Forums and social networks? Are you serious? If that were true, nobody would make games anymore. Forums are about the worst place you can go to find out what the community thinks of a product when only the most fervent, hardcore (and rudest) fans ever visit them. Not to mention you get only a tiny fraction of community opinion.
The bottom line on an accounting sheet is where interest in a particular product is most reliably found. Lumping The Black Pit with the base BGEE game will not indicate anything for whether it's popular or not for Overhaul and Beamdog.
That's why this move is a little bewildering to me. Unless they're holding out, and this ends up being a multiplayer/pvp arena as well, I don't see why you spend time, effort and money building something that looks, smells, and quacks like a DLC micro-expansion into your flagship product. Not that this will stop me from buying the game, as the enhancements alone are worth it, I just question the direction a little bit with this.
I can't agree more with you. That's exactly what i thought, but since english is not my main language I was never able to phrase it as you do.
PVP has become the most popular multiplayer mode today. Apparently the developers target a 500K copies sold. Which means that they are appealing to a wide audience, not just hardcore fans.
This game is targeted much more at the wide gamer audience (but not the casual one) who likes PVP and probably wants to see a PVP dimension in most game they play.
While PvP does not fit Baldur's Gate (this is a RTwP game with focus on single-player content, for Christ's sake), I wouldn't call WoW (competitive) PvP 'Kid's stuff' - that would be stupid and revealing of ignorance.
While PvP does not fit Baldur's Gate (this is a RTwP game with focus on single-player content, for Christ's sake), I wouldn't call WoW (competitive) PvP 'Kid's stuff' - that would be stupid and revealing of ignorance.
You sure you are talking to me? I don't see where I made any such comment in this thread. On the ignorance side, If I had never tried it I would claim ignorance however my Brother and his whole family are WoW addicts and I did play with them for a year or so...I've seen it and Im not impressed.
While PvP does not fit Baldur's Gate (this is a RTwP game with focus on single-player content, for Christ's sake), I wouldn't call WoW (competitive) PvP 'Kid's stuff' - that would be stupid and revealing of ignorance.
You sure you are talking to me? I don't see where I made any such comment in this thread. On the ignorance side, If I had never tried it I would claim ignorance however my Brother and his whole family are WoW addicts and I did play with them for a year or so...I've seen it and Im not impressed.
WoW isn't the only PvP games (in fact most game, if not all games have a PvP dimension), and there is a tons of ways to handle it. You can't generalize PvP because you have played one game with PvP. PvP experience changes from one game to another.
I don't see how you can ''predict'' that it's going to suck. You haven't played it yet, and you don't even know how it could works (because it doesn't exist yet). How can you judge something that doesn't exist?
All I see is prejudice toward PVP in general, and that's what i call moronic, because it just looks like an irrational hatred toward the most widespread and appreciated multiplayer game mode.
@GueulEclator I do not think you have enough experience in PC gaming. What you seem to be describing is CONSOLE gaming. I have over 500 PC games (200 of them from gog.com) and almost NONE of them have PVP with the exceptions being some of the strategy war games that I have. That is my only explanation for you to claim most games have PvP.
@GueulEclator I do not think you have enough experience in PC gaming. What you seem to be describing is CONSOLE gaming. I have over 500 PC games (200 of them from gog.com) and almost NONE of them have PVP with the exceptions being some of the strategy war games that I have. That is my only explanation for you to claim most games have PvP.
I am an hardcore RTS gamer : starcraft2 , WC3, age of empire 2, Rome total war... I am by definition a PC gamer. BG was the second game I ever played. I never owned a console and I hate the direction that gaming took these days.
Are you seriously saying that PVP is for console? PVP is as widespread on console than on PC. Maybe you should try to take a look around the internet, you are going to be surprise. In fact, there are almost more PVP games on PC than on console.
Internet PVP was also invented on PC. Since until 2005, the console had a limited access to internet.
I sent you back your quote : ''I do not think you have enough experience in PC gaming ''
Guys, think of this ... you can now finally test (and experiment with!) bizarre combinations of party members to your hearts content!
A team of nothing but Bards! Awesome! A team of Gnomes and Half-Orcs! Sweet! A team of Skie clones! Amazeballs!
The list is endless! If you CAN import your team after you've completed BG1, that is totally awesome. How anti-climatic is it when you've beaten Sarevok and you have this pumped up band of merry men? Now you can throw them into a separate campaign and watch their levels rise like my trousers will do on September the 18th.
@GueulEclator If in fact you are a PC gamer I cannot explain your lack of knowing about the multitude of NON PvP games, from 1981 the year I got my First PC to now...there have beeen FAR more games with no PvP than with. Consoles are much much more the arena for PvP past and present....yes SOME games are just ports from consoles and I didn't say there were NO PvP PC games. (I do not Recall Wing Commander 3 (WC3) being PvP)
By the way you do NOT need Internet access to have PvP. Hell we had PvP back when Pinball Machines were the most technical gaming machines.
My first computer was an Apple II+ BUT I did have gaming experience on the TRS80 in 1978 or 1979 and on Main Frames such as the IBM 360. Ive been a Computer gamer for as long as there have been public Computers. Eeesh I hate to even consider how much I have spent on computer gaming....im sure it is well into 6 figures by now....and yeah I know Im old. I am an old old old Computer Geek.
Is it me or are some people perpetually stuck in "Negative Nellie" mode? Not only is the present all doom and gloom but predictions of the future are even doomier and even gloomier based solely on a persons worst fears?
The content are less motivated to bespeak their state of mind, but I'm sure there's plenty of happy-as-clams individuals quietly counting down the days till the release!
I believe it´s a proof of concept to them. If the Black Pits becomes popular, they´ll know there is a market for DLCs with independent adventures , i.e. not directly related to the Bhaalspawn saga, using BG engine. If so they can develop theses adventures, free of contractual limitations as they won´t be changing original content and have one more source of revenue in BG EE and BG 2 EE.
It would also prove that an eventual BG3 with no direct connection to the BG saga would have a receptive market.
I think this is probably right. And as others have noted if they were to add an adventure of this scale (6 hours of gameplay) that would indeed earn unbalancing XP. So if Beamdog is to make more new side adventures of extensive length using this engine, they also are going to have to be stand alone.
Comments
PVP has become the most popular multiplayer mode today. Apparently the developers target a 500K copies sold. Which means that they are appealing to a wide audience, not just hardcore fans.
This game is targeted much more at the wide gamer audience (but not the casual one) who likes PVP and probably wants to see a PVP dimension in most game they play.
While PvP does not fit Baldur's Gate (this is a RTwP game with focus on single-player content, for Christ's sake), I wouldn't call WoW (competitive) PvP 'Kid's stuff' - that would be stupid and revealing of ignorance.
I don't see how you can ''predict'' that it's going to suck. You haven't played it yet, and you don't even know how it could works (because it doesn't exist yet). How can you judge something that doesn't exist?
All I see is prejudice toward PVP in general, and that's what i call moronic, because it just looks like an irrational hatred toward the most widespread and appreciated multiplayer game mode.
BG was the second game I ever played. I never owned a console and I hate the direction that gaming took these days.
Are you seriously saying that PVP is for console? PVP is as widespread on console than on PC. Maybe you should try to take a look around the internet, you are going to be surprise. In fact, there are almost more PVP games on PC than on console.
Internet PVP was also invented on PC. Since until 2005, the console had a limited access to internet.
I sent you back your quote : ''I do not think you have enough experience in PC gaming ''
... guys?
Guys, think of this ... you can now finally test (and experiment with!) bizarre combinations of party members to your hearts content!
A team of nothing but Bards! Awesome!
A team of Gnomes and Half-Orcs! Sweet!
A team of Skie clones! Amazeballs!
The list is endless!
If you CAN import your team after you've completed BG1, that is totally awesome. How anti-climatic is it when you've beaten Sarevok and you have this pumped up band of merry men? Now you can throw them into a separate campaign and watch their levels rise like my trousers will do on September the 18th.
By the way you do NOT need Internet access to have PvP. Hell we had PvP back when Pinball Machines were the most technical gaming machines.
My first computer was an Apple II+ BUT I did have gaming experience on the TRS80 in 1978 or 1979 and on Main Frames such as the IBM 360. Ive been a Computer gamer for as long as there have been public Computers.
Eeesh I hate to even consider how much I have spent on computer gaming....im sure it is well into 6 figures by now....and yeah I know Im old. I am an old old old Computer Geek.