Warning: Some posts on this platform may contain adult material intended for mature audiences only. Viewer discretion is advised. By clicking ‘Continue’, you confirm that you are 18 years or older and consent to viewing explicit content.
The lead designer of The Elder Scrolls 5: Skyrim has discussed the difference in design philosophy between Bethesda games and Larian’s Baldur’s Gate 3.
I think a very good distinction is the open-worldness of Elder Scrolls. When you have a virtual map spanning hundreds of acres, all of which you can visit, means the content gets thinned out and walking/climbing/riding around turns into a grind. Not every corner of BG3 has some amazing secret stowed away but I can’t think of any place I’ve visited so far that felt like a waste of my time.
I think a very good distinction is the open-worldness of Elder Scrolls. When you have a virtual map spanning hundreds of acres, all of which you can visit, means the content gets thinned out and walking/climbing/riding around turns into a grind. Not every corner of BG3 has some amazing secret stowed away but I can’t think of any place I’ve visited so far that felt like a waste of my time.
I think it’s a symptom of the old trend of making games ‘bigger’. Fallout 4 was four times bigger than Fallout 3 for example.
Bigger isn’t better. I want a world where I don’t feel the need to fast travel because I know I’ll have fun getting to my destination.
Elden Ring had a hybrid approach, oh look a cave, but 80% of the optional areas had interesting enemies, layouts and loot.
Definitely over tuned some extras, but for such a big game it was way better than Shrines or Koroks in Zelda
That’s one of the best parts about out Bv games- nothing feels contrived.