Beamdog: Something is wrong, we can´t give you patch or BG2. Players: What? What is wrong? Beamdog: Something with Atari. Players: Ok, but WHAT is wrong? Beamdog: We can't say.
This is whole story and many people are pissed because they dont know: " What is going on ?! ".
@Illydth: Your argument hinges on the assumption that Beamdog was in no way responsible for the current situation. That hasn't been established as fact yet, since we don't actually know what happened or why.
So I decided to go ahead and spend the few hours piecing this together for real. To save you the reading trouble of going through it, the current owner (as far as I can tell) of the IP to produce D&D Electronic games is Infogrames Inc. otherwise known as Atari SA, who acquired the electronic rights to produce these games from BioWare and the Distribution rights from Interplay.
For those who don't recognize the Atari SA name, this is the parent company of Atari Inc. (Atari US) which is who's going through the Bankruptcy now. Atari SA has long term rights (negotiated when they purchased Atari from none other than Hasbro themselves) through 2015, and potentially 2020, to produce electronic properties of any of Hasbro's intellectual property rights.
BeamDog can't go to WotC/Hasbro, WotC/Hasbro has a contract with Atari SA and they can't break that contract. The only people BeamDog could go to is Atari SA...and I have to assume that since Atari SA is the rights holder already that's who will end up having to be negotiated with once the bankruptcy is over anyway.
Look at it on the bright side, if Atari SA used Atari US as the US distributor for D&D Based Properties, who does Atari SA have to distribute their D&D Based Properties in the US after the bankruptcy is over?
Here's some glass half full thinking: It looks to me like BeamDog (with their own distribution channels and their own sales methods) is a pretty good candidate to simply pick up the distribution rights from Atari SA who's likely looking for someone else to sell their properties through.
A kickstarter may not be needed at all. The whole pot may simply fall straight into BeamDog's lap. *shrug*
Yep, I've heard this argument as well. And I've made the counter argument to it several times over already:
If, as GameBanshee had stated, BeamDog owed a metric ton of cash to Atari and that was the reason for them to have forced BeamDog to pull sales:
1) There would be a lawsuit between the bankruptcy managers and BeamDog for that cash. The back debt isn't forgiven simply because BeamDog complies with a "stop selling it or else" order. This is bankruptcy, every nickel and dime is going to be accounted for. You don't find it strange that there is no published legal action over so much money owed to a corporation in bankruptcy? The reason is because that money owed doesn't exist.
2) As you'll find from any good journalist or journalistic organization, information that is not sourced through multiple sources is not reliable information. We're how many weeks past that story from GameBanshee? and still not a SINGLE OTHER SOURCE has picked this up. Not a peep, not a filing, not a legal document has been produced in any way. No additional source of information has been published and not a single shred of evidence or primary source has been dredged up to confirm the accusation.
Mom told me years ago not to believe everything I hear on TV. I suspect this applies to the Internet as well.
That said @shawne, if you'd like to counter argument why you believe GameBanshee's article to be the truth, I'd love to hear your reasoning. If I've missed it and you've posted it somewhere else, feel free simply to link it.
Let me save the forums here a whole lot of problem and I'll simply apologize for my unintended tone in that post.
I wasn't trying to belittle @Sandman in any way with that statement, it was intended to identify my view as to why he was continuing to hold his same opinion when I felt my previous post clearly covered why his anger was misdirected.
I write long winded posts to make sure everything I feel needs covered is covered. I'm well aware that the average Internet denizen will not read anything past about 6 sentences. Again, that's not an attack.
I realize that in writing a long post many people will simply not read them or if they do will only read the first paragraph or two. As such: "Either you didn't read what I posted or you're ignoring it. Lets try again...shorter as I might have lost your attention."
Beamdog: Something is wrong, we can´t give you patch or BG2. Players: What? What is wrong? Beamdog: Something with Atari. Players: Ok, but WHAT is wrong? Beamdog: We can't say.
This is whole story and many people are pissed because they dont know: " What is going on ?! ".
@Edvin, your awesome profile pic aside, that's not an accurate recreation of the whole story. It goes more like this:
Beamdog: Due to legal issues with a publishing partner, we have to stop work on the patch and on BG2. We can't tell you any more than that, for legal reasons, nor can we tell you, at this point in time, when or if things will get better. We're optimistic, but this could, nevertheless, take quite a while.
Players (first group): Well, okay. That sucks, but we've waited this long, what're a few more months in the scheme of things?
Players (second group): OMFG R U KIDDING ME. wut is rong w/ u ppl, i paid my money, i want patch rite now damnit
Players (third group): Are you sure there's nothing else you can tell us?
Beamdog: There's absolutely nothing we can tell you guys. Our hands are tied.
Trent Oster: *coughcoughIT'SATARIcoughcough*
Players (second group, this time with better articulation): I have been most foully betrayed. O, fie! Beamdog, how my hopes, so innocently trust'd with thee, have been cruelly dashed. You shall rue the day you withheld the patch from me, Beamdog -- RUE, I say. I can ne'er forgive such a slight as this burdensome hatred thou hast lain upon my soul. It shall be a thing carried henceforth by me, and my sons after me, and their sons and grandsons, on unto the end of my line. Ne'er shall we rest until we have been revenged upon the whole pack of you.
Players (first group): Dudes, chill. It's not their fault. Trent totally said it's Atari's fault.
Trent Oster: *coughcough*
Players (third group): Hey! Has there been any change? What more can you tell us?
Beamdog: We don't have anything more to report.
Players (third group): What more can you tell us?
Beamdog: We aren't able to tell you anything, because this process is ongoing.
Players (third group): What more can you tell us?
((this continues for 20 more pages))
Players (first group): Have you people not been paying attention? Beamdog can't say anything either way for legal reasons.
Players (second group): SIDE WITH THEM IF YOU MUST! But know you this: ANY who stand between me and my most righteous vengeance shall serve as but a foretaste of what my wrath shall visit upon the house of Oster. Either thou art with me, or thou are with the Beamdogs.
Players (trolls breaking away from the first group): Are you stupid or something!? Have you not been paying attention!? It's not Beamdog's fault!? What's your damage!?
Players (second group): You have assailed my honor. Come, sir, I am for you.
((they fight))
Players (third group): ... But what more can you TELL us?
@Illydth You are, again and again, very well informed sir. Do you think Beamdog is already negotiating with Atari SA? And couldn't Atari SA decide to distribute it in the USA themselves? I wonder if Atari SA would be open to sell these *legendary* rights... there it is, I am thinking about hostile takeover again...
Anyways, thank you very much for your troubles. It is appreciated.
So here's the thing. I have no idea what BeamDog is doing, I'm as in the dark about all of this as the rest of us here.
I assume that there's only 3 places BeamDog/OverHaul could have gone to obtain the rights to produce and publish BG:EE back when they first started this project:
1) Hasbro/WotC. Originally in many of my posts I assumed this was the ONLY place where the negotiations had come from since WotC/Hasbro were/are the rights holders for D&D. After the "Unoffical" thread I linked above, I have stepped back from that opinion. Namely because if BeamDog had obtained the rights to produce and sell this from Hasbro directly, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
This leaves open 2 more choices for who could have given BeamDog/OverHaul the rights to produce the game.
2) The second place where BeamDog could have gotten rights is from Atari SA, the original rights holders for D&D Electronic IPs. If this is the case, what we're waiting on is unclear to me. If the distribution rights where through Atari SA, then (as above) there'd be nothing in Atari's Bankruptcy that should have affected this project in any way. Thus I rule this out as the possibility since Atari's bankruptcy has, in some way, affected the sale of this game from BeamDog.
3) The third and most likely place for BeamDog to have gotten its distribution rights from is Atari Inc., who's parent company (Atari SA) owns the rights to publish, produce and distribute D&D Electronic games. Since Atari Inc. is Atari SA's US distribution authority (at least I assume it is) it would only make sense for BeamDog to go to Atari US to obtain the rights to produce and distribute the software. And given that it would also make sense why they had to STOP distribution of the software...that distribution agreement likely got put on hold the moment the bankruptcy filing hit the courts. Here, I believe, we have Occam's razor...the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions.
As posted earlier, I'm not sure what distribution rights look like after the bankruptcy, since Atari Inc. will continue to exist in some way after the Chapter 11 is completed. If Atari Inc. still exists and is still the US distributor for Atari SA then whoever ends up owning Atari Inc. will have to re-negotiate the contract with BeamDog. If, in the case where Atari SA ends up with Atari Inc. (as I expect they will), there is no existing contract with BeamDog, then one will have to be negotiated. Whether Atari SA will create / find another US Distribution point for ATARI products (which will then have to negotiate with BeamDog) or whether Atari SA simply licenses the D&D IP to BeamDog directly (which would save them a whole crapload of issues, but would lessen the amount of money Atari SA would make off the property) would remain to be seen.
None of this can be figured out, however, till we know what is going to happen to Atari Inc...and that, I believe, is what we're waiting on.
To figure out just what the heck will happen to Atari.
Beamdog: Something is wrong, we can´t give you patch or BG2. Players: What? What is wrong? Beamdog: Something with Atari. Players: Ok, but WHAT is wrong? Beamdog: We can't say.
This is whole story and many people are pissed because they dont know: " What is going on ?! ".
@Edvin, your awesome profile pic aside, that's not an accurate recreation of the whole story. It goes more like this:
Beamdog: Due to legal issues with a publishing partner, we have to stop work on the patch and on BG2. We can't tell you any more than that, for legal reasons, nor can we tell you, at this point in time, when or if things will get better. We're optimistic, but this could, nevertheless, take quite a while.
Players (first group): Well, okay. That sucks, but we've waited this long, what're a few more months in the scheme of things?
Players (second group): OMFG R U KIDDING ME. wut is rong w/ u ppl, i paid my money, i want patch rite now damnit
Players (third group): Are you sure there's nothing else you can tell us?
Beamdog: There's absolutely nothing we can tell you guys. Our hands are tied.
Trent Oster: *coughcoughIT'SATARIcoughcough*
Players (second group, this time with better articulation): I have been most foully betrayed. O, fie! Beamdog, how my hopes, so innocently trust'd with thee, have been cruelly dashed. You shall rue the day you withheld the patch from me, Beamdog -- RUE, I say. I can ne'er forgive such a slight as this burdensome hatred thou hast lain upon my soul. It shall be a thing carried henceforth by me, and my sons after me, and their sons and grandsons, on unto the end of my line. Ne'er shall we rest until we have been revenged upon the whole pack of you.
Players (first group): Dudes, chill. It's not their fault. Trent totally said it's Atari's fault.
Trent Oster: *coughcough*
Players (third group): Hey! Has there been any change? What more can you tell us?
Beamdog: We don't have anything more to report.
Players (third group): What more can you tell us?
Beamdog: We aren't able to tell you anything, because this process is ongoing.
Players (third group): What more can you tell us?
((this continues for 20 more pages))
Players (first group): Have you people not been paying attention? Beamdog can't say anything either way for legal reasons.
Players (second group): SIDE WITH THEM IF YOU MUST! But know you this: ANY who stand between me and my most righteous vengeance shall serve as but a foretaste of what my wrath shall visit upon the house of Oster. Either thou art with me, or thou are with the Beamdogs.
Players (trolls breaking away from the first group): Are you stupid or something!? Have you not been paying attention!? It's not Beamdog's fault!? What's your damage!?
Players (second group): You have assailed my honor. Come, sir, I am for you.
((they fight))
Players (third group): ... But what more can you TELL us?
FINALY someone who make sence. This whole topic ( and even more ) in one post. Thank you for that.
[ ] - Did Not Truly Laugh Out Loud [x] - Did Truly Laugh Out Loud
Thanks so much Six, you'll be hearing from my Lawyer now...the rest of my office is looking at me like i have 2 heads due to me guffawing in my cube. Damages I tell you...
"ANY who stand between me and my most righteous vengeance shall serve as but a foretaste of what my wrath shall visit upon the house of Oster."
I swear to God you win life dude. My hat's off to you.
[ ] - Did Not Truly Laugh Out Loud [x] - Did Truly Laugh Out Loud
Thanks so much Six, you'll be hearing from my Lawyer now...the rest of my office is looking at me like i have 2 heads due to me guffawing in my cube. Damages I tell you...
"ANY who stand between me and my most righteous vengeance shall serve as but a foretaste of what my wrath shall visit upon the house of Oster."
I swear to God you win life dude. My hat's off to you.
Apologies. I should have put my NSFW disclaimer up at the top.
@Sixheadeddog Your post is funny! It acutally inspired me to write this *completely hypothetical* scenario involving customers alignment:
Beamdog: Sorry, following Atari's request, we had to stop all working related to BGEE and BG2EE.
Customer's reply (depending on alignment):
Lawfull good: Oh my! That's awfull: I'll start a petition and fight for your honor Beamdog!
Neutral good: No trouble! I understand your predicament and will patiently wait.
Chaotic good: Atari always team with evil and decay. Let's give it a good shake and see what falls out!
True neutral: Oh well, bought the game but didn't play it anyway. Not that big a deal.
Neutral evil: Leak the patch Trent, already got your wife and kids hostages (evil laugh)!
Lawfull evil: On behalf of every aggrieved customers, please receive this class suit involving all and every asset owned by Beamdog, and Trent's boxer shorts in addition. Oh, and good day to you Trent (evil smile)!
Chaotic evil: Leak the patch Trent, or I'll eat your liver with onions (disturbingly salivating)!
Anyways, courage! We ARE gonna make it!
Pretty spot-on, but I've seen a lot less of the Evils encouraging Beamdog to leak the patch, and a lot more of the irrational, liver-eating, blood-vengeance-y hatred. But I think, on the whole, this pretty well encapsulates the general reaction to this news, and then represents it in a very-much appropriate D&D nine-alignments scheme!
Let me save the forums here a whole lot of problem and I'll simply apologize for my unintended tone in that post.
I wasn't trying to belittle @Sandman in any way with that statement, it was intended to identify my view as to why he was continuing to hold his same opinion when I felt my previous post clearly covered why his anger was misdirected.
No, you were trying to belittle me, admit it. Even with this so called apology you put forth to the community is insulting to say the least. Why apologize to them? I am the one that you insulted. You may talk a good game but I know the type of person that you are. Your true colors are shining through my friend. You may have the others fooled but not me.
I stand by what I said to Overhaul. I don't care if you agree or not. Your opinion is of no consequence to me.
I stand by what I said to Overhaul. I don't care if you agree or not. Your opinion is of no consequence to me.
Hmm, curious. On the one hand, you profess not to care about @Illydth's opinion. Presumably not those of the sycophants either (presuming for the moment there are any). Yet you do keep coming back to this thread to continue the... 'conversation'. This seems inconsistent, somehow.
Let me save the forums here a whole lot of problem and I'll simply apologize for my unintended tone in that post.
I wasn't trying to belittle @Sandman in any way with that statement, it was intended to identify my view as to why he was continuing to hold his same opinion when I felt my previous post clearly covered why his anger was misdirected.
No, you were trying to belittle me, admit it. Even with this so called apology you put forth to the community is insulting to say the least. Why apologize to them? I am the one that you insulted. You may talk a good game but I know the type of person that you are. Your true colors are shining through my friend. You may have the others fooled but not me.
I stand by what I said to Overhaul. I don't care if you agree or not. Your opinion is of no consequence to me.
1) He says he wasn't trying to belittle you. He is making an attempt to clarify his intent. But you insist that he was, in fact, trying to belittle you. How to resolve this apparent contradiction?... My recommendation is to take him at his word. Because he is, after all, offering an apology and seeking to end hostilities. Unless you have some compelling reason to keep the argument going?...
2) It does, at first blush, appear somewhat difficult to discern to whom the apology is being offered from the above; the wording does make it rather vague. Is he apologizing to @Sandman? Or to "the forums," which appears as an object in that first sentence? I will submit that the apology is being offered to both: to "the forum" because of the inconvenience that negative, argumentative postings can cause; and to you, @Sandman (the only forum poster specifically named in the quoted text), as the recipient of the unintended insult.
3) You claim that "[@Illydth's] opinion is of no consequence to [you]" -- a statement which I find to be somewhat suspect. If you did not, in fact, care about @Illydth's opinions, why question the sincerity of his apology? Why not just accept that he was big enough to drop it, say he was sorry, and then move on? I should actually think that the "moving on" part would be more in character for someone who doesn't care about the other party's opinions, but that's just me.
I'll also note that, in seeking redress for your having been insulted, you've managed to insult everyone posting here by calling us all sycophants. It's more than fair to express that you feel insulted, but insulting others in the process is not the best way to go about playing nice with others. If you think you are owed an apology... do you think the "sycophants" are owed any less?
@Illydth: I wasn't thinking specifically of the GB allegation, but:
1. How do you know no such lawsuit has been filed against Beamdog by the bankruptcy managers?
2. Aside from announcing the removal of the game, journalists in the industry don't seem at all interested in what's going on: no one's been interviewed, no questions have been asked, no op/ed pieces have been written. Given the utter lack of concern for the situation, it doesn't surprise me that more outlets aren't actively pursuing the story.
3. The reason I'm distrustful of Beamdog at this point is because, even with the legal entanglements, they still have the ability to issue denials regarding information that is flat-out false. Admittedly, I'm not a lawyer, but I kind of doubt debunking a report as having no basis in reality harms negotiations in any way. Instead, the devs' reaction to the GB post ran along the lines of "If it's true, we can't comment on it" along with an expression of concern that someone might be leaking information. That, to me, doesn't sound like a proper response to a fabricated news item.
Obviously, I'm taking all this with a grain of salt - simply because, as you point out, we don't have any concrete facts at this moment - but I felt I should point out that your statement of "Beamdog is good, Atari is at fault" hasn't been verified either.
@shawne, however your other points might hit the spot (I didn't really follow the discussion), I feel the urge to say that point 3 is dead wrong. When you have a secret to keep you can't go around saying what the secret isn't. Any behaviour like that leads to discovery what it actually is. If for the more outrageous theories they would say "no, that is in no way what is happening" but for one of those "we can't comment on it"...
@Deltharis: And yet Trent Oster flat-out said "This is an Atari issue." It seems to me that if they're free to say that, they're equally free to deny false reports - provided they are indeed false.
It's all just pointless conjecture anyway. At the end of the day, we don't know any more now than we did a month ago (save, perhaps, that the auction was never relevant to begin with) and we're not likely to find out anytime soon. Whatever process is supposedly underway, it could take months to resolve, and longer still for results to show since they've suspended all work on BG:EE and BG2:EE. I've already made my decision (no pre-ordering, possibly no purchase at launch either); beyond that, I don't think there's anything more to say.
@shawne I also am not pre-ording or even buying at launch. It's not out of spite, just a reaction to the poor track record displayed by the company thus far.
I do hope to buy BG2EE down the line, but I am concerned that there will be lots of competition from the Eternity and Numenera projects, among others. If Eternity and BG2EE release around the same time, I get the feeling most (including myself) will save their money for Eternity.
How does Beamdog hope to regain customer loyalty in the face of all this?
@shawne Again, without exactly knowing the situation (I only check from time to time to see whether the patch is up or not), it would seem that either his message was concealing enough ("Atari issue" doesn't really suggest whose fault it is, how it started, what it consists of, what are the steps needed to resolve it etc) and bordered what he can say (so no further information could be given), or he made a mistake by revealing it and decided to keep silent from then on not to make things worse. And wow, did I just pack that into one sentence.
Anyway, when you are legally obliged to keep secrets you can't really look trustworthy, but judging them as the opposite solely on the basis of how they fullfill that obligation is unfair. Complaining about the state of the game at release would make some sense at least, complaining that they do not comment on stuff they are not allowed to comment is wrong.
Comments
Beamdog: Something is wrong, we can´t give you patch or BG2.
Players: What? What is wrong?
Beamdog: Something with Atari.
Players: Ok, but WHAT is wrong?
Beamdog: We can't say.
This is whole story and many people are pissed because they dont know: " What is going on ?! ".
I have not the desire nor the inclination to read your long winded posts. And you can drop the insults already ok.
I don't see any insults in Illydth's last post. I know you're frustrated (believe me, so are we), but we're doing the best we can.
http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/20105/the-unofficial-what-the-heck-who-owns-what-bg-related-and-when-thread
So I decided to go ahead and spend the few hours piecing this together for real. To save you the reading trouble of going through it, the current owner (as far as I can tell) of the IP to produce D&D Electronic games is Infogrames Inc. otherwise known as Atari SA, who acquired the electronic rights to produce these games from BioWare and the Distribution rights from Interplay.
For those who don't recognize the Atari SA name, this is the parent company of Atari Inc. (Atari US) which is who's going through the Bankruptcy now. Atari SA has long term rights (negotiated when they purchased Atari from none other than Hasbro themselves) through 2015, and potentially 2020, to produce electronic properties of any of Hasbro's intellectual property rights.
BeamDog can't go to WotC/Hasbro, WotC/Hasbro has a contract with Atari SA and they can't break that contract. The only people BeamDog could go to is Atari SA...and I have to assume that since Atari SA is the rights holder already that's who will end up having to be negotiated with once the bankruptcy is over anyway.
Look at it on the bright side, if Atari SA used Atari US as the US distributor for D&D Based Properties, who does Atari SA have to distribute their D&D Based Properties in the US after the bankruptcy is over?
Here's some glass half full thinking: It looks to me like BeamDog (with their own distribution channels and their own sales methods) is a pretty good candidate to simply pick up the distribution rights from Atari SA who's likely looking for someone else to sell their properties through.
A kickstarter may not be needed at all. The whole pot may simply fall straight into BeamDog's lap. *shrug*
Yep, I've heard this argument as well. And I've made the counter argument to it several times over already:
If, as GameBanshee had stated, BeamDog owed a metric ton of cash to Atari and that was the reason for them to have forced BeamDog to pull sales:
1) There would be a lawsuit between the bankruptcy managers and BeamDog for that cash. The back debt isn't forgiven simply because BeamDog complies with a "stop selling it or else" order. This is bankruptcy, every nickel and dime is going to be accounted for. You don't find it strange that there is no published legal action over so much money owed to a corporation in bankruptcy? The reason is because that money owed doesn't exist.
2) As you'll find from any good journalist or journalistic organization, information that is not sourced through multiple sources is not reliable information. We're how many weeks past that story from GameBanshee? and still not a SINGLE OTHER SOURCE has picked this up. Not a peep, not a filing, not a legal document has been produced in any way. No additional source of information has been published and not a single shred of evidence or primary source has been dredged up to confirm the accusation.
Mom told me years ago not to believe everything I hear on TV. I suspect this applies to the Internet as well.
That said @shawne, if you'd like to counter argument why you believe GameBanshee's article to be the truth, I'd love to hear your reasoning. If I've missed it and you've posted it somewhere else, feel free simply to link it.
Let me save the forums here a whole lot of problem and I'll simply apologize for my unintended tone in that post.
I wasn't trying to belittle @Sandman in any way with that statement, it was intended to identify my view as to why he was continuing to hold his same opinion when I felt my previous post clearly covered why his anger was misdirected.
I write long winded posts to make sure everything I feel needs covered is covered. I'm well aware that the average Internet denizen will not read anything past about 6 sentences. Again, that's not an attack.
I realize that in writing a long post many people will simply not read them or if they do will only read the first paragraph or two. As such: "Either you didn't read what I posted or you're ignoring it. Lets try again...shorter as I might have lost your attention."
Beamdog: Due to legal issues with a publishing partner, we have to stop work on the patch and on BG2. We can't tell you any more than that, for legal reasons, nor can we tell you, at this point in time, when or if things will get better. We're optimistic, but this could, nevertheless, take quite a while.
Players (first group): Well, okay. That sucks, but we've waited this long, what're a few more months in the scheme of things?
Players (second group): OMFG R U KIDDING ME. wut is rong w/ u ppl, i paid my money, i want patch rite now damnit
Players (third group): Are you sure there's nothing else you can tell us?
Beamdog: There's absolutely nothing we can tell you guys. Our hands are tied.
Trent Oster: *coughcoughIT'SATARIcoughcough*
Players (second group, this time with better articulation): I have been most foully betrayed. O, fie! Beamdog, how my hopes, so innocently trust'd with thee, have been cruelly dashed. You shall rue the day you withheld the patch from me, Beamdog -- RUE, I say. I can ne'er forgive such a slight as this burdensome hatred thou hast lain upon my soul. It shall be a thing carried henceforth by me, and my sons after me, and their sons and grandsons, on unto the end of my line. Ne'er shall we rest until we have been revenged upon the whole pack of you.
Players (first group): Dudes, chill. It's not their fault. Trent totally said it's Atari's fault.
Trent Oster: *coughcough*
Players (third group): Hey! Has there been any change? What more can you tell us?
Beamdog: We don't have anything more to report.
Players (third group): What more can you tell us?
Beamdog: We aren't able to tell you anything, because this process is ongoing.
Players (third group): What more can you tell us?
((this continues for 20 more pages))
Players (first group): Have you people not been paying attention? Beamdog can't say anything either way for legal reasons.
Players (second group): SIDE WITH THEM IF YOU MUST! But know you this: ANY who stand between me and my most righteous vengeance shall serve as but a foretaste of what my wrath shall visit upon the house of Oster. Either thou art with me, or thou are with the Beamdogs.
Players (trolls breaking away from the first group): Are you stupid or something!? Have you not been paying attention!? It's not Beamdog's fault!? What's your damage!?
Players (second group): You have assailed my honor. Come, sir, I am for you.
((they fight))
Players (third group): ... But what more can you TELL us?
I assume that there's only 3 places BeamDog/OverHaul could have gone to obtain the rights to produce and publish BG:EE back when they first started this project:
1) Hasbro/WotC. Originally in many of my posts I assumed this was the ONLY place where the negotiations had come from since WotC/Hasbro were/are the rights holders for D&D. After the "Unoffical" thread I linked above, I have stepped back from that opinion. Namely because if BeamDog had obtained the rights to produce and sell this from Hasbro directly, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
This leaves open 2 more choices for who could have given BeamDog/OverHaul the rights to produce the game.
2) The second place where BeamDog could have gotten rights is from Atari SA, the original rights holders for D&D Electronic IPs. If this is the case, what we're waiting on is unclear to me. If the distribution rights where through Atari SA, then (as above) there'd be nothing in Atari's Bankruptcy that should have affected this project in any way. Thus I rule this out as the possibility since Atari's bankruptcy has, in some way, affected the sale of this game from BeamDog.
3) The third and most likely place for BeamDog to have gotten its distribution rights from is Atari Inc., who's parent company (Atari SA) owns the rights to publish, produce and distribute D&D Electronic games. Since Atari Inc. is Atari SA's US distribution authority (at least I assume it is) it would only make sense for BeamDog to go to Atari US to obtain the rights to produce and distribute the software. And given that it would also make sense why they had to STOP distribution of the software...that distribution agreement likely got put on hold the moment the bankruptcy filing hit the courts. Here, I believe, we have Occam's razor...the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions.
As posted earlier, I'm not sure what distribution rights look like after the bankruptcy, since Atari Inc. will continue to exist in some way after the Chapter 11 is completed. If Atari Inc. still exists and is still the US distributor for Atari SA then whoever ends up owning Atari Inc. will have to re-negotiate the contract with BeamDog. If, in the case where Atari SA ends up with Atari Inc. (as I expect they will), there is no existing contract with BeamDog, then one will have to be negotiated. Whether Atari SA will create / find another US Distribution point for ATARI products (which will then have to negotiate with BeamDog) or whether Atari SA simply licenses the D&D IP to BeamDog directly (which would save them a whole crapload of issues, but would lessen the amount of money Atari SA would make off the property) would remain to be seen.
None of this can be figured out, however, till we know what is going to happen to Atari Inc...and that, I believe, is what we're waiting on.
To figure out just what the heck will happen to Atari.
This whole topic ( and even more ) in one post.
Thank you for that.
P.S.
Also thank you for pricing my profile pic.
[ ] - Did Not Truly Laugh Out Loud
[x] - Did Truly Laugh Out Loud
Thanks so much Six, you'll be hearing from my Lawyer now...the rest of my office is looking at me like i have 2 heads due to me guffawing in my cube. Damages I tell you...
"ANY who stand between me and my most righteous vengeance shall serve as but a foretaste of what my wrath shall visit upon the house of Oster."
I swear to God you win life dude. My hat's off to you.
Pretty spot-on, but I've seen a lot less of the Evils encouraging Beamdog to leak the patch, and a lot more of the irrational, liver-eating, blood-vengeance-y hatred. But I think, on the whole, this pretty well encapsulates the general reaction to this news, and then represents it in a very-much appropriate D&D nine-alignments scheme!
I stand by what I said to Overhaul. I don't care if you agree or not. Your opinion is of no consequence to me.
1) He says he wasn't trying to belittle you. He is making an attempt to clarify his intent. But you insist that he was, in fact, trying to belittle you. How to resolve this apparent contradiction?... My recommendation is to take him at his word. Because he is, after all, offering an apology and seeking to end hostilities. Unless you have some compelling reason to keep the argument going?...
2) It does, at first blush, appear somewhat difficult to discern to whom the apology is being offered from the above; the wording does make it rather vague. Is he apologizing to @Sandman? Or to "the forums," which appears as an object in that first sentence? I will submit that the apology is being offered to both: to "the forum" because of the inconvenience that negative, argumentative postings can cause; and to you, @Sandman (the only forum poster specifically named in the quoted text), as the recipient of the unintended insult.
3) You claim that "[@Illydth's] opinion is of no consequence to [you]" -- a statement which I find to be somewhat suspect. If you did not, in fact, care about @Illydth's opinions, why question the sincerity of his apology? Why not just accept that he was big enough to drop it, say he was sorry, and then move on? I should actually think that the "moving on" part would be more in character for someone who doesn't care about the other party's opinions, but that's just me.
I'll also note that, in seeking redress for your having been insulted, you've managed to insult everyone posting here by calling us all sycophants. It's more than fair to express that you feel insulted, but insulting others in the process is not the best way to go about playing nice with others. If you think you are owed an apology... do you think the "sycophants" are owed any less?
1. How do you know no such lawsuit has been filed against Beamdog by the bankruptcy managers?
2. Aside from announcing the removal of the game, journalists in the industry don't seem at all interested in what's going on: no one's been interviewed, no questions have been asked, no op/ed pieces have been written. Given the utter lack of concern for the situation, it doesn't surprise me that more outlets aren't actively pursuing the story.
3. The reason I'm distrustful of Beamdog at this point is because, even with the legal entanglements, they still have the ability to issue denials regarding information that is flat-out false. Admittedly, I'm not a lawyer, but I kind of doubt debunking a report as having no basis in reality harms negotiations in any way. Instead, the devs' reaction to the GB post ran along the lines of "If it's true, we can't comment on it" along with an expression of concern that someone might be leaking information. That, to me, doesn't sound like a proper response to a fabricated news item.
Obviously, I'm taking all this with a grain of salt - simply because, as you point out, we don't have any concrete facts at this moment - but I felt I should point out that your statement of "Beamdog is good, Atari is at fault" hasn't been verified either.
It's all just pointless conjecture anyway. At the end of the day, we don't know any more now than we did a month ago (save, perhaps, that the auction was never relevant to begin with) and we're not likely to find out anytime soon. Whatever process is supposedly underway, it could take months to resolve, and longer still for results to show since they've suspended all work on BG:EE and BG2:EE. I've already made my decision (no pre-ordering, possibly no purchase at launch either); beyond that, I don't think there's anything more to say.
I do hope to buy BG2EE down the line, but I am concerned that there will be lots of competition from the Eternity and Numenera projects, among others. If Eternity and BG2EE release around the same time, I get the feeling most (including myself) will save their money for Eternity.
How does Beamdog hope to regain customer loyalty in the face of all this?
Anyway, when you are legally obliged to keep secrets you can't really look trustworthy, but judging them as the opposite solely on the basis of how they fullfill that obligation is unfair. Complaining about the state of the game at release would make some sense at least, complaining that they do not comment on stuff they are not allowed to comment is wrong.