It’s possible that some of the engine improvements could be easily back-ported to BG3. Or even just compiler improvements could be a little more oomph.
Edit:
> Our Proton version runs on the Steam Deck via the Proton compatibility layer, which requires extra CPU processing power. Running the game natively on the Steam Deck requires less CPU usage and memory consumption overall!
Workaround for a performance regression helps some but I suspect more has gone on.
From what they've said, they were actually hired to work on Baldur's Gate 4 and got partway through development but chose to stop because they didn't love having to stick with the D&D ruleset and preferred doing their own thing: https://www.pcgamer.com/games/baldurs-gate/larian-nearly-mad...
It's a shame, BG3 is one of my all time favourite games. But I really have to respect a company that can make a decision like this, leaving a super successful title behind as they feel it's not a good fit for the team.
They tightened the purse strings regardless of bg3.
WOTC were completely dysfunctional over the last few years and it nearly destroyed d&d.
- They tried to build their own bg3, except it was a VTT that they could fill with microtransactions, but they didn't know what VTTs needed to actually be used. They just thought: "Build something that we can nickle and dime all the users of"
- The new "backwards-compatible" edition that de jure isn't a new edition, but with the power creep is a de facto new edition.
- The OGL fiasco that shattered the community content creators who decided to attempt to make their own games "with blackjack and hookers". (e.g. daggerheart, dc20, draw steel, tales of the valiant, dragonbane, shadowdark, ) and bring their communities along to try the new games (including older offshoots like pathfinder 1e/2e, lancer, 13th age, etc...)
Imagine how much money they've had to pay their major community members (critical role, dimension 20, etc...) just to keep them playing the d&d branded games.
I would really love them to do a Fallout game. The original two games had a lot of properties to them that 3 and subsequent games just ignored or straight up went against, including NV. To me, as a fan who grew up with the first two, it's like a different game series.
They are currently building their capacity to do multiple games in parallel.
I suspect not wanting to do BG4 is at the end of the day a negotiation tactic. There’s an amount of money and consideration that will make them put it back in the queue. But it’s likely at least five years out before they start on such a thing.
They’ll want to avoid the Torchlight trap, where the team got sick of doing Diablo clones and the company kind of cratered afterward.
The path to BG3 existing involved people at WotC playing D:OS 2 and then convincing their bosses that they should partner with Larian. Everyone involved in that on the WotC/Hasbro side subsequently left the company while BG3 was in production, and their replacements are much less favored towards Larian.
BG4 will almost certainly happen, but by some other studio.
I suspect all the awards and giant piles of money may change that opinion back.
You can classify a vendor as a pain in your ass but if they get results, it’s time to look in the mirror and think about why you kept telling them to go right when they went left, and everybody loves the results.
Though it’s also true that a lot of key people have now left WotC and we are slowly working toward a situation where a Darrington Press game is more likely than a WotC game.
It’s possible that some of the engine improvements could be easily back-ported to BG3. Or even just compiler improvements could be a little more oomph.
Edit:
> Our Proton version runs on the Steam Deck via the Proton compatibility layer, which requires extra CPU processing power. Running the game natively on the Steam Deck requires less CPU usage and memory consumption overall!
Workaround for a performance regression helps some but I suspect more has gone on.