10 réponses à ce sujet

[phimseto]

Really not a fan of 4th edition d&d at all, and how it plays like a tabletop MMO. Considering where bioware has taken their games since BG, does any classic BG fan really think a BG3 would be to their satisfaction? It feels like a combination of the current rules set and bioware's current action-y approach would make for a game none of the old fans would appreciate or particularly enjoy. I don't mean that as a knock on bioware, just that where they are and where revival fans are don't strike me as being in the same place.

Curious to hear what the community thinks.

[BomimoDK]

If I was given total creative control, i'd be fine with a third game.

[gunman78]

If it would be like what's Fallout 3 to Fallout 1 & 2, I'd say better not.

[phimseto]

Yeah, that's how I feel, Gunman, and I say that as a big fan of FO3 and FO:NV. That's why I'm so thrilled that Obsidian is considering the idea of a Kickstarter video game project, quite possibly based on the old Infinity Engine games (and also possibly another Planescape game).

[LaxeCas]

agree

they ruined DAO series and now probably ME series with their focus to bring gaming to hamburger helpers types

[phimseto]

Now...here's the funny thing...I had no idea what any of this Hamburger Helper stuff was until it all blew up. When I actually read what she wrote, I was surprised. It seems to me that she's on *our* side of the equation: that she cares most about crafting as deep a story as possible and that gameplay isn't the focus of her interest. It seems like the COD/Battlefield types would have problems with that, but for folks who appreciate the roleplaying element, that speaks more to our sensibilities.

Of course, she would probably push for shorter games, which we wouldn't like, but I don't think it's her crowd that Bioware is trying to cater to. It's the people who are pillorying her that they seem to be targeting, the same ones who shrug off ME3 single player concerns because MP is "so much fun!"  They couldn't care about story length or plot depth.  Just give them extra maps, extra weapons, and extra classes, and all they want is the safe sameness of spawn, kill, die, respawn.  

If anything, the Hamburger Helper episode seems like a Grimm's Fairy Tale-like moral.  When you seek to attract a certain kind of crowd, this is what happens. 

Modifié par phimseto, 01 mars 2012 - 03:28 .

[-Semper-]

phimseto wrote...

that she cares most about crafting as deep a story as possible and that gameplay isn't the focus of her interest. It seems like the COD/Battlefield types would have problems with that, but for folks who appreciate the roleplaying element, that speaks more to our sensibilities.

how can a deep story with light gameplay reflect roleplay?! at best that's for story faxxs who like railroading through cutscenes

@topic: bioware is dead. baldur's gate is dead. d&d within crpgs is currently dead. nothing to see here, pls move along.

Modifié par -Semper-, 01 mars 2012 - 04:38 .

[phimseto]

I figure story-focused players never railroad through the cutscenes, but wring as much out of the dialogues and conversations as they can. As for the gameplay, it's hard for me to fault her because I feel vaguely the same way. When I play an RPG, the gameplay/combat is the least interesting element of the game.

I don't think I'm alone. I have a poll on what people's favorite ME2 loyalty missions were. The top choice was Tali's, and the runner-ups were Samara's and Kasumi's. All three are significant because their most notable elements are the extensive non-combat sequences which drive them.

When I read her comments, I could see how she and I could disagree on implementation of such views, but fundamentally I agreed with her - the more story and interaction and plot depth you can give me, the happier I am. The more I am reading about what didn't make into ME3 - either abandoned or cut - the more upset I get, because BW's insistence on pushing MP in and attracting a different fan base seems to be undercutting the fanbase that made ME such a success to begin with.

That's why I think and hope we are on the cusp of a new wave of gaming types - these AAA titles that somewhat blend into sameness to justify the ridiculous development costs and smaller titles that are cheaper to produce but offer more varied and deeper gameplay. It's no surprise that the first three big Kickstarter initiatives (announced or pending) to attract money and excitement are from Double Fine, Brian Fargo, and Obsidian. People know what they are missing in today's games, and they want to create a market where they can get those lost experiences again.

And it's for that reason that I don't think Baldur's Gate is dead in the form we would like to see it.  If these other initiatives prove successful - particularly if Obsidian's game is a Planescape Torment follow-up - then you might get Wizards of the Coast looking at the potential for revisiting the title.  

Modifié par phimseto, 01 mars 2012 - 04:52 .

[FedericoV]

-Semper- wrote...

@topic: bioware is dead. baldur's gate is dead. d&d within crpgs is currently dead. nothing to see here, pls move along.

D&D was dead in the CRPG market during most of the 90' too. Man, D&D was almost dead as a game considering the state of TSR when WotC bought it and other games like V:tM heavily challenged its supremacy on the P&P market during the same decade. Then, there was Baldur's Gate and 3rd edition. 

So, while we should probably not hold our breath, while we should not wait for another game like BG from EA's Bioware, there's nothing that prevents another resurrection from the ashes even if from another company.

Bioware is not dead. It's changed... a lot. In many ways it's changed for the worst but there's no way to avoid that kind of evolution when a once small and familiar company grows so big. In many ways there's no alternative: a company has to go corporate or it will die.

@OP: The 5th edition of D&D is on the way and from what I've heard they should fix many things that fans did not like in 4th edition. I don't understand your skepticism for a new Baldur's Gate. Imho, it would do very well and the success of DA:O (wich is the closer thing we had in years to BG) is proof enough of it. There's money to be made in it.

Modifié par FedericoV, 01 mars 2012 - 08:07 .

[morbidest2]

The problem with a BG3 is that your party typically ends ToB at levels between 30 and 40. To progress further, they would have to all become demigods and would be hurling planets at their enemies by the end of BG3. One way out would be their kids taking up the banner, with family weapons having degenerated from lev 5 or 6 down to lev 2 or 3.
But if this hasn't been done in the last 12 years, you have to wonder if any game company is going to do it.You can do a new medieval sword and sorcery game without spending the $ to buy the BG copyright from whoever currently owns it (Atari?).

[Realmzmaster]

The copyright for anything D & D is held by Hasbro which owns Wizards of the Coast. Atari only licenses D & D for the computer role playing games. BG3 would have to start off at level one. It has been a while since the last BG game. This also would solve the problem of having 30 to 40 level characters.

The same problem occurs with DAO and Awakenings by the end of Awakenings you would be over level 35 (if there was no cap) just from playing DAO the DLCs and then Awakenings. Bioware has avoided that problem by having a new protagonist for each Dragon Age game.

A BG3 is quite possible, but there are few companies with enough zots to buy a D & D license from Hasbro.