Originally Posted by WarBaby2
Originally Posted by rockmassif
When it was announced that BG3 is going to be a turn-based game, if you followed any new at all you would know that the game was going to be very similar to DOS2 in terms of combat and generally how it plays out. I don't understand why you would think pre-ordering BG3 would be a good idea if you never really liked DOS games to begin with. If you want a nostalgic experience there are already similar games to BG1-2 out there, Pillars of Eternity, Pathfinder etc...


/snip

As for the: WotC whanted the game to be BG3 D:OS eidtion... I doubt it. Then again, who really knows what Wizards wants for it's IPs these days? ...but that's a wholly different discussion.


Well I can tell you didn't read my original post.

We do know the WotC don't want games made similar to how obsidian make their games aka similar to how BG I & II are made. how because I told you already with sources that two companies that came from interplay/black isle both tried to get the license for baldur's gate 3 for over a decade and they were always rejected Larian tried first in 2014 and got it a few years later. Why? what is the fundamental difference? In every other metric Obsidian has more experience. More experience in game design, more experience with D&D games specifically, has more successful games under its belt and has a bigger purse than larian. So how did Larian get the license? Obsidian make RTWP games and Larian makes TB games (at least their last two). RTWP is a huge mechanical departure from D&D.

Do we know for sure why WotC chose Larian? No, but it is pretty obvious from the clues to see the why behind their choices.

[Source] https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/0...t-the-rights-to-baldurs-gate-3-a-e3-2019

Last edited by Gothfather; 08/10/20 06:55 PM.