Bear in mind that (to my knowledge) TSR/Wizards never actually made any games themselves - developers came to them to license their IP for games they wanted to make. Paizo isn't in the videogame business (nor should they want to be, believe me) but there are a lot of companies that are - if Black Isle was still around I'd say you should petition them! :)
M
edit: Don't follow the business that much anymore so had to check - the kids you want to hit up are at Obsidian Entertainment. Guess that's where the former Black Isle devs went when Interplay shuttered it.
Chief Technical Officer
|
We're definitely not going to be branching out into those areas ourselves. We are open to the possibility of licensing our setting and storylines to an established, reputable developer for a projetc like that, though... but I don't think we're quite to the point where the folks who could do it right are taking note of us yet.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
Oh I don't think I'd say that. You never know who is behind some of these nondescript Paizo.com accounts...... but I don't think we're quite to the point where the folks who could do it right are taking note of us yet.
Well, if you've taken notice, contact Paizo and get cranking on a Pathfinder CRPG (preferably turn based, but I could live with a good pausible one a la Baldur's Gate through Dragon Age).
|
|
Well I would say Bioware are the industry leader when it comes to the natural evolution of the Baldur's Gate type games.
Mind you they may be busy with Mass Effect, Dragon Age and Star Wars: The Old Republic.
Bioware has specifically stated they're not going to do licensed IP games anymore - they had some sour taste after Neverwinter Nights, it seems - and they like the freedom of working with their own IP, which shows in Dragon Age.
Honestly best bet would probably be Obsidian. Bethesda would be awesome, but unlikely.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Oh I don't think I'd say that. You never know who is behind some of these nondescript Paizo.com accounts...... but I don't think we're quite to the point where the folks who could do it right are taking note of us yet.
Oh, some of the right folks know who we are—just not in a "let's spend tons of money on a big project" kind of way. Yet.
Why make a bad PC game out of a great tabletop one? The experience is never going to be the same. I could cope with Baldur's Gate but preferred Icewind Dale and never got inmto Neverwinter Nights - but by then I'd discovered MMORPGs. D&D Online was my first but it wasn't the best. Now if we could get a Pathfinder MMORPG that ran like Lord of the Rings Online or World of Warcrat...
|
I'd discovered MMORPGs. D&D Online was my first but it wasn't the best. Now if we could get a Pathfinder MMORPG that ran like Lord of the Rings Online or World of Warcrat...
I would love a Pathfinder mmo! Please no click, point, watch combat though a la wow, lotro. DDO might not be the best but Turbine made the best combat system! Please no turn based video games anymore....please
|
I'd discovered MMORPGs. D&D Online was my first but it wasn't the best. Now if we could get a Pathfinder MMORPG that ran like Lord of the Rings Online or World of Warcrat...I would love a Pathfinder mmo! Please no click, point, watch combat though a la wow, lotro. DDO might not be the best but Turbine made the best combat system! Please no turn based video games anymore....please
Yeah, whatever DDO may or may not have gotten wrong, the combat system was a definite 'got it right'.
Honestly, I can't see it. Implementing Pathfinder is going to run into the same issues as implementing D&D did. DDO is an excellent example on how it doesn't work all that well, and even NWN highlighted many issues. Any of you compared the NWN2 Mask of the Betrayer campaign first as a fighter, then as a wizard?
The rules simply aren't made for a CRPG.
Yet there have been many successful CRPGs based on the D&D system. Sure, they had some issues in their implementation, but the Baldur's Gate and Neverwinter Nights series are held up as an example of some of the best western RPGs around, despite that fact.
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
Yet there have been many successful CRPGs based on the D&D system. Sure, they had some issues in their implementation, but the Baldur's Gate and Neverwinter Nights series are held up as an example of some of the best western RPGs around, despite that fact.Honestly, I can't see it. Implementing Pathfinder is going to run into the same issues as implementing D&D did. DDO is an excellent example on how it doesn't work all that well, and even NWN highlighted many issues. Any of you compared the NWN2 Mask of the Betrayer campaign first as a fighter, then as a wizard?
The rules simply aren't made for a CRPG.
Best recent examples, yes, but I still think the best are the old SSI Gold Box games.
While it would be nice to have a computer game version of PF, don't get your hopes up. D&D 3.5 (and therefore PF) is really, really badly suited to a computer implementation. Not only because of the scope of the rules, the inherent balance problems and the many gray areas left to DM discretion, but also because a vancian magic system is bad thing for a computer game. Either you have 'fake' rests like in NWN2, which are stupid and destroy immersion, or you have to go back to the tavern every few minutes, which is stupid and annoying and destroys immersion.
Also, I think for a PF game to have at least a shot at the indie market, it would have to be on the level of ToEE (Temple of Elemental Evil, the best implementation of 3.5 rules on computers, ever) where art and programming is concerned. This however implies costs of at least a few millions...and while an open-source implementation might be a solution, most OS game projects fail to attract UI designers and artists good enough to make the game accessible to non-developers. And in the case of 3.5/PF, there's the additional problem that many cool options could not be in the game because of licensing restrictions (open vs. closed content).
And finally there's the question if a game that uses a turn-based combat system would sell at all in this day. Most people who play computer games are used to real-time fights, and turn-based combat does make a big difference in the game flow. I love ToEE, and still play it to this day, but even with all the knowledge about 3.5 it does get annoying sometimes...
Bethesda Softworks
Oh, hell no. I don't want to download multiple gigs of mods to make the game enjoyable and mostly bug-free (since they just love to stop patching games very quickly--it's a necessity in Morrowind (and probably Oblivion) to get addons just to fix dozens of quest lines).
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
While it would be nice to have a computer game version of PF, don't get your hopes up. D&D 3.5 (and therefore PF) is really, really badly suited to a computer implementation. Not only because of the scope of the rules, the inherent balance problems and the many gray areas left to DM discretion, but also because a vancian magic system is bad thing for a computer game. Either you have 'fake' rests like in NWN2, which are stupid and destroy immersion, or you have to go back to the tavern every few minutes, which is stupid and annoying and destroys immersion.
Also, I think for a PF game to have at least a shot at the indie market, it would have to be on the level of ToEE (Temple of Elemental Evil, the best implementation of 3.5 rules on computers, ever) where art and programming is concerned. This however implies costs of at least a few millions...and while an open-source implementation might be a solution, most OS game projects fail to attract UI designers and artists good enough to make the game accessible to non-developers. And in the case of 3.5/PF, there's the additional problem that many cool options could not be in the game because of licensing restrictions (open vs. closed content).
And finally there's the question if a game that uses a turn-based combat system would sell at all in this day. Most people who play computer games are used to real-time fights, and turn-based combat does make a big difference in the game flow. I love ToEE, and still play it to this day, but even with all the knowledge about 3.5 it does get annoying sometimes...
Overall, I agree 100%. However, as for turn based success - I point to the Civilization series of games. Civ V is scheduled to come out this fall, and there's no reason to think it won't be a huge seller, just like the rest of the series.
Also, as to cost, you could implement the rules with different price points - an example of 3.5 rules implemented pretty well is the indy game, Knights of the Chalice.
Agree with you about the old SSI Gold Box Games. Sometimes wish I could go back and play those again but alas technology has advanced too far =)
Never heard of DOSBox Emulator ? It is an open source DOS emulator made to run old games on modern computers.
If you can find your old floppies/CD roms (there was a PC compilation on CD-rom with all the old Gold Box videogames years ago named 'Advanced Dungeons and Dragons: Collector's Edition'), you can always try to install them on the 'emulated PC' and give it a try...Back on topic, I would LOVE to see a new videogame based on the Pathfinder rules in the future. Real-time, turn-based, even BEAT'EM UP... I don't care, provided it would be fun and well-made.
For example, I LOVED the old Capcom beat'em up 'Tower of Doom' and 'Shadow over Mystara', and they were well-made D&D games although they were supposed to be only 'Final Fight' clones... they even succeeded in emulating the Vancian magic system ! (the Elf, Cleric and Magic User were all spontaneous casters in the game, but hey, it was a beat'em up with Fireball, Cloudkill and Conjure Elemental !!! And the Fighter could 'Shoryuken' with his Sword OR EVEN USE TWO-WEAPON FIGHTING !). On the other side, 'Pool of Radiance - Ruins of Myth Drannor' was a nightmare for me - too slow, too buggy, monsters crawling from every inch of the map, looooooooooong and boring fights, too many magic items from the beginning (man, a +1 Dagger with 10 Cone of Colds like a wand!?!?! Wands of Magic Missiles every other Chest !?!)... I hated that game (never tried to finish it).
Just to say, it's not fundamental for me that such a game would work exactly the same as the written rules, provided it would give the same feelings as the PnP game itself.
Just my 2c.
And finally there's the question if a game that uses a turn-based combat system would sell at all in this day. Most people who play computer games are used to real-time fights, and turn-based combat does make a big difference in the game flow. I love ToEE, and still play it to this day, but even with all the knowledge about 3.5 it does get annoying sometimes...
I would love a turn based pathfinder game. I still play fallout 2, and consider it one of my favorite rpgs. It did a turn based dnd style game perfectly
I also play Heros of Might and Magic and Civilization, both turn based. When i first got neverwinter nights I was disapointed that it wasnt turn based, becuase that meant they had to butcher the combat system.
(also, for those people saying DDO has a better combat system that WOW, the only difference is in ddo you have to keep clicking for your basic attack. otherwise they are basicly identical)
I would love a turn based pathfinder game. I still play fallout 2, and consider it one of my favorite rpgs. It did a turn based dnd style game perfectly
Yeah, FO2 is great. It does a turn based GURPS style game perfectly ;)
But it would be an extreme niche product today, and with the higher expectations in art and usability today...
And the combat system in Fallout is much less messy than anything derived from 3.5.
I can only recommend ToEE, Temple of Elemental Evil, it is the best D&D 3.5 rules implementation ever developed, and with 7 years of fan patch development, it's actually reasonably bugfree by now ;)
I also play Heros of Might and Magic and Civilization, both turn based. When i first got neverwinter nights I was disapointed that it wasnt turn based, becuase that meant they had to butcher the combat system.(also, for those people saying DDO has a better combat system that WOW, the only difference is in ddo you have to keep clicking for your basic attack. otherwise they are basicly identical)
But those are not RPGs. A single fight in Civ takes a few seconds, whereas a single fight in a faithful PF adaptation will take many minutes...
DDO is a weird beast, just because it takes all the things we know from D&D and twists and shapes them into some weird monstrosity. The best computer-only combat system I know was implemented in Guild Wars. It's easy to learn, but very deep, and allows for many great tactics. All other MMORPGs combat systems seem bland and uninteresting in comparison.
|
|
(also, for those people saying DDO has a better combat system that WOW, the only difference is in ddo you have to keep clicking for your basic attack. otherwise they are basicly identical)
When I tried the wow trial I quit because I didn't like the combat. I could not block, tumble, or dodge. I can do all that in DDO. I dont think they are identical whatsoever. /shrug To each their own
|
|
DDO is a weird beast, just because it takes all the things we know from D&D and twists and shapes them into some weird monstrosity. The best computer-only combat system I know was implemented in Guild Wars. It's easy to learn, but very deep, and allows for many great tactics. All other MMORPGs combat systems seem bland and uninteresting in comparison.
"Weird monstrosity?" Interesting way of putting it. I know many purists were turned off by the adjustments Turbine made. It only got worse as the level cap increased as well. I think overall it was a huge task that they did a good job overall on.
Of course this brings everything back to "turn based or real time?" I would rather a CRPG be based real time with as little adjustment as necessary to work. I left turn based back with final fantasy. I would however love a virtual tabletop.
When i first got neverwinter nights I was disapointed that it wasnt turn based, becuase that meant they had to butcher the combat system.
Neverwinter *is* turned based... you just have to pause the game between each turn.
+1 to Gold Box/Pools of Darkness.
When i first got neverwinter nights I was disapointed that it wasnt turn based, becuase that meant they had to butcher the combat system.Neverwinter *is* turned based... you just have to pause the game between each turn.
+1 to Gold Box/Pools of Darkness.
Pools of Darkness was HUGE :D !!! I loved Secret of Silver Blades, too (although it was only indoor dungeon crawling).
Of the Dragonlance Gold Box games, Champions of Krynn was good and Death Knights of Krynn was awesome (first Gold Box game I've ever played, on the glorious Commodore 64 !).
Dark Queen of Krynn, on the other side, was too much railroaded for me (and difficult as hell... all casters were boosted to the core, and there were hordes of Draconians who were able to kill you simply DYING). There were only 5 'major' dungeons, including the final one (and a few smaller areas, towns excluded), and Hawkbluff was a REAL pain...
The Savage Frontier games were not bad, but Secret of Silver Blades, Pools of Darkness and Death Knights of Krynn... boys, there were great!
|
|
I really liked Icewind Dale and NWN. I would love to see a Pathfinder game similar to NWN. NWN was superb for all the mod's that came out for it and I had some of the best roleplaying experiences on RP servers. Seeing the Pathfinder
Bioware has specifically stated they're not going to do licensed IP games anymore - they had some sour taste after Neverwinter Nights, it seems - and they like the freedom of working with their own IP, which shows in Dragon Age.
Honestly best bet would probably be Obsidian. Bethesda would be awesome, but unlikely.
This explains why they are doing the Star Wars MMO. But yes they do have the preference to work on their own IP. Still I would love to see A new 'NWN' with Pathfinder Ruleset being used.
For the record, I really enjoyed Baldur's Gate (2) and Neverwinter Nights (2). Didn't like Icewind Dale 2 so much, and never got to play Icewind Dale or Planescape: Torment.
You really should have a look at 'Planescape:Torment'. And 'Temple of Elemental Evil' is the by-far best implementation of 3.5 rules.
|
|
Don't bother games are expensive and time consuming to make. This can only be a damned attempt, don't enter the darklands lightly.
Why? The Darklands was an excellent game well ahead of its time
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darklands_%28video_game%29Sorry couldn't help myself it came to mind when you said "darklands"