The future of Infinity Engine
Raggie
Member Posts: 23
I know it's old... I know it's overused. But if Beamdog continued to publish remastered version of all Infinity Engine games and then went on to make a row of new ones, I'd be pretty happy. Anyone else?
1
Comments
Like @jcompton, I too would be horrified. The Infinity engine, to me, is a classic. When I first heard news of the Enhanced Edition of Baldur's Gate, I was appalled and filled with discomfort and almost a feeling of violation. Who dares "enhance" the Mona Lisa? It's only after spending time researching the team behind the Enhanced Edition that my shock and discomfort began to settle.
The promise to not tamper with the core game is what reduced my feelings to mere skepticism, which will remain until I both play and complete BG:EE. The same I shall say for BG2:EE.
If both Enhanced Editions are completed successfully while holding true to the promise to not tamper with the core, then I imagine my attitude towards a new line of Infinity Engine games may change slightly, but that depends strongly of the content of that new line.
Will this new line of games be in AD&D 2.0, as it should always be? Will the feel of the game be true to that of the Baldur's Gate saga and Icewind Dale, even if the new line is not directly related to them? Will the music make me feel like I am playing an Infinity Engine game? Who is calling the shots on it? A cash-grabbing company, or a team of passionate designers?
I would need all of the above questions answered to put myself at ease, and I am sure that some fans of the Baldur's Gate saga feel the same way. There are many threads and posts on this forum and on other websites involving an interest in seeing Baldur's Gate 3, and I hope that game never exists. Baldur's Gate is the story of the Bhaalspawn. The title may not imply that, but it's a fact nonetheless. That story came to an end in Baldur's Gate 2: Throne of Bhaal.
If there is a chance of adding a new line of Infinity Engine games, they must not tamper with the originals.
At any rate, why not a new line of IE games? It's a good engine and I think they could still make good games out of it (not just these actiony "cinematic experiences" they make these days), even if they would be different than the originals. It's just an engine, not a religious relic.
I understand the business model to push the latest product on the shelf (which figures to be Edition Next). But customization has always been integral to PnP D&D. That D&D PnP market is already divided up by preferences for earlier editions--doesn't that tell us something? Also, what works well for a CRPG may not work well for tabletop and vice versa. IE has proven to be near-perfection for a CRPG.
Beamdog is taking the gamble that it can demonstrate the market possibilities for perfecting an old PC game that is already great, and seeing how it sells via new platforms. We already know how BG runs on a computer--sales there should be at least good. I'm sure it will be a great console game, as well. The real test (as I see it) is how well the game translates to tablets and phones. I'm not sure if that share of its market will make or break it. But sales will probably have to perform at least reasonably well.
Anyway, assuming that Infinity gets perfected via EE and sales are good on enough platforms, if then enough BG series fans cry loud enough for BG3 to use the same ruleset as Infinity, then why not give the customer what they want? The customer is always right.
jcompton is horrified by the technical implications: The IE is very old, very limited in what it can do, very hard to code (you may have have heard Trent Oster's cries of pain on Twitter), and very hard to mod (compared to newer games like NWN or the Elder Scrolls series). Sometimes trying to build upon something old is harder than building something new from scratch.
Should Baldur's Gate 3 or any other new RPG be made it would make more sense to develop a new engine from the ground up.
Trent Oster for reference: http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/comment/40866/#Comment_40866
This thread, afterall, is about opinion (Unless I missed something), and I decided to share mine. It is not a decree that all must abide by, but rather my personal preference on the matter. I personally do not use mods, and I personally do not want to see the Infinity Engine taken beyond what it was designed best for (Another opinion of mine): AD&D 2.0
A new engine will be designed for BG 3, and it will retain the feel of the old Infinity games without the cumbersome 'features' of the Infinity Engine.
Parts could be replaced. Probably the scripting, yeah. But otherwise this isn't a total catastrophe.
If Overhaul has real guts, they would develop a new engine that is the spiritual successor to the IE, a 2D, pre-rendered, isometric system, almost identical in every way to IE, but far more customizable and capable of advanced NWN-style multiplayer DMing tools. Sorry folks, but computer D&D was MEANT to be played in an isometric, tactical setting. None of this over-the-shoulder, or first-person bullcrap we get today.
I fear, however, that Overhaul will bow down to the masses and create yet another 3D stinker like Dragon Age or Mass Effect and slap on the "spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate" BS. Bleh...
maybe you should look in the retirement homes
1. Burned out and rendered useless by the vagaries of the game development industry, or
2. Well-paid senior artists and managers who would command excessive prices to be lured into service creating goony clown-colored image sequences.
On the other hand, entry-level people who can rig up very nice character model animations which can be placed directly into (insert sensible modern 3D rendering system here) are being churned out by the thousands by art and vocational schools (not to mention self-teaching) every month.
So i would not want them to do a whole new game based on it and rather focus on developing a good base tech thats on par with todays standard.
Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil was an amazing engine after fan patches. But that game was severely limited content wise. I wouldn't want to see a repeat of that mistake.
In BG you can attach 5 scripts on a creature.
In MW, only one.
In BG you can create an infinite number of various spells.
In MW, there are only 50 effects (and most of them are the same) for create new spells.
In BG you can make a good battle script for a caster.
In MW, it's impossible
In BG you can create a cutscene.
In MW, it's impossible.
In BG you can customize a class (add innate spells or abilities).
In MW, it's impossible.
Very old ? Very limited ? ^^
I believe if you think its doable you should give your list of sprite experts to @Jcompton
We were just discussing that finding people who were skilled is near impossible.
Technology evolved and IE is OLLLLD and it brings with it things like lost skill sets and lack of utilization of modern effects and hardware. Morrowind is ALSO very old, lets compare to newer technologies and you will see the limitations.
All your points are much more enhanced in Neverwinter Nights 1 and 2. There are scripts experts for NWN your jaw would drop in a bottomless hole;)
The OGL's terms make it impossible (by *design*) to produce any software *whatsoever*.
I checked.
With the primary author of the OGL.