203 replies to this topic

[BallOfFire]

But yeah, back to the topic: I don't think you should meet any ancestor to any character. If some of the characters were alive when the prequel is set, by all means, let's meet them, but no ancestors or parents. Please?

Why?

Because, ancestors are implemented to somehow give us a "fake" version of the NPC, because, for some reason, it wouldn't be realistic that the NPC him/herself was there.

But it's just never the same, and it always ends up with a failed attempt at a remake of the real charachter.

AND if they end up deciding that for realism, the ancestor shouldn't have at all anything in common with his child (i.e. Minsc) then there's no reason to bring him in.

I just don't like the idea that a well made and loved NPC could be abused and turned into something horrible.

I agree, though potentially an ancestor could be completely different from their descendent but the connection is just there to be cool. Like there could be Boo's ancestor, an actual Giant Miniature Space hamster =). He could be a boss or something. But seriously... it wouldn't hurt to have one of Valygar's ancestors since magic is in their genes, so it wouldn't help much either. Though I've seen some movies where the ancestor thing has actually been done well because you realize that was a good thing that someone lived even if they are evil, or something like that, because their descendent will help save the day.

[simpel mind]

to bring in my 50 cent about a BGIII :
a sequel to ToB: well, even in ToB the inflation of items (simple soldiers, wearing +2 cand +3 weaponry and armour) was quite annoying/ boring to me (not even counting the main story -In my opinion (A)Melyssan) is still counting to the three most annoying villains i know).
And remeber the power, even a mortal PC controls at the end of ToB:
What challenges could a 20+ -level character face whithout getting bored??
OK, Ordinary soldiers with +7 weapons and armoury... .

In contrast there are many open questions about the events before BG: Why did Gorion became the PC´s fosterfather? How did he meet Jaheira and Khalid (Yup, I like K-K-Khalid)? How did Khalid and Jaheira meet each other? Is Sarevok (whom I favor to the typical mad-scientist) your real brother? What is Elminster´s part of all these things? ... and many more Questions.
There are so many characters in BG1 and BGG2, who were old enough to face (and survive) the time of sorrows (Perhaps explaining, why Xan is SO depressed...).
The only thing i an concerned, is, that none of these things would be realized in a prequel... (Shudders about the thougth of a Diablo-like BG ... )

[Grunker]

to bring in my 50 cent about a BGIII :
a sequel to ToB: well, even in ToB the inflation of items (simple soldiers, wearing +2 cand +3 weaponry and armour) was quite annoying/ boring to me (not even counting the main story -In my opinion (A)Melyssan) is still counting to the three most annoying villains i know).
And remeber the power, even a mortal PC controls at the end of ToB:
What challenges could a 20+ -level character face whithout getting bored??
OK, Ordinary soldiers with +7 weapons and armoury... .

In contrast there are many open questions about the events before BG: Why did Gorion became the PC´s fosterfather? How did he meet Jaheira and Khalid (Yup, I like K-K-Khalid)? How did Khalid and Jaheira meet each other? Is Sarevok (whom I favor to the typical mad-scientist) your real brother? What is Elminster´s part of all these things? ... and many more Questions.
There are so many characters in BG1 and BGG2, who were old enough to face (and survive) the time of sorrows (Perhaps explaining, why Xan is SO depressed...).
The only thing i an concerned, is, that none of these things would be realized in a prequel... (Shudders about the thougth of a Diablo-like BG ... )

Gorion became your fosterfather because he rescued you from the temple where your mother would have sacrificed you to Bhaal (you're shown you're past in ToB), Sarevok is your real brother (you're told in BG1, but it is smashed firm in ToB), Elminster mingles many big problems on Faerûn (read the books about him).

Which is exactly my point. BG2 and ToB answered ALL questions, so a prequel could just let you adventure through them. It's always hard for a prequel to raise new ones.

[Deva]

Hmm. Gotta add my 2 cents on the whole issue of BGIII.

I don't wanna prequel. On the other hand, I can't really think of a way they could make another sequel work, and still fit in with the rest of the story, be of the same quality as the previous games ect. I suppose a prequel could be okay, but the story should tie in with your Bhaalspawn in some way - one thing I'm worried about is that they'll sacrifice the ability of the player to create their own protagonist - which was always what I liked most about the BG games. So, as long as the story is still well thought out, I can still make my own character, decide on my own actions ect, I'm fine.

On the 3-D engine vs. Infinity engine side of things, I'm on the side of IE. It's simple, yet effective, but beautiful. Another great aspect of it was that because it didn't go into a huge amount of detail, it allowed characters to 'fill in the blanks' as it were - provide the skeletons of the characters and locations, let your imagination do the rest.

Right. I'm done. :^^:

[Kish]

Gorion became your fosterfather because he rescued you from the temple where your mother would have sacrificed you to Bhaal

Or maybe someone will take the opportunity to retcon the retcon back to "your mother was a lover of Gorion's who was raped by Bhaal."

...Probably not. The original BG1 writers are likely to be long gone and they'll probably hire the same idiots who wrote the ToB plot for BG3.

[NiGHTMARE]

Or maybe someone will take the opportunity to retcon the retcon back to "your mother was a lover of Gorion's who was raped by Bhaal."

Nowhere in BG1 is it specifically said that the PC's mother was raped by Bhaal.

...Probably not.  The original BG1 writers are likely to be long gone and they'll probably hire the same idiots who wrote the ToB plot for BG3.

More than half of the "idiots" who wrote the ToB storyline were also writers for BG1, including both ToB's Lead Designer (Kevin Martens), and its Director of Writing and Design (James Ohlen). Every single one of them worked on Shadows of Amn as well.

Of the people responsible for the writing in BG1, only three of them didn't work on ToB. And only one of them wasn't responsible for that *cough* milestone of storytelling which is Neverwinter Nights...

Edited by NiGHTMARE, 11 April 2005 - 02:52 AM.

[Hendryk]

From Gorion's letter:

"For reasons unknown to me, he (Bhaal) sought out women of every race and forced himself upon them. Your mother was one of those women..."

[Sir Kalthorine]

Why would another Baldurs Gate game have to concentrate on Bhaalspawn at all? After all, this is the Baldurs Gate series not the Adventures of Bhaal?s kiddies saga? Provided they stay relatively true to the setting (Faerun), history (reflecting events and personalities that people who played the BG series recognise) and gameplay (isometric top-down rendering of AD&D, full party control) I don?t see a problem.

If people are desperate for a link to earlier games, how about starting as a low level character in a region decimated by the activities of a Bhaalspawn during the events of ToB, e.g. a village in the Marching Mountains? If it were set a few years after ToB there might be room for characters and NPCs from the original series to make cameo appearances consistent with their ToB epilogues, to keep previous players of the series happy, while making ?starting from low level? again and investigating completely new areas perfectly viable and logical. Seeing how Minsc is dealing as a Rashemen chieftain sounds like fun ;-)

[Kulyok]

If people are desperate for a link to earlier games, how about starting as a low level character in a region decimated by the activities of a Bhaalspawn during the events of ToB, e.g. a village in the Marching Mountains?  If it were set a few years after ToB there might be room for characters and NPCs from the original series to make cameo appearances consistent with their ToB epilogues, to keep previous players of the series happy,  while making ?starting from low level? again and investigating completely new areas perfectly viable and logical.  Seeing how Minsc is dealing as a Rashemen chieftain sounds like fun ;-)

If they make the story like that, it won't be Baldur's Gate III, it'll be "another RPG", or "another good RPG", if they can think of a good story. But BG series are all about Bhaalspawn, and as sequel is, um, almost impossible to imagine, a prequel it will probably be. Perhaps about Alianna falling in love with Bhaal... (*snicker*)

[NiGHTMARE]

From Gorion's letter:

"For reasons unknown to me, he (Bhaal) sought out women of every race and forced himself upon them.  Your mother was one of those women..."

Rape is merely one interpretation of that statement, not what it actually says.

Besides, was Gorion actually there when Bhaal impregnated any of these women? I think not.

Edited by NiGHTMARE, 11 April 2005 - 02:09 AM.

[Sir Kalthorine]

If they make the story like that, it won't be Baldur's Gate III, it'll be "another RPG", or "another good RPG", if they can think of a good story. But BG series are all about Bhaalspawn, and as sequel is, um, almost impossible to imagine, a prequel it will probably be. Perhaps about Alianna falling in love with Bhaal... (*snicker*)

Have to disagree with you fairly fundamentally there. Just because the Baldurs Gate series has for reasons purely related to character and plotline continuity dealt exclusively with Bhaalspawn so far doesn't mean it has to in the future, since any new game will have to deal with new characters and could not be a continuation of the saga. I reiterate my point that this is a Baldurs Gate series, i.e. the series has to revolve around the area, culture and game world, it doesn't have to revolve around exclusively around a single, continuing storyline. References to the events in the previous games are sufficient, we don't need to find a way to relive them (in fact a change would be welcome IMHO).

I think imagining that any Baldurs Gate III absolutely 100% definitely categorically without question has to deal exclusively with Bhaalspawn is being a little narrow-minded. How many other good fantasy game series have restricted themselves to anything other than simple continuity in a given game world? Fallout series? Final Fantasy series? Ultima series? Nope... they each had an evolving game world with references to earlier games in the series without restricting themselves to being direct follow-ons, and that hardly seemed to dent their popularity.

Of course, with the first 3 games in the Baldurs Gate series we happened to be dealing with the same continuing character, who for plot purposes happened to be a Bhaalspawn. Baldurs Gate does not have to equate to Bhaalspawn, it just so happens that for game plot reasons the character in the first Baldurs Gate games happened to be one. It was not Bhaal's essence that made the games so great, it was the gameplay, the setting, the NPCs and the storylines, and there is no reason any of them cannot continue just because the Bhaalspawn's story is at an end.

Edited by Sir Kalthorine, 11 April 2005 - 02:08 AM.

[Kulyok]

Of course, with the first 3 games in the Baldurs Gate series we happened to be dealing with the same continuing character, who for plot purposes happened to be a Bhaalspawn.  Baldurs Gate does not have to equate to Bhaalspawn, it just so happens that for game plot reasons the character in the first Baldurs Gate games happened to be one.  It was not Bhaal's essence that made the games so great, it was the gameplay, the setting, the NPCs and the storylines, and there is no reason any of them cannot continue just because the Bhaalspawn's story is at an end.

All right, I see your point there. For me, Baldur's Gate series equal the storyline, that's the reason I only play "dialogue" mods, that add to/improve the storyline, and the storyline is the Bhaalspawn saga. Otherwise, for me it would be something like Icewind Dale. (*sigh*) Well, then I suppose we'll have to wait and see... but I desperately hope your ideas would prove wrong.

[Grunker]

If they make the story like that, it won't be Baldur's Gate III, it'll be "another RPG", or "another good RPG", if they can think of a good story. But BG series are all about Bhaalspawn, and as sequel is, um, almost impossible to imagine, a prequel it will probably be. Perhaps about Alianna falling in love with Bhaal... (*snicker*)

Have to disagree with you fairly fundamentally there. Just because the Baldurs Gate series has for reasons purely related to character and plotline continuity dealt exclusively with Bhaalspawn so far doesn't mean it has to in the future, since any new game will have to deal with new characters and could not be a continuation of the saga. I reiterate my point that this is a Baldurs Gate series, i.e. the series has to revolve around the area, culture and game world, it doesn't have to revolve around exclusively around a single, continuing storyline. References to the events in the previous games are sufficient, we don't need to find a way to relive them (in fact a change would be welcome IMHO).

I think imagining that any Baldurs Gate III absolutely 100% definitely categorically without question has to deal exclusively with Bhaalspawn is being a little narrow-minded. How many other good fantasy game series have restricted themselves to anything other than simple continuity in a given game world? Fallout series? Final Fantasy series? Ultima series? Nope... they each had an evolving game world with references to earlier games in the series without restricting themselves to being direct follow-ons, and that hardly seemed to dent their popularity.

Of course, with the first 3 games in the Baldurs Gate series we happened to be dealing with the same continuing character, who for plot purposes happened to be a Bhaalspawn. Baldurs Gate does not have to equate to Bhaalspawn, it just so happens that for game plot reasons the character in the first Baldurs Gate games happened to be one. It was not Bhaal's essence that made the games so great, it was the gameplay, the setting, the NPCs and the storylines, and there is no reason any of them cannot continue just because the Bhaalspawn's story is at an end.

Baldurs Gate is a city, but the game that has the title: Baldurs Gate actually only touches the subject "Baldurs Gate" because it's the biggest city in the first game. So the Baldurs Gate series are about Bhaal and his spawn, and the title of the game revovles around that.

[Grunker]

Okay, let's agree on something at least

The discussion of whether a prequel or sequel would be best is pointless, because we KNOW from Atari that it will 100% surely be a prequel.

Though I would like to see the IE engine recycled, OR see another great 2D engine created, we KNOW for sure that they will make it with a 3D engine.

Great, on with the discussion then

What do you people think would be the best topic that this game should revovle around? We've touched some of them (Bhaalspawn, the history of Baldur's Gate).

[NiGHTMARE]

How Bhaal found out about his impending fate could make for an interesting story. In the Forgotten Realms, normally even the gods can't see into the future (with the sole exception of Savras the All-Seeing).

[BallOfFire]

Invasion of extra-planars. That's never been done before =P.

How about a game like Morrowind that is so open-ended that the main storyline is optional. Then it could be very fun, take advantage of an already well-defined world, and no one has to worry about coming up with some elaborate story to fit it in with the other games. Being called "Baldur's Gate 3" means it can either deal with the storyline from the first two games or the world, not necessarily one or the other (even if it doesn't make sense). I'd love a game with total freedom and fun quests more than a linear game with a great main quest like the BG games have been moving toward. BG1 is so great because it's so open, you can explore or do the main quest or whatever. BG2 was open ended for sections at a time, but the whole thing had a main path to it. ToB is the most linear at all. I'd like to see the prequel go in the other direction =).

[Kish]

How about a game like Morrowind that is so open-ended that the main storyline is optional.

Gag.

[Deva]

I agree there should be open bits, and a little less linear, although a main plot is probably the best idea, as it would then be in-keeping with the rest of the BG-saga. What about having a choice to play as a character like Gorion, or perhaps even a priestess of Bhaal? A character associated with the PC's past.

[BallOfFire]

How about a game like Morrowind that is so open-ended that the main storyline is optional.

Gag.

I know how you feel. But if you put certain restrictions on what you do in Morrowind it becomes an incredible game (soo lacking in balance). If these restrictions existed in the game itself it would be so unbelievably popular right now that all RPGs would be modeled after it, and with good reason =P.

[kingkiller]

A BGIII as a prequel could be good as long as it contained the essential elements of the first two (namely a good storyline, indepth NPC's, etc) and I do not think it should concentrate on the Bhaal saga at all. However, I did like the idea of being in the early days of Baldur's Gate.