I don't think it's possible to overstate just how horny CRPG fans often are. Removing that content from the game, which I'd expect, is going to deter a lot of RPG fans who aren't deeply invested in D&D lore.
Having Drizzt is a lot less important than if you can make him get naked, commercially.
100% this.
CRPGs fans are typically either really into the relationship stuff, and absolutely the horny stuff too usually, or they're really into the edgy stuff, like maybe not being an edgelord character, but dealing with edgy people and situations (discovering brutal and bloody murders, finding and saving torture victims, etc.), or both, and I would be surprised if WotC is going to allow D&D to be associated with that
by their own game. Now, I will say, Exodus is very much looking M-rated at the moment, especially given there is an entire species of aliens who live for torture and nothing but torture, but that's a video game, it's not a family-friendly WotC property.
(I should point out this isn't new, either - this is how, for example, Ultima 7 kind of was, back in 1992)
This is heresy, but I don't think Sigil is necessarily the best choice for a broad appeal computer game, which is what I assume Hasbro is hoping for.
Something a big easier to immediately grasp seems more likely. So Forgotten Realms or maybe Ravenloft.
I actually think a modern audience would be 100% fine with Sigil and wouldn't find it off-putting at all. 20+ years ago, that was a riskier setting and people might have been confused/off-put by it. But in 2024 or later? City at the centre of the universe is almost (but not quite) a cliche, especially with portals so parts of it can take place in any terrain you like. I think the real risk would actually be putting it in a really generic fantasy setting like Dragonlance or Greyhawk, or some of the backwaters of the FR (like the Dales).
Does WotC own the engine that BG3 was made with?
They do not.
It is Larian's own engine and WotC has absolutely no claim on it whatsoever. Nor would they have anyone trained to use it - the only people trained to use it are Larian's own staff, so they'd have to pay ungodly amounts to Larian to be taught how to use it. And I don't think Larian is interested in licencing it out either.
As for "starting with lower-value IPs", sure, that makes a lot of sense if you're being both rational and long-term-ist, buuuuut, if you're making an AAA game, here's the thing - it's going to take years - as I said, 1-3 years to form the studio, then 3-5 years to make the actual game. So you've got to be willing to drop tens of millions for a return in what is probably five years or more. If you're a corporate type making that decision, are you really going to INCREASE the risk you don't get a good return by using a "lesser" IP? That sounds like something a loser might do... And if it looks like it's going to be crap, you just quit three months before it comes out, get another high-paid corporate job, and if anyone asks, whoever took over it managed to screw it up, it was fine when you left it! It's those other guys who ruined that IP - your record is clean!
