To dream or not to dream.

[Xandax]

I've seen various rumours that BG3 would be produced - however nothing substantial (yet ).

However - I think a major factor would be that they would have to start with a new character - after all the ToB level was just insane, and the endings kind of spelled the end of that character.

So if another BG has to be made - it would be a new character - but what about storyline?
You couldn't play another Bhaalspawn, because after all - that saga ended with the character in BG2-ToB. Otherwise you have to play a bhaalspawn that doesn't care about his heritage and isn't influenced by it (doubtful according to the BG-series storyline).

The only way I see a BG3 being produced would be with a brand new storyline, trying to capture some of the "fame" from the name Bladur's Gate. I have a hard time seeing the usage of a BG3 as more then a marketing strategy. (Much like I fear Fallout 3 is being used by Bethesda , but that is a different matter).

[BuckGB]

With Atari's recent onslaught of Dungeons & Dragons games, I don't doubt that they have a developer currently working on Baldur's Gate III. After all, the most reputable PC gaming magazine wouldn't post something like that without some substantial proof... or would they?

If Baldur's Gate III is indeed in the works, then I can't imagine any developer would want to stray from the Bhaalspawn storyline. The game may not actually involve you playing a Bhaalspawn character, but instead traveling the Forgotten Realms on a mission that involves the events of the first two games. This is only my own personal speculation, of course, but I think moving away from the Bhaalspawn storyline would be disasterous.

Do you think it's possible that BioWare would return to Baldur's Gate? Since Dragon Age is a "spiritual successor to NWN and BG", I highly doubt it. Obsidian would probably love to work on it, but with NWN 2 and KotOR II in development, I'm not sure they have the staffing to do it. The only other substantial CRPG developer with Black Isle/Dungeons & Dragons experience I can think of would be Troika. Since they worked with Atari on Temple of Elemental Evil, they just might be the best guess.

[werebeargoddess]

Originally Posted by Buck Satan

If Baldur's Gate III is indeed in the works, then I can't imagine any developer would want to stray from the Bhaalspawn storyline. The game may not actually involve you playing a Bhaalspawn character, but instead traveling the Forgotten Realms on a mission that involves the events of the first two games. This is only my own personal speculation, of course, but I think moving away from the Bhaalspawn storyline would be disasterous.

You mean, it takes place during the first two games, and during it, you hear much about what's going on, but your player character follows his/her own storyline?

[BuckGB]

Originally Posted by werebeargoddess

You mean, it takes place during the first two games, and during it, you hear much about what's going on, but your player character follows his/her own storyline?

It's tough to say. It could take place before, during, or after the events of the original games. I just don't see how a third installment could even bear the Baldur's Gate name without being involved with the Bhaalspawn storyline in some way.

[Xandax]

Originally Posted by Buck Satan

<snip>
Do you think it's possible that BioWare would return to Baldur's Gate? Since Dragon Age is a "spiritual successor to NWN and BG", I highly doubt it. Obsidian would probably love to work on it, but with NWN 2 and KotOR II in development, I'm not sure they have the staffing to do it. The only other substantial CRPG developer with Black Isle/Dungeons & Dragons experience I can think of would be Troika. Since they worked with Atari on Temple of Elemental Evil, they just might be the best guess.

I don't think BioWare would get it no - much like your own speculation and Troika seems to be the imidiate best bet, with Obsidian (BioJr ) bussy with both SW:KotOR2 and NwN2, and Bethesda going for Elder Scroll IV and Fallout 3.

I don't know many other large developers withint he CRPG genre - but who knows. Maybe it could go to some upstart or something.

As for the storyline - I don't doubt that it would be a bhaalspawn spin-off. However - I see many potential pitfalls with almost every approch. Afterall the player have already determined the outcome of the Bhaalspawn line, and thus it leaves very little room for spin-offs.
The one storyline I could see - off the top of my head - would be to not play a bhaalspawn, but play somebody that tries to throw the bhaalspawn from ToB from his fathers throne (somehow).
However - the most "fun" way would be to try and gather a following and challenge his right as the Lord of Murder - but with the "carebear-ifying" of D&D I think that might not go well with WotC and Atari because it would be to "dark" a story.

I fear - as I fear Fallout 3 will be "Morrowind with Guns" - that a Baldur's Gate 3 would just try and recapitalize on the fame and following of the Baldur's Gate series.

[keeB]

All I know, is that I want another RPG like this series. Completely open-ended, where you can choose which quests to do first, if at all, Romances, tons of Dialogue, Banter, the whole works that made BG2 what it is, and continues to be. That is absolutely crucial to me.

[Thrain]

try Planescape:Torment or the Fallout series if you're that desperate to get more storyline-involved games.

[Nightmare]

I'm personally hoping that nothing will come of this. Baldur's Gate is DONE. No more. Using the name to sell another product would be cheap, and ruinious to the series' name.

If the story mixes somewhat, like a plot that goes on during all the Bhaalspawn events, I can understand (and could be cool if pulled off right).

What's Troika's track record with games?

[Xandax]

Originally Posted by Nightmare

<snip>
What's Troika's track record with games?

Well - Arcanum and Temple of Elemental Evil are two.
They are also developing Vampire: TM - Bloodlines.

It was formed by some of the developers from Fallout from Interplay (I think Interplay).

[fable]

ToEE was actually done *for* Troika, rather than by them. That said, they approved the mess. I suspect, given its extraordinary amount of bugs when released, that Troika simply wanted to get it out the door.

As far as I'm concerned, the jury's out on Troika. They talk a good line, but their work has been variable. And as far as a BG3 is concerned, the only way I could see it continuing would be by following the adventures of one or more of the NPCs following the Usual-Nobody-You-Play-Who-Turns-Out-to-Be-a God, but not you, yourself. That's been finished, full dramatic, final resolution chords, in BG2/ToB.

But I guess we'll just have to see, won't we?

[BuckGB]

Troika did all development on Temple of Elemental Evil, Atari simply published it. I don't believe any other studio had a hand in it. Granted, it wasn't as good as I had hoped it might be, but I personally thought that Arcanum was a fantastic open-ended RPG. Having seen Vampire: Bloodlines firsthand on a few occasions, I think their reputation will increase dramatically when it is released (barring another bug-filled release).

[Xandax]

As I understood it - all hear-say and what not - Atari pushed for ToEE to be done, and thus there wasn't time/ressources to fix bugs.
This could just be a "ploy" however - to take some heat from Troika and place it on Atari which many seems to dislike anyways

[fable]

Troika did all development on Temple of Elemental Evil, Atari simply published it.

I didn't think Atari had done anything more than that, but thanks for the headup on Troika's relationship with TOEE--I had heard long ago that they were only peripherally involved, and accepted that.

Granted, it wasn't as good as I had hoped it might be, but I personally thought that Arcanum was a fantastic open-ended RPG.

After the Fallout games, I would have expected Arcanum at the very least to 1) possess a good interface, and 2) possess a decent follower combat AI. What surprised me was the truly awful quality of both. There were many good points to Arcanum, and I've been a supporter of the game, but these two points didn't win it any friends.

Having seen Vampire: Bloodlines firsthand on a few occasions, I think their reputation will increase dramatically when it is released (barring another bug-filled release).

I hope so, sincerely. ToEE was pretty and a good engine implementation, but if one's looking for reasonable interaction with NPCs or sensible quests, there's none of it, there.

That said, they approved the mess. I suspect, given its extraordinary amount of bugs when released, that Troika simply wanted to get it out the door.

For me, this is the heart of the problem. I can accept that a company makes design mistakes. I can accept the implementation of poor AI. I can even accept (with a looong stretch) that every NPC you encounter in a Troika game feels obliged to devulge their deepest secrets to a party of people they've never seen before, and asked for help on achieving goals they could probably have managed in one-tenth the time if they'd just asked around. Admittedly, accepting these things changes the "roleplaying" into "rollplaying," but if it's a dungeon crawl folks want, who am I to deny it to them?

But when a company releases arguably the buggiest game since Ultima 9 knowingly to a gaming public that it's convinced through PR is the biggest, brightest thing ever, they have created a major credibility problem for themselves, IMO. And when they do this just to get it out the door, they don't engender much sympathy. A few bugs are understandable. It's impossible to release a game of any decent size and scope these days in a pristine fashion. But when you issue incredibly buggy code in the hopes that you can sucker your intended audience into thinking they're getting a reasonably good playing experience of the deal--credibility is blown out of the water. It's just my POV, but I think Troika has a lot of ground to make up, here.

[Xandax]

What about other non-usual cRPG developers. Could it be imagined that they would try and grap a hold of a BG3 licens.? Wouldn't want to see an EA BG3

Also - I don't know anything about them - but what about Silver Style that are currently working on The Fall - Last Days of Gaia.
On the surface this game looks quite good and if they are successfull with it - it might be we have another cRPG developer on the market.

(Although - I still doubt the existiance of BG3 production - at least for a while.)

[BuckGB]

Originally Posted by fable

...when a company releases arguably the buggiest game since Ultima 9 knowingly to a gaming public that it's convinced through PR is the biggest, brightest thing ever, they have created a major credibility problem for themselves, IMO. And when they do this just to get it out the door, they don't engender much sympathy. A few bugs are understandable. It's impossible to release a game of any decent size and scope these days in a pristine fashion. But when you issue incredibly buggy code in the hopes that you can sucker your intended audience into thinking they're getting a reasonably good playing experience of the deal--credibility is blown out of the water. It's just my POV, but I think Troika has a lot of ground to make up, here.

Well said. I totally agree that Troika has a lot of work to do in order to get themselves the CRPG developer reputation that they had while many of them were with Black Isle.

As far as other CRPG developers, Baldur's Gate III could certainly end up being developed by someone else. But if you take into consideration that the Baldur's Gate license has some of the most potential for success out of any CRPG franchise available at the current time, I'm betting Atari is going to go with a developer that has a good RPG track record and is composed of designers that are very familiar with the Dungeons & Dragons rules and Forgotten Realms setting. How many development studios still exist right now that can fit both of those criteria? Four, I believe: BioWare, Obsidian Entertainment, Troika Games, and Stormfront Studios.

Liquid Entertainment and Turbine are both working on other Dungeons & Dragons games, but they have no single player RPG track record to go by. Bethesda has proven that they can make a fantastic role-playing game, but they have absolutely no experience with the Dungeons & Dragons rules or FR setting (not that it would totally rule them out, though).

Hopefully, we should know the answer within a couple of weeks when the next issue of PC Gamer hits shelves.