Baldur's Gate 3 and Neverwinter Nights 2 all-but-confirmed by Atari!

[Dark Jezter]

But ID2 was still based in Icewind Dale. Baldur's Gate isn't some generic phrase, neither is Icewind Dale. Any new game is unlikely to have any story connection to the previous games as well as not be based in BG and what you say you like about the games aren't unique to the series, so under the circumstances to me naming a new game BG3 is nothing but an attempt to sucker people into buying the game rather than selling it on it's own merits.

NWN wasn't hurt in sales by not being called BG, the old gold box games weren't hurt by not sharing a name either. If they want attention all they need to do is plop the D&D and FR names on the box and that will accomplish what they're trying to do by calling it BG3.

Settle down, will you? The game hasn't even been officially announced yet, none of us know anything about the gameplay or storyline, and already you're willing to condemn it as a scam to rip people off using the Baldur's Gate name.

Maybe the game will have storyline connections to BG1 and BG2, maybe it won't. Maybe the game will be set in or around the Baldur's Gate area, maybe it won't. I'm going to at least wait until we hear more about the game (maybe even going so far as actually playing it) before I decide whether I hate it or not.

Even if the game is in no way connected to the storyline of BG1 and BG2, I won't mind it having the Baldur's Gate title on the box as long as it has a similar feel to the first two games in the series. I know you disagree with me on this issue, but I find that very few gamers give a rat's behind about the title of a game as long as the game itself is enjoyable, and if the game isn't enjoyable, than the title is the least of its problems.

 

[Express]

Settle down, will you? The game hasn't even been officially announced yet, none of us know anything about the gameplay or storyline, and already you're willing to condemn it as a scam to rip people off using the Baldur's Gate name.

Maybe the game will have storyline connections to BG1 and BG2, maybe it won't. Maybe the game will be set in or around the Baldur's Gate area, maybe it won't. I'm going to at least wait until we hear more about the game (maybe even going so far as actually playing it) before I decide whether I hate it or not.

Even if the game is in no way connected to the storyline of BG1 and BG2, I won't mind it having the Baldur's Gate title on the box as long as it has a similar feel to the first two games in the series. I know you disagree with me on this issue, but I find that very few gamers give a rat's behind about the title of a game as long as the game itself is enjoyable, and if the game isn't enjoyable, than the title is the least of its problems.

Actually, Ive always thougth it kind of funny how the names of games and sequels and related games morph over time. Im sure that the game publishers want to keep the BG name since it is a "brand name" for a franchise; different from NWN, Icewind Dale, etc, although two of the games with BG in the title are console games with no real ties to the PC games.

But this can cause titles to get longer. For instance take the Jedi Knight series. Star Wars:Jedi Knight , Star Wars:Jedi Knight 2:Jedi Outcast, then Star Wars:Jedi Knight:Jedi Academy.

Itd be interesting to see if the BG : Dark Alliance games take the Dark Alliance title as the series name or continue to use BG: DA making the title longer....

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Much as I loved the BG series, I'd really rather see a ToEE sequel -- or at least something using that engine. It's the closest thing to D&D rules I've played, IMO (bugs and release problems aside).A BG title with the ToEE turn-based party combat engine would be heaven!

 

[Welverin]

Settle down, will you?

Take your own advice.

The game hasn't even been officially announced yet, none of us know anything about the gameplay or storyline, and already you're willing to condemn it as a scam to rip people off using the Baldur's Gate name.

I'm condemning it, I do question the use of the name and the reasoning behind it. I will wait until finding out what it's about before deciding one way or the other.

I'm going to at least wait until we hear more about the game (maybe even going so far as actually playing it) before I decide whether I hate it or not.

Good for you.

Even if the game is in no way connected to the storyline of BG1 and BG2, I won't mind it having the Baldur's Gate title on the box as long as it has a similar feel to the first two games in the series. I know you disagree with me on this issue, but I find that very few gamers give a rat's behind about the title of a game as long as the game itself is enjoyable,

Actually I don't disagree with on that at all, I don't care what the title is, so long as the game is good or if it's bad, in which case I won't care because I won't be playing it.

None of that however stops me from questioning the reasoning behind the choice of the name or it's appropriateness for the game, which looks to be the only difference between us on the matter.

 

[ShadowX]

Here is what I want to see

NWN2- Since some think that false expectations and not the crappy engine and horrible campaign ruined this game, model it on the ultimate hero/henchman game, the Fallouts. And get a better engine for the love of God.

BG3- ToEE combat would be nice, but back to reality. Instead of a massive amount of often menial sidequests how about a truly living world. Also shape up the combat, especially at high levels. Looking to Black Isle Studio for how to make interesting combat and how to tell a story would help.

For any RPG emulating Fallout or Torment is a good idea.

 

[Henry]

Final Fantasy and Quake are just two franchises where the sequels have no storyline connection to the games that came before.

Agreed, but to me that's like someone writing a novel called, "Stories of New York" - and then the whole novel takes place in Seattle Washington, and New York is never mentioned. It's a real non sequitur.