Baldur's Gate 3?

[Volourn]

Wait. Did you just quote yourself and blame me for said quote? LMAO

[SonicMage117]

Wait. Did you just quote yourself and blame me for said quote? LMAO

No, I fixed what you said for you by removing the "Fake News" you wrote, then I responded as if you were agreeing with me

 

 

 

My point is that, the bias of "Baldurs Gate is the best (or one of the best) rpg's ever because there wasn't anything like it or because I played it when I was young and had a good time with it" doesn't validate the content quality of the product.

 

I'm going to go deeper inside you guys for a moment here - hoping I don't offend anyone for saying the reality...

 

There is nothing revolutionary about Baldurs Gate, it didn't revolutionize anything in the games industry. I mean, it did introduce alot of things that had never been done in an rpg but let's face it, Jrpg's were already doing all the good stuff better than IE games ever did. The linearity of the Jrpg pushed storytelling to a place where IE games never did, other genres like Arpg birthed Diablo which basically made combat in an isometric rpg fun and useful.

 

In short,

Games like FF7, Diablo and Witcher 3 revolutionized the industry while Baldurs Gate did not in any way. I love that Crpg genre is back now though, it's nice to see games that don't use the horrid D&D systems which were my main gripe with IE games back in our hay days. It's not that I didn't enjoy the games as much as anyone else, I just give credit where it's due.

 

I'm hoping that BG3 will fix those mistakes that BG1&2 had with storytelling, combat, boring companions and please God... Please don't let us hear really bad voice acting with "memorable" lines like "You must gather your party before venturing forth".

 

If they accomplish fixing these things, it can be great!

Edited October 8, 2018 by SonicMage117

[Tale]

Just because you personally dislike something, that doesn't mean you can dismiss its significance. (edit: double and triple negatives are hard, okay)

 

Granted, the influence that Baldur's Gate had is probably overstated in a place like this one, but to act like it had none is pretty obviously false. It may not have caused dozens of copycats to spring out of and birth a major fad like we see with some properties today, but there are significant titles coming out even recently that owe their existence to Baldur's Gate. And that's part of what being revolutionary is about. Causing change.

 

The modern party based RPG descends from Baldur's Gate. And the retro ones coming out now are explicitly wearing their grandfather's old hats.

[InsaneCommander]

I guess we can hope WotC/Hasbro decides to not armchair quarterback their pick for a developer for BG3 (assuming its real, I took the reported tweet as a joke when I first read it).

 

You know, re-reading Chris Avellone's tweet did give me the impression it could be a joke...

[Volourn]

"There is nothing revolutionary about Baldurs Gate, it didn't revolutionize anything in the games industry. I mean, it did introduce alot of things that had never been done in an rpg but let's face it, Jrpg's were already doing all the good stuff better than IE games ever did. The linearity of the Jrpg pushed storytelling to a place where IE games never did, other genres like Arpg birthed Diablo which basically made combat in an isometric rpg fun and useful.

In short,
Games like FF7, Diablo and Witcher 3 revolutionized the industry while Baldurs Gate did not in any way. I love that Crpg genre is back now though, it's nice to see games that don't use the horrid D&D systems which were my main gripe with IE games back in our hay days. It's not that I didn't enjoy the games as much as anyone else, I just give credit where it's due.

I'm hoping that BG3 will fix those mistakes that BG1&2 had with storytelling, combat, boring companions and please God... Please don't let us hear really bad voice acting with "memorable" lines like "You must gather your party before venturing forth".

If they accomplish fixing these things, it can be great!          "

 

 

FAKE NEWS.

[SonicMage117]

I love BG, as well as just about every IE game, I grew up on them, I even supported all of the rereleases again by buying the Enhanced Editions. I can't deny that IE Games have a follwing but I also cannot deny that the following that BG is very small and niche for a reason.

 

Thus, the death and rebirth of the genre was needed for that very reason, developers and publishers can now make D&D games better by harnessing the new tech we have today available for use. Do you agree? I mean the passion in such tiles now are much more visible which is only expanding the genre to fresh eyes by introducing the games in new ways.

 

We also know that when BG3 comes out, many who have never heard of or played Baldurs Gate games before will buy it for that reason. For a long time I, like many others, thought BG2 was the best rpg ever made but then I started playing more games a few years ago, gave indies a try and a good try with open mind and the more I played them the more I saw the faults of our best old golden year rpg's. Something then just clicked, it all made sense to me and the more experience I achieved in real life within the means of familiarity with what rpg's went where and best achieved what, I came to a disappointment in myself that I could throw these new rpg's under the rug because I couldn't accept it or I hadn't played them. I found, I was indeed cheating myself.

 

Now are you going to tell me that my personal expereince is "FAKE NEWS". It won't suddenly make it a false statement, nor will they disappear. I already got ya covered V

 

But enough about my depressing sob story, I have high hopes for this, even higher than SCL. Let's hope it turns out good.

[Vaeliorin]

Faêrun is garbage setting.

FTFY.

 

Honestly, the only part of the Forgotten Realms that I find remotely interesting are the Moonshaes.  And I mean the original Moonshaes from the original Forgotten Realms novels (Darkwalker on Moonshae, Black Wizards and Darkwell.)

 

I also really dislike 5E D&D (though it's not as bad as 2E or 1E.)

 

Still, if such a game is made, I'll probably end up buying it (though unless it's turn-based, probably not until it's $5 or less,)

[KDubya]

This has 'cash grab' written all over it. Make a new DnD game - great, make it big budget - great, but why in the name of Gorion call it Baldur's Gate Three?

 

The Bhaalspawn saga got completed in Throne of Bhaal, you went from naïve hero in Candlekeep to godhood, vanquishing all on the way. There is no where left to go with that story.

 

The game was sort of 2nd edition AD&D which is archaic to say the least in today's gaming. Plus there is no way that WotC does anything not 5e so it'd be an entirely different game system.

 

So you have totally distinct game systems and a completely new story and you'd call it Baldurs Gate Three for …… reasons? Only reason I can see is an attempt to cash grab via nostalgia and name recognition.

 

Make it its own game with its own name and it can be judged on its own merits. Unless they are going to Fallout Three the game and change it to a first person action game in an open world.

[SonicMage117]

This has 'cash grab' written all over it. Make a new DnD game - great, make it big budget - great, but why in the name of Gorion call it Baldur's Gate Three?

I disagree.

 

The reason is for easy identification, just because it's different, doesn't mean it's not worthy of a title continuation. If that was the case, then probably around 60% of game sequels wouldn't have or need a title conituation.

 

Continuing a legacy isn't defined by fan expectations or the demands thereof, nor should it ever be (as fans are never right). Just be great it isn't Baldurs Gate: Dark Alliance 3 - although that would be a phenomenal project as well!

 

On the other hand, if it's really bad, the legacy of Baldurs Gate would be tarnished forever. So that should tell us that the devs/pubes are confident in what they're doing - IF it's really going to be called BGIII (we won't know the exact name til later butt of cows).

The Bhaalspawn saga got completed in Throne of Bhaal, you went from naïve hero in Candlekeep to godhood, vanquishing all on the way. There is no where left to go with that story.

Now this I agree with and that's all the more reason why we don't need to be tied down to BG1+2 characters or story but we COULD have a parallel story in the same world at the same time that BG1 or 2 took place. Imagine that, in a 3D world with a third person perspective (non-isometric). That could be amazing and since there's so much source, it's not like it would be too hard to accomplish but I know that fans would whine over getting such an amazing thing anyway.

[bigbazoopa]

"There is nothing revolutionary about Baldurs Gate, it didn't revolutionize anything in the games industry. I mean, it did introduce alot of things that had never been done in an rpg but let's face it, Jrpg's were already doing all the good stuff better than IE games ever did. The linearity of the Jrpg pushed storytelling to a place where IE games never did, other genres like Arpg birthed Diablo which basically made combat in an isometric rpg fun and useful.

 

In short,

Games like FF7, Diablo and Witcher 3 revolutionized the industry while Baldurs Gate did not in any way. I love that Crpg genre is back now though, it's nice to see games that don't use the horrid D&D systems which were my main gripe with IE games back in our hay days. It's not that I didn't enjoy the games as much as anyone else, I just give credit where it's due.

 

I'm hoping that BG3 will fix those mistakes that BG1&2 had with storytelling, combat, boring companions and please God... Please don't let us hear really bad voice acting with "memorable" lines like "You must gather your party before venturing forth".

 

If they accomplish fixing these things, it can be great!          "

 

 

FAKE NEWS.

Who ranted this crap?

[xzar_monty]

I can't really see a game called Baldur's Gate 3 being that in anything but name. I mean, the story finished already at the end of ToB.

 

This doesn't sound like a very interesting project. Of course, if the game ever comes out, it could be the best ever, but on the face of it, I'm not looking forward to it. BG is done already. It was superb, but it's done.

[SonicMage117]

Who ranted this crap?

Hmmm... You must be new here.

 

Anyway, I did, what's the problem? What was wrong with what I said or do you simply not like it because you don't agree with it?

I can't really see a game called Baldur's Gate 3 being that in anything but name. I mean, the story finished already at the end of ToB.

 

This doesn't sound like a very interesting project. Of course, if the game ever comes out, it could be the best ever, but on the face of it, I'm not looking forward to it. BG is done already. It was superb, but it's done.

You and a few others have stated this so you are not alone but the irony and hypocrisy in this statement lies in the fact that none of you complain about Tales Of games having no relation, or Final Fantasy, Elder Scrolls, Fallout or Ys. While some of those are Jrpg, the subject to comparison remains the same so I'd like someone to enlighten me how having no relation calls for the need to be called another name other than Baldurs Gate III or thereby fails to qualify it when everyone here plays other franchises that do this very thing and it's never bothered them before... Not that we know for sure it's going to be called BG3 anyway. Edited October 9, 2018 by SonicMage117

[aksrasjel]

 

I can relate to your wearing nostalgia goggles and not wanting a potential new installment to tarnish the spell that has laid hold of you since beating the original saga but think of it this way: it's not all about you and me, there are other gamers right now with a fledgling interest in CRPG's and I believe they deserve a chance to capture the same feeling of awe and inspiration that we did when we first began playing BG. I really don't understand why there is such unwillingness to greenlight a third game. Look how many sequels Final Fantasy has cranked out. Some are better and others are worse yet scarcely anyone is calling for an end to the series. Personally I've always wanted a Disney of sorts (the Disney of old, mind you) in the video game industry that makes wholesome and relatively family-friendly games with a lot of depth, which is also why I'm not a big fan of Greenwood's and his Forgotten Realms 'canon'. Anyway, BG is the closest thing to have scratched that itch for me and I'm sure many others will agree. I think of Siege of Dragonspear as an utter failure and yet my fondness for the original series has not waned. Just give it a shot and hope for the best. If it fails, big deal!

Wouldn't Blizzard be the "Disney" of videogame industry nowadays? Say what you want about their business practices, but they are really trying to be "wholesome" and more-or-less fun for everyone to enjoy. They never get political, they stay out of any controversies and just want to make a quality product that would be enjoyable by masses. They are simply too big now to take any risks. And I actually respect them for that in a weird sense.

 

As for BG3 itself - I'm not saying "don't do it" - far from it, I am just very aware that it will most likely not be a game for me. Therefore, my disinterest.

 

I can see - and maybe even prefer - it working as a sequel in a way of "The Force Awakens" - a fun, safe nostalgia trip down the memory lane and nothing else. Don't take unnecessary risks. Make something that both new and old fans - and pretty much everyone - can enjoy. Pulling it off is actually harder than one may think. And yes, as a fan of OT, I did enjoy TFA.

TLJ... not really.

 

SoD was arguably trying to be that escapist nostalgia trip in high concept - too bad the narrative lead had some other ideas, which didn't work out in the end.

Edited October 9, 2018 by aksrasjel

[Heathsunderer]

Wouldn't Blizzard be the "Disney" of videogame industry nowadays? Say what you want about their business practices, but they are really trying to be "wholesome" and more-or-less fun for everyone to enjoy. They never get political, they stay out of any controversies and just want to make a quality product that would be enjoyable by masses. They are simply too big now to take any risks. And I actually respect them for that in a weird sense.

 

As for BG3 itself - I'm not saying "don't do it" - far from it, I am just very aware that it will most likely not be a game for me. Therefore, my disinterest.

 

I can see - and maybe even prefer - it working as a sequel in a way of "The Force Awakens" - a fun, safe nostalgia trip down the memory lane and nothing else. Don't take unnecessary risks. Make something that both new and old fans - and pretty much everyone - can enjoy. Pulling it off is actually harder than one may think. And yes, as a fan of OT, I did enjoy TFA.

TLJ... not really.

 

SoD was arguably trying to be that escapist nostalgia trip in high concept - too bad the narrative lead had some other ideas, which didn't work out in the end.

 

Now that you've brought up Blizzard, I guess you could go so far as to say they strive to be 'wholesome'. The thing is, their games don't seem to have very much depth to them story-wise (I did enjoy playing Warcraft 3 and Diablo 2 when I was growing up) and nowadays as a young man with an overbearing sense of entitlement I can't bring myself to replay them anymore since neither the setting nor lore catch my fancy. On the other hand, BG (which is a flawed gem in my view) was just as entertaining and gripping when I was a kid (didn't beat it back then) as it was on my first successful run a few months ago. So yeah, making a game that both kids/teens and grown-ups will find to their liking is tough as nails but that's why we call them 'classics' or 'timeless'. 

 

EDIT: In addition, Blizzard does get political: https://archive.fo/vn46j

Edited October 9, 2018 by Heathsunderer

[Mamoulian War]

Who ranted this crap?

A mage who loves Sonic and blames nostalgia for all the modern gaming industry failures

[SonicMage117]

 

Who ranted this crap?

A mage who loves Sonic and blames nostalgia for all the modern gaming industry failures

Modern industry failures?

 

More like people being blinded by their nostalgia and not being able to admit that there are games as good as ot better than the ones they played growing up ir just because they can't move as good as they use to, blaming the devs and saying "They don't make em like they use to" but the internet lives in an opposite day, every day and there is always an excuse for everything. Kinda like how a degenerate will lie to themselves about something so silly like "80's > 90's" and "90's > 00's" depending on when they were born, something always has to be superior, eh?

 

The nostalgia cult is here, after all, look at the age of everyone who claims IE games are the best

 

(No offense to you, I'm getting up there in age myself hehe) but let's continue to pretend that masterpieces were in vastly superior in one decade than another because that makes sense and is logical

 

/S

 

However, you were right about the other part, I am a mage main who loves Sonic the hedgehog <3

Edited October 9, 2018 by SonicMage117

[Manveru123]

Can you stop blaming everything on nostalgia already? Baldur's Gate was a fantastic game, and it's still very fun to play. It had its own share of issues, like every game ever made, but it combined great storytelling with memorable characters. This game pretty much created the RTWTP genre type of games, and you say it's not "revolutionary". But Final Fantasy 7 apparently is, even though its gameplay is a copy of 30 other jRPG games made before it :D :D (and when it comes to story depth, it's not even the top FF game out there, and that's excluding FF8 and above)

 

You're the one who's blinded by some silly hate. You're not a god damn mind reader, and your word is not law, so please stop behaving like a redneck already and accept that there are many people who consider Baldur's Gate to be a good game because it's a good game.

 

Or don't. I don't think anyone cares.

 

Wouldn't Blizzard be the "Disney" of videogame industry nowadays? Say what you want about their business practices, but they are really trying to be "wholesome" and more-or-less fun for everyone to enjoy. They never get political, they stay out of any controversies and just want to make a quality product that would be enjoyable by masses. They are simply too big now to take any risks. And I actually respect them for that in a weird sense.

Which is why I'm hoping that they get Star Wars license after the deal with EA expires, but that would probably be too amazing.

Edited October 9, 2018 by Manveru123

[SonicMage117]

Can you stop blaming everything on nostalgia already? Baldur's Gate was a fantastic game, and it's still very fun to play. It had its own share of issues, like every game ever made, but it combined great storytelling with memorable characters. This game pretty much created the RTWTP genre type of games, and you say it's not "revolutionary". But Final Fantasy 7 apparently is, even though its gameplay is a copy of 30 other jRPG games made before it :D :D (and when it comes to story depth, it's not even the top FF game out there, and that's excluding FF8 and above)

 

You're the one who's blinded by some silly hate. You're not a god damn mind reader, and your word is not law, so please stop behaving like a redneck already and accept that there are many people who consider Baldur's Gate to be a good game because it's a good game.

 

Or don't. I don't think anyone cares.

You do care, you just wrote me a letter.

 

I'm blaming nostalgia because that is what exactly is to blame here and I'll continue to do so, so long as there's a reason. Curious, though, what, in your opinion, shoud I blame?

 

I asked a valid question: "Why don't people want the game to he called BG3 but have no issue playimg other franchises which do the same thing and not complain?"

 

FF7 did revolutionize alot, perhaps you never played it so your ignorance prevents you from having the knowledge bit FF7 revolutionized storytelling and cinematics in games as we know it.

https://youtu.be/xsb0kSKegUM

Now feel free to list me the games that FF7 "copied" because I doubt you played it but I'm willing to listen agd be proven wrong if you can give me specifics.

 

I never said Baldurs Gate didn't create the genre but creating a genre doesn't mean it revolutionized the industry lol The genre is a very VERY unpopular one, it's niche, so nice it needed to die and get revived years later.

 

And yeah, I'm a hater - makes total **** sense when I stuck up for Beamdog on the first page of this thread. I guess hate means you are happy for re-releases of games now, who knew that saying you were glad the game got brought to a new generation through another dev/pub meant you disliked the original? The internet is a wonderful place XD

I can relate to your wearing nostalgia goggles and not wanting a potential new installment to tarnish the spell that has laid hold of you since beating the original saga but think of it this way: it's not all about you and me, there are other gamers right now with a fledgling interest in CRPG's and I believe they deserve a chance to capture the same feeling of awe and inspiration that we did when we first began playing BG. I really don't understand why there is such unwillingness to greenlight a third game. Look how many sequels Final Fantasy has cranked out. Some are better and others are worse yet scarcely anyone is calling for an end to the series. Personally I've always wanted a Disney of sorts (the Disney of old, mind you) in the video game industry that makes wholesome and relatively family-friendly games with a lot of depth, which is also why I'm not a big fan of Greenwood's and his Forgotten Realms 'canon'. Anyway, BG is the closest thing to have scratched that itch for me and I'm sure many others will agree. I think of Siege of Dragonspear as an utter failure and yet my fondness for the original series has not waned. Just give it a shot and hope for the best. If it fails, big deal!

That was my point^

 

Glad someone else got it.

Edited October 9, 2018 by SonicMage117

[bigbazoopa]

 

Who ranted this crap?

Hmmm... You must be new here.

Anyway, I did, what's the problem? What was wrong with what I said or do you simply not like it because you don't agree with it?

I can't really see a game called Baldur's Gate 3 being that in anything but name. I mean, the story finished already at the end of ToB.

This doesn't sound like a very interesting project. Of course, if the game ever comes out, it could be the best ever, but on the face of it, I'm not looking forward to it. BG is done already. It was superb, but it's done.

You and a few others have stated this so you are not alone but the irony and hypocrisy in this statement lies in the fact that none of you complain about Tales Of games having no relation, or Final Fantasy, Elder Scrolls, Fallout or Ys. While some of those are Jrpg, the subject to comparison remains the same so I'd like someone to enlighten me how having no relation calls for the need to be called another name other than Baldurs Gate III or thereby fails to qualify it when everyone here plays other franchises that do this very thing and it's never bothered them before... Not that we know for sure it's going to be called BG3 anyway.

No problem i have just never seen anyone criticise bg2 like that before. You are entitled to your opinion but im going to go out on a limb here and say that you are on your own here. It is a very unique and unusual view you have there on bg2

[SonicMage117]

No problem i have just never seen anyone criticise bg2 like that before. You are entitled to your opinion but im going to go out on a limb here and say that you are on your own here. It is a very unique and unusual view you have there on bg2

To this forum? Probably, I mean, most members here worship IE games because it's what they grew up with so my comments may ruffle some feathers - it takes maturity for them not get riled up ad contain tjeir passion for the product, I don't hold BG1+2 to sych a high regard for the obvious reasons. It doesn't mean I dislike or hate the games, again I bought the originals boxed ahd I bought the re-releases by Beamdog and people here tend to think I'm crazy because I've recommended the Beamdog versions over the originals even though you can play the Beamdog versions without the added content, weird huh? I also backed Deadfire, if it wasn't for IE games, I woukd have never known about or backed Deadfire. My all time favorite games are Sonic Spinball ahd PoE1. I'm a very strategically driven person and I like tje color blue - which both Sonic and Pillars 1 consist mainly of.

 

 

 

Now...

 

Off the forum, my outlook isn't so different or unique, maybe that's why birds of the same feather flock together on this forum, a community of the same mindset makes a strong one but a boring one and perhaps this isn't the place for me. Still, I know guests/non-members will appreciate my perspective even if some members don't so I'll stick around. Personally I don't see anything harmful with pointing out a games flaws, disecting it but I guess I can see how that could make someone mad if they are/were obsessed with it or something

 

Anyway, thanks for respecting my opinion. I respect yours as well!

Edited October 9, 2018 by SonicMage117

[Manveru123]

I don't see why do you feel the need to blame anything to be honest. And to answer your question: because people are afraid that sequel will not be as good as the original. It has nothing to do with nostalgia, it's common in game and movie industry that sequels are simply objectively worse (there are of course exceptions).

 

I've finished FF7 fully 14 times in total. It's one of my favourite jRPG game ever made, and it was brilliant, but it did not create a new type of games like Baldur's Gate did. The combat was a copy-paste not only of all previous FF games, but also most other jRPG created at that point in time. You don't have to look far: Final Fantasy 6 had better story and characters (the game literally had a fantasy version of a nuclear holocaust in the middle of a playthrough) overall, but FF7 did a much better job at playing the player's emotions. So was Chrono Trigger. Cinematics? Sure, so cool, except that summon cinematics could not be skipped, and **** like KOTR had a loooong summon cinematic, so it was fun for the first few summons, and an effing chore after that. The graphics tried to be awesome, but models were just a bunch of huge, ugly squares. Also, who the hell rates the game by graphics? Look at Final Fantasy 8. It was a huge graphical improvement over FF7, but the game sucked ass because everything else was bad.

[bugarup]

 Well, I do disagree with the Riddler about BG series significance in PC gaming (they are very significant), but I would agree about them being way overrated -- especially the story, which is really not that good. 

 

To be on topic, I don't believe the game is going to be blatant cash grab -- more likely just another product in the long line of reboots, reimaginings, sequels, prequels and suchlike results of creativity bankruptcy that is currently endemic to most of entertainment industry. I'll still buy it, because I don't have BG-coloured nostalgia glasses and won't be let down, but I'll wait for at least 50% discount. 

[SonicMage117]

And to answer your question: because people are afraid that sequel will not be as good as the original. It has nothing to do with nostalgia, it's common in game and movie industry that sequels are simply objectively worse (there are of course exceptions).

 

In this little that you have wrote, there's so much that is wrong.

 

Hmmm.. Where to begin.

 

The fact that the majority of BG fans agree that BG2 is the better of the two proves that the sequel paranoia is just that - paranoia. Fallout 2 is better than Fallout 1, VTM: Bloodlines is better than VTM: Redemption, The Witcher 3 is far better than the first two, Kotor 2 is better than the first... the list goes on and on. So I don't think that is the issue.

 

I think it's the fact that someone is working on this years later and they hate that fact.

 

 

BUT...

 

Let's be real here, if Baldurs Gate 3 was being made by it's original developers a couple years after BG2's release, nobody here would have a problem, I guarentee you nobody would be saying "Dur! There's no where for the franchise to go so why are they making this?" Instead they'd be jumping for joy. So that's a very important and valid scene variable to consider.

 

Then there's also the fact that we don't know much about it but we already see whining about the name, about the possible content, about everything basically. All those points are what's pretty much what's led me to blame nostalgia. There's no valid reason to why we can't or shouldn't have a realized sequel, everyone here should be rejoicing. I mean, I get it that none of us aren't young anymore and it's just not the same because we aren't at that period of time but it doesn't make sense to say "We're not excited for this" or "Yeah, that seems like bad idea". It's not logical, so this is where protective instinct over a franchise would rather kill it/end the line rather than ressurect it and have more memories even if it's different? Hmmm.... Something is amiss with that mindset, the game is afoot.

 

#SonicLogic

Edited October 9, 2018 by SonicMage117

[Manveru123]

Well I can't disagree with this post. Makes sense now. Though the fact is, Baldur's Gate story is technically over, to continue with the same hero would be just like beating a dead horse. Nothing is stopping them from making another character a hero, tho.

 

To be fair, I don't mind that they're making BG3. In my book, the more games like these, the better. Honestly I don't care if it's amazing or not, I'll buy it anyway.

[aksrasjel]

To play the devil's advocate for 5 seconds. I am surprised nobody brought up Fallout: New Vegas as an argument. You may have heard about the company that made it.

Mechanically, it has nothing to do with FO1 or FO2, but it's very much a proper Fallout 3 game for a lot of fans, myself very much included. And it was a distant sequel to an old franchise.

The catch is - New Vegas was a lightning in a bottle. People that made it were extremely passionate about the franchise and wanted to make the best Fallout they can - unlike Bethesda with their Fallout 3.

 

So, theoretically, you can make an awesome BG sequel without any of the 'nostalgic' attachments. You just need right, passionate people for the job. But what are the real chances that you will recieve a cynical, soulless cashgrab instead?

Edited October 9, 2018 by aksrasjel