I thought the standards people were talking about were the exceptional treatment the players received (Larian provided a full game experience. This is no abusive DLC scheme, no predatory microtransactions and way more polished than the average AAA game experience)
It turns out all the fuss was about the game size?
I think it was about all of the above. The actual quote is about the game size, but not all the way. He says that smaller studios may not have the resources to do what they did by having a multi-year early access period. Remember, they have to pay people that whole time without getting much money from the product. Also, he points out that larger studios such as the one making Starfield should have the resources to do what they did and more.
The size of Baldur's Gate 3 isn't the standard I want it to set anyway. I just want RPGs to be that deep with that level of production value. I finished Act 1 in the time it took me to finish all of Mass Effect 1, and I can't believe I've still got two thirds of the game left. This game is the entire Mass Effect trilogy in one game, but Mass Effect didn't give me a ton of ideas for different ways to play the game I just finished. You can play a Shepard who kills more with powers than with guns or more with guns than with powers, but it's nothing like this.
Also, here's the other standard. The game has multiplayer, but it's not a horde mode. It's not a live service hero shooter. It's just co-op; the video game version of playing tabletop with your friends. It's got LAN mode and direct IP connection. It's available DRM-free. It supports controllers and mouse/keyboard really well. Other than that weird Larian launcher that you can disable easily enough, this game is doing everything I need it to do from a software perspective and to stand the test of time in a world where live services inevitably keep dying.
Add comment