By the way, in the cleric female elf sprite, the vanilla has plate and some black pixels in the back (missing), the 1pp one changed some plate with chainmail (along with fixing the black spots). Not to be nitpicking, but i would like the option to keep the more "plate" look :P PLATE FTW damnit
In general in 1pp, in a lot of sprites ( cleric and fighter female elf for example), some plate has been changed with chainmail, which is great for options and all, but doesn't really feel what a plate user would wear as "full plate".
Now that i think about it better, while 1pp is an amazing work, putting it all together in BG:EE and "enforcing it" on players when they might feel more comfortable with the vanilla look, could be a bit risky don't you think?
Maybe create some options in general for those who want or don't want to use it? Since options in general are an awesome thing and all, they give a sense of freedom to the player :]
Who would ever willingly choose to use BG2 avatars and paperdolls, apart perhaps from blind gamers? ;-)
@AndreaColombo well, you know i'm with you on this :P, it's just that having the option is always nicer than having no option at all. For example i like Human Male fighters in BG1 animations.
But for example cleric elf females are better in BG2 imo, anyway to each his own that's not the point :P
The point is, and i agree, that although 1pp is awesome, some people might prefer the vanilla look we have now as explained in the example above ( cleric and fighter females). I for sure prefer having more plate look when i wear full plates, and not looking like i'm wearing chain mail, so with no disrespect for Erephine, i would prefer the option to keep the "plate" look since i hate chainmail
Of course, Beamdog did not say they are putting 1pp in the game like that, they just said Erephine agreed to let them use it as they see fit.
Thus, i hope we are given the option to keep the vanilla look for the things that change with 1pp. No more chainmail instead of plate please!!
( i kind of prefer the leather skirts too, call me kinky)
Maybe they could create a menu in the options that allows you to enable or disable stuff from the mods that are included, for example 1pp.
Not to sound crass - I really do appreciate Erephine's mods, and it's good that they/she get this kind of recognition - but I'm not sure I see the big-whoop-factor. The situation right now is that players can use the BG2 paper dolls/weapons if they like those, and, thanks to Erephine, the 1PP mods if they prefer those, i.e. everyone can choose what they prefer. Integrating 1PP into the game just sounds like it will take away that choice, unless they keep all the BG2 paperdolls in as well. [...] Some people may prefer them all swapped out, some people may prefer a mix, and most likely there are those who would prefer the BG2 ones. The point is that the present-day situation where you can mix and match exactly what you want is superior compared to just replacing the BG2 objects and making them unavailable.
I keep seeing this argument concerning a large range of things, and I really don't understand it. Yes, mods exist. Customization of the current game is possible, but decisions have to be made concerning every aspect of what goes into the game, and the fan community for Baldur's Gate has made it quite clear over the years that a majority of them (us) prefer the BG1 item graphics and paperdolls, so the team has decided to implement them (which for all we know is only going to affect BG:EE and not BG2:EE, although I'd prefer it to be in both).
If there actually is even a reasonably sized group of fans that prefer the BG2 paperdolls and graphics to the BG1 ones, then I have no doubt that a mod will be made to convert the 1PP graphics back to all their BG2... err.. glory? The point is, it doesn't make sense to complain that decisions are being made, this is a necessity, and they seem to be making decisions based on the desires of the community (and good old-fashioned common sense). Also, the increased modder-friendliness of the enhanced editions which will most likely mean that we all end up having more choices on how to change the game once the enhanced editions come out.
I do understand that in a way, this decision could temporarily limit the choices of the players, as a mod doesn't yet exist to fulfill your preference. The way that a lot of people play BG these days is with Tutu or BGT, so a need for a mod like 1PP was created, if the BG1 graphics/paperdolls become standard, it will create a need for a mod to change them to what they were in BG2 for those that prefer it.
Some items in BG1 had better graphics, and some had better in BG2, 1pp did that fine. Flaming swords anyone?
On some other areas it was about personal preference, on some of the avatar fixes for example. Erephine liked chainmail, so it was added a lot :P
I do agree that when a graphic becomes nicer, we should use it. But it needs to make sense. I'm a fighter, or a cleric, i wear full plate, if i want chain mail i can don it instead.
Anyway we're probably thinking it over too much, since we don't exactly know how the devs will implement 1pp and what exactly. Also, no where did they state that they will use it exactly as it is.
As for the paperdolls, to be honest i never understood what's the fuss about them. Animations i can understand but paperdolls? I preferred the IWD2 style with no paperdolls, extra artwork with no sense in game.
Not to sound crass - I really do appreciate Erephine's mods, and it's good that they/she get this kind of recognition - but I'm not sure I see the big-whoop-factor. The situation right now is that players can use the BG2 paper dolls/weapons if they like those, and, thanks to Erephine, the 1PP mods if they prefer those, i.e. everyone can choose what they prefer. Integrating 1PP into the game just sounds like it will take away that choice, unless they keep all the BG2 paperdolls in as well. [...] Some people may prefer them all swapped out, some people may prefer a mix, and most likely there are those who would prefer the BG2 ones. The point is that the present-day situation where you can mix and match exactly what you want is superior compared to just replacing the BG2 objects and making them unavailable.
I keep seeing this argument concerning a large range of things, and I really don't understand it. Yes, mods exist. Customization of the current game is possible, but decisions have to be made concerning every aspect of what goes into the game, and the fan community for Baldur's Gate has made it quite clear over the years that a majority of them (us) prefer the BG1 item graphics and paperdolls, so the team has decided to implement them (which for all we know is only going to affect BG:EE and not BG2:EE, although I'd prefer it to be in both).
If there actually is even a reasonably sized group of fans that prefer the BG2 paperdolls and graphics to the BG1 ones, then I have no doubt that a mod will be made to convert the 1PP graphics back to all their BG2... err.. glory? The point is, it doesn't make sense to complain that decisions are being made, this is a necessity, and they seem to be making decisions based on the desires of the community (and good old-fashioned common sense). Also, the increased modder-friendliness of the enhanced editions which will most likely mean that we all end up having more choices on how to change the game once the enhanced editions come out.
I do understand that in a way, this decision could temporarily limit the choices of the players, as a mod doesn't yet exist to fulfill your preference. The way that a lot of people play BG these days is with Tutu or BGT, so a need for a mod like 1PP was created, if the BG1 graphics/paperdolls become standard, it will create a need for a mod to change them to what they were in BG2 for those that prefer it.
I would say the argument stems from the perceived current state of the game. If no 1PP mods were available, a decision to revert to the BG1 paperdolls would make total sense, because the state of the game would be a majority of players wanting those paperdolls, but having little choice but to use the BG2 ones unless they wanted to play using the BG1 engine.
With the current availability of mods though, the state of the game is one where you can change a great many aspects of it to suit your preference, and BG1 paperdolls is one of them. Like you say, Tutu has turned into a kind of standard, with 1PP likely being a standard within both Tutu and BG2 for the people who prefer those paperdolls. Thus, there doesn't seem to be an issue that is in need of fixing. The 1PP implementation therefore, appears like it's delivering a solution for the majority, but it's a solution to a problem that's already solved. And the cost of that extra solution is that it creates an issue for those who feel differently. To me, that just isn't a very mysterious argument.
@Shin A major point of your argument is that the mod existing is somehow equal to the contents of the mod being used in-game, which isn't the case. You admit yourself that the preference of the majority is clear, yet you still want the preference of the minority to be the standard. As I said, I'm pretty confident that someone will make this mod, assuming there are more than, say, 50 people that want it (and if there aren't then it really shouldn't be in the game). So, once the mod is made, the preference of the majority will be in-game and those smaller groups with other specific preferences can make use of the mods, this makes sense to me.
Something already existing in some form via a mod is in no way a good argument for not incorporating it into the game, and something not yet existing in a mod is not a good reason to keep it in the game (especially if a majority of fans agree that there's something better).
The argument isn't mysterious to me, I suppose instead of saying I don't understand it, I should have said that I don't think it makes sense. I fully support every player being able to play the game exactly as it best pleases them (with whichever graphics they want), but the best way to do this is to take into account the opinions of the majority of fans and to allow modding to handle the desires of the minority. Let me provide a comparison:
I'm assuming that a large majority of players prefer the idea of playing BG1 (and are hoping to play BG:EE) in the BG2 engine, this is evident by the extreme popularity of Tutu/BGT. I'm sure there are some out there that prefer playing BG1 in the BG1 engine (and also would prefer BG:EE in the BG1 engine), but not as many as prefer to play in the BG2 engine. Now, the needs of the majority here are already met by the BGT/Tutu mods, and so Overhaul's decision to have BG:EE run in the BG2 engine accommodated a desire of the majority that was already met by mods, and also took away the option of the minority (those desiring BG:EE to be played in the BG1 engine). Now, a mod may or may not ever be made to port BG:EE resources into the BG1 engine (probably not), but that doesn't really matter since those that desire this are such a small minority that the burden is on them to satisfy these fringe desires (or to convince the modding community to do so). Does the decision to have the enhanced versions use the BG2 engine seem as unwise to you as the decision to implement 1PP? Maybe this analogy is a bit of an exaggeration, as the contrast of people that want it vs. people that don't is probably much more extreme in this example than in the case of 1PP, but they are still similar ideas.
Sorry for the long posts, I'm just trying to explain my point here.
Besides, if there are enough people who want to have the original BG2 paperdolls and avatars back, there will likely be a mod that restores them at some point ;-)
@Mornmagor - I never liked the paperdoll-less IWD2-style inventory. Paperdolls are like a close snapshot of your characters, and reveal more details about their looks compared to the avatar. Take that away, and your inventory doesn't really add any visual information to what you already see ingame. Why repropose the avatar at all?
The paperdolll is also a retro throwback to the original goldbox rpgs (before my time), but now, since everything is 3D, I doubt such paperdoll interface would be used.
@jaysl659 I would say that the principle is similar for the comparison you mention, assuming that putting BG:EE inside the BG1 engine doesn't put limitations on what can be done feature-wise or to a greater degree affect compatibility with mods, which it is very likely to do. But, assuming that using the BG1 engine for BG:EE could be done while keeping everything else equal and unaffected, and that Tutu could still be applied to it in the same manner as presently so the majority could still enjoy it that way and still take advantage of all the new EE features - then yes, I would support such a decision. It would allow both the minority and the majority to keep playing the way they liked. A difference here apart from feature limitations and mod compatibility is that installing Tutu and degreenifying it is a lengthier and more complex process than installing an average mod. But to me it'd certainly be worth it over forcing people who disagreed to come up with some other kind of reverse-engine conversion that may or may not end up happening.
Coming up with another example that seems more equal, there is a popular feature in the G3 tweakpack (I believe) that lets you hide the helmet animations. Assuming this was spotted during development and a decision was made to make invisible helmets the baseline feature in BG:EE, would you support it? For the people who don't like seeing the helmets, this change would be of little importance - all the difference it would make to them would be having to install one less feature in the tweakpack. For those people who enjoyed seeing helmets on though, the pressure would be on to implement a mod that would display them once again.
To me, no matter how I view it, this implementation seems like going from a situation where people can choose their preference with minimal effort, to one where people who disagree have to put in extra work just to *get back* to a situation where people can choose their preference. Just doesn't seem right even if they are a minority.
I believe I see your argument, but I don't agree. To me the best way to smoothly allow every player to be able to play the game the way they prefer it is to take the current state of the game into account, i.e. to look at what can presently be done with the game assets with existing mods, and work from there; rather than looking at what seems to be used by the most people and make that the baseline feature.
Coming up with another example that seems more equal, there is a popular feature in the G3 tweakpack (I believe) that lets you hide the helmet animations. Assuming this was spotted during development and a decision was made to make invisible helmets the baseline feature in BG:EE, would you support it?
I wouldn't personally agree that it was the best decision (I prefer to see the helmets), but I also wouldn't argue the point if a strong majority of fans truly wanted it. Taking the interests of the majority of fans of a game into account when deciding what goes into the game is just a good policy, so I would gladly accept it. Also, as I've said in regards to everything else, I have no doubt that a mod would soon be made to accommodate the needs of the minority (myself included in this case), which would solve the problem. I still think that it's completely logical to please the largest number of fans (while maintaining the vision of the devs) as possible, and allow the small groups with specific desires of how to modify a game to find a way to deal with that desire themselves.
To me the best way to smoothly allow every player to be able to play the game the way they prefer it is to take the current state of the game into account, i.e. to look at what can presently be done with the game assets with existing mods, and work from there; rather than looking at what seems to be used by the most people and make that the baseline feature.
I don't want to be redundant (or more redundant than I've already been), so I'll just say this: You make it seem like you think that the modding community is dead, that the only logical thing to do concerning the current state of things is to assume that no new mods will ever be made.
What can presently be done with the BG games isn't the thing that should be determining development, but rather: What could be done with BG:EE? What can be done? What will be able to be done in the future? Perhaps I'm being a bit optimistic, and I'll end up being proven wrong, but the modders that have made so many great mods over the years are here on these forums, discussing how excited they are about the externalizations, etc. and how these Enhanced Editions will open up new doors for new mods, and for mods that could never have been done before. I think that we'll see more mods in the future than we've seen already, and I thing that all the new fringe desires that crop up due to changes in BG:EE will be addressed, and so no I don't think we have to look at things from a limitation of what's available to us right now.
To me, no matter how I view it, this implementation seems like going from a situation where people can choose their preference with minimal effort, to one where people who disagree have to put in extra work just to *get back* to a situation where people can choose their preference. Just doesn't seem right even if they are a minority.
Well, we both have strong, differing opinions on this one. Seems like another case where we should just agree to disagree, I think we both understand the others' point, so there's probably no reason to keep discussing it, unless you have anything else to add.
I don't want to be redundant (or more redundant than I've already been), so I'll just say this: You make it seem like you think that the modding community is dead, that the only logical thing to do concerning the current state of things is to assume that no new mods will ever be made.
Well, that isn't how I mean to come across at all - no more so I would guess than you want to be seen as a "the past is dead"-kind of guy who views BG:EE as a clean slate separated from all the BG-related work already out there. Rather, I view the existing collected mods as an integrated, customizable part of the BG games. It is like they serve in lieu of a long and advanced menu that upon starting a new game would ask 'do you want enemies to be this smart or that smart?' 'do you want them to call for help?' 'do you want helmets on or off?' 'hey, would you rather have spell effects from the IWD games?' 'do you want to be able to rest anywhere?' and so on, which to me is awesome.
That doesn't mean that I view modding as dead though. Like you, I believe it'll go forward and agree that much more will likely be possible to do in EE. I'm certainly all for the externalizations, and all for opening up as many parts of the game as possible, and making them moddable as easily as possible. However, I also don't think that creating mod opportunities by, as in this case, making older mods obsolete helps the modding cause in that regard. It's not a feature that makes future modding easier, it's just a resource swap, and - also with the risk of being redundant - one that seems unnecessary because every player who cares about it can already carry it out on his/her own.
It actually seems like the opposite of bringing modding forward. Think about it, if the developers were to look through all the mods out there and make everyone that the majority liked a baseline component of the game, then the modding scene would have a lot of work right off the bat - but it would all be to negate those implementations, so that they were *choices* once more, which is what modding is ultimately all about. So instead of making exciting new mods, a lot of work would be put into getting back to the current state of customizability. At least, that's how it seems to me.
Granted, it may well be blown out of proportion in this thread. It could be the case that the developers believe in customizability as well and include the BG2 paperdolls, and that switching between the two will be no more difficult than moving files from one directory to another.
Well, we both have strong, differing opinions on this one. Seems like another case where we should just agree to disagree, I think we both understand the others' point, so there's probably no reason to keep discussing it, unless you have anything else to add.
We'll be closely examining the 1pp content and making sure that it jives with what we're trying to accomplish. Where possible we want to integrate all the great fixes and work that Erephine's done, but as for opinions on how good things look, or what's the better choice I'm totally going to force our art director Nat to make the judgement call there. Muahahaha! we'll be keeping a close eye on it as it gets integrated and attempting to pick and choose what makes the most sense.
quickedit: on the subject of modding, it's unavoidable that some of the work we've done is going to muck with compatibility of certain mods. Partly because things have been integrated into the game, maybe because the mods might have been relying on something "broken" to work properly etc... where possible we're doing our best to ensure that compatibility is maintained and if anything opening up parts of the engine that weren't easily accessible to modders before. Trent's said it before, but, truly - we want and are committed to this being the best BG1 experience ever, for both new players as well as all the enthusiasts.
Comments
In general in 1pp, in a lot of sprites ( cleric and fighter female elf for example), some plate has been changed with chainmail, which is great for options and all, but doesn't really feel what a plate user would wear as "full plate".
Now that i think about it better, while 1pp is an amazing work, putting it all together in BG:EE and "enforcing it" on players when they might feel more comfortable with the vanilla look, could be a bit risky don't you think?
Maybe create some options in general for those who want or don't want to use it? Since options in general are an awesome thing and all, they give a sense of freedom to the player :] @AndreaColombo well, you know i'm with you on this :P, it's just that having the option is always nicer than having no option at all. For example i like Human Male fighters in BG1 animations.
But for example cleric elf females are better in BG2 imo, anyway to each his own that's not the point :P
The point is, and i agree, that although 1pp is awesome, some people might prefer the vanilla look we have now as explained in the example above ( cleric and fighter females). I for sure prefer having more plate look when i wear full plates, and not looking like i'm wearing chain mail, so with no disrespect for Erephine, i would prefer the option to keep the "plate" look since i hate chainmail
Of course, Beamdog did not say they are putting 1pp in the game like that, they just said Erephine agreed to let them use it as they see fit.
Thus, i hope we are given the option to keep the vanilla look for the things that change with 1pp. No more chainmail instead of plate please!!
( i kind of prefer the leather skirts too, call me kinky)
Maybe they could create a menu in the options that allows you to enable or disable stuff from the mods that are included, for example 1pp.
If there actually is even a reasonably sized group of fans that prefer the BG2 paperdolls and graphics to the BG1 ones, then I have no doubt that a mod will be made to convert the 1PP graphics back to all their BG2... err.. glory? The point is, it doesn't make sense to complain that decisions are being made, this is a necessity, and they seem to be making decisions based on the desires of the community (and good old-fashioned common sense). Also, the increased modder-friendliness of the enhanced editions which will most likely mean that we all end up having more choices on how to change the game once the enhanced editions come out.
I do understand that in a way, this decision could temporarily limit the choices of the players, as a mod doesn't yet exist to fulfill your preference. The way that a lot of people play BG these days is with Tutu or BGT, so a need for a mod like 1PP was created, if the BG1 graphics/paperdolls become standard, it will create a need for a mod to change them to what they were in BG2 for those that prefer it.
On some other areas it was about personal preference, on some of the avatar fixes for example. Erephine liked chainmail, so it was added a lot :P
I do agree that when a graphic becomes nicer, we should use it. But it needs to make sense. I'm a fighter, or a cleric, i wear full plate, if i want chain mail i can don it instead.
Anyway we're probably thinking it over too much, since we don't exactly know how the devs will implement 1pp and what exactly. Also, no where did they state that they will use it exactly as it is.
As for the paperdolls, to be honest i never understood what's the fuss about them. Animations i can understand but paperdolls? I preferred the IWD2 style with no paperdolls, extra artwork with no sense in game.
I agree that it COULD be worse but look at that chain mail armor with epic helmet. Looks like a knight! That one looked good actually.
With the current availability of mods though, the state of the game is one where you can change a great many aspects of it to suit your preference, and BG1 paperdolls is one of them. Like you say, Tutu has turned into a kind of standard, with 1PP likely being a standard within both Tutu and BG2 for the people who prefer those paperdolls. Thus, there doesn't seem to be an issue that is in need of fixing. The 1PP implementation therefore, appears like it's delivering a solution for the majority, but it's a solution to a problem that's already solved. And the cost of that extra solution is that it creates an issue for those who feel differently. To me, that just isn't a very mysterious argument.
Something already existing in some form via a mod is in no way a good argument for not incorporating it into the game, and something not yet existing in a mod is not a good reason to keep it in the game (especially if a majority of fans agree that there's something better).
The argument isn't mysterious to me, I suppose instead of saying I don't understand it, I should have said that I don't think it makes sense. I fully support every player being able to play the game exactly as it best pleases them (with whichever graphics they want), but the best way to do this is to take into account the opinions of the majority of fans and to allow modding to handle the desires of the minority. Let me provide a comparison:
I'm assuming that a large majority of players prefer the idea of playing BG1 (and are hoping to play BG:EE) in the BG2 engine, this is evident by the extreme popularity of Tutu/BGT. I'm sure there are some out there that prefer playing BG1 in the BG1 engine (and also would prefer BG:EE in the BG1 engine), but not as many as prefer to play in the BG2 engine. Now, the needs of the majority here are already met by the BGT/Tutu mods, and so Overhaul's decision to have BG:EE run in the BG2 engine accommodated a desire of the majority that was already met by mods, and also took away the option of the minority (those desiring BG:EE to be played in the BG1 engine). Now, a mod may or may not ever be made to port BG:EE resources into the BG1 engine (probably not), but that doesn't really matter since those that desire this are such a small minority that the burden is on them to satisfy these fringe desires (or to convince the modding community to do so). Does the decision to have the enhanced versions use the BG2 engine seem as unwise to you as the decision to implement 1PP? Maybe this analogy is a bit of an exaggeration, as the contrast of people that want it vs. people that don't is probably much more extreme in this example than in the case of 1PP, but they are still similar ideas.
Sorry for the long posts, I'm just trying to explain my point here.
@Mornmagor - I never liked the paperdoll-less IWD2-style inventory. Paperdolls are like a close snapshot of your characters, and reveal more details about their looks compared to the avatar. Take that away, and your inventory doesn't really add any visual information to what you already see ingame. Why repropose the avatar at all?
But, assuming that using the BG1 engine for BG:EE could be done while keeping everything else equal and unaffected, and that Tutu could still be applied to it in the same manner as presently so the majority could still enjoy it that way and still take advantage of all the new EE features - then yes, I would support such a decision. It would allow both the minority and the majority to keep playing the way they liked.
A difference here apart from feature limitations and mod compatibility is that installing Tutu and degreenifying it is a lengthier and more complex process than installing an average mod. But to me it'd certainly be worth it over forcing people who disagreed to come up with some other kind of reverse-engine conversion that may or may not end up happening.
Coming up with another example that seems more equal, there is a popular feature in the G3 tweakpack (I believe) that lets you hide the helmet animations. Assuming this was spotted during development and a decision was made to make invisible helmets the baseline feature in BG:EE, would you support it? For the people who don't like seeing the helmets, this change would be of little importance - all the difference it would make to them would be having to install one less feature in the tweakpack. For those people who enjoyed seeing helmets on though, the pressure would be on to implement a mod that would display them once again.
To me, no matter how I view it, this implementation seems like going from a situation where people can choose their preference with minimal effort, to one where people who disagree have to put in extra work just to *get back* to a situation where people can choose their preference. Just doesn't seem right even if they are a minority.
I believe I see your argument, but I don't agree. To me the best way to smoothly allow every player to be able to play the game the way they prefer it is to take the current state of the game into account, i.e. to look at what can presently be done with the game assets with existing mods, and work from there; rather than looking at what seems to be used by the most people and make that the baseline feature.
What can presently be done with the BG games isn't the thing that should be determining development, but rather: What could be done with BG:EE? What can be done? What will be able to be done in the future? Perhaps I'm being a bit optimistic, and I'll end up being proven wrong, but the modders that have made so many great mods over the years are here on these forums, discussing how excited they are about the externalizations, etc. and how these Enhanced Editions will open up new doors for new mods, and for mods that could never have been done before. I think that we'll see more mods in the future than we've seen already, and I thing that all the new fringe desires that crop up due to changes in BG:EE will be addressed, and so no I don't think we have to look at things from a limitation of what's available to us right now. Well, we both have strong, differing opinions on this one. Seems like another case where we should just agree to disagree, I think we both understand the others' point, so there's probably no reason to keep discussing it, unless you have anything else to add.
Rather, I view the existing collected mods as an integrated, customizable part of the BG games. It is like they serve in lieu of a long and advanced menu that upon starting a new game would ask 'do you want enemies to be this smart or that smart?' 'do you want them to call for help?' 'do you want helmets on or off?' 'hey, would you rather have spell effects from the IWD games?' 'do you want to be able to rest anywhere?' and so on, which to me is awesome.
That doesn't mean that I view modding as dead though. Like you, I believe it'll go forward and agree that much more will likely be possible to do in EE. I'm certainly all for the externalizations, and all for opening up as many parts of the game as possible, and making them moddable as easily as possible.
However, I also don't think that creating mod opportunities by, as in this case, making older mods obsolete helps the modding cause in that regard. It's not a feature that makes future modding easier, it's just a resource swap, and - also with the risk of being redundant - one that seems unnecessary because every player who cares about it can already carry it out on his/her own.
It actually seems like the opposite of bringing modding forward. Think about it, if the developers were to look through all the mods out there and make everyone that the majority liked a baseline component of the game, then the modding scene would have a lot of work right off the bat - but it would all be to negate those implementations, so that they were *choices* once more, which is what modding is ultimately all about. So instead of making exciting new mods, a lot of work would be put into getting back to the current state of customizability. At least, that's how it seems to me.
Granted, it may well be blown out of proportion in this thread. It could be the case that the developers believe in customizability as well and include the BG2 paperdolls, and that switching between the two will be no more difficult than moving files from one directory to another.
Yep, agreed.
quickedit: on the subject of modding, it's unavoidable that some of the work we've done is going to muck with compatibility of certain mods. Partly because things have been integrated into the game, maybe because the mods might have been relying on something "broken" to work properly etc... where possible we're doing our best to ensure that compatibility is maintained and if anything opening up parts of the engine that weren't easily accessible to modders before. Trent's said it before, but, truly - we want and are committed to this being the best BG1 experience ever, for both new players as well as all the enthusiasts.
anotheredit: @Ward made a thread here r.e. feedback about included modules. Feel free to chime in! http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/1940/component-selection-bgee-1pp