Playing a retarded ape is not fun, seriously, we have to make our choice around 3 stereotyped colors, 3 childish pictures, 3 simple minded ‘sentences’. We're all doomed.
Playing a retarded ape is not fun, seriously, we have to make our choice around 3 stereotyped colors, 3 childish pictures, 3 simple minded ‘sentences’. We're all doomed.
... For me, I am perfectly happy with the Infinity engine. I could absolutely see them making more adventures or additional content based on that engine and still making a profit. I think there is a lot of potential there and would be perfectly happy to vote with my dollars towards the proliferation of additional content/adventures in the Sword Coast (or elsewhere) in a like vein of BG1 or 2 or even Icewind Dale series...
I too am very happy with the Infinity Engine. I generally don't play computer games. The IE games are an exception because they come so close to simulating actual 'tabletop' RPGs (esp. 'old school' AD&D).
I couldn't care less about the latest graphics, etc., because the IE games look fine IMO (indeed, I love the vivid colours and landscapes), and the gameplay experience is what is most important to me.
I compare BG1+2, IWD, etc., with more recent games, and the latter generally bore me. I could play new IE games for the rest of my life and be happy.
Yeah, I have to wholly disagree with the Original Post. I think that, given the state of RPGs today, the stuff that the good folks at Beamdog/Overhaul has provided thus far is worlds better than, oh lets just say DA2 as for example. I think they could do a fine job with either BG3 or with some other game using the infinity engine or it's like. The state of RPG games in the last 10 years has not set the water mark very high.
I personally did enjoy DA:O and even NWN1-2, but even they fall far short of the BG series (in my opinion) in content, choices and impact of same and in tactical and strategic value. I never did like the Witcher series so I don't consider them (although others do so I suspect that they are good games merely not to my preference).
For me, better graphics does not a game make. They are nice, but they are merely icing on the cake rather than the cake itself as some game companies seem to think it is. And social interaction does not equal/equate too or even guarantee Role play. Just because there is a social component, doesn't mean that it is a Role play game.
Why change something that works? I'm in love with the Baldur's gate series not only because of the story, but also the gameplay and the graphic. In my opinion the 2d graphic that BG2/IWD2 has aged much better than that of NwN.
Imagine a whole new world with a new story... Add a huge city (Baldur's gate / amn) and then make it possible to travel (Like Tosc) to another island/world where you can go in the snowy mountains (Icewind dale cozy style). They already got the engine and everything set up, so they can spend all their time on creating a huge world for us to enjoy.
They can make Baldur's gate 2 today with twice the amount of content for the same time it took the original if not less. They could give us 1-2 expansions with even ,more content to explore, a new city and perhaps a huge forest (NwN style).
They don't even have to put a full out 50£ price on this.
So my point is -> Why change something that works?
So my point is -> Why change something that works?
The user experience is not the only reason to change a game engine. One of the modders/developers involved in this like @Kaeloree might know more about this, but the Infinite Engine probably comes with its own baggage (like intellectual property rights, actual functionality, etc).
So my point is -> Why change something that works?
The user experience is not the only reason to change a game engine. One of the modders/developers involved in this like @Kaeloree might know more about this, but the Infinite Engine probably comes with its own baggage (like intellectual property rights, actual functionality, etc).
Ofcourse there might be reasons like the ones you mention that won't let it get of the ground to start with. But i'm just answering to all the people who feel that you can't make BG3 without everything have to be new and fresh.
One of the the things i feel that dragon age and mass effect are missing out on is the imagination of the player. It's an art that is slowly dying nowadays and everyone have to be able to see everything 110%. I miss having my own idea of how people look and act, back in BG you got a portrait and then the rest was for your imagination.
So my point is -> Why change something that works?
The user experience is not the only reason to change a game engine. One of the modders/developers involved in this like @Kaeloree might know more about this, but the Infinite Engine probably comes with its own baggage (like intellectual property rights, actual functionality, etc).
Sure, and I can understand using some other kind of engine for future games for these kinds of reasons.
But I would be very happy if any new engine for BG-style CRPGs were to resemble IE from the user's perspective.
I agree entirely. They are passionate and that's awesome, but they just plain don't have the resources or manpower to bring justice to any sort of Baldur's Gate III. It's that simple.
Seconded. However, I would take it for granted that any BG3 would entail a staff/resources increase. Therefore, I would be delighted to see Beamdog try their hand at BG3.
Also, making new content within strict boundaries (already completed game) kills creativity, still I think the new content was alright.
After BG2:EE is released (keep the faith), I would be delighted with regular DLC containing modules set in the Realms. An updated Infinity Engine is perfect for CRPG D&D. Project Eternity is an isometric view but I believe we have been starved of Realms based adventures because of the well documented legal mess over the D&D license. There is a huge back catalogue of FR lore and adventures waiting to be translated into CRPG's and I believe Overhaul have the passion to do it justice.
I think DLC content with new and different adventures would be most welcome. I don't particularly care if they are FR, although I think that there is a lot of lore that could be leveraged thus saving the problem of having to create something compelling. but again I don't see a need for that necessarily.
I have high hopes for Project Eternity and Wasteland 2 and the new Planescape. I hope we are seeing a revival of good isometric RPG with actual story and interesting game play. I would love to laugh in the faces of the Big Publishers who seem to think that high end graphics, always online and exclusively Multi player 'social' games are all that the consumers want. Phah!!!!
I just love what they do with Bg1, it was my favorite game back then and now I have a lot of fun with the Bg:ee. If they do something similar with bg2 (maybe less bugged, we all hate bugs ^^) it will be perfect. Why I think that bg3 can be a success in their hands?
-The personality/dialogs of every single npc in the blackpit especially Baeloth (You Pathetic Pack of peripatetics!) -The personality/dialogs/little story of Neera/Dorn/Rassad -The way Baeloth was introduce in the main storyline and the way Viconia react to this encounter -The ‘speculate’ storyline of bg3
I would love to have my good old rpg game in an enhanced version; bg1, bg2, iwd1, iwd2, planescape, toee on a tablet and be able to play everywhere.
I agree, the dialogue in the black pits was very good and importantly, funny.
I would actually prefer BG3 to be on the Infinity Engine. I like the simpleness of the graphics. To me these graphics don't look dated. On the contrary, I think they're timeless. The more you try to make graphics look 3D and realistic, the faster they become dated. But if the graphics had none of those intentions to begin with, they would never age.
However, I agree with the OP in that am concerned with how good the content will be. Creating a few new areas worth of content is nothing compared to creating an entire game's worth of content from scratch. If Beamdog can be honest with themselves and is confident that they will be able to successfully create 40+ hours of quality new content for BG3, then I'm all for it.
I don't have any real complaints with BG:EE other than the modding community not being as on-board with it as I was hoping. Though, to be fair, it looks like we're getting the better mods, and not the 99% of garbage most mods represent.
I have faith in Overhaul. BG:EE turned out to be a good experience, and Overhaul is actually listening to us and trying to give us what the franchise needs. You can go on and on about the original on GoG, but then I'm subject to the whims of modders who largely only care about telling their latest Mary Sue's uninteresting story.
Overhaul making the World's Edge +3 glow is a better idea than half the mods out there.
While I have to confess that inxile's Wasteland 2 videos with an all 3D engine and a dynamic (?) camera looked very nice, what they showed for Torment (3D characters on top of 2D painterly, isometric backgrounds) really clicked with me - absolutely beautiful. Seems to be similar in approach to what we can expect from Infinity? I am honestly fed up with seeing "dated" in regards to 2D engines (and even 2D gameplay), if that is what is being implied. They are *different* ways of presentation. One is not by default "better" than the other. Period. Is a movie "better" than a book as a medium?
Also, going with a matter of factly stance in regards to the team not having the manpower/resources for a spiritual sequel to the BG story arc seems a bit off, considering AAA-sized teams is what's basically killing my interest in gaming nowadays (I feel bombastic presentation rules the day - not my day, obviously), whereas indie developers and smaller teams - since they are less restricted by a large publisher, perhaps - usually have my attention. Spiderweb Software constantly gets praise (I say this in regards to team size, personal preferences still apply, of course) and I assume the artwork Beamdog would be able to pull off to supersede Spiderweb's by far (no offence).
I personally like the little to no hand-holding "old-school" approach (dare I assume that so do most of the posters on this forum?) over what I felt was a mix of MMO-mechanics and catering to the console crowd in Dragon Age. Bought that twice (different patforms) but just didn't have fun enough to care about going on, yet a fifteen year old game managed exactly that. I want the souped up table top feel that is isometric (not the "dynamic" DA mix) and I prefer that over anything when it comes to CRPGs. Free exploration is another key-component even BG2 lacked over its predecessor. Hold the "but it was mostly empty" comments. To me that's exactly what's needed in the far too densly designed games of today (maybe a sign of the times or the target audience). Those "empty areas" are the crucial white space of a well-designed page in a book or a magazine.
Etc... (I'm not sure there was a point to all this, other than that I want more isometric, open-ended CRPGs).
@blipmusic - DA:O for the consoles played very differently than for the PC. Was one of the versions you bought PC? If so, how do you think that compared? For me, I enjoyed DA:O for the PC and felt that it was significantly better than 99% of what has come out in the past few years, but it still wasn't BG.
I also agree that more isometric RPG games (that are actual RPG, not MMO because the two are not synonymous!!!!) is definitely the way to go in my opinion.
@blipmusic - DA:O for the consoles played very differently than for the PC. Was one of the versions you bought PC? If so, how do you think that compared? For me, I enjoyed DA:O for the PC and felt that it was significantly better than 99% of what has come out in the past few years, but it still wasn't BG.
I also agree that more isometric RPG games (that are actual RPG, not MMO because the two are not synonymous!!!!) is definitely the way to go in my opinion.
Actually, both were "computer", just for different operating systems. The isometric view (strategic view, was that its name?) didn't properly lock and switched to the er... other, more dynamic perspective whenever the camera bumped into the foreground but I guess that's on the whole a quite minor offence.
Made it to the first village after the "intro" several times but just lost interest after a few quests. The mechanics didn't click with me, neither did the (few) classes available. I also felt I was being too linearly led to the "next quest hub of importance" but that was probably due to giving up way, way too early (and in all fairness that piece of criticism could probably be argued for many games I *do* like). To be honest I'm not sure why, exactly. Maybe I just missed BG. I'll probably try again in future, maybe I'll grasp whatever misconceptions I have and stay till the end.
The MMO comparison was mostly due the way "press '1', wait x seconds until you can press '1' again" worked and a few other things, not necessarily the game as a whole. I also don't dislike MMOs as a genre, I just don't want BG to play like one.
To me, so many people seem to be of the opinion that MMO means RPG. I played Everquest for over a year and never once did I feel like anyone took the Role play seriously. It was all about the grind and the social 'Facebooking' that got done. Then I played NWN2 persistant world for 2 years or more. That was a tiny bit better. But then the DEVS claimed that they were trying to make it into an MMO 'style' game and every decision that they made to that end just felt wrong to me. I finally gave up on it and all MMOs.
In MMOs there is no real impact on the game scape. There is no monster that you can kill that won't simply respawn a little while later all ready for the next group (or more often times your same group) to fight again. People have suggested one MMO where you actually have impact on the world, i forget which, but quite frankly I have a life. I can't spend 16 hours a day 6 days a week leveling up. And I never felt I could get anywhere unless I did exactly that. And if I actually did that, even then there was no impact. So I do have a problem with MMOs.
Personal opinion based on personal experience. I am not saying my experience in any way reflects others. Merely that I didn't enjoy them, nor find them in any way Role Play.
Actually, both were "computer", just for different operating systems.
Right, now we're splitting hairs so finely that you're risking a fission reaction. While you are indeed correct, I think it's fairly clear he meant Console vs. PC.
I have faith in Overhaul. BG:EE turned out to be a good experience, and Overhaul is actually listening to us and trying to give us what the franchise needs. You can go on and on about the original on GoG, but then I'm subject to the whims of modders who largely only care about telling their latest Mary Sue's uninteresting story.
This. A staff that cares about community suggestions and needs is really priceless.
Based on the added content alone to the EE I honestly don't think that the studio has the chops to give us Baldurs Gate 3. I read on a gamespot news article that Baldur's Gate 3 is very possible, and I think it would be a shame and a travesty to let this glorious IP sink to this kind of low.
Yes I really don't have faith that the developers can bring us a Baldurs Gate 3 - we'd all expect something even better than Baldurs Gate 2. With this developer, I really don't see that as a possibility. Not to mention Baldurs Gate 2 and 1 were built on an engine created over a decade ago. I don't want Baldurs Gate 3 to fall into the hands of a studio too scared to try something new, or too poor to bring a Dragon Age Origins kind of graphical experience.
I want Baldurs Gate 3 to be a next gen game, something epic, not a title crippled and mired to an outdated engine thanks to its predecessors, and unable to get the love it deserve because the current devs are too poor.
It's a great IP, and if they are able to make Baldurs Gate 3, I don't expect anything but a cash grab off an exploit of everyone's nostalga and trust in the brand.
I agree 1000%. I want Baldur's Gate 3 to be a dream come true.
While this project is very encouraging in that it's an official revival bringing back Baldur's Gate from the dead, and the public reaction to it has be renewed and very strong, the staggered rehashing of BG into the Enhanced Edition makes me worried about the quality level we'd be looking at with a third game. It might have less to do with the developers and more to do with the funding. Trent needs a great crew with deep resources, but I don't have any doubt that he's got plenty of story waiting to be made into the game after such a long hiatus.
I'm sure Trent can make the best installment yet with so much time, but Beamdog isn't going to pump out a dream game.
What is it about the Beamdog dev that makes you say that you trust it? You did play the extra side quests right?
The problem is Beamdog. It's a gimmicky company interested in turning profits more than making respectable games.
Blizzard-Activision, Hasbro (Wizards of the Coast), or Warner Bros (D&D online) all have deep enough pockets to fund Trent on a 3rd installment, but if D3 was a moneygrab there's no question BG3 would be under Beamdog.
[rant] Why is it that so many people seem to be unable to read the words "we would implement [your favorite feature/mod here] but we would get sued into oblivion if we even thought about it." or any variation on that theme? Overhaul/Beamdog have done everything they can to improve the game, even adding new content, despite the legal cluster@#$% that must have been for them. They have implement several mods that are known to improve performance/user friendliness, and in several cases HIRED THE BLOODY MODDERS. They even would have integrated mods like Unfinished Business, which would be a serious legal grey-area and might get them in trouble, but only didn't because they couldn't get in contact with all of the original modders and didn't want to steal their work. That's right, they would have risked pissing of the GIANT companies that own Baldur's Gate in order to give us what we want, but didn't because they RESPECTED THE MODDERS. They've completely removed loading screens, and overall streamlined and improved the game in every way they can without breaching contract. I'm so sorry that the game doesn't turn your computer into a sentient robot that fulfills your every desire, but from some of the posts I've seen around here, I doubt if even THAT would satisfy some of you. [/rant]
If an improvement in the engine means that they come with a game that has say a party of 4 instead of the BG type party of 6, then I'll know it's not for me. Other so called graphically improved engines have decreased the party size ostensibly to make room for all the "improved" formulae and graphics we were supposed to enjoy. Hell, that's why we were all drawn back with nostalgia to the original BG series. It's not that we wanted to relive a friendly old game with inferior graphics. It's that we wanted to continue to play a game that made more sense to us and offered us more strategy than a flashy "so called improved" game that was actually offering us less of a game.
If you want a "next gen" game, go buy Dragon Age Inquisition and rename the shortcut to "Baldur's Gate 3". If you think graphics engines are what makes games great then, with respect, you are a fool.
Personally, given the restrictions imposed by the powers that be and that BGEE was an straight-up overhaul of an existing game, I don't think that it's possible to make any judgment about the developers' ability to create an original BG game.
Comments
http://www.geekstir.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/rpgs.jpg
Playing a retarded ape is not fun, seriously, we have to make our choice around 3 stereotyped colors, 3 childish pictures, 3 simple minded ‘sentences’. We're all doomed.
I couldn't care less about the latest graphics, etc., because the IE games look fine IMO (indeed, I love the vivid colours and landscapes), and the gameplay experience is what is most important to me.
I compare BG1+2, IWD, etc., with more recent games, and the latter generally bore me. I could play new IE games for the rest of my life and be happy.
I personally did enjoy DA:O and even NWN1-2, but even they fall far short of the BG series (in my opinion) in content, choices and impact of same and in tactical and strategic value. I never did like the Witcher series so I don't consider them (although others do so I suspect that they are good games merely not to my preference).
For me, better graphics does not a game make. They are nice, but they are merely icing on the cake rather than the cake itself as some game companies seem to think it is. And social interaction does not equal/equate too or even guarantee Role play. Just because there is a social component, doesn't mean that it is a Role play game.
Imagine a whole new world with a new story... Add a huge city (Baldur's gate / amn) and then make it possible to travel (Like Tosc) to another island/world where you can go in the snowy mountains (Icewind dale cozy style). They already got the engine and everything set up, so they can spend all their time on creating a huge world for us to enjoy.
They can make Baldur's gate 2 today with twice the amount of content for the same time it took the original if not less. They could give us 1-2 expansions with even ,more content to explore, a new city and perhaps a huge forest (NwN style).
They don't even have to put a full out 50£ price on this.
So my point is -> Why change something that works?
One of the the things i feel that dragon age and mass effect are missing out on is the imagination of the player. It's an art that is slowly dying nowadays and everyone have to be able to see everything 110%. I miss having my own idea of how people look and act, back in BG you got a portrait and then the rest was for your imagination.
But I would be very happy if any new engine for BG-style CRPGs were to resemble IE from the user's perspective.
Also, making new content within strict boundaries (already completed game) kills creativity, still I think the new content was alright.
I have high hopes for Project Eternity and Wasteland 2 and the new Planescape. I hope we are seeing a revival of good isometric RPG with actual story and interesting game play. I would love to laugh in the faces of the Big Publishers who seem to think that high end graphics, always online and exclusively Multi player 'social' games are all that the consumers want. Phah!!!!
However, I agree with the OP in that am concerned with how good the content will be. Creating a few new areas worth of content is nothing compared to creating an entire game's worth of content from scratch. If Beamdog can be honest with themselves and is confident that they will be able to successfully create 40+ hours of quality new content for BG3, then I'm all for it.
I have faith in Overhaul. BG:EE turned out to be a good experience, and Overhaul is actually listening to us and trying to give us what the franchise needs. You can go on and on about the original on GoG, but then I'm subject to the whims of modders who largely only care about telling their latest Mary Sue's uninteresting story.
Overhaul making the World's Edge +3 glow is a better idea than half the mods out there.
Also, going with a matter of factly stance in regards to the team not having the manpower/resources for a spiritual sequel to the BG story arc seems a bit off, considering AAA-sized teams is what's basically killing my interest in gaming nowadays (I feel bombastic presentation rules the day - not my day, obviously), whereas indie developers and smaller teams - since they are less restricted by a large publisher, perhaps - usually have my attention. Spiderweb Software constantly gets praise (I say this in regards to team size, personal preferences still apply, of course) and I assume the artwork Beamdog would be able to pull off to supersede Spiderweb's by far (no offence).
I personally like the little to no hand-holding "old-school" approach (dare I assume that so do most of the posters on this forum?) over what I felt was a mix of MMO-mechanics and catering to the console crowd in Dragon Age. Bought that twice (different patforms) but just didn't have fun enough to care about going on, yet a fifteen year old game managed exactly that. I want the souped up table top feel that is isometric (not the "dynamic" DA mix) and I prefer that over anything when it comes to CRPGs. Free exploration is another key-component even BG2 lacked over its predecessor. Hold the "but it was mostly empty" comments. To me that's exactly what's needed in the far too densly designed games of today (maybe a sign of the times or the target audience). Those "empty areas" are the crucial white space of a well-designed page in a book or a magazine.
Etc... (I'm not sure there was a point to all this, other than that I want more isometric, open-ended CRPGs).
I also agree that more isometric RPG games (that are actual RPG, not MMO because the two are not synonymous!!!!) is definitely the way to go in my opinion.
Made it to the first village after the "intro" several times but just lost interest after a few quests. The mechanics didn't click with me, neither did the (few) classes available. I also felt I was being too linearly led to the "next quest hub of importance" but that was probably due to giving up way, way too early (and in all fairness that piece of criticism could probably be argued for many games I *do* like). To be honest I'm not sure why, exactly. Maybe I just missed BG. I'll probably try again in future, maybe I'll grasp whatever misconceptions I have and stay till the end.
The MMO comparison was mostly due the way "press '1', wait x seconds until you can press '1' again" worked and a few other things, not necessarily the game as a whole. I also don't dislike MMOs as a genre, I just don't want BG to play like one.
In MMOs there is no real impact on the game scape. There is no monster that you can kill that won't simply respawn a little while later all ready for the next group (or more often times your same group) to fight again. People have suggested one MMO where you actually have impact on the world, i forget which, but quite frankly I have a life. I can't spend 16 hours a day 6 days a week leveling up. And I never felt I could get anywhere unless I did exactly that. And if I actually did that, even then there was no impact. So I do have a problem with MMOs.
Personal opinion based on personal experience. I am not saying my experience in any way reflects others. Merely that I didn't enjoy them, nor find them in any way Role Play.
While this project is very encouraging in that it's an official revival bringing back Baldur's Gate from the dead, and the public reaction to it has be renewed and very strong, the staggered rehashing of BG into the Enhanced Edition makes me worried about the quality level we'd be looking at with a third game. It might have less to do with the developers and more to do with the funding. Trent needs a great crew with deep resources, but I don't have any doubt that he's got plenty of story waiting to be made into the game after such a long hiatus.
I'm sure Trent can make the best installment yet with so much time, but Beamdog isn't going to pump out a dream game.
Blizzard-Activision, Hasbro (Wizards of the Coast), or Warner Bros (D&D online) all have deep enough pockets to fund Trent on a 3rd installment, but if D3 was a moneygrab there's no question BG3 would be under Beamdog.
[rant]
Why is it that so many people seem to be unable to read the words "we would implement [your favorite feature/mod here] but we would get sued into oblivion if we even thought about it." or any variation on that theme? Overhaul/Beamdog have done everything they can to improve the game, even adding new content, despite the legal cluster@#$% that must have been for them.
They have implement several mods that are known to improve performance/user friendliness, and in several cases HIRED THE BLOODY MODDERS. They even would have integrated mods like Unfinished Business, which would be a serious legal grey-area and might get them in trouble, but only didn't because they couldn't get in contact with all of the original modders and didn't want to steal their work. That's right, they would have risked pissing of the GIANT companies that own Baldur's Gate in order to give us what we want, but didn't because they RESPECTED THE MODDERS.
They've completely removed loading screens, and overall streamlined and improved the game in every way they can without breaching contract. I'm so sorry that the game doesn't turn your computer into a sentient robot that fulfills your every desire, but from some of the posts I've seen around here, I doubt if even THAT would satisfy some of you.
[/rant]
If you think graphics engines are what makes games great then, with respect, you are a fool.
Personally, given the restrictions imposed by the powers that be and that BGEE was an straight-up overhaul of an existing game, I don't think that it's possible to make any judgment about the developers' ability to create an original BG game.