D&D General No More Baldur's Gate From Larion: Team Is 'Elated'

Bad news for Baldur's Gate fans--It seems that Larion is out of the Baldur's Gate business. CEO Swen Vicke has announced that Baldur's Gate 3 is not getting any expansions, DLC, or a sequel. Patches and fixes will still continue, however, including cross-platform mod support.

"Because of all the success the obvious thing would have been to do a DLC, so we started on one. We started even thinking about BG4. But we hadn’t really had closure on BG3 yet and just to jump forward on something new felt wrong. We had also spent a whole bunch of time converting the system into a video game and we wanted to do new things. There are a lot of constraints on making D&D, and 5th Edition is not an easy system to put into a video game. We had all these ideas of new combat we wanted to try out and they were not compatible."

-Swen Vicke​

Vicke confirmed this at a talk at the Game Developers Conference, and said that Larion Studios wanted to make its own new content rather than license IP from another company.

He also clarified that a Baldur's Gate 4 was still possible, but that if it happened it would not be made by Larion. Larion is already working on its next big release.

According to IGN, Larion has started work on some BG3 DLC, but it was cancelled.

"You could see the team was doing it because everyone felt like we had to do it, but it wasn’t really coming from the heart, and we’re very much a studio from the heart. It’s what gotten us into misery and it’s also been the reasons for our success."

-Swen Vicke​

According to Vicke, when the BG3 team found out that they would not be making more Baldur's Gate content, they were 'elated'.

“I thought they were going to be angry at me because I just couldn’t muster the energy. I saw so many elated faces, which I didn’t expect, and I could tell they shared the same feelings, so we were all aligned with one another. And I’ve had so many developers come to me after and say, ‘Thank god.'"

-Swen Vicke​

​

 

[Scribe]

Fair complaints. I played through Wrath several times, and my last run was as Angel with me digging into as much as I could, and I found it immensely satisfying when all was said and done.

Still, fair points @Ruin Explorer

 

[Superchunk77]

This. Sven's not-so-obtuse rant regarding publishers firing staff to maximize quarterly result - well, easy enough to connect the dots.

I'll point out though that Hasbro is not alone in this tactic. Most of the big publishers do this.

And those other companies/publishers shouldn't get a free pass to do this either. WotC can reap what it sows.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Oh absolutely they were already working on a DLC, and planning BG4, you don't just drop that, especially after BG3 made a ton of money for all invovled.

Whilst I think WotC's behaviour ensured Larian probably won't make any future D&D games, do we have any actual evidence at all that Larian were actually working on a DLC/expansion or BG4? Swen listed Larian's future plans before BG3 came out, and neither a sequel nor DLC were in them, and when people asked him about that back then, he seemed surprised and just avoided the question, like he had no idea anyone might want that. Have you got anything? Even rumours? Or is this just assumption on your part? Fine if it is, but I just wondered.

They just said they want to work on their own content, not licensing someone else's. So, I'd not hold out much hope of further adaptations.

I missed that bit - I pray that they come up with a new IP, and don't return to Rivellon, but Swen seems extremely attached to it, which is unfortunate, given I've seen teenage homebrews which were better on all levels than Rivellon.

Definitely from a financial and interference perspective using your own IP makes sense, but here's to hoping they do like BioWare did and construct their own settings from first principles to avoid licencing - that gave us Dragon Age and Mass Effect, which despite the flaws of certain games, are two of the best computer game settings ever (not just in RPGs). They've got so many more talented writers now than they did when they came up with Rivellon, they could do so much better.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

An interesting comment from Swen:

Oh boy. Somehow, I don't think WotC is going to understand their importance or treat them with respect in the longer run. And the fact that he's being so clear that WotC owns them helps make clear why Larian probably out of working with WotC or on BG.

As for the next game, Swen has been somewhat inconsistent, but if we look only at more recent thing he's said, rather than including stuff from before BG3 came out, he does seem to be suggesting it will be a new IP and will "dwarf BG3".

 

[DarkCrisis]

While I'm happy for Larian's success, I would never have played BG3 if it wasn't called BG3. Or at least tied to D&D in some way.

I've tried some of thier other games and bounced off pretty quick. Same for other games in the genre.

Unless they really do something amazing I don't foresee me playing their next game and I'm willing to bet a large share of the fandom took to the game due to it being D&D which is a household brand name.

I hope for them the best and I know their next game will be a success but it will never land like BG3 did.

 

[wicked cool]

I had a long response to this but when the thread got merged it got eaten. Let me make it as short as possible.

• Rivellon is a bad setting, that's generic, sophomoric (at best) grimdark and was holding Larian back.

• BG3's early EA showed this - it launched with unpleasant, edgelord-y companions like DOS2, a grimdark take on the FR, and situations full of lose/lose or black/grey as the only possible outcomes.

• BG3's early EA also had terrible DOS mechanics slathered all over it, to the point of overwhelming the D&D mechanics.

• These points only changed because of massive negative feedback from the EA, where people were expecting a D&D/BG/FR game, not DOS3. If there had been no EA, or the game was DOS3, the negative feedback wouldn't have been there, and we'd have got a drastically worse (and far less financially successful) game.

• Swen Vincke expressed the opinion in video interviews, shortly before BG3's release, that Rivellon was a better setting than the FR, and DOS2 had much better mechanics than BG3 - this actually attracted some controversy among the few people who watched the video interviews, indicating certainly he had learned absolutely nothing at that point. He actually seemed slightly peeved (in his charming way) that they hadn't made DOS3.

Re: bolded bit, I pray that's true but I really doubt it, given Swen's comments and general attitudes.

As for DOS1/2, both were simultaneously extremely impressive and disappointing:

DOS1 - Basically a Terry Pratchett fanfic written by a 14-year-old Dutch guy (not literally) with a poor sense of humour, a poor grasp on English and a significant misogynist streak. Rescued by fascinating mechanics and an Ultima-esque approach to the world which made it very fun to play at times - but entirely despite the story and characters.

DOS2 - Basically a Joe Abercrombie fanfic written by a 20-something Goth guy with a slightly better sense of humour and grasp on English but still not a good one*. Wildly overrated at release, to the point where I would say that a lot of reviewers are extremely lucky Larian kept patching hard and the Definitive Edition happened, because otherwise they'd be getting called liars for the rest of their careers. It was a buggy and totally incomplete mess at launch (Act 4 barely even functioned). The mechanics this time were far less fun, and only barrelmancy still working really saved it, that and multiplayer chaos. The Definitive Edition corrected much of this, but couldn't rescue it from being sophomoric grimdark.


* = Larian did at least kinda own up to this - With DOS2 they re-wrote huge parts of it for the Definitive Edition (like, most of the game), with primary English speakers and hired huge numbers of writers who went on to write BG3.

Can I ask what you saw in early access that made it so different from the final game (examples)

 

[MGibster]

I don't need an expansion. BG3 was a great game, and it had an emotionally satisfying ending(s), so I don't really need to pick up at the end and continue with my merry band of adventurers.

 

[SteveC]

Oh boy. Somehow, I don't think WotC is going to understand their importance or treat them with respect in the longer run. And the fact that he's being so clear that WotC owns them helps make clear why Larian probably out of working with WotC or on BG.

Yeah, seeing this I can see another reason why Larian is leaving. Again, if I'm WotC and want a strong presence in gaming, I'm saying "what do we need to keep things going." We could have seen a few years of additional content for BG3 and a BG4. If a new studio steps in to make further games, unless discussions for this happened several years ago, we won't be seeing any serious new D&D computer RPG title for years. A BG3 with some modifications as a nod to the new edition would have been a strong bridge to bring people to the new books. What's done is done, unless someone in WotC is going to really step up at this point.

 

[bedir than]

Oh boy. Somehow, I don't think WotC is going to understand their importance or treat them with respect in the longer run. And the fact that he's being so clear that WotC owns them helps make clear why Larian probably out of working with WotC or on BG.

Of course WotC owns them. He just said he wanted nothing more to do with the property, severing the license.

Who else would own the clear IP of WotC?

 

[MonsterEnvy]

An interesting comment from Swen:

View attachment 352888

Oh boy. Somehow, I don't think WotC is going to understand their importance or treat them with respect in the longer run. And the fact that he's being so clear that WotC owns them helps make clear why Larian probably out of working with WotC or on BG.

WotC generally treats its characters well.