The main story of Baldur's Gate 3 is pretty bland and mediocre.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s still a phenomenal game! The companion arcs, acting and overall presentation are still next level, some sidestories are very good, and it’s great how faithfully they adapted the D&D rules. But the main story ...
Spoiler
... is pretty bare bones and has no real twists and turns along the way.
You start with a mindflayer tadpole in your head, so who do you think will be the final boss? Exactly, an elder brain.
On the way you kill 3 major henchmen, who just want power, destruction, or are confused beyond saving. None of them were particularly interesting or multi-layered (maybe Ketheric a bit). None of them could be saved, convinced to switch sides, or at least affected somehow. Aligning with them is only temporary, makes barely any difference, and absolutely no difference for the end afaik.
Most big quests end in act 3 in the same manner: Go to a place in BG and dispose of the boss character behind it all.
The revelations with the Emperor/Balduran were nice, but he was a very mysterious character for the entirety oft he game, and his decision to fight you if you side with Orpheus is just absolutely ridiculous!
I love the game and completely agree. Apparently, there was a complete rework of the main narrative somewhere in development, with the original idea not including the emperor at all, but instead having a character called daisy, who you'd have a number of dialogues with throughout the game in a dream sequence at the bank of a river.
Daisy being the representation of the tadpole, she'd try to convince you to stay down by the river with her, and the final decision of the game would be whether or not to give in.
Not sure how accurate what I've read is, but I like that idea better.
The main story of Baldur's Gate 3 is pretty bland and mediocre.
Don’t get me wrong, it’s still a phenomenal game! The companion arcs, acting and overall presentation are still next level, some sidestories are very good, and it’s great how faithfully they adapted the D&D rules. But the main story ...
Spoiler
... is pretty bare bones and has no real twists and turns along the way.
RDR2 is a glorified movie with half decent gameplay.
I love the game and completely agree. Apparently, there was a complete rework of the main narrative somewhere in development, with the original idea not including the emperor at all, but instead having a character called daisy, who you'd have a number of dialogues with throughout the game in a dream sequence at the bank of a river.
Daisy being the representation of the tadpole, she'd try to convince you to stay down by the river with her, and the final decision of the game would be whether or not to give in.
Not sure how accurate what I've read is, but I like that idea better.
every videogame/work of fiction just recycles generic LOTR medieval european stuff for the last 70 years