1123 replies to this topic

[fearless]

It makes sense that they are doing BGEEs first before attemping a BG3, as it will help the developers to understand (or reacquaint themselves with) the code base and the challenges of adding new content: dialogs, characters, areas, items, spells etc etc. Once they have this done, they will have a better idea of what worked and what went into supporting the new stuff and how this would apply to a newer bigger project that BG3 would ultimately be.

[Vicen]

I just hope if they do...do a BG3 it's not a silent protagonist like in BG1 and BG2...that was fine for those games since they came out over 10 years ago and that you could also be any number of races but...as a person who really loves good voice acting it would be a shame to see another silent protagonist...(at least for me)

Edited by Vicen, 16 March 2012 - 04:44 PM.

[Andrea C.]

I'm quite surprised to see many of you worry so much about BGEE... If nothing else, it is a great opportunity to breathe new life into the BG saga. You may say a game that's still being played after 12 years doesn't really need any new life, and I'd agree to an extent, but I believe BG can never have too many fans. If the re-release brought more people's attention back to the game, all the better. Besides, buying and playing BGEE is optional, just like the additional contents they're working on, so...

[Kaeloree]

I'm super excited about it, myself

[Eleima]

I, for one, am very happy about this bit of news. We'll see how it turns out, but I'm thrilled that it's not BG3.

[Grunker]

You should see what the rpgcodex community thought about the Enhanced Edition announcement... Oh wait, you probably shouldn't.

You mean those people who think BG II isn't an RPG at all? Codex, shmodex...

The Codex isn't some hivemind entitity with a collaborate view on everything, and the majority of the place does not think Baldur's Gate isn't an RPG. Just as Spellhold there are many people and many opinions.

In fact, lately there are more Codexians standing up for the remake than there seem to be here. Schisms are just... greater at the Codex because that forum is centered around complete freedom to express yourself. T'would be boring if all forums were alike, no?

Personally, I'd like for people to support the remake if for nothing else then because it sends a clear signal to the industry that they can stop producing only their streamlined action-RPG garbage; there is a market for Baldur's Gate, Wasteland and similar full-fledged RPGs too.

I just hope if they do...do a BG3 it's not a silent protagonist like in BG1 and BG2...that was fine for those games since they came out over 10 years ago and that you could also be any number of races but...as a person who really loves good voice acting it would be a shame to see another silent protagonist...(at least for me)

I couldn't care less about VO. Give me som proper gameplay, a full-fledged RPG rule-system, lots of options and the non-linearity we knew and loved from the old games. Then they can worry about VO and all that sort of stuff.

I find it hard to blame the industry for turning out crap when we as players seem to place a higher value of voice-overs and animated romance than we do on solid gameplay and depth.

I'm super excited about it, myself

Yeah, me too

[phordicus]

(from the marketing other thread)

Firstly, when you make anything like NWN, you can then lecture people what to boast about and what not.

Argumentum ad verecundiam. (Asinine but I'll continue anyway and hope for a point to actually address.)

Fact is, NWN as a piece of software is immensely more accessible to modding and it would surely do IE games a lot of good if the same level of accessibility would be built into them.

You missed where I said Great toolset and networking. (Still not a good start.)

Why are new rendering options silly? RPG enthusiasts may not be graphics whore, but who doesn't love improvements, rendering optimizations?

Since when is gainsaying an argument? (I'll play t-ball and give you 4 strikes.)

Can they patch it better than Asc64? Seriously?
They have the source code. They don't need to PATCH it. Thay can easily make vast corrections and improvements to the engine.

They wrote it in the first place -- using your appeal to authority, so no, there's no evidence they can do any better.

How can you even assume that a person is "like his former employer"?

Because he's depending on their (prior) reputation based on this game to market it; he's even emphasizing how little he's going to alter it with a very transparent Fixing the stuff you hate, keeping the stuff you love!. The question is, if he's got (1) good storytellers, (2) good coders, and (3) good artists, then why rehash a game that, of all the games that need a facelift, is least in need of one? Why not a new IP? It's like a band that only does covers of great songs.

In facts, I'm led to believe he's nothing like that.

I want to be optimistic, too. Why are you led to believe he's nothing like that?

Anyways, if your quests aren't fun, just play them through and carry on to custom, fan-made ones.

So other than the graphic update, just skip the rest of the content?

The fact that there's will and a way to re-release and enhance the arguably best RPG of all times, WITHOUT switching to lame munchkin rules of 3rd and 4th editions is an encouraging fact.
After DAO, and Bethesda's bullshit games, I was starting to lose hope - but for me this is the best possible thing that could have happened to the genre.

Why is the threat of 3/4e the only other option?

DAO was the last game to inspire hope for the genre, and succeeded IMO. The way they tanked with DA2 killed that hope, at least for Bioware. Bethesda makes moddable sandboxes in decline in RPG-ness since Morrowind, but there it is; I'm not sure what you expected from them.

Trumpeting this as some kind of genre savior is PR bullshit. At least Bioware had the sense/humility to let the media do it after BG was released.

[Shadowhawke]

I will admit that I am trying very hard not to squee constantly like a fangirl. I am afraid at some level they may screw it up, whatever they're doing, but the fact that they're even reviving the game in some way, shape or form means I will probably buy it straight off the shelves anyway.

That said, I really do echo the hopes here of everyone that they will be compatible with mods/include some of the fantastic content that has been developed over the years. Otherwise they're really hobbling themselves.

[Wisp]

I would not get my hopes up about mods being included in this "enhanced edition." I can not imagine Atari being willing to sit down and work out licensing deals with small-fry, lawyer-less modders. I guess there is a possibility they could try some BS like arguing that modding is illegal and we therefore have no rights to material based on their copyrighted work. But I doubt any would like to see that happen.

Toolset and more accessible modding à la NWN?
We already have DLTCEP. There is not much an official toolset could do that can not already be done by community-made tools.
NWN modding is not applicable to IE modding (maybe there has been some development since I stopped caring about NWN modding, but I doubt it). What do you do if you want to modify the NWN OC? Distribute a modified module file and tell the user to overwrite? Distribute some .erf file and ask the user to play modder by opening the toolset and importing the .erf file into the module and manually resolve conflicts? Aside from the TC guys, modding the OC is essentially all we do in IE modding. NWN-style modding does not answer any of the questions we deal with (again, other than the TC stuff).

Edited by Wisp, 17 March 2012 - 06:49 AM.

[berelinde]

Toolset and more accessible modding à la NWN?
We already have DLTCEP. There is not much an official toolset could do that can not already be done by community-made tools.
NWN modding is not applicable to IE modding (maybe there has been some development since I stopped caring about NWN modding, but I doubt it). What do you do if you want to modify the NWN OC? Distribute a modified module file and tell the user to overwrite? Distribute some .erf file and ask the user to play modder by opening the toolset and importing the .erf file into the module and manually resolve conflicts? Aside from the TC guys, modding the OC is essentially all we do in IE modding. NWN-style modding does not answer any of the questions we deal with (again, other than the TC stuff).

A toolset that allowed us to use the tilesets and rotatable 3D models of the original game would be tots awesome. Endless possibilities for area creation...

[Eric P.]

Trust me, I've spent a good deal of time co-working on Item Revisions, an not at all excited at possibly having to adapt it to new version. But then again, if they've got any sense, they should simply include IR's content into the release PS

It's a BG1 mod - as you can see.

Not to offend anybody, but how many people play BG1 instead of BGT/Tutu?

If I could get BGT set up on my system, I'd go for that. Even if I still had the BG1/TotSC game discs, I'd much prefer a "full saga" experience to playing the one game, then importing to the other.

[Rhaella]

I don't think Lava is suggesting adding those mods to BGEE so much as worried that they would no longer be supported if the coding changes.

[GeN1e]

As you may have already read it, they claim to try hard to retain compatibility with old mods.

PS Yay, the 1337th post!

Edited by GeN1e, 17 March 2012 - 11:28 AM.

[Solaufein]

I would not get my hopes up about mods being included in this "enhanced edition." I can not imagine Atari being willing to sit down and work out licensing deals with small-fry, lawyer-less modders. I guess there is a possibility they could try some BS like arguing that modding is illegal and we therefore have no rights to material based on their copyrighted work. But I doubt any would like to see that happen.

Toolset and more accessible modding à la NWN?
We already have DLTCEP. There is not much an official toolset could do that can not already be done by community-made tools.
NWN modding is not applicable to IE modding (maybe there has been some development since I stopped caring about NWN modding, but I doubt it). What do you do if you want to modify the NWN OC? Distribute a modified module file and tell the user to overwrite? Distribute some .erf file and ask the user to play modder by opening the toolset and importing the .erf file into the module and manually resolve conflicts? Aside from the TC guys, modding the OC is essentially all we do in IE modding. NWN-style modding does not answer any of the questions we deal with (again, other than the TC stuff).

Back in the old days I recall the devs saying that using the tools that the community made were far easier to use than the jumbled mess that they had to work with in the game.

[KIrving]

Well, much as I'm a little wary of an eventual BG3, I don't see why they couldn't do it justice if they stay away from the story of the Bhaalspawn. I think they could revisit the city with new characters and adventures. After all it is called Baldur's Gate not Bhaalspawn Gate.

I think it's great that an enhanced edition is happening and that it could bring even more people to these wonderful games, however I'll wait and see how compatible it is with mods and also how well any additional content is written and integrated before diving into a purchase. A graphical overhaul isn't that exciting to me.

[GreyViper]

I would not get my hopes up about mods being included in this "enhanced edition." I can not imagine Atari being willing to sit down and work out licensing deals with small-fry, lawyer-less modders. I guess there is a possibility they could try some BS like arguing that modding is illegal and we therefore have no rights to material based on their copyrighted work. But I doubt any would like to see that happen.

I suspect you are right in that regard.
We could ask for in game mod manager or would something similar to nexus mod manager be better?
And maybe Weimer's Tactics as standard difficulty?
As for BG3 to early to tell, since ToB did good job tying loose ends up. One option is to either take another minor bhaal spawn(not Iomen) and go with that. Hell better question is if and when it would take place? Is it 4th or 5th ed timeline or right after ToB, no prequel adventures tough.

[Vicen]

I couldn't care less about VO. Give me som proper gameplay, a full-fledged RPG rule-system, lots of options and the non-linearity we knew and loved from the old games. Then they can worry about VO and all that sort of stuff.

I find it hard to blame the industry for turning out crap when we as players seem to place a higher value of voice-overs and animated romance than we do on solid gameplay and depth.

All of those things you mention should be in the game to begin with if it's worth playing...so your point is moot. So really in 2012 (13-16ish whenever BG3 comes out) there is no reason we should still have to read endless lines of text. It just shows lazy ness on the developers part (not to mention being cheap) with the old adage "Use your imagination!" If I wanted to use my imagination I would not waste it on a video game that's for sure...Good voice acting can only help a game IMO...

But regardless...whichever route they go for BG3 I am sure I will be pleased...

Edited by Vicen, 17 March 2012 - 04:04 PM.