A friendly reminder: respectful behavior towards other forumites is mandatory per the Site Rules, which you agree to follow by using this forum. We understand that this is a controversial subject and people disagree about the prospects of BG3, but personal attacks, insults, and disrespectful behavior in general are all beneath the standards of this forum.
I learned a long time ago to not feed these kinds of long, annoying back-and-forth arguments. Sometimes folks try to get the last word, or nitpick minor points, or repeat their previous arguments, and it really doesn't accomplish anything. In my experience, the best way to argue is just to state one's fundamentals, briefly address counterarguments, and then let one's statements stand on their own merits. I've found that people take me much more seriously when I keep my arguments succinct.
Personally, I didn't know what Larian was when I heard the announcement, which is funny because I played both Divine Divinity and Beyond Divinity when I was a kid! They were a bit clumsy in terms of gameplay in some respects, but the former's music was gorgeous and I have fond memories of playing them, and I've heard good things about the later Divinity games.
I think Beamdog could have handled this kind of project, given their work at SoD. It wouldn't surprise me if the SoD controversy made Wizards of the Coast a little leery of entrusting the project to Beamdog, though, and I can see why they'd pick a studio that would garner less of a political backlash. Besides, Larian has apparently gotten good sales. From a business perspective, Larian seems like a safe bet for WotC.
The decision probably rested on some talks between WotC representatives and Larian developers. If I were WotC, I'd probably want to find some folks who were passionate about the subject and had a certain game plan before I'd approve anything. There's probably some BG fans at Larian who made a good impression on WotC executives.
Hmm, I'm deeply skeptical that Beamdog would be an enticing landing spot for a new BG title from WotC perspective. For one, obviously WotC isn't looking to make BG3 merely to make one game. They want this game to usher in a new wave of DnD CRPG's. With all due respect to Beamdog, (and I have great respect for them), they have yet to make a title from scratch.
I think some people are greatly underestimating the amount of labor and the size of a team required to make the kind of highly-touted RPG's we see today. Audience expectation is much higher than it was in the days of Bioware's birth. How many total staffers did Beamdog even have at their maximum?
If you read the interviews that JuliusBorusuv has posted, Larian pitched multiple times to WotC. Their persistence clearly paid off. I also don't think the political controversies of SoD are all that well known outside of a tiny subset of fans, much less well-remembered. And, man, do people see how immaterial those complaints were today? I sure hope so.
Personally, I didn't know what Larian was when I heard the announcement, which is funny because I played both Divine Divinity and Beyond Divinity when I was a kid! They were a bit clumsy in terms of gameplay in some respects, but the former's music was gorgeous and I have fond memories of playing them, and I've heard good things about the later Divinity games.
I think Beamdog could have handled this kind of project, given their work at SoD. It wouldn't surprise me if the SoD controversy made Wizards of the Coast a little leery of entrusting the project to Beamdog, though, and I can see why they'd pick a studio that would garner less of a political backlash. Besides, Larian has apparently gotten good sales. From a business perspective, Larian seems like a safe bet for WotC.
The decision probably rested on some talks between WotC representatives and Larian developers. If I were WotC, I'd probably want to find some folks who were passionate about the subject and had a certain game plan before I'd approve anything. There's probably some BG fans at Larian who made a good impression on WotC executives.
I think part of it might have been their proprietary game engine. Paying a third party for license fees and not having the in house muscle to upgrade an engine to the constantly changing standards of cutting edge graphics is a problem. If WOTC wanted a true AAA title to showcase it's rules and game setting, Larain has the goods. Having people in house that can actually build animations as needed instead of cutting corners and minimizing the farm out work makes for a much more competent package. Larian has been upgrading the engine for this project since 2017 before DOS2 was finished according to the articles posted.
WOTC wouldn't allow crowdfunding to my knowledge so having a studio that could take on the weight of the project due to it's jackpot success probably helped seal the deal. They have shown with their last few games that they have the attention of the mainstream and know how to serve them. This is also important if you are planning a massive project that needs mainstream support. Lets not forget that 200 of their employees are in house and they are at the very edge of cutting edge game development. Showing competence and an ability to get things done on time seems to make everyone happy. I think WOTC wanted something too epic and costly that required too much manpower for a small indie label like Beamdog to handle.
Beamdog should still try and get a piece of this new wave of new CRPG thing and keep pitching projects: a BG3 tie-in voice pack and NPC/side quest, more NWN premium modules with fancy assets, another BG side story to scratch the retro itch a new game will bring out... something compact like a TotSC for BG2. Add more exploration and things to find for another playthrough. A quirky dungeon crawl.
Another excuse to get people to buy 'em all again.
Beamdog should still try and get a piece of this new wave of new CRPG thing and keep pitching projects: a BG3 tie-in voice pack and NPC/side quest, more NWN premium modules with fancy assets, another BG side story to scratch the retro itch a new game will bring out... something compact like a TotSC for BG2. Add more exploration and things to find for another playthrough. A quirky dungeon crawl.
Another excuse to get people to buy 'em all again.
I would not at all get your hopes up for something longshot like this. I imagine Larian getting this deal involves some kind of exclusivity on the intellectual property, at least for a time. Of course, I'd also love to see a Fallout: New Vegas type situation play out. But I can't possibly imagine Larian letting someone else do a DLC for their game (which would then have to be included in any "definitive edition" package). As well WotC are the ones who had to think long and hard about who to award the IP's rights. Something like this would extremely unprecedented in the industry.
I could maybe see a spinoff, say an Icewind Dale 3 using Larian's engine (or like New Vegas), but even that would be an extreme longshot.
I think what he meant was more side stories in the original games with the 2E ruleset. I'll admit I don't know if this new game effects the 20 year old games and what can be done to them but I wouldn't think that it does. I think Larian is tied to the Baldur's Gate 3 IP only which probably requires that anything related to it use 5E rules from here on out. 1 and 2 are probably still fair game as Beamdog is still working on them and adding to them on the consoles. If the console versions go well (I hope they do). It could mean heightened interest and budget for future work on the old school infinity engine games. Beamdog could use the interest from Baldur's Gate 3 to benefit from it.
I think Beamdog's plenty big enough to make their amazing rpgs. Heck, some of the best rpgs I've ever played were made by literal 1 or 2 person teams.
It's odd, Beamdog stated multiple times that they wanted to get away from the infinity engine. I thought they were working on a new, more modern engine for a new title. I was told earlier today that their secret project that got cancelled was for a Planescapes Torment addon? Wouldn't that still be infinity engine? If it was a new, more modern engine for a completely new Planescape Torment game then I suppose they could use it on a new, original IP since WOTC won't support their new projects maybe they should make an original IP via crowdfunding. It's clear to me that WOTC are the ones running the show when it comes to D&D and they seem to be pretty up tight when it comes to the deals that people make with them. Maybe if the console versions of the BG games do well they will be able to handle a bigger slice of the cost and renegotiate the Torment deal? Who knows, I wish them luck. I would buy a new Torment game in a new engine or the old one that much I know.
I think Beamdog's plenty big enough to make their amazing rpgs. Heck, some of the best rpgs I've ever played were made by literal 1 or 2 person teams.
It's odd, Beamdog stated multiple times that they wanted to get away from the infinity engine. I thought they were working on a new, more modern engine for a new title. I was told earlier today that their secret project that got cancelled was for a Planescapes Torment addon? Wouldn't that still be infinity engine? If it was a new, more modern engine for a completely new Planescape Torment game then I suppose they could use it on a new, original IP since WOTC won't support their new projects maybe they should make an original IP via crowdfunding. It's clear to me that WOTC are the ones running the show when it comes to D&D and they seem to be pretty up tight when it comes to the deals that people make with them. Maybe if the console versions of the BG games do well they will be able to handle a bigger slice of the cost and renegotiate the Torment deal? Who knows, I wish them luck. I would buy a new Torment game in a new engine or the old one that much I know.
I've suggested they could do what Ceres Games is doing, which is to use the D&D 3.5e/D20 OGL in a new IP setting for a new game.
It's also hard to get upset about the Baldur's Gate 3 situation. Julius linked a tweet from david Giader that stated that Beamdog briefly considered it but never attempted to do it. If WOTC had a successful dev team like Larian actively attempting to do it then there is no reason why they shouldn't get a fair shake at it, especially considering their reputation and financial stability. If WOTC had a shake down and they cut some of their less profitable ventures then that sucks for Beamdog and fans of Beamdog but is has nothing to do with Larian or the Bladur's Gate 3 IP.
I think Beamdog's plenty big enough to make their amazing rpgs. Heck, some of the best rpgs I've ever played were made by literal 1 or 2 person teams.
Do you have the name of these games? I don't remember any game of the size and style of Baldur's Gate or Pillars or Divinity made by one or two person.
Great studios have.made bad games. Studios nobody ever heard about made amazing games. Both Divinity games were good even if I ddin't like the mechanics. So yes BG III has the potential of being a great game but only time will tell.
I think Beamdog's plenty big enough to make their amazing rpgs. Heck, some of the best rpgs I've ever played were made by literal 1 or 2 person teams.
Do you have the name of these games? I don't remember any game of the size and style of Baldur's Gate or Pillars or Divinity made by one or two person.
Well, Jeff Vogel has made over a dozen of them by himself. Graphically they are bare-bones, but there is more quality content than you can shake a stick at. They are massive CRPGs.
One guy also made Tales of Maj'eyal, which is a roguelike of almost limitless scope made by one guy. These games don't have the production value of Baldur's Gate, but they absolutley have the scope.
I think Beamdog's plenty big enough to make their amazing rpgs. Heck, some of the best rpgs I've ever played were made by literal 1 or 2 person teams.
Do you have the name of these games? I don't remember any game of the size and style of Baldur's Gate or Pillars or Divinity made by one or two person.
Well, Jeff Vogel has made over a dozen of them by himself. Graphically they are bare-bones, but there is more quality content than you can shake a stick at. They are massive CRPGs.
One guy also made Tales of Maj'eyal, which is a roguelike of almost limitless scope made by one guy. These games don't have the production value of Baldur's Gate, but they absolutley have the scope.
jeff's games have alot of issues due to it being made by one guy. lack of music, reusing graphics and animations. barley having animations, due to the cheap graphics he has to compensate with to much text.
@the_sextein Nobody said the new Planescape game would ahve been in the Infinity Engine. The setting does not inform the engine used.
@lefreut I didn't say they were the same type as BG or Pillars. Just that amazing rpgs don't need big companies to be realized.
All I meant is that if it was an expansion pack then it would expand the pre existing game and if it was a new engine then it would be a sequel. Nobody is going to swallow the development costs of a new game engine for an expansion pack and if it's not an expansion then it has to use 5E rules anyway.
I love flashy graphics and I appreciate it when a game makes use of all the expensive hardware I have in my PC. Yet, I still play infinity engine, sprite based games because the gameplay matters. I don't see any reason for a game called Baldur's Gate 3 to exist at all to be honest. If they were going to make one, I don't see any reason why it couldn't be a niche title aimed at the Baldur's Gate core fanbase. That is why I reacted negatively to the game announcement originally. If the flashy graphics and huge game world require so much money that they have to aim the game at a different segment of the market other than the Baldur's Gate core fanbase then it's not worth it to me.
Obviously, WOTC see the value of owning a legendary IP like Baldur's Gate and they intend to use it for maximum profit by contracting a mega AAA game. Is Larain the best choice for Baldur's Gate 3? If the game is going to be AAA....Probably. Just don't be surprised if they make a turn based console game. PC games and deep gameplay disappeared when gaming went mainstream. Games like Baldur's Gate can't be AAA games anymore and I don't mean games named Baldur's Gate, I mean games that actually play like Baldur's Gate.
Why do you think we have had to kickstart spiritual successors to Baldur's Gate? If there is any hope that I have it's that Larian has had to kickstart it's games and they know what it's like to be brushed aside to make the games they want. I'm hoping since it's their money that they take a risk and make a core Baldur's Gate game. Then again, Larian has a history of making turn based games so.... Who knows, maybe they can pull a rabbit out of their hat. I don't see why they wouldn't make DOS3 instead, I'm hoping they bought the IP because they genuinely want to make a true Baldur's Gate game now that they are in control. Of course it could be a cheep cash grab as well. They have my attention, I just hope they release meaningful information soon.
If they deliver a true Baldur's Gate game experience with a cutting edge engine in this day and age, I will be blown away. The idea of it makes me want to believe but I know how the industry works and I have seen most of my favorite titles turn into dumbed down games for children or disappear entirely.
Age of Decadence comes to mind. It was made by a team of around half a dozen people, and while it has a full games worth of content it doesn't really have the same size as your three references. It also took approximately 10 years to make.
Prelude to Crashness is an old indie title I remember. I believe it was made by a single guy. Doesn't come close to the same size. Graphics were also very barest necessary even for it's time, and it crashed. A lot. A lot lot. (The actual name was Prelude to Darkness, iirc.)
Spiderweb Software has produced a whole bunch of indie games over the years (Avernum, Geneforge, Avadon) and I think they're one person too. Games tend to to be big-ish plot-wise, but they reuse a lot of graphical content.
I'm fairly certain the guy who created the Eschalon games did so alone. I've never played them further than the demos, so I can't really comment on their size.
Edit: I guess I got a little behind the conversation while writing this. Was supposed to be a response to @lefreut .
Age of Decadence comes to mind. It was made by a team of around half a dozen people, and while it has a full games worth of content it doesn't really have the same size as your three references. It also took approximately 10 years to make.
Prelude to Crashness is an old indie title I remember. I believe it was made by a single guy. Doesn't come close to the same size. Graphics were also very barest necessary even for it's time, and it crashed. A lot. A lot lot. (The actual name was Prelude to Darkness, iirc.)
Spiderweb Software has produced a whole bunch of indie games over the years (Avernum, Geneforge, Avadon) and I think they're one person too. Games tend to to be big-ish plot-wise, but they reuse a lot of graphical content.
I'm fairly certain the guy who created the Eschalon games did so alone. I've never played them further than the demos, so I can't really comment on their size.
Edit: I guess I got a little behind the conversation while writing this. Was supposed to be a response to @lefreut .
And they are still kicking!, they published this last year Dungeon rats ( dungeon crawler with age of decadence engine) and Avadon 3. They are really really basic but fun to play. I wonder what those people will make with a larger team. Especially the one that made Age of decadence.
Willy-nilly- knight also was made with almost a team of one.
And about the name, The final fantasy games have nothing to do one with another, and they are all called Final fantasy. Same the Xenoblade, Fire Emblem, Tales of... sagas.
The Dragon age 2 has plenty of differences in story and gameplay with the first and the third, and they are all called Dragon age.
Etc
So, no problem for me if they use BG3 as long as they do not call it BG: shadows of anm 3 or something.
@JuliusBorisov When someone tells me to like a studio because they like it, your right, I'm not going to just swing my opinion based on that alone.
"Apparently, WotC agreed in 2017 that company could be worthy of such a title. "
Yeah, WothC also once thought the novels were worthy as well.
" But playing DOS I actually felt it had something in common with BG2. There are a few gaming sites, including IGN, who claimed the same."
This is actually encouraging to hear. Would you care to elaborate? Was it a gameplay thing, a story thing, maybe it shared themes are a tone?
Not one thing in particular, but more a combination of different factors:
- Traps are nasty and can end the run, or at least completely finish one or several characters, and there're lots of traps in the game.
- You should always scout ahead not only because of traps but also to check for enemies.
- The way scoundrels worked reminded of "backstabbing"
- You can retreat from combat if you feel it's turning into the bad direction.
- Fights are different, one from another. There're really hard fights, but they can be won if you react to what is happening and adjust your way. Think about a Karoug fight, or the first Beholder dungeon under the Temple District. I felt I could similarly learn and adapt during fights.
- Party members have personalities, but not as deep as in DA games, - reminded the BG2 level of companions.
@JuliusBorisov Thanks you. Its nice to have one of the hyped people actually add meaningful points to the conversation, and without insulting everyone who isn't happy.
What about the writing? Do you think Larian understands the themes and tone of the series?
@JuliusBorisov When someone tells me to like a studio because they like it, your right, I'm not going to just swing my opinion based on that alone.
"Apparently, WotC agreed in 2017 that company could be worthy of such a title. "
Yeah, WothC also once thought the novels were worthy as well.
" But playing DOS I actually felt it had something in common with BG2. There are a few gaming sites, including IGN, who claimed the same."
This is actually encouraging to hear. Would you care to elaborate? Was it a gameplay thing, a story thing, maybe it shared themes are a tone?
Not one thing in particular, but more a combination of different factors:
- Traps are nasty and can end the run, or at least completely finish one or several characters, and there're lots of traps in the game.
- You should always scout ahead not only because of traps but also to check for enemies.
- The way scoundrels worked reminded of "backstabbing"
- You can retreat from combat if you feel it's turning into the bad direction.
- Fights are different, one from another. There're really hard fights, but they can be won if you react to what is happening and adjust your way. Think about a Karoug fight, or the first Beholder dungeon under the Temple District. I felt I could similarly learn and adapt during fights.
- Party members have personalities, but not as deep as in DA games, - reminded the BG2 level of companions.
I disagree. DOS2 fells much different than BG. Certain strategies like raise an undead army to use against mindflayers is possible on BG but impossible on DOS1/2, enemies has soo much HP that requires 5416515 shots into the face to die, armor works in a way that makes no sense, etc. Cooldowns are present on DOS and doesn't exist on BG.
On Baldur's Gate, i fell like an all might sorcerer fighting might creatures using a lot of cool abilities, on DOS2, i fell like i an playing an puzzle game...
About the sales of DOS2 compared to other games, DOS 2 is available on consoles and has no competition on consoles. Pathfinder Kingmaker being available on just one platform, has 1/3 of the consumer base and much more competition.
Not mentioning the lack of marketing resources and all problems that the game faced against game journalists "i can't kill an insect swarm with an halberd, this game is bad"
@JuliusBorisov Thanks you. Its nice to have one of the hyped people actually add meaningful points to the conversation, and without insulting everyone who isn't happy.
What about the writing? Do you think Larian understands the themes and tone of the series?
@ThacoBell I've been thinking 3 days about this. I know there are people mentioning "light" or "humorous " writing in DOS 1&2, especially in the first game.
While there's humor in banters, I don't agree the games are "light". Wherever you go, you find really bad stuff: treachery, craving for money or power, deaths, sacrifices. I think the "light" writing in certain places helps to underline the cruelty of NPCs you meet. I always felt this effect of showing opposite things: something to make you smile, and then suddenly a grim moment.
DOS2 is much darker than DOS1, - I don't actually remember goofy moments there. The themes of human souls, power, resurrection, surviving, magic, gods, and choices are present in DOS just as they are present in BG2.
@JuliusBorisov Thanks you. Its nice to have one of the hyped people actually add meaningful points to the conversation, and without insulting everyone who isn't happy.
What about the writing? Do you think Larian understands the themes and tone of the series?
@ThacoBell I've been thinking 3 days about this. I know there are people mentioning "light" or "humorous " writing in DOS 1&2, especially in the first game.
While there's humor in banters, I don't agree the games are "light". Wherever you go, you find really bad stuff: treachery, craving for money or power, deaths, sacrifices. I think the "light" writing in certain places helps to underline the cruelty of NPCs you meet. I always felt this effect of showing opposite things: something to make you smile, and then suddenly a grim moment.
DOS2 is much darker than DOS1, - I don't actually remember goofy moments there. The themes of human souls, power, resurrection, surviving, magic, gods, and choices are present in DOS just as they are present in BG2.
I've played both only a little, and I agree that they are definitely dark in some cases. From what I have seen my issue with it that in both cases (darkness and goofy) they go over the top and at least in the first OS often clash, i.e. where you have a goofy dialogue right next to another rather dark one.
And as said, my fear is that with all the people on the Internet asking them to be "mature" that they will go completely over the top.
There is one dialogue in D:OS with rape, torture, cannibalism and necrophilia in a single paragraph.
I know there are people who say that this makes the game mature & that it is great that the studio is brave enough to include it.
Speaking only for me: I don't want this kind of explicit dialogue in my games. Baldur's Gate managed to be mature without going over the top of it - they would not have been improved by either detailing the torture at the hands of Irenicus in more detail (as at least one version of the Imoen romance mod felt necessary to do) or by being graphic about the abuses the slaves in Athkatla certainly suffered.
And the trailer certainly indicates that my fear in this regard is justified. In my BG I do not need to see someone vomiting teeth or having his head explode. And the "jay, it looks dark and mature" reaction by so many people only dismays me.
Comments
I learned a long time ago to not feed these kinds of long, annoying back-and-forth arguments. Sometimes folks try to get the last word, or nitpick minor points, or repeat their previous arguments, and it really doesn't accomplish anything. In my experience, the best way to argue is just to state one's fundamentals, briefly address counterarguments, and then let one's statements stand on their own merits. I've found that people take me much more seriously when I keep my arguments succinct.
I think Beamdog could have handled this kind of project, given their work at SoD. It wouldn't surprise me if the SoD controversy made Wizards of the Coast a little leery of entrusting the project to Beamdog, though, and I can see why they'd pick a studio that would garner less of a political backlash. Besides, Larian has apparently gotten good sales. From a business perspective, Larian seems like a safe bet for WotC.
The decision probably rested on some talks between WotC representatives and Larian developers. If I were WotC, I'd probably want to find some folks who were passionate about the subject and had a certain game plan before I'd approve anything. There's probably some BG fans at Larian who made a good impression on WotC executives.
I think some people are greatly underestimating the amount of labor and the size of a team required to make the kind of highly-touted RPG's we see today. Audience expectation is much higher than it was in the days of Bioware's birth. How many total staffers did Beamdog even have at their maximum?
If you read the interviews that JuliusBorusuv has posted, Larian pitched multiple times to WotC. Their persistence clearly paid off. I also don't think the political controversies of SoD are all that well known outside of a tiny subset of fans, much less well-remembered. And, man, do people see how immaterial those complaints were today? I sure hope so.
I think part of it might have been their proprietary game engine. Paying a third party for license fees and not having the in house muscle to upgrade an engine to the constantly changing standards of cutting edge graphics is a problem. If WOTC wanted a true AAA title to showcase it's rules and game setting, Larain has the goods. Having people in house that can actually build animations as needed instead of cutting corners and minimizing the farm out work makes for a much more competent package. Larian has been upgrading the engine for this project since 2017 before DOS2 was finished according to the articles posted.
WOTC wouldn't allow crowdfunding to my knowledge so having a studio that could take on the weight of the project due to it's jackpot success probably helped seal the deal. They have shown with their last few games that they have the attention of the mainstream and know how to serve them. This is also important if you are planning a massive project that needs mainstream support. Lets not forget that 200 of their employees are in house and they are at the very edge of cutting edge game development. Showing competence and an ability to get things done on time seems to make everyone happy. I think WOTC wanted something too epic and costly that required too much manpower for a small indie label like Beamdog to handle.
Another excuse to get people to buy 'em all again.
I would not at all get your hopes up for something longshot like this. I imagine Larian getting this deal involves some kind of exclusivity on the intellectual property, at least for a time. Of course, I'd also love to see a Fallout: New Vegas type situation play out. But I can't possibly imagine Larian letting someone else do a DLC for their game (which would then have to be included in any "definitive edition" package). As well WotC are the ones who had to think long and hard about who to award the IP's rights. Something like this would extremely unprecedented in the industry.
I could maybe see a spinoff, say an Icewind Dale 3 using Larian's engine (or like New Vegas), but even that would be an extreme longshot.
It's odd, Beamdog stated multiple times that they wanted to get away from the infinity engine. I thought they were working on a new, more modern engine for a new title. I was told earlier today that their secret project that got cancelled was for a Planescapes Torment addon? Wouldn't that still be infinity engine? If it was a new, more modern engine for a completely new Planescape Torment game then I suppose they could use it on a new, original IP since WOTC won't support their new projects maybe they should make an original IP via crowdfunding. It's clear to me that WOTC are the ones running the show when it comes to D&D and they seem to be pretty up tight when it comes to the deals that people make with them. Maybe if the console versions of the BG games do well they will be able to handle a bigger slice of the cost and renegotiate the Torment deal? Who knows, I wish them luck. I would buy a new Torment game in a new engine or the old one that much I know.
I've suggested they could do what Ceres Games is doing, which is to use the D&D 3.5e/D20 OGL in a new IP setting for a new game.
Do you have the name of these games? I don't remember any game of the size and style of Baldur's Gate or Pillars or Divinity made by one or two person.
@lefreut I didn't say they were the same type as BG or Pillars. Just that amazing rpgs don't need big companies to be realized.
Well, Jeff Vogel has made over a dozen of them by himself. Graphically they are bare-bones, but there is more quality content than you can shake a stick at. They are massive CRPGs.
One guy also made Tales of Maj'eyal, which is a roguelike of almost limitless scope made by one guy. These games don't have the production value of Baldur's Gate, but they absolutley have the scope.
Yes but only a big company can do a BG3. It cost a lot to do a game like this.
jeff's games have alot of issues due to it being made by one guy. lack of music, reusing graphics and animations. barley having animations, due to the cheap graphics he has to compensate with to much text.
not really a fan from what i saw.
All I meant is that if it was an expansion pack then it would expand the pre existing game and if it was a new engine then it would be a sequel. Nobody is going to swallow the development costs of a new game engine for an expansion pack and if it's not an expansion then it has to use 5E rules anyway.
I love flashy graphics and I appreciate it when a game makes use of all the expensive hardware I have in my PC. Yet, I still play infinity engine, sprite based games because the gameplay matters. I don't see any reason for a game called Baldur's Gate 3 to exist at all to be honest. If they were going to make one, I don't see any reason why it couldn't be a niche title aimed at the Baldur's Gate core fanbase. That is why I reacted negatively to the game announcement originally. If the flashy graphics and huge game world require so much money that they have to aim the game at a different segment of the market other than the Baldur's Gate core fanbase then it's not worth it to me.
Obviously, WOTC see the value of owning a legendary IP like Baldur's Gate and they intend to use it for maximum profit by contracting a mega AAA game. Is Larain the best choice for Baldur's Gate 3? If the game is going to be AAA....Probably. Just don't be surprised if they make a turn based console game. PC games and deep gameplay disappeared when gaming went mainstream. Games like Baldur's Gate can't be AAA games anymore and I don't mean games named Baldur's Gate, I mean games that actually play like Baldur's Gate.
Why do you think we have had to kickstart spiritual successors to Baldur's Gate? If there is any hope that I have it's that Larian has had to kickstart it's games and they know what it's like to be brushed aside to make the games they want. I'm hoping since it's their money that they take a risk and make a core Baldur's Gate game. Then again, Larian has a history of making turn based games so.... Who knows, maybe they can pull a rabbit out of their hat. I don't see why they wouldn't make DOS3 instead, I'm hoping they bought the IP because they genuinely want to make a true Baldur's Gate game now that they are in control. Of course it could be a cheep cash grab as well. They have my attention, I just hope they release meaningful information soon.
If they deliver a true Baldur's Gate game experience with a cutting edge engine in this day and age, I will be blown away. The idea of it makes me want to believe but I know how the industry works and I have seen most of my favorite titles turn into dumbed down games for children or disappear entirely.
Prelude to Crashness is an old indie title I remember. I believe it was made by a single guy. Doesn't come close to the same size. Graphics were also very barest necessary even for it's time, and it crashed. A lot. A lot lot. (The actual name was Prelude to Darkness, iirc.)
Spiderweb Software has produced a whole bunch of indie games over the years (Avernum, Geneforge, Avadon) and I think they're one person too. Games tend to to be big-ish plot-wise, but they reuse a lot of graphical content.
I'm fairly certain the guy who created the Eschalon games did so alone. I've never played them further than the demos, so I can't really comment on their size.
Edit: I guess I got a little behind the conversation while writing this. Was supposed to be a response to @lefreut .
And they are still kicking!, they published this last year Dungeon rats ( dungeon crawler with age of decadence engine) and Avadon 3. They are really really basic but fun to play. I wonder what those people will make with a larger team. Especially the one that made Age of decadence.
Willy-nilly- knight also was made with almost a team of one.
And about the name, The final fantasy games have nothing to do one with another, and they are all called Final fantasy. Same the Xenoblade, Fire Emblem, Tales of... sagas.
The Dragon age 2 has plenty of differences in story and gameplay with the first and the third, and they are all called Dragon age.
Etc
So, no problem for me if they use BG3 as long as they do not call it BG: shadows of anm 3 or something.
Not one thing in particular, but more a combination of different factors:
- Traps are nasty and can end the run, or at least completely finish one or several characters, and there're lots of traps in the game.
- You should always scout ahead not only because of traps but also to check for enemies.
- The way scoundrels worked reminded of "backstabbing"
- You can retreat from combat if you feel it's turning into the bad direction.
- Fights are different, one from another. There're really hard fights, but they can be won if you react to what is happening and adjust your way. Think about a Karoug fight, or the first Beholder dungeon under the Temple District. I felt I could similarly learn and adapt during fights.
- Party members have personalities, but not as deep as in DA games, - reminded the BG2 level of companions.
https://me.ign.com/en/pc/77585/feature/divinity-original-sin-feels-like-a-modern-baldurs-gate
^^ This. It was a Planescape Battle Royale built on the Unreal engine. The loot boxes were amazing:
What about the writing? Do you think Larian understands the themes and tone of the series?
Given the current state of games popularity I totally believed Planescape: Overwatch Royale was a reailty...
I disagree. DOS2 fells much different than BG. Certain strategies like raise an undead army to use against mindflayers is possible on BG but impossible on DOS1/2, enemies has soo much HP that requires 5416515 shots into the face to die, armor works in a way that makes no sense, etc. Cooldowns are present on DOS and doesn't exist on BG.
On Baldur's Gate, i fell like an all might sorcerer fighting might creatures using a lot of cool abilities, on DOS2, i fell like i an playing an puzzle game...
About the sales of DOS2 compared to other games, DOS 2 is available on consoles and has no competition on consoles. Pathfinder Kingmaker being available on just one platform, has 1/3 of the consumer base and much more competition.
Not mentioning the lack of marketing resources and all problems that the game faced against game journalists "i can't kill an insect swarm with an halberd, this game is bad"
Planescape : Fortnite Royale >>> rest.
@ThacoBell I've been thinking 3 days about this. I know there are people mentioning "light" or "humorous " writing in DOS 1&2, especially in the first game.
While there's humor in banters, I don't agree the games are "light". Wherever you go, you find really bad stuff: treachery, craving for money or power, deaths, sacrifices. I think the "light" writing in certain places helps to underline the cruelty of NPCs you meet. I always felt this effect of showing opposite things: something to make you smile, and then suddenly a grim moment.
DOS2 is much darker than DOS1, - I don't actually remember goofy moments there. The themes of human souls, power, resurrection, surviving, magic, gods, and choices are present in DOS just as they are present in BG2.
I've played both only a little, and I agree that they are definitely dark in some cases. From what I have seen my issue with it that in both cases (darkness and goofy) they go over the top and at least in the first OS often clash, i.e. where you have a goofy dialogue right next to another rather dark one.
And as said, my fear is that with all the people on the Internet asking them to be "mature" that they will go completely over the top.
There is one dialogue in D:OS with rape, torture, cannibalism and necrophilia in a single paragraph.
I know there are people who say that this makes the game mature & that it is great that the studio is brave enough to include it.
Speaking only for me: I don't want this kind of explicit dialogue in my games. Baldur's Gate managed to be mature without going over the top of it - they would not have been improved by either detailing the torture at the hands of Irenicus in more detail (as at least one version of the Imoen romance mod felt necessary to do) or by being graphic about the abuses the slaves in Athkatla certainly suffered.
And the trailer certainly indicates that my fear in this regard is justified. In my BG I do not need to see someone vomiting teeth or having his head explode. And the "jay, it looks dark and mature" reaction by so many people only dismays me.