Why no new DnD video games? (no MMO)

[Orogun01]

I thought some of the changes they made when they went to 4th edition were to make it more vidya game friendly

 

I don't have any reference for that though

Considering that NWN was easier to play through than BG I actually believe that.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

No freedom to do what you want, how you want. You're locked into the current rule set. If you want to go back to a previous rule set? No can do.

[Darkpriest]

 

I thought some of the changes they made when they went to 4th edition were to make it more vidya game friendly

 

I don't have any reference for that though

Considering that NWN was easier to play through than BG I actually believe that.

 

 

Wasn't NWN 3.0 and 3.5 ed? while BG was 2nd ed?

[Hiro Protagonist II]

When BG was released, I was hoping for a Ravenloft 2nd ED IE game next. We got Planescape and Icewind Dale instead which I also enjoyed. 2nd ED had a lot of settings.

[Gorth]

I'm not sure I can get any sort of accurate bearing on what Gorth's estimate is of the reach and popularity of D&D, especially given that the word "masses" was in quotes.

 

As in most people would at least recognise the name (Dungeons & Dragons), even if not knowing much about what the name/title covered.

[Nepenthe]

Speaking purely speculatively, but I'd probably put it up with licensing issues (i.e. it's hard to get, or has restrictions a game dev may not care for).

 

Or it's just the fact that the license was first stuck in litigation and then Hasbro regained control of it in the Twilight of 4e... And new games are going to start coming alongside 5e/Next.

 

 

 

I thought some of the changes they made when they went to 4th edition were to make it more vidya game friendly

 

I don't have any reference for that though

Considering that NWN was easier to play through than BG I actually believe that.

 

 

NWN was 3e.

[Infinitron]

In general, PnP license holders are remarkably clueless about video games. Even what TDE is doing is a crude shotgun approach - throw the license at a bunch of developers, see what sticks.

 

It would do a LOT for D&D's brand awareness if there was a D&D videogame released annually, but somehow they don't understand that.

[Monte Carlo]

In general, PnP license holders are remarkably clueless about video games

 

This x 10.

 

D&D, regardless of licence-holder, has been mismanaged since the mid-1980s. And before that even the most die-hard Gary Gygax fans (like me) will admit that TSR was a byword for hubris.

 

WoTC / Hasbro, for example, seem to think they have the whip-hand with the franchise, not realising that the video game end of the deal is the most important. It makes me laugh how for years they nitpicked with developers and publishers about small details and protecting the brand then allowed (finally) the NeverWinter MMO which is nothing like D&D and has pets and crafting and hundreds of levels.

 

The brand is still strong and not beyond redemption. If they had half a brain (which I seriously doubt) Hasbro would assemble a badass team of legendary D&D designers and writers, lock them in a room with a load of video entertainment mentats and ask them to create a video-game specific iteration of D&D that squares the circle between keeping the D&D feel while making a credible and fun video game franchise.

 

In other words, put Sawyer and Monte Cooke in a pool full of jello and polyhedral dice and see what happens.

 

Bolt on a campaign setting that would support a F2P MMO, a first-person sandbox RPG and a load of more 'trad' products that you can licence then release one a year (at least) then you have exactly what Infinitron astutely suggests.

 

D&D, commercially, lends itself to the new DLC model of the industry. Games modules and spat-books were dead tree DLC, for chrissakes. If you made a core game with those bolt-ons, as I describe, I think you'd make money. Would it be 'AAA' enough to grab the suits' attention? Dunno, there might need to be expectation management and a slow-burn. But I can see a world where a core D&D 'puter iteration would make money supporting an ARPG, MMO, sand-box and Dragon Age-type products, as well as licenced smaller products (like dare I say it PoE) in a legacy ruleset that captures a new generation of fans.

 

I might pen a business plan.

Edited February 6, 2014 by Monte Carlo

[Nepenthe]

I swear we could find a carbon copy of this discussion somewhere from the time between Dark Queen of Krynn/Unlimited Adventures and Baldur's Gate. D&D CRPGs have been proclaimed dead before, and they've been raised from the dead before, as well. Or, considering RTWP, reincarnated...

[213374U]

Bolt on a campaign setting that would support a F2P MMO

 

DDO was released back in 2006 (holy **** 8 years already??) and went F2P with a model that more or less works as you describe (you need to purchase the additional adventures/classes/races) and has been getting steady content updates since, so I'm guessing it's profitable enough. It's based on the Eberron setting, which is apparently a big turn-off for many people. In my opinion the game worked beautifully so long as you kept away from PvP. So the market is there.

 

Neverwinter, on the other hand... 

[Infinitron]

I think they added an FR region to DDO as well.

[Maria Caliban]

Why spend money for the DnD license when you can make a generic DnD rip-off that makes just as much money?

[Tale]

In general, PnP license holders are remarkably clueless about video games. Even what TDE is doing is a crude shotgun approach - throw the license at a bunch of developers, see what sticks.

 

It would do a LOT for D&D's brand awareness if there was a D&D videogame released annually, but somehow they don't understand that.

I think the Atari troubles really interfered with it. Atari wasn't in a position to do a yearly release of anything.

[Monte Carlo]

Why spend money for the DnD license when you can make a generic DnD rip-off that makes just as much money?

 

An extremely good point.

 

This, IMO,comes back to Atari / Hasbro - they need to set the franchise free. Like many big owners of IP they seem to have a 'dog in the manger' type attitude towards it. The D&D versus rip-off bit comes down to:

 

1. The brand, and a computer-specific iteration that supports the brand (if you would like me to elaborate on what 'The Brand' is then I will, but I think you'll see where I'm coming from). In short, a new imagining of Dungeons and Dragons that unashamedly acknowledges the change to electronic entertainment but still captures the stuff of the original game.

 

2. The platforms. D&D is now configured for any number of franchises that follow the new iteration. (I'm going to call it D&DE... an electronic D&D). Just like in P&P days the brand stands for certain core values and quality - you know what you're getting. And that might be delivered via an MMO you jump in and out of, a larger classic CRPG or an action game like Diablo or Dungeon Siege configured for consoles. This new design is, of course, deeply cool, stylish, knowing and fun. It's D&DE and is about swords, sorcery, having fun with friends (or not, we love single player too) and staying up too late drinking beer / soda and eating pizza.

 

3. Variety. You can play a pared-down core game or you can play a super-pimped splat-booked version pumped full of DLC. Or something in the middle. This is delivered via licenced / franchisees who are given massive leeway in developing their own rules and settings within the brand. The sandbox game you can play solo or with friends might be in a different campaign setting with different powaz and stuff, but it's still recognisably D&D. I'd work on a system that encouraged cross-product benefits (buying content in splat DLC 'A' unlocks some bonus content in an unrelated D&DE product 'B' - Blizzard does this successfully).

 

I contend, therefore, that the strength of the brand from the P&P version, and it's core values and quality, could easily translate into a suite of computer entertainment products. Easily. People collect DLC and play trading card games. Gamers are collectors. Dammit, you could have a D&D version of Steam to keep your D&DE collection with associated bonus.

 

TL;DR --- convert the entire bloody game to the computer and set the franchise free.

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

 

The brand is still strong and not beyond redemption. If they had half a brain (which I seriously doubt) Hasbro would assemble a badass team of legendary D&D designers and writers, lock them in a room with a load of video entertainment mentats and ask them to create a video-game specific iteration of D&D that squares the circle between keeping the D&D feel while making a credible and fun video game franchise.

 

 

 

I so wish something like this would happen. To me, D&D will always have a very special place in my heart. I've been so loyal I basically bought any CRPG with "D&D" on the box. I like the world settings (I see it is a strength that I am familiar with its lore and history -that's why I think the 4th ed of FR was such a let down. They should have kept going where they were and progressed year by ear, and not skip some century and declare great catastrophes and upheavals. You don't run amok and kill gods like that.) It's all a materr of quality writing and great devs. The loyal fan base is out there. It's still strong in numbers and nowadays we tend to be pretty strong on the financial side as well, at least compared to some decades ago. So, please, make this happen, somehow, someday...

[Zoraptor]

My general idea for reinvigorating the D&D computer game subgenre was something along the lines of NWN3, with the SoZ world map as a starting feature. Have a strong campaign, have bolt on/ plug in DLC, profit! Which is pretty similar to Monte's idea, really.

 

I think there are inherent problems with a cheap licensing solution though. Going back to my big list on the first page you still have the problems of who will develop it and how it is funded, plus add the problem of potentially having a load of low budget shovelware options crop up. The last years of Atari were not just bad because they released few titles, they were also bad because the titles they did release were definitely not of the highest quality.

 

I did wonder if the 'publisher' that approached Obsidian about doing a kickstarter around the time of P: E was actually Hasbro. It's one of the few options where a publisher retaining the IP rights could actually make sense to the IP owner and still have them think it would be a benefit to the kickstarter as well.

[Nepenthe]

I doubt that, I'm pretty sure the legal in hasbro would be ****ting bricks re IP dilution even at the whisper of crowdfunding.

[Zoraptor]

Don't know about that, corporations like free money and from their pov that's what kickstarter provides, and in that case it would be working with a developer with a proven record in D&D and who had shown fairly recent interest in it until diddled over by Atari. They aren't exactly flush with options for potential developers and I could see that overriding any other considerations, especially if there really isn't a big queue of publishers just waiting for a licence opportunity.

 

(Overall I don't think it was Hasbro on balance of probability, but someone else being clueless about things. But I do think they'd make most sense if we were looking for a sensible suggestion.)

[Hiro Protagonist II]

I've always wondered what games would be like if made with previous edition rule sets. I would love to try out a 1st ed or 2nd ed new game with todays technology, or at least in the same style of the IE games. Putting a stop to previous versions always seemed odd to me.

[Gorth]

I can just see it for me... this little group of protesters in long hair, bell bottoms and fleece vests, sitting by the campfire outside Hasbro's office with "Save our THAC0's"

[Hiro Protagonist II]

Even if it's indie developers. I think it'd be cool to see Indie developers being able to choose which rule set they'd like to make a game with and Hasbro saying, 'yeah no problem. just pay us the royalties.' I've never bought an indie game before and I'd buy some of these games with previous rule sets. At the moment we're stuck with 4th ed.

[alanschu]

Hasbro probably isn't too keen on supporting the old rulesets similar to how Activision isn't too keen on still supporting the older Call of Duty games.

[BruceVC]

http://kotaku.com/q-a-baldurs-gate-ii-enhanced-edition-took-a-lot-of-w-1507720763

 

Guys here is quick read around all the work to produce BG2 : EE

 

For me the most interesting part of the article is the discussion around BG3 and how Trent Oster is not only keen to make the game but is making a semblance of progress in the required negotiations with Wizards of the Coast

[Nepenthe]

Don't know about that, corporations like free money and from their pov that's what kickstarter provides, and in that case it would be working with a developer with a proven record in D&D and who had shown fairly recent interest in it until diddled over by Atari. They aren't exactly flush with options for potential developers and I could see that overriding any other considerations, especially if there really isn't a big queue of publishers just waiting for a licence opportunity.

 

(Overall I don't think it was Hasbro on balance of probability, but someone else being clueless about things. But I do think they'd make most sense if we were looking for a sensible suggestion.)

Sigh. There's a reason all the IPs we see on kickstarter are the ones that were dead for all practical purposes. In spite of having had its halo tarnished a bit, DND is still far from dead. In fact, a DND game showing up on kickstarter would orobably be the most certain way of figuring out that the IP is no longer valued by its owner.

[Nepenthe]

http://kotaku.com/q-a-baldurs-gate-ii-enhanced-edition-took-a-lot-of-w-1507720763

 

Guys here is quick read around all the work to produce BG2 : EE

 

For me the most interesting part of the article is the discussion around BG3 and how Trent Oster is not only keen to make the game but is making a semblance of progress in the required negotiations with Wizards of the Coast

Frankly, I'd prefer if they were making a semblance of progress with patching bg2, even giving them the allowance of only having two coders on the team and a bunch of rabid android owners screaming for their version.