Baldur's Gate 3?

[Chilloutman]

 

The only reason at this point to make a BG3 is to cash in on the name of a beloved franchise, Fallout-style. No thanks.

 

Fallout: New Vegas was imho the closest thing to original Fallouts (and Van Buren) that you can get, it had that feel, while Fallout 3 was just a money-making-machine. For me NV *is* number 3. Although in Fallout franchise it is easier to make a new story not related to the previous protagonists - it usually makes sense. A hypothetical Baldur's Gate 3 would be equally silly if it was about the same Charname Bhaalspawn (a demigod who fought for the Throne of Bhaal, ffs) or if it was about a brand new character.

 

Well, maybe a son/daughter of Imoen perhaps.... NO, totally not.

 

 

I cant agree, while NV was definetelly better than original F3, it feel too much over the top for me. Almost all characters where not much belivable and caricaturesque

[Volourn]

Like PST? K.

[Lephys]

Like PST? K.

Oooooooh! Lemme go get some aloe for that BURRRRRN!

[FootDive]

"BG3 is the worst idea anyone can think of. The Bhaalspawn Saga fully ended, there's just not more you could possibly do to add to the franchise"\

 

\Simply not true and if you think so you lack imagination. There's tons that can be done with a BG3. And, it would be GLORIOUS. Unless you lack imagination.

 

\

\

A BG3 can be done and it can be done awesomely. It should not eb done, hwoever, unless the docs are involved. That said, an Obsidian/BIO/pick  developer can still make a fun BG3.

Right, go on and say I lack imagination, I won't name call back.

 

The reason its a bad idea is because every single ounce of possible imagination in the BG franchise was absolutely and utterly spent. There is nothing to build from, every plot thread was resolved. At that point, if someone does make a BG3, it would be all entirely new content unheard of in the previous series at which point you may as well ask "why not just make a new game?". Do you understand how much that dev/publisher is risking just to make an entirely new game with the same name of an already pre-established franchise? I even mentioned it in my previous post, even Black Isle knew not to tread there, they went with a completely unaffiliated route and was BG in name only. 

 

The characters had their final epilogues and you know their fates. You wipe out all Bhaalspawn essence in the end, the blood of the franchise that drove the game and its story and finally either find peace through mortality or become a god. The Bhaalspawn PC was level 30+ by the game's end, the PC was a walking death machine at that point, absolutely NOTHING can get in his/her way, that severely limits the types of stories you could do with the PC which is not even taking into account with the PC was a god or a mortal.

[rjshae]

My understanding is that the contract signed with TSR made certain contractual allowances for the use of the name 'Baldur's Gate'. Thus it could have legal ramifications that may make it more financially feasible to create a Baldur's Gate 3 than, say, a Waterdeep 1. It wouldn't necessarily need to be connected to the original, in the sense that Icewind Dale 2 told a whole new tale. Or it could have some loose connections. *shrug*

[DeadManINC84]

I feel like games like Divintiy Original sin prove they should make it and it will sell well, that game has never left the no.1 bestseller sense it came out over a week ago.  Clearly people like to play old school RPG'S.

[Bryy]

Corrected link.

This is friggin' amazing. But would absolutely blow with D&D's ruleset.

 

 

I feel like games like Divintiy Original sin prove they should make it and it will sell well, that game has never left the no.1 bestseller sense it came out over a week ago.  Clearly people like to play old school RPG'S.

Correction: people like good games.

 

Using this logic, not trying to be completely asinine, but Doublefine would be making millions on Broken Age.

Edited July 10, 2014 by Bryy

[Lohi]

Having replayed the series somewhat recently, there were some drawbacks to it.  For one, the main character just can't be in the game anymore in a sequel without the game becoming too silly as the levels are too high.  Throne of Bhaal failed for me for that reason, things were too high level in power and it sucked out the fun.  Also, the D&D rules just really become terrible at high levels, all the later versions with complicated feats, and the whole system just does not work well except for a small set of level ranges (or at least without going to earlier editions like AD&D).

 

Also the story is done.  BG1 was a decent story, BG2 was better, expansions for both those games felt lackluster and more like an IWD combat-only style than an RPG.   I imagine any subsequent sequel would also hit the problem of just dragging things out and losing a lot of what made the originals work.

 

Now certainly it could be a game set in the same world. The whole setting is overused and cliched now, especially with computer games.  Too much magic.  Too much name-dropping.  Too many sub-races. Better to have a D&D set in a classic realm like Greyhawk, or a made up setting.  and besides with all those other computer games using forgotten realms there's no reason to have yet another.

 

And finally, developers run the risk of trying too hard to make lightning strike twice in the same place and a sequel could end up inadvertently as a parody of the earlier games.  Better to try something new rather than be constrained by unrealistic expectations.

[sibakruom]

There was a Baldur's Gate 3 actually planned, called The Black Hound. It had nothing to do with the Bhaalspawn saga, and the hook of the storyline was reminiscent of what we've heard about PoE: main character is a random person who is at the wrong place at the wrong time, and witness to a supernatural event.

If I remember correctly, it was as rjshae said: the only reason it was named "Baldur's Gate" was because they already had the rights to make games with this name. And according to its wikipedia article, there was some continuity planned with Icewind Dale 2, but not BG.

[rjshae]

I feel like games like Divintiy Original sin prove they should make it and it will sell well, that game has never left the no.1 bestseller sense it came out over a week ago.  Clearly people like to play old school RPG'S.

Correction: people like good games.

 

Using this logic, not trying to be completely asinine, but Doublefine would be making millions on Broken Age.

 

True, people like to play good games. Tastes vary, of course. But I do think that many of us suspected there remained a latent market for old-school CRPGs. The people who didn't seem to know it were many of the corporate suits in charge of deciding what games get funded. D:OS and others will hopefully demonstrate that there is at least a niche market that may be worth some funding.

 

At least until they saturate it with a pipeline full of fodderall.

[sibakruom]

True, people like to play good games. Tastes vary, of course. But I do think that many of us suspected there remained a latent market for old-school CRPGs. The people who didn't seem to know it were many of the corporate suits in charge of deciding what games get funded. D:OS and others will hopefully demonstrate that there is at least a niche market that may be worth some funding.

 

At least until they saturate it with a pipeline full of fodderall.

 

There's always been a significant market for CRPGs, and since there's barely any competition, any decent one is garanteed to make a profit. And if the game is actually good, it will inevitably attracts players that aren't necessarily fans of the genre but will still want to try it out.

 

It's actually a bit surprising CRPGs simply stopped being made. The more CRPG-y games of the last 5-10 years were commercial successes (Neverwinter Nights 2, Dragon Age). There hasn't been a huge profile game bombing miserably to point at and say "see, this genre is dead!" either.

Why no other big studio ever tried to get in the market?

[marelooke]

 

True, people like to play good games. Tastes vary, of course. But I do think that many of us suspected there remained a latent market for old-school CRPGs. The people who didn't seem to know it were many of the corporate suits in charge of deciding what games get funded. D:OS and others will hopefully demonstrate that there is at least a niche market that may be worth some funding.

 

At least until they saturate it with a pipeline full of fodderall.

 

There's always been a significant market for CRPGs, and since there's barely any competition, any decent one is garanteed to make a profit. And if the game is actually good, it will inevitably attracts players that aren't necessarily fans of the genre but will still want to try it out.

 

It's actually a bit surprising CRPGs simply stopped being made. The more CRPG-y games of the last 5-10 years were commercial successes (Neverwinter Nights 2, Dragon Age). There hasn't been a huge profile game bombing miserably to point at and say "see, this genre is dead!" either.

Why no other big studio ever tried to get in the market?

 

My assumption is that the big studios/publishers (or at least the suits running them) have caught a severe case of consoleitis. Making these kind of games (thinking cRPG and RTS mainly here, though I'm sure there are other genres) work well with a controller is something nobody has pulled of as of yet (and I frankly doubt it's even possible, but I guess that's another discussion), as such they didn't consider it a viable investment (aka "No controller, no care!").

 

After the resurgence of PC gaming (or rather, with people finally realizing PC gaming isn't dead, hasn't ever been anywhere near dead and isn't going to be dead anytime soon) they just forgot about all these genres they'd been neglecting all this time and just kept pushing out these console ports to PC gamers instead of playing to the strengths of the platform.

 

Maybe all these successful Kickstarters will change their minds, we'll see. Though honestly, as long as the likes of Obsidian, inXile, Larian, etc keep cranking out great "niche" games for use to enjoy I could scarcely care less about what generic crap the big publishers keep shovelling out the door*.

 

*I'm aware that's a generalization, of course it's not *all* generic crap.

[Volourn]

"I feel like games like Divintiy Original sin prove they should make it and it will sell well, that game has never left the no.1 bestseller sense it came out over a week ago.  Clearly people like to play old school RPG'S."

 

D:OS is a good, fun game. But, aside of the turn based combat, it is NOT old skool. Old skool RPGs don't use RPS to determine dialogue outcomes. L0L

 

 

P.S. BG3 can be made, and it can be connection to the BG series, and it can be awesome. I have tons of solid ideas for it as I'm sure anyone else with imagination can come up with their own.

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

 

P.S. BG3 can be made, and it can be connection to the BG series, and it can be awesome. I have tons of solid ideas for it as I'm sure anyone else with imagination can come up with their own.

 

Volo I'm going to be honest when I say that's one of the  most accurate and insightful posts you've ever made

[Volourn]

So, now you  re insulting ime in THIS thread?

[Suburban-Fox]

Why would anybody want a Baldur's Gate 3 now anyway? Are people under the impression that simply calling a game "Baldur's Gate" will automatically make it good?

 

The team that made the original two are not likely to work on any kind of a sequel now. If such a sequel is made, there's a good chance it will disappoint. Also, do we really need a continuation of the whole "child of Bhaal" storyline?

 

Besides, WotC aren't going to grant permission for anybody to do an RPG based on an outdated version of their game, so it will be made with the current version of D&D, which, at the moment, is still officialy 4th edition! Do you really want that??

[Volourn]

Actually, 5th adition is out. And, while not perfect, it seems to be a MASSIVE upgrade on 4the dition.

 

While a BG3 being made may not be guaranteed to be good but it cna't be good if it isn't made right. Afterall, without the crappy FO3 we wouldn't have gotten the very good FO:NV.

 

We don't 'need' anything. When it coems to games it's always 'want'. Geez.

[rjshae]

Why would anybody want a Baldur's Gate 3 now anyway? Are people under the impression that simply calling a game "Baldur's Gate" will automatically make it good?

 

The team that made the original two are not likely to work on any kind of a sequel now. If such a sequel is made, there's a good chance it will disappoint. Also, do we really need a continuation of the whole "child of Bhaal" storyline?

 

Because positive name recognition still works well on most people as a marketing tool. It might not in some cases such as you, but individually you're not going to make or break the game sales. As for whether or not it will disappoint, well that would be true regardless of the title. All the title would do is get the foot in the gamer's door, so to speak.

[BruceVC]

So, now you  re insulting ime in THIS thread?

 

Dude seriously...insulting you? I just paid you a compliment...no need to thank me

[Volourn]

Damning with faint praise is still damning.

 

If you think that was one of my most 'accurate and sightful' posts you need to read more of my posts.

[Suburban-Fox]

Because positive name recognition still works well on most people as a marketing tool. It might not in some cases such as you, but individually you're not going to make or break the game sales. As for whether or not it will disappoint, well that would be true regardless of the title. All the title would do is get the foot in the gamer's door, so to speak.

 

It might get a foot in the door, but it'll suck, because everybody will be expecting a repeat of the Baldur's Gate experience, which they're not going to get. Because it'll fall short of expectations, everybody will rail at the developers for daring to release a title that wasn't to their liking, under the title of "Baldur's Gate".

 

Baldur's gate was a product of the Bioware/Black Isle partnership. Many of those people have moved on to other things, and the entire gaming industry has become infected with Moderngameitus. If Baldur's Gate was made now, it'd have map markers, regenerating health, and arcade-style combat. :-P

[Volourn]

"Baldur's gate was a product of the Bioware/Black Isle partnership."

 

No. It was Bioware + Feargus.  BIS gets way too much credit for being the publisher. OMG! They helped playtest the game. LMAO

[RoverGrover]

It has been my experience that rehashing something old, merely for it to fall under the same title is a recipe for disaster.  It always ends up being a horrible mix of obligatory fanservice and attempts to recapture the past. The Baldurs Gate games were some of my favorite games of all time.  But I would prefer to see some original content that captures what made Baldurs Gate great rather than a game that exists merely to carry on the line. 

[Lephys]

Old skool RPGs don't use RPS to determine dialogue outcomes. L0L

Yeah, they use dice rolls, not some random determinance. Gyah!

 

Damning with faint praise is still damning.

 

If you think that was one of my most 'accurate and sightful' posts you need to read more of my posts.

Bruce, will you help me start a petition to get Volourn's avatar officially changed to a photo of Grumpy Cat?

 

Don't tell him he looks nice today, or he'll think you mean he doesn't look nice on other days.

[rjshae]

It has been my experience that rehashing something old, merely for it to fall under the same title is a recipe for disaster.  It always ends up being a horrible mix of obligatory fanservice and attempts to recapture the past. The Baldurs Gate games were some of my favorite games of all time.  But I would prefer to see some original content that captures what made Baldurs Gate great rather than a game that exists merely to carry on the line. 

 

 

Nobody is making you buy it. If there is a 10% chance that you are utterly wrong, then you'll get a game you enjoy. If you are right, then that will show up in the reviews and feedback, allowing you to avoid wasting your money. You have little to lose by encouraging the development of more games like the BG series, regardless of the name. If you want to criticize a release, it is more productive to do so once it is out and you can rationally assess it.