@sextein - you seem to be fundamentally confused about why type of combat system the Infinity games feature. In truth, they are all turn-based games. The term "realtime with paus" was always misleading for them -- a more accurate phrasing would be "turn based in realtime". When you enter combat in BG the game rolls initiative and then your characters act out their turns in that order. When they've done their attack/s they can't act again until the next time it's their turn. The only exception is that movement is a free action.
I would love it if Larian decides to spend millions of dollars on a Baldur's Gate project with real time 5E combat.
They can't make a 5th Ed real-time combat game. 5th Ed is turn based. It's a fundamental part of how the system works. Any deviation from it would be a deviation from 5th Edition DnD.
I'm obviously aware that characters in Baldur's Gate are on a turn based initiative but the game is in real time with pause. This is just semantics. second edition rules are turn based just like 5th edition rules. They can both be incorporated into a real time with pause based video game.
People in this thread need to stop acting like dicks. Like, everybody. Jesus. Is it really that hard to stop the ad hominem BS and actually address what people are talking about?
To that end, let's try to bring the discussion of the gaming market into a bit more focus. I'm not really a gamer, I pass on a LOT of interesting games because I just don't have time to play them. So I don't know a ton about the market. But one thing that worries me about a move to turn-based is that, there don't seem to be that many RTwP games out there. Lots of stuff in the "RPG" bucket are either turn-based (XCOM, Shadowrun, Divinity, Torment, JRPGs) or open-world-FPS-with-levels (Skyrim, Fallout, Witcher), or actual RTS. The magical little merging of turn-based party RPG with RTS-style "wind them and let them go" gameplay that appeared in 1998 was a revelation, that clearly scratched some itch in me (and many others). Are we headed back to 1997, when your only options in the RPG sphere are
- some variant of Quake
- some variant of Pools of Radiance
- some variant of Starcraft
If Baldur's Freaking Gate, of all franchises, doesn't continue to carry the torch of excellent RTwP gameplay, who will? In my casual unfamiliarity with the industry, I know of PoE*, PoE2*, and ... anything?
It seems like multiple Beamdog employee's are in favor of turn based gameplay. Should I assume that they know something that I don't?
What I'm saying.
* (And don't get me started on how PoE refuses to make a tablet port, notwithstanding that there are ports for consoles that have slower hardware and crappier controls, just because they insist on shoving 20GB of needless eye candy into the game... )
Yes, this discussion has become decidedly uncivil. I doubt RTwP is going to permanently die out - the Pathfinder game used it as well. But who knows? Phase-based seems to be dead as well. But maybe that is something to be discussed after the presentation. It might be fun to speculate but with the reveal so close, maybe unnecessary?
@DragonKing I consider Pokemon an rpg. Party members, turn based, leveling. Its got the classic mix. Besides, how many rpgs have over 1000 party members with completely unique sprites and backgrounds?
I don't think Baldur's Gate should be anything but RTwP and if it's going to be Baldur's Gate 3 instead of having a sub title then I have to question how they could even tie it into a story that is already finished. I highly doubt they would allow you to import a character from a 20 year old game to play god games. I have a strong suspicion that the game is going to use the IP to get attention and it's going to copy paste the gameplay of the times to appeal to the mainstream console audience that is needed to pay all of the royalty fees. Obviosuly some people strongly dissagree but there is no proof to the contrary and the writing is on the walls. This game's main purpose is to push 5E rules in a D&D setting.
I feel like I am looking at the subject from a similar angle to how @subtledoctor is looking at it . I'm not a huge gamer anymore either and it's got to do with the types of games that are mainstream and growing up/not having as much time. I've watched things for years and failed to find any relevant RTwP games. My worries have been based on the fact that most of them are indie and crowdfunded and even then, they are slowly turning toward turn based because that is what the mainstream seems to want. If the crowd funded indie teams are going turn based then it's even less likely that a game with BG IP and 5E financial burden is going to ignore the realities of game develpment in order to stay true to an IP that has been dorment for 2 decades.
We'll all find out soon enough. If Larian sticks to the established formula for the BG games, well and good. That would be as it should be, and I will enthusiastically support Larian's game.
If Larian goes against the established formula for the BG games, I wonder how the "Larian is awesome; they won't do anything bad; we all should just trust them" folks will then choose to spin things.
Please watch at 6:00 about combat (mentioning BG as well, btw) and then 47:00 (about TB combat), and then 48:00 for the overall conclusion (bad for @the_sextein , I'm afraid)
We'll all find out soon enough. If Larian sticks to the established formula for the BG games, well and good. That would be as it should be, and I will enthusiastically support Larian's game.
If Larian goes against the established formula for the BG games, I wonder how the "Larian is awesome; they won't do anything bad; we all should just trust them" folks will then choose to spin things.
This is exactly what is discussed in the video, in a way. About an "established formula" and how that evolved now. And this comes from Josh, who has been working in the industry and on these games since late 1990-s early 2000-s.
If Larian goes against the established formula for the BG games, I wonder how the "Larian is awesome; they won't do anything bad; we all should just trust them" folks will then choose to spin things.
At least for me, it probably will only take a quick look at what they're doing to know if I'll have any interest in it or not. I'll be disappointed if not, but then I won't have to waste any more of my time on it and just carry on with the games I do care about.
Please watch at 6:00 about combat (mentioning BG as well, btw) and then 47:00 (about TB combat), and then 48:00 for the overall conclusion (bad for @the_sextein , I'm afraid)
We'll all find out soon enough. If Larian sticks to the established formula for the BG games, well and good. That would be as it should be, and I will enthusiastically support Larian's game.
If Larian goes against the established formula for the BG games, I wonder how the "Larian is awesome; they won't do anything bad; we all should just trust them" folks will then choose to spin things.
This is exactly what is discussed in the video, in a way. About an "established formula" and how that evolved now. And this comes from Josh, who has been working in the industry and on these games since late 1990-s early 2000-s.
I just watched the video. I don't hear that at all. In fact, I see @the_sextein's point being validated here. I hear Josh hedging as much as he can so he doesn't alienate RTwP fans while at the same time saying, yeah I want to move to TB.
Honestly, he talked about how a bunch of people werent happy that their favored combat style wasn't chosen for their franchise and so they relented to it. That's basically it.
People found real time to be too fast and confusing so they dumbed it down. That doesn't mean it sucks and I won't play it. It's just means there are realities when building games for the masses instead a niche crowd and the masses are a mandatory focus point in modern game design if a developer wants to keep making games. I also found the point funny that his boss forced the largest quicksand moment on the games development because of crowdfunding/making a larger audience happy and it bit them in the rear like it always does when it comes to the integrity of a game developers design. Adding TB to POE 2 was purely because of the mainstream demanding it. Right from Joshes mouth.
I do appreciate the videos and I have a lot of respect for Josh. I'm currently enjoying one of his games. I've said everything I have to say on this topic and I'm not going to reiterate over and over again every time someone challenges my views or makes assumptions of them that make no sense. I'll just sit here and wait.
It's great that a new D&D game is being made with the latest rules and hopefully they have a good budget and make a fun game. My views remain unchanged about modern game design and how these games appeal to me as an individual as it is not something I can just change. If I find something of old to be more fun and I don't get overwhelmed or confused by mass combat like SOD's fantastic gameplay then that is simply the way it is for me. If games continue to appeal to the masses they will no doubt continue to disappoint me and gutting IP's that I enjoy to serve the masses will always be annoying to witness. Still, that doesn't mean I can't enjoy a new title, I just don't think it will serve my interests as much as the games of old and the game will not have a lasting legacy like it's legendary predecessors in my opinion. Only time will tell.
Comments
Yummy troll meat cooked over a fire. You should try it sometime.
I'm obviously aware that characters in Baldur's Gate are on a turn based initiative but the game is in real time with pause. This is just semantics. second edition rules are turn based just like 5th edition rules. They can both be incorporated into a real time with pause based video game.
Yes, this discussion has become decidedly uncivil. I doubt RTwP is going to permanently die out - the Pathfinder game used it as well. But who knows? Phase-based seems to be dead as well. But maybe that is something to be discussed after the presentation. It might be fun to speculate but with the reveal so close, maybe unnecessary?
To those wondering about TB vs RtwP in modern games, I recommend to watch the PoE 2 post-mortem (posted just today):
The TB vs RtwP argument is addressed in that video.
I feel like I am looking at the subject from a similar angle to how @subtledoctor is looking at it . I'm not a huge gamer anymore either and it's got to do with the types of games that are mainstream and growing up/not having as much time. I've watched things for years and failed to find any relevant RTwP games. My worries have been based on the fact that most of them are indie and crowdfunded and even then, they are slowly turning toward turn based because that is what the mainstream seems to want. If the crowd funded indie teams are going turn based then it's even less likely that a game with BG IP and 5E financial burden is going to ignore the realities of game develpment in order to stay true to an IP that has been dorment for 2 decades.
If Larian goes against the established formula for the BG games, I wonder how the "Larian is awesome; they won't do anything bad; we all should just trust them" folks will then choose to spin things.
This is exactly what is discussed in the video, in a way. About an "established formula" and how that evolved now. And this comes from Josh, who has been working in the industry and on these games since late 1990-s early 2000-s.
At least for me, it probably will only take a quick look at what they're doing to know if I'll have any interest in it or not. I'll be disappointed if not, but then I won't have to waste any more of my time on it and just carry on with the games I do care about.
I just watched the video. I don't hear that at all. In fact, I see @the_sextein's point being validated here. I hear Josh hedging as much as he can so he doesn't alienate RTwP fans while at the same time saying, yeah I want to move to TB.
I do appreciate the videos and I have a lot of respect for Josh. I'm currently enjoying one of his games. I've said everything I have to say on this topic and I'm not going to reiterate over and over again every time someone challenges my views or makes assumptions of them that make no sense. I'll just sit here and wait.
It's great that a new D&D game is being made with the latest rules and hopefully they have a good budget and make a fun game. My views remain unchanged about modern game design and how these games appeal to me as an individual as it is not something I can just change. If I find something of old to be more fun and I don't get overwhelmed or confused by mass combat like SOD's fantastic gameplay then that is simply the way it is for me. If games continue to appeal to the masses they will no doubt continue to disappoint me and gutting IP's that I enjoy to serve the masses will always be annoying to witness. Still, that doesn't mean I can't enjoy a new title, I just don't think it will serve my interests as much as the games of old and the game will not have a lasting legacy like it's legendary predecessors in my opinion. Only time will tell.
Please continue discussing this game in our new subforum.