Anomen too. :)

I understand too why some people would want the game as it was originally, I think the best thing to do would be to make the new content optional. However, I did enjoy having Neera and Rasaad in my party in BG1 and I didn't find Neera's voice irritating.

I didn't add Neera to the party in SoD because by the time she appears I already had a full party I was happy with, same thing happened with Rasaad. In SoD I enjoyed Corwin a lot (the voice acting not so much), and I wish she was in BG2.

I picked Neera again in BG2 to do her quest and dropped her to get Imoen (didn't have enough room for both). I picked Rasaad in BG2 and will keep him when I reach TOB (always wanted to try a Monk, but I never wanted my main character to be one, so it's something I think was missing in the old game).

I didn't try the evil characters as they don't fit in my party. I rescued Hexxat, though, and dropped her later, seemed interesting (really enjoyed her introduction) but not someone I wanted in my party.

Overall, I find the new characters alright, nowhere near as good as most of the old ones, I like them more than some, though. Writing is not as good as the old companions (even the ones I don't like, like Anomen), Neera feels a little out of place at times, but it wasn't as bad as to make me want to drop the characters. I enjoyed their quests, both in Bg1 and Bg2, I really liked the new areas.

I wasn't trying to convince you, though, if you enjoy the old game more then good for you. :)
I posted the link because Stig79 said a friend of his asked him if there was a way to uninstall the new companions and he thought it was not possible.

I have to say though, I enjoy the EE for way many more things than just what the widescreen mod has to offer.

https://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?topic=349130.0

This guy nails it about Siege of Dragonspear and why it was just extremely poorly written.

Also a fun bit about where the writer got the name for her token trans character.

That "guy" is a woman.

My bad. And yes. The irony is not lost on me.

Fair enough :-)

I simply wanted to point out that if you care about experiencing the game as it was originally meant you need to mod EEs. And then the argument that EEs are more convenient, which is mentioned many times when people discuss EE, is not valid any more.

True, if you're going to fix or remove the EE changes with mods, you may end with an installation process equally cumbersome as modding the original game. And if you play with a bunch of mods anyways, as many fans do, I don't think saving a few minutes during installation is a big deal. Having said that, I'm happy I don't have to bother with some mods anymore, it's not the reason I like the EE, but it's still nice. :)

And if you really want to experience the first game as it was originally meant, sadly it's not possible with the EE (unless there's a mod I'm not aware of), which is closer to playing BG1 with TUTU or BGT.

I've played both original and EE, I'm not seeing the major differences in gameplay. Item stack sizes are different, there are a few more items and now you can have something in your offhand without it disallowing you from keeping two handed weapons in your quickslots. Oh, plus shapeshifter claws can't be dispelled anymore. And the permanent buffs at the end of BG2 are now permanent stat increases. Other than that I've had a pretty similar experience. I've never played SoD though and so far only included the new NPC's in parties that would be less than 6 without them (like an all evil party).

I will agree though that the writing is not on par with the original series, but since they are optional... and yeah, they initiate dialogue, but it's mere seconds of your life to click through it.

There are major differences in gameplay, in a similar way that TuTu and BGT changes BG1 into a completely different game. That's why I recommend new players to go with the original, without mods (widescreen being the exception if necessary, of course) in order to witness the game as it was released. Later iterations with mods, or EEs I would advice to try only after that.

In a similar way I would say that, if you want to play StarCraft, you should play the original first, even if you are only interested in the campaign, instead of playind the StarBow mod for SC2. This is a totally different experience.

Some may say that the BG1 UI, graphics and controls are dated/old/archaic. I will say that they are just fine, there's nothing bad about trying to learn how the game works, it's part of the experience, besides BG2 character animations are ugly as hell.

So, do as you want, there are numerous possibilities, this is just how I would advice someone new to play it and play myself to this day.

Hi OP, I never played Baldur's Gate (or any Infinity Engine game) back in the day, and played through Baldur's Gate Enhanced Edition for the first time a few weeks ago. I think a lot of the feedback you've gotten here is from longtime fans disgruntled about the launch of the Enhanced Edition, or who have other reasons to be unhappy about the developer. Those are of course valid perspectives, but speaking as a fellow newbie to Baldur's Gate: don't bother with the original (non-Enhanced) version unless you have a strong personal reason to (like nostalgia). The Enhanced Edition is great, right out of the box.

People saying that the new characters (especially Neera) are annoying and poorly written are right IMO, but Neera is in a total of one short mandatory scene, and can be ignored entirely after that. Same for other new characters. And to be perfectly honest, none of the original characters are any good either. I haven't played Baldur's Gate 2 yet and I've heard BG2 has much more impressively fleshed out characters, but the BG1 characters are cardboard cutouts. Xan is depressed, and that's his whole character. Ajantis is Stock Paladin, and that's his whole character. All the NPCs just have a few voice clips that play ad infinitum. Again, can't speak for BG2, but if you're playing BG1 for characters you're going to be disappointed.

What's good here -- freedom to explore, unexpected conversations and choices, a large wilderness, the sudden deaths and scares of low level D&D, Infinity Engine combat -- is not in any way compromised by the Enhanced Edition. And almost all of what's bad here (inventory clutter, repetitive encounter design, cardboard cutout NPCs, kinda boring villains) was bad before Beamdog arrived and will be bad long after they're gone.

Just make sure you've got your main party roles (warrior, thief, cleric, mage) covered, save often, and explore every nook (after saving often). That's really about all you need to know. The overworld is pretty open, so if you take a turn into a bad neighborhood and get stomped, just make a note to come back later. The game doesn't require min-maxing and isn't that hard; you'll die a bunch, but retrying will make it easy since a lot of the difficulty comes down to bad dice rolls or cheap shot surprises.

Baldur's Gate is just a game, not some grand historical artifact, and I don't think there's a good reason to play it "as it was first released." I prefer the NES version of Dragon Quest III to the Super Famicom remake (and can name specific gameplay changes I dislike), but I can accept that the latter is a better option for people coming into the game blind, despite my attachment to the former.

Yet you condemn and give advice as though you did. Talk about what you know about or keep your council.

In contrast to you, all of us played both the classic and the EE. We all played EE with open mind, but were disappointed by the quality of changes implemented by Beamdog. There is the additional issue of how arrogant Beamdog reacted to any valid criticism about the EE which at the release were also bugged beyond the belief, and by Beamdog terrible expansion to BG1. But that's beyond the point.

My advice about BG1 is purely based on the experience of playing classic edition and EE. Nothing more and nothing less. Your advice is based on your limited experience and with some preconceptions about fans of BG1.

I consider the "deaths and scares of low level D&D" to be poor design; the start of a game should be gentle, not harsh, to the player. It's OK to have deaths and scares, but they should be saved for later in the game, when the player has had enough experience with the game; Dragon Quest 2 is a game that does this better (endgame enemies that can cast multi-target instant death spells, one of which always works), as is Elminage Gothic.

Also, I have found that Infinity Engine combat is really not that great; it combines the worst aspects of turn-based combat with the worst aspect of action combat, but it lacks both the rhythm of turn-based combat and the fluidity of action combat. Out of curiosity, what Dragon Quest 3 gameplay changes do you dislike? I've played Dragon Quest 1-9, as well as remakes of 1-6, and the DQ3 remake (GBC version, which is based off the SFC version gameplay-wise) is the only DQ remake where I *can't* think of a gameplay change I dislike. In fact, DQ3 fixed one issue with the original that happens to be a dealbreaker for me, namely the way HP/MP growth works makes Vitality and Intelligence seeds worse than useless.

Edit: I noticed that this post is "low rated". Could someone care to explain why? (In particular, what did I do wrong here?)

Which makes what you say next worthless.