What Could 3D Bring to Baldur's Gate

[edlington_j]

There's an awful lot of discussion as to whether BG3 should be in 3D or not on this forum. Everyone has their own opinion. So let's avoid the pros/cons of that in this thread.

Assuming the game happens and if it did go fully 3D what do you think it could bring to the series?

I'll start us off with the Teleport Field spell. I've been thinking about this and I can't get the image of an ogre appearing 30 foot in the air right above his kobold mate resulting in much squishiness (realtime physics as well, what the hell).

Even a dragon would be in trouble if she was teleported 20 foot over her nest full of eggs without time to flap her wings. If you then finished her off with a few fireballs, not only would get the horde but also an omellette of incredible power.

Of course I wouldn't have a clue how to implement the working details (creatures appearing in the ground, euurgh) in a fun way. That's where the developer's earn their money.

What do you lot think could happen?

[koz-ivan]

imho the real advantage is that areas will have four walls, and hopefully the camera can rotate around if need be, i'd not mid having zoom capability either.

in some of the ie games problems arose where a char would drop something or die "behind" a wall and locating their gear became a somewhat painfull excercise, or if really unfortunate items were droped infront of a chest or the like and were then "unclickable"

3d could also allow for vertical movement (as you implied) or stuff like flight / levitation, climbing, falling (real pit traps) ect.

in addition i would think it makes maps / areas easier to render on the design side allowing for more complex areas and less recycling of whole maps.

[Daveron]

In my own opion i would hate baldurs gate to become 3d. I mean it was the 2d style and interface of the bg series that attracted me to the sereis in the first place and it created a terrific atmosphere. I just dont see the point in wrecking a perfectly good game like bg3 by making it 3d while you could keep the same tested and proven formula the fans like and make more MONEY.

[Elhioc]

Infinity engine is most likely the biggest reason why I play current bg saga thru over and over again. I dont get it why everything must be in 3d just because 3d exists, like its somehow better option just because its newer than 2d. If Atari insists on fumbling and making a 3d polygon engine whatever, then I at least hope there's a fixed clear bird eye view like in bg's so controlling 6 person group doesn't get even harder because of some halfarsed camera.

Guess its just because the younger population playing games are so used to playing trash like tomb raiders and such that everything must be in 3d to please them now. Yay, Baldur's Raider III. Just replace Lara with some tight arsed elf woman with two swords.

[Daveron]

lol i totally agree why use 3d when it exsists when using 2d would make the game funner and more beatiful to play.

[Xandax]

Originally Posted by Elhioc

Infinity engine is most likely the biggest reason why I play current bg saga thru over and over again. I dont get it why everything must be in 3d just because 3d exists, like its somehow better option just because its newer than 2d. If Atari insists on fumbling and making a 3d polygon engine whatever, then I at least hope there's a fixed clear bird eye view like in bg's so controlling 6 person group doesn't get even harder because of some halfarsed camera.

Guess its just because the younger population playing games are so used to playing trash like tomb raiders and such that everything must be in 3d to please them now. Yay, Baldur's Raider III. Just replace Lara with some tight arsed elf woman with two swords.

So the engine is more reason to replay then party interaction, quests, story and all thoese things for you?

For me - the IE engine is about the last reason why I play BG/BG2, compared to gameplay.
The game engine has very little (if anything) to do with gamequality if the developers continue to have focus on the gameplay and writing.
In fact much more gameplay is possible when going 3D,.

Besides - I'm 27, so don't think I've never gamed in neither 2D or even text-based.

[Elhioc]

So the engine is more reason to replay then party interaction, quests, story and all thoese things for you?

Of course... none of those matter if dumped on a poor unejoyable game engine.

[Nightmare]

So by that logic, text-based games are utterly irrelevant and bad since they have no engine to speak of.

[Elhioc]

No engine? Every game has engine.. and text based one fits muds well. No hassle since you only control one character. In fact mud text based engine is one of the best working one in my opinion, and graphics are also top of the line. Called imagination.

[edlington_j]

Glad to see we're not getting off topic here guys.

[Elhioc]

oops

Well, 3d could bring... errr... (must it be positive?).. well... clatoo verata *coughcough*

[Xandax]

Well - the possiblity for diving, climbing, levitation would be nice.

[Nightmare]

Originally Posted by Elhioc

No engine? Every game has engine.. and text based one fits muds well. No hassle since you only control one character. In fact mud text based engine is one of the best working one in my opinion, and graphics are also top of the line. Called imagination.

Imagination generally runs all the time (at least, mine does), if its MUD or a 3D game.

Many people are saying graphics don't matter...and hypocritically saying that 3D would ruin the game.

[Elhioc]

As you've noticed, we haven't only said that 3d engine sucks for the blocky graphics, but also in playability. Got better things to do than fiddle some camera all the time that gets stuck and trying to find all party members and cursing the view for not going to good spot in combat...

*edit*
What comes to me being hypocrite... imagination works with text based games of course since they leave pretty much everything concerning graphics to mind but doing 3d engine is forcing their own vision of the game up. Kind of like the difference with television and books. You've red books right?

And comparing which in my opinion pleases the eye more, 2d or 3d, I say 2d if those are the options. Too bad if you dont agree, thats your headache

[Xandax]

Originally Posted by Elhioc

As you've noticed, we haven't only said that 3d engine sucks for the blocky graphics, but also in playability. Got better things to do than fiddle some camera all the time that gets stuck and trying to find all party members and cursing the view for not going to good spot in combat...

*edit*
What comes to me being hypocrite... imagination works with text based games of course since they leave pretty much everything concerning graphics to mind but doing 3d engine is forcing their own vision of the game up. Kind of like the difference with television and books. You've red books right?

And comparing which in my opinion pleases the eye more, 2d or 3d, I say 2d if those are the options. Too bad if you dont agree, thats your headache

Problems with playability in 3D as compared to 2D? I have a hard time to see this.
Loosing party members? - I "lost" my partymembers because they couldn't pathfind in BG1+2 as well - so that has nothing to do with 2D vs. 3D. You could easily reposition the camerar on a party member in 3D as you can in 2D.

To me it seems that the many "issues" people have with 2D vs. 3D is actually viewpoint related (first person, isometric, over-the-shoulder) and not actually 2D/3D related.
3D can run in locked isometric view as it was in the BG-series; however, one of the advantages of 3D is that you have the possiblity for much more freedom, like free camerar movement.