CVG - Baldur's Gate III Rumours

Dhruin

SasqWatch
Joined
August 30, 2006
Messages
11,842
Location
Sydney, Australia
Is doesn't get any more vague than this...CVG says Baldur's Gate III is "tipped" to be in development:
A third instalment in the Baldur's Gate series is tipped to be in development, without original creator BioWare.

Although it won't be ready for at least another year, we've heard the RPG sequel is coming along at an as-yet-unnamed developer and Neverwinter Nights 2 house Atari - which recently released a series compilation on PC-DVD - is said to be handling the publishing duties. [...]
Obsidian is a possibility then but the developer behind the third Baldur's Gate is still a mystery to us, although we've heard it's a studio more than capable of making a fantastic looking production. Speculate away.

When contacted Atari said it had no comment to make except that Baldur's Gate is "one of the properties Atari has rights to".
More information.
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
11,842
Location
Sydney, Australia
I'd love to see it if done well.

My two questions would be:

1) What is the relation to the first two? Probably just the same setting I would think as there isn't much more you can do with the main character

2) What engine would this use? I'd be ok with the NWN2 engine, with hopefully a few more tweaks.
 
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
4,353
Location
Austin, TX
I came across to this comment by David Gaider in DA forum.

http://dragonage.bioware.com/forums/viewtopic.html?topic=649271&forum=135&sp=15
And if I was willing to let my baby be taken from me and handed over to anyone, it would be the likes of Chris Avellone, J.E. Sawyer, Rob McGinnis and so many others there. So while I've no answer for you regarding our plans, I can say that if it ever went in that direction again it certainly wouldn't be an issue for me.

Just want to make it clear that the topic is about possible DA extension. Of course, you can dig into it if you like but...*shrugs* I'll simply leave it to anyone who might be interested in.
 
Then I guess you're easily satisfied, either that or you never played BG 1&2.

I'm not sure what you are going at. I liked the new entries in Bioware's / Obsidian's history as much as I liked the earlier ones (well, if Obsidian was Black Isle then I think they have improved).

And what the heck has the publisher to do with the quality of the game? There are some points in which their money plays a role (eg. the abbreviated localization of The Witcher or the non-release of the Ossian sudios NWN2 adventure pack), but generally they don't interfere as much.

I think Atari has a lot of merits, especially in releasing eastern european games that would've never made it to Europe without them (Requital, anyone?)
 
Same here. The publisher is usually who screws a game, no-one else.
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
21,908
Location
Old Europe
I do not want a Baldur's Gate III. The Bhaal Saga is over, finito. Continuing that story is as stupid as producing a Lord of the Rings 4.
 
Joined
Oct 26, 2006
Messages
6,027
I do not want a Baldur's Gate III. The Bhaal Saga is over, finito. Continuing that story is as stupid as producing a Lord of the Rings 4.

I don't want to see BG3 either but for a different reason: it will inevitably be drastically different than the first two and will debase the series, like Fallout3 is set to do in a few weeks time.

Atari will never publish a game that's anything but what they determine to be the most likely candidate to sell the most copies possible, and that's guaranteed to be a very different game than BG1&2.
 
Joined
May 25, 2007
Messages
95
Atari will never publish a game that's anything but what they determine to be the most likely candidate to sell the most copies possible, and that's guaranteed to be a very different game than BG1&2.

So BG1&2 didn't sell a lot of copies?

Atari has published both The Witcher and NWN2+MotB. I wouldn't call those games mainstream nor simplified.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
720
Location
Denmark
Myself, I'd love to see another Baldur's Gate game. But like JemyM, I'd probably hate any attempt at taking the story forward.

I think a Baldur's Gate sequel would be the perfect opportunity for the genre to take a step back and then a couple of steps forward in different direction. The last BG game, and a handful of others made around that time, all overachieved, IMO. Each of them was a compromise that did a whole bunch of things well in order to make it work.

Baldur's Gate took you on a nice adventure while still leaving a lot to your imagination. Maybe they could find a way to leave even more to the player's imagination the next time around. So instead of using the computer as a tool for pumping clever RPG into pleasing simulation, they could use it as a tool to pump pleasing simulation into clever RPG.
 
Joined
Nov 11, 2006
Messages
1,807
Location
Orange County, California
Yes, but they were great games, and they weren't published by Atari...

Yeah, but if Atari - hypothetically - only publishes games that "they determine to be the most likely candidate to sell the most copies possible", then why would they change the recipes of BG1&2 when those games were commercially very successful? That's all I'm saying.
Especially when considering that Atari has published The Witcher and seen that making a hardcore RPG is something that can sell a lot of copies in today's gaming environment. Perhaps Atari didn't finance The Witcher but they did publish it, and that is bound to have some impact on the decision making in Atari.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
720
Location
Denmark
I do not want a Baldur's Gate III. The Bhaal Saga is over, finito. Continuing that story is as stupid as producing a Lord of the Rings 4.

I agree, though I'd be lying if I said I wouldn't follow the development with interest.
 
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
118
Perhaps Atari didn't finance The Witcher but they did publish it,

Which is exactly why that's a poor comparison. Atari may have done a decent job of bringing titles from other countries, but their track record with D&D products is not good, just look at TOEE.

I wouldn't have a problem with Atari publishing it if that's the ONLY thing they were involved in, unfortunately that won't be the case because they hold the rights to the D&D franchise.
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,136
Location
Florida, US
So BG1&2 didn't sell a lot of copies?

Atari has published both The Witcher and NWN2+MotB. I wouldn't call those games mainstream nor simplified.


Yes BG1&2 sold lots of copies, but that was then. They were cutting edge at the time they were released. I guess my point is that Atari will only get behind a game that they think gamers want in 2008 (or 2011 or whenever it gets released). Though I wish they would, I don't think they'll take the risk to make it very similar to the first 2 (3/4 top-down perspective for one..) I think they'll go the route of Fallout3, though I'd love to be wrong about that
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 25, 2007
Messages
95
I'm not a fan of Atari but MotB is a fine piece of work and SoZ looks pretty good to me from this distance.

What other (NA or major international) publisher has a better RPG track record? I can't think of one.

And why on earth would anyone think the Bhaal-spawn story would be continued? The title is a marketing and gameplay archetype, nothing more.
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
11,842
Location
Sydney, Australia
Back
Top Bottom