Dungeons & Dragons has soared in popularity in ways that many of us D&D nerds would never have anticipated. In the gaming sphere, there are multiple titles taking place in the canon universe; and, in the case of Baldur’s Gate 3, winning Game of the Year for it. However, there is one major drawback when it comes to D&D games: these games are missing crucial elements of D&D itself. Mainly, these games are missing the elements of improvisation, adaption, and collaboration. D&D is a game played with multiple players going along a pathway that they carved out themselves however, video games have set choices, set paths, and set outcomes. There is only so much to account for, after all, but it completely dampens player imagination. While these adaptations are fun and a great introduction to the tabletop, it’s time to admit that they’re only a little bit like the actual tabletop itself. I feel the need to clarify that Baldur’s Gate 3 is still one of my favourite games of all time, but this is my main complaint/critique about the game as a whole. Adapting D&D is Just Hard Not Everything Translates Well Before anyone jumps on my case about me not understanding how hard it is to adapt D&D into a physical video game: I actually do, as I’ve been a Dungeon Master (who also homebrews a significant amount of content) for about five years now, as well as being a player in a different campaign. I love D&D and have been working closely with it for a hot second to know that there are certainly spells, items, races, classes, and even entire modules that are difficult to adapt. Some changes, after all, are necessary in order for it to even work in a gaming setting. However, these tweaks don’t change the fact that these games are still missing the key component of D&D as a whole: improvised creativity. While you can easily play Baldur’s Gate 3 multiplayer, the issue arises in the fact it’s designed as a single-player game first which is where we encounter our first oxymoron. Single player and D&D mix as well as oil and water, since the story is collaboratively told based on the decisions of the various players and their DM. Some of these actions, some of these decisions, you’d never anticipate coming, and it ends up flipping the entire story on its head. With video games, that obviously can’t happen. There’s a set beginning, middle, and end, and you’re just along for the ride. Sure, they can try to make up for this with as many pathways and dialogue options that players can think of, but there’s always going to be a decision that isn’t represented, or an idea that won’t get followed through due to the in-game boundaries. Coming back to Baldur’s Gate 3, for example, there are countless points in the game where players are faced with a multitude of decisions they could make. Let’s keep things simple and look at an example from Act One: Investigate Kagha. This quest is activated when you uncover a secret letter to Kagha from Cloakwood, the Shadow Druids. Upon finding this, my immediate reaction was to take the letter to Rath or Halsin in order to expose her, but there isn’t an option for that at all. You have to go to the Putrid Bog and find more of the correspondence tucked away in tree bark, and even then, you can only confront Kagha about her joining Cloakwood. You can’t rally anyone against her, you can’t influence discipline from Halsin, you can’t do anything other than tell her to knock it off, or to let the Rite of Thorns happens. I already know of twenty different ways my own players would have approached this if I had a similar investigation in my game there are at least five different choices I would make myself, much less when I factor in other players with endless creativity. It ends up making the game feel ten times more linear than it needs to be, especially if it’s meant to be an open-world roleplaying game set in D&D. The last thing you want is your players to feel like they’re being railroaded, and unfortunately, that’s exactly what ends up happening in most of these adaptations. Creativity and Improv is Dampened Choices Are Pre-Selected Dungeons & Dragons, at its core, has always been about collaborative creativity. The things that you and your fellow players could improv tend to make memories far more powerful and cherished than a funny dialogue option in a video game. The main mistake with this, I believe, is the fact that these video game adaptations target the Single Player demographic, and they end up flattening the entire experience with a steamroller. If a D&D game were made with multiplayer in mind (even if it’s only two people, that still provides that same creative experience that a whole table would have), the core of D&D would be back at the heart of these games. Developers don’t have to think of every single outcome in the world, but they should remember that a game like Dungeons & Dragons was never meant to be played alone. Players don’t like it when something rains on their parade, and that tends to happen when they feel railroaded. Baldur’s Gate 3 could have been the largest and most detailed open world game we’ve ever seen, but that doesn’t change the fact that the story only goes in a single direction, and there’s nothing anyone can do about it. Single player and D&D mix as well as oil and water, since the story is collaboratively told based on the decisions of the various players and their DM. I just remember the excitement I felt getting to Act Three for the first time, thinking that this was where most of the substance was going to be in such a massive city with so much to do but I couldn’t have been more wrong. Every single quest is not only pretty cut and dry (typically having a maximum of about three grand choices), but the approaches to these quests tend to be very basic. When dealing with Orin, for example, she gives you an ultimatum or else she kills your companion. However, you can easily talk her out of it, without meeting her conditions, and any stakes that were laid out end up being completely useless in the end. Plus, finding her at the Temple of Bhaal goes the exact same, without fail: you go to the Murder Tribunal, deal with Sarevok Anchev, get the directions and the amulet, and go. There is no other way to get into this temple. There’s no way to break in, no way to sneak in, no way to talk your way in, nothing. It completely diminishes how a player is supposed to approach the game and how they build their character. Sure, there are countless little choices leading up to this, but when it has zero impact on the story and ultimately takes you in the same story direction anyway, it feels pointless. D&D Adaptations Will Always Lack Something There’s Only So Much Devs Can Do Of course, I’m not asking for these games to have every possible outcome you could think of I’m not asking for the impossible. However, that doesn’t make it any less disappointing when game adaptions tend to only give you a small sampling of outcomes, not even covering all the bases, rather than having all alignment options. At the same time, we can’t keep pretending that these games are the perfect example of D&D and what it all has to offer. The reality of the situation is that D&D adaptations are a fantastic introduction to the tabletop, and players will find so much more substance when they actually give D&D a proper try. Instead of treating games like Baldur’s Gate 3 like the end all, be all, it should be treated like dipping your toe in a body of water, like the tip of an iceberg, like having the slightest taste of a new dessert. It’s just enough to build intrigue, to get you excited, to get you wanting more so when you finally get to the actual tabletop game itself, it’s nearly overwhelming how much you can do. And if future developers could emphasise that D&D game adaptations are meant to be collaborative, that would be even better.
https://www.dualshockers.com/dd-games-are-great-but-theyre-always-missing-something/
D&D Games Are Great, But They’re Always Missing Something
