What Could 3D Bring to Baldur's Gate

Aegis · Post by **Aegis** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 6:32 am

Actually, it's been shown many times thats 2D backgrounds are less detailed

. Lower displayable resolution, static environment, and in the case of BG and BG2, rather dull, pastel looking backgrounds. A 3D enviroment would actually allow for more detail to go into the background, making it interactable, and good looking.

Simply put, a connection between poor gameplay and 3D graphics can't be made effectively, simply because 3D is still a growing method of gaming graphics. Hell, if anything, we should hate 2D more for the reasons I've been seeing in these threads, you know, seeing as there are far more horrible 2D games, then 3D games...

Oh, and Baldur's Gate 2, I hate to say it, it's never going to be repeated. You have to understand that. To think that BG3 will be on par, or better, is silly, simply because of the all the already gathered hype, high expectations, and people analyzing this 2D vs. 3D argument to death. But, it's not going to be the graphics of BG3 that dissapoint, I can almost assure you of that.

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 7:27 am

Just a little bit of Off Topic, but Dragon Age dosen't use Aurora as engine:

.12: What game engine does Dragon Age use? (Back to Top)

Dragon Age will use a brand-new cutting edge technology engine, called the BioWare Dragon Age Engine. BioWare's programmers are applying the experience learned from working on past BioWare engines like the BioWare Infinity Engine, the BioWare Aurora Engine, the BioWare Odyssey Engine and the BioWare Jade Empire Engine to create this new RPG engine.

But otherwise - I agree with what you said, because it is similar to what I say also

Aegis · Post by **Aegis** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 9:38 am

[QUOTE=Xandax]Just a little bit of Off Topic, but Dragon Age dosen't use Aurora as engine:

But otherwise - I agree with what you said, because it is similar to what I say also

[/QUOTE]
My bad. There's another game that is using a revamped one. I got it confused

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 10:03 am

It is proberly "The Witcher" you are thinking off. NwN2 will also run using a wamped up Aurora.

Aegis · Post by **Aegis** » Mon Aug 30, 2004 11:48 am

[QUOTE=Xandax]It is proberly "The Witcher" you are thinking off. NwN2 will also run using a wamped up Aurora.[/QUOTE]
I think that's the one. I remember checking out some screens for it (off GB) and being amazed it was the same engine.

Paranitis · Post by **Paranitis** » Thu Sep 02, 2004 7:33 pm

Dont throw fireballs at me for this..but I really wouldn't mind too much if BG3 used the engine they use in UT2004, or the one they are gonna use for Halo 2. Atleast for what it looks like and how it actually looks natural when you see someone shooting something out of the sky..rather than have someone shooting at ground level and the arrow or whatever flying upwards like has been done in some games.

And if you truly think about it..an UT2004 online map by the name of "Torlan" is relatively the same size as a map screen in the BG/IWD/NWN games..so possibly have make a few maps that are this size like in BG/IWD/NWN that look as good as UT2004/Halo2 and you would be set!

Yet you would be able to rotate the camera, go 3rd person, control a group, show every new piece of equipment you wear on you..and all that stuff would be awesome in a Baldur's Gate game. As long as there is a good story though..because if it was just Unreal: Baldur's Gate..then it wouldn't be right

I know you would probably need the highest top of the line computer to play something like that, but I don't care..I will go and get a job to be able to afford the computer then get the dang game.

*Editted*
Oh yeah, and if it is 3D like I said..you can use the skills CLIMB/JUMP/SWIM, and you can use WINGS and not just hover over the ground well within the distance of a halfling with a dagger, and you could make use of the FLY spell..just don't go the route of Morrowind with that..because it just makes you run in the air, and really horribly looking I might add.

Actually..now that I think of it..the fly spell could look almost like using a jetpack in Giants: Citizen Kabuto..meaning when you fly foward, you lean foward to some degree based on how fast you go, and when you are going backwards or to the sides, you lean those ways based on how fast you move as well.

Just saying that it is DEFINATELY possible to show these things really well in a game, it just hasn't exactly been done to the extent yet.

Mcfraggie · Post by **Mcfraggie** » Thu Sep 09, 2004 11:32 am

I think the biggest problem will be to create an addictive gameplay like in BG 1&2, and btw 3D engines are very well capable of showing the game from the same perspective as an 2D, with maybe a little bit less detail in environment.

Opalescence · Post by **Opalescence** » Sat Sep 11, 2004 3:30 pm

Ok, when I think 3D vs 2D, I think mainly Myst/Riven/Myst3 vs URU. Check ANY of the Myst forums you'll see that at least 70% of the people will vote MRM3 over Uru. And, just to show that the developers themselves believe the same, Myst 4 will be 2D as well. Of course, there's a big difference between nodular slideshow pre-rendered and BG-esque 2D. Still, the comaparison is still valid I think. When you ask what can 3D bring to BG, I was thinking, what DID 3D bring to the Myst genre? Awkward controls, SIGNIFICANTLY inferior graphics unless you ramp up shadows and graphics quality to the absolute MAX (and on some computers, like mine, that's not possible), and a complete reworking of the way the puzzles worked; they thought because the player COULD run and jump, they just HAD to put in puzzles that require running and jumping. As far as I could see, there were absolutely NO benefits associated with the jump from Prerendered to full 3D for the Myst genre, and after that significant disappointment, I can't exactly have high hopes here either. Not to mention the fact that, let's face it, the more time they spend making the game look prettier, the less time they spend on the really important aspects of the game; you know stuff like gameplay, NPC interaction, storyline. Xandax was right, the bottom line drives them far more than anything else, so they're gonna think, "Let's build this game for adreneline-filled 12-year-olds who want awesome graphics and fight-scenes and couldn't care a twit for storyline, which is slow and boring anway!"

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Sat Sep 11, 2004 5:07 pm

Problem is - that what you mention is an evolution in the gaming industry.
More and more games have to cater to a larger portion of gamers, thus they have to even out the bumbs. For instance visible by the easy gameplay in some of the recent RPG-type games. (I remember being stuck in games like Fallout 1/2, Baldurs Gate, but funnily enough - not in SW:KotOR, NwN and similar)

However - many - if not all - of these things aren't related to the 3D vs. 2D per se.
Because some (most) developers/publishers seems to stop thinking about presenting a challenge to the gamers, instead of an 20-40hour easy campaign with trivial puzzles at best and at the same time making the game 3D, it dosen't mean that it is possible to make a connection that 3D offers nothing positive to a game.
3D brings much good to many other game genre, and I don't see why it should be different for the RPG genre. It is because when (many) people think 3D they often think of FPS games or similar, and then they forget that one can easily have isometric top down locked view in 3D as well.

When I think of some of the boring parts of the BG-series (or any IE game I've played) it has always been that it is a static game. Lack of animation/movement made the character static. Lack of differences between the characters made them all almost similar and deducted from the immens feel of the game. Similar with the background - it was impossible to interact with most of the game, because it was all painted instead of modelled.
That is why I would love to see a BG1/2 type game in 3D, because it opens up for so many possibility.....however - they should still focus on the gameplay and utilize 3D to that advantage. One is not mutal exclusive to the other.

Paranitis · Post by **Paranitis** » Sat Sep 11, 2004 7:14 pm

Oh..and I just remembered something that 3D will be able to definately add to BG compared to 2D.

DEATH FROM ABOVE!

Seriously though, you can be going rooftop to rooftop with your rogue or whoever and then jump down on top of opponents for a special attack.

asure · Post by **asure** » Sat Nov 27, 2004 11:16 pm

The BG3 will use NWN game engineer,won't it ?

I think ToEE's engineer was good. It will fit that it use in BG3

fable · Post by **fable** » Sat Nov 27, 2004 11:25 pm

Um, huh? BG3 has only been talked about. Bioware, who did NWN, isn't doing it, as far as I know. And I think you mean engine, rather than engineer. Remember, this is just a product in the early stages of conceptual development--if that.

Faerun · Post by **Faerun** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 6:22 pm

edlington_j wrote:Assuming the game happens and if it did go fully 3D what do you think it could bring to the series?

Nothing of note.

Faerun · Post by **Faerun** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 6:28 pm

Nightmare wrote:Imagination generally runs all the time (at least, mine does), if its MUD or a 3D game.

Many people are saying graphics don't matter...and hypocritically saying that 3D would ruin the game.

2d Infinity style view allows for the creation of a beautiful atmosphere and game feel while still allowing imagination to do it's thing.

Using your imagination in 3D games becomes more of a challenege, especially when you always have to keep thinking about toggling your freakin' camera angle.

Baldur's Gate series style graphics is the ultimate balance of creating aesthetically pleasing and believable environments while still leaving plenty to the imagination.

dakedoom · Post by **dakedoom** » Sat Aug 25, 2007 7:56 pm

asure wrote:The BG3 will use NWN game engineer,won't it ?

no.. no! NOOOO!.. never.. no NWN engine for Baldur's Gate. NEVER! back foul demons!

the reaction truly speaks for itself.. BG must not be ruined.. it's a work of art, not a custom made walk in the dungeons.

i can imagine a 3d designed world with elaborate and living details and an interactive surrounding.. but NO camera, nope.. rotating and zooming are evil in games like these

goddess_light · Post by **goddess_light** » Sat Mar 08, 2008 8:54 pm

I would like it to be 2D infinity engine. Why?

It's simple the graphics are freakin beautiful, you can't help but take a look around the screen. It's also pretty easy to figure out and easy to navigate once you have. If the game goes 3D it becomes incredibly hard to navigate 6 characters. Most 3D games and newer engines no matter how advanced the graphics lack grace and elegance. Baldurs gate and baldur's gate 2 have an artistic quality I rather enjoy. It gives me the feeling as if I'm entering a world of someone's own creation and even though I have control over various things and if I truly wanted to I could mod it, I never have complete control

Besides my comp is crapy and 3D games don't run particularly well on it to my misfortune.

Tristam Shandy · Post by **Tristam Shandy** » Wed Apr 02, 2008 7:19 am

Already 3D

It would be very hard for a sequel not to be in 3D ,as the existing Baldur's Gate games are 3D - they present an image on an isometric grid in which movement is possible on all 3 axis. Vertical movement is constantly going on; think about how many times you've climbed stairs, gone up a hill etc. While movement on the vertical axis is arguably underused in BG, and features like climbing and levitating could add something to the game, their use is not precluded by the use of an engine like the IE. Levitation could be so easily achieved from an isometric position.

Technically speaking, of course, all games (and all images percieved by the brain) are 2D images anyway (computer screens are flat after all), and are merely interpreted by the brain as a 3D image by visual cues: shadows, size of objects, relative distance and a myriad of other subtle clues that unite to create the illusion of a 3D world. What's being discussed here is not a dichotomy between 3 dimensional and 2 dimensional, it is merely a question of which viewpoint(s) it should be approached from. This might sound like an arbitrary distinction, but it's pretty central to the discussion that's being had here. What's at stake here isn't another dimension (and thus movement on another axis - climbing etc.), just where the 'camera' is, and its relation to the characters. The advantages of moving to what people call 3D are really very slim: there isn't much to be gained, certainly not an extra dimension.