Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 17 of 18 1 2 15 16 17 18
Joined: May 2019
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: May 2019
Originally Posted by Warlocke
Originally Posted by IrenicusBG3
DOS2 had a lot of post-market exposition, because of its scores. But the point made is that is not the combat that makes DOS2 attractive.


DOS2 received universal acclaim from critics and very high scores from players, and while every part of the game was praised, the combat was pretty much always applauded. There is no evidence that all of these people liked it in spite of the turn based combat, and plenty of evidence that lots of people genuinely enjoyed it.

So back to my original point: Larian could make BG3 in a different genre, but why would they? They made a thing, millions of people bought the thing, and the overwhelming preponderance of the feedback that they got was that people liked the thing.

They have no reason to change something that isn’t broken.

PoE2 also received universal acclaim from critics and very high scores from players. So these things don't necessarily translate into sales.

And yes, oftentimes people do buy and play cRPGs even though they don't like the combat system. The emphasis here is on *cRPGs* because for a great many RPG fans their love for that genre of game has to do with things other than the combat.

Joined: Jan 2018
W
old hand
Offline
old hand
W
Joined: Jan 2018
Yeah, sure, that is true. I bought Pillars 2 despite being somewhat underwhelmed by the combat.


But my point is still that Larian has no reason to change what has already worked for them. The studio has been around for a while, and they have finally found a formula that has helped them break out into a mainstream developer. The post I was responding to said they could do things differently than they are. I was just saying that sure, they could, but there isn’t any evidence that they need to, so why should they?

Joined: Apr 2020
Location: Boston , MA
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Apr 2020
Location: Boston , MA
Maybe because it is a different franchise that is known for another system? Maybe because being in the comfort zone (which clearly they opted for) don't expand your audience?

Joined: Jan 2018
W
old hand
Offline
old hand
W
Joined: Jan 2018
Originally Posted by IrenicusBG3
Maybe because it is a different franchise that is known for another system? Maybe because being in the comfort zone (which clearly they opted for) don't expand your audience?


Being in their comfort zone and refining and iterating something that they were familiar with already did expand their audience, with DOS2 outselling 1. Furthermore, WotC contacted Larian during DOS2 prerelease and offered them BG3 because they liked what they saw with that game. Many other studios besides Larian, such as Obsidian and InXile, had pitched to get the BG licensing rights, but WotC wanted the DOS2 model for BG3. Clearly Larian isn’t going to change their approach when that is what their client is requesting.

Joined: Apr 2020
Location: Boston , MA
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Apr 2020
Location: Boston , MA
Originally Posted by Warlocke
Being in their comfort zone and refining and iterating something that they were familiar with already did expand their audience, with DOS2 outselling 1.


To some extent. That philosophy would certainly apply to DOS 3, but feels insufficient to BG3.

Regarding WoTC, not sure if they care about mechanic details of the game as long as they carry the 5ed flagship. Their quality control has not being great, especially in their mid and low tier franchises such as the new Dark Alliance.

Joined: Mar 2019
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2019
Originally Posted by Warlocke
Originally Posted by IrenicusBG3
Maybe because it is a different franchise that is known for another system? Maybe because being in the comfort zone (which clearly they opted for) don't expand your audience?


Being in their comfort zone and refining and iterating something that they were familiar with already did expand their audience, with DOS2 outselling 1. Furthermore, WotC contacted Larian during DOS2 prerelease and offered them BG3 because they liked what they saw with that game. Many other studios besides Larian, such as Obsidian and InXile, had pitched to get the BG licensing rights, but WotC wanted the DOS2 model for BG3. Clearly Larian isn’t going to change their approach when that is what their client is requesting.

WoTC: "Hey Larian, we love what you did with DOS2 and we'd love you give our flahship title!"

Larian" "Wow! Great. We're in!"

WoTC: "So what can we expect?"

Larian: "We're gonna roll the dice with something completely new and untested, which may or may not end up being better, but is going to cost a lot more money and time to produce!"

WoTC: "..."

Joined: Mar 2020
Banned
Offline
Banned
Joined: Mar 2020
Originally Posted by Emrikol
Originally Posted by Warlocke
Originally Posted by IrenicusBG3
Maybe because it is a different franchise that is known for another system? Maybe because being in the comfort zone (which clearly they opted for) don't expand your audience?


Being in their comfort zone and refining and iterating something that they were familiar with already did expand their audience, with DOS2 outselling 1. Furthermore, WotC contacted Larian during DOS2 prerelease and offered them BG3 because they liked what they saw with that game. Many other studios besides Larian, such as Obsidian and InXile, had pitched to get the BG licensing rights, but WotC wanted the DOS2 model for BG3. Clearly Larian isn’t going to change their approach when that is what their client is requesting.

WoTC: "Hey Larian, we love what you did with DOS2 and we'd love you give our flahship title!"

Larian" "Wow! Great. We're in!"

WoTC: "So what can we expect?"

Larian: "We're gonna roll the dice with something completely new and untested, which may or may not end up being better, but is going to cost a lot more money and time to produce!"

WoTC: "..."

Then don't take on a project you can't deliver.

WotC asked for BG3. They are getting DOS3: Forgotten Realms.

Joined: Sep 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Emrikol
Originally Posted by Warlocke
Originally Posted by IrenicusBG3
Maybe because it is a different franchise that is known for another system? Maybe because being in the comfort zone (which clearly they opted for) don't expand your audience?


Being in their comfort zone and refining and iterating something that they were familiar with already did expand their audience, with DOS2 outselling 1. Furthermore, WotC contacted Larian during DOS2 prerelease and offered them BG3 because they liked what they saw with that game. Many other studios besides Larian, such as Obsidian and InXile, had pitched to get the BG licensing rights, but WotC wanted the DOS2 model for BG3. Clearly Larian isn’t going to change their approach when that is what their client is requesting.

WoTC: "Hey Larian, we love what you did with DOS2 and we'd love you give our flahship title!"

Larian" "Wow! Great. We're in!"

WoTC: "So what can we expect?"

Larian: "We're gonna roll the dice with something completely new and untested, which may or may not end up being better, but is going to cost a lot more money and time to produce!"

WoTC: "..."


I don't understand point that you're trying to make. Are you upset about higher production values and subsequently longer production times (especially during a global pandemic,) or are you implying that Larian isn't sticking to the D:OS2 model that helped them secure the rights in the first place (even though they mostly are?)


I don't want to fall to bits 'cos of excess existential thought.

Joined: Jan 2018
W
old hand
Offline
old hand
W
Joined: Jan 2018
Originally Posted by Tzelanit

I don't understand point that you're trying to make. Are you upset about higher production values and subsequently longer production times (especially during a global pandemic,) or are you implying that Larian isn't sticking to the D:OS2 model that helped them secure the rights in the first place (even though they mostly are?)


Emrikol was showing through hypothetical example how absurd it would be for Larian to try and reinvent the wheel and do something different than what they know.


Joined: Aug 2018
D
member
Offline
member
D
Joined: Aug 2018
Originally Posted by qhristoff
Originally Posted by Emrikol
Originally Posted by Warlocke
Originally Posted by IrenicusBG3
Maybe because it is a different franchise that is known for another system? Maybe because being in the comfort zone (which clearly they opted for) don't expand your audience?


Being in their comfort zone and refining and iterating something that they were familiar with already did expand their audience, with DOS2 outselling 1. Furthermore, WotC contacted Larian during DOS2 prerelease and offered them BG3 because they liked what they saw with that game. Many other studios besides Larian, such as Obsidian and InXile, had pitched to get the BG licensing rights, but WotC wanted the DOS2 model for BG3. Clearly Larian isn’t going to change their approach when that is what their client is requesting.

WoTC: "Hey Larian, we love what you did with DOS2 and we'd love you give our flahship title!"

Larian" "Wow! Great. We're in!"

WoTC: "So what can we expect?"

Larian: "We're gonna roll the dice with something completely new and untested, which may or may not end up being better, but is going to cost a lot more money and time to produce!"

WoTC: "..."

Then don't take on a project you can't deliver.

WotC asked for BG3. They are getting DOS3: Forgotten Realms.


It looks like it's BG3 to me, as evident by the title, lore, and mechanics. your silly little gatekeeping of what makes a BG title is no doubt of zero concern to WOTC, Larian, or plenty of people who will have no problem enjoying the game.

Joined: Jan 2018
W
old hand
Offline
old hand
W
Joined: Jan 2018
Originally Posted by qhristoff

Then don't take on a project you can't deliver.

WotC asked for BG3. They are getting DOS3: Forgotten Realms.


No, Larian is delivering exactly what the license holder asked for. Wizards of the Coast loved DOS2, and that is what they wanted for BG3.

Joined: Mar 2019
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2019
Originally Posted by qhristoff
Then don't take on a project you can't deliver.

WotC asked for BG3. They are getting DOS3: Forgotten Realms.

Yeah, I'm sure WoTC had no idea what Larian intended to make before they agreed to the deal.

Originally Posted by Tzelanit
I don't understand point that you're trying to make. Are you upset about higher production values and subsequently longer production times (especially during a global pandemic,) or are you implying that Larian isn't sticking to the D:OS2 model that helped them secure the rights in the first place (even though they mostly are?)

I'm not upset about anything. And I think they are sticking to the basic formula behind DOS2 with BG3. I suspect they wouldn't have been given the chance to make BG3 if they didn't.

Joined: Apr 2020
Location: Boston , MA
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Apr 2020
Location: Boston , MA
Originally Posted by Emrikol

Larian" "Wow! Great. We're in!"

WoTC: "So what can we expect?"

Larian: "We're gonna roll the dice with something completely new and untested, which may or may not end up being better, but is going to cost a lot more money and time to produce!"

WoTC: "..."


The argument can go in both directions. You are either making changes in core features of a established franchise vs changes in Larian Modus operandi.

Joined: Mar 2019
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2019
Originally Posted by IrenicusBG3
Originally Posted by Emrikol

Larian" "Wow! Great. We're in!"

WoTC: "So what can we expect?"

Larian: "We're gonna roll the dice with something completely new and untested, which may or may not end up being better, but is going to cost a lot more money and time to produce!"

WoTC: "..."


The argument can go in both directions. You are either making changes in core features of a established franchise vs changes in Larian Modus operandi.

Yeah, it is more ambiguous without the part that says WoTC: "Hey Larian, we love what you did with DOS2 and we'd love you give our flahship title!" And sure, it is possible WoTC expected something completely unlike DOS2. But do you really believe that?

Joined: Sep 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Sep 2020
i'm Forgotten Realms fun, so BG in the title doesn't bother me at all, since i played most of the games within that settings.

if i had to pick what irks me the most, it's current poster, very similar to DOS2, but i'm sure it will change with time and the game will have it's own identity

Joined: Apr 2020
Location: Boston , MA
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Apr 2020
Location: Boston , MA
Originally Posted by Emrikol
Yeah, it is more ambiguous without the part that says WoTC: "Hey Larian, we love what you did with DOS2 and we'd love you give our flahship title!" And sure, it is possible WoTC expected something completely unlike DOS2. But do you really believe that?


Not ambiguous, but could be used in both sides.

I don't see WoTC rejecting Larian if they said " We want to keep D/N cycle, open world and Rtwp" (3 "nostalgic" traits that had become standard in many games nowadays).

My point is that it was up to Larian to decide.

Last edited by IrenicusBG3; 25/09/20 06:55 PM.
Joined: Mar 2019
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2019
Originally Posted by IrenicusBG3
Originally Posted by Emrikol
Yeah, it is more ambiguous without the part that says WoTC: "Hey Larian, we love what you did with DOS2 and we'd love you give our flahship title!" And sure, it is possible WoTC expected something completely unlike DOS2. But do you really believe that?


Not ambiguous, but could be used in both sides.

I don't see WoTC rejecting Larian if they said " We want to keep D/N cycle, open world and Rtwp".

My point is that it was up to Larian to decide.

Yes, it was up to Larian to decide what they wanted to propose to WoTC. But more importantly, it was up to WoTC to decide if they accepted that proposal. If WoTC wanted "D/N cycle, open world and Rtwp," it would be a really odd choice for them to go with Larian, since that isn't their thing. I'm sure WoTC isn't micromanaging the development of this game, but I am just as sure they knew and approved of what Larian is doing. Also, if their is something WoTC insisted on, it would be in the game. For example, we know WoTC told Larian they didn't want alignment to be rigid like it used to be. Are we to believe that is all WoTC demanded? Or that they demanded other elements that Larian either refused to accept, or worse, agreed to but chose to ignore anyway?

By and large, there is no reasonable argument to suggest that the game Larian is making is anything but what WoTC wanted BG3 to be. WoTC is the big cheese here. If they wanted something different, they'd have it.

Last edited by Emrikol; 25/09/20 07:05 PM.
Joined: Apr 2020
Location: Boston , MA
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Apr 2020
Location: Boston , MA
Originally Posted by Emrikol
Yes, it was up to Larian to decide what they wanted to propose to WoTC. But more importantly, it was up to WoTC to decide if they accepted that proposal. If WoTC wanted "D/N cycle, open world and Rtwp," it would be a really odd choice for them to go with Larian, since that isn't their thing. I'm sure WoTC isn't micromanaging the development of this game, but I am just as sure they knew and approved of what Larian is doing. Also, if their is something WoTC insisted on, it would be in the game. For example, we know WoTC told Larian they didn't want alignment to be rigid like it used to be. Are we to believe that is all WoTC demanded? Or that they demanded other elements that Larian either refused to accept, or worse, agreed to but chose to ignore anyway?

By and large, there is no reasonable argument to suggest that the game Larian is making is anything but what WoTC wanted BG3 to be. WoTC is the big cheese here. If they wanted something different, they'd have it.


https://youtu.be/LI4v6hC_rjM?t=155

Despite the comic and oversimplified nature, that is probably what WoTC wants in the game. Swen said in many interviews they are not micromanaging.

The alignment comes from 5ed more liberal approach.

And before goin back in circular discussion, they probably don't care about the execution (if it is word by word or more abstract) as long is faithful in meaning. As they were ok in the past with Bioware.

Joined: Jan 2018
W
old hand
Offline
old hand
W
Joined: Jan 2018
Swen actually said that early in the development that WotC was much more hands on and cautious in their review process, and it is only after Larian built up their trust were they given more freedom. That might have been in the Dropped Frames interview.

Anyway, I’m not sure what the point is here.

Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Originally Posted by Warlocke
Swen actually said that early in the development that WotC was much more hands on and cautious in their review process, and it is only after Larian built up their trust were they given more freedom. That might have been in the Dropped Frames interview.

Anyway, I’m not sure what the point is here.


I guess you lost the point when you introduce the Wotc/Larian thing again grin

Last edited by Maximuuus; 25/09/20 07:38 PM.
Page 17 of 18 1 2 15 16 17 18

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5