European Commission has recently claimed that Microsoft's acquisition of Activision Blizzard, in fact, represents a positive development.
The armadillo returns.
I personally do remember Infogrames in the years prior to merger. They really did have a portfolio that stuck out and I enjoyed. I wonder what value they see in reviving it now though?
The good old days of Driver and Stuntman. Unfortunately both games are long gone.
Hopefully this gets Embracer group back on track
Yea! But thats what happens when you have 2,2 billion dollar in debt and the interest rise from 0,5% to 5% in a year
Huzaifah from eXputer: "With Larian Studios washing their hands of the IP, what is the ultimate fate of the legendary Baldur's Gate series?"
If anybody's gonna mention BioWare, then look at Archetype Entertainment, they're the new BioWare
or else
Obsidian is still a good choice but not independent anymore.
No, WoTC is pivoting to mobile. They can use Larian's work to justify DnD Go and everyone will accept it.
Correct answer. Most people don't realise that the companies that are still making good games using common sense and a customer focus are generally not American. They are from Poland, Belgium, Japan, or other countries that have not yet become completely corrupted by 'extreme capitalism'.
Before you down vote me into oblivion I am not anti-american. I just don't like greed and corruption which unfortunately seems to correlate with power.
I would guess the next Baldurs gate will probably be filled with GaaS.
This is simply not true, probably the most capitalistic company in the world is Ubisoft right now, actually claiming that we have to get used to not owning games and asking 130$ for the ultimate edition of star wars outlaws with paywalled day one exclusive DLC, and they are from France, which is a socialist country with all kind of public services for everything, so it's not something exclusive to America or directly related to highly capitalist countries.
Of course, communist countries like China don't have problems like this, since workers don't have rights to strike since 1982 and unions are affiliated to the national government, so you'll never hear of any labour rights issues on these non-capitalist countries, they simply can't make their voices heard on their working conditions, neither by strikes or independent unions, that's better for you i suppose.
Honestly, we're talking completely new engine and none of Larian's built-in stuff with regard to environments and the like that they had from their past divinity game. No one is going to have that just ready to go. So, they need to shop for a dev studio that has a past game that shows what they want.
Obsidian doesn't have that, maybe the closest being Dungeon Siege 3 or Pillars of Eternity, but those are very basic, not as open, very little environment related and altering capabilities. So, we're talking a step way back on what Larian delivered. Zero scene experience to line up with what was done in BG3. Okay conversation tree designs, but still needs more complexity.
inXile has Wasteland 3 as a base model engine, and I think that's better than Pillars of Eternity from Obsidian. But, still needs to be more open world, more environmental effects, and a much heavier rules set adaptation. But, not a bad overall engine as a base, but still a ton of work. Zero scene experience to line up with what was done in BG3. Needs a ton of work on that entirely.
Tactical Adventure did the Solasta game. Really good and more accurate as far as 5e rules than BG3. But, again, if the expectation is similar to what made BG3 a big hit, engine isn't designed for moving the camera, is a bit outdated in graphics, doesn't have in-game scene elements, and needs much better writers/voice actors.
Owlcat of pathfinder games is another choice, even though they've recently moved on to WH40k licensed games. Again, though, the engine is the biggest issue here to match up, but it's a much better option overall than Tactical Adventure. Another question is writers/story telling, as much of their overall story telling bits are very limited with a lot of random worldbuilding elements that are just +\- of some attributes.
TBH, no matter who takes over, it's just not going to be like BG3 much like how BG3 isn't at all like BG1/2. And BG3 was so successful because of how much Larian was able to put in with their engine and how focused they were on players having ridiculous control over the story being told. I just don't see the next BG being the same and depending on what it is, it might be good but I'm not as big of a reach as BG3. It's way more likely players are going to go into BG4 (or its spiritual successor if it moves away from Baldur's Gate and into Neverwinter or something like Plansescape) expecting much of what is in BG3 with more options, new and older characters, and the same level of control over what they're doing. If it doesn't have that, regardless of who makes it, it won't be as successful, IMHO.
Yes, I completely concur.
As good and talented as inXile and Obsidian are in their own specific way of making their particular games, none of them have Larian's attention to detail, dynamic worlds, and reactivity, so even if they end up making a new Baldur's Gate, it's going to be a significant step-down in terms of gameplay if not narrative.
I vehemently disagree imo I think this hinder gaming and no company should merge with Activision I rather see them go bankrupt like THQ then years later reforged themselves as something new like again THQ.
So a company does a bad job for generations and it's allow to buy the biggest publisher... Can't believe how stupid they can be. Let's promote incompetence by allowing this.
These regulatory agencies are focused on cloud, which I don't think is such a big deal because I'm not as optimistic about it. So I agree the cloud dominance argument is kinda weak.
The thing they're ignoring is the thing I'm most worried about:
"But we found that Microsoft would probably not shoot itself in the foot by stopping sales of Call of Duty games to the much larger PlayStation player base. "
I feel MS would be happy to do that if it helped their long-term goal. Losing money in the short term for long term dominance is their MO. Either take it off PS or negotiate such ridiculous terms that they'd be bending Sony over if they wanted to take it. That's the MS we know, no doubt about it.
Let´s go!
Let it be over!