Baldur's Gate 3 rumor

[newc0253]

*sigh* You claim to understand the logic of Atari's reasoning but are still 'amazed'. It's not complex or amazing. It's about profit.

it's good that Atari have fans like you, Vol, to defend their bottom line.

[ramza]

*sigh* You claim to understand the logic of Atari's reasoning but are still 'amazed'. It's not complex or amazing. It's about profit.

it's good that Atari have fans like you, Vol, to defend their bottom line.

 

Volourn just likes to contradict whatever everyone has to say...

[Monte Carlo]

Sorry to go slightly O/T (although it won't harm this thread given the non-rumour that kicked it off)...

 

but it really is time for a HACKMASTER CRPG. Seriously.

 

Cheers

MC

[Gorgon]

Original ADD rules, my favorite.

[Bartimaeus]

Storms of Zehir is supposed to be the 'spiritual successor' to Baldur's Gate (as is Dragon Age, for that matter). If those games sell well, why not go the whole hog and make a game called BG3?

 

 

NWN2 is completely and utterly different from Baldur's Gate. There's hardly any relation to gameplay at all. It is completely wrong to compare the two.

Edited September 23, 2008 by Bartimaeus

[Pidesco]

Storms of Zehir is supposed to be the 'spiritual successor' to Baldur's Gate (as is Dragon Age, for that matter). If those games sell well, why not go the whole hog and make a game called BG3?

 

 

NWN2 is completely and utterly different from Baldur's Gate. There's hardly any relation to gameplay at all. It is completely wrong to compare the two.

 

 

Are you kidding?

[Bartimaeus]

No, I am not. They are completely different in terms of game play. I can't even understand how people can relate such different things.

[Tigranes]

A combat system which emulates D&D rounds into pausable real-time, involving a PC and several NPCs that may be directly controlled, all of it using D&D rules and systems?

 

I obviously left out all the differences, but hell, of course it's related.

[Pidesco]

Well, they're both games where you follow a linear story through different chapters, with a lead character you created by picking a class, atributes and physical characteristics. Furthermore, you go through both games picking up a motley crew of adventurers, with whom you talk to further each of the character's plots. Also, you go around doing quests, mostly of the fetch or kill variety which usually can be completed in either a good or evil fashion. Also, the combat follows a formula where you take the characters you picked to follow you plus the lead character to fight against all manner of beasties like ghouls, skeletons, spiders, orcs and many humans, who may be thieves, or bandits, or evil priests or whatever. It should be noted these fights are somewhat tactical and follow a set of arbitrary rules known as Dungeons & Dragon where the classes and attributes of the characters involved determine the outcome of battles. Finally, both games take place in the same fictional universe.

 

 

 

Completely different games. It's like comparing Civilization and Halo.

[newc0253]

Storms of Zehir is supposed to be the 'spiritual successor' to Baldur's Gate (as is Dragon Age, for that matter). If those games sell well, why not go the whole hog and make a game called BG3?

NWN2 is completely and utterly different from Baldur's Gate. There's hardly any relation to gameplay at all. It is completely wrong to compare the two.

NWN2 and BG are both D&D games. that's comparing apples with apples, afaic.

 

but i otherwise fail to see the logic of the original post. just because SoZ is yet another 'spiritual successor' (bleeah) to BG, how does it make sense to publish a game called BG3 but otherwise with no connection to the original series, except maybe a geographical one?

[Volourn]

Seems to work with the FF series. *shrug*

 

It also worked for the BG series since BG1 was Baldur's Gate/surroudnings and BG2 was Athkatla/Amn.

[SteveThaiBinh]

Whether the games are similar to or different from Baldur's Gate is not the point; the point is that someone has decided that saying your game is a spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate is a Good Thing. The name and the brand have marketing value, and why not, given all the 'top 100 games ever' lists over the years that have featured one or both of the Baldur's Gate games? I think Baldur's Gate 3 would get a similar or greater marketing boost from the established reputation of the brand. Isn't this one of the reasons Bethesda bought Fallout?

[Dark_Raven]

BG3 would recieve contempt and utter hatred from the die hard fans just as Fallout 3 has. Just leave it alone. Do something original Mr./Ms Game Developer.

[Tigranes]

Actually, I don't think it will. Fallout is largely defined by its unique setting, one which was entirely invented by the game's creators - so that there is not as much room for reimagination or reinvention that doesn't seem out of place. On the other hand, people in generla have an attachment with the Bhaalspawn saga, but the setting is... just the Sword Coast, and hell, nobody had a problem with not even having Baldur's Gate in the second game. It's FR to boot so theres a lot of room for new stuff without offending people. The only way BG3 would gain the kind of hatred FO3 gets, is if it decided to directly continue the Bhaalspawn saga or have the same PC or something silly like that.

 

I mean, look at TBH. All you need is ~2 months of good solid marketing to drum "its bg3 NO ITS NOT BHAALSPAWN SAGA" into people's heads.

[Killian Kalthorne]

Why have the 3 in it in the first place?

 

Just call it Baldur's Gate, give it a subtitle, and call it a day.

[Volourn]

"BG3 would recieve contempt and utter hatred from the die hard fans just as Fallout 3 has."

 

No.

[Jaesun]

I. Can't. believe. I am say this. But.... Volourn is correct.

 

I'm going to go take a long hot shower or something....

[Tigranes]

Just call it Baldur's Gate, give it a subtitle, and call it a day.

 

Nowhere as effective a brand name, though.

[newc0253]

Just call it Baldur's Gate, give it a subtitle, and call it a day.

 

Nowhere as effective a brand name, though.

 

how about:

 

Baldur's Gate 3: Baldur's Gate In Name Only

 

or maybe:

 

Baldur's Gate 3: Nothing To Do With The First Two Except The Name

 

or perhaps:

 

Baldur's Gate 3: Just Buy This Already, You Clueless N00b.

[Azure79]

I. Can't. believe. I am say this. But.... Volourn is correct.

 

I'm going to go take a long hot shower or something....

 

I think everyone on this forum has had that thought at one time or another.

 

I don't think BG3 if announced, will cause the amount of backlash that Fallout 3 did. Wasn't that mainly because Bethesda was the dev? They're great at making empty open-ended worlds with the same elven ruin and goblin caves over and over again, but they really weren't well-known for crafting, hmm...a good story, good dialog with interesting NPCs and such.

 

They should just make game called Baldur's Gate Gaiden: Minsc and Boo Adventures. I would buy it. How about an entire series following the escapades of the NPCs. BG Gaiden: Imoen meets Elminster, Edwin and the Netherscroll 2. Jan Jansen and the Terrible Turnip, Viconia and the drow orgy. Make them adventure games.

[CoM_Solaufein]

BG3, we do not need nor wish to see the light of day. The BG series had its time, if they desire to create a new D&D game, go with something original and not rehash a series that is better off staying dead.

[taks]

um, giving an old title to a new game is in no way similar to "rehashing a series." it was not the "BG series," it was the "bhaal series" that was named BG. sheesh.

 

taks

[ramza]

Why don't they use the Mystary engine (the one used for the Van Burren and Jefferson projects)? It features 3D isometric graphics and I am sure people would love to play with such an engine.

 

I just wonder who got the rights to it... Interplay? Or has Obsidian bought it as well (along with concept art and such)?

Edited September 24, 2008 by ramza

[Pop]

As Sawyer has said, that engine was not terribly efficient where art asset creation was concerned.

[newc0253]

it was not the "BG series," it was the "bhaal series" that was named BG.

it's great that you keep trying to push that utterly semantic distinction, but have you noticed that nobody is buying it?