When will Beamdog close the Soultaker Plot hole they created?
Soultaker Plot hole is really disturbing. It can be closed by in the end of SoA easily. Or better, let charname find dagger in Chateau Irenicus and send it with help of Cowled mages or Ribald or someone else to Baldurs Gate.
@Cabal82 Its even worse than you think, because Beamdog went so far as to have a questline to resolve in BG2 planned and outlined, before just deciding not to do it.
@Cabal82 Its even worse than you think, because Beamdog went so far as to have a questline to resolve in BG2 planned and outlined, before just deciding not to do it.
@Cabal82 Its even worse than you think, because Beamdog went so far as to have a questline to resolve in BG2 planned and outlined, before just deciding not to do it.
@Cabal82 Its even worse than you think, because Beamdog went so far as to have a questline to resolve in BG2 planned and outlined, before just deciding not to do it.
I think WotC nixed it more than Beamdog though.
Hard to tell.
We got the story covered in the next issue of Wild Surge out next week directly from one of the people most responsible for putting the gaping plot hole there in the first place.
I won't be asking for Soultaker resolution anymore. It hasn't happend because WotC is actively forbidding any expansions for the EE games. Because of Larian's game.
Not to worry @ThacoBell I will do the asking for us then . I think the situation may be less grim.
In a recent AskBeamdog, Luke said that Beamdog would consider taking on community mods and sell them as DLC’s - with the maintenance and all the legality stuff to boot. This mostly for consoles and mobile platforms (where there is a potential market). It would off course require consent and collaboration from the author - and a joint venture profit split. All manageable in a contractual form.
I may be naive (a wishful thinker at least), but I see the newly stable and less hassle versions of SCS and ascension as an omen of things to come - and I heartily welcome it. I would love to see them as DLC for my mobile.
I’d reckon If any took on closing the soultaker plot with a plot as described in the WildSurge, it would seem as a perfect mod for a community DLC as well. As I see it Beamdog has yet to deny the possibility of that loophole (or close it). I see the sudden leak of the plot as an indication of the opposite in fact.... well a vague indication.
So I will not willing to abandon hope yet. It may be far fetched, but I can live with that (inside my plastic bubble with a tin foil hat).
A DLC that made the game adhere more closely to P&P rules (except the fun-killing ones, such as racial level caps or P&P Spell Immunity) would be something I’d put money toward. However, it would have to be a full package, i.e. include enemy A.I. that actually makes intelligent use of the P&P abilities. Kind of like aTWEAKS, but for the whole game.
Let me just comment that Foley probably doesn’t have the time to do this and stated so in the interview.
He also never gave it any thought until I actually asked him so expectations of him working on this should be below low.
Let me also state that allegedly @camdawg is attempting to work on a mod about it, but since he personally hasn’t announced it, the community shouldn’t hold him too it but we are here to support him if he is.
In the meantime, @LavaDelVortel has released their own take on the soultaker plot in their mod here. Its their own take on resolving soultaker and is worth a look.
I won't be asking for Soultaker resolution anymore. It hasn't happend because WotC is actively forbidding any expansions for the EE games. Because of Larian's game.
Sounds exactly like something WotC would do, yeah.
Maybe we should just starting hounding Beamdog with "Is WotC letting you make expansions for the EEs yet?" instead. Surely it can't be a permanent policy.
Maybe we should just starting hounding Beamdog with "Is WotC letting you make expansions for the EEs yet?" instead. Surely it can't be a permanent policy.
WotC has a pretty strong "Out with the old!" policy.
There used to be lots of tools out there for 3.5, including a program called e-tools that was an official 3.5 character builder. When 4th came out, all those 3.5 tools and documents disappeared almost overnight, following lots of take-down requests from WotC. Even e-tools, which at one point was the official character builder, could not be sold anymore.
Maybe we should just starting hounding Beamdog with "Is WotC letting you make expansions for the EEs yet?" instead. Surely it can't be a permanent policy.
WotC has a pretty strong "Out with the old!" policy.
There used to be lots of tools out there for 3.5, including a program called e-tools that was an official 3.5 character builder. When 4th came out, all those 3.5 tools and documents disappeared almost overnight, following lots of take-down requests from WotC. Even e-tools, which at one point was the official character builder, could not be sold anymore.
Yup. WotC not wanting any additional content for old BG in order to avoid distracting from BG 3 and 5th edition is in line with their past policy of wanting to push the latest edition exclusively. And they probably do not want another SoD like controversy (silly as it was) with the name "Baldur's Gate" at this point, when they are busy hyping BG 3.
So even without evidence, WotC decisions being the cause for not releasing the new DLC was something I assume it is probably true.
As an aside, this also means that Beamdog & employees likely have a very strong incentive not to anything that is less that enthusiastic about BG 3 and Larian.
Also WotC wisely does not give out blanket/exclusive license like the Star Wars license for EA. They approve individual products - so:
They can multiple companies working on games based on their IP
WotC can block development on specific games and specific DLCs without affecting other products
SSI used to have an exclusive D&D license in the TST days.
Which is probably directly related to why WotC doesn't give out exclusive/blanket licenses anymore...
Maybe? But there weren't many good or successful D&D games in the first years after SSI lost the license, compared to the Gold Box Era.
I'm under the impression that you need the license to both develop and release, which would put the start of the Baldur's Gate development at the same time as SSI still having the OK to finish work on Darksun: Crimson Sands (if that game doesn't count, Ravenloft: Stone Prophet was 1995)
Also WotC wisely does not give out blanket/exclusive license like the Star Wars license for EA. They approve individual products - so:
They can multiple companies working on games based on their IP
WotC can block development on specific games and specific DLCs without affecting other products
SSI used to have an exclusive D&D license in the TST days.
Which is probably directly related to why WotC doesn't give out exclusive/blanket licenses anymore...
Maybe? But there weren't many good or successful D&D games in the first years after SSI lost the license, compared to the Gold Box Era.
I'm under the impression that you need the license to both develop and release, which would put the start of the Baldur's Gate development at the same time as SSI still having the OK to finish work on Darksun: Crimson Sands (if that game doesn't count, Ravenloft: Stone Prophet was 1995)
I think SSI still retained a license, just not an exclusive one. They lost the exclusive license in 1994. But yes, BG was started in 95.
But I think we would not have lost much if TSR had just transferred the license from SSI to Interplay. Though BG was a much bigger success than anticipated.
I won't be asking for Soultaker resolution anymore. It hasn't happend because WotC is actively forbidding any expansions for the EE games. Because of Larian's game.
Does this also mean that we will never ever be able to get the new SoD NPC:s in BG2EE ? I had dared to hope that they would become available for purchase as a NPC-bundle in the future...
They were able to add rasaad/Dorn/Neera so I don't think new NPCs are considered expansions. It's not impossible, I would say, for that to happen. I do think it's unlikely that Beamdog has that on their to do list.
Comments
Soultaker Plot hole is really disturbing. It can be closed by in the end of SoA easily. Or better, let charname find dagger in Chateau Irenicus and send it with help of Cowled mages or Ribald or someone else to Baldurs Gate.
I think WotC nixed it more than Beamdog though.
Hard to tell.
We got the story covered in the next issue of Wild Surge out next week directly from one of the people most responsible for putting the gaping plot hole there in the first place.
The worst that can happen if you ask something is rejection.
do we have an eta for
- next patch 2.6?
- the wild surge issue?
The 2.6 patch is under the QA testing. There's no ETA but I think we're talking about weeks til the release.
Soon. When Tilly has time to post it.
https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/76324/wild-surge-issue-16-goblins
In a recent AskBeamdog, Luke said that Beamdog would consider taking on community mods and sell them as DLC’s - with the maintenance and all the legality stuff to boot. This mostly for consoles and mobile platforms (where there is a potential market). It would off course require consent and collaboration from the author - and a joint venture profit split. All manageable in a contractual form.
I may be naive (a wishful thinker at least), but I see the newly stable and less hassle versions of SCS and ascension as an omen of things to come - and I heartily welcome it. I would love to see them as DLC for my mobile.
I’d reckon If any took on closing the soultaker plot with a plot as described in the WildSurge, it would seem as a perfect mod for a community DLC as well. As I see it Beamdog has yet to deny the possibility of that loophole (or close it). I see the sudden leak of the plot as an indication of the opposite in fact.... well a vague indication.
So I will not willing to abandon hope yet. It may be far fetched, but I can live with that (inside my plastic bubble with a tin foil hat).
He also never gave it any thought until I actually asked him so expectations of him working on this should be below low.
Let me also state that allegedly @camdawg is attempting to work on a mod about it, but since he personally hasn’t announced it, the community shouldn’t hold him too it but we are here to support him if he is.
Sounds exactly like something WotC would do, yeah.
WotC has a pretty strong "Out with the old!" policy.
There used to be lots of tools out there for 3.5, including a program called e-tools that was an official 3.5 character builder. When 4th came out, all those 3.5 tools and documents disappeared almost overnight, following lots of take-down requests from WotC. Even e-tools, which at one point was the official character builder, could not be sold anymore.
Yup. WotC not wanting any additional content for old BG in order to avoid distracting from BG 3 and 5th edition is in line with their past policy of wanting to push the latest edition exclusively. And they probably do not want another SoD like controversy (silly as it was) with the name "Baldur's Gate" at this point, when they are busy hyping BG 3.
So even without evidence, WotC decisions being the cause for not releasing the new DLC was something I assume it is probably true.
As an aside, this also means that Beamdog & employees likely have a very strong incentive not to anything that is less that enthusiastic about BG 3 and Larian.
WotC is only blocking classic BG content. NWN is still fine. Until they decide to make a NWN3.
SSI used to have an exclusive D&D license in the TST days.
Which is probably directly related to why WotC doesn't give out exclusive/blanket licenses anymore...
Maybe? But there weren't many good or successful D&D games in the first years after SSI lost the license, compared to the Gold Box Era.
I think SSI still retained a license, just not an exclusive one. They lost the exclusive license in 1994. But yes, BG was started in 95.
But I think we would not have lost much if TSR had just transferred the license from SSI to Interplay. Though BG was a much bigger success than anticipated.
Does this also mean that we will never ever be able to get the new SoD NPC:s in BG2EE ? I had dared to hope that they would become available for purchase as a NPC-bundle in the future...