D&D 5E So Why Can't 5E Get a Video Game?

[Kalshane]

My favorite recent D&D game is Chronicles of Mystara, but that has more to do with nostalgia for sidesrollers. There's really not much (or any) "D&D" in it.

I wasted way too many quarters playing Shadows over Mystara in the arcade when I was younger and promptly bought Chronicles of Mystara for both Xbox 360 and PS3 when it came out so I could play with my friends on both systems. The D&D stuff is mostly cosmetic, but it's still a really fun game.

 

[Corpsetaker]

We DO have a D&D video game. Sword Coast Legends that came out in late 2015. To have a new video game now, a new company has to get the rights to the game, which is tricky since Digital Extremes might still have them. Failing that they need to negotiate with WotC, which takes time. Then they need to make the video game, which also takes *gasp* time. Years. I didn't back it. Because of the LAST Pathfinder KS video game. Which was Pathfinder Online and god awful. Will this one be better or be akin to SCL? We don't know and will find out in a year! Pillars of Eternity required $1,100,00 to get off the ground in a bare bones fashion. But that was a company that made video games, had made several successful video games, had the staff and infrastructure, and likely had put some work into the game already. WotC is a collectable card publishing company that dabbles in books, not a video game company. I'd trust them as much to make a video game as I'd trust them to make dog food or kites. Why would I expect them to make a video game? The problem is that video games are super expensive and D&D and RPGs are niche. Look at the Pathfinder game you mention: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/owlcatgames/pathfinder-kingmaker They asked for half a million dollars. And they already have a lot of the game architecture done (it's in Alpha) and done by people with a history in gaming. So it's a safe bet. But they only managed to just fund a few days ago, and there's less than 2 weeks left. It's trending towards $851,711 according to Kicktraq: http://www.kicktraq.com/projects/owlcatgames/pathfinder-kingmaker/ That puts it below Pathfinder Online, that cleared a million: http://www.kicktraq.com/projects/1675907842/pathfinder-online-a-fantasy-sandbox-mmo/ (That had a dubious surge in funds at the end that suggest someone internally decided to pay the difference.) Neither are CLOSE to what Pillars of Eternity made. Funny thing, Obsidian Entertainment was making a Pathfinder game. They got the licence to Pathfinder in 2014. Why don't we have a Pathfinder game by Obsidian. Because the Pillar's Kickstarter did well and then the game reviewed well and sold really, really well. So Obsidian decided they were better off with Pillars 2. So why don't we have a D&D game? Because it's cheaper and potentially more profitable for game companies to make their own games. Because a successful game doesn't require a licensed name to succeed, AND video game fans have learned to be super wary of licensed properties, which are typically of dubious quality. Because D&D is too small to attract a number of people to qualify as a successful game.

Yeah and Sword Coast Legends is an absolute failure that caused the company that created it, N-Space, to close it's doors for good. Not exactly a D&D game I would be proud of.

 

[Derren]

The answer is simple, because the D&D license is not attractive enough for large studios to use and too restrictive for enthusiastic kickstarter projects.
It doesn't help that the value of D&D has been reduced a lot over the past few years. The massive player drain and bad press with 4E and several bad video games and movies. So why would a studio use the license when it mostly carries a negative image while also setting the expectations of a video game rather high because of Baldurs Gate and Neverwinter Nights?
And currently most studios create their own settings anyway to keep full creative control and keep the possibility of publishing their own books open.
And finally, the current market is turning towards SciFi. It will take several years for it to swing back to fantasy again.

 

[Michael Lueneburg]

With virtual tabletop software, there really is no need for a stand alone video game, at least in the traditional sense. They would have much better luck combining a traditional VTT like Fantasy Grounds or Roll20 with the graphics of Sword Coast Legends.

Imagine playing D&D as you normally do: descriptions, NPC interaction, party interaction, the DM being the ultimate arbiter and designer... Now instead of the DM pulling out minis, a dry erase board or pulling up a map in VTT software, he pulls up an encounter map that looks graphically the same as Sword Coast Legends (via VTT or the Television). The DM still controls initiative and combat, dice are still rolled. The attack is animated, though generically and leaving room for description. The software tracks things like status effects, distance, etc on the back end... Taking some burden off of the DM.

D&D Beyond is actually a step in this direction, I believe.

 

[payn]

And finally, the current market is turning towards SciFi. It will take several years for it to swing back to fantasy again.

Could you expand on this?

 

[Derren]

Could you expand on this?

From my subjective observation the market for movies and video games swings between fantasy and scifi (it no surprise that they are often lumped together). The last decade fantasy was much more prominent than scifi, especially because LotR and Hobbit. But now this has ended and more and more Scifi products get produced. This is even visible on the PnP market with Starfinder.
That does not mean that fantasy will vanish but it will be even more niche than before until people are oversaturated with SciFi and some big fantasy blockbuster ywings the pendulum back.

 

[Mallus]

I think the people saying 1) WotC has no interest in spending money to create D&D computer/console games and 2) the license isn't an attractive buy for outside studios have it right.

From my perspective, every computer and console game that has roots in D&D-style fantasy *is* a D&D game, for all intents and purposes. I don't really need to be fighting the IP-protected bestiary to get that experience. The new Torment game is set in Numenera and it works fine (ahem, technical issues aside).

 

[VikingLegion]

I don't expect a D&D video game to follow all of the rules and math of D&D (but several have in the past, including all the best ones). But it shouldn't feel like Generic Fantasy: Origins with a beholder.

So what are the correct rules and math of D&D? Back in the day, the lower your AC, the better. Starting with 3e, you want higher AC. Did the entire IP suddenly flip on its head? No, they are just a system for resolving a basic action: did the monster hit me and did he do damage? What are hit points? My mage in 2e had about 40 of them. My mage in the game Neverwinter on PS4 has about 98,000. But if a demon smacks the former for 20hp and the latter for 49,000, guess what? Both mages are down to half of their health and need to fall back and heal up a bit. Both games resolved the same exact situation with identical results. The numbers - no matter how vastly different - are just expressions of percentages.

Is every table across the world that is playing original D&D through 4th edition *not* playing "real" D&D because 5e is the currently supported iteration? The old dudes playing Greyhawk down the road for the last 30 years, numerically, don't have anything in common with the 5e crew that gets together on Tuesdays to run the latest FR campaign. What about a 5e group that introduces a few semi-significant house rules? Are they playing D&D or are they playing Generic Fantasy: Something-That-Resembles-D&D-But-Is-Not-Quite-Right?

If my wizard can cast magic missile or line up a cluster of kobolds to fry with a fireball: that's a D&D game
If my paladin can quest for a flaming holy avenger sword: that's a D&D game
If I can roam an enormous, sprawling city like Waterdeep and visit Khelben "Blackstaff" Arunsun in his tower: that's a D&D game
If I can ride a kank across the harsh Tablelands, guarding a caravan against attacks from elven desert-runners or packs of thri-kreen: that's a D&D game
If I can fly a silver dragon across the plains of Solamnia to halt an advance of Lord Soth: that's a D&D game
If I can take my chances with a Deck of Many Things, or confront Strahd in his castle, or lead a charge of knights against the forces of Iuz, well, I think you get the picture.

Why get caught up on what the correct rules are for a great D&D video game, when you could never get two out of a thousand tables to agree exactly on what the right way to adjudicate a session is? Rules are kind of like the ropes and pulleys and dudes in all black that move stuff around during a theatrical production. They're just there to facilitate the story - the less noticeable they are, the better, yes? I don't care if a D&D video game has my characters cap out at level 20 or level 150. I don't care if their hit points (or, *gasp*, "health") hangs around 70 points or reaches into the millions. I don't care if the suit of platemail has a +5 bonus to AC or a +7,580 Defensive boost.

TL;DR - if the story is good and they make usage of all the iconic D&D elements - spell names, locations, famous NPCs, unique items and artifacts, and yes BEHOLDERS AND MIND FLAYERS, I will absolutely give it a try.

 

[Jester David]

If my wizard can cast magic missile or line up a cluster of kobolds to fry with a fireball: that's a D&D game
If my paladin can quest for a flaming holy avenger sword: that's a D&D game

Or a Pathfinder game. Or a 13th Age game. Or World of Warcraft for that matter... (Ashbringinger is totally a holy avenger.)

Why get caught up on what the correct rules are for a great D&D video game, when you could never get two out of a thousand tables to agree exactly on what the right way to adjudicate a session is? Rules are kind of like the ropes and pulleys and dudes in all black that move stuff around during a theatrical production. They're just there to facilitate the story - the less noticeable they are, the better, yes? I don't care if a D&D video game has my characters cap out at level 20 or level 150. I don't care if their hit points (or, *gasp*, "health") hangs around 70 points or reaches into the millions. I don't care if the suit of platemail has a +5 bonus to AC or a +7,580 Defensive boost.

I agree to a point.
The math and the numbers and the rules happening behind the screen don't matter. Especially damage numbers, hit points, odds of hitting, etc.

So many D&D elements - wizards, clerics, fireball, warriors, rogues, shapeshifting druids, holy warrior paladins - are generic enough that lots and lots of non-D&D RPGS (both PnP and digital) make use of them. It takes more than that to make something a D&D RPG. If that's all it took, then we already have really excellent D&D RPGs.
Similarly, there are a lot of D&Disms that are hard to get away from. The six main stats, with 18 being "good" for one. Terms like "armour class" and "hit points". Certain classes and races. The sacred cows.
As the general rejection of 4e showed, there's only so far you can branch away from the core elements of D&D before the fans start rejecting the final product.

As I said before, it takes more than D&D branding and images to make something a D&D game. As was shown by Arena of War.
And while I had a hell of a fun time playing Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance for the PS2, I wouldn't say that the "D&D connection" was strong, despite taking place in Baldur's Gate and featuring things like a beholder. It was just a well done isometric hack-and-slash RPG.

On the main page there's some fun charts showing how well ALL current RPGs compare to the sales of the entire hobby gaming industry, and then compared to movies and video games. It's ridiculous how small D&D's sales are compared to video games.

Bottom Line: A D&D is just not going to compete against every other fantasy RPG on their turf. If can't have as polished mechanics and story as a AAA game. Or even an A game.
For a D&D game to have a chance it really needs to focus on being a D&D game. That's the selling feature. That's what makes it stand out.

 

[Derren]

Bottom Line: A D&D is just not going to compete against every other fantasy RPG on their turf. If can't have as polished mechanics and story as a AAA game. Or even an A game.
For a D&D game to have a chance it really needs to focus on being a D&D game. That's the selling feature. That's what makes it stand out.

It just needs to be a good game.
Dark Alliance had not much to do with the a tual rules, but it was one of the more successful D&D video games.