Theft is fine? Because unless Beamdog sold the story because they wanted too, that's what it is. Not like this is at all confimed. Anything is just guessing at this point.
Beamdog was denied the chance to make BG3. That's all we can guess. Anything else isn't worth speculating upon.
The thread will stay as there is always the next project.
I'd like to give a small update, considering it was I who wrote the OP here.
PST:EE indeed turned to be the next game if we go back to April 2016.
The second idea in the OP was about a new D&D game (the third idea was about IWD2, but that is known to be ruled out because the source code of the game couldn't be found). Seeing questions about that, and also taking into account it was I who started this thread, I'd like to link the following updates which have become public knowledge over the years.
At one moment in 2016, Dave said: "For the sake of argument, let's pretend we were making a D&D game of some kind." I guess this is the source of comments like the one by @kanisatha "You guys promised us a NEW D&D cRPG several years ago."
I understand that there are people who want to measure us by a benchmark of a D&D game. But in gaming not all the projects see the light of a day.
This really looks like WotC took Beamdog's pitch and gave at least a sketch/outline of it, if not more, to Larian. Kind of a loser move on WotC's part if you ask me, but I'm really glad some of the good ideas Beamdog generates will get all the razzledazzle of a Larian title if that underhanded move on WotC's part is the case.
That said, might not've happened. Just speculating! Sure hope Beamdog comes out swinging with a big unique story of their own sometime in the next few years though, I really want to see what they can do with an isometric RPG title that they build themselves from the ground up!
What we need is either Beamdog making NWN3 for 5e, or
Do you really think, if Beamdog didn't get to develop BG3, they'll be granted Neverwinter Nights 3? No thanks, give that to Obsidian. We KNOW Obsidian can develop original games, as they've churned out a few gems in recent years.
NWN: EE getting beefy expansions that will transform it into a modern looking (3.5e) game.
Uwotm8?
The community already made up for the gaps between 3rd Edition and 3.5, with a plethora of mods. Unless you're making some silly comment about graphics, I don't know what you mean. Also, absolutely no one in the NWN EE community, as a whole, will bother with a NWN EE expansion. They might buy it, but they're be more annoyed than anything, because they'd have to update their multiplayer servers.
NWN2 works way worst on my PC than NWN. And I know at least six other people who has the same complaint - the game is unplayable actually. Despise graphics requirements being attended, the character lags all the time. It keeps moving on the same spot and then jumps to a new location. Annoying as hell.
Not doing it because "Trent doesn't like it" is a very amateur way to conduct business. I want to believe that there is a more solid reason for not doing it.
If "player agency" was a requirement - and based on SoD's lame parley scene - I do understand why Beamdog was cut off.
And considering that SoD's writers were ordered to make the dialogues shallow/short I'm really glad that it is not Beamdog who is doing BG3.
Considering it will be a brand new adventure I can say that Larian already have my money.
And considering that SoD's writers were ordered to make the dialogues shallow/short I'm really glad that it is not Beamdog who is doing BG3.
Looking back on it, I think SoD's writers really screwed the pooch. The game had a lot of potential. But it's sad when you can look at SoD, then hear folks who've never played it before and want to play BG1 & 2 again ask, "Is SoD a requirement?" And you have to respond, "I don't think it is. It'd have been a good game if it wasn't attached to the Baldur's Gate series, but it's not a strong addition to the series. Play it if you want to."
The reason I call that sad is, the Baldur's Gate games remain some of my favorite and most loved games. SoD? I can't honestly say it matches up.
Before accusing someone, think about this: there's a source of inspiration for every artist wanting to illustrate something DnD related - lots of DnD books. The 5E Monster Manual shows an illithid in armor.
And considering that SoD's writers were ordered to make the dialogues shallow/short I'm really glad that it is not Beamdog who is doing BG3.
Looking back on it, I think SoD's writers really screwed the pooch. The game had a lot of potential. But it's sad when you can look at SoD, then hear folks who've never played it before and want to play BG1 & 2 again ask, "Is SoD a requirement?" And you have to respond, "I don't think it is. It'd have been a good game if it wasn't attached to the Baldur's Gate series, but it's not a strong addition to the series. Play it if you want to."
The reason I call that sad is, the Baldur's Gate games remain some of my favorite and most loved games. SoD? I can't honestly say it matches up.
To be fair, I honestly say this about ToB. I can't remember the last time I've played through it. It was always a big let down for me. Some people also skip a lot of TotSC. Some runs, you want to do it all. Other times, you skip a bunch.
To be fair, I honestly say this about ToB. I can't remember the last time I've played through it. It was always a big let down for me. Some people also skip a lot of TotSC. Some runs, you want to do it all. Other times, you skip a bunch.
The major difference is, ToB actual adds an important story closure element. It may take awhile to get to that important choice at the end of ToB, but no one can deny its importance as a story element of the saga. It closed a major plothole.
SoD didn't really add anything of substance; in fact, SoD's story is downright awkward at times, due to the fact that it was trying to squish itself between two different long established games.
And considering that SoD's writers were ordered to make the dialogues shallow/short I'm really glad that it is not Beamdog who is doing BG3.
Looking back on it, I think SoD's writers really screwed the pooch. The game had a lot of potential. But it's sad when you can look at SoD, then hear folks who've never played it before and want to play BG1 & 2 again ask, "Is SoD a requirement?" And you have to respond, "I don't think it is. It'd have been a good game if it wasn't attached to the Baldur's Gate series, but it's not a strong addition to the series. Play it if you want to."
The reason I call that sad is, the Baldur's Gate games remain some of my favorite and most loved games. SoD? I can't honestly say it matches up.
To be fair, I honestly say this about ToB. I can't remember the last time I've played through it. It was always a big let down for me. Some people also skip a lot of TotSC. Some runs, you want to do it all. Other times, you skip a bunch.
the only bits of tosc i skip is durlag's tower as i'm not into those types of dungeons [ same reason i don't do watchers keep] and just stick to the rest of it.
TotSC is bad. The Ice Island plot looks like something coming from a lazy DM "yeah... So he teleports you guys and there is this maze with some wizards and... Oh yeah, you need to get a cloak. Let's do it because my girlfriend wants to watch a movie". But it adds Durlag's Tower and I'm a dungeon crawler. The Werewolf Island is kind of cool - to get in touch with the past is BG's founder is something to cherish.
ToB is bad. I think the power curve is bad planned giving +3 weapons to every John Doe and the damn HLAs - also the fact that it is railroaded AF turns me off. But it gave us Watcher's Keep - a dungeon inline with BG2 challenges. It also puts us in front of the decision if becoming a god or not, a classic ending for D&D (the first one) parties - all the way to Lv 1 to Godhood.
SoD is bad. It would be ok if it was a new title (a la Icewind Dale) but as a BG story it is kind of lost. Nothing interesting is added (the Temple of Bhaal is cool, but too short to be considered a proper dungeon), the story is more railroaded than the one presented in ToB. I have the feeling that I took my Ravenloft character and started to play with him in a Dark Sun campaign; cool, better than putting my character on a shelf, but totally out of place. Also the writing is... IDK. Odd? Looks like no one really wants to talk, the feeling I have is that the NPCs are as bored with the campaign as I was.
Icewind Dale could make a better narrative with basically a druid, a narrator and some loose dialogues.
Defeating Irenicus gives almost as much story closure -- as in I could imagine charname living their life presented in the epilogue endings immediately after dealing with Irenicus -- with ToB only adding the ascend or not ascend decision in its endgame.
I mean, it doesn't though. The saga isn't ended until "Ascend or Not Ascend". It's a massive plothole.
Now, is ToB "good"? No, it's not. It's boring and feels rushed. But it does complete the story. That has been my only point about ToB.
Hmm. I like SoD, and it has become canon BG in my book.
I would have loved to have seen the BG3 announcement coming from Beamdog and not Larian - it would be a guarantee for quality content and respect for the history/heritage imho.
But since that door is closed I hope for new expansions for NWN:ee. Perhaps an epic adventure for level 1 characters ending as epic adventures. A compelling new story with a mind flayer in a paladin armour? The
TotSC is bad. The Ice Island plot looks like something coming from a lazy DM "yeah... So he teleports you guys and there is this maze with some wizards and... Oh yeah, you need to get a cloak. Let's do it because my girlfriend wants to watch a movie". But it adds Durlag's Tower and I'm a dungeon crawler. The Werewolf Island is kind of cool - to get in touch with the past is BG's founder is something to cherish.
I wouldn't called it bad as you said yourself that you like 2/3 of it
And considering that SoD's writers were ordered to make the dialogues shallow/short I'm really glad that it is not Beamdog who is doing BG3.
Looking back on it, I think SoD's writers really screwed the pooch. The game had a lot of potential. But it's sad when you can look at SoD, then hear folks who've never played it before and want to play BG1 & 2 again ask, "Is SoD a requirement?" And you have to respond, "I don't think it is. It'd have been a good game if it wasn't attached to the Baldur's Gate series, but it's not a strong addition to the series. Play it if you want to."
The reason I call that sad is, the Baldur's Gate games remain some of my favorite and most loved games. SoD? I can't honestly say it matches up.
To be fair, I honestly say this about ToB. I can't remember the last time I've played through it. It was always a big let down for me. Some people also skip a lot of TotSC. Some runs, you want to do it all. Other times, you skip a bunch.
the only bits of tosc i skip is durlag's tower as i'm not into those types of dungeons [ same reason i don't do watchers keep] and just stick to the rest of it.
I started skipping Werewolf Island after Siege of Dragonspear added a bug where a second greater wolfwere spawns just outside the starting town, long before you can get the weapons of Balduran to deal with it.
Comments
I mean, it's published in Xanathar's, I'm hoping the game launches with all official published stuff. Or maybe they'll let it get modded in.
Pretty sure Obsidian owns the rights to NWN2. Beside, Trent doesn't like it. I don't think its ever going to happen.
KOTOR 3? That would be awesome....
That said, they'd have get approval from Lucas Arts, which is owned by Disney now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LucasArts
Oh, it's published? I misremembed. That makes it a tiny bit more likely to be included.
This really looks like WotC took Beamdog's pitch and gave at least a sketch/outline of it, if not more, to Larian. Kind of a loser move on WotC's part if you ask me, but I'm really glad some of the good ideas Beamdog generates will get all the razzledazzle of a Larian title if that underhanded move on WotC's part is the case.
That said, might not've happened. Just speculating! Sure hope Beamdog comes out swinging with a big unique story of their own sometime in the next few years though, I really want to see what they can do with an isometric RPG title that they build themselves from the ground up!
it also does not need one. nwn 2 does not have as many issues running on modern pcs as 1 did.
What we need is either Beamdog making NWN3 for 5e, or NWN: EE getting beefy expansions that will transform it into a modern looking (3.5e) game.
Uwotm8?
The community already made up for the gaps between 3rd Edition and 3.5, with a plethora of mods. Unless you're making some silly comment about graphics, I don't know what you mean. Also, absolutely no one in the NWN EE community, as a whole, will bother with a NWN EE expansion. They might buy it, but they're be more annoyed than anything, because they'd have to update their multiplayer servers.
Not doing it because "Trent doesn't like it" is a very amateur way to conduct business. I want to believe that there is a more solid reason for not doing it.
If "player agency" was a requirement - and based on SoD's lame parley scene - I do understand why Beamdog was cut off.
And considering that SoD's writers were ordered to make the dialogues shallow/short I'm really glad that it is not Beamdog who is doing BG3.
Considering it will be a brand new adventure I can say that Larian already have my money.
The reason I call that sad is, the Baldur's Gate games remain some of my favorite and most loved games. SoD? I can't honestly say it matches up.
At least ToB gives Charname's journey a closure.
SoD didn't really add anything of substance; in fact, SoD's story is downright awkward at times, due to the fact that it was trying to squish itself between two different long established games.
the only bits of tosc i skip is durlag's tower as i'm not into those types of dungeons [ same reason i don't do watchers keep] and just stick to the rest of it.
ToB is bad. I think the power curve is bad planned giving +3 weapons to every John Doe and the damn HLAs - also the fact that it is railroaded AF turns me off. But it gave us Watcher's Keep - a dungeon inline with BG2 challenges. It also puts us in front of the decision if becoming a god or not, a classic ending for D&D (the first one) parties - all the way to Lv 1 to Godhood.
SoD is bad. It would be ok if it was a new title (a la Icewind Dale) but as a BG story it is kind of lost. Nothing interesting is added (the Temple of Bhaal is cool, but too short to be considered a proper dungeon), the story is more railroaded than the one presented in ToB. I have the feeling that I took my Ravenloft character and started to play with him in a Dark Sun campaign; cool, better than putting my character on a shelf, but totally out of place. Also the writing is... IDK. Odd? Looks like no one really wants to talk, the feeling I have is that the NPCs are as bored with the campaign as I was.
Icewind Dale could make a better narrative with basically a druid, a narrator and some loose dialogues.
Now, is ToB "good"? No, it's not. It's boring and feels rushed. But it does complete the story. That has been my only point about ToB.
I would have loved to have seen the BG3 announcement coming from Beamdog and not Larian - it would be a guarantee for quality content and respect for the history/heritage imho.
But since that door is closed I hope for new expansions for NWN:ee. Perhaps an epic adventure for level 1 characters ending as epic adventures. A compelling new story with a mind flayer in a paladin armour? The
I wouldn't called it bad as you said yourself that you like 2/3 of it
I started skipping Werewolf Island after Siege of Dragonspear added a bug where a second greater wolfwere spawns just outside the starting town, long before you can get the weapons of Balduran to deal with it.