Is the Story a direct sequel of the previous games ?

[Solideres]

Or the game is a standlone story?

[Berserk Breton]

Originally posted by Arctic Dream:

Originally posted by Razorblade:

It's stand-alone. It occurs about 100 years after the end of BG2.

So they used the name Baldurs Gate to sell copies of a half finished game? Nice.

This is factually the case, but it isn't like they are intending to run away with the money!

They are working on the game and will release/support a full version in time.

[Elendir Blue]

Originally posted by Harukage:

It is as if the previous games with the same titles that took place in The Forgotten Realms,. aside from 2 Baldur's Gate games followed the same story.
Please just tell me how Icewind dale 2 was direct sequel to Icewind dale 1. Or how the story of Neverwinter Nights 2 is tied to Neverwinter Nights 1.
This is Baldur's Gate game. It takes place in Baldur's Gate and it's surroundings. End of the story.

I don't think that your example with Icewind dale serves your point. Icewind dale was made to use existing technology, created for BG1 and BG2. However, they didn't plan to do same epic story and so they moved to diferent part of Forgoten Realms and diferent name.

BG - epic story with great (by standard of that time) characters.
IWD - combat and adventure oriented.

So BG wasn't only about place in FG, it was about the way content of game was built.
IWD2 then used same approach as IWD1 in creating it`s content, so it was reasonable mark it as secound of serie.

BG3 should be more than only from some place of FG to deserve its name. BG2 has nothing connected with BG as place in FG, because it isn't important part of IP.
Larian don't try to recreate soul of previous BG. They use soul of DOS, what are different games, different IP and different soul.

[AngryT]

Originally posted by Cirrus:

Originally posted by AngryT:

BG1 and BG2 were Direct sequels thats a fact, BG3 isnt it just as well be a stand alone game.




No Im not late, I bought this game the moment it came out and have been waiting for the game to give me anything that remotely feels like Bg1 or Bg2, which it doesn't, I'm just giving a honest opinion on a Game that apart from being set in the BG universe has no resemblence to BG1 or BG2, throwing a couple of easter eggs in or references doesn't make it feel like BG1 or BG2




i never played Icewind Dale, i didnt like it, so i cant answer that,





what a hilarious reply, any good writer can Pull a sequel out his rectum, all the big fantasy titles do it. The Devs Sold this Game a BG sequel, fans flocked to it thinking we would get more of BG1 and BG2 the only people who think other wise are you DnD fans,

by the looks of it you guys seem to be slighty obsessed DnD fanatics who troll anyone who dares to criticise, your beloved Baldur's Gate Attack of the Mind Flayers, rather than attacking people for having an Opinion, why dont explain with more depth, why you believe its worthy to be considered a BG Sequel and not another Divinity with Poorer Characters and an even poorer Story.

The Game its pretty Decent if you're a Divinity Fan, which i am, But im also a BG1 BG2 fan.

What a hilarious reply. Indeed!

You expected sequel because sequels can be pulled from rectum. That I believe. And that is all I need to know.

Everything else is ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥. Nobody has ever sold this game as sequel. Not even hinted. History is full of WoTC game series where next game is not sequel. Only total idiot assumes that by default.

''You expected sequel because sequels can be pulled from rectum. That I believe. And that is all I need to know''

No, i didnt say that, i used that as a way to get my point across, which clearly flew over your head,

Im not going to repeat myself to someone who is clearly a Troll that cannot fathom someone having a opposite view to them.

Alot of this community seem to be alot like you, you all seem very Hostile, to even the most simple of questions or criticism.

Originally posted by Tinball:

I think it's a sequel because it's a story that is going to center around the city of Baldur's Gate. The OG titles were called Baldur's gate because you were on a mission to get there.

Guess what is happening in this story? We are on a mission to get to Baldur's gate.

Yes, the story of Gorian's ward has come to a completion with the Throne of Bhaal. Or has it? No one knows the full story. We know the Dead 3 are involved. So I would save your breath before getting your Golden Pantaloons in a bunch.

saying this contradicts alot of other peoples reasons that its not a sequel, i must admit i only got as far the under world then i kind of lost interest, i may have missed some titbits of lore, Regardless the way i feel about the current game and its lack of good story, horrible group characters and zero BG feel still stands, i grew up playing BG1 and BG2 and this games just doesnt feel like BG1 or BG2 and its a shame, i really hope it does somehow by 2023

[Heu, Iterum Id Feci]

Originally posted by God King 069:

Originally posted by F3rro:

Ignorance is neither a reason nor an excuse for stupidity. :duranceleft::duranceright:
First of all, the name Baldur's Gate is not a brand, but a city in the Forgotten Realms campaign.
Secondly, it's not a finished product at the moment, it's early... ah forget it!

It became a brand. Look up brand. Look up the definition for franchise.

Here I'll help:

a series of related works (such as novels or films) each of which includes the same characters or different characters that are understood to exist and interact in the same fictional universe with characters from the other works

So yeah fair argument to have that they used the name for what came with it and to say they didn't would be to sell the minds behind the company short.

so and now compare your definition ti final fantasy 6, 7, 8 and 9...it will not work.
however what you are leaving out are decades of writing lore etc regarding baldurs gate.
baldurs gate predates the bioware games by a decade. same for all the gods. bhaal, myrkul etc...the elfsong tavern, elminster etc pp.
very, very large parts of bg1 and bg2 were already part of the much much larger d&d forgtten realms franchise, together with icewind dale, neverwinter, waterdeep and many, many other things. And thats exactly where your argument fails you.
There is an ongoing shared fictional universe with returning characters, locations, gods etc.
by your own definition there are dozens and dozens of videogames alone in this ranchise going back to the late eighties.
You arbitrarily limit it to the 2 bioware games, yet your definition includes hundreds, if not thousands of not only video games but also books, magazines, articles and even some films, yet here you cry about 2 arbitrarily chosen games.

[Dis Lexic]

You guys do realize that a francice with numbers doesnt necessarily need to be composed of direct sequels, right? Fallout, The Elder Scrolls and Final Fantasy all come to mind as examples of games set in teh same world that arent...really connected.

[ΕΝ Alexander]

It's a sequel in the way that Dragon Age: Inquisition is a sequel to Dragon Age 2, or Dragon Age 2 is to Dragon Age: Origins. It's not exactly direct, but it's not that far off either.

[Ronin Gamer]

It'll tie in to things that happened in the older games to some extent, but it has also been a decent amount of time since the end of the old games, so just how much no one is completely sure. Larian has said there will be some stuff from the old games though.

[God King 069]

Originally posted by (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Rusty ♥:

Originally posted by God King 069:

It became a brand. Look up brand. Look up the definition for franchise.

Here I'll help:

a series of related works (such as novels or films) each of which includes the same characters or different characters that are understood to exist and interact in the same fictional universe with characters from the other works

So yeah fair argument to have that they used the name for what came with it and to say they didn't would be to sell the minds behind the company short.

so and now compare your definition ti final fantasy 6, 7, 8 and 9...it will not work.
however what you are leaving out are decades of writing lore etc regarding baldurs gate.
baldurs gate predates the bioware games by a decade. same for all the gods. bhaal, myrkul etc...the elfsong tavern, elminster etc pp.
very, very large parts of bg1 and bg2 were already part of the much much larger d&d forgtten realms franchise, together with icewind dale, neverwinter, waterdeep and many, many other things. And thats exactly where your argument fails you.
There is an ongoing shared fictional universe with returning characters, locations, gods etc.
by your own definition there are dozens and dozens of videogames alone in this ranchise going back to the late eighties.
You arbitrarily limit it to the 2 bioware games, yet your definition includes hundreds, if not thousands of not only video games but also books, magazines, articles and even some films, yet here you cry about 2 arbitrarily chosen games.

wtf are you even talking about. He said it wasn't a brand. It is. As are all of the ones you are talking about. Final Fantasy? Brand. Fallout. Brand. Even someone named Dis Lexic gets it.

[Dis Lexic]

Oi, no need to be rude! I'm dyslexic, not an idiot!

[Alf Stewart]

Larian doesnt rlly care about bg1 and 2 they just wanna make a dnd game so i cant imagine the story is going to have much to do with them. dont expect Boo to make an appearance.

[Cirrus]

Originally posted by Alf Stewart:

Larian doesnt rlly care about bg1 and 2 they just wanna make a dnd game so i cant imagine the story is going to have much to do with them. dont expect Boo to make an appearance.

All the things discussed Boo has factually most high propability of making an appearance.

[Heu, Iterum Id Feci]

Originally posted by God King 069:

Originally posted by (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Rusty ♥:

so and now compare your definition ti final fantasy 6, 7, 8 and 9...it will not work.
however what you are leaving out are decades of writing lore etc regarding baldurs gate.
baldurs gate predates the bioware games by a decade. same for all the gods. bhaal, myrkul etc...the elfsong tavern, elminster etc pp.
very, very large parts of bg1 and bg2 were already part of the much much larger d&d forgtten realms franchise, together with icewind dale, neverwinter, waterdeep and many, many other things. And thats exactly where your argument fails you.
There is an ongoing shared fictional universe with returning characters, locations, gods etc.
by your own definition there are dozens and dozens of videogames alone in this ranchise going back to the late eighties.
You arbitrarily limit it to the 2 bioware games, yet your definition includes hundreds, if not thousands of not only video games but also books, magazines, articles and even some films, yet here you cry about 2 arbitrarily chosen games.

wtf are you even talking about. He said it wasn't a brand. It is. As are all of the ones you are talking about. Final Fantasy? Brand. Fallout. Brand. Even someone named Dis Lexic gets it.

but the brand is not limited to bg1, bg2 and bg3. icewind dale neverwinter nights are also parts of the brand, as are bg dark alliance, eye of the beholder 1 and 2 and dozens of other videogames he is ignoring. plus the hundreds of books etc. yet he is only comparing this game to 2 more or less arbitraryly chosen titles. The brand is dungeons & dragons forgotten realms, not Baldurs Gate. bg is just a very small part of it.
Yet his definition includes at least all of d&d forgotten realms. If not eberron, dragonlance planescape, magic the gathering etc, bc according to wotc they all share a multiverse.

[God King 069]

Originally posted by (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Rusty ♥:

Originally posted by God King 069:

wtf are you even talking about. He said it wasn't a brand. It is. As are all of the ones you are talking about. Final Fantasy? Brand. Fallout. Brand. Even someone named Dis Lexic gets it.

but the brand is not limited to bg1, bg2 and bg3. icewind dale neverwinter nights are also parts of the brand, as are bg dark alliance, eye of the beholder 1 and 2 and dozens of other videogames he is ignoring. plus the hundreds of books etc. yet he is only comparing this game to 2 more or less arbitraryly chosen titles. The brand is dungeons & dragons forgotten realms, not Baldurs Gate. bg is just a very small part of it.
Yet his definition includes at least all of d&d forgotten realms. If not eberron, dragonlance planescape, magic the gathering etc, bc according to wotc they all share a multiverse.

None of which matters because that's not how it works. People look at grouped things at the smaller level as the brand in this context. I wouldn't go to a book store and ask for Forgotten Realms if I wanted to read the Drizzt books. I'd ask for the Legend of Dritzzt. Crpgs are seen in the same light we don't look at Neverwinter 1 and 2 or BG 1 and 2 as Forgotten Realms either we look at them as Neverwinter and Baldur's Gate series and that's the brand or the better term would be franchise or series. Final Fantasy same thing. So no they aren't part of the 'brand' in this context as the only people that would be looking at it in that way are people that are discussing the greater umbrella.

So to the original statement, no BG is not just a place as it would be in a table top setting.
In the video game world use of the Baldur's Gate title comes with the fan base and expectations that the Baldur's Gate series has built upon it's past success.

[Heu, Iterum Id Feci]

Originally posted by God King 069:

Originally posted by (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Rusty ♥:

but the brand is not limited to bg1, bg2 and bg3. icewind dale neverwinter nights are also parts of the brand, as are bg dark alliance, eye of the beholder 1 and 2 and dozens of other videogames he is ignoring. plus the hundreds of books etc. yet he is only comparing this game to 2 more or less arbitraryly chosen titles. The brand is dungeons & dragons forgotten realms, not Baldurs Gate. bg is just a very small part of it.
Yet his definition includes at least all of d&d forgotten realms. If not eberron, dragonlance planescape, magic the gathering etc, bc according to wotc they all share a multiverse.

None of which matters because that's not how it works. People look at grouped things at the smaller level as the brand in this context. I wouldn't go to a book store and ask for Forgotten Realms if I wanted to read the Drizzt books. I'd ask for the Legend of Dritzzt. Crpgs are seen in the same light we don't look at Neverwinter 1 and 2 or BG 1 and 2 as Forgotten Realms either we look at them as Neverwinter and Baldur's Gate series and that's the brand or the better term would be franchise or series. Final Fantasy same thing. So no they aren't part of the 'brand' in this context as the only people that would be looking at it in that way are people that are discussing the greater umbrella.

So to the original statement, no BG is not just a place as it would be in a table top setting.
In the video game world use of the Baldur's Gate title comes with the fan base and expectations that the Baldur's Gate series has built upon it's past success.

Originally posted by God King 069:

Originally posted by F3rro:

Ignorance is neither a reason nor an excuse for stupidity. :duranceleft::duranceright:
First of all, the name Baldur's Gate is not a brand, but a city in the Forgotten Realms campaign.
Secondly, it's not a finished product at the moment, it's early... ah forget it!

It became a brand. Look up brand. Look up the definition for franchise.

Here I'll help:

a series of related works (such as novels or films) each of which includes the same characters or different characters that are understood to exist and interact in the same fictional universe with characters from the other works

I am going by your own definition here, so don't complain to me.
bg1, neverwinter nights and eye of the beholder are related works, each of which include the same or different characters that are understood to exist and interact in the same fictional universe with characters from the other works.
however, final fantasy 7, 8 and 9 do neither share the same characters nor do they share the same universe.
so by your own definition bg1, neverwinter nights and eye of the beholder are the same franchise, while final fantasy 7, 8 and 9 are not the same franchise.

[God King 069]

Originally posted by (っ◔◡◔)っ ♥ Rusty ♥:

I am going by your own definition here, so don't complain to me.
bg1, neverwinter nights and eye of the beholder are related works, each of which include the same or different characters that are understood to exist and interact in the same fictional universe with characters from the other works.
however, final fantasy 7, 8 and 9 do neither share the same characters nor do they share the same universe.
so by your own definition bg1, neverwinter nights and eye of the beholder are the same franchise, while final fantasy 7, 8 and 9 are not the same franchise.

Clearly you aren't smart enough to continue this discussion. I'm out.