WotC Dungeons & Dragons: Dark Alliance Video Game Announcement Trailer

An announcement trailer for Dungeons & Dragons: Dark Alliance premiered at The Game Awards on Thursday evening.

​

Developed by Tuque Games, the studio acquired earlier this year by Wizards of the Coast, the game will be a sequel of sorts in the Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance action-RPG series for the Xbox, Playstation 2, and Gamecube. This game, however, will go to Icewind Dale and feature four-player co-op as you take on the roles of Drizzt Do'Urden, Cattie-Brie, Wulfgar, and Bruenor. The game is due for release in 2020.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Nah. Some opinions merit some light derision.

And there is no “winning” internet arguments about preferences, which is all any of this is.

Video games aren’t dnd. Period. They’re an adaptation.

If the game tells a story about dnd characters in a dnd world using dnd tropes and dnd enemies and rewards you with dnd items and character abilities, but you refuse to admit it’s a dnd game because it...isn’t turn based, then you’re being silly.

I never said it wasn't a D&D game. I said it didn't feel like a D&D game, and to many that matters. I'm not dismissing them as being wrong grognards. And if literally the only similarities are the proper pronouns, then that in fact is name dropping.

 

[Fenris447]

A lot of folks get way too worked up about little crap like that. “Oh no they changed Tifa’s cup size! OMG how can I maintain immersion in a trailer with rock music! How dare they change Harry Potter’s eye color!?!!!?!?!”

You're not entirely wrong, but I think setting the right tone, especially with your very first marketing push, is very important. Whoever designed that trailer seems remarkably out of touch with both modern gaming communities and the D&D community. The tone is just...wrong for everybody.

Life is much more satisfying when one chills the hell out, and just like...enjoy stuff or ignore it.

Truth. Which is why as bad as this is, I'm not going to spend any energy wringing my hands over it. Well, no more energy than typing about it in an online forum. If the game ends up great, then I'll have a great game to play. If not, oh well. Maybe next time.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

I never said it wasn't a D&D game. I said it didn't feel like a D&D game, and to many that matters. I'm not dismissing them as being wrong grognards. And if literally the only similarities are the proper pronouns, then that in fact is name dropping.

I think Gyor is being dismissed as a whiny Grognard cause he said only certain genre's can be D&D games and has insulted many games including well liked classics for not falling into his narrow mold.

 

[Mercador]

Isch, sérieux, ça fait peur.

"La guerre des tuques" guys, turn this game in a ARPG VR game or something. Work with Larian perhaps, they have a studio in Quebec City.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I never said it wasn't a D&D game. I said it didn't feel like a D&D game, and to many that matters. I'm not dismissing them as being wrong grognards. And if literally the only similarities are the proper pronouns, then that in fact is name dropping.

That seems like a distinction without a difference, to me.
Again, if it’s set in a dnd world, and uses dnd tropes, themes, and yes names, to tell a dnd story, it’s a dnd game.
The mechanics change from edition to edition, and every single dnd game ever made has deviated from the mechanics in some way.

Dismissing the setting, characters, items, enemies, etc, as “just name drops” is too ridiculous to take seriously, IMO.

You're not entirely wrong, but I think setting the right tone, especially with your very first marketing push, is very important. Whoever designed that trailer seems remarkably out of touch with both modern gaming communities and the D&D community. The tone is just...wrong for everybody.

Truth. Which is why as bad as this is, I'm not going to spend any energy wringing my hands over it. Well, no more energy than typing about it in an online forum. If the game ends up great, then I'll have a great game to play. If not, oh well. Maybe next time.

Yeah it’s a bad trailer, for sure.

It’s like they wanted to go for something like this and then decided for no reason that putting go-pros on the ends of weapons would make it cooler somehow, and it went downhill from there.

Which...honestly tells us literally nothing about the game. It’s a marketing guy’s dumb idea.

 

[Mercador]

Yeah it’s a bad trailer, for sure.

It’s like they wanted to go for something like this and then decided for no reason that putting go-pros on the ends of weapons would make it cooler somehow, and it went downhill from there.

Which...honestly tells us literally nothing about the game. It’s a marketing guy’s dumb idea.

It tells already a lot for the studio unfortunately (for us).

 

[oreofox]

When I saw a new Dark Alliance game, I was intrigued. Then I saw the trailer, and it vanished. It might be a good game, it might be as bad as the trailer. And I probably won't care until the game is almost released and I remember it exists. Though, it looking like you play predetermined characters (Drizzt (ugh), I assume Bruenor, and I don't know or care who else) doesn't give bonus points for this game.

 

[Hurin70]

It’s like they wanted to go for something like this and then decided for no reason that putting go-pros on the ends of weapons would make it cooler somehow, and it went downhill from there.

Which...honestly tells us literally nothing about the game. It’s a marketing guy’s dumb idea.

You make a good point that we don't know much, but I think the trailer does tell us a little more about the game: it tells us that the graphics are going to be cartoony, and the animations clunky. That's part of what is turning me off personally.

DnD is a big IP, and it could have been given to a AAA developer. But part of the problem WotC has had with their videogames in recent years is that they have been handing the license to obscure developers who bit off more than they can chew.

I'll wait to see what the rest of the game is about to make a final judgment. I like metal, I like action games, I've liked many of the Dark Alliance games, and I have no problem considering this a DnD game, so I am right in their core demographic. But what I've seen so far has me the opposite of excited.

 

[Retreater]

I liked Dark Alliance well enough on PS2. I could also go with a beam 'em up like Chronicles of Mystara.
I know I'm in the minority, but I'm not a fan of the Divinity games. I can't find my way through them. They seem too obtuse for me. Of course, I was raised on console games, not CRPGs.

 

[thom_likes_gaming]

I'm in the 'not impressed at all' camp. FPS stuff makes me motion sick these days (bye bye everything Elder Scroll et al), the graphics are underwhelming (might be early stage, so possibly forgivable) and I completely fail to see how they want to make this into an RPG. All over, looks like I'll be sitting this one out.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I'm in the 'not impressed at all' camp. FPS stuff makes me motion sick these days (bye bye everything Elder Scroll et al), the graphics are underwhelming (might be early stage, so possibly forgivable) and I completely fail to see how they want to make this into an RPG. All over, looks like I'll be sitting this one out.

Just a note; you can zoom out to third person view in every Elder Scrolls game.

 

[generic]

Just a note; you can zoom out to third person view in every Elder Scrolls game.

What, you don't like having an axe raised..? high above your head... oh, it's coming down now... IT's COMING DOWN!

Yeah, personally, I have no problem with the first-person view, but it's always good to have 3p view in non-competitive games.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

What, you don't like having an axe raised..? high above your head... oh, it's coming down now... IT's COMING DOWN!

Yeah, personally, I have no problem with the first-person view, but it's always good to have 3p view in non-competitive games.

Yeah I just prefer 3rd person in any context other than actual shooters.

 

[ddaley]

oh, setting, story, characters, all the things that actually matter.

LOL “death metal”? Have you...ever listened to any metal? That isn’t what death metal sounds like.

That was hardcore bro metal, along the lines of garbage like Five Finger Death Punch.

And it’s a trailer. Why are you worried about verisimilitude in a game trailer?


lord I’m glad that dnd grognards aren’t who will determine the success or failure of a dnd video game.

If that trailer is at all representative of the actual gameplay, then I don't see this game appealing to many people at all. The graphics and gameplay are awful. Gameplay looks way too chaotic and lacking in any kind of depth. And the graphics... don't think much needs to be said.

 

[Sacrosanct]

That seems like a distinction without a difference, to me.
Again, if it’s set in a dnd world, and uses dnd tropes, themes, and yes names, to tell a dnd story, it’s a dnd game.
The mechanics change from edition to edition, and every single dnd game ever made has deviated from the mechanics in some way.

Dismissing the setting, characters, items, enemies, etc, as “just name drops” is too ridiculous to take seriously, IMO.

What's too ridiculous to take seriously is your argument that mechanics aren't really that important, but it's the proper nouns that matter.

I don't think anyone can honestly, and truthfully, argue that a game like DragonStrike and Blood&Magic give the D&D experience just because they take place in a D&D world. The mechanics very in some way from edition to edition, true, but they all stay true to the core chassis (4e was the only one that made the biggest change by going to AEDU, but even then the core mechanics were the same). Trying to dismiss the major difference between a flight simulator and a turn based RPG because "1e had some different mechanics as 4e" is a false equivalency of epic proportion. I'm pretty sure you do know that it's more than just a "distinction without a difference" between a game like Baldur's Gate and DragonStrike.

I'm not arguing that they aren't technically D&D games. I'm arguing that that's all they are, in name only, and the difference matters. Just like putting a Ferrari kit on a Fiero doesn't make it anything like a Ferrari, despite the same logo and name.

 

[generic]

What's too ridiculous to take seriously is your argument that mechanics aren't really that important, but it's the proper nouns that matter.

I don't think anyone can honestly, and truthfully, argue that a game like DragonStrike and Blood&Magic give the D&D experience just because they take place in a D&D world. The mechanics very in some way from edition to edition, true, but they all stay true to the core chassis (4e was the only one that made the biggest change by going to AEDU, but even then the core mechanics were the same). Trying to dismiss the major difference between a flight simulator and a turn based RPG because "1e had some different mechanics as 4e" is a false equivalency of epic proportion. I'm pretty sure you do know that it's more than just a "distinction without a difference" between a game like Baldur's Gate and DragonStrike.

I'm not arguing that they aren't technically D&D games. I'm arguing that that's all they are, in name only, and the difference matters. Just like putting a Ferrari kit on a Fiero doesn't make it anything like a Ferrari, despite the same logo and name.

Liked for the first part.

However, how is this applicable to videogames? We're not talking about creating an edition of D&D, or even, a full D&D experience. It's a game with D&D themes.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Liked for the first part.

However, how is this applicable to videogames? We're not talking about creating an edition of D&D, or even, a full D&D experience. It's a game with D&D themes.

I'll refer you to my earlier posts, so I don't have to retype them

If I wanted to play an action RPG, there are plenty of good ones to choose from already: Skyrim, Witcher, etc. When I want to play D&D, I want to feel like I'm playing D&D, and that's turned based (or pause-able). It seems like whenever D&D tries to go out genre, it never works well because they simply can't compete with the aforementioned Witcher or Elder Scrolls. Almost like they just think they can skate by on the D&D Brand.

Another reason why I don't like it when a game like D&D goes action RPG is because it seems a bit ableist. D&D is a game pretty much anyone can enjoy. But when you turn it into a game where thinking and planning matters less, and hand-eye coordination and reflexes matter the most, you're turning away many of your D&D fans who can't, or aren't very good, at those games.

 

[generic]

I'll refer you to my earlier posts, so I don't have to retype them

Actually, fair enough. I may have come around to your argument a bit. Not fully, because D&D could totally be represented by an action fighting game just themed on D&D, but I understand your argument.

Even a young'un like myself can see the logic of Grognardianism on occasion.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Tuque makes some good looking games. I think we need to see another trailer before this is written off.

Ideally a proper gameplay trailer. (As the game is apparently 3rd Person.)

 

[generic]

Tuque makes some good looking games. I think we need to see another trailer before this is written off.

Wasn't Livelock the only game they made?

I agree, however.