Baldur's Gate 3 launched earlier this month to player and critical acclaim. However, as players have begun to reach act 3, many are discovering that it's...a touch less polished than the first two acts.
I was fortunate enough to not run into any of the quest-breaking bugs. Had no issues doing what I wanted to do. What I did run into a lot was buggy scripting where dialogues assumed I had information I didn’t, so I wouldn’t know what my companions were talking about some of the time.
The bigger problem in my eyes is spells/items/class abilities/feats not working correctly and being outright non-functional in some cases. That’s going to be an enduring problem for replays, and it’s not encouraging to me that very little has been done on this since release.
I do think this game wouldn’t have scored as well as it did if so many publications didn’t rush to press with half a playthrough. In this particular case, I think the game–bugs and all–is still a strong GotY contender, but I really hope there’s a conversation being had in the professional games criticism sphere about how this practice could cause a scandal in the future.
As it is, I’m genuinely surprised the reviewers aren’t coming under fire more than they have for this. I come from an era where publishing a review without completing a game would have been unconscionable.
I was fortunate enough to not run into any of the quest-breaking bugs. Had no issues doing what I wanted to do. What I did run into a lot was buggy scripting where dialogues assumed I had information I didn’t, so I wouldn’t know what my companions were talking about some of the time.
The bigger problem in my eyes is spells/items/class abilities/feats not working correctly and being outright non-functional in some cases. That’s going to be an enduring problem for replays, and it’s not encouraging to me that very little has been done on this since release.
I do think this game wouldn’t have scored as well as it did if so many publications didn’t rush to press with half a playthrough. In this particular case, I think the game–bugs and all–is still a strong GotY contender, but I really hope there’s a conversation being had in the professional games criticism sphere about how this practice could cause a scandal in the future.
As it is, I’m genuinely surprised the reviewers aren’t coming under fire more than they have for this. I come from an era where publishing a review without completing a game would have been unconscionable.
Do you have an example? Haven’t noticed that yet in 110h of playing.