If they were to sell the Baldur's Gate IP then personally I'd hope for a bigger studio to buy it. Beamdog are great with what they're trying to do with BG:EE, but if it's to be sold off to anyone then I'd appreciate it being bought by a studio with better resources to not only take the game to a wider market, but also to potentially do more ambitious projects with the BG IP than tinkering with the old game somewhat.
ALL BEAMDOG CAN LEGALLY DO IS TINKER! IF THEY DID ANY MORE THAN THAT, THEY WOULD LOOSE THE RIGHTS TO MAKE THE EEs AND GET SUED OUT OF EXISTENCE FOR BREACH OF CONTACT!
I apologize to the rest of you for the caps lock, but it seems for some of our fellow forum-goers, it's necessary. I mean, seriously, how many times does this have to be said before people start to get it?
Well from what I read, one of the bigger and more invested of Atari's IP's sold for $1.75 million.
If that's one of their bigger IP's I'm going to guess that BG that hasn't had a new game made in quite some time, wouldn't be anywhere near that expensive.
I hate to admit it, but I loved the black pits WAY more than I thought I would. If the devs had the power to add that kind of content into the actual story line, I would be a very happy camper...so I'm all for them buying the IP if at all possible. I will remain cautiously optimistic.
Though I'd still wouldn't be entirely behind Beamdog to acquire it though (blasphemy that it may be). I can't help but wonder what someone with more resources and possibly not being restricted by the same legal shenanigans could accomplish with BG.
Though it's probably unlikely someone else will offer anyway. I have to wonder how many devs would be eager to take on the BG IP.
On a more serious note, if the assumption is that other companies wouldn't be restricted by "legal shenanigans" without Atari being involved, I do sort of question the incidental assumption that Beamdog wouldn't also be free of those shenanigans under the same circumstances.
A few weeks ago the right to Freespace (my favorite space sim of all time) was sold off by THQ for $7500. Surely we here can manage that much, right?
*passes hat*
In unfairness, Interplay actually already held several of the important Freespace rights (in fact, from what Hard Light Productions tell me, most of the rights Interplay got apparently weren't worth much of anything without the rights Interplay held). Legal shenanigans can make it rather hard to compare rights and rights.
@Dee Which is a fair point. Also, what's with the name change, if I may ask?
But like I said previously I just think why not give it to a bigger studio who could do more with the IP? From what I've seen on these boards Beamdog said they have limited resources (not to say bigger companies have unlimted resources lol). At least that's the impression I get from they've said on what they can and can't do regardless of the legal situation (before the latest developments).
I've loved a lot of what has been done with BG:EE and was cautiously awaiting BG2:EE, but I can't say I didn't view the process as flawed and that I'm left with the impression that some people were possibly too eager to take on BG:EE despite some serious restrictions. I don't know all the ins and outs there because obviously I'm not privy too inside knowledge, but that's the impression from what has been said on the legal issues and their ramifications.
To be clear to everyone I'm not saying the game is awful or that I regret spending money on it, just that I question some of the decisions made. I realise that may not be popular to say, but those are my views and I don't see the harm of airing them.
They did say early on after launch that BG:EE was a proof of concept and that the green light wouldn't be given on BG2 unless certain criteria in the way of sales were met for BG:EE.
Beamdog had a contract to deliver both games. The "proof of concept" you're thinking of is for a hypothetical BG3.
Stupid question, perhaps, but if there's a contract to deliver two games, how come Atari stopped production and sale? I know you can't reveal details of the case and I'm not asking for that. My question is more along the lines of... doesn't that sort of potentially put Overhaul in danger of being sued by Beamdog?
And both can sue ATARI for breaking the develop contract, but employees (even the 3° contracted for single works only and even when they're under a juridical person) normally wait for the best moment to do this kind of move.
Though I'd still wouldn't be entirely behind Beamdog to acquire it though (blasphemy that it may be). I can't help but wonder what someone with more resources and possibly not being restricted by the same legal shenanigans could accomplish with BG.
You realize the more likely scenario is that if someone with more resources - say, EA - picked up BG, they'd either go for "modern remakes" (see: "Syndicate", "SimCity", "Wolfenstein") or just leave the IP in the dust because it's "old", right? Beamdog may have dropped the ball on occasion, but they're the only group that's capable of doing the series justice for the simple reason that they're the only ones who want to do it justice.
On a more serious note, if the assumption is that other companies wouldn't be restricted by "legal shenanigans" without Atari being involved, I do sort of question the incidental assumption that Beamdog wouldn't also be free of those shenanigans under the same circumstances.
Isn't that an erroneous assumption to begin with? I thought the contractual restrictions were imposed by WotC, not Atari...
In 24 august 2012, Sony had renewed Legend of Dragoon Trademark, everyone then expected an HD remake or a sequel of that great game, however no news about it have been released. Sometimes get a copyright just mean that a rival can't get it or just mean a 10 years project as Big companies doesn't have any urge about the products at their hand, they got thousand of options already.
Though I'd still wouldn't be entirely behind Beamdog to acquire it though (blasphemy that it may be). I can't help but wonder what someone with more resources and possibly not being restricted by the same legal shenanigans could accomplish with BG.
You realize the more likely scenario is that if someone with more resources - say, EA - picked up BG, they'd either go for "modern remakes" (see: "Syndicate", "SimCity", "Wolfenstein") or just leave the IP in the dust because it's "old", right? Beamdog may have dropped the ball on occasion, but they're the only group that's capable of doing the series justice for the simple reason that they're the only ones who want to do it justice.
You make a good point, but I think you step into the area of gross exaggeration. I see what you're trying to say, but you're taking it a step too far imo. It's nowhere near beyond possible that other developers could potentially create a game with the BG IP that's both of good quality and respectful to what came before it. Even with the stipulation that it could only be top down rpg.
Also while those three games aren't great games they are hardly the end all and be all when it comes to updating past games. The Fallout games managed to find an audience. There are already games like Bionic Commando Re-armed, Double Dragon Neon (in a kinda/sorta way) and others out there. Even Flashback is getting a new lick of paint. Beamdog have hardly cornered the market in old school updates.
Though like I've said before the likeliness anyone else picking it up makes it a moot point. It's all hypothetical at this stage.
In 24 august 2012, Sony had renewed Legend of Dragoon Trademark, everyone then expected an HD remake or a sequel of that great game, however no news about it have been released. Sometimes get a copyright just mean that a rival can't get it or just mean a 10 years project as Big companies doesn't have any urge about the products at their hand, they got thousand of options already.
You make a good point, but I think you step into the area of gross exaggeration. I see what you're trying to say, but you're taking it a step too far imo. It's nowhere near beyond possible that other developers could potentially create a game with the BG IP that's both of good quality and respectful to what came before it. Even with the stipulation that it could only be top down rpg.
By their very nature, major developers like Ubisoft, EA and Activision are one-trick ponies: mass appeal to the lowest common denominator. "Fallout 3" and "New Vegas" have their fans, but they don't resemble their predecessors in any way. "Bionic Commando Rearmed" was a straight-up modern remake, but you seem to forget that it was packaged with this, which wasn't exactly a shining testament to the spirit of the original game.
For such a company to get control of the BG IP would be nothing short of a disaster, because one thing all these modern remakes have in common - regardless of whether or not they're good games in and of themselves - is that they fundamentally misunderstand the appeal of the original. Which is how you go from this to this.
Which makes sense: in most cases the people doing the remakes weren't involved in the creation of the template, so they don't actually know what it is they're trying to bring back. Beamdog's chiefest strength at the moment is the fact that it can trace its lineage all the way back to the founding of BioWare and maintains friendly relations with people like David Gaider.
But like I said previously I just think why not give it to a bigger studio who could do more with the IP? From what I've seen on these boards Beamdog said they have limited resources (not to say bigger companies have unlimted resources lol).
I guess it's something to consider. A good example seems to be Bethesda buying the Fallout IP, eventually resulting in Fallout 3 and NV. The kind of overhaul done in terms of world presentation and overall modernization of the franchise shouldn't be overlooked - personally I liked the new Fallout games a lot, but there were also a lot of fans feeling something was inevitably lost from the franchise in the transition to AAA game. There's also a lack of comparison with what would have happened if the original developers would have been given the means to keep making Fallout games in the original spirit.
Another thing to consider is the focus of the developer. Bigger ones have a lot of balls in the air and it might take significant time before they decide to make something of the BG IP once purchased - wouldn't be that surprising if they just kept it on a shelf for 5-10 years while pursuing other projects, whereas Overhaul/Beamdog obviously have a plan and would go directly to work on it.
@shawne Again. You have a couple of good points, but your posts are still largely generalisations and hyperbole. At this point lets just admit we have different views.
One thing I've learned during these recent events is to ignore all white posts and skip straight to the blue posts. All the wild speculations and infighting get tiresome fast.
If Beamdog were to somehow acquire the BG IP, if i'm not mistaken, it still means they can't touch the graphics because of low resources right?(besides not having the original art source)
Which kind of makes the next question, if that(graphic overhaul) is too expensive, how are you going to acquire the IP in the first place?
Anyway, i have mixed feelings to be honest. What i -selfishly maybe- want, and i'm not hiding it, is to see Beamdog do something with the graphics, if that is impossible, i don't see how the enhanced editions would do anything for me, after playing the originals 1000 times.
However, i don't like low blows especially when someone is down, so i wish you good luck, for what it's worth, and obviously, i would support a potential BG3 should you acquire the IP in the end.
Now, on a side note, are you considering touching IWD? Or that is contract hell as well? I heard its assets(cough ) might be available.
If Beamdog were to somehow acquire the BG IP, if i'm not mistaken, it still means they can't touch the graphics because of low resources right?(besides not having the original art source)
Which kind of makes the next question, if that(graphic overhaul) is too expensive, how are you going to acquire the IP in the first place?
Anyway, i have mixed feelings to be honest. What i -selfishly maybe- want, and i'm not hiding it, is to see Beamdog do something with the graphics, if that is impossible, i don't see how the enhanced editions would do anything for me, after playing the originals 1000 times.
However, i don't like low blows especially when someone is down, so i wish you good luck, for what it's worth, and obviously, i would support a potential BG3 should you acquire the IP in the end.
Now, on a side note, are you considering touching IWD? Or that is contract hell as well? I heard its assets(cough ) might be available.
I know I would be hesitant of a game that completely redoes the graphics of a game like bg... Resolution improvement is nice, etc, but other than vanillas interface, the game is hardly 'sandpaper on your cornea' level. Makes me think of Quest for Glory, the first one, which got remade very soon after the original came out. Why did this happen? The difference in terms of interface and graphics was so massive in that time frame (especially VGA graphics being mainstream) that the game was difficult to play if you had not played the old style of RPGs. Also the graphics in the original were tremendously outdated. Sandpaper territory. IMHO, bg wouldn't be a better game if the art was completely redone. Sell better though? Perhaps, lots of graphics nuts around here!
Comments
I apologize to the rest of you for the caps lock, but it seems for some of our fellow forum-goers, it's necessary. I mean, seriously, how many times does this have to be said before people start to get it?
If that's one of their bigger IP's I'm going to guess that BG that hasn't had a new game made in quite some time, wouldn't be anywhere near that expensive.
Though I'd still wouldn't be entirely behind Beamdog to acquire it though (blasphemy that it may be). I can't help but wonder what someone with more resources and possibly not being restricted by the same legal shenanigans could accomplish with BG.
Though it's probably unlikely someone else will offer anyway. I have to wonder how many devs would be eager to take on the BG IP.
A few weeks ago the right to Freespace (my favorite space sim of all time) was sold off by THQ for $7500. Surely we here can manage that much, right?
*passes hat*
Free hat, guys!
*wears hat*
On a more serious note, if the assumption is that other companies wouldn't be restricted by "legal shenanigans" without Atari being involved, I do sort of question the incidental assumption that Beamdog wouldn't also be free of those shenanigans under the same circumstances.
But like I said previously I just think why not give it to a bigger studio who could do more with the IP? From what I've seen on these boards Beamdog said they have limited resources (not to say bigger companies have unlimted resources lol). At least that's the impression I get from they've said on what they can and can't do regardless of the legal situation (before the latest developments).
I've loved a lot of what has been done with BG:EE and was cautiously awaiting BG2:EE, but I can't say I didn't view the process as flawed and that I'm left with the impression that some people were possibly too eager to take on BG:EE despite some serious restrictions. I don't know all the ins and outs there because obviously I'm not privy too inside knowledge, but that's the impression from what has been said on the legal issues and their ramifications.
To be clear to everyone I'm not saying the game is awful or that I regret spending money on it, just that I question some of the decisions made. I realise that may not be popular to say, but those are my views and I don't see the harm of airing them.
On an unrelated note.
.....shenanigans. Doop do dah-do-do. :P
Overhaul and Beamdog are comprised of the same people.
In 24 august 2012, Sony had renewed Legend of Dragoon Trademark, everyone then expected an HD remake or a sequel of that great game, however no news about it have been released. Sometimes get a copyright just mean that a rival can't get it or just mean a 10 years project as Big companies doesn't have any urge about the products at their hand, they got thousand of options already.
http://legendofdragoon.wikia.com/wiki/The_Legend_of_Dragoon_Wiki
Also while those three games aren't great games they are hardly the end all and be all when it comes to updating past games. The Fallout games managed to find an audience. There are already games like Bionic Commando Re-armed, Double Dragon Neon (in a kinda/sorta way) and others out there. Even Flashback is getting a new lick of paint. Beamdog have hardly cornered the market in old school updates.
Though like I've said before the likeliness anyone else picking it up makes it a moot point. It's all hypothetical at this stage.
I'm not arguing an absolute here by the way. Just an opinion.
For such a company to get control of the BG IP would be nothing short of a disaster, because one thing all these modern remakes have in common - regardless of whether or not they're good games in and of themselves - is that they fundamentally misunderstand the appeal of the original. Which is how you go from this to this.
Which makes sense: in most cases the people doing the remakes weren't involved in the creation of the template, so they don't actually know what it is they're trying to bring back. Beamdog's chiefest strength at the moment is the fact that it can trace its lineage all the way back to the founding of BioWare and maintains friendly relations with people like David Gaider.
Another thing to consider is the focus of the developer. Bigger ones have a lot of balls in the air and it might take significant time before they decide to make something of the BG IP once purchased - wouldn't be that surprising if they just kept it on a shelf for 5-10 years while pursuing other projects, whereas Overhaul/Beamdog obviously have a plan and would go directly to work on it.
Ahhh Thank you both! That would have been my next question about Atari breaking the contract. Thanks, I get it now.
If Beamdog were to somehow acquire the BG IP, if i'm not mistaken, it still means they can't touch the graphics because of low resources right?(besides not having the original art source)
Which kind of makes the next question, if that(graphic overhaul) is too expensive, how are you going to acquire the IP in the first place?
Anyway, i have mixed feelings to be honest. What i -selfishly maybe- want, and i'm not hiding it, is to see Beamdog do something with the graphics, if that is impossible, i don't see how the enhanced editions would do anything for me, after playing the originals 1000 times.
However, i don't like low blows especially when someone is down, so i wish you good luck, for what it's worth, and obviously, i would support a potential BG3 should you acquire the IP in the end.
Now, on a side note, are you considering touching IWD? Or that is contract hell as well? I heard its assets(cough