Baldur's Gate 4 Isn't Next For Larian; Something Bigger Is Coming
www.youtube.com
Tam sits down with Swen Vinke from Larian to talk about the success of Baldur's Gate 3, all the roadblocks the team ran into during development, and the stud...

This is a really good interview. tl;dw is…

  • their next game was going to be D&D, but they changed course and are doing something else now
  • Vincke has a vision for “the one RPG to rule them all”, and each of their past three RPGs is a step closer to it
  • the next game is not going to be that master vision but one step closer toward it, with their previous 3 RPGs proving out emergent design/multiplayer, story and consequence, and personal stories/performance capture, respectively
  • Vincke would like to have this next game done in 3 years compared to BG3’s 6 year development cycle, but realistically expects 4 years, as long as there isn’t something like COVID-19 or a war in Ukraine to impede their progress
  • umbraroze@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1·
    9 months ago

    I’m, like, oof? History repeating itself much?

    There was this little RPG company, BioWare, that made this little known game called… uh… Baldur’s Gate or something. Then they made Baldur’s Gate II. And all was fine. And then they said “you know what, we should do something really cool and innovative and creative!” …And they did! They made Neverwinter Nights. And Wizards of the Coast/Hasbro was a real drag in the process, wanting them so many compliance meetings regarding the content and canon and game mechanics. So Bioware was like “OK this is the absolute last time we work with this kind of nitpickers, we’ll create our own fantasy RPG setting and system.” …and that’s how Dragon Age came about.

    WotC/Hasbro isn’t any easier to work with these days, that’s for sure. Except this time, even the tabletop fans know that.

    Hopefully Larian gets to eventually make the epicest dream game they can and, uh, not get bought out by EA or something.

    • SuperSaiyanSwag@lemmy.zipEnglish
      3·
      9 months ago

      Kinda backwards with Larian as they already made original IPs before BG3. Which were critical hits already.

      • MalachaiConstant@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        9 months ago

        The divinity games definitely felt inspired by DND. I’ve even been able to convince friends (including some who don’t play video games at all) to pick it up because of how similar it feels to tabletop. Larian was a natural choice for BG3 and I’m convinced that was part of the vision with their early work

  • Mongostein@lemmy.caEnglish
    0·
    9 months ago

    Yeah Wizards of the Coast isn’t the same company as when they signed the deal for BG3.

    Smart of them to ditch the sinking ship that is D&D.

    • ampersandrew@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      1·
      9 months ago

      Sinking ship or not, word was that Wizards’ cut of BG3 was over $90M. $100M was the entire production cost of Baldur’s Gate 3. If you could fund an entire other massive video game for the cost of what you paid your partner for licensing, I’m sure anyone would be rethinking that deal. At this point, they don’t need the D&D license any more than BioWare needed the Star Wars license after KOTOR.

      • Mongostein@lemmy.caEnglish
        0·
        9 months ago

        Thanks for expanding on my point.

        They don’t need to be associated with WotC as they keep fucking up. Other RPG systems are becoming more and more popular.

        Maybe they can partner with Paizo and make the next Pathfinder game, although I’d feel bad for Owlcat because their games have been great too.

        • ampersandrew@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
          0·
          9 months ago

          For similar reasons as D&D, I doubt they’d license someone else’s system either, but I could be wrong.

          • Cethin@lemmy.zipEnglish
            0·
            9 months ago

            I agree, but Piazo seems like much better partners. I wouldn’t be surprised if they’d let them make the game for no fee, just license out the rules to try to make the system more well known and popular. Pathfinder 2E is the better system without a doubt, but people are used to D&D5e, so having something out there to bring new people in would be huge for them.

            • ampersandrew@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
              0·
              9 months ago

              I’ve played Baldur’s Gate 1, Baldur’s Gate 2, and Planescape: Torment on 2nd edition rules. I’ve played Baldur’s Gate 3 on 5th edition rules and started playing tabletop 5th edition. I’ve played Pillars of Eternity 1, as I understand it largely inspired by 3.5 edition rules, and the first 10 hours of Pillars of Eternity 2, which I assume is now iterating on its own offshoot. I understand Pathfinder to largely be D&D 3.5. If that’s the case, and it’s in the ballpark of what Pillars of Eternity 1 is, I’ll take 5th edition any day of the week, but if you’d like to explain to me briefly why I might be wrong, I’m listening. Compared to how the 2e games and the Pillars games handle spells of different levels, 5e’s upcasting seems like a godsend, for instance.

              • Cethin@lemmy.zipEnglish
                0·
                9 months ago

                I understand Pathfinder to largely be D&D 3.5.

                Pathfinder 1E is essentially an improved D&D 3.5 that came to be the last time the licensing for modules became an issue. 2E is it’s own thing, and a large improvement.

                One if the best changes for Pathfinder 2E is how actions work. D&D 5e has its a weird system of movement, action, bonus action, and then abilities that can add actions, but you can only cast one spell per turn regardless of if you have actions to use, except in some situations, and you can only use actions for some things sometimes, sometimes only once per turn. It’s just filled with exceptions because that’s not the original design intent but it’s tons of patches to make things function halfway decently.

                Pathfinder 2E you have three actions per turn. Those can be used for anything always without exception. Every ability has a cost. For example moving is 1 action and can be done multiple times per turn, which makes things that displace enemies useful as they have to consume actions to get back into melee. Some spells may cost multiple actions, some very large ones can even require channeling multiple actions over several turns. It’s a very simple and intuitive system and you don’t need to remember thousands of exceptions like D&D5e.

                Almost everything in Pathfinder 2E works like this. Things may be more complex to start with (which allows for choice), but you don’t need to remember tons of exceptions, so in total it’s simpler.

                • ampersandrew@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
                  1·
                  9 months ago

                  It doesn’t feel like a bunch of exceptions to me. It feels like you have a bonus action that’s basically always class-related, and everything else is an action. What you describe for Pathfinder doesn’t sound bad at all, but if some things cost multiple actions, that sounds like every bit the type of exception that you make 5e out to be full of. I don’t really find 5e to be unintuitive thus far such that I’m looking for another system to remedy it, I guess.

            • WarmSoda@lemm.eeEnglish
              0·
              9 months ago

              I don’t know. The Owlcat games have a really deep system that Divinity and BG3 don’t have. Is that just because of the pathfinder ruleset? Or does Larian do better with simpler systems? I don’t have an answer to those questions. It might be cool to see a BG3 “version” of Pathfinder, but I think it would lose something in the process.

              • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.worldEnglish
                01·
                9 months ago

                The visuals out of Larian run laps around Owlcat. But that comes at the expense of depth, as each asset takes more time to develop.

                It’s two different design philosophies creating two very different kinds of experience. Owlcat makes more of a complex digital board game while Larian has muddled a strategy format with a dating sim.

            • mihnt@lemy.lolEnglish
              0·
              9 months ago

              They’ve also tanked the used market for people. 2 decks I had that I paid way too much for aren’t worth the cardboard they are printed on now. (MTG)

                • StarPupil@ttrpg.networkEnglish
                  0·
                  9 months ago

                  Reprinting some things, neglecting to reprint others, power creeping the stuff they did reprint out of the game, banning some stuff that was too powerful while printing other stuff that’s just as good for the same reasons. You know, standard card game stuff.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.worldEnglish
        01·
        9 months ago

        any more than BioWare needed the Star Wars license after KOTOR.

        Glances at Starfield

        Maybe not your strongest point

        • Tilgare@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          9 months ago

          Bioware didn’t make Starfield - that was Bethesda. Maybe you were thinking of Anthem? And fair point there.

  • lanolinoil@lemmy.worldEnglish
    01·
    9 months ago

    Divinity 2 mechanics > BG3 even though BG3 is obviously the ultimate masterpiece. Pumped to see what they do

    • Jocarnail@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      9 months ago

      I’m not sure I agree. DoS2 mechanic are cool, but the combat becomes way to chaotic for my liking. Also you do one mistake and now half your party is dead and the other half is on fire.