Baldur's Gate - Enhanced Edition Tidbits

sakichop said:
The story was never the main draw for me with the BG series. It was the d&d setting, monsters, character creation and progression and exploration.

So if they stick to the original formula and don't go the fallout 3 route I would welcome a BG 3,4,5,6 and so on.
Click to expand...

Agreed for me personally. In fact, I thought the overarching plot was dull. The name would primarily be a marketing device but I don't have a problem with that if it brings me the appropriate gameplay. I also can't see that it would be that hard to tie it in appropriately - base it in Baldur's Gate (you know, the city that wasn't actually in BG2), follow up one of the other characters from the series, expand on one of the subplots and so on.
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
11,842
Location
Sydney, Australia
Meh. First of all, these "enhanced editions" are going to be exclusive to beamdog (which is their own digital download service as far as i understand). Secondly, the mod community has over the years already "enhanced" the games more than enough. BG1, that had some directddraw problems under win7, is already perfectly playable in BG2 engine. That's the most important thing for compatibility. The games have also supported widescreen resolutions for a long time. Most of the bugs have been fixed and usability annoyances solved.
There's also ludicrous amount of extra content for the games ranging from restorations to full blown expansions. The problem is, majority of this content is mediocre fanfic at best, and downright silly retconning at worst. I simply don't trust beamdog yet to do any better than (well meaning and no doubt knowledgeable) modders, who have been at it for years and years and haven't really produced that much worthwhile extra content.
 
Joined
Sep 30, 2008
Messages
369
Location
Estonia
tolknaz said:
Meh. First of all, these "enhanced editions" are going to be exclusive to beamdog (which is their own digital download service as far as i understand). Secondly, the mod community has over the years already "enhanced" the games more than enough. BG1, that had some directddraw problems under win7, is already perfectly playable in BG2 engine. That's the most important thing for compatibility. The games have also supported widescreen resolutions for a long time. Most of the bugs have been fixed and usability annoyances solved.
There's also ludicrous amount of extra content for the games ranging from restorations to full blown expansions. The problem is, majority of this content is mediocre fanfic at best, and downright silly retconning at worst. I simply don't trust beamdog yet to do any better than (well meaning and no doubt knowledgeable) modders, who have been at it for years and years and haven't really produced that much worthwhile extra content.
Click to expand...

Yes, I've played most of the mods. The big difference though is that those other modders didn't have the source code or work on the original games. This should result in much better results. Even if it's only as good as what's out now I will still support it in hope of future projects.
 
tolknaz said:
The games have also supported widescreen resolutions for a long time.
Click to expand...

Yes, you can play them in widescreen, but not without everything scaling down in size as you increase the resolution. Once you get past 1024x768 it looks like you're playing an RTS game. I'm looking forward to being able to play them in high-res with proper scaling.
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,417
Location
Florida, US
I agree with Dhruin and the rest. A continuation of the franchise with very loose ties to the original storyline (if any) would be a very desirable thing...

Another reason to support this effort methinks, in addition to getting a version that would play and look well in my 22" monitor, and comes already packaged/tweaked and tested...
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
1,734
Ashbery76 said:
This is going to be like Lucas messing with the original StarWars.It will be fail.
Click to expand...

Er no, most likely any new npc's will be completely optional like the ones already in the game, if you want to ignore them go for it. On the other hand Jar Jar Binks is harder to ignore, he doesn't stand in a corner of one location saying nothing unless spoken to! :lol:

Daniel.
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
733
Location
England
JDR13 said:
Amen to that. I don't get why so many people think BG3 would actually be a good idea.
Click to expand...
moonmonster said:
BG3 would be pretty ridiculous. TOB was already pushing the ability of the 2nd ed system (and really any system would have issues) to deal with characters of that power.
Click to expand...
Baldur´s Gate 3 was in the plans quite shortly after BG2 and even then it was only very loosely tied to the previous two games and it was supposed to be a low level campaign.
If these guys will ever attempt to make BG3, I´ll be surprised if they won´t choose a similar route, at least when it comes to story ties. The name will very likely be there just for recognition´s sake.

Wiki entry for Baldur´s Gate 3: The Black Hound
The concept for that was rather Obsidian-y and it seems like some of the stuff was later tweaked and used in Mask of the Betrayer.
 
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Messages
2,437
Location
Prague
JDR13 said:
Amen to that. I don't get why so many people think BG3 would actually be a good idea.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I pray that BG saga rest in peace. I would love to see new d&d rpg though.

Dhruin said:
I also can't see that it would be that hard to tie it in appropriately - base it in Baldur's Gate (you know, the city that wasn't actually in BG2), follow up one of the other characters from the series, expand on one of the subplots and so on.
Click to expand...

Yes, the event is no longer taking place at Baldur's gate but it follows on Bhaalspawn story so I say BG series is finished. No forced resurrection please. I would really prefer seeing a new game developed in d&d setting similar to BG series - isometric, awesome NPCs... and maybe new location, perhaps Dragonlance setting?
 
Dragonlance, eberron, planescape, dark sun, any of those would be funky!

Daniel.
 
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
733
Location
England
Very interesting... and please, no BG III.Thanks.

Really hope for this to turn out good & successful -- then hopefully we may see IWD and Planescape!
 
Joined
Nov 3, 2009
Messages
123
Location
Hell
I gotta say an infinity engine game on any of the mentioned settings would have an automatic customer here.

I would actually prefer that to a continuation of BG or Forgotten Realms used as a setting again.

I just don't see it happening. This venture would already seem too risky to investors without an already established name to use(for marketing purposes as Dhruin mentioned)…

I think the lack of a recognizable name might even make a crowdfunded attempt fail to take off (I would like to see them try though)… Maybe after BG3 ;)
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
1,734
Of course they'd call any original game Baldur's Gate 3. They got the IP, not using it would be stupid. That'd be like Bethesda getting the Fallout IP and calling their game "Nuclear Apocalypse Party".

And just because it'd be called Baldurs Gate 3 doesn't mean it'd be linked to the BG1 and 2 story. The Black Hound wasn't going to. The Dark Alliances weren't. So all you asses ranting that they shouldn't make a BG3 should just shut the fuck up. Like anyone wants to hear your negative garbage. If you hate RPG's so much you don't want a new infinity engine game, why are you even here?
 
Joined
Sep 28, 2009
Messages
837
Honestly, I have no idea where the anti-BGIII people are coming from. You seem to want new BG-like IE games. Don't you realize that this is probably the only way you'll get one? I seriously doubt it would be a direct continuation anyway, as pretty much all of us are saying.

The choice isn't between:
1. BG III
2. Your favorite obscure RP setting.. which will draw less attention than BG and which they might not own the rights to.

The choice is between:
1. BG III
2. Nothing
 
Joined
Sep 16, 2011
Messages
445
I don't think anyone is being "anti' Baldur's Gate 3. For example, I won't complain if a BG3 is eventually made, I would just prefer a new, more creative/unique setting. That's a big difference from saying "I would hate a new BG3." If a BG3 is all that comes from this, I would gladly take it.

"Of course they'd call any original game Baldur's Gate 3. They got the IP, not using it would be stupid. That'd be like Bethesda getting the Fallout IP and calling their game "Nuclear Apocalypse Party".

That's a poor example. Conversely, if a BG3 was made, it would be more like saying, "a BG3 would be like Bethesda placing every new Elder Scrolls title in the same province." All people here are saying is that the BG saga is complete, the setting has been fully fleshed out, and it wouldn't really benefit from new entries; why not take advantage of one of the unique D&D settings that hasn't really been utilized?

This is all just wild speculation though, and we're getting way ahead of ourselves - this is just a remake/"enhanced edition," which by no means guarantees that completely brand new IE games will be made.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 18, 2010
Messages
1,022
purpleblob said:
No forced resurrection please.
Click to expand...

Why is a new game set in or around Baldur's Gate/the Sword Coast "forced"? Was BG2 forced? Because when I played that for the first time, I certainly didn't think "bugger, the story is incomplete - it really needs another couple of games to finish it properly".

Nerevarine said:
I don't think anyone is being "anti' Baldur's Gate 3. For example, I won't complain if a BG3 is eventually made, I would just prefer a new, more creative/unique setting. That's a big difference from saying "I would hate a new BG3." If a BG3 is all that comes from this, I would gladly take it.
Click to expand...

There are clearly posters going beyond "I'd rather a new setting", which is their choice, just not one I understand. I think most of us would love a new setting - but is it practical? I can see "BG3" getting funded after a successful BG/BG2 Enhanced - can you see something new getting to market as easily?

I'll take a game that uses the name over no game with high-minded principles.

I hope Obsidian's Kickstarter is a completely original game, by the way, but I think Obsidian can gather more support than "Overhaul Games".
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
11,842
Location
Sydney, Australia
Dhruin said:
Why is a new game set in or around Baldur's Gate/the Sword Coast "forced"? Was BG2 forced? Because when I played that for the first time, I certainly didn't think "bugger, the story is incomplete - it really needs another couple of games to finish it properly".
Click to expand...

Because BG1 + BG2 was based on Bhaalspawn saga and if there's going to be BG3, it should follow Bhaalspawn story? But as we all know, Bhaalspawn story is completed.

If there is going to be another BG game, it should be a spin off, much like BG: Dark Alliance — diffierent hero, different story etc. I don't mind, say, BG: Imoen or BG: Tales of Bhaalspawn companions something like that. It just shouldn't be BG"3"

There are clearly posters going beyond "I'd rather a new setting", which is their choice, just not one I understand. I think most of us would love a new setting - but is it practical? I can see "BG3" getting funded after a successful BG/BG2 Enhanced - can you see something new getting to market as easily?
Click to expand...

Yes, if there is going to be another IE game, obviously BG3 is the best bet. Doesn't mean people have to like it — you may like the idea, but some of us don't.
 
Well, games like NWN1 + 2 and KotOR1 + 2 have different main characters despite being sequels. They share the same setting, time period and a bunch of the same characters though. The Might & Magic series is another example.

For BG3 to follow a similar recipe, all that's needed is for it to be set in Baldur's Gate or the area nearby, during the same time period and include some of the same characters.

I'm not really commenting on whether that's right or wrong to do it, I'm just saying it's pretty common for RPG series.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
7,586
Location
Bergen
purpleblob said:
Because BG1 + BG2 was based on Bhaalspawn saga and if there's going to be BG3, it should follow Bhaalspawn story?
Click to expand...
Why?
Baldur´s Gate 2 was also just a recognition thing, there was barely any other reason for the name, Shadows of Amn would be sufficient (and less misleading, while we´re at it).
If anything, the "correct" naming should´ve been Bhaalspawn Saga: Baldur´s Gate and Bhaalspawn Saga 2: Shadows of Amn or something.
No one´s going to make Bhaalpawn Saga 3.
If anyone´s going to make Baldur´s Gate 3, it´s gonna be something á la BG3: Yeah, We Do Mention the City at Least Twice in Our Game.

Personally I doubt there are any serious plans for BG3 anyway. Without any further info, to me it seems like a way to add a bit more hype to what already seems mainly like a promotion to a digital distribution service.
 
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Messages
2,437
Location
Prague
DeepO said:
Why?
Baldur´s Gate 2 was also just a recognition thing, there was barely any other reason for the name, Shadows of Amn would be sufficient (and less misleading, while we´re at it).
If anything, the "correct" naming should´ve been Bhaalspawn Saga: Baldur´s Gate and Bhaalspawn Saga 2: Shadows of Amn or something.
No one´s going to make Bhaalpawn Saga 3.
Click to expand...

I understand what you're trying to say, but "Baldur's Gate" and "Bhaalspawn Saga" are always going to be the same thing in most people's minds.
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,417
Location
Florida, US
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom