Interesting vid Slandered! Would love to see Owlcat continue to grow & continue to up the production values without sacrificing their core design philosophies. I love how you are showing your face a bit more in the vids. Definitely adds some contrast to seeing just gameplay! Makes it more interesting to watch IMO.
All im saying "The demoness looks formidable with her entourage around her, but her threats ring hollow to you now. You look at her and feel like a titan looking at an ant. Overwhelming, all-conquering power fills you. What, that little demoness? Only the gods are your Equals now" If this isn't top badass moment in the history of gaming i don't know what is
14:40 i agree wrath of the righteous was amazingly good in how it made you from a dude draggged to be healed fron injury to a literal dude that changes the world rules even gods are afraid from you
@@andersonrosa6645 Absolutely, my first playthrough I was only level 4 or 5 (I missed a lot of content) and even though I was on normal the fight right before was a struggle. So when I saw the boss it was a "oh crap" moment, then the thing happens and the music drops.
"The demoness looks formidable with her entourage around her, but her threats ring hollow to you now. You look at her and feel like a titan looking at an ant. Overwhelming, all-conquering power fills you. What, that little demoness?"
For me, BG3 was much easier to get into, but the longer I played, the more cracks in the armor I found, so to speak. WOTR has been the opposite; it took me a few tries to get into the game, but the more I play it, the more I enjoy it.
BG 3 has an absolutely fantastic first act, but as it goes on the plot sorta unravels a bit and some of their writing conventions wore thin for me, particularly for playing evil. Thay had a bit of a 'loose' hand with the setting and lore that as a veteran of the original Saga and the setting in general- started to irk me as the hours rolled past. Seeing how two certain returning characters from the original saga were written just sapped my will to finish the game.
@@catoblepasomega BG3 first 2 acts is just very good. 3rd act is a little bit boring the more you play. I think it is because level progression is no more in act 3, and the enemy is just too easy in act 3. No challenge in act 3, and story progression a bit confusing in act 3. Aside from that, I could not find any other game like BG3 or WOTR again in the few next months or maybe within a year. Still worth my best 100hr++ gameplay
Legit one of the biggest issues with BG3 Act 3, on top of what most people point out, is just the fact that at that point you'll be either level 12, or close to it. Being at the level cap despite the game having tons of content left hurts the progression IMMENSELY, and suddenly you have no real reward for completing any of the dozens of confusing quests that act 3 densely throws at you. It just becomes fatiguing and unrewarding.
@@johnroush5731 nah man I finished a playthrough in 30 hours, 10 hours for each act and got to level 12 before ACT 3 finished my first playthrough was 86 hours long, in comparison
IMO these games are apples and oranges, they are both under the crpg tag but are completely different games. We are 'lucky' to have 2 top tier games that are this diff to choose from. If you like a coop, party adventure, where you explore/experiment/mess around, BG3 is the best. If you like a solo power fanstasy, deep build mechanics then wotr is it. I prefer wotr but love every coop bg3 adventure.
I think both of them can be games where you explore, experiment, and mess around. It just depends on the type of experience you want. WotR isn't a solo power fantasy for me.
@@SlanderedGaming Any game can be played in any way. WOTR is single player only and it's base design is for you the player to become a powerful being that alters the lands in ways no other beings even could come close, for example the queen leading many failed crusades over many years. BG3 is coop and any member of the party can go off on their own, giving more agency/power to each individual member, as opposed to wotr members only getting power from the KC. wotr does have some hidden things you can discover but bg3 you can spend hours in a random corner doing random things and having fun. WOTR you can click on things on the map that the game lets you.
Pretty much agree with everything you said, 32:42 is 100% true I've played BG3 3 times a good,evil and honour mode run and that's enough for a while. WoTR is just a different beast with Mythic paths and builds and it makes me wonder if we will ever get another crpg with so many options. Especially since Owlcat wants full VA moving forward I'm wondering if it will cost them too much to have so many options again. Great video.
Owlcat stated that full voicing will not impact their writing and that they'll just allocate more budget without losing the quality. I say we give them a chance before judging.
28:18 Wrath has the best leveling up song. "Mythic Power" hits so well especially as it comes in the most critical moments of the game. assaulting a keep, a fortress the abyss it self
Well the only category I strongly disagree would be the combat because some advantages you did not point out for BG3 is that there is so much more freedom on how you want to initiate combat with many environmental hazards you can benefit from (shooting the block of stone and let it fall on the 2 bandits or pushing down the statue in the goblin camp to name a few) which does makes the combat easier but the choice is there. The 'push' mechanic which is one of the most funniest or most OP bonus action you could ever use on someone who's near the edge of a loooong fall. The game even allows stupid meta builds like barrlemancy to flourish or some insane level of play that cannot be done in WOTR. There's this one clip of a woman who defeated the Adamantine Forge by standing below the hammer with the golem, drop a health potion below her feet, firebolt the lever killing both the golem and herself but saved by the health potion that was also crushed scattering the liquid and revived herself up. It's not a intended solution but with creative thinking, you can do shit like that which is why BG3 combat wins for me.
I love Wrath so much, but the amount of prebuffing that was necessary to play on the higher difficulties got to be a bit of a bore. Especially playing on console (but I guess that’s my fault more than the game’s).
@@sayurioffenborn4960you’ll get the hang of it…. My first play through I was more pissed than enjoying it because I had absolutely no idea what I was doing, it never tells you, hey casting this will break THAT concentration, or that action will use this slot. I was so confused about what expended what why some things would hit, others always missing. I didn’t touch most the crafting, always rushing here and there, no idea how honestly most the systems even worked…. Then I started slowly grasping things in act 3, it was the first time I felt like I could explore a bit, test the waters, take a breathe and learn instead of just going from one near death to the next….by the time I got to some of the final bosses through sheer trial and error, a little cheating and a lot more powers added to my arsenal I was felling more confident at least, actually the last battle was kind of trivial. Anyways, now starting another playthrough with some added classes and races (astral elf and twilight cleric) and im loving it like everyone else is now. Games with strategy often work like this and id had no idea about dnd before.
combat in wotr is much more deeper, more complex and more mature...i dont want "funny" things like throwing barrels or goblins in serious game...sure younger people find it "funny"...in wotr trickster mythic path is superrior to bg 3 interaction
one thing I admire BG3 for is how many ways it has to get creative with the relatively simple mechanics it provides, owlbears stagediving or players throwing a small pouch containing 30 explosives at a boss, using spells like knock or darkness to make progress - there is a lot of fun in BG3 that pathfinder with it's more rigid style can't match. You can create amazing combat builds in wrath and you are absolutely correct that the replay value of that game is insane as a direct result of combat mechanics and story being linked. I feel though like player freedom in how they solve most encounters is sadly a bit more of a railroad in wrath, exceptions here and there of course, but you get the idea.
I keep having a hard time getting into WOTR because most of the combat feels like an uninspired hallway fight or a roadblock to slow down my exploration. I am sure that there must be some great, crunchy, tactical combat, but I'm like ten hours in and I don't feel like I've seen it yet. BG3s encounters always felt fresh, unique, and creative with a lot of different ways to engage with (or work around) it.
BG3 is going to be the golden standard for AAA games. WOTR however has more replay value due to the sheer amount of content. Bg3 is the better game at base but I play WOTR more because of more content and higher difficulty.
I'll respectfully disagree that bg3 is the better game at base all it has is more ease of play and higher production Value. Wotr has Higher amount of player choice due to its mechanical depth and class building and many endings, Arguably deeper and more interesting companions along with other things
@@alexcompositionflat sorry but I don't agree I said this above but don't know if you saw my comment before but bg 3 only really has Polish on its side and less bugs with easier to grasp gameplay. With wotr it has better class options, more building options, more paths and ways to make play thoughts feel special, and arguably deeper gameplay (story, companions and music are all subjective) but just from gameplay and mechanics alone wotr simply is the better and deeper game, it also has much more and much better evil options compared to bg3 honestly after you play bg3 for three playthroughts or so you'll pretty much see everything it has to offer if your not 100% where as you can play wotr many MANY times and get a different play through every time that vary drastically
Man, this comparison hurts my soul. I love them both so much for reasons that are so similar yet so different at the same time. Just yesterday I was trudging through Alushinyrra and I was struck by the thought of how cool it would be to traverse using BG3's jump and flight mechanics. It actually made me kinda sad 😅
@@mihai000000 yeah, but I think it's super clunky and not as fun as BG3 platforming. And the fact I still need to do it even if my whole party can fly is silly.
Always thought of them as BG3 quality vs WOTR quantity I love BG3 but I find myself replaying WOTR more for the various mythic paths and that it seems longer since BG3 only has 3 acts with zero dlc
Hopefully with AI generation of voice acting, over time, there will be some fairly seamless and substantial user made content. Not confident its going to be another Skyrim though. I think it may be just too big an ask of hobbyist to add significant content to the game which actually feels appropriate.
The music category has to go to Wrath for the mythic paths alone imo. I've never heard such perfect themes. Dragon conjures images of a majestic dragon soaring in the sky & raining fire down upon evil. You can almost hear the last of your humanity fading away in Aeon's theme. Lich conjures images of your Lich character slowly walking across a battlefield while rising an ever growing horde of undead. Azata conjures images of a merry band of prancing outcasts & weirdos, attracting more to their number to the tune of the Azata's flute. Swarm assaults your ears with all consuming buzzing that's almost uncomfortable to listen to. Legend conjures images of your character rising up, showing the powerful forces they have been dealing with just how capable a mortal is. As an army of unlikely allies follows behind. Truly one of the most hype songs in the game. BG3 has a lot of amazing music & yeah Down By The River is iconic. But the Mythic Path themes alone blow it out of the water. I legit listen to them a lot. Was even listening to the WOTR soundtrack today while playing tabletop with friends.
Agree 100%. Liked quite much more Pathfinder. Made me wonder how wonderful could have been if all voice acted and animated. I Oulcat had the money of Larian we could had a universal masterpiece.
Great video, still watching. Sad that Pillars of Eternity seems to be slowly fading from this type of conversation. It's great that it's happening because it means we're getting a lot of great new games. I hope we get a Pillars of Eternity 3 some day to get back into the ring. So much potential in the world, its religions, cultures etc. And Obsidian's style of storytelling, leaning heavily into factions and consequences is so much fun.
Well there is the upcoming first person fantasy game in the same world to dive into it again (i think it was called avowed?, but yea i would preffer another CRPG too
I just finished watching a video comparing BG3 to POE. It doesn't have a lot of views, but it's a decent vid. I do love the world of POE, and especially Deadfire which I found better since it was a little brighter and not as dark and gloomy. Even if the main story of Deadfire was lackluster. As for the future, most likely action rpg's is the direction Obsidian is going to stick with. Especially with microsoft footing the bill. I wouldn't rule out POE 3 completely though, the success of BG3 may motivate Microsoft some.
WOTR's Legend theme alone wins the music category for me! It oozes perseverance through adversity, reminds me of Icewind Dale's theme in that regard. It pumps me up to the point I could fight a horde of enemies going up hill in a blizzard. And I haven't even done a Legend run (yet)! Great video as always Slandered.
PF1 character mechanics are way superior to D&D5 in terms of designing the concept you want. D&D5 was designed to be simpler, and have less maths, so once you master PF1 you can build a far greater range of options. Multiplied over a party this means there are vastly more options around party design too. Give me PF1 anyday.
I can somewhat agree here. My problem with WOTR is you are pretty much forced to specialize. Yes, you can get much more specific build ideas in mind, but you can do so much more with what you have in BG3. I like creative approaches to combat and never felt I got enough of that in WOTR or Kingmaker. Like, every character I had felt pigeon holed into a hyper-specific playstyle by the end of the game. Plus, I feel I have to plan out every feat in Pathfinder to even make what I want somewhat functional. BG3 allowed me to find creative approaches to combat, even if I didn't have a party comp prepared for certain encounters. It made swapping companions around much easier and made combat much more fun in my opinion, which also enhanced my experience with story and companion interactions. I love both games and go back and forth between which one I enjoy more, but I would give combat to BG3 personally as I'd rather be able to do more with what I have than have more build options but less I can do with each, if that makes sense.
@@damianmorris6700 hear what you say but that's a platform thing I suspect not a system thing. Played various versions of D&D for 40 odd years so for me its about the potential of you to realise your concept.
Well said mate. I've enjoyed both, for different reasons, but one thing that I love about WoTR is you can completely change the entire game universe based on your mythic path (you can probably guess my favourite mythic path). With BG3, and as someone who played BG1 and BG2 at release, it feels like the real story is behind the durge origin character, but you also miss out on stuff vs a blank slate custom character, or other origin character). Might be time to download WoTR once again, onto my new PC, I got late last year :) Edit: My one big dislike about WoTR is Campaign Mode, which, even though skippable on easy, means you do miss out on some content. As someone who grew with the old school AD&D I do like that WoTR, or Pathfinder in general, uses an old school style D&D ruleset, including alignments that matter and prestige classes, vs BG3s 'easy mode' 5E ruleset.
I hate the art direction of BG3. Too cartoons and the characters look "post-modern" if that make sense. The cast looks like they came off a university campus instead of a fantasy world. Pathfinder wins easily in this regard.
Both are def great games. I personally like how much more class types and abilities Wotr has, but can easily understand people being overwhelmed. At the same time I also appreciate BG3 not having a million different buff and debuff types lol.
Recently downloaded Pathfinder wotr and found myself in character creation for 2hrs...I am now enjoying your lich playthrough. Newly subscribed and excited to explore the channel.
To me, it depends on what you're looking for. Wrath of the Righteous (and Pathfinder by extension) cater to a more hardcore fanbase. The game is absolutely awesome in how it handles being a power fantasy, how it handles your choices, how it handles being evil, and how it handles alignment. The story is also really good for the majority of the game and it offers you a ton of replayability. When I played WOTR, I enjoyed most of my time with it. While I found levelling and the crusade mechanic cumbersome, I dealt with it. What almost killed WOTR for me and is preventing me from replaying it again is just how much I HATED Act 4 and how I just wanted the game to end in Act 5 because of what I can only best describe as stat bloat. BG3, on the other hand, caters more towards new cRPG players and people familiar with DnD/BG1+BG2. The game offers a really good story (especially as redemption Dark Urge), interesting companions, easier combat, a more cinematic experience, and a less cumbersome levelling + character creation system. The game also benefits from the fact that it's set in the Forgotten Realms and that it uses a modified 5e ruleset. Both of which are more well known than Golarion and the Pathfinder 1e ruleset. The modified 5e ruleset is also a benefits because it's more accessible as well. If I had to choose one, I would pick BG3 but that's mainly because of preference. DnD is my bread and butter (I've played and ran a lot of it) and I've never been a huge fan of the Pathfinder 1e ruleset (I do like 2e better though). I also just found BG3 more enjoyable because I found it easier to get into and I was able to connect better with the story and companions.
pathfinder ruleset is based dnd 3.5 rules. I agree that bg3 is more for casuals. Since dnd 5 edition was made in casual in mind and dnd 3.5 is for hardcore players. Probably why most people do not stick with wotr.
BG3 absolutely does not offer a good story. There are plotholes of the size of the average galaxy, not to mention rather minimal agency of the player. The entire thing feels more like a D&D-themed rollercoaster, rather than an actual CRPG story. BG3 is a good game, but I wouldn't call it Baldur's Gate.
I feel like after having played both that even though WotR has so many classes and archetypes, BG3 builds feel much more unique as you hit the late game, while WotR builds start feeling very similar.
What a FANTASTIC comparison video. I stopped BG3 at the end of act 2 a few months ago because I didn’t want my story to end… I’m ready to finish it now and embark on a new journey with WotR. Thank you!!! New Sub 👍
Yes and he immediately adds "in the game it absolutely works" so let me ask you this: My brother in christ.. did you even.. listen to.. what is being SAID IN THE VIDEO?
It's hard to choose between the two, that's for sure. There is one thing about BG3 I only just realised that is a pretty severe mark against it: once you've picked your feats during level up, there is nowhere in the character sheets you can find this information. You are only able to see it again on level up. By contrast, while a bit of an overload, WOTR's character sheets are completely comprehensive.
There is a severe lack of information provided to the player within the game. There's no bestiary, there's no spell descriptors, there's no index or codex to help you understand what counters spells and how to cure things. It took me forever to figure out how to cure the paralyzed tiefling in the druid camp. I had to actually go online to look it up
That is not true. All acquired feats and a description for them are listed under Character Sheet - Characteristics - Notable Features. Same screen that lists your conditions, casted buffs, resistances, buffs from items,etc.
It's Pathfinder for me all the way. No matter how hard I try I cannot seem to connect with Larian games. With respect to BG3, my issues are: - Interface: inventory management still felt like a huge chore, and I wish I could just drag a box to select characters like typical isometric games instead of grappling with the chain system. Setting up characters' positions to be optimal for a fight often wasn't worth the hassle. - Combat: I get I'm in the vast minority here, but the turn-based only combat is so slow and tedious that I would actively try to avoid combat as much as possible, especially when a lot of the encounters seem designed to start you at a disadvantage. I get that's part of the strategic appeal for some but for the love of god, give me RTwP with auto pause options to speed things up a bit. - Companions/characters - Completely agree with all your points on character writing. Also, how some of my BG2 favorites were treated - unconscionable, and completely undid any character development/endings from Throne of Bhaal. Very few decent evil companions. Areelu is more interesting than the BG3 villains IMO. BG3 is a good game and I did manage to finish it once, but at this point I've accepted that Larian games just might not be for me.
@@gordonmcinnes8328 Yeah, there was a post on the Forgotten Realms subreddit where some people got his autograph and IIRC he was asked about if he was coming to voice act Minsc in BG 3 (it was during EA) and apparently he defined his communications with them as something like 'I wish they would acknowledge I exist' That maes me doubly uncomfortable knowing that he worked alongside the current VA for Minsc in Siege of Dragonspear...kinda like he poached his job. The writing for the two returning old characters though was really something else...I couldn't keep playing the game after that. If you had shown it to me outside the context of BG 3 I would have assumed it was a hate fic.
I play these games for different reasons tbh. Builds and fighting are amazing in WOTR, but the constant combat without many options to avoid it can get tiring. It’s almost like an endless gauntlet. BG3’s smaller scope (likely due to the incredible production value having limits) can be a little samey after multiple runs. Act 1 can be a slog after the tenth (or twentieth) time running through it as there are only so many things you can do differently. WOTR isn’t that different in this regard, but the sheer number of builds can offset it some.
I wished they would add something like neverwinter nights base campaign had, an option to start playing a specific act/chapter. Finished the game already great, then you can replay any chapter/act you want with the same or different character if you prefer.
I wish I could experience the WOTR writing with BG3 combat-to-plot ratio. The dungeons are designed as old school dungeon crawls, which require turn-based combat and serious resource management. But the dungeons are massive and turn based combat slow, turning a single location into an entire workday of slow grind. Add on top of it the repetitive minigame grind on the world map, which for some idiotic reason is mandatory for the special ending, and repetitive and slow world map travel with random encounters. WOTR is the only RPG where I have ever turned the difficulty to easy in middle of the campaign because it was just too much of a slog to go through.
Even as someone who likes Pathfinder more than D&D. BG3 is a better game. While Wotr has some good charcters with Camillia and Ember being stand outs the entire cast of BG3 though is great. I think the biggest thing is just how tedious and cumbersome some of WoTr's mechanics are. Too many blah fights the crusade management is fun but only for a little bit. While its nice you can turn it off that locks you out of some endings. I never feel like in slogging through to get to something fun and interesting in BG3 where it can feel like that in WOTR.
Crusade management was definitely mishandled. and I *love* grand strategy games. I had the opposite experience in my (evil) playthrough of BG3. I found that while well-voice acted, many companions felt very similar to each other, even down to the same wit and banter, and I slowly became indifferent to most companions save romanced Minthara and Astarion Late Act 2/3. WOTR on the other hand, felt like each companion was distinct, with only a few that were too similar to each other. Even the ones I despised like Ember felt more memorable than a lot of BG3's companions.
@@GHOST5800000 She’s a writer’s pet. Her whole stick is “Demons are just sad and angry.” She’s literally the 5 year old asking “Why can’t the two warring sides just be nice”, and instead of having her grow from that, she’s treated as completely in the right. Aru suffered and toiled to earn redemption. Ember says some vaguely nice things and swaths of demons turn.
@@josephercanbrack8393 Damn well Ive only jus started playing cause its free on PS plus, so I cant judge everything like you can IG, but from what Ive experienced from Ember so far I kinda get it, like shes almost TOO good lol, I get it, so far I jus think shes kinda cute cause she kinda dumb as hell but shes so dumbly innocent I jus wanna protect her lmfao Also by Aru you mean that succubus lady? I Think she gonna be my fav companion and prolly who I romance from what I know of the companions so far...
Great video, got my like and sub! I feel bad saying it but I wasn't even able to get through BG3. I played until I killed Ketheric Thorm / Apostle of Myrkul. Overall I just feel like Larian remade D:OS2 with a Forgotten Realms coat of paint and called it a day. That's an oversimplification technically, but that's the impression that stuck with me as I played. I guess I had hoped they would've looked to BG 1 and 2 more than they did, I've played both of them to death so it was strange to me that I found myself less and less eager to play before I even finished the game once. But the same thing happened to me when playing Original Sin 2. I could definitely see why people loved D:OS2 and BG3, but it just didn't click with me for some reason. I loved Pathfinder Kingmaker and I've heard that Wrath of the Righteous is just a straight up improvement over PF:K. I think that'll be the next game I play once I'm done with Elden Ring.
I'm glad you took the time to focus on many of the strong points in both titles. I personally feel owlcat kinda dropped the ball when it comes to character creation and certainly doesnt focus on strong unique spell casting abilities.
Reluctantly agreed. Thanks for the deatailed analysis (not to mention your playthroughs!) I feel certain my view will more strongly align with you over time. I was new to CRPGs and began playing Wrath to learn this game style in prep of BG3. I have played thousands of hours of TT DnD and was all in for BG3. I had only played 20-30 hours in Wrath before BG3 released, but will be returning to it soon.
I think BG3 is a great book, like those choose your adventure type of books, every time you pick it up you discover something new... For instance after every counter in BG3 I was like "I did so poorly and unimaginative, I could have fought more creatively" on the other hand WotR is like chess, you need to move your pieces carefully, plan ahead to min-max, squeeze every bit of advantage you can get to have the edge against the monsters... So I think both deliver different delicacies and I cannot have one and not have the other :D
What a timing!! Just when i was looking for vids on that same topic!!! Good work as usual man! Also really well done with how well structured the video is comparing different specific categories instead of a broad , general opinion.
Unfair is very literally unfair. I prefer core because the base numerical values for things like armor class and saving throws of enemies are almost identical to the tabletop system.
Personally, I think the unfair difficulty amps up difficulty in a way which is not very fun. I dont get me started on chained darkness on unfair. As some who refused to save scum a CC spell landing, that just felt completely unreasonable due to RNG not just on dice, but with regards to how random his target selection and spell usage is.
BG3 had a budget of over 100 million dollars compared to Pathfinder WOTR 2 million. If WOTR merely had a 15-20 million dollar budget, it would have surpassed BG3. That puts the comparison in perspective, and the perfect TTRPG would have the 3.5/Pathfinder 1e system with BG3s high production value.
@@SlanderedGaming Until Owlcat comes out with a new masterpiece rpg, I will use mods with BG3 on my Xbox. That is the only choice we have, until another triple A production RPG/TTRPG comes out.
Now this is where it gets tricky. The main reason Owl Cat could pull off those epic storytelling and absurd complexity is that most of the details were presented as "texts", combats are basically number crunch as many people will say. The further up you go with "presentation" the more you'll have to cut off many details due to budget limitations. And Again that's where the divide goes even deeper perhaps. Presentation/Graphics vs Details/Complexity. In technical and economical POV, it is easier to create a game like PF:WROTR than BG3.
You are wrong. Rules dnd3.5 not for everyone. Pathfinder not for everyone especially with a lot of wrong game decisions and not adapted for computer game dnd3.5 rules.
@@alekseygoi5449 Yes I have heard other RPG fans say the 3.5 or 5th edition rules don't work well with video games, on the other hand if you want to take another character from the medieval fantasy setting like Elder Scrolls, Baldurs Gate/Forgotten Realms Witcher or Dragon Age, you can't do that with BG3s simplified 5th DnD rules. There are not enough races or subclasses to do that without a lot of mods. So far consoles are far away from having enough mods to transfer other fantasy characters over to BG3.
Pathfinder WotR is better in most ways imo. As much as I love BG3, it had a lot of minor issues that annoyed me over time, from gameplay issues to minor bits of the narrative not making too much sense depending on the choices you made. I feel like a lot of the hype for it comes from the production with full voice acting, and it being a lot of people first proper CRPG so they were impressed by the amount of player choice which is standard for many games in the genre. Games like pathfinder, pillars of eternity, and dragon age have been doing similar things for years.
WotR still uses that old cRPG trope of allowing you to ask newly recruited companions almost everything about their past and history straight away( except the parts that are story locked, of course), like you're performing an interview. Takes away from the immersion . Bg3 does this in a more believable way, and you can totally miss out on information if you're being an asshole 😁
i've said it before , and i'll repeat myself : bg3 is baby's first crpg. Yes , its pretty , and has great production value , but it has no challenge , and actually very little content , once you've played it once , and seen most of the dialogue. From an 100ish hours game , it turns into a 50-60 hours if you skip everrything that you;'ve seen already. Also , the game is waaaay too easy. I beat honor mode in my 2nd playthrough , and i didn't even had a very hard time doing it either
I liked WOTR more simply because the more I learned about the setting, the more I understood and even agreed with the antagonist. There is still the occasional debate on Steam regarding Areelu and whether she was right or wrong. That grey area is why I play video games that focus on stories in the first place.
I started playing bg3 before WotR, but I finished my first WotR playthrough of ah before my first BG3 playthrough - though I had to take significant breaks from both games. Restarting both games multiple times made me very familiar with the opening acts of both games, and they both became kind of a slog after a certain point. Mythic paths added a lot to WotR, but the bizarre rate at which you gain new mythic levels was a hindrance to that experience overall - it felt like I was barely changing for a while and then got a huge amount all at once. I do think I enjoy BG3 more mechanically, since the amount of gameplay options you have to approach each scenario is way higher - stealth and pickpocketing and even using jumps and areas of darkness to get into better positions before starting combat, plus the variety of terrains and surfaces you can use while in combat - you have way more freedom of approach in a lot of cases than WotR does, since that game is so heavily combat oriented. Honestly, even with all that, I can’t decide on a true favorite - I think it’s pretty much a tie in my eyes, both games have their strengths and weaknesses. WotR doesn’t have Shadowheart and BG3 doesn’t have Arueshalae, so overall i guess it’s a wash.
@@mysticaloctopus8224 WoTR lets you buy enough bags of holding to hit "take all" from everything, every time with no downside. BG3 makes you hit "send to camp" on every single item in the game one at a time. yeah WoTR wins
@@mysticaloctopus8224 1)That still takes longer than just carrying everything you own at all times, and just hitting take all. 2) not on console it ain't.
The most in-depth review that I ever seen. Thanks for what you said about the deepest romances on PWoTR, I will try it out as soon as I finishing Rogue Trader. Thank you!
Excellent video as always. We're just so lucky to get both of these games right now. Gives us a ton of hours of great content to enjoy and have. Agree with your points a great look at both titles.
Really nice video. I'm leaning to Wotr also. But I will say that playing evil in wotr does have its restrictions but it stems mostly from dialogue options or the lack of reactivity from both the world and companions, rather than the restrictions in BG3.
Great analysis! Almost completely agree with you. I would also point to the fact that you can reach level 20+ with WoTR, while only 12 with BG, and there are 5 giant chapters in WoTR while only 3 in BG. This gives WoTR way more replayability and satisfaction with the story arch. I've put nearly 3000 hours into Pathfinder, and I still feel like I've got a lot more to experience.
Prediction of the final score: Presentation,character creation companions and combat goes for BG3. Maybe music but both games have really good osts. Wrath gets progression, build mechanic, endings, mods (because the game is older), endings , replaybility (easy, mythic path) and story..
I love pathfinder and wrath....but I do believe BG3 is the superior experience. Especially from a video game and Tabletop RPG style experience. Wrath just can't capture that same feeling of "I'm playing a very good D&D campaign". There's too many pointless combat interactions and filler But this is also the flaw of playing a 5 act story as opposed to playing a 3 act story. The experience can be much tighter in a 3 act structure. Although, I do agree with you in that the story from Wrath is MUCH more satisfying and I had way more "OH SH%&!" moments playing wrath when characters were introduced than I did with BG3
Hard agree. I gave wotr a try after my 4th playthrough of BG3. While I understand the appeal of the game and I enjoyed my time with it, I couldn't finish one playthrough. A lot of the feats in the game during level up did not feel impactful. Part of the reason I ended quitting and not wanting to do a new playthrough are petty, like how weapon proficiency works or spell penetration. It just didn't feel good to me compared to BG3. The story of wotr was pretty great.
Excelent video man, totally agree. All in all, I'd say WOTR is a game you can play years literally, whereas BG3 is a game you play a lot maybe ONE year of your life. WOTR wins the prize in my opinion. And I dream when there comes a day you have another game with over 200 classes to choose from, and the almost endless learning, skull cracking, mind bending options to build not only your character, but also your companions, having fun doing the most crazy stuff ever, suffering because you F'd up in your build, and thinking on how to fix it and become strong again... It's a monstrous amount of content that honestly, makes me use my brain, and feel the absolutely awesome feeling of being a master of myself, and also the freedom of doing almost anything. Besides that; music, (remember my name, Wenduag), over all story, and mythic paths progression is fantastic. Side note: The other day I was watching a youtuber play on unfair, streaming, like a full playthrough, and he made a really "bad" build, not only in his Main Character but also companions. And he was complaining and suffering a lot, swearing and reloading all the time, and I was laughing a lot the whole time... A couple of level ups later, he somewhat fixed his builds a little, and was having a much better time in the game, and prasing himself or the characters, and again I was laughing all the time, and I thought.. "somehow, this what Wrath of the Righteous is all about, and it's great!"
I feel both games have pros and cons but Pathfinder is better to me. The thing that sets it apart is the depth of character progression also the story depth is insane compared to BG3. While BG3 is like playong through a movie. For me reading is not an issue, especially once we get a voice for those characters. Lastly what gave Pathfinder Wotr the edge to BG3, is the fact of the hot mess that is the rushed third act. Larian dropped the ball hard on the third act. Some other notable things that WotR does that just makes sense, is you as the main character dont have to do EVERY skill. In a conversation needs to pass a persuasion check but youre a fighter with 8 CHA well you have a Paladin with high charisma and the roll is made on their skill. Also you can take your level WAY past 12. Oh and did i meantion you can get a DRAGON!!!!! Yes you can get a dragon in WotR.
Maybe my mind's just playing tricks on me, but I came back to Baldur's Gate 3 after a 10 month hiatus, and for some reason, it seems to look even better somehow.
Pathfinder, for all its diverse class/race roster and the "freedom" to build your character really locks you into very few minmax options (provided you don't play on lower difficulty levels). It's a hardcore game and you don't want an "RP" character in a hardcore game. You don't build a mage with low dexterity, because a lot of offensive spells requier a touch roll. You don't pick a class with a cool description if it's subpar, mechanics-wise (which over half of them are, compared to the top dogs). You want to build an optimal Sword saint? Your only option is Strength, and a very specific weapon selection, like the Scythe, Falcata, etc. Want to build a tank with sky-high AC? Well, take a dip into a bunch of non thematically-correlated classes and create a hideous Frankenstein's monster. Want to build a blaster mage? You're pretty much locked into 1-2 solutions. Not to mention that the vast majority of "difficulty" is defeated by tedious buff-stacking. BG3, does have its meta, sure (Tavern brawler+elixir of strength, be damned - although it's nerfed in Honor mode), but I find it to be way more flexible in terms of viable multiclasses and ways that mechanics scale. I built crazy invincible monsters in Baldur's Gate 1, 2, Icewind Dale, Neverwinter Nights 1 and 2, I built freaks of nature that made "Unfair" difficulty hardly fair for my enemies in Pathfinder. But really, I find that Baldur's Gate 3 hit the sweet spot between accessibility (casual-friendliness), good ergonimics and complexity. Almost every subclass is useful. No race falls too far behind in racial perks. Multiclassing is much more flexible, especially for casters. I wouln't mind having more classes, a higher level cap, more feats in BG3, but I think it's in a really nice place.
PF WoTR lets me relive all the hours I spent when I was younger playing Neverwinter Nights 1 and 2. It feels so similar to the 3.5 D&D and has so much depth and scope. BG3 is amazing and fun but doesn't really feel like "Baldurs Gate 3", more like it's own standalone thing. WOTR scratches a bigger itch and I 100% agree its the better game overall. Great video!
I think the main thing that makes wrath better for me than bg3 is the build aspects. In bg3 you have to activity hold yourself back when building. If you come up with anything too strong the game is basically over. In wrath you have to have an INSANE build just to stand a chance on anything past core. Also while there are a lot less mods, toybox is worth at least a thousand bg3 mods rolled into one.
Agree with all your conclusions except for combat. In my mind BG3 wins combat by a wide margin. There are just so many ways to approach a particular encounter in BG3 and higher difficulties encourages creativity (excluding the last boss fight which is just a dps check). WotR the viable options decreases significantly as the difficulty increases and all you are really doing is stacking different to hit and AC numbers. Every fight is pre-buff, smack, rest, repeat. Plus I never had to deal with dumb stuff like my characters walking into my deadly earth and dying due to a pre-scripted cutscene in BG3.
Well done! Been waiting for this kind of video from you. You did fantastic job comparing these two games. I greatly enjoy both games, but Wrath is overall better experience for me as well.
Now this is where it gets tricky. The main reason Owl Cat could pull off those epic storytelling and absurd complexity is that most of the details were presented as "texts", combats are basically number crunch as many people will say. The further up you go with "presentation" the more you'll have to cut off many details due to budget limitations. And Again that's where the divide goes even deeper perhaps. Presentation/Graphics vs Details/Complexity. In technical and economical POV, it is easier to create a game like PF:WROTR than BG3.
wotr is simply goated. they really captured the feel of playing a tabletop heroic adventure, while still givign crazy customization and RP options. i really hope owlcat makes another pathfinder game. but rogue trader is great too
Being a seasoned DnD player I will always believe Wrath is better than Baldur’s Gate 3 mostly due to the battle mechanics. Wrath’s battle mechanics is based on PF1 which was originally based on DnD 3.5 but improved upon which offered a wealth of options for combat and character interactions. While Baldur’s Gate 3 is based on 5E DnD and while Baldur’s Gate 3 is pretty and the music is great. In my opinion Wrath wins in every other category.
As someone who absolutely loved both games, I think the biggest thing that puts BG3 above WOTR for me is the actual combat itself. WOTR has a ton of customization and lets you build almost anything, which is amazing. But 90% of those choices felt like they're devoted to making numbers go up. There are admittedly some really fun ways to make said numbers go up, and I myself still had fun, but some of the values felt way too inflated, and a lot of fights just felt like stat checks against enemies that have dozens of buff spells on them for seemingly no reason. BG3, while having objectively way less customization, has a world that's more interactable. Terrain feels like it matters way more, and there's multiple boss fights that make active use of it. Both games have reactivity based on what you play, but BG3 felt like people reacted to my character's class and race more often and in more meaningful ways. And because every fight in BG3 was carefully placed there (minus the shadows in Act 2), they felt like they mean more. The story of WOTR had me absolutely hype. Mythic power theme was incredible any time it came out, I loved the story and most of the companions, and it really hit a huge power fantasy. But outside of a few combat encounters like Playful Darkness where I only survived because of very good positioning and skill usage, most fights in WOTR felt like I either won or lost because me or the enemy had like a +20 to hit/AC/saving throws. Compare that to BG3, where I was regularly taking high ground, using chokepoints, throwing enemies around, and destroying the terrain. I still love both games, but during actual gameplay? BG3 is higher.
I prefer BG3, and it is not because it has better production values. My two problems with WOTR (which I did enjoy and spent a lot of time playing) is that (1) there are too many combat encounters, most of which are uninspired and forgettable and (2) I do not like high level D&D/Pathfinder very much, as it just becomes ridiculous (i.e., eventually you are fighting random encounters with god-like entities). I can distinctly remember the majority of BG3 combat encounters because each one is a real set-piece and most areas only have 2 or 3 combat encounters. WOTR just throws mob after mob after you, and I find it tedious.
Don't forget all the pre-buffing you have to do in WOTR to win most of the actually worthwhile combat encounters. I find WOTR an absolute chore to play for that reason and the ones you stated.
@@tiradegrandmarshal Oh yes, I forgot about all the pre-buffing. That was also a chore. I am glad D&D 5e fixed that (although it would be nice to be able to concentrate on two spells at a time).
I have tried so many times to get into WOTR but I simply cannot. I am going to take BG3 over this BUT I have watched a lot of your content as well as listening to the community that you guys are apart of and for that reason I will give WOTR another go lol. Hopefully I can appreciate it as much as you guys do
Push through the first 4 to 5 hours; it's worth it. I dropped it a few times after just 2 or 3 hours; but once you get out of the underground it really picks up.
I would switch to turn based if you're having trouble with real time, it really uped my enjoyment but its up to preference and you can freely switch between game modes, I tend to switch to reel time when fighting a way to big fight.
I agree dude, i don't know how it has 9/10 on steam. It's ok game, but not that great. and that army management is annoying and then you have act 4 the most annoying part.
I agree with everything except combat section (i especially agree with bg3 having bad evil playthroughs). I would say bg3 is better in terms of actual combat due to fights being handmade and that battlefields and stuff that's on the ground actually matters. Even tho difficulty is non existent compared to wotr i believe that actions you can do in combat in bg3 compared to wotr are superior and is more important than difficulty. Especially considering most of the gameplay in wotr you'll spend prebuffing instead of actually fighting enemies Edit: I would also mention that even tho bg3 character creation is better overall, but wotr provides sheet with useful information on what to expect on which lvl meanwhile in bg3 there's no indication and you have to go wiki to know on which lvl you gain what
Bg3 looked like shit in beta, it looked like shit when it got released, and it still looks like shit. It looks like mainstream garbage for idiots who like critical role.
I love both games. So which is better? Yes. Depends on the itch I want scratched. WotR is better for customization, unique builds and you can actually plan your build in advance because you can see the mechanics you will get as you level before you get there. BG3 is a more cinematic experience with so many different permutations possible that it just isn’t possible to get the same experience twice. It looks good, the combat is balanced without trash mobs taking up all your time and is far more tactical than just prebuff and charge like it is with WotR. Combat feels better and more impactful. Both are absolute titans in the rpg space and I wouldn’t have it any other way.
BG3 is a beautiful well polished marble. Its smooth, easy to handle and extremely pretty. However it starts to loose its luster the more you look at it. WotR is a rough cut gem. Not as eye catchingly shiny, and its sharper edges make it uncomfortable to handle but the more you look at it, the easier it is to loose yourself in its faceted depths.
I'm of the opinion that these games aren't really worth comparing. They're simply too different. BG3 is as close to a true D&D tabletop adventure as you can get in a video game (currently), WotR is very much a on the rails campaign with little room for shenanigans. They're both entirely different beasts. I personally like WotR more, but there are things in BG3 that I very much do prefer. Combat being one of them. WotR combat mechanics are complicated and can become stale very quickly. Buffs are almost a requirement at Core or higher difficulty, and buffs make you roll through most of the game. BG3's combat in comparison feels more balanced. It's simple and has depth. I prefer the music in WotR. It's got more variety. One thing that wasn't mentioned was certain crescendo moments. The score in Wrath is masterfully integrated with the gameplay, cutscenes, and story. For example: Banner over the Citadel playing during the climax of Act 2 is chill inducing. It's the most hype part of the entire game for me personally. Another example is when Master of My Own Fate first plays. This is another chilling moment that highlights the use of the music in the game in my opinion. Besides these two particular things, I pretty much agree with the video. Thanks for more great content Slandered!
Recently, I have been playing Wrath of the Righteous. I'm on my 3rd run now. I have played BG3 and can't deny it's extreme quality. If WotR didn't exist, I'd say BG3 was the best RPG ever made. That being said, the exact points you stated about story progression, power progression, and character progression are the reasons why it falls short of WotR.
On the music angle; while I love all the tracks for bg3, wrath’s azata melody is the only track from either game that I will hum to myself without reason
Bro is speaking the truth. For real tho, what you mentioned with the bg3 endings threw me off completely when I beat the game for the first time. I beat it before the patch 4 epilogue was added, but by then I remember I felt extremely discouraged to do another play through. After I got the closure with the epilogue, I was still disappointed at how I felt afterwards. BG3 starts off strong but in my honest opinion, failed to stick the landing, or at least the landing was rough. You said it very well, the game gets less interesting the more you play it. In fact, I’ve tried to do a dark urge playthru, since my first character was custom origin, but I couldn’t find myself to get passed act 1. As opposed to WOTR, I’m on my 5th playthru this time trying all the DLCs for the first time as the first 4 were when the game came out (tho I quit the fourth one around act 3-4 I think?) only recently have I gotten back into it and am enjoying the DLCs too. There’s so many builds and mythic paths I wna try, the replayability is insane although there is a lot of slog (which I think can be curated w settings and mods) I’m more inclined to start and finish a dark urge playthru recently so I may get on that, but like you said, the game has at best 3 playthrus before getting stale. Here is one angle I’ve had that I don’t see mentioned often. I think the production value of BG3 is a double edged sword. It created some of the most memorable companions, well voice acted and cool writing (tho some got more attention than others). But I think the fact that they were so memorable and believable made me reluctant to play a new character, if that makes sense? It’s like saying goodbye to friends over the course of the story, and starting a new character almost breaks that bond. It would be like having a group of friends playing dnd, finishing a great campaign, and then playing again but only you changed your character. It’s a shame there will be no story DLC, I think bg3 would’ve benefitted greatly from a mid game and maybe epilogue DLC. Love both games tho but WOTR #1 with BG3 a close #2
I totally agree with your assessment, and I congratulate you for your courage in openly stating that Wotr is better than Bg3. Both are excellent, but it is clear that Larian opted to please, facilitate and make the game more accessible to everyone, with the budget they had it seems to me an intelligent decision and although to us RPGOldschool players it seems too simple, it has managed to make the RPG on everyone's lips, and this is undoubtedly an immense, transcendental achievement and one that we undoubtedly greatly appreciate. The future of RPGs is crazy with AI, imagine that each NPC has a chatgpt with limited knowledge and you have the ability to write the questions yourself, on an audiovisual level we don't even talk about it. Wotr and Bg3 are already in the Olympus of RPGs before AI. As lovers of RPGs and video games, very happy years are coming that will not depend so much on studios or budgets and will be made by the community.
bg3 pretty much ruined crpgs for me, in the sense that I have real trouble getting properly immersed if there is no voice acting and I have to "imagine" whats going on. I am beyond bad at playing crpgs so I end up just going thorugh them on the lowest difficulty and treating them as interactive movies where I also have to collect all the items and find all the secrets. Bg3 wins hands down because of the reactivity of the npcs and environment. I liked WOTR enough to play 2 full runs, but I wish the devs eventually got enough resources to make something fully voice acted and properly animated.
![Эволюция Pathfinder [от Kingmaker до Wrath of the Righteous]](/img/n.gif)
Interesting vid Slandered! Would love to see Owlcat continue to grow & continue to up the production values without sacrificing their core design philosophies. I love how you are showing your face a bit more in the vids. Definitely adds some contrast to seeing just gameplay! Makes it more interesting to watch IMO.
Thank you! Ironically watching your vids was a big reason why I decided to make the change. I agree it helps to make the videos more interesting.
We need a Wolfheart/Slandered joint stream one of these days. Make it happen, guys! 😎
@@Mike-r4h I second that!
2 of my 3 favorite crpg content creators ❤❤
All im saying
"The demoness looks formidable with her entourage around her, but her threats ring hollow to you now. You look at her and feel like a titan looking at an ant. Overwhelming, all-conquering power fills you. What, that little demoness? Only the gods are your Equals now"
If this isn't top badass moment in the history of gaming i don't know what is
14:40 i agree wrath of the righteous was amazingly good in how it made you from a dude draggged to be healed fron injury to a literal dude that changes the world rules even gods are afraid from you
While BG3 has music I'll never forget, nothing hit me as hard as hearing Mythic Power in WotR that first time.
The scene where it plays for the first time is amazing.
@@andersonrosa6645 Absolutely, my first playthrough I was only level 4 or 5 (I missed a lot of content) and even though I was on normal the fight right before was a struggle. So when I saw the boss it was a "oh crap" moment, then the thing happens and the music drops.
There's also "The Cosmic Balance", the Aeon Mythic Path theme.
"The demoness looks formidable with her entourage around her, but her threats ring hollow to you now. You look at her and feel like a titan looking at an ant. Overwhelming, all-conquering power fills you. What, that little demoness?"
ARE YOU THE HARBINGER OF NEW HOPE
All we need now is a Pathfinder WOTR creation kit like Neverwinter Nights has.
Hmmm never played NVN so cannot comment.
@@SlanderedGaming It basically allows you to create your own campaigns.
The main reason why nwn is still around.
@@adanos4 and allows you to dm the games for other players as well.
Another NWN (or Pathfinder WOTR with a creation kit) is the dream.
For me, BG3 was much easier to get into, but the longer I played, the more cracks in the armor I found, so to speak.
WOTR has been the opposite; it took me a few tries to get into the game, but the more I play it, the more I enjoy it.
Particulary, going evil is SO much more fulfilling in WOTR
Exactly WotR gets better the more you play it whereas I feel the opposite about BG3.
I agree
BG 3 has an absolutely fantastic first act, but as it goes on the plot sorta unravels a bit and some of their writing conventions wore thin for me, particularly for playing evil. Thay had a bit of a 'loose' hand with the setting and lore that as a veteran of the original Saga and the setting in general- started to irk me as the hours rolled past. Seeing how two certain returning characters from the original saga were written just sapped my will to finish the game.
@@catoblepasomega BG3 first 2 acts is just very good. 3rd act is a little bit boring the more you play. I think it is because level progression is no more in act 3, and the enemy is just too easy in act 3. No challenge in act 3, and story progression a bit confusing in act 3. Aside from that, I could not find any other game like BG3 or WOTR again in the few next months or maybe within a year. Still worth my best 100hr++ gameplay
Legit one of the biggest issues with BG3 Act 3, on top of what most people point out, is just the fact that at that point you'll be either level 12, or close to it. Being at the level cap despite the game having tons of content left hurts the progression IMMENSELY, and suddenly you have no real reward for completing any of the dozens of confusing quests that act 3 densely throws at you. It just becomes fatiguing and unrewarding.
I hit act 3 at level 9. I think people tried to do everything in one go in the first playthrough, and overleveled.
I also think the level cap of 12 is a bit too low. Some of those last few fights were pretty cheesy. Would have been nice to have a bit more XP.
@@johnroush5731 nah man I finished a playthrough in 30 hours, 10 hours for each act and got to level 12 before ACT 3 finished
my first playthrough was 86 hours long, in comparison
IMO these games are apples and oranges, they are both under the crpg tag but are completely different games. We are 'lucky' to have 2 top tier games that are this diff to choose from. If you like a coop, party adventure, where you explore/experiment/mess around, BG3 is the best. If you like a solo power fanstasy, deep build mechanics then wotr is it. I prefer wotr but love every coop bg3 adventure.
I think both of them can be games where you explore, experiment, and mess around. It just depends on the type of experience you want. WotR isn't a solo power fantasy for me.
@@SlanderedGaming Any game can be played in any way. WOTR is single player only and it's base design is for you the player to become a powerful being that alters the lands in ways no other beings even could come close, for example the queen leading many failed crusades over many years. BG3 is coop and any member of the party can go off on their own, giving more agency/power to each individual member, as opposed to wotr members only getting power from the KC.
wotr does have some hidden things you can discover but bg3 you can spend hours in a random corner doing random things and having fun. WOTR you can click on things on the map that the game lets you.
prefer WOTR cos it has RTW
Pretty much agree with everything you said, 32:42 is 100% true I've played BG3 3 times a good,evil and honour mode run and that's enough for a while. WoTR is just a different beast with Mythic paths and builds and it makes me wonder if we will ever get another crpg with so many options. Especially since Owlcat wants full VA moving forward I'm wondering if it will cost them too much to have so many options again. Great video.
Thanks glad you enjoyed it!
I think it's without a doubt going to negatively impact the overall game when they sink too much resources into voice acting.
AI voice acting makes it possible
Owlcat stated that full voicing will not impact their writing and that they'll just allocate more budget without losing the quality. I say we give them a chance before judging.
@@YanChosethey won't use AI for VA, though
28:18 Wrath has the best leveling up song. "Mythic Power" hits so well especially as it comes in the most critical moments of the game. assaulting a keep, a fortress the abyss it self
Well the only category I strongly disagree would be the combat because some advantages you did not point out for BG3 is that there is so much more freedom on how you want to initiate combat with many environmental hazards you can benefit from (shooting the block of stone and let it fall on the 2 bandits or pushing down the statue in the goblin camp to name a few) which does makes the combat easier but the choice is there. The 'push' mechanic which is one of the most funniest or most OP bonus action you could ever use on someone who's near the edge of a loooong fall. The game even allows stupid meta builds like barrlemancy to flourish or some insane level of play that cannot be done in WOTR. There's this one clip of a woman who defeated the Adamantine Forge by standing below the hammer with the golem, drop a health potion below her feet, firebolt the lever killing both the golem and herself but saved by the health potion that was also crushed scattering the liquid and revived herself up. It's not a intended solution but with creative thinking, you can do shit like that which is why BG3 combat wins for me.
I love Wrath so much, but the amount of prebuffing that was necessary to play on the higher difficulties got to be a bit of a bore. Especially playing on console (but I guess that’s my fault more than the game’s).
But this makes BG3 combat confusing. At least for me.
@@sayurioffenborn4960you’ll get the hang of it…. My first play through I was more pissed than enjoying it because I had absolutely no idea what I was doing, it never tells you, hey casting this will break THAT concentration, or that action will use this slot. I was so confused about what expended what why some things would hit, others always missing. I didn’t touch most the crafting, always rushing here and there, no idea how honestly most the systems even worked…. Then I started slowly grasping things in act 3, it was the first time I felt like I could explore a bit, test the waters, take a breathe and learn instead of just going from one near death to the next….by the time I got to some of the final bosses through sheer trial and error, a little cheating and a lot more powers added to my arsenal I was felling more confident at least, actually the last battle was kind of trivial. Anyways, now starting another playthrough with some added classes and races (astral elf and twilight cleric) and im loving it like everyone else is now. Games with strategy often work like this and id had no idea about dnd before.
combat in wotr is much more deeper, more complex and more mature...i dont want "funny" things like throwing barrels or goblins in serious game...sure younger people find it "funny"...in wotr trickster mythic path is superrior to bg 3 interaction
@@tomasistok7229 its an option. BG3 has better combat.
one thing I admire BG3 for is how many ways it has to get creative with the relatively simple mechanics it provides, owlbears stagediving or players throwing a small pouch containing 30 explosives at a boss, using spells like knock or darkness to make progress - there is a lot of fun in BG3 that pathfinder with it's more rigid style can't match. You can create amazing combat builds in wrath and you are absolutely correct that the replay value of that game is insane as a direct result of combat mechanics and story being linked.
I feel though like player freedom in how they solve most encounters is sadly a bit more of a railroad in wrath, exceptions here and there of course, but you get the idea.
Yup. That's a Larian staple in their games, I don't think it's fair expecting other developers to be as good at it, not yet anyway 😁
I keep having a hard time getting into WOTR because most of the combat feels like an uninspired hallway fight or a roadblock to slow down my exploration. I am sure that there must be some great, crunchy, tactical combat, but I'm like ten hours in and I don't feel like I've seen it yet.
BG3s encounters always felt fresh, unique, and creative with a lot of different ways to engage with (or work around) it.
Forgot to mention about BG3 leveling that you cant see future level abilities which is a huge drawback. :)
Great content! Ty
Thank you!! Glad you enjoyed it!
BG3 is going to be the golden standard for AAA games. WOTR however has more replay value due to the sheer amount of content. Bg3 is the better game at base but I play WOTR more because of more content and higher difficulty.
Unfinished/Unpolished AAAs maybe 😂
????@@DargorV
I'll respectfully disagree that bg3 is the better game at base all it has is more ease of play and higher production Value.
Wotr has Higher amount of player choice due to its mechanical depth and class building and many endings, Arguably deeper and more interesting companions along with other things
@@RocketSlime its obviously better at base
@@alexcompositionflat sorry but I don't agree I said this above but don't know if you saw my comment before but bg 3 only really has Polish on its side and less bugs with easier to grasp gameplay. With wotr it has better class options, more building options, more paths and ways to make play thoughts feel special, and arguably deeper gameplay (story, companions and music are all subjective) but just from gameplay and mechanics alone wotr simply is the better and deeper game, it also has much more and much better evil options compared to bg3 honestly after you play bg3 for three playthroughts or so you'll pretty much see everything it has to offer if your not 100% where as you can play wotr many MANY times and get a different play through every time that vary drastically
Man, this comparison hurts my soul. I love them both so much for reasons that are so similar yet so different at the same time. Just yesterday I was trudging through Alushinyrra and I was struck by the thought of how cool it would be to traverse using BG3's jump and flight mechanics. It actually made me kinda sad 😅
u can dimension door a good portion of alushinyrra tho
@@mihai000000 yeah, but I think it's super clunky and not as fun as BG3 platforming. And the fact I still need to do it even if my whole party can fly is silly.
Always thought of them as BG3 quality vs WOTR quantity I love BG3 but I find myself replaying WOTR more for the various mythic paths and that it seems longer since BG3 only has 3 acts with zero dlc
Yup WotR has way more replayability.
Hopefully with AI generation of voice acting, over time, there will be some fairly seamless and substantial user made content. Not confident its going to be another Skyrim though. I think it may be just too big an ask of hobbyist to add significant content to the game which actually feels appropriate.
Sorry but bg 3 isn't quality it's good at a select amount of things but wotr also does that and has more
The music category has to go to Wrath for the mythic paths alone imo.
I've never heard such perfect themes.
Dragon conjures images of a majestic dragon soaring in the sky & raining fire down upon evil.
You can almost hear the last of your humanity fading away in Aeon's theme.
Lich conjures images of your Lich character slowly walking across a battlefield while rising an ever growing horde of undead.
Azata conjures images of a merry band of prancing outcasts & weirdos, attracting more to their number to the tune of the Azata's flute.
Swarm assaults your ears with all consuming buzzing that's almost uncomfortable to listen to.
Legend conjures images of your character rising up, showing the powerful forces they have been dealing with just how capable a mortal is. As an army of unlikely allies follows behind. Truly one of the most hype songs in the game.
BG3 has a lot of amazing music & yeah Down By The River is iconic.
But the Mythic Path themes alone blow it out of the water.
I legit listen to them a lot. Was even listening to the WOTR soundtrack today while playing tabletop with friends.
Agree 100%. Liked quite much more Pathfinder. Made me wonder how wonderful could have been if all voice acted and animated. I Oulcat had the money of Larian we could had a universal masterpiece.
20:02 i agree again the game plot reveal was truly amazing, like who is my enemy and my friend and what even i am
Great video, still watching. Sad that Pillars of Eternity seems to be slowly fading from this type of conversation. It's great that it's happening because it means we're getting a lot of great new games.
I hope we get a Pillars of Eternity 3 some day to get back into the ring. So much potential in the world, its religions, cultures etc. And Obsidian's style of storytelling, leaning heavily into factions and consequences is so much fun.
Was thinking the same exact thing.
Well there is the upcoming first person fantasy game in the same world to dive into it again (i think it was called avowed?, but yea i would preffer another CRPG too
Sadly, I think Avowed is the future (not merely a spin-off) of the Pillars universe. Similarly to the way Fallout 3 shifted from 2.
I just finished watching a video comparing BG3 to POE. It doesn't have a lot of views, but it's a decent vid. I do love the world of POE, and especially Deadfire which I found better since it was a little brighter and not as dark and gloomy. Even if the main story of Deadfire was lackluster.
As for the future, most likely action rpg's is the direction Obsidian is going to stick with. Especially with microsoft footing the bill. I wouldn't rule out POE 3 completely though, the success of BG3 may motivate Microsoft some.
WOTR's Legend theme alone wins the music category for me! It oozes perseverance through adversity, reminds me of Icewind Dale's theme in that regard. It pumps me up to the point I could fight a horde of enemies going up hill in a blizzard. And I haven't even done a Legend run (yet)! Great video as always Slandered.
PF1 character mechanics are way superior to D&D5 in terms of designing the concept you want. D&D5 was designed to be simpler, and have less maths, so once you master PF1 you can build a far greater range of options. Multiplied over a party this means there are vastly more options around party design too. Give me PF1 anyday.
It will be interesting to see how PF2.0 games compare to D&D 5e options.
@@SlanderedGaming indeed PF2 is sort of half-way between.
I can somewhat agree here. My problem with WOTR is you are pretty much forced to specialize. Yes, you can get much more specific build ideas in mind, but you can do so much more with what you have in BG3. I like creative approaches to combat and never felt I got enough of that in WOTR or Kingmaker. Like, every character I had felt pigeon holed into a hyper-specific playstyle by the end of the game. Plus, I feel I have to plan out every feat in Pathfinder to even make what I want somewhat functional. BG3 allowed me to find creative approaches to combat, even if I didn't have a party comp prepared for certain encounters. It made swapping companions around much easier and made combat much more fun in my opinion, which also enhanced my experience with story and companion interactions.
I love both games and go back and forth between which one I enjoy more, but I would give combat to BG3 personally as I'd rather be able to do more with what I have than have more build options but less I can do with each, if that makes sense.
@@damianmorris6700 hear what you say but that's a platform thing I suspect not a system thing. Played various versions of D&D for 40 odd years so for me its about the potential of you to realise your concept.
Well said mate. I've enjoyed both, for different reasons, but one thing that I love about WoTR is you can completely change the entire game universe based on your mythic path (you can probably guess my favourite mythic path). With BG3, and as someone who played BG1 and BG2 at release, it feels like the real story is behind the durge origin character, but you also miss out on stuff vs a blank slate custom character, or other origin character). Might be time to download WoTR once again, onto my new PC, I got late last year :) Edit: My one big dislike about WoTR is Campaign Mode, which, even though skippable on easy, means you do miss out on some content. As someone who grew with the old school AD&D I do like that WoTR, or Pathfinder in general, uses an old school style D&D ruleset, including alignments that matter and prestige classes, vs BG3s 'easy mode' 5E ruleset.
I hate the art direction of BG3. Too cartoons and the characters look "post-modern" if that make sense. The cast looks like they came off a university campus instead of a fantasy world.
Pathfinder wins easily in this regard.
[cartoony]
Both are def great games. I personally like how much more class types and abilities Wotr has, but can easily understand people being overwhelmed. At the same time I also appreciate BG3 not having a million different buff and debuff types lol.
Recently downloaded Pathfinder wotr and found myself in character creation for 2hrs...I am now enjoying your lich playthrough. Newly subscribed and excited to explore the channel.
To me, it depends on what you're looking for. Wrath of the Righteous (and Pathfinder by extension) cater to a more hardcore fanbase. The game is absolutely awesome in how it handles being a power fantasy, how it handles your choices, how it handles being evil, and how it handles alignment. The story is also really good for the majority of the game and it offers you a ton of replayability. When I played WOTR, I enjoyed most of my time with it. While I found levelling and the crusade mechanic cumbersome, I dealt with it. What almost killed WOTR for me and is preventing me from replaying it again is just how much I HATED Act 4 and how I just wanted the game to end in Act 5 because of what I can only best describe as stat bloat.
BG3, on the other hand, caters more towards new cRPG players and people familiar with DnD/BG1+BG2. The game offers a really good story (especially as redemption Dark Urge), interesting companions, easier combat, a more cinematic experience, and a less cumbersome levelling + character creation system. The game also benefits from the fact that it's set in the Forgotten Realms and that it uses a modified 5e ruleset. Both of which are more well known than Golarion and the Pathfinder 1e ruleset. The modified 5e ruleset is also a benefits because it's more accessible as well.
If I had to choose one, I would pick BG3 but that's mainly because of preference. DnD is my bread and butter (I've played and ran a lot of it) and I've never been a huge fan of the Pathfinder 1e ruleset (I do like 2e better though). I also just found BG3 more enjoyable because I found it easier to get into and I was able to connect better with the story and companions.
All of that absolutely makes complete sense.
pathfinder ruleset is based dnd 3.5 rules. I agree that bg3 is more for casuals. Since dnd 5 edition was made in casual in mind and dnd 3.5 is for hardcore players. Probably why most people do not stick with wotr.
BG3 absolutely does not offer a good story. There are plotholes of the size of the average galaxy, not to mention rather minimal agency of the player. The entire thing feels more like a D&D-themed rollercoaster, rather than an actual CRPG story. BG3 is a good game, but I wouldn't call it Baldur's Gate.
@@osiris4457 still it is one of popular games on the market despite not hitting many boxes in the right areas.
@@adanos4 Rollercoasters are generally popular, yes. Popularity has rarely been a factor regarding story quality.
I feel like after having played both that even though WotR has so many classes and archetypes, BG3 builds feel much more unique as you hit the late game, while WotR builds start feeling very similar.
What a FANTASTIC comparison video. I stopped BG3 at the end of act 2 a few months ago because I didn’t want my story to end… I’m ready to finish it now and embark on a new journey with WotR. Thank you!!! New Sub 👍
Welcome to the channel!
watching your Dragon Age Veilguard Time’s GOTY reaction video now 🤣🤣🤣
"Many of the songs feel like a military marching band"
My brother in christ.. you do know... you are leading.. a CRUSADE right?
Yes and he immediately adds "in the game it absolutely works" so let me ask you this: My brother in christ.. did you even.. listen to.. what is being SAID IN THE VIDEO?
Completed 2 honor mode runs. Played a lot of BG3. But at the emd of the day its WotR I want to play again.
It's hard to choose between the two, that's for sure.
There is one thing about BG3 I only just realised that is a pretty severe mark against it: once you've picked your feats during level up, there is nowhere in the character sheets you can find this information. You are only able to see it again on level up. By contrast, while a bit of an overload, WOTR's character sheets are completely comprehensive.
There is a severe lack of information provided to the player within the game. There's no bestiary, there's no spell descriptors, there's no index or codex to help you understand what counters spells and how to cure things. It took me forever to figure out how to cure the paralyzed tiefling in the druid camp. I had to actually go online to look it up
That is not true. All acquired feats and a description for them are listed under Character Sheet - Characteristics - Notable Features. Same screen that lists your conditions, casted buffs, resistances, buffs from items,etc.
Bro! Many many months ago I mentioned your channel would grow. It's really great to see you picking up momentum big time!! Keep up the hard work
It's Pathfinder for me all the way. No matter how hard I try I cannot seem to connect with Larian games. With respect to BG3, my issues are:
- Interface: inventory management still felt like a huge chore, and I wish I could just drag a box to select characters like typical isometric games instead of grappling with the chain system. Setting up characters' positions to be optimal for a fight often wasn't worth the hassle.
- Combat: I get I'm in the vast minority here, but the turn-based only combat is so slow and tedious that I would actively try to avoid combat as much as possible, especially when a lot of the encounters seem designed to start you at a disadvantage. I get that's part of the strategic appeal for some but for the love of god, give me RTwP with auto pause options to speed things up a bit.
- Companions/characters - Completely agree with all your points on character writing. Also, how some of my BG2 favorites were treated - unconscionable, and completely undid any character development/endings from Throne of Bhaal. Very few decent evil companions. Areelu is more interesting than the BG3 villains IMO.
BG3 is a good game and I did manage to finish it once, but at this point I've accepted that Larian games just might not be for me.
Yeah I was not a fan of what was done with BG2 OG's.
@@SlanderedGaming agree. Minsc especially, the original voice actor was shafted to tap the Critical Roll market.
@@gordonmcinnes8328 Yeah, there was a post on the Forgotten Realms subreddit where some people got his autograph and IIRC he was asked about if he was coming to voice act Minsc in BG 3 (it was during EA) and apparently he defined his communications with them as something like 'I wish they would acknowledge I exist' That maes me doubly uncomfortable knowing that he worked alongside the current VA for Minsc in Siege of Dragonspear...kinda like he poached his job.
The writing for the two returning old characters though was really something else...I couldn't keep playing the game after that. If you had shown it to me outside the context of BG 3 I would have assumed it was a hate fic.
I agree on all of your points and I can add many more. I felt the same about DOS 1&2 as well. I don't like these games.
I play these games for different reasons tbh. Builds and fighting are amazing in WOTR, but the constant combat without many options to avoid it can get tiring. It’s almost like an endless gauntlet. BG3’s smaller scope (likely due to the incredible production value having limits) can be a little samey after multiple runs. Act 1 can be a slog after the tenth (or twentieth) time running through it as there are only so many things you can do differently. WOTR isn’t that different in this regard, but the sheer number of builds can offset it some.
I definitely agree there is way too much fighting in WotR.
I wished they would add something like neverwinter nights base campaign had, an option to start playing a specific act/chapter. Finished the game already great, then you can replay any chapter/act you want with the same or different character if you prefer.
@@SlanderedGamingowl cat games all have too much imo
I wish I could experience the WOTR writing with BG3 combat-to-plot ratio. The dungeons are designed as old school dungeon crawls, which require turn-based combat and serious resource management. But the dungeons are massive and turn based combat slow, turning a single location into an entire workday of slow grind. Add on top of it the repetitive minigame grind on the world map, which for some idiotic reason is mandatory for the special ending, and repetitive and slow world map travel with random encounters. WOTR is the only RPG where I have ever turned the difficulty to easy in middle of the campaign because it was just too much of a slog to go through.
@@user-pi4qo3zc2e i am fine playing this on normale with real time with pause. I take it that didn't enjoy hereos of might and magic?
Even as someone who likes Pathfinder more than D&D. BG3 is a better game. While Wotr has some good charcters with Camillia and Ember being stand outs the entire cast of BG3 though is great.
I think the biggest thing is just how tedious and cumbersome some of WoTr's mechanics are. Too many blah fights the crusade management is fun but only for a little bit. While its nice you can turn it off that locks you out of some endings. I never feel like in slogging through to get to something fun and interesting in BG3 where it can feel like that in WOTR.
That's a good call out. A lot of players cannot stand crusade management.
Crusade management was definitely mishandled. and I *love* grand strategy games.
I had the opposite experience in my (evil) playthrough of BG3. I found that while well-voice acted, many companions felt very similar to each other, even down to the same wit and banter, and I slowly became indifferent to most companions save romanced Minthara and Astarion Late Act 2/3. WOTR on the other hand, felt like each companion was distinct, with only a few that were too similar to each other. Even the ones I despised like Ember felt more memorable than a lot of BG3's companions.
@@josephercanbrack8393 damn bruh why you despise Ember? ;(
@@GHOST5800000 She’s a writer’s pet. Her whole stick is “Demons are just sad and angry.” She’s literally the 5 year old asking “Why can’t the two warring sides just be nice”, and instead of having her grow from that, she’s treated as completely in the right.
Aru suffered and toiled to earn redemption. Ember says some vaguely nice things and swaths of demons turn.
@@josephercanbrack8393 Damn well Ive only jus started playing cause its free on PS plus, so I cant judge everything like you can IG, but from what Ive experienced from Ember so far I kinda get it, like shes almost TOO good lol, I get it, so far I jus think shes kinda cute cause she kinda dumb as hell but shes so dumbly innocent I jus wanna protect her lmfao
Also by Aru you mean that succubus lady? I Think she gonna be my fav companion and prolly who I romance from what I know of the companions so far...
This was a terrific analysis. Thank you!
My pleasure!
Great video, got my like and sub!
I feel bad saying it but I wasn't even able to get through BG3. I played until I killed Ketheric Thorm / Apostle of Myrkul. Overall I just feel like Larian remade D:OS2 with a Forgotten Realms coat of paint and called it a day. That's an oversimplification technically, but that's the impression that stuck with me as I played.
I guess I had hoped they would've looked to BG 1 and 2 more than they did, I've played both of them to death so it was strange to me that I found myself less and less eager to play before I even finished the game once. But the same thing happened to me when playing Original Sin 2. I could definitely see why people loved D:OS2 and BG3, but it just didn't click with me for some reason.
I loved Pathfinder Kingmaker and I've heard that Wrath of the Righteous is just a straight up improvement over PF:K. I think that'll be the next game I play once I'm done with Elden Ring.
Awesome welcome to the channel!
I'm glad you took the time to focus on many of the strong points in both titles. I personally feel owlcat kinda dropped the ball when it comes to character creation and certainly doesnt focus on strong unique spell casting abilities.
Give me the Mythic Power theme as best song.
Reluctantly agreed. Thanks for the deatailed analysis (not to mention your playthroughs!)
I feel certain my view will more strongly align with you over time.
I was new to CRPGs and began playing Wrath to learn this game style in prep of BG3.
I have played thousands of hours of TT DnD and was all in for BG3. I had only played 20-30 hours in Wrath before BG3 released, but will be returning to it soon.
Stil have not played BG3, but everytime that Mithyc Power plays in Pathfinder it gives me chills
I think BG3 is a great book, like those choose your adventure type of books, every time you pick it up you discover something new... For instance after every counter in BG3 I was like "I did so poorly and unimaginative, I could have fought more creatively" on the other hand WotR is like chess, you need to move your pieces carefully, plan ahead to min-max, squeeze every bit of advantage you can get to have the edge against the monsters... So I think both deliver different delicacies and I cannot have one and not have the other :D
What a timing!! Just when i was looking for vids on that same topic!!! Good work as usual man! Also really well done with how well structured the video is comparing different specific categories instead of a broad , general opinion.
Great video, wotr on unfair difficulty is amazing although I would say sometimes very brutal on those dice rolls.
Yup it's not my cup of tea but glad it's there for players.
Unfair is very literally unfair. I prefer core because the base numerical values for things like armor class and saving throws of enemies are almost identical to the tabletop system.
I can’t get even get past the beginning without getting wiped by the bugs as a monk
@@Mike-r4h Yep. When my tank characters are getting one shot, I don't know wtf I'm supposed to do. Two shot would be way different.
Personally, I think the unfair difficulty amps up difficulty in a way which is not very fun. I dont get me started on chained darkness on unfair. As some who refused to save scum a CC spell landing, that just felt completely unreasonable due to RNG not just on dice, but with regards to how random his target selection and spell usage is.
BG3 had a budget of over 100 million dollars compared to Pathfinder WOTR 2 million. If WOTR merely had a 15-20 million dollar budget, it would have surpassed BG3. That puts the comparison in perspective, and the perfect TTRPG would have the 3.5/Pathfinder 1e system with BG3s high production value.
Seems like Owlcat's game will be much closer to BG3 level production values and it will be interesting to see if it still succeeds.
@@SlanderedGaming Until Owlcat comes out with a new masterpiece rpg, I will use mods with BG3 on my Xbox. That is the only choice we have, until another triple A production RPG/TTRPG comes out.
Now this is where it gets tricky. The main reason Owl Cat could pull off those epic storytelling and absurd complexity is that most of the details were presented as "texts", combats are basically number crunch as many people will say. The further up you go with "presentation" the more you'll have to cut off many details due to budget limitations. And Again that's where the divide goes even deeper perhaps. Presentation/Graphics vs Details/Complexity. In technical and economical POV, it is easier to create a game like PF:WROTR than BG3.
You are wrong. Rules dnd3.5 not for everyone. Pathfinder not for everyone especially with a lot of wrong game decisions and not adapted for computer game dnd3.5 rules.
@@alekseygoi5449 Yes I have heard other RPG fans say the 3.5 or 5th edition rules don't work well with video games, on the other hand if you want to take another character from the medieval fantasy setting like Elder Scrolls, Baldurs Gate/Forgotten Realms Witcher or Dragon Age, you can't do that with BG3s simplified 5th DnD rules. There are not enough races or subclasses to do that without a lot of mods. So far consoles are far away from having enough mods to transfer other fantasy characters over to BG3.
PF:WotR is better cause my companions do not sexually harass me ;)=
Can't stand the npcs in BG3, too 'fan service'.
Except Sosiel
😂
Have you had Daeren in your party? 'Cause dude is a walking harassment suit.
@@opethmike He died in an "accident". Who? I never heard of her.
Pathfinder WotR is better in most ways imo. As much as I love BG3, it had a lot of minor issues that annoyed me over time, from gameplay issues to minor bits of the narrative not making too much sense depending on the choices you made. I feel like a lot of the hype for it comes from the production with full voice acting, and it being a lot of people first proper CRPG so they were impressed by the amount of player choice which is standard for many games in the genre. Games like pathfinder, pillars of eternity, and dragon age have been doing similar things for years.
Yup the increased PV definitely helped the game.
I hate how BG3 makes looting such a choir.
I disagree, that demon city part almost made me quit.
WotR still uses that old cRPG trope of allowing you to ask newly recruited companions almost everything about their past and history straight away( except the parts that are story locked, of course), like you're performing an interview. Takes away from the immersion . Bg3 does this in a more believable way, and you can totally miss out on information if you're being an asshole 😁
i've said it before , and i'll repeat myself : bg3 is baby's first crpg. Yes , its pretty , and has great production value , but it has no challenge , and actually very little content , once you've played it once , and seen most of the dialogue. From an 100ish hours game , it turns into a 50-60 hours if you skip everrything that you;'ve seen already. Also , the game is waaaay too easy. I beat honor mode in my 2nd playthrough , and i didn't even had a very hard time doing it either
I liked WOTR more simply because the more I learned about the setting, the more I understood and even agreed with the antagonist.
There is still the occasional debate on Steam regarding Areelu and whether she was right or wrong. That grey area is why I play video games that focus on stories in the first place.
I started playing bg3 before WotR, but I finished my first WotR playthrough of ah before my first BG3 playthrough - though I had to take significant breaks from both games. Restarting both games multiple times made me very familiar with the opening acts of both games, and they both became kind of a slog after a certain point. Mythic paths added a lot to WotR, but the bizarre rate at which you gain new mythic levels was a hindrance to that experience overall - it felt like I was barely changing for a while and then got a huge amount all at once. I do think I enjoy BG3 more mechanically, since the amount of gameplay options you have to approach each scenario is way higher - stealth and pickpocketing and even using jumps and areas of darkness to get into better positions before starting combat, plus the variety of terrains and surfaces you can use while in combat - you have way more freedom of approach in a lot of cases than WotR does, since that game is so heavily combat oriented. Honestly, even with all that, I can’t decide on a true favorite - I think it’s pretty much a tie in my eyes, both games have their strengths and weaknesses. WotR doesn’t have Shadowheart and BG3 doesn’t have Arueshalae, so overall i guess it’s a wash.
Oh yeah. And before I forget - inventory management. WotR knocks this one way out of the park. Dear god.
@@mysticaloctopus8224 WoTR lets you buy enough bags of holding to hit "take all" from everything, every time with no downside.
BG3 makes you hit "send to camp" on every single item in the game one at a time.
yeah WoTR wins
@@acrab6527 it is possible to ctrl+click to highlight more items and then send them all to camp at once
@@mysticaloctopus8224 1)That still takes longer than just carrying everything you own at all times, and just hitting take all.
2) not on console it ain't.
The most in-depth review that I ever seen. Thanks for what you said about the deepest romances on PWoTR, I will try it out as soon as I finishing Rogue Trader. Thank you!
Thank you! Glad you enjoyed it!
Excellent video as always. We're just so lucky to get both of these games right now. Gives us a ton of hours of great content to enjoy and have. Agree with your points a great look at both titles.
17:20 does pillars of eternity POTD and the 12 constellation challenges count? that's the hardest of all CRPG games :P
Very well thought out and presented video. Thanks. Pretty much with you on all points.
Thank you glad you enjoyed it!
Really nice video. I'm leaning to Wotr also. But I will say that playing evil in wotr does have its restrictions but it stems mostly from dialogue options or the lack of reactivity from both the world and companions, rather than the restrictions in BG3.
Great analysis! Almost completely agree with you. I would also point to the fact that you can reach level 20+ with WoTR, while only 12 with BG, and there are 5 giant chapters in WoTR while only 3 in BG. This gives WoTR way more replayability and satisfaction with the story arch. I've put nearly 3000 hours into Pathfinder, and I still feel like I've got a lot more to experience.
Prediction of the final score:
Presentation,character creation companions and combat goes for BG3. Maybe music but both games have really good osts.
Wrath gets progression, build mechanic, endings, mods (because the game is older), endings , replaybility (easy, mythic path) and story..
no chance of companions, Regil beats every BG3 companion alone.
Hmmm looks like there are some surprises in the video for you. :)
@@12345Granada Regil is such an awesome companion. Imagine if he was fully voiced and animated like the BG3 companions
@@zoozi214imagine if he was in bg3
@@hectorsanchez7581 Larian couldnt write a character like Regil hes too serious and larian whimsey would just make him stupid
Thanks for a good, objective (as objective as these gets...) comparison.
I have played both games, and agree with most of it.
I love pathfinder and wrath....but I do believe BG3 is the superior experience. Especially from a video game and Tabletop RPG style experience. Wrath just can't capture that same feeling of "I'm playing a very good D&D campaign". There's too many pointless combat interactions and filler
But this is also the flaw of playing a 5 act story as opposed to playing a 3 act story. The experience can be much tighter in a 3 act structure. Although, I do agree with you in that the story from Wrath is MUCH more satisfying and I had way more "OH SH%&!" moments playing wrath when characters were introduced than I did with BG3
Hard agree. I gave wotr a try after my 4th playthrough of BG3. While I understand the appeal of the game and I enjoyed my time with it, I couldn't finish one playthrough. A lot of the feats in the game during level up did not feel impactful. Part of the reason I ended quitting and not wanting to do a new playthrough are petty, like how weapon proficiency works or spell penetration. It just didn't feel good to me compared to BG3. The story of wotr was pretty great.
Excelent video man, totally agree. All in all, I'd say WOTR is a game you can play years literally, whereas BG3 is a game you play a lot maybe ONE year of your life.
WOTR wins the prize in my opinion. And I dream when there comes a day you have another game with over 200 classes to choose from, and the almost endless learning, skull cracking, mind bending options to build not only your character, but also your companions, having fun doing the most crazy stuff ever, suffering because you F'd up in your build, and thinking on how to fix it and become strong again...
It's a monstrous amount of content that honestly, makes me use my brain, and feel the absolutely awesome feeling of being a master of myself, and also the freedom of doing almost anything. Besides that; music, (remember my name, Wenduag), over all story, and mythic paths progression is fantastic.
Side note:
The other day I was watching a youtuber play on unfair, streaming, like a full playthrough, and he made a really "bad" build, not only in his Main Character but also companions. And he was complaining and suffering a lot, swearing and reloading all the time, and I was laughing a lot the whole time... A couple of level ups later, he somewhat fixed his builds a little, and was having a much better time in the game, and prasing himself or the characters, and again I was laughing all the time, and I thought.. "somehow, this what Wrath of the Righteous is all about, and it's great!"
Idk if that's true, I've gotten pretty bored with wotr.
I feel both games have pros and cons but Pathfinder is better to me. The thing that sets it apart is the depth of character progression also the story depth is insane compared to BG3. While BG3 is like playong through a movie.
For me reading is not an issue, especially once we get a voice for those characters.
Lastly what gave Pathfinder Wotr the edge to BG3, is the fact of the hot mess that is the rushed third act. Larian dropped the ball hard on the third act.
Some other notable things that WotR does that just makes sense, is you as the main character dont have to do EVERY skill. In a conversation needs to pass a persuasion check but youre a fighter with 8 CHA well you have a Paladin with high charisma and the roll is made on their skill.
Also you can take your level WAY past 12.
Oh and did i meantion you can get a DRAGON!!!!! Yes you can get a dragon in WotR.
How do you get the dragon? You mean it's one of those mythic path?
@@regiluthfi She is a companion you get as a certain mythic path.
Or you can be a dragon.
@@mattjharrisyahoo there is that also.
You can be a dragon by casting a spell, and a powerful one at that. Being a dragon in WotR is not as outlandish as it would seem😂
I’m around level 5 in wotr and so far every combat encounter feels the same.
So far bg3 is the clear winner for me but we shall see.
Wait till chapter 3 my dude the game role play is on another level
Maybe my mind's just playing tricks on me, but I came back to Baldur's Gate 3 after a 10 month hiatus, and for some reason, it seems to look even better somehow.
I don’t know how, but your voice sound very old and wise. Damn great content btw.
Pathfinder, for all its diverse class/race roster and the "freedom" to build your character really locks you into very few minmax options (provided you don't play on lower difficulty levels). It's a hardcore game and you don't want an "RP" character in a hardcore game. You don't build a mage with low dexterity, because a lot of offensive spells requier a touch roll. You don't pick a class with a cool description if it's subpar, mechanics-wise (which over half of them are, compared to the top dogs).
You want to build an optimal Sword saint? Your only option is Strength, and a very specific weapon selection, like the Scythe, Falcata, etc. Want to build a tank with sky-high AC? Well, take a dip into a bunch of non thematically-correlated classes and create a hideous Frankenstein's monster. Want to build a blaster mage? You're pretty much locked into 1-2 solutions. Not to mention that the vast majority of "difficulty" is defeated by tedious buff-stacking.
BG3, does have its meta, sure (Tavern brawler+elixir of strength, be damned - although it's nerfed in Honor mode), but I find it to be way more flexible in terms of viable multiclasses and ways that mechanics scale.
I built crazy invincible monsters in Baldur's Gate 1, 2, Icewind Dale, Neverwinter Nights 1 and 2, I built freaks of nature that made "Unfair" difficulty hardly fair for my enemies in Pathfinder. But really, I find that Baldur's Gate 3 hit the sweet spot between accessibility (casual-friendliness), good ergonimics and complexity. Almost every subclass is useful. No race falls too far behind in racial perks. Multiclassing is much more flexible, especially for casters.
I wouln't mind having more classes, a higher level cap, more feats in BG3, but I think it's in a really nice place.
just started WotR a few days ago. I plan on buying BG3 soon and playing that next
PF WoTR lets me relive all the hours I spent when I was younger playing Neverwinter Nights 1 and 2. It feels so similar to the 3.5 D&D and has so much depth and scope. BG3 is amazing and fun but doesn't really feel like "Baldurs Gate 3", more like it's own standalone thing. WOTR scratches a bigger itch and I 100% agree its the better game overall. Great video!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Because pathfinder is based dnd 3.5 ruleset.
I think the main thing that makes wrath better for me than bg3 is the build aspects. In bg3 you have to activity hold yourself back when building. If you come up with anything too strong the game is basically over. In wrath you have to have an INSANE build just to stand a chance on anything past core.
Also while there are a lot less mods, toybox is worth at least a thousand bg3 mods rolled into one.
Both pathfinder did things to me no other game could. It felt like i rediscovered gaming. BG3 didn't even barely scratched that feeling.
Agree with all your conclusions except for combat. In my mind BG3 wins combat by a wide margin. There are just so many ways to approach a particular encounter in BG3 and higher difficulties encourages creativity (excluding the last boss fight which is just a dps check). WotR the viable options decreases significantly as the difficulty increases and all you are really doing is stacking different to hit and AC numbers. Every fight is pre-buff, smack, rest, repeat. Plus I never had to deal with dumb stuff like my characters walking into my deadly earth and dying due to a pre-scripted cutscene in BG3.
Well done! Been waiting for this kind of video from you. You did fantastic job comparing these two games. I greatly enjoy both games, but Wrath is overall better experience for me as well.
29:40 a quick fix you see them dead in Baals temple in Orins room
Now this is where it gets tricky. The main reason Owl Cat could pull off those epic storytelling and absurd complexity is that most of the details were presented as "texts", combats are basically number crunch as many people will say. The further up you go with "presentation" the more you'll have to cut off many details due to budget limitations. And Again that's where the divide goes even deeper perhaps. Presentation/Graphics vs Details/Complexity. In technical and economical POV, it is easier to create a game like PF:WROTR than BG3.
Something you didnt really bring up enough is that BG3 is multiplayer, and good multiplayer.
wotr is simply goated. they really captured the feel of playing a tabletop heroic adventure, while still givign crazy customization and RP options. i really hope owlcat makes another pathfinder game. but rogue trader is great too
Being a seasoned DnD player I will always believe Wrath is better than Baldur’s Gate 3 mostly due to the battle mechanics. Wrath’s battle mechanics is based on PF1 which was originally based on DnD 3.5 but improved upon which offered a wealth of options for combat and character interactions. While Baldur’s Gate 3 is based on 5E DnD and while Baldur’s Gate 3 is pretty and the music is great. In my opinion Wrath wins in every other category.
I hope owlcat makes a dnd video game . they seems to know how to implement tabletop to games very well.
My good brother you need to seriously consider voice acting. You have an amazing voice. I need to hear it in an anime or something.
As someone who absolutely loved both games, I think the biggest thing that puts BG3 above WOTR for me is the actual combat itself.
WOTR has a ton of customization and lets you build almost anything, which is amazing. But 90% of those choices felt like they're devoted to making numbers go up. There are admittedly some really fun ways to make said numbers go up, and I myself still had fun, but some of the values felt way too inflated, and a lot of fights just felt like stat checks against enemies that have dozens of buff spells on them for seemingly no reason.
BG3, while having objectively way less customization, has a world that's more interactable. Terrain feels like it matters way more, and there's multiple boss fights that make active use of it. Both games have reactivity based on what you play, but BG3 felt like people reacted to my character's class and race more often and in more meaningful ways. And because every fight in BG3 was carefully placed there (minus the shadows in Act 2), they felt like they mean more.
The story of WOTR had me absolutely hype. Mythic power theme was incredible any time it came out, I loved the story and most of the companions, and it really hit a huge power fantasy. But outside of a few combat encounters like Playful Darkness where I only survived because of very good positioning and skill usage, most fights in WOTR felt like I either won or lost because me or the enemy had like a +20 to hit/AC/saving throws. Compare that to BG3, where I was regularly taking high ground, using chokepoints, throwing enemies around, and destroying the terrain.
I still love both games, but during actual gameplay? BG3 is higher.
Exactly the comparison I wanted to see🎉❤
Great video! I agree on almost all points. Well done sir!
I prefer BG3, and it is not because it has better production values. My two problems with WOTR (which I did enjoy and spent a lot of time playing) is that (1) there are too many combat encounters, most of which are uninspired and forgettable and (2) I do not like high level D&D/Pathfinder very much, as it just becomes ridiculous (i.e., eventually you are fighting random encounters with god-like entities). I can distinctly remember the majority of BG3 combat encounters because each one is a real set-piece and most areas only have 2 or 3 combat encounters. WOTR just throws mob after mob after you, and I find it tedious.
Don't forget all the pre-buffing you have to do in WOTR to win most of the actually worthwhile combat encounters. I find WOTR an absolute chore to play for that reason and the ones you stated.
@@tiradegrandmarshal Oh yes, I forgot about all the pre-buffing. That was also a chore. I am glad D&D 5e fixed that (although it would be nice to be able to concentrate on two spells at a time).
I have tried so many times to get into WOTR but I simply cannot. I am going to take BG3 over this BUT I have watched a lot of your content as well as listening to the community that you guys are apart of and for that reason I will give WOTR another go lol. Hopefully I can appreciate it as much as you guys do
Push through the first 4 to 5 hours; it's worth it. I dropped it a few times after just 2 or 3 hours; but once you get out of the underground it really picks up.
Hope you like it the second time around!
I would switch to turn based if you're having trouble with real time, it really uped my enjoyment but its up to preference and you can freely switch between game modes, I tend to switch to reel time when fighting a way to big fight.
I will say play it on normal mode. I tried to not play it on normal mode and hated. I have enjoyed normal mode a lot tho
I agree dude, i don't know how it has 9/10 on steam. It's ok game, but not that great. and that army management is annoying and then you have act 4 the most annoying part.
Yes!!!! I always wondered what your thoughts were on this topic!
Both games are winners as we as players get choices and that's a great thing ❤.
Agreed!
I agree with everything except combat section (i especially agree with bg3 having bad evil playthroughs). I would say bg3 is better in terms of actual combat due to fights being handmade and that battlefields and stuff that's on the ground actually matters. Even tho difficulty is non existent compared to wotr i believe that actions you can do in combat in bg3 compared to wotr are superior and is more important than difficulty. Especially considering most of the gameplay in wotr you'll spend prebuffing instead of actually fighting enemies
Edit: I would also mention that even tho bg3 character creation is better overall, but wotr provides sheet with useful information on what to expect on which lvl meanwhile in bg3 there's no indication and you have to go wiki to know on which lvl you gain what
I still am playing wrath of the selfrightious.
I can not get myself to play baldurs gate 3 again.
Yup the replay value isn't nearly as high.
Same with me 🙂
Bg3 looked like shit in beta, it looked like shit when it got released, and it still looks like shit. It looks like mainstream garbage for idiots who like critical role.
yea ones you played bg3 to the end there is no much reason to replay but to play as the dark urge evil playthrough but that's it
I love both games.
So which is better? Yes. Depends on the itch I want scratched.
WotR is better for customization, unique builds and you can actually plan your build in advance because you can see the mechanics you will get as you level before you get there.
BG3 is a more cinematic experience with so many different permutations possible that it just isn’t possible to get the same experience twice. It looks good, the combat is balanced without trash mobs taking up all your time and is far more tactical than just prebuff and charge like it is with WotR. Combat feels better and more impactful.
Both are absolute titans in the rpg space and I wouldn’t have it any other way.
Amazing video. One of the best comparison videos I've seen. Got to me to try WOTR and, of course, subscribe to your channel.
Thank you! Welcome to the channel!
My answer is simple. I did not finished BG3 (intend to at some point). I did 8 different party with Wotr (finished all of them).
BG3 is a beautiful well polished marble. Its smooth, easy to handle and extremely pretty. However it starts to loose its luster the more you look at it. WotR is a rough cut gem. Not as eye catchingly shiny, and its sharper edges make it uncomfortable to handle but the more you look at it, the easier it is to loose yourself in its faceted depths.
Wotr not having basic portraits for major characters is really wack
The game could definitely use more portraits for characters.
I'm of the opinion that these games aren't really worth comparing. They're simply too different. BG3 is as close to a true D&D tabletop adventure as you can get in a video game (currently), WotR is very much a on the rails campaign with little room for shenanigans. They're both entirely different beasts.
I personally like WotR more, but there are things in BG3 that I very much do prefer. Combat being one of them. WotR combat mechanics are complicated and can become stale very quickly. Buffs are almost a requirement at Core or higher difficulty, and buffs make you roll through most of the game. BG3's combat in comparison feels more balanced. It's simple and has depth.
I prefer the music in WotR. It's got more variety. One thing that wasn't mentioned was certain crescendo moments. The score in Wrath is masterfully integrated with the gameplay, cutscenes, and story. For example: Banner over the Citadel playing during the climax of Act 2 is chill inducing. It's the most hype part of the entire game for me personally. Another example is when Master of My Own Fate first plays. This is another chilling moment that highlights the use of the music in the game in my opinion.
Besides these two particular things, I pretty much agree with the video. Thanks for more great content Slandered!
Recently, I have been playing Wrath of the Righteous. I'm on my 3rd run now.
I have played BG3 and can't deny it's extreme quality. If WotR didn't exist, I'd say BG3 was the best RPG ever made. That being said, the exact points you stated about story progression, power progression, and character progression are the reasons why it falls short of WotR.
On the music angle; while I love all the tracks for bg3, wrath’s azata melody is the only track from either game that I will hum to myself without reason
Man WOTR made you have you own boss music and even top badass moments
14:53
Bro is speaking the truth. For real tho, what you mentioned with the bg3 endings threw me off completely when I beat the game for the first time. I beat it before the patch 4 epilogue was added, but by then I remember I felt extremely discouraged to do another play through. After I got the closure with the epilogue, I was still disappointed at how I felt afterwards. BG3 starts off strong but in my honest opinion, failed to stick the landing, or at least the landing was rough. You said it very well, the game gets less interesting the more you play it. In fact, I’ve tried to do a dark urge playthru, since my first character was custom origin, but I couldn’t find myself to get passed act 1.
As opposed to WOTR, I’m on my 5th playthru this time trying all the DLCs for the first time as the first 4 were when the game came out (tho I quit the fourth one around act 3-4 I think?) only recently have I gotten back into it and am enjoying the DLCs too. There’s so many builds and mythic paths I wna try, the replayability is insane although there is a lot of slog (which I think can be curated w settings and mods)
I’m more inclined to start and finish a dark urge playthru recently so I may get on that, but like you said, the game has at best 3 playthrus before getting stale.
Here is one angle I’ve had that I don’t see mentioned often. I think the production value of BG3 is a double edged sword. It created some of the most memorable companions, well voice acted and cool writing (tho some got more attention than others). But I think the fact that they were so memorable and believable made me reluctant to play a new character, if that makes sense? It’s like saying goodbye to friends over the course of the story, and starting a new character almost breaks that bond. It would be like having a group of friends playing dnd, finishing a great campaign, and then playing again but only you changed your character. It’s a shame there will be no story DLC, I think bg3 would’ve benefitted greatly from a mid game and maybe epilogue DLC.
Love both games tho but WOTR #1 with BG3 a close #2
I totally agree with your assessment, and I congratulate you for your courage in openly stating that Wotr is better than Bg3.
Both are excellent, but it is clear that Larian opted to please, facilitate and make the game more accessible to everyone, with the budget they had it seems to me an intelligent decision and although to us RPGOldschool players it seems too simple, it has managed to make the RPG on everyone's lips, and this is undoubtedly an immense, transcendental achievement and one that we undoubtedly greatly appreciate.
The future of RPGs is crazy with AI, imagine that each NPC has a chatgpt with limited knowledge and you have the ability to write the questions yourself, on an audiovisual level we don't even talk about it.
Wotr and Bg3 are already in the Olympus of RPGs before AI.
As lovers of RPGs and video games, very happy years are coming that will not depend so much on studios or budgets and will be made by the community.
bg3 pretty much ruined crpgs for me, in the sense that I have real trouble getting properly immersed if there is no voice acting and I have to "imagine" whats going on. I am beyond bad at playing crpgs so I end up just going thorugh them on the lowest difficulty and treating them as interactive movies where I also have to collect all the items and find all the secrets. Bg3 wins hands down because of the reactivity of the npcs and environment. I liked WOTR enough to play 2 full runs, but I wish the devs eventually got enough resources to make something fully voice acted and properly animated.