still a decently fun game. And the turrets are very cute

Great. Have P-ranked act I and the first prime sanctum but I'll be waiting till the full game has been released until I continue.

I've currently beaten 141 puzzles (so I still have quite a bit to do), but I think I've played enough to be able to say that this game is, on a mechanical level, pretty much everything I want out of a puzzle game.

Played on hard. Middling experience. The weapons feel fine, but not great. There are maybe a couple of cool levels, but a lot of the levels are the same in spirit: walking around shooting things. The fact that, even though each chapter has "unique"; enemy types (ranging from okay to annoying), you'll handle them the same way: strafing or walking away and shooting, makes everything feel really one-note. Add on to this the fact that a lot of the levels are linear, and you get a, though generally "fine" game, kind of dull experience.

It's hard not to admire the ambition, but I can't say I had the same experience as all of the people calling the game a masterpiece. I certainly enjoyed my time with the game but the game has a lot of faults, some are maybe the result of the devs having to rush certain aspects (for whatever reasons), but most problems I have are related to the foundation that the game is built on: The DnD system doesn't translate well to video games. 1. DnD combat doesn't work that well outside of a table-top setting Note: I played on tactician until halfway through act 2 and switched to explorer for the rest of the game. I was probably underleveled for a decent part of the first two acts, though I don't think either of these factors really influence my final opinion. A big part of DnD (for me) is the social aspect: just hanging around with some friends. And this aspect smooths over the possibly frustrating nature of a dice based combat system. When you roll like shit in DnD it's just kind of funny. But also if you roll like a god it's all the more exhilarating. This isn't really the case in Baldur's Gate 3. If you roll like garbage or the enemy rolls really well it's just kind of annoying. At worst you lose the encounter and have to do it all over again, which sometimes makes the combat tedious especially if you've already spent a lot of time on the encounter. This makes it more attractive to save-scum which isn't exactly fun either. If you decide to think of a strategy to beat a tough encounter you also have to pray that you roll well otherwise you'll just have to start over again. Now, the combat isn't terrible. It's still fun to roll a crit in a moment of need (though it's not as exhilarating as a similar moment in DnD because there generally aren't really any consequences to losing except losing time) and killing things stays decently fun, generally speaking. Some other problems: - Lack of transparency: I'm sure you can't make the combat just like chess, where you technically know all the things your opponent can do, but I wish there was a way to know what an enemy is capable of i.e. their attack range and movement capabilities, maybe even their spell list. A lot of the times I had to restart an encounter because I wasn't aware of the enemy's spells. - In the endgame, with all the NPCs involved in an encounter, it takes forever until you can make a decision again. I wish there was some kind of option for a shorthand for all the moves made. - It' s tedious to change your companions for tough encounters, as you'll often have to travel to a safer environment. I have a strong aversion towards using consumable items so it's possible I didn't experience the best version of the combat, but the combat would still be weak even if this "problem" was solved. 2. The DnD system (maybe it's just a symptom of video-game storytelling in general) isn't good at telling traditional dramatic stories. Rolling a dice isn't an interesting way to develop a story. It's possible there are situations in which it can be interesting, but in Baldur's Gate 3 it mainly detracts from the experience. The main problem I have is the fact that the game doesn't have a strong sense of dramatic causality or necessity (I'm not talking about something like "if x doesn't die in act y they'll return in act z" That's fine but it's not really what I'm interested in). The characters don't have their own agency, rather they are there to be manipulated by the player. Everyone is one or two "persuasion" checks away from changing their mind. This isn't entirely the fault of the dice system, some of it's part of the general "expected way of doing things" for these types of choice-driven games. You're expected to be able to decide where the story goes. I don't really know if there's a solution or if this just means I don't care for these types of stories. In general the game is very solipsistic. Though there are moments where the companions will quibble amongst each other. During a lot of actual conversations they'll just stay quiet (except for "x approves/disapproves" but that's not really what I want). It's seems likely that this is just way too much work and would take away agency from the player. It's possible that I just don't connect with most types of video-game storytelling (in general I don't think being involved in the story as a player has ever been a positive for me, though I don't dispute the idea that it's possible to do well) so I don't really know how you would fix this even if you had unrestrained budget and time. Other things: Failing a skill check doesn't lead to anything interesting a lot of the time. Often times it just starts a combat encounter or locks you out of opportunities. - A lot of NPCs are just waiting for a moment to try to kill you if you say anything slightly out of order. - There are some choices that are fluff and just end up giving the same result. LAST UNRELATED THING: FACES I've been rewatching The Shield and it's quite the whiplash to go from beautifully expressive faces likes those of Michael Chiklis and Walton Goggins to the plastic facial expressions and movements of the characters in Baldur's Gate. Sure the faces - disregarding movement - look good. But video games are lightyears away from getting anywhere close to the expressive capabilities of good actors (like Walton Goggins as Shane Vendrell who possibly has the best face in the history of acting). This isn't really a specific complaint about Baldur's Gate 3, it's something that's the case in the entire gaming industry, and it doesn't seem solvable for the foreseeable future. Anyway, even though I'm only talking about negatives aspects, I enjoyed my time and it's a pretty good game. In general it's still fun to just walk around and influence the world, even if it has its deficiencies.

Black black white black black white black white black white black white black black white black black white black white black white black white white white black black black white black white black white white black black white white white black white black white white. Fuck me. GOAT Video Game OST though.