Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance Revival

[Cutlock]

also, New Vegas true to original BIS games in gameplay and style?

le sigh

 

let me guess. style = 2D isometric graphics, gameplay = turn-based combat?

 

 

I really did not see New Vegas incorporate that. They did however bring back perks, traits that were thought long lost. I'll give you that. The game, however, is Morrowindized.

 

Engine: A lot of engines. Why don't we use one? Different companies you see:

 

Activision: ID Tech, IW, Titanium

EA: Too many to count

Bethesda: ID Tech, Gamebryo, Creation

THQ: ... don't ask ... please

Ubisoft: Tintin? Rayman? Call of Juarez? WWE!

 

Now you tell me which is better?

 

I was just saying that 3 and NV use the same engine and there is not a lot of differences.

[sorophx]

it's like saying that there aren't a lot of differences between games on the UE3

[Cutlock]

it's like saying that there aren't a lot of differences between games on the UE3

 

There are different kinds of games using the UE3.

 

Fallout 3 and NV are Post-Apocalyptic RPG's set in the Fallout world.

[sorophx]

ho... kay let's backtrack a bit

So wait, you like Fallout: New Vegas and not Fallout 3?

New Vegas approaches quest design and overall concept in a vein similar to the original Fallout games, and not Fallout 3.

 

Fallout 3 was a linear game at its core, it was a sandbox game, yeah, but the main quest was very weak, most sidequests completely generic, and the biggest area - the city of Washington - was a terrible disappointment. not to mention the whole eastern branch of the Brotherhood of Steel...

 

again, the engine doesn't make a game what it is, it's just a tool. if you think Fallout 3 is just as good or better than New Vegas, then we have nothing more to talk about, since our views are obviously very different

Edited June 14, 2011 by sorophx

[Cutlock]

ho... kay let's backtrack a bit

So wait, you like Fallout: New Vegas and not Fallout 3?

New Vegas approaches quest design and overall concept in a vein similar to the original Fallout games, and not Fallout 3.

 

Fallout 3 was a linear game at its core, it was a sandbox game, yeah, but the main quest was very weak, most sidequests completely generic, and the biggest area - the city of Washington - was a terrible disappointment. not to mention the whole eastern branch of the Brotherhood of Steel...

 

again, the engine doesn't make a game what it is, it's just a tool. if you think Fallout 3 is just as good or better than New Vegas, then we have nothing more to talk about, since our views are obviously very different

 

Fallout was also a linear game: find the water chip, kill the master and destroy the FEV

NV was also a linear game: find out who shot you, choose a side and let the war begin

 

The only game that would have been truly non-linear would have been Baldur's Gate III: The Black Hound.

 

The closest we have to non-linear is Mass Effect 2 and coming soon, Mass Effect 3.

[sorophx]

see what I mean?

[glenn3e]

see what I mean?

 

I guess I'm with sorophx. Due to the same reasons, NV was way better than FO3 . Heck, I finished the main quest in FO3 ACCIDENTALLY lol. And it didn't make sense. And I didn't have much options other than being shoehorn along a linear storyline.

 

In NV, when I reached the branching portion of the main quest, I can choose sides. And then make more choices on who I decide to antagonized and ally with. Also, most quests help a particular faction and such. And no more subway mazes. And my companions are actually useful. And have some sort of storyline. It just..... feels more Fallout-like where you can influence the fate of the various factions/towns you encounter.

[The Yeti of 66]

Fallout 3 was a fine title. Bethesda does incredibly well with building lore and atmosphere, and I felt those were very strong in Fallout 3. It wasn't all correct or the same, but they had to rebuild this franchise from the ground up to pull it out of the early grave Interplay's financial woes tossed it in. It may not have had as great of an overall feel as the original Fallout, but I loved the atmosphere of the game. Sure, the main quest was weak, but they still managed to scrounge up some incredible moments in it (appearance of the Enclave, Liberty Prime etc). I haven't yet started New Vegas, so I can't comment on which of the two is better, but I don't think it will be of such a high magnitude that will make me look back on Fallout 3 as a farce.

 

Now, Cutlock, have you considered all of the angles for getting a new installment of Dark Alliance created in the current market? First, you need to decide if you're going to rebuild the game for a modern age as an A or B list title or if you're going to go for more retro appeal and shoot for a budget title that would go on XBLA or similar services. I seriously doubt the latter would even be possible due to the fact that they don't even hold all of the rights to the setting. However, the former isn't likely unless Fallout Online is a success simply because Interplay has almost no free capital. Investors won't approach them with a ten foot pole until they can prove that they can handle a substantial investment that will actually make money. MDK doesn't count, that game was made years ago. If they can prove that their developers can hit the milestones on a large enough project and turn a profit, then there is a good chance of getting another Dark Alliance game. They have limited opportunities to do so currently, and the ones they do have look like a total farce. If I were a developer or an investor, I can't think of a publisher I'd want to work with less, and that's no hyperbole.

[sorophx]

appearance of the Enclave, Liberty Prime

these ruined the game completely for me

[Cutlock]

"Now, Cutlock, have you considered all of the angles for getting a new installment of Dark Alliance created in the current market? First, you need to decide if you're going to rebuild the game for a modern age as an A or B list title or if you're going to go for more retro appeal and shoot for a budget title that would go on XBLA or similar services. I seriously doubt the latter would even be possible due to the fact that they don't even hold all of the rights to the setting. However, the former isn't likely unless Fallout Online is a success simply because Interplay has almost no free capital. Investors won't approach them with a ten foot pole until they can prove that they can handle a substantial investment that will actually make money. MDK doesn't count, that game was made years ago. If they can prove that their developers can hit the milestones on a large enough project and turn a profit, then there is a good chance of getting another Dark Alliance game. They have limited opportunities to do so currently, and the ones they do have look like a total farce. If I were a developer or an investor, I can't think of a publisher I'd want to work with less, and that's no hyperbole."

 

From the reviews I read of Daggerdale. They had said that they would have appreciated the game as a B, not C, title if it had less bugs and was much longer. Now, a Dark Alliance Compilation or Dark Alliance 3, will be longer, so a B-Title, bugs, maybe so it could go A-Title. Rights. Interplay holds the Dark Alliance rights, Atari holds the Baldur's Gate and Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance Compilation Rights (Not the Dark Alliance Rights, only a part of it). The petition is a thing to get the publishers to team up so maybe we can get our Dark Alliance Games and Earthworm Jim PSP finished. If Fallout Online is not a success in game-play, then it will be in money, a lot of people are going to buy it even if it sucks alien balls. I'm talking about the MDK2 WiiWare remake, that game was the top seller for WiiWare the week it came out. So was Legendary Wars on the DSiWare. Atari would be the publisher, Interplay would be the developer.

 

I have asked Chris Taylor on Interplay what the story of Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance III was going to be. I hope he responds soon.

[Cutlock]

Not really a bump, but does not fit into the last post.

 

Chris Taylor responded that he did not know what the story of BGDA3 was and I asked him to check through Interplay's records or ask Eric or Herve Caen. He has not responded yet, probably asked them and is compiling information or something. He then said that Dark Alliance III was in development by Interplay and was canned in 2005, he did not know how far through the development it was. It probably would have been 25 % through.

 

I will not stop till I know the story of DA3.