If BG3 ends up (as most of us hope) a optionally-controlled party tactical game, then it really has to be turn-based, rather than RTS, as it is difficult for the average game player to control multiple characters to the level of detail required.
Quote:
|
also maybe try to add some epic battles
|
The real problem here is that this again would probably require you to manually control most of the characters - and this game is an RPG, not a turn-based tactical wargame. The fanbase is not identical, and many RPGers would grind their teeth at having to manually control 50 characters for each round of a 40-round battle. This is *not* a good way to add gameplay hours, IMO
Quote:
|
Also I didn't like the XP cap in the original bg games I would rather have a more authintic d&d experience
|
How does placing an XP camp on the game make it a non-authentic D&D experience? A billion years ago, when I played D&D (not even AD&D - I have been "out of the loop" for a bit
), the DM (nowadays, you call 'em GMs? is that Game Master?) would try to make sure the encounters were tailored, more or less, to the character's levels. I just kinda figured the XP cap was supposed to keep folks from "ruining" the game by cheesing their way to a boring level. Course, IMO, if a player wants level forever, I guess they can - it's their game, after all! In "real" AD&D, though, are there EXP limits? In pen & paper games, are their any players outside of young teenagers who really play level 100 Wizards and such?