Icewind Dale - Past, Present and Future @ GameBanshee

[sakichop]

I'm probably one of the few that liked the icewind dale series better than bg. I often wondered why a smaller company doesn't but the infinity engine from bioware? Would they want to much money or simply they won't sell it?

I would think once you have the engine you could make the games relatively cheap and wouldn't need massive sales to make a profit. I would think any game released on the infinity engine would sell more than any indie game on name alone.

 

[TheSisko]

I would think once you have the engine you could make the games relatively cheap and wouldn't need massive sales to make a profit. I would think any game released on the infinity engine would sell more than any indie game on name alone.

It's cheaper to produce assets for a 3D engine, and several good free ones are available,

 

[getter77]

Well, there's always the GemRB project in terms of taking the long way around the impasse I suppose. http://www.gemrb.org/wiki/doku.php?id=status

In theory, like many community projects, an infusion of talented people/coders at opportune times could result in it leapfrogging forward quite a bit, but time will always tell.

I'd still like to think the "answer" to this sort of conundrum will be a composite one from the substantial modding scenes like Circle of 8 and the Vampire: Bloodlines folks alongside the advancements proceeding on a fairly rapid clip in the Roguelike communities, particularly the Engines and intentionally modular projects. Quality media assets, in abundance, will always be the sticking point even after all technological hurdles are wrangled, improved procedural sorcery on this front withstanding.

 

[Lucky Day]

I love the IWD's - better than the BG's. Except Trials of the Luremaster which was a huge 10 hour letdown. PS:T did sell very well but only after a word of mouth and sites like our own kept singing its praises. If IWD2 only sold a few 100k then its a shame because its a great, great game.

IWD unfortunately was the catalyst for the change in low level character party dynamics. Players complained profusely that their characters kept dying early on in IWD. So rather than telling them, "yeah that's the way it works in D&D, you have to be really, really careful and smart and learn to run away" Black Isle and Bioware announced that will never happen again. Hence we had tank familiars, etc. in NWN.

Can't see Hasbro ponying up any money for a new one tho - don't think its in the budget. Best we can seem to get is the new Neverwinter which looks like a bit of a dud. It will basically be DDO or WoW with a level designer..

Remember that the IE games were controversial among traditionalists (us) for its actiony pause-and-play as well.

Would an isometric 2D play well on a phone or a tablet device? I don't think it would. Mind you, I can't get what I have working on my Asus Tablet.

 

[TheSisko]

If IWD2 only sold a few 100k then its a shame because its a great, great game.

I think that recent multiplatform sales expectations have skewed your perceptions. "A few 100k" is great for a niche PC title and IWD2 sold according to expectations.

 

[Relayer]

Icewind Dale is so underrated. Overall, it was a better experience than NWN, TOEE and other lesser games that are usually well-remembered these days. In some ways I enjoyed it more than the first Baldur's Gate.

Sure, it was a little light on the dialogue/character interaction and didn't have much as far as side quests or secrets to uncover but it had:

- Excellent pacing
- Perfect length (around 25 - 30 hours or so if I'm remembering correctly)
- Replayability (due to the length and building your own party)
- Outstanding music and lovely art design
- Challenging battles

What's not to like? Seriously, while Baldur's Gate 2 is on a whole other level as far as depth, characters and story, I would still rate both BG2 and IWD 10 out of 10. What IWD did it did very well. It's probably the only post-90s RPG that reminds me of the classic Gold Box games.

The sequel was disappointing, but is still worth playing once at least. They just dropped the ball big time as far as pacing thanks to the addition of puzzles and inconsistent battle difficulty. Otherwise, it was just as beautiful as the first game and benefited from improved writing including some pretty funny dialogue. I've actually never finished it but have played about 4 times, always stopping at some point which I estimate to be about 60% through.

 

[Relayer]

I don't think they are quite similar to IE games… rather they are quite similar to each other.

What? No they weren't. Drakensang put me to sleep. Dragon Age restored my faith in Bioware. NWN 2's OC was decent but a bit bland (though nowhere as bad as NWN's OC) and had way too much combat (and most of it easy), but the MoTB expansion was very good.

I'd say Dragon Age was the closest to an IE game of any game released since the IE games. It was how I envisioned BG2 in 3D.

 

[Ragnaris]

I'm probably one of the few that liked the icewind dale series better than bg. I often wondered why a smaller company doesn't but the infinity engine from bioware? Would they want to much money or simply they won't sell it?

Perhaps one of the few, but I'm in the same boat. I preferred the IWD series to BG.

I don't think any company would see the profit in reviving the series other than Baldur's Gate. I would think the percentage of those who prefer isometric view to third person nowadays (such as Dragon Age: Origins) are fairly small, and even then a large portion of it's success (PS:T and IWD) is by word of mouth. Some of the younger generation of gamers don't even know what an isometric view is. That, and the simplification of RPGs has become a huge part of the mainstream market.

Not to say that it wouldn't be worth the investment, but it's much more costly to experiment with that idea now, and you wouldn't be targeting the mainstream crowd. So while there may be a potential investment, it couldn't stand up to the current generation of RPG gamers (sadly ).

 

[TheSisko]

I would think the percentage of those who prefer isometric view to third person nowadays

So offer both options just as in Dragon Age, NWN2, Drakensang.

Some of the younger generation of gamers don't even know what an isometric view is.

Ridiculous - lots of action games are isometric.

Not to say that it wouldn't be worth the investment, but it's much more costly to experiment with that idea now

Why?

and you wouldn't be targeting the mainstream crowd.

IWD didn't target the mainstream crowd.

 

[purpleblob]

What? No they weren't. Drakensang put me to sleep. Dragon Age restored my faith in Bioware. NWN 2's OC was decent but a bit bland (though nowhere as bad as NWN's OC) and had way too much combat (and most of it easy), but the MoTB expansion was very good.

I'd say Dragon Age was the closest to an IE game of any game released since the IE games. It was how I envisioned BG2 in 3D.

Well, in my opinion they were more similar to each other than IE games. It all boils down to personal experiences. Drakensang 2 was extremely boring for me as well. NWN2 was not that great either. I don't see what is the big fuss about MotB, I certainly didn't enjoy it. And while I really enjoyed DA:O, it was more of a *improved NWN2* rather than improved BG2/IE engine games.

 

[Ragnaris]

So offer both options just as in Dragon Age, NWN2, Drakensang.

I can agree with this.

Ridiculous - lots of action games are isometric.

True, but action games are moving toward more first and third person perspectives. As they move away from the isometric view, newer generations become less familiar with it.

Why?

Because tinkering with experimentation on modern day games costs much more than it used to a decade ago.

IWD didn't target the mainstream crowd.

That's my point - if they were to focus their efforts on IWD3, they wouldn't be targeting a mainstream crowd and wouldn't make nearly as much money as they might invest in it as a result.

 

[Pessimeister]

Except Trials of the Luremaster which was a huge 10 hour letdown.

I can't agree with that at all. I think Trials of the Luremaster added some good challenging content to the game and coupled with the fact that it was a completely free download, it made the Icewind Dale+Heart of Winter experience all the more satisfying and rewarding. You could argue that its release was largely in light of the fact that many of the fans found Heart of Winter too short, but I don't take that view or begrudge Trials of the Luremaster's release at all.

 

[TheSisko]

I can agree with this.
True, but action games are moving toward more first and third person perspectives. As they move away from the isometric view, newer generations become less familiar with it.

I've not seen games "move away" from it. Some type of action games simply lend themselves to that perspective - like "Renegade Ops" for instance. But anyway - just let the player manipulate the camera and it's not even an issue.

Because tinkering with experimentation on modern day games costs much more than it used to a decade ago.

Only if you're making a mainstream "AAA" game.

That's my point - if they were to focus their efforts on IWD3, they wouldn't be targeting a mainstream crowd and wouldn't make nearly as much money as they might invest in it as a result.

Your point does apply to Obsidian, but a smaller developer could make a similar game.

 

[JDR13]

I can't agree with that at all. I think Trials of the Luremaster added some good challenging content to the game and coupled with the fact that it was a completely free download, it made the Icewind Dale+Heart of Winter experience all the more satisfying and rewarding. You could argue that its release was largely in light of the fact that many of the fans found Heart of Winter too short, but I don't take that view or begrudge Trials of the Luremaster's release at all.

I remember liking TotL as well. As you mention, it was a nice supplement to HoW, and it was free. I thought the setting was a nice change of pace from the ice and snow, and it introduced some new monsters to the mix.

 

[Lucky Day]

I can't agree with that at all. I think Trials of the Luremaster added some good challenging content to the game and coupled with the fact that it was a completely free download, it made the Icewind Dale+Heart of Winter experience all the more satisfying and rewarding. You could argue that its release was largely in light of the fact that many of the fans found Heart of Winter too short, but I don't take that view or begrudge Trials of the Luremaster's release at all.

neither can I.

It was HoW I disliked not TotL - sorry to mix that up, its been too many years. TotL was ok - the price tag made up for the $30 I spent on Heart of Winter. Its been too many years.

IWD I think found a mainstream audience because being released at the same time as Diablo II it was actually expected to bomb. Personally, I found the two games nothing alike.

I think IWD showed me that linear games could be enjoyable and not just a mindless grind. Unlike BG, IWD had focus. If a game had a story that compelled me I am definitely interested from going from point A to B.

 

[Ragnaris]

Your point does apply to Obsidian, but a smaller developer could make a similar game.

The "AAA" term seems to be thrown around so loosely these days, I tend to avoid modern day ratings, but I do agree.

That's my point. A big name developer wouldn't want to focus their efforts on it. If anything, a small indie developer could benefit more from it, but even that is risky because you're asking them to keep the same formula from the ground up.

Don't get me wrong, I think IWD3 would be nice, but I can't see it ever coming to life, and if it did, it wouldn't be in the same vein as IWD or IWD2 (similar to Fallout 3's case).

 

[Avantenor]

PS:T sold less than 100K.

Not correct. It have been at least around 400k. Dev Quote Scott Warner. Dev quote Avellone from the RPGWatch-Feature: According to Feargus it made no loss.

 

[TheSisko]

Not correct. It have been at least around 400k. Dev Quote Scott Warner. Dev quote Avellone from the RPGWatch-Feature: According to Feargus it made no loss.

Oh, that's cool. I guess they expected it to sell closer to BG if 400K was disappointing.

 

[Maylander]

From what I know, it sold fairly decent, but only over time. It didn't really make money right away. Investors generally want money "RIGHT NOW!!" and not in three years.

PS: T is the kind of game that started selling well once word-of-mouth made it popular.

 

[blatantninja]

I'm probably one of the few that liked the icewind dale series better than bg. I often wondered why a smaller company doesn't but the infinity engine from bioware? Would they want to much money or simply they won't sell it?

I would think once you have the engine you could make the games relatively cheap and wouldn't need massive sales to make a profit. I would think any game released on the infinity engine would sell more than any indie game on name alone.

Producing the backgrounds and setting up all the various mask levels takes a LOT of time. I toyed around in the modding community around '01 and '02 and just creating a single area from scratch, even with all the great tools available in the mod community takes dozens of hours. That's why almost all the mods you see simply re-use existing areas.

I love the IWD's - better than the BG's. Except Trials of the Luremaster which was a huge 10 hour letdown. PS:T did sell very well but only after a word of mouth and sites like our own kept singing its praises. If IWD2 only sold a few 100k then its a shame because its a great, great game.

Trials of the Luremaster was hastily put together to appease fans that were upset with the extremely short length of Heart of Winter, and it suffered for it.

Would an isometric 2D play well on a phone or a tablet device? I don't think it would. Mind you, I can't get what I have working on my Asus Tablet.

Avadon seems to be doing pretty well on the iPad.

- Replayability (due to the length and building your own party)

What's not to like? Seriously, while Baldur's Gate 2 is on a whole other level as far as depth, characters and story, I would still rate both BG2 and IWD 10 out of 10. What IWD did it did very well. It's probably the only post-90s RPG that reminds me of the classic Gold Box games.

I only played IWD once because of the lack of story development. I need a good story to get me engaged and make we want to re-experience it. I tried going back to IWD again a few years back and it just couldn't hole my interest. Yet I've played BG1&2 more times than I can count! I think the thing that really gets me though is the lack of resolution at the end of the game:

Spoiler

It's kill the big boss, fade to black, roll credits. I hate that. I was a little resolution beyond that like at the end of BG2. IWD2 tried to fix that, but the story there never grabbed me either

The sequel was disappointing, but is still worth playing once at least. They just dropped the ball big time as far as pacing thanks to the addition of puzzles and inconsistent battle difficulty. Otherwise, it was just as beautiful as the first game and benefited from improved writing including some pretty funny dialogue. I've actually never finished it but have played about 4 times, always stopping at some point which I estimate to be about 60% through.

First time I played IWD2 I got to the monks and realized I had absolutely no idea what the story was, I was just plowing through. I lost interest. I went back and played it again a year or two ago using the party mod, and enjoyed it a lot more. Not sure why, but the graphics of it always looked poorer than the other IE games to me. It almost looked like they used a 256 color palette or something, mainly in the towns.

Not correct. It have been at least around 400k. Dev Quote Scott Warner. Dev quote Avellone from the RPGWatch-Feature: According to Feargus it made no loss.

IIRC, that number is total since launch, but when it initially launched, it only sound around 60k or so. Its become a cult classic so to speak.