4 ms·

> So yes, a different studio being given the license for the sequel (which is already a very questionable practice that rights holders should be called out for)

by piaste 3y ago

> So yes, a different studio being given the license for the sequel (which is already a very questionable practice that rights holders should be called out for) should strive to mimick the feel of the original game very closely. I'm just going to have to fundamentally agree to disagree. I would 100% endorse this quote if we were talking about novels or theatrical plays, and maybe 50% if talking about movies (Godfather? Yes. Alien? Nah). But a game, outside of odd niches like visual novels or 'walking simulators', is a much more open-ended experience, and the expectation of a sequel is not merely to continue the story - that's typically called an 'expansion', a concept that doesn't exist in novels or movies. A sequel is generally expected to innovate, and the longer since the previous title the more innovation is expected.

account42 3y ago
You can innovate while still staying true to the original and not making a fundamentally different game. BG2 itself did change many things compared to BG1 but still managed to retain the overal feel. "BG3" on the otherhand innovates on Divinity: Original Sin 2 instead and then slaps a Baldur's Gate paint on the result. I also don't see why games should be inherently different from other media in this respect. Yes, games are often seen as lesser art compared to more established forms but this is (in part) a result of them being treated as products first and not a justification for it.
- piaste 3y ago
  > "BG3" on the otherhand innovates on Divinity: Original Sin 2 instead and then slaps a Baldur's Gate paint on the result. Do you think that the setting, themes, story, and RPG rules are just 'paint'? Is the Infinity Engine so much more important than the Forgotten Realms? > I also don't see why games should be inherently different from other media in this respect. Because games aren't media: games are media generators. The same game can be a tragedy to one player and a comedy to another. So you can have two different kinds of follow-ups: ones that simply generate more media in the same way ( = expansion), or ones that improve on how the media is generate ( = sequel). The distinction doesn't make sense for fixed media like novels or films. Note that I'm not talking about video games in particular, it applies to any kind of game. If I publish a book that adds a new secret level to the crypt of Acererak in the same style as the original, it's an expansion. If I publish a story about a different crypt that feels connected to the original but with its own unique design choices, that's when I can call it Tomb of Horrors 2.

by piaste 3y ago

account42 3y ago

You can innovate while still staying true to the original and not making a fundamentally different game. BG2 itself did change many things compared to BG1 but still managed to retain the overal feel. "BG3" on the otherhand innovates on Divinity: Original Sin 2 instead and then slaps a Baldur's Gate paint on the result. I also don't see why games should be inherently different from other media in this respect. Yes, games are often seen as lesser art compared to more established forms but this is (in part) a result of them being treated as products first and not a justification for it.

piaste 3y ago
> "BG3" on the otherhand innovates on Divinity: Original Sin 2 instead and then slaps a Baldur's Gate paint on the result. Do you think that the setting, themes, story, and RPG rules are just 'paint'? Is the Infinity Engine so much more important than the Forgotten Realms? > I also don't see why games should be inherently different from other media in this respect. Because games aren't media: games are media generators. The same game can be a tragedy to one player and a comedy to another. So you can have two different kinds of follow-ups: ones that simply generate more media in the same way ( = expansion), or ones that improve on how the media is generate ( = sequel). The distinction doesn't make sense for fixed media like novels or films. Note that I'm not talking about video games in particular, it applies to any kind of game. If I publish a book that adds a new secret level to the crypt of Acererak in the same style as the original, it's an expansion. If I publish a story about a different crypt that feels connected to the original but with its own unique design choices, that's when I can call it Tomb of Horrors 2.