Kotaku Obsidian Article

[Orogun01]

Did you try adding it as an exception?

[Stun]

I don't know if there are still legal issues, but could anyone from Obz give us a clue as to what the gist of BG3 might have been?

 

Please?

 

Like an Xmas present.

We actually know a good deal about what the plot/goal would have been. Wiki has a summary on it, gathered from various interviews with the devs back in the day.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baldur%27s_Gate_III:_The_Black_Hound

 

Thing is, I'm not sure what the point would have been to call it BG3, beyond the obvious marketing/sales benefit of doing so. Because it otherwise isn't even remotely related to the first two games in plot or setting.

[Apatia]

I don't know if there are still legal issues, but could anyone from Obz give us a clue as to what the gist of BG3 might have been?

 

Please?

 

Like an Xmas present.

We actually know a good deal about what the plot/goal would have been. Wiki has a summary on it, gathered from various interviews with the devs back in the day.

 

http://en.wikipedia....The_Black_Hound

 

Thing is, I'm not sure what the point would have been to call it BG3, beyond the obvious marketing/sales benefit of doing so. Because it otherwise isn't even remotely related to the first two games in plot or setting.

 

That is the Black Isle's BG3. I think Monte meant BG3 that Obsidian almost did for Atari.

[FlintlockJazz]

I don't know if there are still legal issues, but could anyone from Obz give us a clue as to what the gist of BG3 might have been?

 

Please?

 

Like an Xmas present.

We actually know a good deal about what the plot/goal would have been. Wiki has a summary on it, gathered from various interviews with the devs back in the day.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baldur%27s_Gate_III:_The_Black_Hound

 

Thing is, I'm not sure what the point would have been to call it BG3, beyond the obvious marketing/sales benefit of doing so. Because it otherwise isn't even remotely related to the first two games in plot or setting.

 

As Apatia pointed out thats the Black Isle version. They were going to call that one BG3 because they only had the rights to make D&D games if they used the BG name, same reason why Mechwarrior 2 Mercenaries wasn't called Mechwarrior 3 as the company only had the rights to Mechwarrior 2 (yeah its all a blag to get around rights).

[JFSOCC]

AVG *really* hates TSLRP. Dozens of alerts. I had to deactivate it to install. And it happily crashed swkotor2.exe because I was using it.

 

Also, I was thinking you were crazy, but in 1.0b10 (I really should actually run through that one in it's entirety, haven't done it yet) it does sound leaps better than the abhorrant mess it was in the leaked beta (1.0b08) on which I based my previous assumption.

For those interested... comparrison!

(and then, back on the topic )

http://youtu.be/5SjsZzxzuKk

I stand by my preference. the second one is a case of horrible over acting. the first is a case of a bad mic and a little over acting.

that said, I don't really like either of them.

Edited December 20, 2012 by JFSOCC

[Hassat Hunter]

Hah, yeah, could be better.

If we had a nice voice acrtress, I wouldn't mind that...

[Guest The Architect]

Canonically, HK-47 was supposed to be on Mustafar until the time of Luke Skywalker and BioWare's MMO ignored that. I think if Obsidian ever got to make Knights III, they should be able to do whatever they want. Canon of any sort has no place in video games.

[santanzchild]

Thanks for sharing that one missed that story. Was a really good write up and actually fair.

[Keyser]

Hearing about the Obsidian BG3 that could have been is of course painful at first, but if it was in 2007, a time when they themselves admit their QA sucked and their games unnecessarily buggy, I'm not sure I would have wanted them to make it. If Project Eternity turns out like I hope it will, I'd be 100% in favour of them trying to get the license.

 

Great games and shows are always dragged out for as long as they can be until they become too horrible to make a profit. There's few exceptions where they actually quit while they were ahead (Firefly to name one, also Baldur's Gate until recently with the mixed BGEE, which however might still be salvageable I think). If there's a BG3, the developers must be willing to work towards hitting the highest of expectations. Depending on the quality of Project Eternity, I would be willing to say that Obsidian can now be that developer. But was Obsidian that developer in 2007? I unfortunately don't think they were.

[C2B]

Hearing about the Obsidian BG3 that could have been is of course painful at first, but if it was in 2007, a time when they themselves admit their QA sucked and their games unnecessarily buggy, I'm not sure I would have wanted them to make it. If Project Eternity turns out like I hope it will, I'd be 100% in favour of them trying to get the license.

 

?

 

No, its not 2007. Beginning of 2009.

[Keyser]

?

 

No, its not 2007. Beginning of 2009.

 

Well, they were first approached in 2007 and at that time said they wanted to do it. Work on a "pitch", by which I presume they mean initial prototyping, started in early 2008, I'll give you that. Seeing as, according to the interview linked in the OP, they implemented effective Quality Assurance only after FO3:NV sometime between the end of 2010 and 2011, I still stand by my point.

It's great that they learned from the past and identified their weak point and I think their future games will be better for it, but if they had done BG3 at the time they were first offered it, I believe the game and the intellectual property would have suffered as a result.

[C2B]

?

 

No, its not 2007. Beginning of 2009.

 

Well, they were first approached in 2007 and at that time said they wanted to do it. Work on a "pitch", by which I presume they mean initial prototyping, started in early 2008, I'll give you that. Seeing as, according to the interview linked in the OP, they implemented effective Quality Assurance only after FO3:NV sometime between the end of 2010 and 2011, I still stand by my point.

 

It started actual development after Storm of Zehir was released (since most of that team crossed over to the title). That's why I said beginning 2009. In 2008 it probably would have been at the very end. I don't think they would have been paid for the pitch itself.

 

Anyway, it's hard to say without knowing how big the team was and how long a development time would have been given. There's a good chance (IMO) it would have ended up after F:NV's release and the quality control lessons taken during development. DSIII was after all its replacement.

 

A main factor to include here if it was made with Onyx. I'll ask.