Beamdog - Infinity Games Console Release Dated

Originally Posted by Stingray
Actually, CD Projekt didn't start out "editing existing versions of games". They started out as a game distributor. Later on they moved into localization, but equating that with enhanced editions etc is pretty silly. To be honest, besides being wrong about the history with CDPR (distributor/localizer) and CDPR Red (game developer), the whole argument you presented seems incredibly weird and pointless. For starters, Beamdog still hasn't even released what I'd call a real game - only a DLC (or expansion, if you prefer) for a BioWare game. But the whole number of years thing - wow, who cares?

No shit it's weird and pointless! That was the point of the original argument!

Originally Posted by purpleblob
Here you referred to people who dislike Beamdog (yes, I dislike Beamdog) with the assumption that the root cause is irrational.

Yeah, you just verified what I said in my previous post. Not sure what the point of that was, but thank you.

Originally Posted by JDR13
Yeah, you just verified what I said in my previous post. Not sure what the point of that was, but thank you.

No, it shows you bundled me as one of those who you assume have "irrational" dislike for Beamdog because you simply can't fathom to see other people's point of view.

But whatever I'm going to drop it since someone will ask to go back on the topic.

Originally Posted by purpleblob
So you guys can judge and call my opinion/value/thoughts as "fallacy" or "bias" but I can't judge Beamdog.

^This is yet another fallacy. No ever said you can't judge Beamdog.

Here are a few of the many fallacies presented in this entertaining thread:

Straw man

Slippery Slope

And I also see hints of:

Gaslighting

(for those of you who identify with that last one, probably time to see a couples therapist, if you're in a relationship)

Originally Posted by purpleblob
But whatever I'm going to drop it since someone will ask to go back on the topic.

I was indeed about to ask something like that. Let's just follow purple's example and drop this specific part of the discussion.

The goodness of it depends on the interface. People say Larian did a decent job but I've heard of some pretty poor jobs (thankfully I don't play consoles so no first hand experience
-
Time will tell - or has someone here played the beta ?

Originally Posted by JDR13
I can't imagine playing the IE games with a gamepad, but this is still a good thing.

There's a significant % of gamers who exclusively game on consoles, and now they'll have a chance to play some classic RPGs that they otherwise might never have tried.

Maybe if Beamdog added a slow mode like Tower of Time it would be easier to play on console.

I suspect Tower of Time may have redefined a new aspect of game enjoyment, we'll see in the next few years if other projects follow suit.

Didn’t they have concept art out (or contracted an artist with work credited to a Beamdog project) of like a golden armoured minotaur, among other things? I’m sure it was some kind of fantasy steampunk RPG. Whatever happened to that game.

Originally Posted by TheSnarkyShaman
Didn’t they have concept art out (or contracted an artist with work credited to a Beamdog project) of like a golden armoured minotaur, among other things? I’m sure it was some kind of fantasy steampunk RPG. Whatever happened to that game.

One word Cancelled. Well more then one.

Basically lack of funds and wasted talent.

Despite Beamdog being founded by a Bioware veteran, Larian has a number of obvious advantages over Beamdog when it comes to making a Baldur's Gate 3. They've actually made not one, but four isometric rpgs, and two of them were party based (I'm not even counting Beyond Divinity even though it had a 2 person party). With the exception of Beyond Divinity all of them were critically succesful and the two D:OS games actually made tons of money and won GOTY awards. They did all of that without the D&D licence. They already have a successful engine in place. They have many more employees, and have the means to make such a game without having to bring in extra help. In short there is no way anyone can doubt that they have the capacity to complete such a game. With Beamdog I'd say a lot of those things are in doubt. I enjoyed Siege of Dragonspear, but they used a lot of old assets, the expansion can hardly be called modern, and I think it was only moderately successful. I'm not saying they couldn't make a good Baldur's Gate game, but I think its a much bigger gamble than letting Larian develop it would be.

[edit: lol ok never mind, I'll shut up about it too then at Myrthos's request. The mystery remains!]

*Edit* On second thought, someone already has their panties in a bunch. We'll leave it at that.

I'm angry about something, too. But I refuse to say why.

Originally Posted by forgottenlor
Despite Beamdog being founded by a Bioware veteran, Larian has a number of obvious advantages over Beamdog when it comes to making a Baldur's Gate 3. They've actually made not one, but four isometric rpgs, and two of them were party based (I'm not even counting Beyond Divinity even though it had a 2 person party). With the exception of Beyond Divinity all of them were critically succesful and the two D:OS games actually made tons of money and won GOTY awards. They did all of that without the D&D licence. They already have a successful engine in place. They have many more employees, and have the means to make such a game without having to bring in extra help. In short there is no way anyone can doubt that they have the capacity to complete such a game. With Beamdog I'd say a lot of those things are in doubt. I enjoyed Siege of Dragonspear, but they used a lot of old assets, the expansion can hardly be called modern, and I think it was only moderately successful. I'm not saying they couldn't make a good Baldur's Gate game, but I think its a much bigger gamble than letting Larian develop it would be.

Er…ok? Not sure how that has anything to do with this thread, but cool.

Originally Posted by JDR13
Er…ok? Not sure how that has anything to do with this thread, but cool.

Well, it was indirectly connected to my thought on why Beamdog keeps on doing these ports rather than something new. To be able to do something new they'd need some financing to do so. But that doesn't seem like its going to happen and there are reasons for it.

Originally Posted by forgottenlor
Well, it was indirectly connected to my thought on why Beamdog keeps on doing these ports rather than something new. To be able to do something new they'd need some financing to do so. But that doesn't seem like its going to happen and there are reasons for it.

They have their niche, and they're good at it. I see no reason for them to change their current strategy if it's working for them. I think you're fabricating reasons why they're not doing a new game when that simply might not be their goal right now.

Originally Posted by JDR13
They have their niche, and they're good at it. I see no reason for them to change their current strategy if it's working for them. I think you're fabricating reasons why they're not doing a new game when that simply might not be their goal right now.

So you don't think they'd prefer to be working a new game? I find that a surprising viewpoint.

Originally Posted by forgottenlor
So you don't think they'd prefer to be working a new game? I find that a surprising viewpoint.

I think they prefer having a solid business model. Theirs seems to be working for them. I'm not sure what's surprising about that.

I don't mind Beamdog, and I certainly can't be opposed to them bringing my favorite RPGs to a wider audience. As said by others before, I also can't imagine playing the IE games with a controller, but who knows, maybe they'll make it work?

I wouldn't mind an original D&D game by them, but I can't say I'm sad that Larian got BG3.