It's no surprise to me that it's getting a lot more sales than they expected, and I'm glad to see devs get rewarded for making a quality product.
It's no surprise to me that it's getting a lot more sales than they expected, and I'm glad to see devs get rewarded for making a quality product.
Yes, but naming the game "Baldur's Gate 3" instead of something like "Divinity: Dungeons & Dragons" is, unfortunately, a successful cash-grab. Which is to be expected considering that AFAIK _none_ of the original developers or writers worked on it.
given that the whole dark alliance branch exists and essentially turned the game into something totally different it's not like the precedent for radical change hasn't already been set.
also phrasing 'cash grab' in association to any 'Wizards of the Coast' IP as if it were any kind of surprise seems to be missing their whole business tactic for the past 20+ years.
See: the new Neverwinter Nights branches and the cadre of expansion packs/add-ons/dlcs/campaigns/skins/whatever.
if anything BG3 exhibits less cash-grab behaviors than the entire rest of the portfolio of WotC at the moment.
But that was my point - they didn't dare to name it "Baldur's Gate _3_ Dark Alliance". It would rub people the wrong way much less if they named the new game "Baldur's Gate: Divinity" I assume.
> also phrasing 'cash grab' in association to any 'Wizards of the Coast' IP as if it were any kind of surprise seems to be missing their whole business tactic for the past 20+ years.
Cash grab from Larian. Obviously I don't expect WotC to have any ethics or integrity.
> if anything BG3 exhibits less cash-grab behaviors than the entire rest of the portfolio of WotC at the moment.
I kinda agree, but I never claimed that BG3 is somehow most blatant cash grab from the long list of WotC cash grabs over the years. I'm just disappointed that they have succeeded with it :)