You wouldn't have to play BG3 with the 4E ruleset because WotC is already playtesting 5E, which is looking to be much closer to 2E than it is to 4E conceptually. Maybe a mix of 3E and 2E with a few of 4E's better ideas and some new tricks to play around with. I wouldn't say that it's fully baked yet, but I'd still play the current playtest over 4E.RhombusHatesYou said:That could be problematic as WotC are loathe to licence games that don't use their current rulesets... and I'd rather pick my nose with a mining drill than suffer through BG3 in D&D4e.Andy Chalk said:There are ways to make it happen while still staying true to the original, and a new D&D RPG in the BG style is something I'd be very excited about.
Of course if the wanted to try their hand at BG style RPG using a GOOD fantasy rule set I'd be willing to take a look at it.
Or, you know, they could grab some other good IP... Zombies are still selling, maybe they could licence All Flesh Must Be Eaten. Or, if they've been taking a lot of drugs, Pokethulu or the Geezers setting for Risus... hell, I'll even help browbeating S John Ross to get either of those deals done.
Trent Oster was a Bioware co-founder and lead programmer during BG2, and the guy they got to write the new content, Dave Gross, has some experience writing Forgotten Realms fiction(though I confess I have not read his novels). Given the rut that Bioware has been digging since KOTOR, I'd rather have the current Beamdog team handle it. At least they're passionate about such things (where as Bioware itself to EA).Chaosritter said:There might be no Baldur's Gate III?
WHAT IS HAPPENING?! HOW CAN THAT BE?!
Seriously, it was pretty much obvious a decade ago that BG III will never happen. And even if someone is insane enough to try, the result would most likely be an insult to the originals.
To be honest, I wouldn't even want one made by Bioware. Unless they somehow manage it got gather the original BG II team and flip the bird to EA.
The same contractual bullshit that is causing problems now has hamstrung the Beamdog's options in overhauling the game, but let's be clear: BGEE was never meant to be a "remake." Indeed, a true remake would likely be met with cries of "you're ruining my childhood" and other similar complaints. And you can't get BGEE with mods, because a lot of the effort that went into BGEE is behind the curtain coding that isn't obvious from the outside except in that it runs faster and on more platforms than the original. It also supposedly is more open to modding, but as I am not a modder myself, I can't really verify that.Carnagath said:I find that rather positive. Those devs can't even do a remake properly, you can get the same "remake" they did by modding the original game, and with much less problems as well. I can't imagine a full new Baldur's Gate from them would be anything other than catastrophic.
While I wasn't a fan of the Black Pits, that was mostly due to it taking place outside the normal course of playing the game. The other content(i.e. the new characters and their related quests) were fine, and I was very interested in "adventure y," which was supposed to fill the time gap between BG and BG2.Mr.K. said:Yeah I honestly am not saddened by this because BG: EE was really not good in the added content department, and those were just small snippets of their work, if they went onto a full game those shortcoming would be the entire game... that is just not a good formula.
Look if you have what it takes then just make a new IP, we still want to play those style of games and you won't piss us off by borking up Baldur's Gate, also no legal issues.
Now all of that said, I really hope that this bullshit clears out. I've been championing BGEE for a while, but if this turns into a dead end, BGEE will become pretty worthless without a BG2EE to transition to. So regardless of the possibilities or lack thereof for a BG3, let's hope that either Atari gets its head out of its ass or that the new owners of the BG games are willing to honor a similar arrangement.