D&D 4E Is there any D&D 4th computer game?

[Tale]

I'm in the "it's got to be turn based" camp. There's too many instant actions and movement abilities. These are two things neither NWN game did with any competence.

But the Western mass-market doesn't care as much for turn-based RPGs. All turn based RPGs are predominantly Eastern or low budget. There a minimal amount of turn based strategy making the rounds, but they still are relatively niche and feed specifically off of complex systems and multi-hour sessions. There actually was a 3.5e turn-based D&D game. On the PSP. Atari has no faith in the idea, either.

Western RPGs are becoming progressively more shooter to access a broader base and secure extra funding. Going back on that progression is not something I see Atari or any Western developer being overly comftorable with enough to secure significant finances.

If we get one, expect a low budget and unknown developer. The wild card being Obsidian. I have no idea if they're trying to get the job, but they're probably the only known that'll try for it.

 

[Kneecleaver]

I'm not sure 4e would make a great turn-based game. There are 2 issues. One is that every single square of movement of the enemy would require a pause to let you potentially respond with OAs etc.

That is a very good point. In most cases it wouldn't be every square of movement, and it could be intelligent enough to know if the conditions are met for a party action, but it would still slow things down. There might be a creative workaround, like requiring you to flag actions you might use, so it's not checking every single one. I don't think it is a gamekiller, but it is a significant hurdle.

I disagree on the AI. The way the powers are structured should make things easier than, say, 3.x was. I'm not saying you would have necessarily great AI's, but I don't think the way the system works makes developing a good AI impossible. That said, there are very few games out there that actually do have good, much less great, AI's.

 

[Tyrion]

I'm in the "it's got to be turn based" camp. There's too many instant actions and movement abilities. These are two things neither NWN game did with any competence.

But the Western mass-market doesn't care as much for turn-based RPGs. All turn based RPGs are predominantly Eastern or low budget. There a minimal amount of turn based strategy making the rounds, but they still are relatively niche and feed specifically off of complex systems and multi-hour sessions. There actually was a 3.5e turn-based D&D game. On the PSP. Atari has no faith in the idea, either.

Western RPGs are becoming progressively more shooter to access a broader base and secure extra funding. Going back on that progression is not something I see Atari or any Western developer being overly comftorable with enough to secure significant finances.

If we get one, expect a low budget and unknown developer. The wild card being Obsidian. I have no idea if they're trying to get the job, but they're probably the only known that'll try for it.

It's not that the mass market doesn't care about Western turn-based RPGs, it's that almost none of them are made anymore, and none of them have decent budgets. It's a chicken-and-egg sort of problem.

The PSP D&D game sold poorly, but that's because 1) it was bad, and 2) most PSP games sold poorly.

I wouldn't say WRPGs are going more shooter, necessarily. Yeah, you have stuff like Mass Effect 2 and Fallout 3, but Dragon Age actually went in a more traditional, tactical direction and sold very well.

You're right, though. Western developers are notoriously conservative, even when it hurts their bottom line. A big Western developed turn-based RPG hasn't been made in a long time, so by their logic, it's not worth doing.

 

[SSquirrel]

What a load of bollocks.

The Baldur's Gate series, Icewind Dale series, and previous edition games have all been turn-based and have sold very well.

The only reason the Temple of Elemental Evil didn't do well for Troika was because it was a buggy piece of crap. And even then, it didn't do terribly.

Neverwinter Nights is essentially turn-based and that has done quite well.

BGII Throne of Bhaal June 2001
Icewind Dale II August 2002
Neverwinter Nights 2 October 2006

Yeah ToEE was buggy as sin. NN2 came out over 3 years ago. The other 2 games came out over 7 years ago. The market is a different place now than it once was. Just b/c it sold well in the past doesn't mean that playstyle still sells as well. Ho many turn based RPGs are on the market right now? What are their sales like? It is something they have to consider

 

[BruntFCA]

I love turn based games. Still play Temple of Elemental Evil (the fixed version with the fan made c08 patch).

The problem with 4e turn game is

1 Devs are paranoid about tbg
2 WOTC don't want to compete too much with their existing business model

 

[BruntFCA]

I love turn based games. Still play Temple of Elemental Evil (the fixed version with the fan made c08 patch).

The problem with 4e turn game is

1 Devs are paranoid about tbg
2 WOTC don't want to compete too much with their existing business model

EDIT...just lost about 2 pages of text...will finish it later...lol

 

[renau1g]

Not quite sure what tbg is?

 

[Garthanos]

Not quite sure what tbg is?

The Big Guy --? ummm I will figure I dont know either.

 

[KarinsDad]

Not quite sure what tbg is?

Turn based games.

 

[Benimoto]

Like almost everyone else I'm excited to eventually see a 4th edition-based computer game. I've played computer games based on D&D going back to Pool of Radiance, which was based on 1st edition AD&D.

I do see some significant hurdles though. As far as a turn-based game like Final Fantasy Tactics or Disgaea, the problem there is that turn-based games these days are generally niche games, developed by small teams on low budgets, as they don't generally become best-selling hits. If D&D does have fairly steep licensing fees, that might squeeze a low-budget game right out of existence.

The other problem is that games like Final Fantasy Tactics are popular because they allow complex tactics with a very simple interface. The interactivity in these games is generally limited to picking an attack and then picking a single target. A vast number of 4e powers (including almost every leader-type at-will) involve picking 2 or more (sometimes many more) targets for a single action. Then, on top of that there are opportunity actions, immediate interrupts and immediate reactions, sometimes with triggers that happen on almost every creature's turn like "you or an ally takes damage".

So, the game could be adapted to real time, like an MMO or a game like Mass Effect or Oblivion. The complex targeting is still a challenge there, but since the game is already clearly adapted, I'm sure you could get away with having the game pick optimal secondary targets for you in many circumstances. The challenge with a real-time game is that you can generally only control one character at a time, and 4e is so party-based that you'd either have to have some pretty slick AI or be designing an MMO.

One problem with an MMO is that the existing D&D MMO is still, from what I hear, fairly popular and financially successful. So you'd have immediate competition from an established player in your little MMO niche.

I'm sure some company will tackle all the challenges and make some type of D&D game. I'm pretty curious to see how they pull it off.