GameSpot may receive revenue from affiliate and advertising partnerships for sharing this content and from purchases through links.

Baldur's Gate 3 Is In Development For Xbox, But There's A Series S Snag

Larian Studios says there's no console exclusivity deal for the RPG.

59 Comments

Baldur's Gate 3 isn't avoiding Xbox Series X|S because of a console exclusivity deal with Sony for PlayStation 5. Instead, the Xbox omission stems from a developmental issue regarding split-screen support on Series S.

Developer Larian Studios cleared the air about Baldur's Gate 3 on consoles after the RPG was unveiled it's heading to PS5 during Sony's State of Play event yesterday. "We've had an Xbox version of Baldur's Gate 3 in development for some time now," Larian Studios said in a statement.

Please use a html5 video capable browser to watch videos.
This video has an invalid file format.
00:00:00
Sorry, but you can't access this content!
Please enter your date of birth to view this video

By clicking 'enter', you agree to GameSpot's
Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

Now Playing: Baldur's Gate 3 - Reveal Trailer | PS5 Games

"We've run into some technical issues in developing the Xbox port that have stopped us feeling 100% confident in announcing it until we're certain we've found the right solutions--specifically, we've been unable to get splitscreen co-op to work to the same standard on both Xbox Series X and S, which is a requirement for us to ship."

So Baldur's Gate 3 hasn't been ruled out as coming to Xbox Series X|S. Though that's still up in the air. Additionally, this isn't the first time there have been complaints about Series S. Studios have reportedly asked Microsoft to drop the Xbox Series S launch requirement because it holds back games.

There is a power and performance difference between Xbox Series X and Series S. For example, the former sports 12 teraflops against 4 teraflops for Series S. There isn't a similar issue when developing for PS5.

For now, Baldur's Gate 3 will arrive August 31, 2023, on PS5 and PC--with Larian noting that includes Mac and GeForce Now. The developer added it "will announce support for additional platforms if and when we're ready." GameSpot has contacted Microsoft for comment.

Got a news tip or want to contact us directly? Email news@gamespot.com

Join the conversation
There are 59 comments about this story
59 Comments  RefreshSorted By 
  • 59 results
  • 1
  • 2
GameSpot has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to toxic conduct in comments. Any abusive, racist, sexist, threatening, bullying, vulgar, and otherwise objectionable behavior will result in moderation and/or account termination. Please keep your discussion civil.

Avatar image for bubba_666
Bubba_666

835

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

This isn't Devs being lazy at all, we're living in the land of 4K TV's (not 1080p), cell phones (not landlines), high speed internet (not dial up), and so on. The Series S is a cheap, hey I can't get a Series X, so let's make MS MORE money and make a weaker console. Even the One X should have been kept in development (production) over the One S/and Series S. Drop those!! The One X is still getting games at Native 4K, the Series X is only twice as powerful. That's not a night and day difference at all, just a weaker CPU in the One X.

Devs don't want to deal with weaker GPUS, and limited memory bandwidth, why would they? Would you? If you're going along, everythings fine, and there's a bump in the road, you need to hit it, or go around. Well devs have been going AROUND the Series S limitations for just over 2 years now. And they're tired of it. So yes drop the thing, MS are a trillion dollar company. In fact they LOSE money with every console they sell. Look at the facts and figures. Save up for the best, get the best, and have no worries. That's all these development teams are asking for a well. Why make it so difficult for them (unnecessarily). Because at the end of the day, no developers, not games..then what? Stop blaming them for the Series S being a (Potato).

Upvote • 
Avatar image for mooglestar
MoogleStar

3588

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

What a miStake.

😏

Upvote • 
Avatar image for RSM-HQ
RSM-HQ

12537

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 94

User Lists: 1

Comment section at its finest.

Hilarious reading that Larian Studios is 'lazy' no one still makes RPG games like these anymore because it's the opposite of laziness lol.

Also I don't think the Series S was ever ruled out, they clearly noted to be having trouble with it and want Baldur's Gate III to meet the same standards as the other platforms.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Runeweaver
Runeweaver

598

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

Drop split screen from Xbox and release at the same time as the PS5, Patch it in later if they get it working on the Series S, Or hopefully MS will allow them to patch the Series X first then the series S later.

2 • 
Avatar image for jenovaschilld
jenovaschilld

8028

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By jenovaschilld

@Runeweaver: Agree, if you do not have a game to sell, you cannot sale it. That is bad for the consumer as well. Get it into the hands of those that can play it, X series, and port it down as soon as possible, to the S. OR, release it on both- but with that one feature blocked off to the S series, until a patch opens it up.

What is the alternative- delay these games across the gaming industry for everyone, for the rest of 9th gen.

It is bad enough that games are developed for the playstation and then ported to the xbox, is this what the rest of 9th gen is going to look like. Games delayed to the xbox system because one Sku# cannot play a certain feature.

If it cannot be done, F' it, the S series does not play physical, does not play in 4k, does not do a lot of things, but that is what it is. People knew going in, and their was NO promise, it was a hope at best, it would all be the same as the X and S series.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for londoxleed
londoxleed

87

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

It's good to be back after all of these years

Upvote • 
Avatar image for jenovaschilld
jenovaschilld

8028

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Drop mandatory S compatibility, drop proprietary storage.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for sladakrobot
sladakrobot

11910

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By sladakrobot

@jenovaschilld: Dropping the Series S is not realistic...its the most sold Series console and i guess it could also cause legal problems if they break the promise to Series S consumers that every new(current) gen game will also run on it.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for jenovaschilld
jenovaschilld

8028

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@sladakrobot: Actually, while the S series has beaten the X series in some markets, the X series has sold the most, and also the most in demand of the xbox 9th gen console. Since 9th gen, some months, only the S series could even be found.

Screw the 'promise', if it takes longer, if it breaks features, or some games just will not run on the S as the developer intends, release it anyways on the X series. Later on, they can fix it or not. Just like you cannot play in 4k or play a physical disc, then you will not get to play a certain feature, or multiplayer, or game. Life moves on.

The most important number is tie in ratio or hardware to software. While playstation has the highest numbers by far, the X series owners do tend to buy more software then S, and this includes gamepass as a whole. IF you do not have a game for that system, it is hard to sell it. Better get it out as best you can, and then port it down to the S as soon as you can. That is a win for platform, publishers, developers, and .... the consumers.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for ceelogreen94
ceelogreen94

607

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

These devs are lazy point blank. If you can optimize a game to run on a PC with less horsepower than a series S, then you can get it to run on the series no excuses. Microsoft made a console that should run just about every game in 1440p an 1080, this isn't rocket science. I build PCs all the time for people and yes some of those are weaker than the series S and the still run graphic heavy games at 1080p, 60fps. This just pure laziness.

2 • 
Avatar image for Atzenkiller
Atzenkiller

4977

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@ceelogreen94: A PC with less power? PC specs generally have to be better than those on consoles because of the lack of optimization. And while you can run a PC game on some crappy laptop that barely manages 20fps on the lowest settings, that's not how developers want people to play their games. And for a console game that is in no way acceptable. On PC if a game runs poorly you just say "get a better rig".

Upvote • 
Avatar image for mogan
mogan

19978

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

mogan  Moderator

@ceelogreen94: The Steam store page doesn't list splitscreen/local multiplayer, so I don't know that the issue they're having with the Series S (getting split screen to work well enough) is something a PC would need to deal with.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for letsgame82
letsgame82

709

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Xbox should have never made a Series, their marketing was misleading but some of us could see it's shortcomings soon as the next gen games start releasing and in full swing. People would've been better off keeping their Xbox One X and saved for the Series X if they really wanted to experience next gen console gaming . I've got a feeling Series S would give Xbox devs alot of similar issues going forward, starting with Starfield

2 • 
Avatar image for jenovaschilld
jenovaschilld

8028

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By jenovaschilld

@letsgame82: I agree.

If you go onto gamesindustry and into the developers forums, there is a lot of bemoaning the extra costs of porting two versions. While you would think it would just work automatically, the gold version has to be tweaked for each to ensure it works well.

Hopefully 10th gen xbox will not have this or be like the PS versions. But I dislike the option of not have the ability to play physical.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Atzenkiller
Atzenkiller

4977

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@jenovaschilld: It requires more effort because console games have to be optimized for the hardware. Since you can't just buy a better graphics card like you can with PCs. Ideally PC games would be optimized as well but that's hard to do due to the endless variety of hardware parts available.

But I do wonder how many more Series X would have been sold by now if MS hadn't released the crappy S model. Some poor folks might have been happy to get a new Xbox for only $300. Even if it's weaker than the last gen top model. But for everyone else who was looking forward to getting a proper next gen console, supply was even lower than it would have been otherwise.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for jenovaschilld
jenovaschilld

8028

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@Atzenkiller: Yeah, for sure.

On console, every scene, every graphics, every UI they (developers) turn something up/down, on or off, in the api -Application programming interface. Giving gamers the most possible from that hardware, even if we do not realize it. Not bad for a subsidized $500 console that keeps going down in price over its lifetime. (well pandemic/inflation aside lol)

The last estimated numbers were around December at 18 million ish consoles. And while the S series has outsold X in some markets the X is suspected to be nearly 3 to 1 more (maybe 4 to 1) consoles then S. The demand is wildly higher for the series X, but in some places, and at some times, only the S is available. The S is also in more brick and mortar stores then the X as well. Where impulse buys by moms/dads, or younger kids will likely generate a purchase faster then a $500 option would.

MS is also trying to push the S series, what it can, because of the all digital console. The extra costs of developing to two differently powered sku's was thought to be minor and the developers would soak the costs, not effecting the platform or publisher's 30+%. Not something the developers have fondly expressed this gen.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Elranzer
Elranzer

1422

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

The Series S is somehow more pathetic than the Nintendo Switch. At least with the Switch’s potato hardware, devs still optimize their games to run on it due to guaranteed profits.

The Series S is just a turd in the punchbowl.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Vojtass
Vojtass

2756

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

There's no such thing as "console exclusivity". Something is exclusive (released for one platform), or not. In this case not, because of PC, primary platform for this game.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for deactivated-64f32fa0d8a48
deactivated-64f32fa0d8a48

608

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 10

Saw this coming a mile away, been saying it on Reddit for a while now. Eventually devs are just going to skip Xbox because of it and here it is.

6 • 
Avatar image for naydazng7
Naydazng7

158

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@rizenstrom: no wonder they are trying to buy a monopoly they cant win fair because they are so stupid. stupid MS

3 • 
Avatar image for deactivated-64efdf49333c4
deactivated-64efdf49333c4

21783

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 36

User Lists: 0

@naydazng7: This is the kind of stupid shit that fuels the Xbots. Don't fuel their stupid with more of your own.

5 • 
Avatar image for sladakrobot
sladakrobot

11910

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Can some tell the minimum PC requirements and how they compare to the Series S specs?
I am not a tech person so i couldnt tell if they are comparable.
Anyways,i dont believe that Sony has anything to do with it.
Maybe Xbox can get in touch with Larian?
It werent the first time Xbox did something like that...Diablo 3/60fps problems got solved back then.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for jenovaschilld
jenovaschilld

8028

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By jenovaschilld

@sladakrobot: This still requires a team to go through the xbox x/s versions, and tweak the apis to run at best performance possible. It is not automatic yet. (well not all of it)

Upvote • 
Avatar image for deactivated-64efdf49333c4
deactivated-64efdf49333c4

21783

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 36

User Lists: 0

@sladakrobot: The XS meets the requirements, so it should be able to manage it. But as some noted, it is true that many smaller western PC devs tend to design their games with brute force PC specs in mind. They're rarely polished.

4 • 
Avatar image for sladakrobot
sladakrobot

11910

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@Barighm: good to hear

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Slash_out
Slash_out

2731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

@sladakrobot: An older pc with a 1080 has 8 terraflops, the Series S is half that.

An xbox one X, the previous gen has 6 terraflops. 50% more power.

2 • 
Avatar image for Djon
Djon

59

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Lazy developers not knowing how to optimize their code is what it is.

Just look at all the games running perfectly on the S.

3 • 
Avatar image for Slash_out
Slash_out

2731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

Edited By Slash_out

@Djon: How is it lazy if they are doing it? Not to mention the games run on it... Just not in split screen.

And even if they are lazy this is fine. I would not release my gamr on xbox if I had to mutilate my baby to make it run a machine that's half the power of the previous gen thzt would ask for tons of work and wouldn't generate much sales.

5 • 
Avatar image for sladakrobot
sladakrobot

11910

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@Djon: That optimization can eat up some time i guess,dont you think?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for mcnichoj
mcnichoj

1880

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

It runs on SteamDeck but not on Series S? Okay, sure buddy.
I guess Sony must be including "create up some technical excuse for why you can't release the game on Xbox other than for the reason that we're paying you" for their exclusivity agreement contracts.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Slash_out
Slash_out

2731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

@mcnichoj: The steam deck runs game at 720p.

Are you saying they should release it on the series S/X at 720p?

2 • 
Avatar image for faithxvoid
faithxvoid

940

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

@Slash_out: yes. Last gen was terrible due to prioritizing resolution over frame rate. The 1440p thing is overkill anyhow. It’s for some small niche of people who use a series s on a pc monitor.

2 • 
Avatar image for Slash_out
Slash_out

2731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

Edited By Slash_out

@faithxvoid: My comment was sarcasm as it's not possible for them to release a game in 720p this gen. No matter what your priority is.

Which is how the game runs on the deck, hence why the comparaison is ridiculous.

1440p might be overkill, which it really is not right now. But still 1080p is not 720p.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for deactivated-64efdf49333c4
deactivated-64efdf49333c4

21783

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 36

User Lists: 0

@Slash_out: What's wrong with 720p? It looks fine. Not the best but I can barely notice the difference and I'll bet the vast majority of you are pushing 40. Is everyone hawkeyed, now?

2 • 
Avatar image for Slash_out
Slash_out

2731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

Edited By Slash_out

@Barighm: Fisrt of all it's about perception, you don't publish a 720p title on main consoles on latest gen hardware.

Secondly are you kidding or daft on purpose? Are you perhaps thinking of the difference between 720p and 1080p on a handheld screen like the Steam deck? Because yes you won't see the difference there, that's why the Deck outputs at 720p, because it's a 7 inch screen. It doesn't get much benefits from a higher resoluton on a screen that size particularly for the cost.

If you are saying you won't see the different on a 50+ inches tv screen between 720p, 1080p and 1440p ? Then you are full of it lol.

2 • 
Avatar image for mcnichoj
mcnichoj

1880

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@Slash_out: You seem to be doing some flip flopping here. First you state that they "can't" release a game in 720p and then you say that they 'shouldn't' release a game in 720p.
People that own a Series S know they got the budget less powerful console. It can't output to 4k for games anyway. So most people using it are going to be using 1080p displays or they'll be using a 4k set that does some bullshit forced upscaling which will result in a negligible quality increase. Factor in that the Series is BC with Xbox One titles, plenty of which couldn't even hit 1080p, you have some games that maxed out at 900p. Then you also have Xbox 360 games which max out at 720p if they don't have an X enhancement patch. It's more than fine to release a lower res version of a game (or do plenty of other concessions) to get it on lower spec supported hardware. I'm pretty sure that with all the lowest settings to run on potato PC's would work fine for the SS.
You're talking about optics for releasing a visually poor version of a game, what are the optics of denying millions of players a game?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Slash_out
Slash_out

2731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

Edited By Slash_out

@mcnichoj: No flip flopping both are true, and I don't seem to say it. I say it.

Also x360 games are not x series games. With that logic ps2 games were almist all releasdd at 480p so it would fine to release in that resolution nowadays?

It's not just about the optics of releasing it in an unacceptable resolution. People will bitch and moan if they get the game in 720p and rightly so. It will impact the reception of the game. There are standards to follow and those standards evolve with time. You don't release a game this gen with similar standards as you did 2 gens ago.

Also when you get a console 3 to 4 times less powerful than the main model you should expect not to be able to do everything the more powerful one can do.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for mcnichoj
mcnichoj

1880

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@Slash_out: Whew, what a relief. You're doubling down on your bad takes. Well for starters, if what you say about the rule involving Microsoft disallowing companies to release 720p games on the Series S is true then link me the documentation.

Are you intentionally being obtuse? I don't think a single game runs less than native 720p on PS4 so you couldn't get 480p. However Xbox 360 games that run on the Xbox One or other consoles will not run natively above 720p. Yes the console does forced upscaling to make them not look completely trash on higher resolution screens but you won't notice any difference playing an un-enhanced Xbox 360 game on modern hardware if you switched from a 30 inch 720p display to a 4k 30 inch one.
Also MS doesn't give a shit about standards, like I already said the Xbox One had brand new game releases that could only have a maximum output resolution of 900p meanwhile the PS4 for those same games were doing 1080.

No one is expecting the Series S to do the same things as the other consoles. Get some help. They can reduce the resolution, framerate, lighting, particle effects, amount of polygons on screen and plenty of other tricks to make it run on weaker hardware which is something they already had to do for the PC release. Plenty of games had to do this for the Switch and how many people complain about that? Hardly any because they all understand they wouldn't have it otherwise.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for sladakrobot
sladakrobot

11910

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@mcnichoj: How does it run on Steamdeck?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Vodoo
Vodoo

3881

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Edited By Vodoo

Frigin MS! This is a generation that the Series-S cannot handle every game. Stop hamstringing the Series -X. You're basically making the X into an S like that. Drop that stupid requirement!

Or better yet, put out a hardware revision for the S or make it your Game pass machine. But don't hold back all the X owners. We kinda paid the extra money for a reason.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for cydie
Cydie

158

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

Edited By Cydie

@Vodoo: but this game shouldn't require that much horsepower it's not like an action game or anything it's an rpg. i think they are making this more complicated then it should, Hogwarts works just fine on both system and ITs easily 100x more complicated then BG3.

3 • 
Avatar image for Slash_out
Slash_out

2731

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

@cydie: They said that split screen doesn't work as well as it should. From what they are saying solo game works fine

3 • 
Avatar image for deactivated-67413c4dcb898
deactivated-67413c4dcb898

486

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

I have a Series S and would have liked to play Baldur's Gate 3, but if they can't do it then it should just be a Series X game. I can live without it.

3 • 
  • 59 results
  • 1
  • 2