I don’t know if I would go that far. It’s graphically superior to Planescape: Torment but that game was 5 Acts and had a better ending with more variation for the companions. The last really great DnD games used 2e, a vastly inferior system.
That said BG3 is far and away the best story applied to 5e mechanics (though I do wish Larion had looked at Solasta for navigation and UI).
The Owlcat Pathfinder games are the best examples of 3.5e/PF1e mechanics but have short comings in UI and navigation same as BG3.
Are you implying that because the game had more acts it is in some way better? PS:T has been my #1 game for decades so I’m not exactly disparaging it here, but this argument is ridiculous. A PS:T completion takes probably 50-70 hours tops, depending on your reading speed. I’m 2/3 of the way through bg3 at 80+ hours… More acts does not equal more content or better content.
I don’t know if I would go that far. It’s graphically superior to Planescape: Torment but that game was 5 Acts and had a better ending with more variation for the companions. The last really great DnD games used 2e, a vastly inferior system.
That said BG3 is far and away the best story applied to 5e mechanics (though I do wish Larion had looked at Solasta for navigation and UI).
The Owlcat Pathfinder games are the best examples of 3.5e/PF1e mechanics but have short comings in UI and navigation same as BG3.
Are you implying that because the game had more acts it is in some way better? PS:T has been my #1 game for decades so I’m not exactly disparaging it here, but this argument is ridiculous. A PS:T completion takes probably 50-70 hours tops, depending on your reading speed. I’m 2/3 of the way through bg3 at 80+ hours… More acts does not equal more content or better content.