I mean, why wouldnāt they go back to their own IP they have 100% control over?
The chance to make BG3 was obviously worth it, but Larian doesnāt need DnD to make video games.
And honestly Iām happy theyāre not making bg4 next. But I hope a decade from now they do. These games arenāt CoD, we dont need to crank out sequels immediately.
I wouldnāt have bought BG3 if it werenāt for D&D, but youāre right, after how awesome that game was, Iāll definitely buy whatever they make next.
The Divinity games they made before this were wildly popular and have a lot of the same things that made bg3 popular.
If you have played Divinity 2 yeah, scoop it up on the next sale
Itās worth clarifying that itās the Divinity: Original Sin games that are similar style CRPGs, and Iām assuming you mean Original Sin 2.
There is a game called Divinity 2, but itās wildly different (I still love it though)
Divinity 2 is completely awesome. The humor is just š Original Sin 2 is just amazing.
I havenāt played a lot of Divinity but I will say the DnD character creator is much more interesting to me then the skill system in Divinity. I donāt know if Divinityās skill systems gets better as it goes, but BG3 starts out with a lot of really interesting classes and choices.
Itās been a while, but Iād say Divinity is even deeper from memory.
DND seems like a lot of choices because you need to decide which class/subclass your take, and while you can multi class, it gets real confusing.
In Divinity everyone levels up the same and gets the same amount of upgrade points, you can just do whatever.
You donāt need to min/max multiclass to make sure youāre maximizing feats or crazy stuff. You just use your points to get what you want.
So, in ways simpler, but in other ways more complex.
DnD locks them down, which may be why theyāre moving away from it.
Speaking of it, both Original Sin 1 and 2 are currently on sale on GOG, super cheap:
I bought BG3 because Larian was doing it. I absolutely loved the Divinity games and knew they made quality products. It was cool to see a D&D game done so well but that was not the main selling point. I do hope that they revisit D&D one day to do a Ravenloft setting but Iām probably just dreaming.
Hell, CoD would probably also be a better franchise if there werenāt new versions so often.
I mean, why wouldnāt they go back to their own IP they have 100% control over?
A smart company would acknowledge that they needed the outside expertise to be so successful and not shoot themselves in the foot by assuming they wil get the same results in house. [Edit: I am saying WotC needs to acknowledge they need Larianās expertise]
I also like it when they let a game of this scooe with a lot of replayability stick around for years before cranking out the next one. That gives time for replays to experience the alternate choices and for modding to be added so the community can expand as well.
Edit: apparently I read this backwards as WotC taking 100% of their DnD Ip back from Larian. Probably misread it so due to the context of WotC taking control over the desktop setting.
They piggybacked off the success of dos2 which was a better game anyways. Sure, theyll lose the dnd fans that play solely for the familiar IP, but theyve gained enough name recognition to be massively successful on their own. Just keep making good games like From Soft & thatās all they need.
Honestly I disagree that dos2 was better I think bg3 was much more intricate with skills abilities and playstyles than dos2 was
Agree. DOSā elemental surface effects was cool, but having to deal with it all the time got old. Even more so with necrofire. Iām really hoping DOS3 learn something from BG3ās more conservative usage of surface effects.
You mean they need WotCās expertise to handle D&D 5E properly? Or to make a good game?
As far as the formerā¦ I think that the partnership was a major factor in BG3ās success, but I expect it has more to do with the D&D brand and BG nostalgia, than any virtues of the 5E system. Maybe WotCās contributions to worldbuilding and lore helpedā¦ Larian are of course good at that in their own right, but thereās a whole Forgotten Realms canon to navigate. (I donāt actually know what WotC contributed in that regard, mind you)
In the case of the latterā¦ The Divinity system is pretty heckin good, and in many ways a better CRPG system than any edition of D&D. Larian ARE experts at making really solid CRPGs, after all. The Divinity series is perhaps the most successful ever, maybe now behind BG3ā¦ So returning to their own IP would not be shooting themselves in the foot by any stretch, IMO. More like trading one kind of overwhelming success for a different kind of overwhelming success.
I read it as WotC taking back their IP and was saying WotC did not recognize that they needed Larianās expertise. So, opposite of that.
Oh. I think OP meant Larian returning to their own IP (maybe Divinity). AFAICT, it was Larianās decision to not continue with the D&D IP, not WotC taking it back. But I might have that wrong.
Just saw your edits-- I see whatās going on now :)
What outside expertise? Hasbro contributed nothing except the IP, and the team at Hasbro that actually worked on BG3 has all been laid off anyway.
Hasbro needed Larianās expertise.
Right, makes more sense with your edits
Yeah, I shouldnāt responded to a post that didnāt name who was who with a reply that didnāt name who was who.
I thought WotC was the one who dropped Larian, not the other way around.
WotC were the ones who needed to contract an outside developer. Larian obviously needed their help to develop a D&D game specifically to get the details right, but theyāre quite capable of making a good game without them, thatās how they got the licence in the first place.
That is what I was saying, guess I read the OP wrong.
No worries, happens to everyone on occasion.
Swen describes how relieved his team was that they werenāt going to be doing more Baldurās Gate, and even in BG3 development they talked about the difficulties of making 5E DnD work in a video game past 12th level. Larian clearly gave all they had for 6 years of development and they didnāt chop it into DLC the way a lot of studios would have. In my mind itās like BG3 launched in āGame of the Year Complete Editionā with all DLC included.
Part of what made BG3 special was how excited the team was about working on it. Iām actually happy to hear they arenāt going to try and force more content. Iām looking forward to seeing what they make with the ideas theyāre excited about next.
I mean, a lot of pc players bought it when it was just act 1.
I got more enjoyment playing that over and over than I did all of Diablo IV, so it was more like one huge DLC for us just getting the rest of the game.
I could 100% see some other studios making act 1 the base game then selling each next act as DLC.
the difficulties of making 5E DnD work in a video game past 12th level.
Making the tabletop game work past 12th level is a slog too!
Larian did a great job of making levels 1-12 work better in a video game than they do on a tabletop, and I say that having enjoyed playing on the tabletop when 5e was released. BG3 got the group back together after I got a bit burnt out DMing a tabletop campaign.
Difficulties of making 5e DnD work in a video game beyond 12th level
BG3 might have missed the mark for me in the end, but God Damn do I feel that one. Full respect to them for managing to make such a good game even when working from such a flawed base
While larian was always respected by the crpg community, BG3 brought them to such a wide audience that whatever they make next is all but guaranteed to be popular. They donāt need the D&D IP anymore, and I canāt wait to see what they come up with next.
