Skip to content

The future of Infinity Engine

RaggieRaggie Member Posts: 23
I know it's old... I know it's overused. But if Beamdog continued to publish remastered version of all Infinity Engine games and then went on to make a row of new ones, I'd be pretty happy. Anyone else?
immagikman
«1

Comments

  • jcomptonjcompton Member Posts: 157
    I would be horrified.
  • pablo200783pablo200783 Member Posts: 96
    edited August 2012
    Original engine from BG2 is great even now i like it more than more from Dragon Age engine.
  • AnduineAnduine Member Posts: 416
    edited August 2012
    @Raggie, I appreciate your enthusiasm for the Infinity engine, and I share it. However...

    Like @jcompton, I too would be horrified. The Infinity engine, to me, is a classic. When I first heard news of the Enhanced Edition of Baldur's Gate, I was appalled and filled with discomfort and almost a feeling of violation. Who dares "enhance" the Mona Lisa? It's only after spending time researching the team behind the Enhanced Edition that my shock and discomfort began to settle.

    The promise to not tamper with the core game is what reduced my feelings to mere skepticism, which will remain until I both play and complete BG:EE. The same I shall say for BG2:EE.

    If both Enhanced Editions are completed successfully while holding true to the promise to not tamper with the core, then I imagine my attitude towards a new line of Infinity Engine games may change slightly, but that depends strongly of the content of that new line.

    Will this new line of games be in AD&D 2.0, as it should always be? Will the feel of the game be true to that of the Baldur's Gate saga and Icewind Dale, even if the new line is not directly related to them? Will the music make me feel like I am playing an Infinity Engine game? Who is calling the shots on it? A cash-grabbing company, or a team of passionate designers?

    I would need all of the above questions answered to put myself at ease, and I am sure that some fans of the Baldur's Gate saga feel the same way. There are many threads and posts on this forum and on other websites involving an interest in seeing Baldur's Gate 3, and I hope that game never exists. Baldur's Gate is the story of the Bhaalspawn. The title may not imply that, but it's a fact nonetheless. That story came to an end in Baldur's Gate 2: Throne of Bhaal.

    If there is a chance of adding a new line of Infinity Engine games, they must not tamper with the originals.
  • RaggieRaggie Member Posts: 23
    I don't think I understand. The BG saga is my favorite RPG, but I don't put in on a pedestal. Or perhaps I don't think it couldn't be improved because I'm already used to modding, and I like these "tampered" games better than the original BG series.

    At any rate, why not a new line of IE games? It's a good engine and I think they could still make good games out of it (not just these actiony "cinematic experiences" they make these days), even if they would be different than the originals. It's just an engine, not a religious relic.
    immagikmanGrandeClakridsMoira
  • LemernisLemernis Member, Moderator Posts: 4,318
    The answer to the OP's vision for a new series of games using Infinity may be found in the plans for BG3. It seems next to impossible that BG3 would use the enhanced Infinity Engine. We have been advised by Philip Daigle to expect BG3, if there is one, to use whatever ruleset is current at the time of release with WotC. That engine would therefore probably be built from the ground up, as WotC will not authorize use 2nd ed. AD&D (with some elements of 3.0) that Infinity uses. We can expect BG3 to use an isometric perspective, though.
  • LemernisLemernis Member, Moderator Posts: 4,318
    edited August 2012
    I would add that if BG/BG2:EE proves a financial success my hope is that this could be used to persuade WotC that there is a very robust niche market for retro/nostalgia products. Perhaps then WotC might reconsider.

    I understand the business model to push the latest product on the shelf (which figures to be Edition Next). But customization has always been integral to PnP D&D. That D&D PnP market is already divided up by preferences for earlier editions--doesn't that tell us something? Also, what works well for a CRPG may not work well for tabletop and vice versa. IE has proven to be near-perfection for a CRPG.

    Beamdog is taking the gamble that it can demonstrate the market possibilities for perfecting an old PC game that is already great, and seeing how it sells via new platforms. We already know how BG runs on a computer--sales there should be at least good. I'm sure it will be a great console game, as well. The real test (as I see it) is how well the game translates to tablets and phones. I'm not sure if that share of its market will make or break it. But sales will probably have to perform at least reasonably well.

    Anyway, assuming that Infinity gets perfected via EE and sales are good on enough platforms, if then enough BG series fans cry loud enough for BG3 to use the same ruleset as Infinity, then why not give the customer what they want? The customer is always right.
  • MississippiGhostMississippiGhost Member Posts: 20
    edited August 2012
    @Raggie @Anduine @Lemernis: Do not confuse AD&D based, isometric RPGs with the Infinity Engine. The IE is simply the technical foundation. In theory, it could be used to produce D&D 4.0, D&D Next or even My Little Pony Island Adventure games.

    jcompton is horrified by the technical implications: The IE is very old, very limited in what it can do, very hard to code (you may have have heard Trent Oster's cries of pain on Twitter), and very hard to mod (compared to newer games like NWN or the Elder Scrolls series). Sometimes trying to build upon something old is harder than building something new from scratch.

    Should Baldur's Gate 3 or any other new RPG be made it would make more sense to develop a new engine from the ground up.

    Trent Oster for reference: http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/comment/40866/#Comment_40866
    jcomptonUlfgar_TorunnGrandeC
  • RaggieRaggie Member Posts: 23

    @Raggie @Anduine @Lemernis: Do not confuse AD&D based, isometric RPGs with the Infinity Engine. The IE is simply the technical foundation. In theory, it could be used to produce D&D 4.0, D&D Next or even My Little Pony Island Adventure games.

    Sounds fun to me!

  • AnduineAnduine Member Posts: 416
    Raggie said:

    I don't think I understand. The BG saga is my favorite RPG, but I don't put in on a pedestal. Or perhaps I don't think it couldn't be improved because I'm already used to modding, and I like these "tampered" games better than the original BG series.

    At any rate, why not a new line of IE games? It's a good engine and I think they could still make good games out of it (not just these actiony "cinematic experiences" they make these days), even if they would be different than the originals. It's just an engine, not a religious relic.

    While I respect your opinion, you may find that a number of BG fans *DO* put the game on a pedestal (Or rather, respect that it's already there) and in a manner of speaking, do look upon the game as a religious relic or pinnacle of gaming.

    This thread, afterall, is about opinion (Unless I missed something), and I decided to share mine. It is not a decree that all must abide by, but rather my personal preference on the matter. I personally do not use mods, and I personally do not want to see the Infinity Engine taken beyond what it was designed best for (Another opinion of mine): AD&D 2.0



  • ZeckulZeckul Member Posts: 1,036
    Anduine said:

    I personally do not use mods, and I personally do not want to see the Infinity Engine taken beyond what it was designed best for (Another opinion of mine): AD&D 2.0

    It already was taken beyond AD&D 2.0 though, with IWD2.

  • Ulfgar_TorunnUlfgar_Torunn Member Posts: 169
    edited August 2012
    The success of Baldur's Gate is the product of addictive gameplay, likeable characters and an engrossing story, the engine has nothing to do with it. In fact, (as @Zeckul states) Trent Oster has often tweeted about the horrors of this ancient technology. It may have gotten the job done, but it did it in a way that was slow, difficult to mod and often arcane.

    A new engine will be designed for BG 3, and it will retain the feel of the old Infinity games without the cumbersome 'features' of the Infinity Engine.
  • AnduineAnduine Member Posts: 416
    Zeckul said:

    Anduine said:

    I personally do not use mods, and I personally do not want to see the Infinity Engine taken beyond what it was designed best for (Another opinion of mine): AD&D 2.0

    It already was taken beyond AD&D 2.0 though, with IWD2.

    I did not deny that it was taken beyond, nor do I doubt that it can be. I am stating my preference on "should", not "are/is." And for the record, I did not enjoy Icewind Dale 2 at all.

    reedmilfam
  • reedmilfamreedmilfam Member Posts: 2,808
    @Anduine - I thought IWD/IWD2 was just 'go here, fight monsters, go somewhere else'. I remember nothing about the game, except the drowning spooky things that are hard to kill.
  • Avenger_teambgAvenger_teambg Member, Developer Posts: 5,862
    edited August 2012
    jcompton said:

    I would be horrified.

    Well, a bad engine is still better than a non existing engine.
    Parts could be replaced. Probably the scripting, yeah. But otherwise this isn't a total catastrophe.
  • GaelicVigilGaelicVigil Member Posts: 111
    edited August 2012
    I love the Infinity Engine. If there was a way for Overhaul to use it again for Baldur's Gate 3 (or whatever it will be called), I would be in heaven. That's unlikely to happen because of the difficulty of the engine, and I think modern gamers would weep over a 2D, isometric view in today's gaming world.

    If Overhaul has real guts, they would develop a new engine that is the spiritual successor to the IE, a 2D, pre-rendered, isometric system, almost identical in every way to IE, but far more customizable and capable of advanced NWN-style multiplayer DMing tools. Sorry folks, but computer D&D was MEANT to be played in an isometric, tactical setting. None of this over-the-shoulder, or first-person bullcrap we get today.

    I fear, however, that Overhaul will bow down to the masses and create yet another 3D stinker like Dragon Age or Mass Effect and slap on the "spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate" BS. Bleh...
  • jcomptonjcompton Member Posts: 157


    Parts could be replaced. Probably the scripting, yeah. But otherwise this isn't a total catastrophe.

    As someone who has tried to find people who can make palletized layered sprites in the 21st century, I beg to differ.
    CrevsDaak
  • immagikmanimmagikman Member Posts: 664
    edited August 2012
    Skill sets hard to find @jcompton ?

    maybe you should look in the retirement homes ;)
  • jcomptonjcompton Member Posts: 157
    edited August 2012
    "Retirement home" is not far from the truth. The careers of people who really "understand sprites" peaked in the 1990s. That means today they fall into two major categories:

    1. Burned out and rendered useless by the vagaries of the game development industry, or
    2. Well-paid senior artists and managers who would command excessive prices to be lured into service creating goony clown-colored image sequences.

    On the other hand, entry-level people who can rig up very nice character model animations which can be placed directly into (insert sensible modern 3D rendering system here) are being churned out by the thousands by art and vocational schools (not to mention self-teaching) every month.
    immagikmanAntonDiscoCatCrevsDaak
  • ZeckulZeckul Member Posts: 1,036

    If Overhaul has real guts, they would develop a new engine that is the spiritual successor to the IE, a 2D, pre-rendered, isometric system, almost identical in every way to IE, but far more customizable and capable of advanced NWN-style multiplayer DMing tools.

    I agree with everything but the "2D, pre-rendered" graphics. The only reason the Infinity Engine uses pre-renders is because it was designed back in the days where hardware could not do real-time rendering of such highly detailed scenes. So they traded off the freedom of moving the camera around for fluid rendering. Today you don't have to make that trade-off: you get the freedom of point of view and highly detailed renders that are real-time and fluid. 3D also lets you have a much greater number of animations and appearances for all your characters without the exponential explosion of sprites 2D require. Plus with the source art lost for BG today forbidding higher-res renders we see the evil of not shipping the "real" art with the game.

    jcomptonimmagikmanDiscoCatelminster
  • NWN_babaYagaNWN_babaYaga Member Posts: 732
    edited August 2012
    Not to imagine to build a new engine or a one based on infinity with 2D backgrounds and sprites. There are ways today to render landscapes, dungeons etc. in 3d it will outshine anything other. It just depends on the artistic style and how you approach design in terms of authenticy. The infinity graphics were very authentic to me, very simplistic (dont get that one wrong) and realistic with the 1% magic (except PT). On the other hand you have the trees as an example, in BG i dont know...

    So i would not want them to do a whole new game based on it and rather focus on developing a good base tech thats on par with todays standard.
  • TreyolenTreyolen Member Posts: 235
    If they could get Bioware/EA on board to license the IE there is no reason not to use the 3rd edition ruleset under the OGL. That would free them up from WotC involvement altogether and save a little coin on the licensing side. A new engine would be great, but those don't grow on trees. I'd rather see money spent on new content for an old engine than a new engine with less content.

    Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil was an amazing engine after fan patches. But that game was severely limited content wise. I wouldn't want to see a repeat of that mistake.
  • KerozevokKerozevok Member Posts: 695

    The IE is very old, very limited in what it can do, very hard to code (...), and very hard to mod (compared to newer games like NWN or the Elder Scrolls series).

    Baldur's Gate vs Morrowind.

    In BG you can attach 5 scripts on a creature.
    In MW, only one.

    In BG you can create an infinite number of various spells.
    In MW, there are only 50 effects (and most of them are the same) for create new spells.

    In BG you can make a good battle script for a caster.
    In MW, it's impossible

    In BG you can create a cutscene.
    In MW, it's impossible.

    In BG you can customize a class (add innate spells or abilities).
    In MW, it's impossible.

    Very old ? Very limited ? ^^
    CrevsDaak
  • immagikmanimmagikman Member Posts: 664
    @Kerozevok

    I believe if you think its doable you should give your list of sprite experts to @Jcompton
    We were just discussing that finding people who were skilled is near impossible.

    Technology evolved and IE is OLLLLD and it brings with it things like lost skill sets and lack of utilization of modern effects and hardware. Morrowind is ALSO very old, lets compare to newer technologies and you will see the limitations.
    NWN_babaYaga
  • NWN_babaYagaNWN_babaYaga Member Posts: 732
    edited August 2012
    @Kerozevok
    All your points are much more enhanced in Neverwinter Nights 1 and 2. There are scripts experts for NWN your jaw would drop in a bottomless hole;)
  • KerozevokKerozevok Member Posts: 695
    @immagikman Morrowind & Oblivion are the same for the modding... (Never played with Skyrim).
  • immagikmanimmagikman Member Posts: 664
    edited August 2012
    I think we see that BG / IE is the pinacle of one type of technology that has since been left behind, comparisons to first gen new technologies like NWN is unfair, compare against mature modern game engines....and things dont look so rosy for the IE.....however I would still buy every Enhanced IE game that gets produced and I would play new games if they were created.
    Talvrae
  • immagikmanimmagikman Member Posts: 664
    edited August 2012
    Well still Oblivion was better visually and I liked the game play better, Skyrim improved upon that and is probably very similar. FallOut 3 and NV are also good references. I would like to hope that there were still some more advanced engines to IE in the 2D realm.
  • TalvraeTalvrae Member Posts: 315

    I think we see that BG / IE is the pinacle of one type of technology that has since been left behind, comparisons to first gen new technologies like NWN is unfair, compare against mature modern game engines....and things dont look so rosy for the IE.....however I would still buy every Enhanced IE game that gets produced and I would play new games if they were created.

    I agree with that and while the nvironements of the IE was quite strikingly beautifuls, but we sure can,t sau the same for the dolls, they never looked good even back in the day
    immagikman
  • jcomptonjcompton Member Posts: 157
    Treyolen said:

    there is no reason not to use the 3rd edition ruleset under the OGL.

    Incorrect.

    The OGL's terms make it impossible (by *design*) to produce any software *whatsoever*.

    I checked.

    With the primary author of the OGL.
    immagikman
Sign In or Register to comment.