Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

Dark Dreams of Furiae - a new module for NWN:EE! Buy now
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

BG3: Yay or Nay?

2456719

Comments

  • megamike15megamike15 Member Posts: 2,231
    Nay!
    and the kotor games even if in 2 your playing as a different character are stilll about revan.

    the masss effect devices are not the main focus of that story either.

    ThacoBellDavidW
  • BallpointManBallpointMan Member Posts: 1,091
    Yay!
    ThacoBell wrote: »

    Yeah, those went over SO WELL.

    4th and 12th highest grossing movies of all time. I agree. They did go over pretty well.

  • PsicoVicPsicoVic Member Posts: 545
    edited June 2019
    Yay!
    Absolutely Yay!! even if it is like Tides of numenera (hope it´s better tho)
    You can never have enough Crpg-style games based on D&D, pathfinder or drakensang settings.

    Edit:
    hybridial wrote: »
    I think the chances of this turning out to be something I want are pretty low at the moment, and I also don't really like the marketing strategy of where you try to hype things with everything but showing and detailing the actual game. And if this game is supposedly out within the next year, they should have stuff to show by now.

    This is an argument which is being used too often. They'll show it when they feel they should.


    The ones of Cyberpunk asking for a gameplay... this is pure comedy :D

    JuliusBorisovTakisMegas
  • ArdanisArdanis Member Posts: 1,736
    edited June 2019
    Nay!
    Indifferent. It's probably gonna be a fine game, but "tough decisions with real consequences" is a very big negative in my book now. I prefer hand-crafted engaging story and fun characters I can empathize with, instead of doing the narrative designer's work myself as I play.

    CrevsDaak
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 10,806
    Nay!
    ThacoBell wrote: »

    Yeah, those went over SO WELL.

    4th and 12th highest grossing movies of all time. I agree. They did go over pretty well.

    Most of which came from new audiences with not connection to the original trilogy.

    Pokota
  • themazingnessthemazingness Member, Mobile Tester Posts: 662
    edited June 2019
    Yay!
    I agree with those who say it is too early to tell for sure. But I would be surprised if I never play it. I've been wanting a good 5e D&D cRPG.

    It's interesting to me that people wouldn't play it just because it isn't about Gorion's ward. On the one hand I think we have plenty of that story. On the other hand, I'd welcome more of it. Baldur's Gate is absolutely a setting, not the character. That's why the Dark Alliance games have the name. That's why Icewind Dale doesn't revolve around Drizzt. I feel like that is tantamount to expecting Planescape PnP modules to be about The Nameless One and his party of misfits. On the other hand, I can see why several fans feel that marketing the game as a successor is strange if it doesn't fill that role.

    Post edited by themazingness on
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 10,806
    Nay!
    @themazingness The problem isn't that its not about Gorion's ward. The problem is that the game is being marketed as BG3, which strongly implies that the game is a continuation of the previous serise. Which was about Gorion's ward. So the issue is straight up false marketing.

    megamike15kanisatha
  • GenderNihilismGirdleGenderNihilismGirdle Member Posts: 1,350
    Yay!
    I am beyond pumped for this, Larian is gonna knock it outta the park. Too bad it couldn't have been Beamdog, I love this company and all they've done for these isometric RPGs I grew up with and cherish so dearly...but then again, I'd almost rather see completely inventive, creative stuff from them that's either a) set elsewhere in the Realms than the usual suspects for something genuinely fresh and interesting or b) maybe not FR or maybe even not D&D! I just want to see an isometric RPG where Beamdog's talent runs wild all over it, and I hope we still get to see that.

    But to be back on topic for a second HOLY CRAP am I ever excited for BG III

    byrne20BelleSorciere
  • DinoDinDinoDin Member Posts: 798
    Yay!
    hybridial wrote: »
    [This is an argument which is being used too often. They'll show it when they feel they should.

    Then announce it then, and not before. An argument that's used often is used often because it's probably right.

    It's as if you've never seen a game launch before.

    Ardanisbyrne20
  • hybridialhybridial Member Posts: 191
    Nay!
    DinoDin wrote: »
    It's as if you've never seen a game launch before.

    Just because its how that's often done, doesn't mean its the best way to do it, and really I think a decent amount of games are at least announced with a gameplay trailer, enough to say that not every games developer opts for just a cinematic teaser announcement.

    It's a trash approach and it always will be.

    ThacoBellRohen
  • DinoDinDinoDin Member Posts: 798
    Yay!
    Seems like a juvenile thing to complain about frankly. "I'm getting my gameplay videos a week/month/whatever later than I wanted!!!111"

    GenderNihilismGirdleArtonabyrne20
  • the_sexteinthe_sextein Member Posts: 711
    edited June 2019
    I don't know if this game is going to appeal to me or not because I don't know anything about it other than 5E, forgotten Realms, large dev team, Large budget with high quality CG.

    I can say that I have wanted to experience more Forgotten Realms games ever since BG2 ended. I was always disappointed that Bioware didn't give it more attention.

    Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance was a game with more simplistic gameplay aimed at broader audiences and it didn't really appeal to me but that doesn't mean it shouldn't have been made. It didn't cheapen the original games and I wasn't forced to play it. I feel similar about this project. Even if it fails, how would that be any different than nothing being created at all?

    My initial response was negative because I have seen popular IP's get used to gain attention and then deliver games that have no business with the logo being on the cover. It's annoying to buy a stealth game like splinter Cell only to find that it's a simplistic shooter that I am not interested in. Why not just make a new IP for an action game instead of ruining a great IP that I enjoy?

    Here is the thing, The original Baldur's Gate series is over and nothing that this game does or does not do will change that. Beamdog was developing this title and lost it somehow but they were going to call it Baldur's Gate 3 as well and it was going to have a new engine and 5E rules with the ilithid storyline. I believe Beamdog would have been more likely to stick to the original RTwP gameplay to serve their niche market but I don't know that and probably won't ever know that. Also, we don't know what Larian plans to do yet.

    I'm not going to write off years of hard work from 300 people just yet. Even if it isn't as cool as the original games, it could still be more fun than some of the generic games I have seen over the years. Also, there is always the slim chance that they could innovate and actually make gameplay that is better than anything that has come before. It's unlikely but Bioware put up with a lot of cynics giving them a hard time about RTwP when they decided to innovate and look what that brought us. Anything is possible and I won't write it off until I see gameplay and come to my own conclusions.

    For now I'm not going to vote. I have a mixture of pessimistic and optimistic feelings regarding it at the moment.

    BelgarathMTHRohen
  • SjerrieSjerrie Member Posts: 1,109
    scriver wrote: »
    The second one was a spin-off about the continuing adventures of the Protagonist of BG1. They only kept the name BG as a shameless cash-grab off of the first game's success.

    Not sure if this is sarcasm...

    Adding a numeral to the title because it is in every way a continuation of the first game's story is suddenly a shameless cash-grab?

    How do you feel about Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2? Star Wars? Star Trek? Original Sin?

    Should they have just named BG2 "Athkatla" instead, and hope people realise it is a continuation?

    megamike15Rohen
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 10,806
    Nay!
    @the_sextein "Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance was a game with more simplistic gameplay aimed at broader audiences and it didn't really appeal to me but that doesn't mean it shouldn't have been made. It didn't cheapen the original games"

    It also wasn't called "BG3". It was titlted as the spin off that it was.

    "Beamdog was developing this title and lost it somehow but they were going to call it Baldur's Gate 3 as well and it was going to have a new engine and 5E rules with the ilithid storyline."

    According to Beamdog, the Illitithid game was a Planescape game, and not a BG game.

    the_sexteinGenderNihilismGirdle
  • TakisMegasTakisMegas Member Posts: 835
    Yay!
    ThacoBell wrote: »
    @the_sextein "Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance was a game with more simplistic gameplay aimed at broader audiences and it didn't really appeal to me but that doesn't mean it shouldn't have been made. It didn't cheapen the original games"

    It also wasn't called "BG3". It was titlted as the spin off that it was.

    "Beamdog was developing this title and lost it somehow but they were going to call it Baldur's Gate 3 as well and it was going to have a new engine and 5E rules with the ilithid storyline."

    According to Beamdog, the Illitithid game was a Planescape game, and not a BG game.

    I am happy that Larian got the rights to BG3, with all due respect, don't think Beamdog was/are ready for that type of undertaking. SoD vs DoS 1&2, no contest.

  • DinoDinDinoDin Member Posts: 798
    Yay!
    Sjerrie wrote: »
    scriver wrote: »
    The second one was a spin-off about the continuing adventures of the Protagonist of BG1. They only kept the name BG as a shameless cash-grab off of the first game's success.

    Not sure if this is sarcasm...

    Adding a numeral to the title because it is in every way a continuation of the first game's story is suddenly a shameless cash-grab?

    How do you feel about Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2? Star Wars? Star Trek? Original Sin?

    Should they have just named BG2 "Athkatla" instead, and hope people realise it is a continuation?

    Pretty sure he was making a tongue-in-cheek point about fan obsession with what can legitimately be called a sequel.

    Sjerriescriver
  • the_sexteinthe_sextein Member Posts: 711
    edited June 2019
    ThacoBell wrote: »
    @the_sextein "Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance was a game with more simplistic gameplay aimed at broader audiences and it didn't really appeal to me but that doesn't mean it shouldn't have been made. It didn't cheapen the original games"

    It also wasn't called "BG3". It was titlted as the spin off that it was.

    "Beamdog was developing this title and lost it somehow but they were going to call it Baldur's Gate 3 as well and it was going to have a new engine and 5E rules with the ilithid storyline."

    According to Beamdog, the Illitithid game was a Planescape game, and not a BG game.

    I remember someone saying that but I don't think they knew what Beamdog was actually working on and it would be bad PR to let that cat out of the bag because they want to avoid fans taking sides. Obviously I don't know what Beamdog was working on either but now that the CG was released I get the feeling that Beamdog was working on Baldur's Gate 3. Trent owned the BG3 web address, and they were working on a title with Ilithid that was very secretive and David G was involved. Suddenly the big announcement they were going to make gets cancelled, the web address disappears and a BG3 CG from larian shows up with Illithid. Seems pretty strange. Especially since Trent stated that Beamdog's original goal as a company was to make Baldur's Gate 3 which cannot be done legally without 5E rules which also means a new engine. Why would they cancel Beamdog's project if it wasn't BG3?

    I feel you when it comes to the title being Baldur's Gate 3 and I agree. I think the main reason why either company would do it is because many games have come out lately that are spiritual successors to Baldur's Gate and they wanted to make a statement that this is bigger. Financially it is way bigger than anyone has done before regarding Baldur's Gate. I doubt even BG 2 had a team that size and things cost way more now.

    It is possible that they used the Baldur's Gate 3 title to let the core fanbase know that it's a game aimed at them rather than a spin off like Dark Alliance. Still, I agree it feels cheep unless they actually tie it to the original game. It features the city and cameo's from the original cast and it's being aimed at fans of the original though so maybe that is why they did it. Doesn't mean they should but that's my take on it. Maybe they will add a subtitle later once they have everyone's attention. I do see these IP's used like this for AAA games that don't relate to the IP's established gameplay and it always pisses me off. This one seems to be following the same predictable formula that I was bitching about in the other thread but I'm going to hang back, take a chill, and see what Larian has in store for us.

  • BrokenkatanaBrokenkatana Member Posts: 35
    I think the BG3 name is a generic way of covering it being the next in line of the BG classic and the Dark Alliance games, since both were up to a number 2. My hope is that even though this game is called BG3, it wouldn't limit Beamdog's ability to make an expansion to the Bhaalspawn saga like Dragonspear was, if they choose to do it. Stuff like that has happened before with the Batman Arkham games. Which would probably only help draw attention to both games.

  • BallpointManBallpointMan Member Posts: 1,091
    edited June 2019
    Yay!
    ThacoBell wrote: »

    Most of which came from new audiences with not connection to the original trilogy.

    I... what? Not only is that completely and totally immaterial (Are only the original fans allowed to have opinions of a movie?) - it doesn't remotely refute the point. The new Star Wars are incredibly successful. They also used a numerical naming system.

  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 10,806
    Nay!
    @the_sextein "I remember someone saying that but I don't think they knew what Beamdog was actually working on and it would be bad PR to let that cat out of the bag because they want to avoid fans taking sides."

    It was our own @JuliusBorisov that posted tweets made by devs that straight up said it was a Planescape title. If anyone knows what Beamdog was working on, it was Beamdog.

    @semiticgod The worst that can happen is that because of the new game, WotC blocks any attempt at future BG content that isn't directly related to the new game. Effectively killing one of the most venerable RPG series.

    @BallpointMan Well, you'd think something being called the continuation to a respected series should attempt to be respectful of the series so many people love and you know, NOT piss off the old fans. If bringing a new audience to the table is all that matters, then stop pretending this is the sequel to anything. Just let it be something new. More people will appreciate it that way.

    StummvonBordwehr
  • the_sexteinthe_sextein Member Posts: 711
    edited June 2019
    I was told by @Ardanis that guys like Camdawg and Julius were contracted and had no idea what Phil, Trent and David were actually working on. They don't even know what the gameplay was. TB or RTwP. See the Baldur's Gate announcement thread for the conversation. Phil's posts were cryptic and didn't actually give a name. He did mention an Ilithid though and Knowledge that he would have to live with. Again, if It was planescapes torment then why did it get cancelled and then BG3 gets announced by another studio? Why did the BG3 web address owner become no longer listed as Trent during that time?

    Also Ardanis and Camdawg were directly addressing me about weather they knew about BG3 being turn based or not which would be pointless if they didn't think team Beam was working on it wouldn't it? Camdawg mentioned to me that he was asking around other Beamdog employees and none them knew if BG3 was going to be Turn based or not. Why would any of them ask each other or think someone would know if their employer was not involved somehow? Camdawg even showed suspicion that maybe some of them did know and wouldn't tell him.

    Post edited by the_sextein on
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 10,806
    Nay!
    @the_sextein You could go read Julius' comment rather than argue with me about it.

  • the_sexteinthe_sextein Member Posts: 711
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 10,806
    Nay!
    I did read it dude.

    Okay, then you already know that the game was a planescape game.

  • the_sexteinthe_sextein Member Posts: 711
    edited June 2019
  • jackjackjackjack Member Posts: 3,248
    Yay!
    I can't wait. Quite glad they aren't tacking something else onto the Bhaalspawn story.

    CrevsDaak
  • semiticgodsemiticgod Member, Moderator Posts: 14,258
    Yay!
    @the_sextein just hit 666 comments!

    But it went up to 668 before I finished writing this message. :frowning:

    I wouldn't worry about WotC shutting down any future BG games, @ThacoBell. The mere existence of BG3 itself was always a long shot; it's not like there was much room for more titles in the saga regardless. I'm surprised even a single new game is coming out.

    Besides, if the SoD controversy couldn't kill Baldur's Gate, what possibly could? :smile:

  • the_sexteinthe_sextein Member Posts: 711
    edited June 2019
    I wasn't paying attention. I should have retired this account to let it die a legend. >:)

Sign In or Register to comment.