D&D Movie/TV What will make more money DADHAT or BG3?

[Demetrios1453]

Yaj

Yeeeaaah, that sort of thing is going to keep thebgame a bit niche...

Actually, if you go to the BG3 subreddit, it's actually brought in a pretty large amount of interested newcomers. Weird as it may be, it generated a lot of buzz. People went from "What the..." to "Oh, it's a shape-shifting situation" to being interested in a game that's audacious enough to do this.

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

- Simon the sorcerer: Have you watched it? In the last BG3 trailer someone does it with a bear.

• Doric the druid: DON'T DARE TO HINT!!
• Deadpool, the mercenary with a mouth: Have you met Mommy Bear? Goldilocks has said poliamory isn't the same without her!

---

Is WotC going to earn more money with the BG3 merchandising? Profit percentage hasn't to be distributed with Paramount.

 

[Burnside]

Honestly, there isn't that much talk about BG3 going on outside of the D&D sphere. The bear scene got a talk and some people interested, but its not like, Hollow Knight 2 levels of hype or anything like that

Why devs consider Baldur’s Gate 3 anomaly, not new standard for RPG genre: “It’s Rockstar-level nonsense for scope” | Game World Observer

Steam Charts

 

[bedir than]

Profit percentage hasn't to be distributed with Paramount.

They are sharing with Larian though

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Honestly, there isn't that much talk about BG3 going on outside of the D&D sphere. The bear scene got a talk and some people interested, but its not like, Hollow Knight 2 levels of hype or anything like that

That was true a while ago, but it's definitely not true now. It's been at or very near the top of Steam's best-seller charts for some time now. It's currently topping the global best-seller chart (which is based on revenue, note).

PC Gamer is doing a special multi-cover edition because of it:

The bear thing didn't go very far, I suspect because honestly it's a bit a pedestrian these days (I suspect Larian were hoping for a reaction similar to FOX news' "BAN THIS FILTH"-type coverage of Mass Effect 1), but Xalavier Nelson's comments and those of other devs have caused a huge amount more discussion in the game-o-sphere in general.

The hype is certainly massively higher than Hollow Knight 2 or similar at this point.

Re: Nelson's comments there has unfortunately been a lot of dim-witted tribalism over them, which has helped them to become better click-fodder. But realistically, whilst it's annoying to contemplate, he's largely correct that the same factors don't apply to other companies. I think he's pissing in the wind to hope people don't judge devs for not reaching Larian's standards here, but I also think people will be more discerning than he expects, and will not expect full facial mocap from tiny studios or that every RPG is a 100-200 hour game or whatever. In fact, I think the latter may actually cause some backlash to BG3 in the longer-term (i.e. years away) as some people will try replaying it and really just choke on the sheer size of it. Most people don't even finish 30-hour games, too.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

They are sharing with Larian though

The sad thing is any significant profit-share with WotC, assuming there is one, makes sequels or even expansions for BG3 less likely.

BG3 has elevated Larian to "full AAA" status, with over 400 employees, and unless it's bad in shocking and unexpected ways (seems unlikely, at this point), they will be huge news in PC gaming and RPGs especially. Plus they're independent and not IPO'd. It's very likely they'll get some fairly bonkers acquisition offers (Hasbro WotC probably can't afford them, though).

If they want to stay independent and successful, their smartest move is probably like that of Bioware, to create an original fantasy IP, and rely on people buying it because "It's Larian!" rather than relying on people buying it because "It's D&D" or "It's Baldur's Gate". That's why Dragon Age was created. WotC didn't necessarily want a huge cut from D&D games, and weren't too bad re: interfering (unlike say, Games Workshop), but still, D&D was fundamentally their IP, which they could pull or licence to others (even with a contract, it's not going to be indefinite - you could make a successful game and WotC could say no to a sequel), and even if they didn't, and Bioware did an amazing job, they're both having to either pay a licence fee, or give away a cut, and are boosting an IP that isn't theirs.

I suspect they won't go back to DOS' setting because it's a rather dull and generic setting, even by fantasy setting standards (which are very low).

 

[Oofta]

The sad thing is any significant profit-share with WotC, assuming there is one, makes sequels or even expansions for BG3 less likely.

BG3 has elevated Larian to "full AAA" status, with over 400 employees, and unless it's bad in shocking and unexpected ways (seems unlikely, at this point), they will be huge news in PC gaming and RPGs especially. Plus they're independent and not IPO'd. It's very likely they'll get some fairly bonkers acquisition offers (Hasbro WotC probably can't afford them, though).

If they want to stay independent and successful, their smartest move is probably like that of Bioware, to create an original fantasy IP, and rely on people buying it because "It's Larian!" rather than relying on people buying it because "It's D&D" or "It's Baldur's Gate". That's why Dragon Age was created. WotC didn't necessarily want a huge cut from D&D games, and weren't too bad re: interfering (unlike say, Games Workshop), but still, D&D was fundamentally their IP, which they could pull or licence to others (even with a contract, it's not going to be indefinite - you could make a successful game and WotC could say no to a sequel), and even if they didn't, and Bioware did an amazing job, they're both having to either pay a licence fee, or give away a cut, and are boosting an IP that isn't theirs.

I suspect they won't go back to DOS' setting because it's a rather dull and generic setting, even by fantasy setting standards (which are very low).

Larian gained notice for it's Divine Divinity games which was it's own IP. According to interviews, and posts by the developers they wanted to continue on the tradition of Baldur's Gate II into a new era. It was pretty much always their goal to create a D&D game but they had to prove that they knew how to make games. From this article

The series' intellectual property (IP) had been sought after by multiple developers; according to Brian Fargo, a former Interplay developer and founder of inXile Entertainment, both he and Feargus Urquhart of Obsidian Entertainment had been seeking the IP rights for at least a decade.[3] Larian Studios had been interested in making a sequel in the Baldur's Gate series for some time, having first approached Wizards after their release of Divinity: Original Sin around 2014. At this time, Wizards felt the studio was still too new to the industry to be trusted with the Baldur's Gate license. Larian continued to develop Divinity: Original Sin II which would be released in September 2017. Pre-release materials related to the game had impressed Wizards, and the publisher contacted Larian asking if they still had interest in Baldur's Gate III. Larian accepted, and while working to wrap up the release stage of development for Divinity: Original Sin II, a small group gathered to develop the design document to present to Wizards with their ideas for the new Baldur's Gate.​

​

 

[jgsugden]

... sold 2 to 5 million copies of BG3 according to Steam Spy, BEFORE the Bear Sex. ...

In my experience, adding Bear Sex typically adds between 14 and 19.5% to revenue for 6 months, with a prolonged increase in revenue of 3 to 7 percent over a 3 year span. Errr ... I mean, Bear Sex! Weird!

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Steam Charts

Top selling and top played games across Steam

store.steampowered.com

BG3 is still rising.



An interesting take on the BG3 is an anamoly controversy. Why didn't the Witcher 3, Mass Effect, etc... get this effect when they came out?

Haven't watched the video, but both of those comparisons seem wrongheaded to me. BG3 is coming out more than two decades after Throne of Bhaal. Both ME3 and Witcher 3 came out just a few years after the previous games. Further, at least with ME3 (I haven't played any Witcher games), there was a steady progression away from the RPG-like structure of ME1 as the games progressed, an effort to make the games more "approachable" etc. But, at least in my experience, what that mostly did was flatten the game experience into being little more than a waist-high-wall shooter with some flashy bits. ME1 actually felt like you had to learn some things. By the time it got to ME3, it felt like all you had to "learn" was twitch reflexes.

BG3, on the other hand, is trying very hard to keep as much of the spirit of D&D 5e's rules as it can, only making concessions for quality of life stuff where there's a clear, tested benefit. Further, it spent a long time in Early Access, whereas (AFAIK) neither ME3 nor Witcher 3 spent any time in Early Access at all, and certainly didn't respond strongly to major customer feedback from that. I suspect, if they had, ME3 would not have had the extremely controversial ending it did. (I still remember the clip of some important figure for the ME franchise explicitly saying that Mass Effect would not end up being a "pick a color" type ending....only to end up being EXACTLY that, red/blue/green energy explosions.)

More or less, if BG3 is "an anomaly," it's only because people are trying to shoehorn it into a comparison that doesn't work in the first place. At least, that's my thesis without having watched the video.

 

[le Redoutable]

Steam Charts

Top selling and top played games across Steam

store.steampowered.com

BG3 is still rising.



An interesting take on the BG3 is an anamoly controversy. Why didn't the Witcher 3, Mass Effect, etc... get this effect when they came out?

is it me, or we can't see anything on the screen ? ( sorry boring, or simply jealous ?? )