Since BG3s release he has said that their next game would be smaller in scope. He explicitly said that for him he's done with BG3 and would now start working on the next game. None of their previous games ever got DLC. But they got a final ultimate update with many finishing touches.
Why are people so surprised?
Why are people so surprised?
There is money to be made, and we're not used to seeing cashcows beeing left alone
Oh, never you fear pal, I'm certain that Hasbro has no intention of leaving the cashcow alone. Larian might be moving on to other things, but those ghouls certainly aren't.
Whatever Larian touches turns to gold, at least for now. Divinity 2 was so insanely good. Div 1 is pretty good, according to friends. Haven't finished it yet.
They're still working on a game they say is far bigger than BG3, though.
Prior to development on Baldur's Gate 3, Larian CEO Swen Vincke was already planning out the company's future, and this included what he calls "the very big RPG that will dwarf them all."
Speaking to GameSpot at GDC, Vincke explained that Larian's next game also won't actually be the aforementioned "very big RPG," but will be another step toward realizing it.
I don't know how much to read between the lines, but one can read Hasbro is to blame. Praise for WotC and the DnD team. Nothing for Hasbro...
It may be much simpler though - why work on someone else's IP and make them money, and dance to their turn going forward when you can work on your own?
Divinity Original Sin 2 was also critically acclaimed even if not to BG3 levels, and they own that outright. I wouldn't be surprised if they're going to make a new IP - nows the time to take such a risk.
That's what CD Project Red did after Witcher 3 - and while it was rough initially in the end it's paid dividends.
Independent IP and publishing only deals is how studies stay independent and can thrive.
Cyberpunk is not a new IP, it's based on the Cyberpunk TTRPG.
What new IP did cdpr create after the witcher 3?
I don't think they "are to blame" (i.e. main reason), but as you say, reading between the lines, it sounds to me like they were definitely part of the reason.
I think larian got a lot of attention really quick and didn't like that kind of spot light. I will be following their next games though. Hopefully they can build on this.
I think they've now reached the level of attention they deserve and that means they can stop licking boots of large IP holders just to make games for them. Divinity original sin was bg3 before bg3, it just didn't have a large license attached to it, and now they can make DOS3 and know that people will buy it because it'll most likely be a great game
D:OS2 didn't have the branching questlines though - BG3 added a lot too, but I agree the main base of the game was there.
But yeah they're the only developer I will preorder from.
Well yeah, they didn’t have the same budget.
Mechanically I still think DOS2 is superior to BGIII, mainly due to not being weighed down by the clunky tabletop mechanics. Not saying BGIII is bad, but it would’ve (in my opinion) been better without the DND rubbish.
Personally, I think the presentation is what sets BG3 apart. I agree that D:OS2 has a more fun combat system, but that's not really the key to mainstream appeal.
Stuff like zoomed in dialogues with actual motion capture and visible facial expressions really pulls you in in a way zoomed out isometric dialogue presentations never can.
Not saying BGIII is bad, but it would’ve (in my opinion) been better without the DND rubbish.
Maybe a better game, but definitely not as successful. Between the movie coming out the same year and Stranger Things and Critical Role (and their Amazon show) and what have you, D&D was already in the zeitgeist. It was absolutely an important aspect of BG3 hitting that mainstream success, imo.
It is primarily the combat system I'm talking about though. I would've loved to see BDIII but with DOS general combat and combat movement. I don't care for the "does 1d4 lightning damage" stuff.
I'm obviously not saying that DOSII had the better dialogue and quest systems. BGIII is obviously rooted in the same engine and tech as DOSII, but it's been built upon wonderfully. I enjoy BGIII, and Larian has once again done an excellent job. I just think DOSII was the better game on a mechanical level, disregarding the story/graphics/tech, etc.
Oh I agree with you there. Combat was more fun in DOS2 (though it got ridiculous at times).
I prefer BG3, as DOS2 has the awkward separate armour systems - so you're forced to either target physical or magical armour specifically.
Also BG3 has Baldur's Gate which is awesome with all the city quests, etc. - lot of quests you can do entirely with stealth.
I don't think I was clear enough. I think DOSII was better mechanically, not from a story/quest/graphics perspective. I'm not saying BGIII was bad in any way, it's an amazing game, and it's very clear that a lot of love was put into it from everyone that contributed, but I overall feel like D:OS II had the better game mechanics. I liked the action point system for moving and attacking, I liked that you could save up action points to unleash more on later turns. I don't care too much for the behind-the-scenes dice rolls - though the big roll X to pass check is quite fun.
The voice cast also did such an amazing job. I've been playing Warframe a lot lately, and it's really fun to hear Astarion as a fish.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
I heard they are working on something other than DOS3 for now. They are trying new IP, which I'm honestly fine with. I like companies with the balls to try something new.
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
Comments.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities: