Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Chances for BG1 & 2 remake?

First of all I want to thank you for this great game and congratulate you to the well deserved big success. Is there any chance that you can make a remake of Baldurs Gate 1 and 2? I kow these games got a so called enhanced edition, but at least BG1 didn't aged well grapics-wise. It would be so great to see a real remake of these classics in the engine of BG3, and you guys have already proven yourselves more than worthy to work on this franchise. If someone can do this then it's you.

Btw. speaking of BG2... if i really miss something in BG3, then it's a companion like Korgan Bloodaxe

There is close enough to a 0% chance to that happening that we can round down and call it a 0% chance.

And why do you think so? Did the devs already rule that out in the past?

Problems:
Beamdog is the current publisher of BG1+2
BioWare made the original games and is now owned by another company
No one at Larian had anything to do with BG1+2
BG1+2 were made with DND 2.5, BG3 is 5e.
It is unclear from how many entities Larian would need approval for remake.
Larian probably doesn’t want to, most importantly. They are a large scale indie studio specialising in systems-based multiplayer RPGs, now with immersive sim elements.

Haha. I think some of the old BG fans round here might actually explode if they tried that.

Plus what other said above.

If they would have to use 5e ruleset then please no never.

I don't know if there would be a license problem. I think the IP is owned by Wizards of the coast and not Beamdog or Bioware. Also why not use 5e in 1 & 2 too?

Because 5e is shit.

Had they listened to the so called die-hard fans, there never would have been a BG3. I can well remember quotes like "BG3? Oh hell please no"

Actually the opposite, if they had listened to the fans, there would have been BG3 over 10 years ago but using the same second edition ruleset. It wouldn't have been as popular sure but it would have been brilliant.

Wotc do not allow older rulesets to be licensed for new games, the reason there aren't many DnD based games can actually be blamed on this decision.

No there wouldn't have been a BG3 because these guys said the BG saga was about the story of the Bhaal spawns which concluded in ToB. So the chorus was "story told, leave it alone". And about the ruleset.... well, one can like it or not. I'm fine with it.

Reason 1: I can guarantee Larian don’t want to do this. It would not be creatively satisfying.
Reason 2: It would be a step back. Remakes are usually outsourced to smaller, less experienced studios. Larian just grew to a full AAA studio. They aren’t going to pause their momentum to do a remake.
Reason 3: There isn’t much demand for it, so they can almost certainly do something better with their resources to bring in a bigger return.

Just realized something, if they remade BG1&2 with 5e rules, none of the boss fights like Daevorn would be any challenge.

I would assume odds of remakes here to be none...not from Larian at least. If Wizards of the Coast find another skilled studio willing to work on D&D then it might happen but I don't think Larian are going to start doing remakes.

Yeah, like Beamdog. *Barf barf barf barf barf barf barf barf barf barf barf*

The enhanced editions weren't remakes, they were the original games enhanced.

Remakes of the first two would most likely be ruined with whatever modern dumbed down features and 5e ruleset.

As much as I would love it, there is so much dialogue in BG/1 that I don't know if they could be fully voice actored with 90% of content cut? especially when you couldn't get the same voice actors so that'd change so much. Imagine Irenicus without Warner? I can't.

As for rule changes AD&D was streamlined, 5e was about returning to that simplificaitons of AD&D after the complications of 3.5, so the 'dumbed down' card doesn't really play here.

A remake, reimagination of BG1/2 in BG3s engine would be amazing, and I think it could work to be not fully voiced. It'd be a big investment though and probably draining as there wouldnt be allow of room for creativity, but if it took a new perspective, risk and interpretation (which i think would be better creatively and gameplay consideration) it'd be review bombed into nonexistence by nostalgia loyalists?
It just seems too volatile/risky ?

BG4 or BG3 stand alone campaign expansions that explore new stories would be my preference for follow up.

Yea no thanks. That would completely ruin BG1 and BG2.
Thinking of it, that would be an amazing DOWNGRADE. Less party members, less companions due to all cinematic dialogues, shittier combat, no day/night (because its Larian), very un-flexible modding options, bad UI, bad party controls, sex parties everywhere....

The classic games plays great on modern PC, whether you play the Enhanced Editions or the Classic CD version (which I prefer). Why would you want to remake those with a Design philosophy that is night and day different to these older games.

Making NEW games instead of remakes makes more sense for Larian and all Baldur's Gate fans. And all of gaming in general (arguably, if your passionate for original creative stuff).

You don't remake a classic Jimmy Hendrix Rock album. You just upgrade the way it is distributed to make it work on modern machines Thats my view anyways for older games. I really dislike this times of "remake" craziness we are in now. The budget that goes in those could of been used to make original amazing games.

People like classic cars not for the potential of "modern" conveniences that can be added to them. Well, some might, but point being people buy these to enjoy the "archaic" analogue aspects to them. The bare bones mechanics, the sound, the switches, the simpleness. I think the same is true for games like BG1/BG2.
So remaking these games feels like a wasted opportunity to make something better and original that 20 years down the road would feel like classics

This would be a bad idea. Larian makes games with a very different tone/gameplay from the Infinity Engine games. There is no way that this would not rub off on any hypothetical BG I+II remakes.

Secondly, It would be expected to adhere to the lore of whatever iteration of D&D lore that WoTC is playing around with currently. Larian is already.....loose with Forgotten Realms lore in BG III, I would not like to see the added layer of the setting being changed to accomodate whatever dictates WoTC might have in mind. BG I+II literally got me invested in the setting. I don't want to see Haer'Dalis as a Horned red devil man or whatever.

Thirdly, I don't think they'd do the characters justice. I have seen what their writing team did to some of my long-tie favorites And I don't want them touching any more of them with a ten foot pole.

I would rather see new DnD stories from Larian tbh. I'm very happy with BG3, but I don't think, the first two need remakes, just give us new stories to explore.