So the plot of BG3 involves Illithid invasion. Weren't there refereces to Illithids being up to something in various places in BG2 (most notably Alhoon in the sewers)? I wonder if that's connected.
If Larian is at all smart, they will make the connection.
This I agree on. If they don't, they aren't fans of Baldurs Gate.
If they want this game to have at least a slight resemblance of BG, there are at least three key factors that need to happen.
It should be written from scratch without shitty engines like Unity, or whatever they use these days. Just look at the disaster called Pillars of Eternity, Tides of Numenera, or what have you.
Full isometric view with hand-written backgrounds and models. No 3D revolution. Just look at Neverwinter Nights. When you switch immediately from Infinity Engine game to NN, there is no climate. It's cold and bland.
Real time with pause mode, like all Infitiy games - Planscape, Icewind Dale and Baldur's Gate.
So it means, that they should take what BG is and make it better. Even better, if they would do what BD should have done - take Infinity Engine and improve it, adapt it to today standards, add to it, etc. If source code is gone, they could write it from scratch.
And there is also fight mechanics, story, modding, and so on.
There is just no way, that this game is going to be a worty successor to BG. It probably will be a good game, but they should leave BG out of it.
So the plot of BG3 involves Illithid invasion. Weren't there refereces to Illithids being up to something in various places in BG2 (most notably Alhoon in the sewers)? I wonder if that's connected.
If Larian is at all smart, they will make the connection.
This I agree on. If they don't, they aren't fans of Baldurs Gate.
Well apparently half of the 300 person team had to be told what Baldur's Gate was. So at least half of them aren't.
@raizo Disaster? Pillars was fantastic. So was Tyranny. The unity engine is good.
@raizo Disaster? Pillars was fantastic. So was Tyranny. The unity engine is good.
The only issue I have with Unity in regards to those games is the optimisation is clearly a problem, but then some games that get made on Unity work fantastically.
I have only finished (albiet not 100%, working on that now before going to PoE2) the first PoE and not Tyranny or Numenara, but what I would say is PoE is evidence a game like Baldur's Gate can be made and be great. It's not perfect, I find the way some stats work questionable, but it had so much of its own flavour. It is a pretty dry game and takes a while to get into, but it is immensely rewarding once you do and the writing is great, its a game that really expects far more from the player to consider its themes than most other games these days. I'm dreading PoE2 in that regard because I've not heard good things for its writing, but I'll try to give it a chance.
I really want the 2D backgrounds for BG3, full 3D open world would probably out and out ruin it for me.
@raizo Disaster? Pillars was fantastic. So was Tyranny. The unity engine is good.
The only issue I have with Unity in regards to those games is the optimisation is clearly a problem, but then some games that get made on Unity work fantastically.
I have only finished (albiet not 100%, working on that now before going to PoE2) the first PoE and not Tyranny or Numenara, but what I would say is PoE is evidence a game like Baldur's Gate can be made and be great. It's not perfect, I find the way some stats work questionable, but it had so much of its own flavour. It is a pretty dry game and takes a while to get into, but it is immensely rewarding once you do and the writing is great, its a game that really expects far more from the player to consider its themes than most other games these days. I'm dreading PoE2 in that regard because I've not heard good things for its writing, but I'll try to give it a chance.
I really want the 2D backgrounds for BG3, full 3D open world would probably out and out ruin it for me.
I agree about POE. It had problems with balance and trash mobs at release but it's a pretty good title now that the dust has settled. It's not as good at Baldur's Gate in my opinion but it's a cut above the rest and well worth the time and money.
I'm pretty sure Baldur's Gate 3 has been confirmed to be an upgraded version of the DOS2 game engine which is 3D. I do think that POE has better looking art than any of the 3D games up to this point. Many 3D RPG's have a very generic appearance. The Witcher looks nice but it's pretty much a 3rd person action game and can't be compared to a party based game that requires an elevated view point.
I mean, Tyranny is it's own thing that just happens to use RTwP. But it doesn't seem that wrong to me that the Pillars of Eternity series would have a better claim on the legacy simply because that is explicitly what it set out to do, from the very opening scene of the first game. It was designed from the ground up to be a modern revival of Baldur's Gate an the Infinity Engine. Obviously it's got it's own world and rule-set, but that was the clear goal from the outset. Even the expansions to the first game (The White March) were a nod to Icewind Dale, and Deadfire was in every way following in the steps of BG2 in the way it expanded the world beyond the limited scope of the first game. People can argue whether it succeeded or not, but we all know that in the months leading up to that first game being released, there was a palpable sense of that magic coming back again, because that is how the project was pitched from the outset.
Another option is to use both options: paused real-time and turn-based, so you can play the way you want by choosing at the start of the campaign.
PoE: deadfire did it. The game is the same besides the combat part.
And to be honest, I do not know if it´s because I replayed the game after a pause of several months, but I kinda enjoyed PoE2 more in TB, even in its BETA state.
Put me down for a strong vote against having "both" combat systems. It's tantalizing to think a game can just add an option or a different mode and thus make a game that appeals to everybody, but this comes with a labor cost. More time spent on creating and then balancing different game modes is less labor and money spent on other aspects of the game.
In fact, in playing Deadfire, I think this was one of its downfalls. The team's solution for many issues simply seemed to be to add some knob that players can fiddle with instead of focusing on a extremely polished, singular design.
I'm not completely against some options, but something like two radically different combat modes is going to require an extensive sink of Larian's resources.
The suspense is killing me... and looks like no gameplay Would of been to much to expect so soon I guess. Hopefully we will get something more solid in the coming months.
@ThacoBell Mike Mearls from WotC has just explained why it's BGIII - it's a chapter in the BG saga. And by the BG saga he means all the games about BG (as well as the tabletop adventure coming out this fall - a prequel to BGIII). This is coming officially from WotC.
And just to save everyone else some time: Larian talked about BG3 during the PC Gaming event at E3 and revealed (drumroll please) absolutely nothing new.
There's a chance for gameplay there - as other companies at the show are showing the gameplay!
Just watched it: nothing at all was shown about BGIII. Nor a release date given. Very barebone-ish as far as E3 presentation usually goes. What they did talked about in more detail was concerning the direct PnP sequel to BGII (which, also is designed as the prequel to BGIII).
now i hope i'm wrong. but it feels like they want go wrap up that calar sub plot with this pnp thing. now if that is the case that feels like a middle finger to beamdog and i'd rather just wait until someone finishes their calar mod. because at this point i don't want to consider bg 3 canon.
now i hope i'm wrong. but it feels like they want go wrap up that calar sub plot with this pnp thing. now if that is the case that feels like a middle finger to beamdog and i'd rather just wait until someone finishes their calar mod. because at this point i don't want to consider bg 3 canon.
This is religious, isn't it?
Can we consider this a schism? And who will be the anti-pope?
@ThacoBell Mike Mearls from WotC has just explained why it's BGIII - it's a chapter in the BG saga. And by the BG saga he means all the games about BG (as well as the tabletop adventure coming out this fall - a prequel to BGIII). This is coming officially from WotC.
So, what is it the 3rd chapter to? By this logic, BG2 shouldn't count since the city isn't involved. There are also 2 previous baldur's gate spinoffs, the Dark Alliance series. So this SHOULD be called Baldru's Gate 4 according to the reasoning listed above. Hmmm, but the P&P modules are also considered canon, so there's 2 in 5e now right? So the title is Baldur's Gate 6. This "logic" is spotty and inconsistently applied. Seems to me that its justification after the fact after so many people complained (rightfully!) that this game isn't BG3.
But man, making P&P canon take precedent over the canon of the games that this is supposed to be a sequel to? That's a huge slap in the face to the classic games. The more I hear about this game, the worse it seems like its going to be.
Baldur's Gate 2 wasn't named because it took place there. It was called Baldur's Gate 2 because it was a direct sequel and continuation of the first game, and that is what the first game was named. Yes, the first game happened to have that name because of a locale. At a certain point, the term "Baldur's Gate" came to mean a great deal more than what it did originally. It became a sort of monolithic name that simply meant the purest D&D experience available on an electronic medium. I think everyone is well aware of this, and I wish we'd stop arguing about whether the game having a connection to the city means anything, because we all know it doesn't, and hasn't since Tales of the Sword Coast came out. It's the name of the franchise.
now i hope i'm wrong. but it feels like they want go wrap up that calar sub plot with this pnp thing. now if that is the case that feels like a middle finger to beamdog and i'd rather just wait until someone finishes their calar mod. because at this point i don't want to consider bg 3 canon.
This is religious, isn't it?
Can we consider this a schism? And who will be the anti-pope?
It's refreshing to finally see some meta sense of humor about all this controversy. I also noticed that the controversy bears some resemblance to a historical religious schism. We human beings are funny creatures, are we not, at least until we start attacking each other over our differences? Even then, having a sense of humor about it helps me laugh so I don't cry.
Comments
This I agree on. If they don't, they aren't fans of Baldurs Gate.
So it means, that they should take what BG is and make it better. Even better, if they would do what BD should have done - take Infinity Engine and improve it, adapt it to today standards, add to it, etc. If source code is gone, they could write it from scratch.
And there is also fight mechanics, story, modding, and so on.
There is just no way, that this game is going to be a worty successor to BG. It probably will be a good game, but they should leave BG out of it.
Well apparently half of the 300 person team had to be told what Baldur's Gate was. So at least half of them aren't.
@raizo Disaster? Pillars was fantastic. So was Tyranny. The unity engine is good.
The only issue I have with Unity in regards to those games is the optimisation is clearly a problem, but then some games that get made on Unity work fantastically.
I have only finished (albiet not 100%, working on that now before going to PoE2) the first PoE and not Tyranny or Numenara, but what I would say is PoE is evidence a game like Baldur's Gate can be made and be great. It's not perfect, I find the way some stats work questionable, but it had so much of its own flavour. It is a pretty dry game and takes a while to get into, but it is immensely rewarding once you do and the writing is great, its a game that really expects far more from the player to consider its themes than most other games these days. I'm dreading PoE2 in that regard because I've not heard good things for its writing, but I'll try to give it a chance.
I really want the 2D backgrounds for BG3, full 3D open world would probably out and out ruin it for me.
I agree about POE. It had problems with balance and trash mobs at release but it's a pretty good title now that the dust has settled. It's not as good at Baldur's Gate in my opinion but it's a cut above the rest and well worth the time and money.
I'm pretty sure Baldur's Gate 3 has been confirmed to be an upgraded version of the DOS2 game engine which is 3D. I do think that POE has better looking art than any of the 3D games up to this point. Many 3D RPG's have a very generic appearance. The Witcher looks nice but it's pretty much a 3rd person action game and can't be compared to a party based game that requires an elevated view point.
PoE: deadfire did it. The game is the same besides the combat part.
And to be honest, I do not know if it´s because I replayed the game after a pause of several months, but I kinda enjoyed PoE2 more in TB, even in its BETA state.
In fact, in playing Deadfire, I think this was one of its downfalls. The team's solution for many issues simply seemed to be to add some knob that players can fiddle with instead of focusing on a extremely polished, singular design.
I'm not completely against some options, but something like two radically different combat modes is going to require an extensive sink of Larian's resources.
There's a chance for gameplay there - as other companies at the show are showing the gameplay!
Just watched it: nothing at all was shown about BGIII. Nor a release date given. Very barebone-ish as far as E3 presentation usually goes. What they did talked about in more detail was concerning the direct PnP sequel to BGII (which, also is designed as the prequel to BGIII).
This is religious, isn't it?
Can we consider this a schism? And who will be the anti-pope?
So, what is it the 3rd chapter to? By this logic, BG2 shouldn't count since the city isn't involved. There are also 2 previous baldur's gate spinoffs, the Dark Alliance series. So this SHOULD be called Baldru's Gate 4 according to the reasoning listed above. Hmmm, but the P&P modules are also considered canon, so there's 2 in 5e now right? So the title is Baldur's Gate 6. This "logic" is spotty and inconsistently applied. Seems to me that its justification after the fact after so many people complained (rightfully!) that this game isn't BG3.
But man, making P&P canon take precedent over the canon of the games that this is supposed to be a sequel to? That's a huge slap in the face to the classic games. The more I hear about this game, the worse it seems like its going to be.
https://baldursgate3.game/
It's refreshing to finally see some meta sense of humor about all this controversy. I also noticed that the controversy bears some resemblance to a historical religious schism. We human beings are funny creatures, are we not, at least until we start attacking each other over our differences? Even then, having a sense of humor about it helps me laugh so I don't cry.