"Bioware is currently NOT developing BG-3"

[Ellester]

Originally Posted by jcompton

It was an autumn issue (October, I believe) of PC Gamer, the one with all the D&D 30th anniversary material. Atari confirmed that it would be made, but gave scant details. So, yes, of course it can be cancelled, but at a point in the recent past they stuck up their hands and said "yes."

True the PCGamer issue stated it was in development and gave the prelude reference etc… But since no developer was named it sounded like Atari was just blowing hot air. Meaning they do want to make it, but they had not gotten a developer to sign on it yet. Anyways I’m sure that article is the reason why Gamebanshee started this BG3 forum, because Atari confirmed it (although I’m hesitant to believe it).

Obsidian’s unannounced 3rd title, which is being called New Jersey, seems to be a console only title. At least that’s what the rumors are since they started hiring console developers. Also a developer posted saying it wasn’t a sequel or a bioware hand me down. So Obsidian is definitely not doing BG3.

I’m kinda with Fable, it’s in limbo right now. Atari can’t get a good developer to take on BG3, so it’s just sitting. But I would like to be proved wrong, though.

[Ellester]

Originally Posted by Faust

Out of curiousity, why do you think it won't get made? Considering the first two Baldur's Gates were fairly massive PC hits (that have a living mod community and fan base even years after release), and even the Dark Alliance action games for console did moderately well, I'd think a BGIII would be a sure ticket item for Atari. I realize they are focusing on NWN2 right now, but, still, I'm a bit surprised there hasn't been more initiative to make a BGIII.

It will get done eventually. That’s why they want NWN2 and BG3, as these have been the two biggest selling d&d computer games ever. Atari realizes the cash potential BG3 can bring and it will get made. When is the question?

[fable]

Originally Posted by Ellester

It will get done eventually. That’s why they want NWN2 and BG3, as these have been the two biggest selling d&d computer games ever.

Do you have figures for this? My impression is that Morrowind and KotoR have sold more than either, and that NWN hasn't done that particularly well. If I'm wrong, it won't be the first time, or the last; but I'd really like to know for certain. And you seem so positive, after all.

[Faust]

Originally Posted by fable

Do you have figures for this? My impression is that Morrowind and KotoR have sold more than either, and that NWN hasn't done that particularly well. If I'm wrong, it won't be the first time, or the last; but I'd really like to know for certain. And you seem so positive, after all.

It's my impression that KoTOR is the top seller of those you mention. From what I've read, Morrowind between its X-Box and PC sales would seem to have out sold BG. However, the exact figures are really not out there for anyone to know the exact details. And, as such, I'm not even sure of how either of those games would measure up to a KoTOR, Final Fantasy, or Fable. I'm not sure about NWN. While it dissappointed many gamers, it did warrant a lot of Bioware's attention and 2 expansions, a sequal, and even a premium module project years after initial release. This implies to me that it was probably a fairly successful PC game as well. Of course, the problem with all this is that sales numbers remain mainly internal numbers that the public isn't given.

Regardless, more to the point, I think it's fairly clear that the BG series was a big success particularly for a PC RPG in its day, much more so than many RPGs before or since. By most accounts the titles sold over a million each, and even the Dark Alliance spin-offs were industry successes. As such, some sort of sequal, would seem a logical move. However, the duration of time since 2, leads me to wonder if the idea hasn't been scrapped somewhere in the midst of licensing chaos. However, Atari will live up to their earlier word.

[fable]

Originally Posted by Faust

Regardless, more to the point, I think it's fairly clear that the BG series was a big success particularly for a PC RPG in its day, much more so than many RPGs before or since. By most accounts the titles sold over a million each, and even the Dark Alliance spin-offs were industry successes. As such, some sort of sequal, would seem a logical move. However, the duration of time since 2, leads me to wonder if the idea hasn't been scrapped somewhere in the midst of licensing chaos. However, Atari will live up to their earlier word.

I'm inclined to think that BG3 will be made, and never be made. That's to say, a game called Baldur's Gate III will show up; and that it will not be made by any of the people involved in the earlier titles in the sieres, nor will it reproduce any of the salient features of series. It will simply be another RPG, probably as generic-feeling as the KotoR titles, and leave me with that sense of internal emptiness afterwards.

Why? For one, it's simply been too long. The people who made BG2 at Bioware are for the most part long gone, and publishers are interested in money, not in such petty, mortal matters as reassembling a great development team. Then, too, the sense of atmosphere in the BG games was partially conditioned by a 2D environment that allowed for much greater graphical detail. Even a game as graphically rich (compared to the KotoR titles)as Morrowind uses a far smaller number of objects than the hand-realized artwork of BG2. This certainly isn't meant as criticism of Morrowind, a great RPG, IMO.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but I don't think so. For better and worse, Interplay's Brian Fargo had a vision, and kept a strong hand in what he wanted the company to make. There's no one like that at the helm of Atari, where accountants rule.

[Faust]

Originally Posted by fable

I'm inclined to think that BG3 will be made, and never be made. That's to say, a game called Baldur's Gate III will show up; and that it will not be made by any of the people involved in the earlier titles in the sieres, nor will it reproduce any of the salient features of series. It will simply be another RPG, probably as generic-feeling as the KotoR titles, and leave me with that sense of internal emptiness afterwards.

Why? For one, it's simply been too long. The people who made BG2 at Bioware are for the most part long gone, and publishers are interested in money, not in such petty, mortal matters as reassembling a great development team. Then, too, the sense of atmosphere in the BG games was partially conditioned by a 2D environment that allowed for much greater graphical detail. Even a game as graphically rich (compared to the KotoR titles)as Morrowind uses a far smaller number of objects than the hand-realized artwork of BG2. This certainly isn't meant as criticism of Morrowind, a great RPG, IMO.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but I don't think so. For better and worse, Interplay's Brian Fargo had a vision, and kept a strong hand in what he wanted the company to make. There's no one like that at the helm of Atari, where accountants rule.

In all likelihood, you're correct in assuming the emphasis in BG3 will be on storytelling and not laying out a Morrowind like world. BG2 was one of those rare games where both solid and intriguing storylines and NPC interactions managed to mix well with a non-linear pace (well the illusion of it, anyway), expansive environments, and detailed combat situations. We're more likely to see a more KoTOR style game in the third installment. I'm sure it will include exhaustive voice-overs and non-recycled graphics, and, interesting NPC development. Hence, it should be enjoyable for a large portion of its fan base. Assuming its not the same kind of mediocre drivel that was NwN. I'll actually be very interested in seeing what direction NwN2 is taken in by Obsidian. If its a success, I wouldn't be suprised to see BG3 resemble it in many ways. Of course, it's possible that BG3 will be unlike anything we've ever seen before. It's happened before (for that matter it happened with the earlier Infinity Engine games). Regardless, it's my hope that someone with a real vision and love of the previous games ends up helming the development team on the third game. I'll not jump to the bleak conclusion that no one at Atari has vision, quite yet. Though, maybe in time....

[The Z]

Well, Atari is publishing Dragonshard, developed by Liquid Games, and that looks pretty creative (check the interviews here at GameBanshee and at Gamespot). Ed Del Castillo's company has a fairly good record at RTS games (the original Red Alert and Battle Realms) so Atari has managed to get a quality developer recently.

[fable]

Originally Posted by The Z

Well, Atari is publishing Dragonshard, developed by Liquid Games, and that looks pretty creative (check the interviews here at GameBanshee and at Gamespot). Ed Del Castillo's company has a fairly good record at RTS games (the original Red Alert and Battle Realms) so Atari has managed to get a quality developer recently.

Bear in mind, I've been involved as reviewer in the PC gaming community for almost two decades; so I'm not as sanguinary as you. Whether that means I'm cynical or realistic, is up to each person to decide.

But my take is that publishers don't look for great developers; they look for developers with great money-making track records. That's why a company like Liquid Entertainment which turns out credible but hum-drum RTS products is getting contracts, while companies like Shiny and Frog City that have always emphasized innovative approaches have closed their doors. Atari is actually running true to form, in other words. Not that I expect them to go for loss makers. But I would only be heartened if they had several known, dedicated gamemakers of quality at their corporate helm; and they don't. They have slick businesspeople, and this can be confirmed by checking over the curricula vitae of their upper management. Unlike, say, Microprose, Origin Systems, SirTech, Interplay, or Lucasarts during its prime.

Again, just my views.

[The Z]

I guess you're right when it comes to getting sales...I have a few friends who feel that Morrowind is a better quote-unquote "RPG" than the Baldur's Gate series and whenever they mention that it drives me insane. It's all about eye-candy and 'features' to many modern gamers. So you're realistic...I'm just more of a 'hope for the best even though I know I'm wrong' type of person.

I did enjoy Red Alert though and didn't think it was humdrum at all.

In all honesty I would've preferred that the Fallout and/or D&D license go to a developer like Troika or Bioware. At least that way we'd have some idea of what the game would be like. I mean, I'm really distressed about Bethseda doing Fallout because I doubt it'll be the same. But that's a whole other topic.

Maybe they should get Will Wright to do BG3

[fable]

Originally Posted by The Z

Maybe they should get Will Wright to do BG3

Now, *there's* a concept! I wonder what that game would be like. Different, completely different from what we've seen--and I'll bet it would be pretty good, too!

[The Z]

Originally Posted by fable

Now, *there's* a concept! I wonder what that game would be like. Different, completely different from what we've seen--and I'll bet it would be pretty good, too!

SimBG: Build your own Forgotten Realms city up from the ground! Deal with plagues and invasions in your own way! Hire Bhaalspawn to do various meaningless tasks for you in exchange for special items! Have those Bhaalspawn destroy a neighbouring place, like the Friendly Arm Inn! Make business deals with weaker towns by either taking them under your wing or crushing them with Bhaalspawn!

Ahem.

Anyways, just so this post isn't complete spam, does anyone think that Obsidian wouldn't mind developing a BG3?

[midnight_storm]

I believe Obsidian could make BG3 if they wanted to. Once they finish NWN 2 they could start on BG3, unless they have something else planned but I don't think they do.

[fable]

Originally Posted by midnight_storm

I believe Obsidian could make BG3 if they wanted to. Once they finish NWN 2 they could start on BG3, unless they have something else planned but I don't think they do.

It isn't a matter of what they want to make: it's what a publisher will approach them to create. Obsidian is a development house, not a publisher.

[midnight_storm]

Well, then I'm sure if the publisher asked them to produce it I don't think they would refuse.

[fable]

No, I don't suppose they would. No development house will turn down any contract from a large publisher, unless the contract in question has problematic terms. But as no publisher has any real money backing BG3, I think the point is moot.