The future is tablets and touch screens. I like the idea of BG being played by future generations so they can see the difference between good games and pieces of shit EA/Bioware make nowadays. Around here though it feels like everyone wants the kids off their lawn.

I think it's fair to say that merging the originals and the enhanced versions into a "definitive edition" is a lame anti-consumer move, regardless of what you think about the Enhanced Editions of BG 1/2 and Icewind Dale. I understand the rationale (Having two different versions of these three games is probably confusing, they want to sell copies of the Enhanced Edition because that's the one that links up with Siege of Dragonspear, etc etc) but I can't support the principle, even for as much as I also think most of the people who want to play the un-enhanced versions of those games have already bought them in the 5+ years they've been available on GOG.

Man, I think no one here has any objections about the EEs being sold on tablets. People should be free to purchase them, specially when theres no classic version available for tablets. Have fun with them!

And have fun with them on PCs too! Our only beef is regarding the merging when it comes to the sales of the pc version. The 2 versions shared space being sold individually for years. Good for consumers and even good for gog (the 2 classic games were always among the top 10 sales). Only beamdog benefits from this new policy.

Just wanted to highlight that fact.

"I hate to be the one who tell you this but the review page for the classic Baldur's Gate was likely populated by a lot of reviews of people playing it through Tutu, which is a massive alteration of the game itself. The review page for Baldur's Gate never was for one product any more than it is now. You're still free to use the store page to review (and recommend) any version."


Actually, based on what I remember, most of the people describing their memories of playing the games in the late 90s and the beginning of the 2000s.


Do some players today play the classic games with the aid of mods? Yes, they do. So what? This is encouraged by the gog page itself. In many games they have sections in their respective pages with list of recommended and even required mods in order to play the games in todays machines.

Even the people behind the EEs were after mod creators in order to hire them. They themselves embrace the concept of mods and welcome people to offer them for their version.

Old games on new machines with the aid of mods is no shameful deed, nor a close-guarded secret that you happened to uncover, It´s a very known fact of life among pc players. Are you some sort of console-only player who just recently stumbled with pc gaming?

By the way, a lot of people whopurchased the new versions and the expansion also used mods (I´m one of them). This fact can be verified by the big number of reviewers complaining that the new revision and the expansion disrupted the compatibility with mods.


Should the people who write reviews for the new versions (either writing good things or bad things) be ignored because of the use of mods that spoil the experience?

So, what exactly is your point?

"And I actually think you're being counterproductive with downrating the EE"

There´s nothing counterproductive if their insatisfaction with the product is sincere. If they think rpgs are a place to have fun and not a political battleground. Or if they deslike the changes done to the characters. Or to the mechanics. Or the quality of the writing. Or any other aspect. It´s their right, wheter you like it or not.

"for new fans it's actually the best introduction to the series."

I totally agree with you here. It´s more friendly toward new players. And the story mode is a great addition.

And yet, while being able to find virtue in the new version (as well as faults). I still see no reason why we can´t have the classic games being sold as separate products. I mean, it was working fine till just a few days ago. Why not keep doing it? Only beamdog stands to profit from this. Not good for consumers, and I have serious doubts if it´s even lucrative for gog.

"Old fans might prefer the authentic experience, but if you try to tell new fans to jump on to that they might just go "fuck this archaic shit" over playing one of the best cRPGs of all time."

I agree, In most cases, that would be the likely reaction. But why should them - as well as everyone else-, veterans and new players, simply be deprived of CHOICE? A choice that was actually available for years?

The only significant change brought by this recent measure is that the old games increased price.


Let´s say I was someone who already owned the new edition on tablet. Or steam. What if I wanted to purchase on gog the classic versions? Or if I was someone who was away from gaming for a long time.

"Baldur's Gate is my favorite series of all time, I want as many people as possible to enjoy it even though I know they won't like it exactly as I did."

And who exactly is attempting to sabotage new people from purchasing the new games? They may actually have to pay more now, since there now new extras, beamdog could justify an increase in price soon. it may become harder for them, and it´s definetly harder for the classic players who just want the originals.

Why should they be forced to digest a classic version that -as you were saying - may be too unpalatable, archaic, unrefined and hard for them? And why should classic players only interested in their old version have to pay so much more for a new version they have no interest in?

" And for starting the reply with "besides the pricing" you do go on to talk a lot about pricing concerns and again: demand fair prices. You don't need to split the package up for that."

For a bundle, the price is fair. It´s just unfair when one is only interested in the bonus. It´s also the oportunity for some people to offer their own political statement to beamdog with their wallets by having nothing to do with their own political crusade in order to insert their own sjw fecal matter into gaming. Or simply the lame fanfiction-like writing.

"As for the "don't want to pay Beamdog over political agenda". Ok I forgot that, that's another reason. Not one I sympathize with though."

Too bad. For you. But for many here, it´s a legitimate freedom, and one that should be respected.

Besides, beamdog fired the first shot. By accusing the original games of being sexist, by self-proclaiming our professors who will educate us, the public, on social matters. They brought their bankrupt and perverse social agenda into the market, and the consumers can bring theirs as well with their reviews and their wallets.

You do enjoy when your legitimate freedoms are respected, don´t you? Then please, do respect it when it comes to other people´s.

This is a ridiculous statement.

Consumers benefit from the changes as well. People purchasing Enhanced Edition can now enjoy the classics without paying for more.

Having one neat bundle is better for people as it is less confusing compared to having two different versions of the same game.

For those who are arguing restricting options is always anti-consumer move, there is such thing as decision fatigue. There is a reason why 9 different editions for Watch Dogs wasn't a welcome sight despite providing more 'options.'

There´s a difference between having too many options and no options.

The distinction between the classic versions and the new ones was clear as daylight. And even one ignorant customer could be educated in a matter of minutes just by reading the description from each product.

Yes, there may be situations when too many options become confusing. But this is hardly the case. It´s simply a case of options being taken away, beamdog deciding and thinking for all customers, and- I will say it again - only beamdog stands to profit from this. BG 1 and 2 were always big sellers. And by the way, for those who think that the people who were interested in the classics already own them, look again. Planescape torment, neverwinter nights 1 and 2 and the 2 classic icewind dale games are, to this day, great sellers in the rpg section of gog. Beamdog just wants that from now on every sale become a sale of their version.

If you cant see this, then you really deserve the "quality" writing of Amber Scott.

Wrong. I'm sure Wizard of the Coast gets a cut of the sales too since they own D&D. Beamdog couldn't do anything without their approval. By bundling them for twice the price of the originals, they get a larger check for whatever their percentage cut is. If you followed the progression of "Siege of Dragonspear" at all, you would know that WotC had to approve everything for that release and any other release. You want to blame someone, then blame WotC which owns everything.

No it isn't. You are looking at it from your perspective only. I have already commented about this, but I had absolutely no clue which version was better for me.

Large number of conflicting statements about which version is better is all over the internet.

I have to say that I regret purchasing complete edition last year as the reviews I read and the videos I watched didn't do a great job at portraying how clunky and user unfriendly the UI is, especially for the new player. Not to mention, large number of what I would consider design oversight (Scrolls case which takes only 20? What were the original devs thinking?)

I don't know why you are talking about Dragonspear as that has nothing to do with our current topics, not to mention, I can't comment on it as I only purchased BGEE and BG2EE.

Your comment seems to indicate you are arguing not because the option was taken away from the players, but just to shit on Beamdog.

You are also wrong about how Beamdog decided what is best for them. In most cases, the monetization, sales price, etc. are handled by the publisher NOT the developers. It is most likely that Wizards didn't want new players to be confused on which one to purchase and bundled up the two prodcuts.

Then don't.
I never made a statement. If you're going to reply to somebody, reply to the person you're addressing.

Wow!

Do I really need to explain so you can understand or are you just playing fool in order to make me waste my time?

Did you really understand that I was trying to say that beamdogs gets to collect all the money without paying fees nor sharing profits?

Please, tell me you´re trolling and that you´re not really so incredibly mentally impaired. I know that the SJW crowd is far from being mensa material, but this is getting ridiculous.

Of course that WOTC profits from the sales. What I wanted to say that the only ones who would truly benefit from the new policy is beamdog.

Gog and wotc probably made more money from the classic versions, since both titles were always among the top 10 rpgs (right after torment). Large sales driven by their low cost and highly-rated status.

Now, with lower scores, less marketing potential (since they´re no longer among the top sellers), and higher cost, it´s likely they will generate less profit for gog, interplay, bioware, wotc and whoever more that may have to collect a share.

The only ones who stand to profit from this new system are the people at beamdog, since every sale now is of their product from now on.

This may have been a demand from them, since they could argue that they had to pay costly fees in order to use trademarked materials, so they´re entitled to exclusive deals when it comes to being the only ones to currently offer producs with the baldur´s gate name, and that the classic version (being sold for much less) was doing a predatory competition against their own product. Good for them, that´s for sure, but no really consumer-friendly since it deprives everyone of options, increases the prices for the classic versions and probably makes gog profit less than before.

But I guess things could be far worse. Sure they could. They could have demanded that the original games stopped being sold till the end of their contract. It would generate A LOT of backlash against them, so I guess that offering the classics as bonus was the best deal they could reach while attempting to secure their product and reinforce their sales.

Is it clear to you now or do we need to hire a designer?

If it is, I´m glad I was able to help your reasoning. If not... Well, do consider seeking professional help. Nothing more for me to say. Sorry.

My point was that you can still review the enhanced and classic version separately in reviews, just as people have been reviewing the Tutu version in the classic version reviews.

That is, the fear of conflating Enhanced Edition reviews with all those equally different builds people are reviewing already is irrational.

And I don't believe that most reviews where from peoples memories of 15 years ago. I don't believe Baldur's Gate lacks the appeal to bring in new players and I don't believe old players haven't replayed it recently. For a fan, you have a shocking lack of faith in the quality of the game.

Which is my point. I prioritize bringing more people into great gaming like Baldur's Gate over political pettiness.

The result of downrating the EE is confusing players, potentially offering a worse first time experience for people who buy the classics and ultimately the end result will be less people who will appreciate a fantastic game.
Again, pricing concerns are just that. Demand fair pricing. Demand Baldur's Gate old price for the bundle. This does not necessitate unbundling it.
I fail to see what freedom you're being deprived of here.

"No it isn't. You are looking at it from your perspective only."

No, son. I´m looking from a rational, impartial perspective.

Are you capable of reading?

I think so. At least, I want to believe it.

Assuming you can, it´s easy for you to read that the classic versions are the unadultered versions released for windows 95 and 98 long ago, and that mods are stronglly recommended in order to enjoy them. As for the list of changes done to the EE, frankly, their respective pages makes an excellent way of pointing them out.

"I have already commented about this, but I had absolutely no clue which version was better for me. "

That´s for you to determine. Not for other people to point it out. After all, we don´t really know you. We don´t know your needs, expectations, likes or dislikes.

Forgive my rudeness, but if you think that 2 versions is way too confusing and too much options for you, I guess you´re simply mentally lazy. A customer that would rather have some company do all the work for you instead of being educated about what you´re going to purchase.

I don´t even know how you could become a pc gamer. Since you´re so opposed to options, so lazy in trying to get informed, so afraid of choices... Why don´t you play on devices that come totally ready and offer no chance of upgrades, like consoles? The old system was fine for all concerned (aside from beamdog). Your problem is that you´re a stranger on a strange land. Maybe even consoles may be too much of a pain for you, since you´re going to any someone´s help in order to point out to you if it would be better for you to go with a PS4 or the X1.

I´m willing to bet that you agonize over the options screens in videogames.

What version is cheaper? The classic. factual information.

What version is more stable? Both have bugs. When released, the new version was terrible in this regard, but was being improved.

The easiest for new players? the new one.

What version has more material? The new one.

What version has the largest number of mods? Classic.

What version will run best without mods? The new one.

And so on...

Ask objective questions and you shall receive factual informations. Just do not expect the same to happen if you touch in subjective areas such as asking which game is more fun to play, more beautiful, more consistent, better regulated and so on.

Of course that asking which one is better for you is a tough situation. That´s for you and you alone to decide. The best other people can do is to provide information that will help you determine that for yourself. Our options were never really problematic. Your mental lazyness, on the other hand, is.

"Large number of conflicting statements about which version is better is all over the internet. "

Of course. Because this is determined by personal taste. Each person is different. Each one has different expectations, turn ons and turn offs. Any person who is not mentally handicapped with acess to the pages of each product and even the reviews should be determine to separete subjective info from facts and determine by himself (or herself) what would be the best choice.

"I have to say that I regret purchasing complete edition last year as the reviews I read and the videos I watched didn't do a great job at portraying how clunky and user unfriendly the UI is, especially for the new player."

Really? So you never read about how tough and unforgiving the old-school rpgs were? And how hard in particular this game is, with notions that are not intuitive? It´s obvious to me that you did not do your homework.

"I don't know why you are talking about Dragonspear as that has nothing to do with our current topics, not to mention, I can't comment on it as I only purchased BGEE and BG2EE. "

Yeah, but having purchased it or not should not prevent you from having the mental awareness in order to realize that another reason for beamdog to push the end of the classic version being sold as a separate product is to help promote their new expansion. After all, each new buyer becomes a potential buyer of it.

"Your comment seems to indicate you are arguing not because the option was taken away from the players, but just to shit on Beamdog."

Actually, a lot of what beamdog does is ok on my book. They have ups and downs with me. Their products do have merits and demerits. I believe that all of my criticism was factual and well explained.

I believe that my criticism of their products and their practices was entirelly factual and unbiased. You´re the one who seems to be way too emotional, incapable of reasoning and even thinking for yourself.

Now the only thing missing is for you to accuse me of hating women and insinuate that I want to murder homossexuals.


"You are also wrong about how Beamdog decided what is best for them. In most cases, the monetization, sales price, etc. are handled by the publisher NOT the developers. It is most likely that Wizards didn't want new players to be confused on which one to purchase and bundled up the two prodcuts. "

I suggest you read the message I just posted prior to this one directed at another individual who seems to be as blind as you are. If it´s not too much requirement of your mental faculties, of course.

Beamdog and/or WOTC whoever you all are blaming put in the effort and investment to make these games relevant and profitable. Making money is what companies do. Not everyone can complain on the internet all day; some have to contribute to the economy.

And when people don't complain, whether with words or their wallet, companies get sloppy and run roughshod over their customers. It's what they do.