Baldur's Gate 3 is dead..

Remove all ads!

The REAL Baldur's Gate 3 was the game we call "Throne of Bhaal". That's the truth, and the saga ended there. While I admit that it can be interesting to continue, I feel that the name of the game would just be used to either make whole new game (which is wrong) or a continueing of the ToB, which would be nearly impossible, seeing as there were 3 different endings to the ToB. I hated the Dark Alliance series and this would be case here I think.

Though I really hope Bethesda makes a good third part of the Fallout series..

I refuse to speculate. Why beat a dead horse?

Prove me wrong if you wish.

 

Money

 

is not everything.

 

it's the only thing.

Sorry. Seriously, it's true that most likely BG 3 won't be the twin brother of BG 1 and 2. Is that a bad thing? It's going to be a prequel, so we'll hopefully get to see interesting parts of history. I can only pray that they'll resist the temptation to throw in cameos, either of popular FR characters (cough, Drizzt, cough) or chars from BG 2 just because they're popular. I'm looking forward to it, and I rwally think it'll be good.

Keeping my fingers crossed here.

edit: And on a side note, I actually liked Dark Alliance.

[ November 09, 2004, 20:20: Message edited by: Kam ]

 

"Pre-equal"? As in Baldur's Gate episode 1?

 

No, as in Baldurs Gate: the tale before Baldur's Gate 1, probably about Gorion meeting the protagonist of the original series,

 

I'm predicting BG3 is going to be kiddy-fied console crap that they're pushing to make as much money as possible off of the BG name.

Expect a completely different camera system, combat, storyline and characters. Any possible reason why they even went with the name BG3 if it wasn't about money eludes me.

 

Rednik, agreed.

Morgoth: That's exactly what I meant.. And it sounds very crappy to me. What's the story going to be about? The newborn child of the dead tree running around Candlekeep reading books and doing chores..? Or perhaps you play as Bhaal running around trying to get some with every creature of the other sex one see's?

 

Prediction: Story is going to be full of hack and slash, you must go to point A and come back, you need to clear this dungeon and etc. crap.

Fanboys: omg woah, but at least we gett 2 c tha feer in teh ork's eyes? lol

 

Who knows...perhaps they'll develop a new engine similar to the Infinity Engine but better (gotta keep that overhead view), have a great story line, and not be buggy.
Not holding my breath, but one can dream!

As far as the story line goes, perhaps we could play as Minsc...it'd be about his travels with Dynaho from Rasheman, his first meeting with Boo...of course, we'd have to assume that he'd had all his levels drained by some undead Gnoll before he winds up in Nashkel....

 

@Kam

seriously? you liked Dark Alliance? It was crap compared to Champions of Norrath, at least they let you create your own character :/

As regards BG3, you never know. I'm keeping an open mind..

 

Different views don't bother me - whether it's over-the-shoulder or isometric, it still could be good. That's largely down to the implementation. Also, it's probably not going to have the same feel of the previous games - it's a new team, so fair enough.

However, comments about the fear in the orc's eyes when you blast him with a fireball do little to stir any hopes of playing a good role-playing game.

 

I think Rednik was being sarcastic. That was a line that one of the NWN developers used to market their game iirc.

 

Yeah, I liked Dark Alliance. I've never played Champions, largely because I don't have a PS2. And besides, create your character, don't create your character, who cares? In that kind of game, it's all about becoming as powerful as possible. Dark Alliance was FUN. It was no Fallout 2 or BG2, but it was fun to pick up, play for a couple of levels, and then go back to System Shock 2.

Back on topic, as I've said elsewhere, I'm hoping to play as Balduran. Arrrr, pirates ahoy! Avast and belay, and all that good piratey stuff.

 

While I admit that it would be interesting to play as Balduran, it wont feel as a true BG.. I dont think they should call it BG3 then.

 

Was it? Oh, damn - well, if my brain works that well, perhaps I'll enjoy BGIII after all!

 

say wha..?

 

Perhaps I should have added '@ Enagonios' in my previous post. Sorry

 

I simply think an RPG should not EVER be a prequel. It limits character choice. Your character MUST go down a certain path in a certain way otherwise the story will have major plot holes.

Why call it Baldur's Gate? To make money. They can call it Baldur's Gate if they like, I don't want them to use the same damn saga though. It's over, finished, they can't improve upon it or add anything to it without screwing something up. I thought Bethesda Softworks prided themselves on having a good reputation from producing some very good games (Daggerfall, Morrowind). They know how to make good games, why would they do this when it's obviously going to be VERY difficult to have a good story.

 

I don't really care about plot holes, BG2 assumed what you party was and who was still alive from BG1. The fact that my character had never spoken to Jaheira & Khalid (they disappear after a while if you don't pick them up), or that I'd fragged Edwin didn't come into it.
Enjoy the game for what it is, don't worry about how it effects the "future". The future is (somewhat) fluid next time you play the game anyway!