Maybe quite emotional but... after half year of waiting i must say I'm disappointed. I don't trust Overhaul anymore and i hope they will never mess up with Baldur's Gate series again. I hope they read 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.
Well, as you said in an earlier post @shawne, you're not a lawyer. And, for that matter, neither am I. But I do have (far too many) friends who are in corporate law. From chatting casually with them about this issue, and listening to them talk shop (which, in the most recent case, I was in no position to stop, since I was with my best friend and he was buying me the best pastrami sandwich in Los Angeles for lunch [so, as far as I was concerned, he was free to take the conversation wherever he wanted]), here is my understanding of how these sorts of things work:
1) In corporate law, you don't want to go to trial. The way these things are supposed to work, and the way that companies prefer them to work, involves a good deal of posturing, and letters moving back and forth between the opposing legal counsels. When things do go to trial, that usually means one side or the other has fouled something up rather badly (or, that differences between the two opposing parties are so irreconcilable that you need a judge to be in the room to sort things out and play referee). This is why basically none of this is public but for what either Atari or Beamdog has made public to its body of customers: exactly none of it is happening in a courtroom.
2) Beamdog (and Trent Oster) wouldn't be able to say anything unless both sides had given it the go-ahead. In Beamdog's initial announcement (and the FAQ that appears on the Baldur's Gate main page), there is no mention at all made of Atari being the other entity. Trent didn't admit that it was Atari until later on. All that we can infer from this is that something changed in the understanding between the two parties, between the initial announcement and the revelation that the "publishing partner" was Atari, as far as what information could be released. The suggestion that "they're equally free to deny false reports" is rather baseless without knowing more about what is being said between the two sides in their ongoing discussions. Which, you know, obviously! Because if we knew more about the discussions we wouldn't be sitting here in the forums speculating, now would we?
3) What this particular dispute revolves around is intellectual property law. Which, as my best friend suggested to me as I gorged myself on delicious, delicious pastrami on rye, is one of the more difficult and contentious aspects to corporate law. Essentially, the aim of intellectual property law is to sort out who has the right to make money off of which ideas. I believe I recall someone, pages and pages ago in this discussion thread, talk about how Atari's filing for bankruptcy would have affected their existing contracts? Like a big shiny reset button. This is not something I am clear on, but regardless. Once again I feel the need to single out the contention that Beamdog deserves any of our blame and ire as being a totally irrational, illogical and utterly indefensible position. Everything that we know so far (admittedly very little, but regardless) suggests that Beamdog is only guilty of going about its business working on updating a classic CRPG when they were hit with a letter from Atari's legal counsel, likely regarding a renegociation of the terms of the IP agreement whereby Beamdog has the right to earn any money off of the Baldur's Gate property.
Once again: I am not a lawyer. I'm just a guy who likes video games and pastrami. But I think I'm intelligent enough to have a reasonable grasp of what few facts are public knowledge, and these are what inform my position on this entire mess, re: Beamdog, Atari et al. Also: this is my 100th post. I'm going to go have a sandwich to celebrate.
@ThunderSoul: And 22.2M is less than a 10th of the amount they owe ONLY to Atari SA (250M or something like that)...not including what the rest of their creditors are owed. That, of course, assumes the judge authorizes the $200+M claim of Atari SA...that felt more like a "land grab" claim than anything else.
@shawne I like your posts and your logic, if not your position. Your points are concise (much more so than mine) and a good counter argument to my posts. Well Done!
To Rebut a second:
"1. How do you know no such lawsuit has been filed against Beamdog by the bankruptcy managers?"
I do not "know" anything. If your argument hinges on the actual definition of "know", then I cannot defend my position...of course, that same definition would preclude your position or pretty much any discussion on these forums, so lets assume "know" in this case means "can reasonably/logically guess". (i.e. There is some evidential backing to why we believe as we do.)
I believe no such lawsuit has been filed because I have neither heard of any legal battles between Atari and Beamdog, nor can I find any such documents that define a legal battle. Court documents are public record, and a search of public record turns up nothing.
To cut this down a bit, if BeamDog were in debt to Atari they would appear in Atari Inc.'s Statement of Assets that they filed when they filed bankruptcy.
Second: There simply isn't any information to corroborate GB's story on this. Not a single shred of evidence, not a single additional story, not a single reference.
See below.
< snip - Edit: I prefer the method below to the rest of my argument.< /snip >
Not to beat a dead horse (yea, go ahead, laugh), but I think the best point I can make toward the GameBanshee article would be done through an example. Apologies in advance.
NOTICE: Nothing below has the SLIIGHTEST hint of the truth to it. This is mearly an example. ---------------- BALDUR'S GATE FORUM DENIZEN ACTUALLY ATARI EMPLOYEE Aug. 8, 2013: St. Louis Missouri.
An industry source today has reported that a user on the Baldur's Gate Enhanced Editions forum otherwise known as @shawne is, in fact, an Atari Employee. @shawne has been known to post anti-BeamDog sentements on the forum and has in the past pushed the belief that BeamDog, producers of Baldur's Gate: Enhanced Edition, owes Atari money.
It has been further revealed by the industry source that @shawne has been hired by Atari Inc. to push this view on BeamDog's own forums in an attempt pursuade BeamDog customers to purchase their copies of the hit game through the Atari distribution method of Steam rather than wait for BeamDog's future ability to sell the game. Due to publishing rights, Atari Inc. makes significantly more revenue per copy of the game through their Steam distribution agreement than through BeamDog's distribution channels.
An attempt to contact @shawne for comment returned nothing. -----------------
There we have it folks! @shawne is an Atari Employee! Someone on the internet posted an official story that says so!
So now, @shawne, what kind of denial should be given? Maybe something like...
"From @shawne: I am not now, nor have I ever been employed by Atari Inc. or any of it's parents or subsidiaries. The opinions I've posted on these forums are mine and mine alone, and are posted in the interest of providing my opinions to the community. These acusations are groundless, and without merit."
A great corporate rebuttal if ever there was one written @shawne! I'm sure that will shut the internet up completely right?
"From RandomForumDenizen01: LOLzors! Of COURSE @shawne denies being an Atari Employee, DUH what's he going to do? Stand up and say 'yep, that's me, i'm here to subvert you all...' Of COURSE NOT. He's going to deny this as he's done!
I don't know, 'The gentelmen doth protest too much, me thinks!' (Shakespere, Hamelt, Act III)"
And then what? Are you going to come back on the forums and continue to deny this idiotic initial claim? Are you really going to get involved in an interent forum discussion about whether you are or are not an Atari employee? Are you going to post up your birth cirtificate and drivers license to prove you're not? What if your name is "Joe Smith" and there are 6 Joe Smiths employed at Atari?
How must farther down the rabit hole could this completely felatious dicussion get? Does it really do you any good to respond to this? We both know the detractors who "don't believe" BeamDog are simply going to take this route in their discussions. The argument simply changes from "you won't deny it so it must be true" to "we don't trust what you say because you lied to us before"
With the interent revolution and the dismantling of the majority of the real news organizations (those NOT controlled by a totaliarian media dictator with his own agenda), many of us have forgoten what "primary source" and "due diligence" really mean. Instead we've come to trust any major website with even the slightest name recognition behind it to provide us the news of the day. What we need to keep in mind is that many of the folks running these websites aren't Journalists, they're programmers and web developers, they may not have the background in Journalistic Ethics. Hell even some journalists and journalistic companies these days are more in it for the sales and recognition a "juicy story" provides than in ensuring quality news.
@shawne, you may be COMPLETELY RIGHT. GameBanshee may have this story dead on the money and BeamDog might very well owe Atari a boatload of money. That still doesn't negate the fact that GameBanshee has COMPLETELY failed to publish this in a way that even comes remotely close to passing the sniff test.
They used a generic "industry source" without backing that information up with further confirmation. They have failed to publish any further research backing up this source's information. They have published no primary or secondary sources that confirm anything they've said, and they've done no independent research to coroberate the information in the story they published. At MINIMUM that makes the story suspect...and really little more than page filler.
I'm paying money not to worry about all of this. They should resolve this kind of cr*p behind the scenes; I'm not happy wasting time waiting for a patch that I already paid for which will not come because of some greedy extremely obese white-haired selfish eccentric bureaucrats that want an additional $10m in their pockets in addition to the who knows how many hundreds of millions they already have in their damned bank accounts. They're just bored and got nothing better to do, nothing to lose, and all they can do is go cause trouble for others, a.k.a. the lil' guy who had to save $20-$30 in 3-4 months just to afford a great game they used to love as a kid!
You are an unbelievably awesome person, ThunderSoul. I feel privileged to know you, even in the vague, not-really-knowing-you-at-all way of online forum postings. Your ascendance to the heights of your chosen profession and indeed the achievement of all your personal goals and then some are a certainty upon which I would bet the life of my only child. I don't have a child, but you make me wish I did so I could bet its life upon your inevitable success. Your noble bearing and gentle grace inspire me, as they must all others who encounter you. I only pray I die before you do, preferably in your service. The idea of living in a world without the great ThunderSoul is one I don't even want to contemplate. If you were to leave me, I would be lost in a meaningless void from which there can be no escape, not without you, Thundersoul, you absolutely top-notch person you.
You are an unbelievably awesome person, ThunderSoul. I feel privileged to know you, even in the vague, not-really-knowing-you-at-all way of online forum postings. Your ascendance to the heights of your chosen profession and indeed the achievement of all your personal goals and then some are a certainty upon which I would bet the life of my only child. I don't have a child, but you make me wish I did so I could bet its life upon your inevitable success. Your noble bearing and gentle grace inspire me, as they must all others who encounter you. I only pray I die before you do, preferably in your service. The idea of living in a world without the great ThunderSoul is one I don't even want to contemplate. If you were to leave me, I would be lost in a meaningless void from which there can be no escape, not without you, Thundersoul, you absolutely top-notch person you.
I'd snip some of this and make it a signature @Thundersoul.
You know I knew it was some kind of a lolly pop but honestly I don't recall being into tootsie pop's much as a kid. I did get tootsie rolls a lot for halloween (which for me was basically a waste of space in a halloween bag haha) but tootsie pops must just not been as big where I grew up I guess. Anyways I'm only writing this because the first question that popped into my mind when I saw your post was "what the heck is a tootsie pop?". Now I know
I think you missed out on something big, @elminster... but, then again, if I had to choose between indulging in things like tootsie pops in my youth, or eventually growing up to be a 29th level Mage and one of the Chosen of Mystra...
Agree that tootie rolls are just cheapo-poor quality halloween candy, but the tootsie pops are good stuff. Grape, in particular.
You are an unbelievably awesome person, ThunderSoul. I feel privileged to know you, even in the vague, not-really-knowing-you-at-all way of online forum postings. Your ascendance to the heights of your chosen profession and indeed the achievement of all your personal goals and then some are a certainty upon which I would bet the life of my only child. I don't have a child, but you make me wish I did so I could bet its life upon your inevitable success. Your noble bearing and gentle grace inspire me, as they must all others who encounter you. I only pray I die before you do, preferably in your service. The idea of living in a world without the great ThunderSoul is one I don't even want to contemplate. If you were to leave me, I would be lost in a meaningless void from which there can be no escape, not without you, Thundersoul, you absolutely top-notch person you.
ROFL, a stroke of genius and poetic writing. Very good story, how long did it take you to make it up? :P
With such a magnificent personage as Thundersoul, the words cannot help but flow. In such instances, which are all too few and far between in this wretched world, it's all I can do to catch some meagre few of them long enough for my woefully inadequate fingers to express the depths of my sincere emotions.
Now, could you perhaps find it in you to eulogize the legal person(s) on the other end of the Atari <-> Beamdog tug-of-war?
With your inestimable skill in the art of adulation, I predict they will be so caught up in the reverie of their own splendor that they'll in all likelyhood agree to just about anything Beamdog suggests. And then we all win.
Illydth, I won't quote you, your post is way too long. It is a shame that useless comments have flooded the post since then hence covering some very impressive writing.
I sure am glad I waited to buy this. I wanted to see if it was bug free like it was supose to be but it wasn't. I then waited for the bugs to be fixed. It was getting better and I was almost ready to buy and now this. What a waste. If it is ever sorted out who will care by then. I guess I will now wait to see if all 3 BG are released before I buy since I already own the originals and the enhanced editions are useless unless the series is completed. You can't use the characters from the enhanced edition in the originals. It sure would help if there was more information posted about what is happening. It would at least give hope and make the wait more bearable.
@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.
I don't think the cost of the games competes for most people. Buying both is cheaper than a regular full-priced game.
I don't think the cost of the games competes for most people. Buying both is cheaper than a regular full-priced game.
You are certainly entitled to that opinion, and I am sure that is true in your case. But as a full-time student taking loans, every financial cost not essential to living has to be assessed. I would point to GOG and Steam to support my position that gaming prices are very competitive, and 20 dollars is at the high end of what many would pay for a game. I personally got 5 games for about 20 bucks off the Steam sale.
If you had to choose between BG2EE and Eternity at release, would you still go with BG2EE? I think Beamdog needs to be checked for dropping the ball a few times personally.
I think a lot of people will be getting Eternity by default simply because they contributed during the Kickstarter campaign; all of those people already paid for the game, and so when it comes to BG2EE (or Torment, or any other game), Eternity isn't a factor because the purchase happened a year ago.
Not for everyone, obviously, but that's one advantage for Kickstarter: fans who contribute end up with a free game later on, leaving them with a bit more cash to spend on other projects they may have missed.
As an Eternity backer, I'm with Dee on this one. Of course, as an Eternity backer, I also lack the perspective of a non-backer who's interested in Eternity, so I could be mistaken.
@Dee I would disagree and say it is a factor for the majority, but you are correct that some people won't have to re-purchase the game. I say 're-purchase' because they did not get it for free; they 'donated' and received something in return.
If it was the majority, and they got it for free as you say, I would say Kickstarter is the worst thing that happened to game developers since Atari going into bankruptcy (that's going to be a saying now).
@Jarrakul How much did contribute to secure your copy? Right now they have the Slacker Backer deal for like 30 bucks which gets you the digital game. Were you able to contribute a lot less to get the game?
During the campaign, the "get a copy of the game" tier was at $25, with a limited number being given away at the $20 tier.
I ended up donating $35 because I wanted the soundtrack as well, but it sounds like $25 is less than what the final game will cost, making it a "better" choice to buy it early (the downside being that you're buying it sight-unseen).
@Dee: I don't know that I'd call it "sight unseen" - names like Chris Avellone, George Ziets and Tim Cain carry a lot of weight for gamers, and deservedly so. There's no way "Project Eternity" can be all things for all people, but the odds of it being a bad game in itself are virtually nil.
Comments
1) In corporate law, you don't want to go to trial. The way these things are supposed to work, and the way that companies prefer them to work, involves a good deal of posturing, and letters moving back and forth between the opposing legal counsels. When things do go to trial, that usually means one side or the other has fouled something up rather badly (or, that differences between the two opposing parties are so irreconcilable that you need a judge to be in the room to sort things out and play referee). This is why basically none of this is public but for what either Atari or Beamdog has made public to its body of customers: exactly none of it is happening in a courtroom.
2) Beamdog (and Trent Oster) wouldn't be able to say anything unless both sides had given it the go-ahead. In Beamdog's initial announcement (and the FAQ that appears on the Baldur's Gate main page), there is no mention at all made of Atari being the other entity. Trent didn't admit that it was Atari until later on. All that we can infer from this is that something changed in the understanding between the two parties, between the initial announcement and the revelation that the "publishing partner" was Atari, as far as what information could be released. The suggestion that "they're equally free to deny false reports" is rather baseless without knowing more about what is being said between the two sides in their ongoing discussions. Which, you know, obviously! Because if we knew more about the discussions we wouldn't be sitting here in the forums speculating, now would we?
3) What this particular dispute revolves around is intellectual property law. Which, as my best friend suggested to me as I gorged myself on delicious, delicious pastrami on rye, is one of the more difficult and contentious aspects to corporate law. Essentially, the aim of intellectual property law is to sort out who has the right to make money off of which ideas. I believe I recall someone, pages and pages ago in this discussion thread, talk about how Atari's filing for bankruptcy would have affected their existing contracts? Like a big shiny reset button. This is not something I am clear on, but regardless. Once again I feel the need to single out the contention that Beamdog deserves any of our blame and ire as being a totally irrational, illogical and utterly indefensible position. Everything that we know so far (admittedly very little, but regardless) suggests that Beamdog is only guilty of going about its business working on updating a classic CRPG when they were hit with a letter from Atari's legal counsel, likely regarding a renegociation of the terms of the IP agreement whereby Beamdog has the right to earn any money off of the Baldur's Gate property.
Once again: I am not a lawyer. I'm just a guy who likes video games and pastrami. But I think I'm intelligent enough to have a reasonable grasp of what few facts are public knowledge, and these are what inform my position on this entire mess, re: Beamdog, Atari et al. Also: this is my 100th post. I'm going to go have a sandwich to celebrate.
Very well said and written, hopefully your artfully written explanation will bring some understanding to the more frustrated consumers.
Also kudos for taking the time to present knowledge/information/opinions in such a clear convincing way, one hell of a fine read.
@shawne I like your posts and your logic, if not your position. Your points are concise (much more so than mine) and a good counter argument to my posts. Well Done!
To Rebut a second:
"1. How do you know no such lawsuit has been filed against Beamdog by the bankruptcy managers?"
I do not "know" anything. If your argument hinges on the actual definition of "know", then I cannot defend my position...of course, that same definition would preclude your position or pretty much any discussion on these forums, so lets assume "know" in this case means "can reasonably/logically guess". (i.e. There is some evidential backing to why we believe as we do.)
I believe no such lawsuit has been filed because I have neither heard of any legal battles between Atari and Beamdog, nor can I find any such documents that define a legal battle. Court documents are public record, and a search of public record turns up nothing.
To cut this down a bit, if BeamDog were in debt to Atari they would appear in Atari Inc.'s Statement of Assets that they filed when they filed bankruptcy.
Second: There simply isn't any information to corroborate GB's story on this. Not a single shred of evidence, not a single additional story, not a single reference.
See below.
< snip - Edit: I prefer the method below to the rest of my argument.< /snip >
NOTICE: Nothing below has the SLIIGHTEST hint of the truth to it. This is mearly an example.
----------------
BALDUR'S GATE FORUM DENIZEN ACTUALLY ATARI EMPLOYEE
Aug. 8, 2013: St. Louis Missouri.
An industry source today has reported that a user on the Baldur's Gate Enhanced Editions forum otherwise known as @shawne is, in fact, an Atari Employee. @shawne has been known to post anti-BeamDog sentements on the forum and has in the past pushed the belief that BeamDog, producers of Baldur's Gate: Enhanced Edition, owes Atari money.
It has been further revealed by the industry source that @shawne has been hired by Atari Inc. to push this view on BeamDog's own forums in an attempt pursuade BeamDog customers to purchase their copies of the hit game through the Atari distribution method of Steam rather than wait for BeamDog's future ability to sell the game. Due to publishing rights, Atari Inc. makes significantly more revenue per copy of the game through their Steam distribution agreement than through BeamDog's distribution channels.
An attempt to contact @shawne for comment returned nothing.
-----------------
There we have it folks! @shawne is an Atari Employee! Someone on the internet posted an official story that says so!
So now, @shawne, what kind of denial should be given? Maybe something like...
"From @shawne: I am not now, nor have I ever been employed by Atari Inc. or any of it's parents or subsidiaries. The opinions I've posted on these forums are mine and mine alone, and are posted in the interest of providing my opinions to the community. These acusations are groundless, and without merit."
A great corporate rebuttal if ever there was one written @shawne!
"From RandomForumDenizen01: LOLzors! Of COURSE @shawne denies being an Atari Employee, DUH what's he going to do? Stand up and say 'yep, that's me, i'm here to subvert you all...' Of COURSE NOT. He's going to deny this as he's done!
I don't know, 'The gentelmen doth protest too much, me thinks!' (Shakespere, Hamelt, Act III)"
And then what? Are you going to come back on the forums and continue to deny this idiotic initial claim? Are you really going to get involved in an interent forum discussion about whether you are or are not an Atari employee? Are you going to post up your birth cirtificate and drivers license to prove you're not? What if your name is "Joe Smith" and there are 6 Joe Smiths employed at Atari?
How must farther down the rabit hole could this completely felatious dicussion get? Does it really do you any good to respond to this? We both know the detractors who "don't believe" BeamDog are simply going to take this route in their discussions. The argument simply changes from "you won't deny it so it must be true" to "we don't trust what you say because you lied to us before"
With the interent revolution and the dismantling of the majority of the real news organizations (those NOT controlled by a totaliarian media dictator with his own agenda), many of us have forgoten what "primary source" and "due diligence" really mean. Instead we've come to trust any major website with even the slightest name recognition behind it to provide us the news of the day. What we need to keep in mind is that many of the folks running these websites aren't Journalists, they're programmers and web developers, they may not have the background in Journalistic Ethics. Hell even some journalists and journalistic companies these days are more in it for the sales and recognition a "juicy story" provides than in ensuring quality news.
@shawne, you may be COMPLETELY RIGHT. GameBanshee may have this story dead on the money and BeamDog might very well owe Atari a boatload of money. That still doesn't negate the fact that GameBanshee has COMPLETELY failed to publish this in a way that even comes remotely close to passing the sniff test.
They used a generic "industry source" without backing that information up with further confirmation. They have failed to publish any further research backing up this source's information. They have published no primary or secondary sources that confirm anything they've said, and they've done no independent research to coroberate the information in the story they published. At MINIMUM that makes the story suspect...and really little more than page filler.
They're just bored and got nothing better to do, nothing to lose, and all they can do is go cause trouble for others, a.k.a. the lil' guy who had to save $20-$30 in 3-4 months just to afford a great game they used to love as a kid!
Very good story, how long did it take you to make it up? :P
So yeah, it didn't take that long.
Now, could you perhaps find it in you to eulogize the legal person(s) on the other end of the Atari <-> Beamdog tug-of-war?
With your inestimable skill in the art of adulation, I predict they will be so caught up in the reverie of their own splendor that they'll in all likelyhood agree to just about anything Beamdog suggests. And then we all win.
Yeah, colour me the practical sort...
Hold on to that feeling, yeah~!
If you had to choose between BG2EE and Eternity at release, would you still go with BG2EE? I think Beamdog needs to be checked for dropping the ball a few times personally.
Not for everyone, obviously, but that's one advantage for Kickstarter: fans who contribute end up with a free game later on, leaving them with a bit more cash to spend on other projects they may have missed.
If it was the majority, and they got it for free as you say, I would say Kickstarter is the worst thing that happened to game developers since Atari going into bankruptcy (that's going to be a saying now).
@Jarrakul How much did contribute to secure your copy? Right now they have the Slacker Backer deal for like 30 bucks which gets you the digital game. Were you able to contribute a lot less to get the game?
I ended up donating $35 because I wanted the soundtrack as well, but it sounds like $25 is less than what the final game will cost, making it a "better" choice to buy it early (the downside being that you're buying it sight-unseen).