I honestly totally agree with this forum topic, especially the first post. In fact, I've been trying to say for a LONG time on this forum that the developers needed to get their act together, to no avail. In many instances it just resulted in bashful fights, and finally *someone* says it?
Open your eyes people, leave nostalgia out of the equation for once, Baldur's Gate EE was no true success! For example, the new areas they made were amateurish at best, and the content was very nil and void in terms of actual content. Reviews were mediocre. And if reviews don't make games, how come the top studios get 1,000,000+ views? I look at reviews.
Let's be honest, they have one chance. They have one chance to make sure their next remake of a game succeeds. It's a tough thing to do. For right now, Overhaul doesn't have what it takes.
@Twilight_Fox and @BobC I still don't buy it. I think that the story was clearly finished with the epilogues for both CHARNAME and the NPCs as well as the general feeling of accomplishment at the end of TOB. Having a Baldur's Gate without CHARNAME would be like having a book of Harry Potter without Harry Potter, and telling his tale among the Pantheon of the gods or as a mortal again would raise a good deal of issues, not the least of which being continuity issues that would make the assumed party at the beginning of BG2 look like nothing (not that it's really a problem, but you get my meaning.) In my opinion, Baldur's Gate is the story of CHARNAME, and his story is done. I'd love to hear and play another story, but let's not pretend that it's Baldur's Gate.
@Karsus WotC is making new products edition neutral? Really? That's interesting, I didn't know that. That's good to hear. I'm a fan of 3.5, myself, and 4 just doesn't jive with me...
In my opinion, Baldur's Gate is the story of CHARNAME, and his story is done. I'd love to hear and play another story, but let's not pretend that it's Baldur's Gate.
Absolutely. Of course, in my perfect world, Beamdog gets the right to Baldur's Gate, makes BG2:EE as SoA and Watcher's Keep, and expands ToB into a full game, Baldur's Gate 3. I bet Melissan could have been a villain on par with Sarevok and Irenicus with some time to give her, you know, any characterization at all.
Would be great if they could introduce one or two NPC's from the Baldur's gate series in BG3 that you could meet up with. I could imagine Garrick finding a rich woman to end up marrying, you might also end up finding Valygar sitting at a pub, or Haer'dalise in some seedy tavern. I don't want to meet too many as i feel that would ruin the immersion (Why would they all be here?) but having 2-4 NPC's from both BG1/BG2 to sit down and talk with would be nice.
I'm not a big fan of BGEE from the game point of view but what they have done for the community through this forum, and how they renewed the interest in an old game like this introducing people to it, that's just amazing.
They had their hands tied with BGEE and you can clearly see that. I'm sure that if they had free hands to do what they wanted no one here would complain. It's like telling a kid that his homemade sword isn't good enough because it isn't made out of metal, well the kid only had wood to do it with and he did his best with what he had.
And you also have to remember that this is BG1. They can't introduce super huge and awesome quests or NPCs interaction, that would stick out like a sore thumb because BG1 never had that to begin with. I'm sure that if/when BGEE2 happens you'll be able to truly see what they can do with this game. BGEE was just the first push of the big snowball down the mountain, BGEE2 is where it'll take up speed.
I love the Baldur's Gate series. I love them to death. But they're a product of a different time. If you made a new game in that style now, I'm not sure it would work. (It's not just BG3 - I'm conflicted about Project Eternity as well.)
On the other hand, if any franchise could pull it off, it would be Baldur's Gate. If somebody did make BG3, I'd probably play it, to be perfectly honest.
There're already very solid arguments here in favor of Beamdog as possible developers of BGNext. I'm fully behind this judgement and I'll try to mention the additional and, in my opinion, key things that testify the next (fingers crossed) game should be made by this team.
Rather than slating the quality of additional content in BG:EE, we should reward and encourage the initiative to continue the life of BG games. For more than 10 years it had no future and Beamdog changed the whole context.
Rather than making conclusions based on the proposition that Beamdog is a potential exploiter (what, 20 bucks for so little changes?), we should focus on them making it easier for people to play this game on the modern PCs, in high resolution, on several platforms, with more detailed in-game explanations of all the mechanics.
In this era of lucre projects, it is maybe lost that Beamdog are hardworking people in a working family.
They've put in long hours to improve the game after the release and to communicate with all of us, to find out our wishes and requests. Even after the release they've added - for free - new kits and a secret NPC and were going to add even more.
It's their attention to details that give them the edge (i.e. Colquette's Family Amulet), their enthusiastic team. They regularly check everything, listen to the customers and act on what they hear. They use the feedback to develop further. The problem-solving process hasn't been limited to the launch.
The attention to detail is the main trump card and the strategic advantage of Beamdog. The bigger companis will likely concentrate their efforts on the graphics and it often happens that on the details there's no (or very little) attention left.
Great delivery also depends on great communication, which starts at the top. Beamdog gives us a psychological boost - we know we can contact them anytime a problem comes up that requires their attention. This is a rare thing when we speak about the giants of the gaming industry.
So Beamdog has all the basics to develop a wonderful game. The money will inevitably follow the talent and ideas.
Beamdog had massive contractual restrictions on changing existing content to the original game for BG:EE. The new content they added was pretty inspired, though, I feel. I'm a big fan of all three new NPCs (and remember, Rasaad has yet to come into his own in BG2:EE, which I'm sure we will see released eventually). Graphically, they did what they could given the lost source artwork, which was such a major blow to the project.
Much of the work Beamdog did came in rewriting the Infinity engine code for the next generation of operating systems, and getting the game to play on other devices than a PC (and working in multiplayer between different devices/OSs). That's all invisible to us at the user end, but it was no doubt a Herculean labor.
Beamdog is incredibly, enormously responsive to the fan base. How often does one see that to this degree? Seriously...
The OP's fears that the Infinity engine would be used for BG3 will not come to pass. As far as 2D isometric versus 3D I'm actually not as sure as I once was that 2D would be preferable. I would just want for the backgrounds to have a lush painterly look. And for the camera not to be a distraction.
I would totally trust Beamdog to build a fantastic new game, whether it is BG: Next or a kickstarter for something entirely new.
In the upcoming auction of Atari's rights to its franchises July 16-19, I remain hopeful that Beamdog can put together, or at least partner in, a deal to realize their vision.
I'm not so keen on Overhaul making BG3, but I still think it's a better option for them to make it than it not becoming a reality. And if it turns out bad people can just not play it, right? It's not like it would somehow "soil" the previous two games of the series.
Still, if they are to make an open-world RPG of any kind Overhaul Games will have to muster up a lot more resources than what they have had so far. If their team has had as much technical difficulty with BG:EE as we've seen, creating a new game would likely be an overwhelming challenge for them. Even if a new engine is much easier to work with, creating an RPG from scratch is incomparably more work-intensive than touching up an old classic.
Most people seem to be going too far one way on the other on Beamdog/Overhaul. BG: EE is what it is--a competent, passable effort given the restrictions. Were they restricted from possibly doing a fantastic job? Yes. Still, that doesn't change the fact that the result isn't incredible. Doesn't mean that they did a bad job either. I rather play it than Tutu or BGT, so it's good enough. It certainly didn't get worse treatment than most re-released versions of old games.
As for whether the company can make a great original game, who the hell knows. We'll know when it happens.
Would just like to mention that if it wasn't for BGT/tutu then BGEE would have gotten universally praised. The problem is that those mods came first and that kind of takes the edge of the "Enhanced" .
Again let me reiterate, just because something is getting a new look, doesn't mean its going to auto fail. Look at what Bethesda did with the Fallout franchise. I'm sure at a creative level they had the chance to just keep it the same. But they didn't they re designed the games appearance, yet at the same time still keeping true to its roots, in its humour and moral ambiguity.
Did no one get that gasp feeling when they ventured out into the capitol wasteland upon exiting the vault? Do you think you would of been able to of had that feeling if you were playing Fallout 3 with the infinity engine?
And please I'm merely referencing Dragon Age: Origins as a separate entity from the Dragon Age franchise entirely.
I'm not asking for flashy flashy graphics, I'm just saying, with the technology available today, it would be a complete and utter shame not to try and re-imagine the franchise whilst at the same time keeping true to its roots.
Overall at a creative level, the company is going to be restricted by what they can achieve and accomplish with the resources they have. Which is undeserving of one of the most revered rpg franchises of all time.
By all means, create a game with the infinity engine in the Forgotten Realms dungeons and dragons universe and all that, just don't call it Baldur's Gate, as obvious "target the nostalgia" margeting ploys are getting a bit tiresome and a bit sly.
Again let me reiterate, just because something is getting a new look, doesn't mean its going to auto fail. Look at what Bethesda did with the Fallout franchise. I'm sure at a creative level they had the chance to just keep it the same. But they didn't they re designed the games appearance, yet at the same time still keeping true to its roots, in its humour and moral ambiguity.
Not even close. Fallout 3 is a casual/consolized game for consoles' market.
Again let me reiterate, just because something is getting a new look, doesn't mean its going to auto fail. Look at what Bethesda did with the Fallout franchise. I'm sure at a creative level they had the chance to just keep it the same. But they didn't they re designed the games appearance, yet at the same time still keeping true to its roots, in its humour and moral ambiguity.
Not even close. Fallout 3 is a casual/consolized game for consoles' market.
Fallout 3 is still an amazing game in it's own right. It gave us something we had never seen before.
Again let me reiterate, just because something is getting a new look, doesn't mean its going to auto fail. Look at what Bethesda did with the Fallout franchise. I'm sure at a creative level they had the chance to just keep it the same. But they didn't they re designed the games appearance, yet at the same time still keeping true to its roots, in its humour and moral ambiguity.
Not even close. Fallout 3 is a casual/consolized game for consoles' market.
Fallout 3 is still an amazing game in it's own right. It gave us something we had never seen before.
Fallout 3 is still an amazing game in it's own right. It gave us something we had never seen before.
What exactly is that? As the poster above me said it's basically Oblivion with Fallout graphics, and guns instead of swords. I'm not against 3d Fallout, in fact I think New Vegas is the best RPG of this decade, but Fallout 3 just completely missed the mark. The game felt less like a Fallout game than even Tactics did.
Morrowind was there to introduce the big world. But a post apocalyptic setting like Fallout hadn't been done before that in such a broad way. The whole going through the sewers in the dark with a flash light, scavenging ammunition and dodging traps and the ghouls, it brought something new to gaming.
It has a much more 'survival' trait to it than morrowind, also the horror elements are there, it really has everything in one package. I do understand where the people come from when they say it's nothing like fallout 1 o 2, i agree with this but it's still an amazing game in it's own right.
If your aim is to sound as unintelligent as possible, then you should definitely continue using the phrase "Oblivion with guns." Otherwise, try actually coming up with a genuine criticism of the game rather than a pre-packaged slogan the hatred bandwagon provided you with when the game was new. There are no Perks in Oblivion, the SPECIAL stats aren't in Oblivion, there are no schools of magic in FO3, the enemies and the graphical style are clearly different and not just reskins of Oblivion content. The games are different, their only real similarity being that you can explore without zig-zagging like a tool as you would in the original Fallout games.
Would be great if they could introduce one or two NPC's from the Baldur's gate series in BG3 that you could meet up with. I could imagine Garrick finding a rich woman to end up marrying, you might also end up finding Valygar sitting at a pub, or Haer'dalise in some seedy tavern. I don't want to meet too many as i feel that would ruin the immersion (Why would they all be here?) but having 2-4 NPC's from both BG1/BG2 to sit down and talk with would be nice.
While I like where you are going, I Kill Valygar every single time so that I can get into the Planar Sphere without having to drag him along. So maybe another choice? I could see running into Maisie and maybe Cernd. I don't think anyone intentionally kills them (well maybe Cernd).
Since I clearly disagree with those who think that bg3 cannot be a good game and the rightful successor of bg2 with the current team and that I found their arguments ‘mediocre’ at best, I will move on to others topics. You still have my support beamdog, Bg:ee was exactly what I was looking for, I look forward to bg2:ee.
Actually, in all fairness, Oblivion, Fallout 3, and Fallout: New Vegas DO use the same engine.
True, but so do Borderlands and Mass Effect. The engine of a game is its barest bones. Saying two games share an engine is like saying you and a friend of yours both have nervous systems.
Actually, in all fairness, Oblivion, Fallout 3, and Fallout: New Vegas DO use the same engine.
True, but so do Borderlands and Mass Effect. The engine of a game is its barest bones. Saying two games share an engine is like saying you and a friend of yours both have nervous systems.
To an extent. More to the point, my friend and I both have human nervous systems, whereas previous Fallout and Elder Scrolls games had, let's say, lizard and bird nervous systems, respectively; similar, but most assuredly not the same thing. Don't get me wrong, I love all three games in question, but I can also understand the complaints that they're too similar, and a large departure from the history of their respective franchises.
Comments
Open your eyes people, leave nostalgia out of the equation for once, Baldur's Gate EE was no true success! For example, the new areas they made were amateurish at best, and the content was very nil and void in terms of actual content. Reviews were mediocre. And if reviews don't make games, how come the top studios get 1,000,000+ views? I look at reviews.
Let's be honest, they have one chance. They have one chance to make sure their next remake of a game succeeds. It's a tough thing to do. For right now, Overhaul doesn't have what it takes.
http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/baldurs-gate-enhanced-edition Money and marketing.
-
By the way... did you find the "poor review" done by gametrailers?
http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/comment/311668/#Comment_311668
I still don't buy it. I think that the story was clearly finished with the epilogues for both CHARNAME and the NPCs as well as the general feeling of accomplishment at the end of TOB. Having a Baldur's Gate without CHARNAME would be like having a book of Harry Potter without Harry Potter, and telling his tale among the Pantheon of the gods or as a mortal again would raise a good deal of issues, not the least of which being continuity issues that would make the assumed party at the beginning of BG2 look like nothing (not that it's really a problem, but you get my meaning.) In my opinion, Baldur's Gate is the story of CHARNAME, and his story is done. I'd love to hear and play another story, but let's not pretend that it's Baldur's Gate.
@Karsus
WotC is making new products edition neutral? Really? That's interesting, I didn't know that. That's good to hear. I'm a fan of 3.5, myself, and 4 just doesn't jive with me...
I'm not a big fan of BGEE from the game point of view but what they have done for the community through this forum, and how they renewed the interest in an old game like this introducing people to it, that's just amazing.
They had their hands tied with BGEE and you can clearly see that. I'm sure that if they had free hands to do what they wanted no one here would complain. It's like telling a kid that his homemade sword isn't good enough because it isn't made out of metal, well the kid only had wood to do it with and he did his best with what he had.
And you also have to remember that this is BG1. They can't introduce super huge and awesome quests or NPCs interaction, that would stick out like a sore thumb because BG1 never had that to begin with. I'm sure that if/when BGEE2 happens you'll be able to truly see what they can do with this game. BGEE was just the first push of the big snowball down the mountain, BGEE2 is where it'll take up speed.
I love the Baldur's Gate series. I love them to death. But they're a product of a different time. If you made a new game in that style now, I'm not sure it would work. (It's not just BG3 - I'm conflicted about Project Eternity as well.)
On the other hand, if any franchise could pull it off, it would be Baldur's Gate. If somebody did make BG3, I'd probably play it, to be perfectly honest.
Rather than slating the quality of additional content in BG:EE, we should reward and encourage the initiative to continue the life of BG games. For more than 10 years it had no future and Beamdog changed the whole context.
Rather than making conclusions based on the proposition that Beamdog is a potential exploiter (what, 20 bucks for so little changes?), we should focus on them making it easier for people to play this game on the modern PCs, in high resolution, on several platforms, with more detailed in-game explanations of all the mechanics.
In this era of lucre projects, it is maybe lost that Beamdog are hardworking people in a working family.
They've put in long hours to improve the game after the release and to communicate with all of us, to find out our wishes and requests. Even after the release they've added - for free - new kits and a secret NPC and were going to add even more.
It's their attention to details that give them the edge (i.e. Colquette's Family Amulet), their enthusiastic team. They regularly check everything, listen to the customers and act on what they hear. They use the feedback to develop further. The problem-solving process hasn't been limited to the launch.
The attention to detail is the main trump card and the strategic advantage of Beamdog. The bigger companis will likely concentrate their efforts on the graphics and it often happens that on the details there's no (or very little) attention left.
Great delivery also depends on great communication, which starts at the top. Beamdog gives us a psychological boost - we know we can contact them anytime a problem comes up that requires their attention. This is a rare thing when we speak about the giants of the gaming industry.
So Beamdog has all the basics to develop a wonderful game. The money will inevitably follow the talent and ideas.
Much of the work Beamdog did came in rewriting the Infinity engine code for the next generation of operating systems, and getting the game to play on other devices than a PC (and working in multiplayer between different devices/OSs). That's all invisible to us at the user end, but it was no doubt a Herculean labor.
Beamdog is incredibly, enormously responsive to the fan base. How often does one see that to this degree? Seriously...
The OP's fears that the Infinity engine would be used for BG3 will not come to pass. As far as 2D isometric versus 3D I'm actually not as sure as I once was that 2D would be preferable. I would just want for the backgrounds to have a lush painterly look. And for the camera not to be a distraction.
I would totally trust Beamdog to build a fantastic new game, whether it is BG: Next or a kickstarter for something entirely new.
In the upcoming auction of Atari's rights to its franchises July 16-19, I remain hopeful that Beamdog can put together, or at least partner in, a deal to realize their vision.
Still, if they are to make an open-world RPG of any kind Overhaul Games will have to muster up a lot more resources than what they have had so far. If their team has had as much technical difficulty with BG:EE as we've seen, creating a new game would likely be an overwhelming challenge for them. Even if a new engine is much easier to work with, creating an RPG from scratch is incomparably more work-intensive than touching up an old classic.
As for whether the company can make a great original game, who the hell knows. We'll know when it happens.
Did no one get that gasp feeling when they ventured out into the capitol wasteland upon exiting the vault? Do you think you would of been able to of had that feeling if you were playing Fallout 3 with the infinity engine?
And please I'm merely referencing Dragon Age: Origins as a separate entity from the Dragon Age franchise entirely.
I'm not asking for flashy flashy graphics, I'm just saying, with the technology available today, it would be a complete and utter shame not to try and re-imagine the franchise whilst at the same time keeping true to its roots.
Overall at a creative level, the company is going to be restricted by what they can achieve and accomplish with the resources they have. Which is undeserving of one of the most revered rpg franchises of all time.
By all means, create a game with the infinity engine in the Forgotten Realms dungeons and dragons universe and all that, just don't call it Baldur's Gate, as obvious "target the nostalgia" margeting ploys are getting a bit tiresome and a bit sly.
It has a much more 'survival' trait to it than morrowind, also the horror elements are there, it really has everything in one package. I do understand where the people come from when they say it's nothing like fallout 1 o 2, i agree with this but it's still an amazing game in it's own right.
If your aim is to sound as unintelligent as possible, then you should definitely continue using the phrase "Oblivion with guns." Otherwise, try actually coming up with a genuine criticism of the game rather than a pre-packaged slogan the hatred bandwagon provided you with when the game was new. There are no Perks in Oblivion, the SPECIAL stats aren't in Oblivion, there are no schools of magic in FO3, the enemies and the graphical style are clearly different and not just reskins of Oblivion content. The games are different, their only real similarity being that you can explore without zig-zagging like a tool as you would in the original Fallout games.
Wait... I remember you. You are the guy who loves Dragon Age 2, right?
"Love" is a strong word. I enjoy the game, and find the overblown criticism against it ridiculous. Who accused you of attacking anybody?
Don't get me wrong, I love all three games in question, but I can also understand the complaints that they're too similar, and a large departure from the history of their respective franchises.