great , but just tell us, if it takes a week , two weeks , month or two ? and i'm just talking about the trailer of the game and announcement , not game itself
great , but just tell us, if it takes a week , two weeks , month or two ? and i'm just talking about the trailer of the game and announcement , not game itself
I think you'll have something to talk about next month some time.
Can't wait either. I hope I can start BG2EE with Dorn in my party after that.
..Sorry to pick you to quote, I know others are talking about that too..
But this kind of comment baffles me. Isn't one of the goals of BG:Y to explain how you ended up with Imoen, Khalid, Jaheira, Minsc and Dynaheir, even if you are evil and what not?
Also, they haven't said anything about being allowed to actually change anything of the original BG:2, so why are people still thinking they would? oO
The evil alternative canon party idea sounds fun. Maybe Dorn and Viconia instead of Minsc and Jaheira. Imoen doesn't seem like she's replacable without breaking the BG2 plot, though.
Last i seen this, there are more than 2 combos, not just a simple evil alternative.
Of course, I might be mistaken, and Avenger might have only talked strictly about party composition in Adventure Y. After all, changing the BG2 starting party sure sounds tricky and difficult to implement, especially from a storytelling point of view.
I have a theory on how they made it where you can choose who goes to Irenicus dungeon with you. I think they built a couple of what if mods of Irenicus's Dungeon in Adventure Y's game which might take you straight BG2EE after. Remember how when you first got Throne of Bhaal expansion and played Shadows of Amn to end and it brought you straight to Throne of Bhaal after the credits. I think Adventure Y will work the same way.
But, what if they made Irenicus' dungeon part of Adventure Y and had it be optional in BGII. That would solve all the continuity problems. i think that's what @Vasculio is saying?
But, what if they made Irenicus' dungeon part of Adventure Y and had it be optional in BGII. That would solve all the continuity problems. i think that's what @Vasculio is saying?
Thats what i meant... the what ifs' are built into Adventure Y, not BG2EE
Well, who's to say the contractual situation hasn't been altered since we've last heard of it? "You're not allowed to change things" might become "okay, you can change some things now" if you've proven yourself as someone who can change things for the better.
Well, who's to say the contractual situation hasn't been altered since we've last heard of it? "You're not allowed to change things" might become "okay, you can change some things now" if you've proven yourself as someone who can change things for the better.
I don't really think this happened. It is not something you change in a moment, they alreay went through a lot in order to have an agreement that would let them realise BG:EE.
Well the rights to the names and content of these games do not generate any income by themselves, they only do so by giving the rights holders shares of game/product sales. Since the only BG-related products coming out in the past few years were the Enhanced Editions (other than that one D&D module), and since the vanilla games have been out for 15+ years and thus they're no longer the goldmine they once were, I would imagine Beamdog's BG:EE and BG2:EE sales were pretty much the only things generating new income for the BG rights holders in recent years. Of course, I have absolutely no idea how well the BG:EE and BG2:EE sales have been doing from a business standpoint, but if they've been doing well enough, I suppose it could be in the rights holders' best interest to give Beamdog more liberties (not necessarily in the monetary sense, but more so as developers) so that their games could do even better.
And we shouldn't forget that Beamdog have received the rights to develop an entire new game under the Baldur's Gate name using existing BG characters, so I think that's a pretty big show of trust right there.
I'm not sure what sort of insight you guys may have into any legal agreements that Beamdog has with the rights holders to the games, but clearly they have already made a TON of additions to both games, including adding new characters, new items, new areas, new dialogue to old characters and much more. Personally it doesn't seem like there is a ton that they can't do at this point, because they have already done it. I don't think there is anything holding them back and I totally agree that making Irenicus' dungeon a part of Adventure Y would be an easy way to alter your starting party's configuration there.
I hope that they add a couple of the original Baldur's gate NPCs to BG2EE like Branwen, or Kivan or Xan. It would be cool to have more party continuity if you want it, or at least explain why they didn't follow the main character around after the battle with Sarevok...
Also I think it would make more sense to be able to pick who shows up with you in that dungeon for storyline continuity. I don't always have a party that is Jaheira/Khalid/Dyneheir/Minsc. I usually get one of the pairs but leave some space for some of the other cool NPCs. It was always a little weird that I always had to start with a party config that didn't match what I had before. I hope they make this possible.
Thats what i meant... the what ifs' are built into Adventure Y, not BG2EE
Cutting content from BG2 is still "changing" npc dialogue (even if it is made optional), something I don't think they are allowed to do.
True... but its under a different IP. -----> Aventure Y or whatever name its going to be called later. So having a modified Irenicus Dungeons doesn't breach contract of BG2EE. Because if you were to play BG2EE without Aventure Y... you would still start out with Imoen, Minsc and Jaheira, with Khalid and Dynaheir missing. But explained
Having BG1&2EE content in Adventure Y with custom Irenicus Dungeons is allowed. Because they acquired the rights to do so... its the exploit that was allowed under THAT IP. They just can't do that in the main BG2EE itself.
I'm not saying im right... but come on! Seriously... this gimmick would draw more people into playing BG2EE and possibly more BG2EE sells.
Thats what i meant... the what ifs' are built into Adventure Y, not BG2EE
Cutting content from BG2 is still "changing" npc dialogue (even if it is made optional), something I don't think they are allowed to do.
True... but its under a different IP. -----> Aventure Y or whatever name its going to be called later. So having a modified Irenicus Dungeons doesn't breach contract of BG2EE. Because if you were to play BG2EE without Aventure Y... you would still start out with Imoen, Minsc and Jaheira, with Khalid and Dynaheir missing. But explained
Having BG1&2EE content in Adventure Y with custom Irenicus Dungeons is allowed. Because they acquired the rights to do so... its the exploit that was allowed under THAT IP. They just can't do that in the main BG2EE itself.
I'm not saying im right... but come on! Seriously... this gimmick would draw more people into playing BG2EE and possibly more BG2EE sells.
I agree that they would be able to do this with Adventure Y, but they would not be able to make the first part of BG2:EE optional. To me, having to play Irenicus Dungeon two times in a row (when playing all 3 games back to back) would be more jarring then explaining how you end up with the canon party by the end of Adventure Y.
great , but just tell us, if it takes a week , two weeks , month or two ? and i'm just talking about the trailer of the game and announcement , not game itself
I think you'll have something to talk about next month some time.
With Oster saying that they're waiting for E3 to have happened and subsequently calmed down (two or three weeks), and Daigle giving us next month as a notable time period, I'd say that something interesting is most definitely not that far away.
Comments
But this kind of comment baffles me. Isn't one of the goals of BG:Y to explain how you ended up with
Imoen, Khalid, Jaheira, Minsc and Dynaheir, even if you are evil and what not?
Also, they haven't said anything about being allowed to actually change anything of the original BG:2,
so why are people still thinking they would? oO
And we shouldn't forget that Beamdog have received the rights to develop an entire new game under the Baldur's Gate name using existing BG characters, so I think that's a pretty big show of trust right there.
I hope that they add a couple of the original Baldur's gate NPCs to BG2EE like Branwen, or Kivan or Xan. It would be cool to have more party continuity if you want it, or at least explain why they didn't follow the main character around after the battle with Sarevok...
Also I think it would make more sense to be able to pick who shows up with you in that dungeon for storyline continuity. I don't always have a party that is Jaheira/Khalid/Dyneheir/Minsc. I usually get one of the pairs but leave some space for some of the other cool NPCs. It was always a little weird that I always had to start with a party config that didn't match what I had before. I hope they make this possible.
Having BG1&2EE content in Adventure Y with custom Irenicus Dungeons is allowed. Because they acquired the rights to do so... its the exploit that was allowed under THAT IP. They just can't do that in the main BG2EE itself.
I'm not saying im right... but come on! Seriously... this gimmick would draw more people into playing BG2EE and possibly more BG2EE sells.
Is something going to be revealed ( or even released ) within the end of the next week?