Have the folks at Beamdog ever talked about making a new D&D game? If they did, what would you want?
Terin
Member Posts: 2
The Baldur's Gate games obviously made a *HUGE* impact on RPG's in video-games, and still features some of the best voice-acting I've ever had the pleasure of listening to. The "Enhanced Editions" have been phenomenal, and brought a lot of great quality-of-life improvements to some already-amazing games.
I'm curious, though, if there's ever been any discussion on whether the folks at Beamdog might consider making an all-new game? And if they did, what sort of stuff would you guys want to see?
For my part, personally I've always found it incredibly difficult to manage multiple characters, and to be blunt, I still find Magic to be super confusing. I'd personally really dig an option whether my teammates play totally by themselves, while I only have to worry about managing my own character (including just setting party members to auto-follow my main dude).
Beyond that, it would be cool to try and incorporate some genuinely new classes, or maybe even just flesh-out some of the "Unearthed Arcana" stuff? For example, I personally love the idea of a "Phoenix Sorcerer", or maybe even a "Martial Artist" that's super dark and violent, sort of like Akuma from the Street Fighter series (ie. "martial artists that practice self-perfectionism, see combat at the ultimate form of art, and even fight an opportunity to push themselves further").
I'm also a huge fan of having multiple love-interests to pursue, and not just "Here's the 'good' one, this one's evil, the other one is hot but vain, etc". Something BioWare was kind of bad about in some of their recent RPG's, though, is that there was no option to just "be straight", so I felt like I had to purposely be mean towards my buddies to prevent them from getting romantic. So, maybe not have characters flirt with you unless you sort of prompt it a little more?
Beyond that... I'd kind of dig a whole new art-style. Instead of going for photorealism, I wouldn't mind things being a bit more stylized. Doesn't have to be goofy or over-exaggerated like Warcraft or anything, but just more discernible silhouettes from a distance. Or maybe a more zoomed-in kind of view?
Anyways, that's just me! What about you guys? What would your personal wish-lists look like, assuming they get the chance to forge a new D&D game?
I'm curious, though, if there's ever been any discussion on whether the folks at Beamdog might consider making an all-new game? And if they did, what sort of stuff would you guys want to see?
For my part, personally I've always found it incredibly difficult to manage multiple characters, and to be blunt, I still find Magic to be super confusing. I'd personally really dig an option whether my teammates play totally by themselves, while I only have to worry about managing my own character (including just setting party members to auto-follow my main dude).
Beyond that, it would be cool to try and incorporate some genuinely new classes, or maybe even just flesh-out some of the "Unearthed Arcana" stuff? For example, I personally love the idea of a "Phoenix Sorcerer", or maybe even a "Martial Artist" that's super dark and violent, sort of like Akuma from the Street Fighter series (ie. "martial artists that practice self-perfectionism, see combat at the ultimate form of art, and even fight an opportunity to push themselves further").
I'm also a huge fan of having multiple love-interests to pursue, and not just "Here's the 'good' one, this one's evil, the other one is hot but vain, etc". Something BioWare was kind of bad about in some of their recent RPG's, though, is that there was no option to just "be straight", so I felt like I had to purposely be mean towards my buddies to prevent them from getting romantic. So, maybe not have characters flirt with you unless you sort of prompt it a little more?
Beyond that... I'd kind of dig a whole new art-style. Instead of going for photorealism, I wouldn't mind things being a bit more stylized. Doesn't have to be goofy or over-exaggerated like Warcraft or anything, but just more discernible silhouettes from a distance. Or maybe a more zoomed-in kind of view?
Anyways, that's just me! What about you guys? What would your personal wish-lists look like, assuming they get the chance to forge a new D&D game?
0
Comments
Personally, I'd love to see something in Ravenloft, or maybe something witha strong Cletic flavor.
1653 and counting when D&D 5e (Monster Manual) was released to the public and still no RPG D&D game (digital board games and Idle games do not count) on its rule set.
Come on WotC. FEED ME.
Hah, to each their own! I'm going to try a fresh playthrough of BG2 again soon, so maybe as I grow more comfortable with using magic I'll be able to appreciate the combat system more? I typically just treat everyone like my character's "support".
Truth be told, though, if I could snap my fingers to make the perfect game? I'd want the depth, setting, and superb voice-acting of Baldur's Gate II, but with a gameplay style a bit closer to the recent XCOM games. Firaxis is clearing doing their own thing (and I feel bad for saying this, but I think that new "mutant animals" thing is going to be a huge flop), but Beamdog seems capable of something like that.
Almost a "Final Fantasy Tactics" vibe, but with better storytelling.
sword coast legends not doing so well may be the main reason we have not gotten many dnd games.
I do like the BG style, though, with a party under your control. I don't have a preference for rule set, since I imagine there would have to be tweaking anyway (thanks to a computer DM)
I also WOULD like to see romances be included in the game, provided that they're well-written and allow for believable romantic development (like BG2. I appreciate the effort Beamdog put in for SoD, but there really wasn't enough writing for the various romances to really make them feel worthwhile.)
Romance? Romance? When i first started playing, way back in the good old days of basic, we were a bunch of preteen boys with no desire for romances.Then, later, when one would get a girl friend, she would play and he would make her character his lover. It was only to keep other players from flirting with her through her character, to control her actions. It would distract from the role playing, not enhance it. I don't believe it enhances anything in video games either, unless it is integral to the story.
I actually do not pause that often, no. What I typically do is when the battle starts, I size up my opposition and assign instructions to my party members. The fighter types usually have scripts that make them attack the nearest enemy once their target is dead, so they're very much like "fire and forget" missiles that I don't pay much attention to UNLESS more enemies show up and I need to rush a warrior over to some high priority enemy. I always disable all spellcasting AI, so spells are targeted manually, but in most battles that just consists of the Cleric casting Prayer/Recitation or the odd Flame Strike when the mood strikes me. My Mage is the one that I babysit the most (they usually have AI completely disabled). My Thief and Ranger I usually just equip with ranged weapons with instructions to target enemy spellcasters, after which they can attack whichever targets they want.
The end result is that most battles tend to be over in a few rounds, so 10 - 20 seconds of real time. In BG-style games, I find that most of the time spent dealing with combat is buffing before the fight and then healing up afterwards.
I won't deny that ToEE did very well in bringing a turn-based D&D experience to the computer (particularly with grappling rules, something which no other D&D game has tried to implement, I believe), but something about its combat just didn't sit well with me. Like I mentioned above, having to wait for 8 zombies to slowly shuffle across a room towards you before your characters can take their next turn (you can't even queue up the next set of targets or actions for your characters while waiting) just felt aggravating.
As for romances and roleplaying, your experience may vary. *shrug* I find it very hard to experience true immersion when playing with other human players, whether it's in tabletop, multiplayer RPGs or MMOs. Invariably somebody will start talking about real life stuff, a movie they've seen recently, problems they're having with work, medical issues etc. And before you know it, everybody at the table is distracted. That's fine for a tabletop game (which I should mention that I also play at frequently), but it's not the kind of deep immersive roleplaying that I want when I sit down with a CRPG, like getting lost in a book's story. Perhaps romances don't improve that feeling for you, but they do for me (and I dare say a lot of other players too) when it comes to giving your character greater investment and attachment to this world you're diving into. (In fact, there's this longstanding joke/rule in my tabletop group that our characters should all be orphans and have no romantic entanglements, because otherwise we can definitely expect our loved ones to get attacked or blackmailed at some point. While from a metagaming perspective, it's entirely true, but it doesn't make for very believable characters in a story.)
As for setting, I'd leave Planescape aside as it would automatically set the new game against PS:T which is a heavy burden to bear (a pity, however, as the Planescape setting is amazing.)
Dark Sun would be great, though other areas of Faerun or even Maztica, Zakhara, or even Eberron could be very interesting.
Sword Coast Legends is barely 5e. Like, it has the same names for some classes and spells but almost everything else is different. I bought into the hype but was quickly disappointed when I learned it didn't use the PnP rule set.
Romance between PC's is specifically my issue. A love interest is often a great story device for DM's to use in many ways. But when it's between player characters then they take the story away from the DM and the quest at hand. In CRPG'S the dialogues are to limiting and usually cheesy and unbelievable to me.
I'm flexible on turn based v. Real time. I'm in no hurry, I'll just freshen up my drink and then kill me some zombies.
i never played pnp dnd, so i am not biased toward it in any way, for me the reason to have a new turn based game would not be "cause dnd is turn based", but because the turn based computer games imo are very different from true real time ones, in them strategy count much more then sharp reflexes.
when i play bg2 i have almost always different autopauses on, and i use often he pause, micromanaging my party, for me to play it is something similar to playing a chess game, that is also turn based. when i play not turn based games i have a completely different experience and i play them in a completely different way.
it would be possible to play chess in a not turn based way, the player that think and move faster has advantages, but doing it too fast can lead you to a bad position. and if your rook is trying to capture my queen, i can be fast enough to move it in a safe position. it would be a possible way to play chess that way, maybe some rules should be added, like i can not counter your rook capturing it with my queen that is under attack. but it would be a completely different game with a completely different feeling.
i like the feeling of those turn based computer games.
There are times when you can get in a jam with real time, and there are even times when you have to smash the pause button awfully fast, but overall I really enjoy the fact that once you get everyone set up, you can sit back and watch the action. Which is why I think real time with pause is the perfect compromise. Of all the games I've played, I think that is my favorite approach.
Of course, I also enjoyed the pure real time of Ultima Underworld, so maybe I'm more biased to real time than I think.
my tactical planning is done before the battle.
Beamdog, with its background in CRPGs, would be an ideal company to do it - if they would get around to doing it.
See this is exactly how I see it! So I just cannot understand people's attraction for TB. And TB is by far the worst characteristic a game can have that is immersion-breaking. I mean who in the world tries to kill one another by politely taking turns?!
Well, as I said above in a post, I am hopeful that Brian Fargo's reveal a few months ago that he knows that someone is making a BG game turns out to be true.
I have found it more difficult to maintain immersion being locked into a small selection of dialogue options, watching toons just stand there waiting for their next action while other toons may be attacking or casting or moving about for some reason. But this is a limitation of the tech we all have to live with.
It's interesting you say this, because all of us in the tabletop group I used to play with back in grad school a long time ago were constantly trying to find ways to "fix" the immersion-breaking and even logic-breaking nature of taking turns in our game. So we always allowed players to go simultaneously with others if they wished, and "initiative" was determined not by luck but by character-specific attributes and positioning. And most importantly, if you try to coordinate your actions with your party mates by calling out actions to one another, it was assumed the enemy also knew what you were intending to do.
Hope they can make the numbers work for at least a modest new NWN module using new assets to show off the upgrades.
So everybody talked all at once? All rolled dice simultaneously? Or did each announce their actions one by one, and then dice rolls, and then the results of all actions applied? Or some other version of these? I'm confused how this would be any different regarding immersion.
'Coordinate actions by calling out actions to one another"? Weren't you telling the DM your actions? Couldn't the other players hear that and determine their actions from that? I'm really not seeing how this system aided gameplay, let alone immersion. Also, it's verisimilitude...simulated truth aka the suspension of disbelief. This does not come from the game mechanic but from the DM. A good story told properly by a DM who is comfortable with the rules and can keep the game flowing at a natural pace, well it just sucks you in. Computers are amazingly inferior at this, what with no imagination and all.
EDIT: It was really late when I wrote this. If it seems overly confrontational, just blame exhaustion and please accept my apology. However you enjoy playing is fine, as long as you're having fun. Which I assume you are, or you wouldn't be playing.