CVG - Baldur's Gate III Rumours

[Saber-Scorpion]

DO NOT WANT.

I like the Baldur's Gate series as it is: it has a beginning, a middle, and an ending. It's a beautiful, epic, flawed, yet nearly perfect RPG series.

If anything, just re-publish the series in one huge collection, but leave it the heck alone.

 

[JDR13]

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

Are you serious? I'm sure I could think of a few, again....look how Atari handled TOEE and Gothic 2.




@Saber_Scorpion- I'm with you 100% on that one.

 

[Dhruin]

Are you serious? I'm sure I could think of a few, again....look how Atari handled TOEE and Gothic 2.




@Saber_Scorpion- I'm with you 100% on that one.

You side-stepped it, though.

I agree both ToEE and Gothic 2 were mishandled but look beyond the surface. Gothic was an external distribution deal and before release, Atari announced they were scaling back or even abandoning external distribution deals. Gothic 2 became a victim of that policy - and they didn't care; an unknown German game, anyway.

ToEE, yeah...you're dead right. BUT! No other publisher would have made it in the first place. Can you think of another major western turn-based CRPG made in NA in the last decade? PoR2: RoMD?

In my opinion, a dodgy ToEE is better than nothing.

So, again, who are the other NA or major international publishers with a better RPG record?

 

[Lucky Day]

WANT!

Well this report is extremely thin. This site decided they needed to verify with Atari who politely refused to. BG3 has been less than Vapourware since Black Isle scrapped its first try which leads to...

...We haven't heard nuthin' about JE Sawyer's attempt to remake Van Buren with the NWN2 engine in a long time. His pet side project may be the secret detail that we're missing here.

If you think about it Obsidian doing it with NWN2 makes total sense - a proven developer already having the project designed and half out the door. Stick its original name on it and we're talking from zilch dollars to 2 million units if done right. That's a net gain of $∞.

I, for one, would look forward to a BG3. There's been too many 'mature' RPG's out lately and this could put back them on the right track.

It doesn't have to be the Bhaalspawn saga to be a BG. Heck, BG2 was set in Amn and never went to Baldur's Gate. For it to be a proper BG it must feel like D&D, be a large open ended game with a compelling storyline. A linear story would make it an Icewind Dale.

It must be huge! Not Elder Scrolls huge but BG huge, like Arcanum. Another thing it must be multiplayer capable with the story focused around characters you pick up along the way. Rolled characters would make it an IWD although you could still have the option.

You'll remember IWD2 had little to do with its predecessor as well, other than being set in the same general area. Yet it had all the same qualities of the first one in spite of being 3e. The boys at Black Isle learned their mistake from HoW.

 

[JDR13]

You side-stepped it, though.

No I didn't, I just didn't feel the need to get in a pissing match about who likes what publisher better. Instead I simply gave some great examples of why I don't have a lot of faith in Atari.

ToEE, yeah...you're dead right. BUT! No other publisher would have made it in the first place. Can you think of another major western turn-based CRPG made in NA in the last decade? PoR2: RoMD?

Atari didn't make TOEE, Troika did. Atari just screwed it up by forcing them to release it before it was ready. Turn-based CRPGs fell by the wayside quite a while ago, and TOEE didn't do much to help the genre.

 

[KazikluBey]

Atari didn't make TOEE, Troika did. Atari just screwed it up by forcing them to release it before it was ready.

Yes, I'm sure it was all Atari's fault for not meeting the agreed upon milestone deadlines.

 

[JDR13]

Yes, I'm sure it was all Atari's fault for not meeting the agreed upon milestone deadlines.

Right, because we all know that a publisher would NEVER rush a development team...

 

[skavenhorde]

TOEE had the shortest developmental cycle for a RPG I've read about. A year and a half to do what they did was amazing, imo. Even with all the bugs when it first launched it still was an amazing game. I bought the thing when it first came out and yes it was buggy but the combat system was innovative for a TB game and there were no CTDs on my computer. Most importantly though it was fun.

Here is an interview with the developers about making TOEE.
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/greyhawkthetempleofee/news.html?sid=6080000&mode=news

Atari could have given them more time but even so, like Dhruin said when was the last time any major pulbisher made a fun TB game? Let alone a D&D TB game.

Personally, I would like to revisit the Sword Coast. I'm sure that we're not going to have a continuation of the story but a whole new one in the Sword Coast. I don't understand why anyone wouldn't want to go back to the City Baldurs Gate unless they didn't like the setting in the first place.

 

[Roi Danton]

Then I guess you're easily satisfied, either that or you never played BG 1&2.

Oh, I actually played BG 1 & 2 (incl. expansion) but I really was satisfied with NWN1 and 2 and MotB. At least MotB had a story and a setting to rival BGs. It wasn't as extensive but it was really good.

By the way, I still don't regard BG as the über RPG game. It had a good story and good characters, but it was not perfect.

 

[JDR13]

Atari could have given them more time but even so, like Dhruin said when was the last time any major pulbisher made a fun TB game? Let alone a D&D TB game.

No other publisher could make a D&D game even if they wanted to, Atari owns the rights to D&D until 2017.

I don't understand why anyone wouldn't want to go back to the City Baldurs Gate unless they didn't like the setting in the first place.

For the exact same reason that so many people are pessimistic about Fallout 3, it seems unlikely that a sequel made by an entirely different development team would capture the same feeling that the originals had.

 

[JDR13]

By the way, I still don't regard BG as the über RPG game. It had a good story and good characters, but it was not perfect.

I agree 100%, it definitely had a few flaws, but then again I have yet to play a game that doesn't. It's not my overall favorite crpg, although it might be my favorite party-based crpg.

 

[Dhruin]

No I didn't, I just didn't feel the need to get in a pissing match about who likes what publisher better. Instead I simply gave some great examples of why I don't have a lot of faith in Atari.

I'm not trying to get into a pissing match and I'm not a big fan of Atari, either. But...I still don't know who you think does it better.

Atari didn't make TOEE, Troika did. Atari just screwed it up by forcing them to release it before it was ready. Turn-based CRPGs fell by the wayside quite a while ago, and TOEE didn't do much to help the genre.

Semantics. You know that I know who "made" ToEE. No, ToEE didn't help the genre. I still think no other publisher would have even attempted it.

 

[Asbjoern]

Right, because we all know that a publisher would NEVER rush a development team...

Right, and we all know that a developer would never pitch a game to a publisher with a shorter development cycle and less expensive budget than what is possible. That is the standard method in a lot of different industries. But to be honest I can't see how that is relevant to our specific discussion, because speaking in general terms for publishers/developers is hardly any argument for the behaviour of neither Atari nor Troika.

All of Troikas games were unfinished at release and that was because of the development method used internally at Troika. I would recommend you to read this article at The Escapist about Troika's history. The unfinished state of their games were down to the people at Troika. The fact that all their games were unfinished and all were published by different publishers are something that support this. They just didn't handle their publisher/business relations very well.

(I couldn't mention The Witcher as a positive example because they didn't finance it, but you mention Gothic 2 as a negative example even though they didn't finance that game either?)

Though I'm not saying that I like Atari and have faith in them. I'm just saying that I don't dislike Atari and that I don't have no faith in them.

 

[Alrik Fassbauer]

Yes BG1&2 sold lots of copies, but that was then.

Plus they were water given to the thirsty in the desert.

Hence my opinion that both are too much overrated.

 

[purpleblob]

No more BG series please... do not ruin the masterpiece. Especially if it's going to be published by Atari.

EDIT:
I'm with Saber_Scorpion and JDR13 100%. And I just dont see how NWN series is better than BG series. Without the whole modding tool, NWN series is just piece of crap.

 

[JDR13]

I'm not trying to get into a pissing match and I'm not a big fan of Atari, either. But...I still don't know who you think does it better..

Microsoft? 2K Games? Bethesda? But hey, I hope I'm wrong about Atari. If they do indeed end up behind the operation for another BG game then I want it to be great, I'm just not confident that it will be.

 

[skavenhorde]

No other publisher could make a D&D game even if they wanted to, Atari owns the rights to D&D until 2017..

lol, fine I'll take out that last bit "Let alone a D&D TB game" cross that out and what I said still applies.

For the exact same reason that so many people are pessimistic about Fallout 3, it seems unlikely that a sequel made by an entirely different development team would capture the same feeling that the originals had.

Oh nononono, two totally different deamons your talking about here. I would love to revisit the Fallout universe if say Troika actually got it way back before they closed shop or Atari, but Beth in their infinate wisdom changed the whole way you play the game. Going from 3rd person isometric TB game to first person shooter. That is what is wrong with Fallout 3. Not that they are revisiting the setting or different developer. You would not hear as much nerdrage about Fallout 3 if they had just changed it from turnbased to realtime but didn't do the firstperson shooter part.

As far as I know BG3 is just tipped for development. If they make it a first person shooter then yes I'll be mad and avoid the game at all costs. However this is D&D were talking about here not Fallout. Probably if they have any brains at all they will make it somewhat similar to Neverwinter Nights and if they do that then, Yippee skippee because I get to revisit the setting.

My god people, how many RPGs get made nowadays and when one gets a little hint at being made everyone and their mother is outraged. Just take it for what it is. That they're thinking about doing another game in that setting. Big deal. If you don't want it to upset your experience with BG 1 and 2, then don't buy it. It will be that simple.

 

[skavenhorde]

Microsoft? 2K Games? Bethesda? But hey, I hope I'm wrong about Atari. If they do indeed end up behind the operation for another BG game then I want it to be great, I'm just not confident that it will be.

Microsoft? Beth? Your joking about Beth right? I guess your definition of a fun rpg is way different from mine. I don't care for the sandbox with no story. I tried liking them but it's just too hollow for me.

I haven't been a huge fanboy of Atari either but they have made some good rpgs where other developers avoid them at all costs. At least it's not EA who tipped BG3 for development.

 

[JDR13]

Right, and we all know that a developer would never pitch a game to a publisher with a shorter development cycle and less expensive budget than what is possible. That is the standard method in a lot of different industries. But to be honest I can't see how that is relevant to our specific discussion, because speaking in general terms for publishers/developers is hardly any argument for the behaviour of neither Atari nor Troika.

Ok I'm going to make this real simple.

The publisher has the final word about when a game will be released. If the developer tells the publisher that the deadline hasn't been met then the publisher has 2 choices. The first choice would be to extend the development time to insure that the product is 100% complete and entirely bug-free, or at least close to it.

The second choice is for the publisher to roll the dice and release the product as-is, because they want to see some profit sooner than later, and they don't care if the product reaches the level of quality that it could have. It's quite obvious what Atari's choice was.

 

[JDR13]

Microsoft? Beth? Your joking about Beth right? I guess your definition of a fun rpg is way different from mine. I don't care for the sandbox with no story. I tried liking them but it's just too hollow for me.
.

Whether or not you think Bethesda's games are enjoyable is up to you, but you can't deny the quality of their products. They release games that don't need a dozen patches from the get go(excluding Daggerfall), and they continue to support their games long after release. Same with Microsoft.