D&D General Should BG4 be a new story or continue on from BG3's story?

[Reynard]

You could call the game Baldur's Gate 4 and set it in Katashaka for all it matters. It's a brand.

D&D includes 1000 "brands" -- FR probably half of them. The only reason to call it "Baldur's Gate 4" would be to lure players of BG3 -- and then utterly disappoint them with a game that neither feels nor plays like BG3 because Larian owns everything that matters about it.

You should recall that there was very recently a game that tried to ride a previously beloved D&D brand name and failed utterly -- Dark Alliance.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

D&D includes 1000 "brands" -- FR probably half of them. The only reason to call it "Baldur's Gate 4" would be to lure players of BG3 -- and then utterly disappoint them with a game that neither feels nor plays like BG3 because Larian owns everything that matters about it.

You should recall that there was very recently a game that tried to ride a previously beloved D&D brand name and failed utterly -- Dark Alliance.

Larian "own" very little. They were just renting.

 

[wicked cool]

Larian owns the engine. Who knows what wotc has in store

Could wotc pump a ton of money into the studio that produced solasta 2 or something similar for bg4. Solasta 2 has a lot of promise and passion but was/is missing what Larian was also missing (capital)

 

[AlViking]

Larian "own" very little. They were just renting.

The game engine is owned by Larian which impacts the look and feel of the game. Things like a target taking extra lightning damage if in water was all Larian although someone could copy those of course. The writing and storyline along with an unusually long public beta were a big part of what made it successful, I doubt many really cared that it was set in FR or even that it was a D&D based game.

As @wicked cool said Solasta was closer to the core rules in implementation they just didn't have the budget or license agreement.

 

[Reynard]

The game engine is owned by Larian which impacts the look and feel of the game. Things like a target taking extra lightning damage if in water was all Larian although someone could copy those of course. The writing and storyline along with an unusually long public beta were a big part of what made it successful, I doubt many really cared that it was set in FR or even that it was a D&D based game.

As @wicked cool said Solasta was closer to the core rules in implementation they just didn't have the budget or license agreement.

I'm actually surprised WotC/Hasbro has just bought the Solasta folks.

 

[TwoSix]

The game engine is owned by Larian which impacts the look and feel of the game. Things like a target taking extra lightning damage if in water was all Larian although someone could copy those of course. The writing and storyline along with an unusually long public beta were a big part of what made it successful, I doubt many really cared that it was set in FR or even that it was a D&D based game.

As @wicked cool said Solasta was closer to the core rules in implementation they just didn't have the budget or license agreement.

And even the engine only has so much value. Larian has already said they're doing a major revamp of their engine for Divinity; precisely because their engine required them to make major trade-offs in D:OS2 and especially BG3 in Act 3.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

I'm actually surprised WotC/Hasbro has just bought the Solasta folks.

Or offered either a licence deal or offered to licence their game engine. I think that Solasta has proved that there is a market in the low budget end of D&D and to licence the engine and play for a bunch of different writers and production teams to hire some voice talent and produce a bunch of games in different D&D worlds.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The game engine is owned by Larian which impacts the look and feel of the game. Things like a target taking extra lightning damage if in water was all Larian although someone could copy those of course. The writing and storyline along with an unusually long public beta were a big part of what made it successful, I doubt many really cared that it was set in FR or even that it was a D&D based game.

As @wicked cool said Solasta was closer to the core rules in implementation they just didn't have the budget or license agreement.

A lot of the issues that where changed during the beta was to tone down the excessively Larianesque surface effects. And the engine, cobbled together from DOS2, is a mess. You could easily reproduce all the good elements of BG3 gameplay, without having to remove a bunch of silliness.

The “look” of the game belongs entirely to WotC.

 

[GreyLord]

D&D includes 1000 "brands" -- FR probably half of them. The only reason to call it "Baldur's Gate 4" would be to lure players of BG3 -- and then utterly disappoint them with a game that neither feels nor plays like BG3 because Larian owns everything that matters about it.

You should recall that there was very recently a game that tried to ride a previously beloved D&D brand name and failed utterly -- Dark Alliance.

Dark Alliance could have been better. If those who made it had spent just one hour playing the original (or it's sequel) and sought to recreate what was good about those, the game would have turned out very differently.

Instead, it's like they saw a video of how it was and then went their own way.

They had this idea for a game, but rather than make it under it's own title they made it under the title of another game instead to draw in the nostalgia crowd.

 

[AlViking]

A lot of the issues that where changed during the beta was to tone down the excessively Larianesque surface effects. And the engine, cobbled together from DOS2, is a mess. You could easily reproduce all the good elements of BG3 gameplay, without having to remove a bunch of silliness.

The “look” of the game belongs entirely to WotC.

They may have toned things down but surface effects are still a bigger part of the game than D&D. They also made some other tweaks. As far as the "look" there's a lot more to that than setting and species.

Regardless I don't think another company could replicate the secret sauce that made BG 3 successful and since I assume nobody would try to pick up with where BG 3 left off I think they'd be better off with a different name because it won't have that Larian feel.