Baldur's Gate 3 rumors

Ripper said:

I don't think they'd necessarily have to stop selling games produced while they had the license.

Click to expand...

That's not how IP licensing works. You need the license to sell the associated products. If you do not have the license, you can't sell it anymore. If Beamdog is still publishing the BG games that means they still have BG publishing rights.

But to make a Baldur's Gate 3, Beamdog would need a new D&D/FR license from WotC.

The split over the Baldur's Gate video game IP and D&D/FR licenses is why the titles were in publisher hell for a while. Interplay kept the BG video game IP publisher rights when Atari got the D&D/FR exclusive rights in like 2002. It wasn't until 2008 that Atari got the BG video game IP rights. In 2011, Atari lost the D&D license to Hasbro (WotC) after a court case, but kept the BG publisher rights. Around that time, Overhaul (aka Beamdog) started to make the EE for Atari. Then Beamdog bought the BG publisher rights from Atari somewhere between 2014-2016.

On top of that, I think the Baldur's Gate console rights at still at Interplay.

I think you're getting mixed up with different aspects of the licensing. Beamdog have the publishing rights for the original games - the IP in that case relates only to those specific BG games. If they sold those publishing rights to someone else, obviously they wouldn't be allowed to publish them any more.

azarhal said:

It's the same rumors that claims Larian is making Baldur's Gate 3. The journalists went "Larian is making BG3 now, so that means Beamdog lost the BG license". If that had happened we would have heard of it from the official channels and Beamdog would have to delist the BG:EE/BG2:EE games from retailers and stop selling them.

Click to expand...

This is where I think you're mistaken. A license to produce further BG games is a separate thing. If they had that at one time and then they "lost" it, they wouldn't be able to make BG3, but it wouldn't mean that they also lost the publishing rights for existing games, and they wouldn't have to stop selling them.

Ripper said:

I think you're getting mixed up with different aspects of the licensing. Beamdog have the publishing rights for the original games - the IP in that case relates only to those specific BG games. If they sold those publishing rights to someone else, obviously they wouldn't be allowed to publish them any more.

This is where I think you're mistaken. A license to produce further BG games is a separate thing. If they had that at one time and then they "lost" it, they wouldn't be able to make BG3, but it wouldn't mean that they also lost the publishing rights for existing games, and they wouldn't have to stop selling them.

Click to expand...

Based on the information I can find about this, the publishing rights that Beamdog bought from Atari (instead of the license they had originally) was for the Baldur's Gate IP on PC (and mobile*) not something limited to the already released titles. If they only have publishing rights to BG1 and BG2 that means Interplay or Atari SA still own the Baldur's Gate video game IP because it was never at Hasbro/WotC (unless something happened in the background in the last 4 years and it never reached the web).

Do not confuse Baldur's Gate IP publishing rights with the D&D/FR licenses which is also required to make a new Baldur's Gate regardless of who makes the game. But you also need the Baldur's Gate IP publishing rights to release a new game (unless it's not called Baldur's Gate and isn't a sequel to the existing ones).

*I actually think the mobile came from Interplay, they were apparently involved in BG:EE back in 2012.

Yes, I understand the complications and the various moving parts, and that's my point really - one can't make assumptions about how the licensing was done, and there are countless different IP license arrangements out there. I'm saying we can't necessarily state that if Beamdog lost (or sold) the right to make a new BG game, then it would mean they lost the right to sell the existing games.

We also don't know what restrictions, or possible expiry, might exist on various licenses. The rights to publish the existing games might be perpetual and transferable, but the right to create new BG games might have been limited in number, or expire at a certain point. All sorts of possibilities, and very likely a lot of significant details just aren't known to the public.

In any of the cases, Beamdog can't have lost anything. If they only have BG1/BG2 publishing rights, they never had the BG3 rights to start with so they can't have lost them. If they are the owners of the entire Baldur's Gate video game IP publishing rights, they can't have magically lost them or part of them and they wouldn't be able to still publish BG1/BG2 if they did. If Beamdog sold some publishing rights, that's not losing anything.

Beamdog can't have lost a license to make BG3 or new D&D games it never had.

azarhal said:

Beamdog can't have lost a license to make BG3 or new D&D games it never had.

Click to expand...

Maybe they have lost the chance of acquiring that license?

azarhal said:

In any of the cases, Beamdog can't have lost anything. If they only have BG1/BG2 publishing rights, they never had the BG3 rights to start with so they can't have lost them. If they are the owners of the entire Baldur's Gate video game IP publishing rights, they can't have magically lost them or part of them and they wouldn't be able to still publish BG1/BG2 if they did. If Beamdog sold some publishing rights, that's not losing anything.

Beamdog can't have lost a license to make BG3 or new D&D games it never had.

Click to expand...

Well, just off the top of my head I can think of one scenario where they could lose the right to make BG3 - the right to produce new BG games could have been time limited (which is a common feature of IP licensing.) So, Hasbro could have tied them up by refusing to grant the necessary additional D&D license, and waited out the clock until the specific BG license expired and effectively returned to them.

But, also, I think talk about losing the license could just mean that Hasbro decided to grant the new licenses to someone else.

It's all total speculation. My point is only that we can't necessarily conclude what's going on with the rights to make a new BG game by virtue of the fact that Beramdog hasn't stopped selling their wares.

Cacheperl said:

Maybe they have lost the chance of acquiring that license?

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure WotC/Hasbro is done with exclusive deal after the Atari fiasco. They allowed Neverwinter Online, Sword Coast Legend, Chronicles of Mystara, Tales from Candlekeep: Tomb of Annihilation, Idle Champions of the Forgotten Realms and Lords of Waterdeep to be made since they got the D&D rights back from Atari in 2011.

It was Atari who was looking to make BG3 back in 2007-2008 anyway (and Beamdog original partner for the EE was Atari). I never had the impression WotC was interested in it themselves, more D&D/FR 5e games based on their current modules yes, a Baldur's Gate sequel no.