D&D Movie/TV What will make more money DADHAT or BG3?

[Parmandur]

Actually, if you go to the BG3 subreddit, it's actually brought in a pretty large amount of interested newcomers. Weird as it may be, it generated a lot of buzz. People went from "What the..." to "Oh, it's a shape-shifting situation" to being interested in a game that's audacious enough to do this.

I am sure that it has brought in a certain crowd. I oredeictbthisnwill do solid Mass Effect or Dragon Ahe numbers.

 

[Oofta]

Haven't watched the video, but both of those comparisons seem wrongheaded to me. BG3 is coming out more than two decades after Throne of Bhaal. Both ME3 and Witcher 3 came out just a few years after the previous games. Further, at least with ME3 (I haven't played any Witcher games), there was a steady progression away from the RPG-like structure of ME1 as the games progressed, an effort to make the games more "approachable" etc. But, at least in my experience, what that mostly did was flatten the game experience into being little more than a waist-high-wall shooter with some flashy bits. ME1 actually felt like you had to learn some things. By the time it got to ME3, it felt like all you had to "learn" was twitch reflexes.

BG3, on the other hand, is trying very hard to keep as much of the spirit of D&D 5e's rules as it can, only making concessions for quality of life stuff where there's a clear, tested benefit. Further, it spent a long time in Early Access, whereas (AFAIK) neither ME3 nor Witcher 3 spent any time in Early Access at all, and certainly didn't respond strongly to major customer feedback from that. I suspect, if they had, ME3 would not have had the extremely controversial ending it did. (I still remember the clip of some important figure for the ME franchise explicitly saying that Mass Effect would not end up being a "pick a color" type ending....only to end up being EXACTLY that, red/blue/green energy explosions.)

More or less, if BG3 is "an anomaly," it's only because people are trying to shoehorn it into a comparison that doesn't work in the first place. At least, that's my thesis without having watched the video.

According to devs on the ME3 team the two lead developers didn't even consult other members of the team. The two (I forget their names) just sat in a conference room, decided what was going to happen and told everyone else to make it happen. One of the worst endings possible for the game that had promised everything up to that point would matter.

There was obviously no long term plan, no idea how to actually fulfill their promises.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

According to devs on the ME3 team the two lead developers didn't even consult other members of the team. The two (I forget their names) just sat in a conference room, decided what was going to happen and told everyone else to make it happen. One of the worst endings possible for the game that had promised everything up to that point would matter.

There was obviously no long term plan, no idea how to actually fulfill their promises.

What I'd heard, there had been a plan, and then they changed a whole bunch of the team midstream (meaning, midway through developing ME2), including the lead writer.

Which is why we had all that scary mystery stuff with the star Tali was studying, and how she was deeply concerned that it was aging much, much too fast--on a timeline of centuries, not millions of years--which was then unceremoniously dropped. Dropped without comment, even, as far as I could tell. It's also why the Reapers went from unknowable eldritch horrors with lasers, to liquefied people with delusions of grandeur.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

The planning to produce a movie, a TV serie or a videogame are different. An AAA videogame is a riskier bet.

The videogame has got two parts: Software engine and plot. The first one could be reused in a next title, but the necessary update. The second one needs a team of screenwritters.

Teorically you should choose "better" instead "sooner". That mistake was very expensive for Cyberpunk 2077. It is not only the money but the prestige of the company.

Videogame studios would rather to start from zero their own IPs to enjoy total creative freedom and not-worring about time-limit of the licence.

Hasbro is very interested into licence of videogames, but the no-fantasy franchises aren't so easy to be adapted into TTRPG.

Some times I guess Hasbro dreams with D&D version of Pokemon. Ilkoria(Magic: the Gathering) seems to be have designed with this goal. Here the challenge would be to design a monster-summoner class totally compatible with the rest of D&D.

Other point is the micro-trasantions in online videogames. The gamers don't want to spend more money into a videogame whose servers could be closed a couple of years later. That is also a risk bet. Here Hasbro could follow the same path, the collabs.