I think maybe it has something to do with the fact that the discussion's all happening in the announcement thread. We may want to consider making these announcements "read-only" (the assumption being that people are welcome to discuss them in the General Discussions subforum).
What do people think about that idea?
I'd prefer a single discussion thread each announcement because otherwise General Discussions will be cluttered with multiple threads regarding one announcement. Better keep the thread list clean and let us discuss in one single thread - the one which was started with the announcement. One can still find out which post refers to which by quoting.
I agree with AendaeronBluescale. Just leave this stuff in one thread. If there starts being rampant abuse then close it but otherwise it makes sense to just leave it all together.
Please keep this thread open. For me, at least, it's really great to be able to see the developer answers in the same thread as the announcement. If you closed it and several other popped up I would have to look around in all of them for that blue colour of awesome ; )
Anyway, I really hope you manage to cut through the legal mess and salvage a workable deal for the games that we love! Like they say in tennis: Come on, Beamdog!
Maybe if I share something about myself it will help clarify the discussion, if the analogy I try to make holds.
In real life, I am a classical music teacher and performer. Classical music teachers and performers are paid very low salaries unless they "hit the big time" with a major international-quality professional symphony orchestra. Ninety percent of us never do.
I knew this by the time I was eighteen years old, but I still pursued a career in classical music. I did it because I love classical music, and I didn't want to have to make my living doing anything else.
But, I have bills to pay. I have to buy groceries, I have to keep my lights turned on, and I have to pay property taxes. I'd sure hate to have to live without an internet connection or cable/satellite/fiber optic TV. I need a cell phone, and I still kind of like having a land line in my house.
If people stop paying me to teach their kids classical music, then I will have no choice but to find some other kind of job.
Now, try to imagine how I would feel, when forced to find another job, if one of my student's parents said to me, "Why, you're just a greedy money-grubber! I can't believe you won't teach my kid as a free-time hobby! You went into the classical music business so you could make money! That's all you classical music teachers care about, is money. I know that the main reason anybody ever goes into classical music is to make money! That's the whole purpose of being a classical musician! You don't care about classical music, it's just a capitalistic money-making scheme to you."
So, does everyone understand my analogy, or is that too subtle? I really have an emotional reaction to some of these posts that some people are kicking Beamdog while they're down, just because they can. I support the Beamdog/Overhaul team whole-heartedly, and the $20 bill I gave them was one of the best $20 bills I ever spent. Let's see, I could have ordered pizza one night for supper, or I could buy a new version of Baldur's Gate that I can enjoy forever, while possibly keeping a business afloat that might give me even more things to enjoy, at very low cost. That decision was a no-brainer, to me.
Maybe if I share something about myself it will help clarify the discussion, if the analogy I try to make holds.
Now, try to imagine how I would feel, when forced to find another job, if one of my student's parents said to me, "Why, you're just a greedy money-grubber! I can't believe you won't teach my kid as a free-time hobby! You went into the classical music business so you could make money! That's all you classical music teachers care about, is money. I know that the main reason anybody ever goes into classical music is to make money! That's the whole purpose of being a classical musician! You don't care about classical music, it's just a capitalistic money-making scheme to you."
Who in this thread said this? I've read so many posts I cannot recall whether someone made this argument or not.
I don't care whether the guys at Overhaul make a dollar a day, or a thousand dollars, or a million.
I don't care whether their motive is to make money, or have fun, or do something cool to attract girls. Or just to do this to be together because they happen to enjoy each other's company.
I don't care whether they drive a Cadillac or a BMW or a Rolls Royce, or a rusty old Fiat. Whether they eat Filet Mignon or burgers.
What I do care about is whether or not they create a product that I want, at a price that I am willing and able to pay.
@rdarken I can't find anything that resembles belgarathmth's argument. The reason I bring it up is because misrepresenting other people's viewpoints can lead to more unnecessary arguing.
So, does everyone understand my analogy, or is that too subtle? I really have an emotional reaction to some of these posts that some people are kicking Beamdog while they're down, just because they can. I support the Beamdog/Overhaul team whole-heartedly, and the $20 bill I gave them was one of the best $20 bills I ever spent. Let's see, I could have ordered pizza one night for supper, or I could buy a new version of Baldur's Gate that I can enjoy forever, while possibly keeping a business afloat that might give me even more things to enjoy, at very low cost. That decision was a no-brainer, to me.
@rdarken I can't find anything that resembles belgarathmth's argument. The reason I bring it up is because misrepresenting other people's viewpoints can lead to more unnecessary arguing.
@belgarathmth didn't misrepresent anyone's viewpoints. It was an exaggeration, and a hypothetical, and he didn't mention anyone by name. While the exact words he used never appeared in this discussion before he posted them, he did (I think) a nice job of summarizing and responding to some of the unfounded ire directed at Beamdog since this whole mess started.
Both sides exist, Beamdog is a company and intent to make business. But this is also Baldur's Gate, and we doesn't have many companies outside willing to remake this game.
A shame they don't have free reign, a shame in my view they didn't remake the game from it's bases (into a decent 3D fashion) and a shame they make so few new content for BG:EE, but at least they did something, $18,00 (what i paid) wasn't a so scam price to generate so much bad behavior.
Yeah, I don't want to go pointing any fingers or stirring up unnecessary drama, but belgarath was responding to a few posts from the last page or two of posts.
But you can't respond (correctly) to somebody's argument by making up a situation that is convenient for your rhetoric. I can't say I'm particularly fond of some of the more aggressive posters' sentiment, but I haven't seen anyone claim that Beamdog is a group of money-grubbing capitalist schemers... unless I missed that post, which is possible among the 15 pages we have now generated.
I am sure beamdog told Atari of their intentions before they began and Atari did not act upon it. The fact Atari have waited for a whole release and the upcoming 2nd release of EE shows they had little care for the game until it was making profit for beamdog.
I have no idea why this is even up for debate. Atari should be getting their ass handed to them on a silver platter at the courts because of their inability to act and the greater crime of preventing better gaming content for public use at the expense of some greedy corporation from a game Atari had no intentions of touching. This is the kind of action taken from a drowning corporation like Atari that needs money.
I swear if this game doesnt see the light of day again, I will boycott Atari games until they are bargain basement prices. They will never receive that first week of crucial pay that so many companies crave.
Check this out if you do not belive me. Jimquisition is probally one of the best soruces of information on how gaming companies work.
I will warn younger people to not click the link. PG content required
I think this thread mustn't be closed till the problem has a resolution. It's very convenient to open this one thread and to find any news on the matter that exists. If this thread is closed then to discuss the situation and to find out what's happening now we should browse the whole forum opening many different discussions. Moreover, the good side of one thread about all this is an ability to see how the situation has been developing day by day.
There're so many good points and interesting ideas on this thread as well as encouraging speeches and insightful points of view. Keep it up! The Devs really need to feel our love and belief in these circumstances. They've given us a product of our life so let's give them everything we can.
Personally, it feels something special to be able to help, even morally, to this great team and to show them the respect they fully deserve.
I am sure beamdog told Atari of their intentions before they began and Atari did not act upon it. The fact Atari have waited for a whole release and the upcoming 2nd release of EE shows they had little care for the game until it was making profit for beamdog.
I would have a hard time believing this was some sinister trick Atari had up their sleeve the whole time. It seems to me that the timing has more to do with Atari's bankruptcy, which I doubt is something that they were planning on.
I think this thread mustn't be closed till the problem has a resolution. It's very convenient to open this one thread and to find any news on the matter that exists. If this thread is closed then to discuss the situation and to find out what's happening now we should browse the whole forum opening many different discussions. Moreover, the good side of one thread about all this is an ability to see how the situation has been developing day by day.
The thing is, other than the original post by PhillipDaigle, there is very little actual news in this thread. There are a few tidbits here and there, but most of it is just conjecture, either from people reading too far into the few details that have been given, or just flat out making stuff up. Obviously there's nothing wrong with people sharing their thoughts on the matter, but I think that if people want a thread where they could easily look for accurate information, it'd be better if the moderators just made a locked thread that they'd update as details becomes available. There could always be a seperate thread dedicated to forum members discussing the issue.
I would like to lend my support to your efforts in resolving this.
Aside from moral support, kind words, well wishes, fairy magic and Jedi mind tricks, I also wouldn't mind contributing financially. Have you considered setting up some way for people to donate directly?
I'm sure I'm not the only one who'd like to help out, and while it might not be enough to pay for legal fees, it could at least help cheer you up, or get you trough a rainy day. Even if you just use it for beer and pizza I'd consider it money well spent.
There is one comment from Trent Oster that I'd like to clarify - is overhaul legally prevented from publishing patches to the already published game, or have they decided they cannot work on the patch because they cannot sell the game any more?
I don't think that this is a matter of money, at least directly, atm @DeathOfNames. They have contractual and copyright issues apparently to solve. A partner is already down, as we can see by the vanish of HASBRO logo from the trademark display at the bottom of the page, and ATARI apparently is keeping the pressure up.
There is one comment from Trent Oster that I'd like to clarify - is overhaul legally prevented from publishing patches to the already published game, or have they decided they cannot work on the patch because they cannot sell the game any more?
In Trent Oster's announcement on www.baldursgate.com there's the following statement (emphasis mine):
<...>We've taken this step at our publishing partner's request as we attempt to resolve a number of contractual issues <...> until this matter is resolved, we are unable to release the latest Baldur's Gate: Enhanced Edition patch<...>.
So, it clearly shows that Beamdog & Overhaul Games is not able to publish any patch now.
And Trent Oster's statement sent to Kotaku has the following (again emphasis mine):
<...>From our end, without the hope of revenue to cover salaries, we have to stop work on all Baldur's Gate products, including the patch. Instead, we need to look for new projects to move our team onto.
So, this part means that the work (the process) on the patch is stopped because of no revenue.
Both these parts don't contradict to each other, instead the second quote adds to the first.
Beamdog & Overhaul Games has no legal rights to publish any patch. And as there's no revenue right now, all the work on patches is stopped.
The answer to your question is: Overhaul is legally prevented from publishing patches to the already published game and in the same time because they cannot sell the game any more and cannot get any revenue they decided to stop current and future work on the patch till the moment this matter is decided.
It would probably make sense to move this whole thread to discussion, and make a new (closed) announcement thread which just has the actual facts (and a link to this thread maybe).
I don't think that this is a matter of money, at least directly, atm @DeathOfNames. They have contractual and copyright issues apparently to solve. A partner is already down, as we can see by the vanish of HASBRO logo from the trademark display at the bottom of the page, and ATARI apparently is keeping the pressure up.
Hasbro's logo is still at the bottom of the main page so they are still here. They own Wizards of the Coast and it doesn't sound like either of them are the issue. No, this is all ATARI.
The answer to your question is: Overhaul is legally prevented from publishing patches to the already published game and in the same time because they cannot sell the game any more and cannot get any revenue they decided to stop current and future work on the patch till the moment this matter is decided.
I'm sorry, do you know that or are you speculating? If you do know, than thanks for the answer, if not - I can speculate myself, and my understanding of these two quotes is different i.e. Beamdog cannot sell the game and make more money on it, so they are not going to work on the patch. Of course this is just speculating on what are not the clearest sentences in the world, hence my question in hope that someone who actually knows what's going on could enlighten us.
The answer to your question is: Overhaul is legally prevented from publishing patches to the already published game and in the same time because they cannot sell the game any more and cannot get any revenue they decided to stop current and future work on the patch till the moment this matter is decided.
I'm sorry, do you know that or are you speculating? If you do know, than thanks for the answer, if not - I can speculate myself, and my understanding of these two quotes is different i.e. Beamdog cannot sell the game and make more money on it, so they are not going to work on the patch. Of course this is just speculating on what are not the clearest sentences in the world, hence my question in hope that someone who actually knows what's going on could enlighten us.
Atari Inc., Atari Interactive Inc., Humongous, Inc. and California US Holdings, Inc. (Atari Companies) have filed petitions for relief under chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York.
Chapter 11 affords the debtor in possession a number of mechanisms to restructure its business. A debtor in possession can acquire financing and loans on favorable terms by giving new lenders first priority on the business's earnings. The court may also permit the debtor in possession to reject and cancel contracts.
Once a bankruptcy is filed, the Trustee (a Chapter 11 debtor-in-possession acts in the same capacity as a trustee) may cure any default and preserve the remaining benefits of the debtor's unexpired executory contracts. Alternatively, the Trustee may unilaterally terminate an executory contract and minimize the financial impact of the default. An executory contract may be sold and assigned to a third party, even though the contract has a provision which otherwise prohibits assignment.
The debtor's rights under the contract, such as the remaining term of a favorable lease, may have significant value to the bankruptcy estate. The Trustee may wish to sell those rights for the benefit of the creditors.
The Trustee may elect to affirm and accept (assume) or terminate and surrender (reject) an executory contract or unexpired lease. Assumption requires court approval. Most courts will apply the "business judgment test" to determine if assumption is appropriate. Rejection is automatic if the contract is not assumed within a proscribed time. The entire contract must be assumed or rejected. The Trustee may not assume part of the contract and reject or modify the rest. The contract may not be assumed unless the Trustee first cures the defaults or provides "adequate assurance" that any defaults will be cured. With some exceptions, the Trustee may assume and assign an executory contract notwithstanding an anti-assignment clause in the contract unless applicable non-bankruptcy law excuses the non-debtor party from accepting or giving performance to a third party, such as a personal service contract, without the party's consent.
So, according to the United States legislation Overhaul that has an executory contract with Atari Companies is legally prevented from publishing patches while there's no resolution on this case.
And I just avoided getting BG and BGII in the gog sale because I was going to get it from here. Do we know if this is just a matter of some amount of time, and is likely to ever be resolved?
Comments
BG:EE was awesome. It can't stop there. I really hope everything gets resolved and it hasn't delayed things to much!
Anyway, I really hope you manage to cut through the legal mess and salvage a workable deal for the games that we love! Like they say in tennis: Come on, Beamdog!
(ThispostdoesnotreflecttheopinionofBeamdogOverhaulGamesoranyoneotherthanitsauthorwho'sabitofawiseasssometimes.)
In real life, I am a classical music teacher and performer. Classical music teachers and performers are paid very low salaries unless they "hit the big time" with a major international-quality professional symphony orchestra. Ninety percent of us never do.
I knew this by the time I was eighteen years old, but I still pursued a career in classical music. I did it because I love classical music, and I didn't want to have to make my living doing anything else.
But, I have bills to pay. I have to buy groceries, I have to keep my lights turned on, and I have to pay property taxes. I'd sure hate to have to live without an internet connection or cable/satellite/fiber optic TV. I need a cell phone, and I still kind of like having a land line in my house.
If people stop paying me to teach their kids classical music, then I will have no choice but to find some other kind of job.
Now, try to imagine how I would feel, when forced to find another job, if one of my student's parents said to me, "Why, you're just a greedy money-grubber! I can't believe you won't teach my kid as a free-time hobby! You went into the classical music business so you could make money! That's all you classical music teachers care about, is money. I know that the main reason anybody ever goes into classical music is to make money! That's the whole purpose of being a classical musician! You don't care about classical music, it's just a capitalistic money-making scheme to you."
So, does everyone understand my analogy, or is that too subtle? I really have an emotional reaction to some of these posts that some people are kicking Beamdog while they're down, just because they can. I support the Beamdog/Overhaul team whole-heartedly, and the $20 bill I gave them was one of the best $20 bills I ever spent. Let's see, I could have ordered pizza one night for supper, or I could buy a new version of Baldur's Gate that I can enjoy forever, while possibly keeping a business afloat that might give me even more things to enjoy, at very low cost. That decision was a no-brainer, to me.
I don't care whether their motive is to make money, or have fun, or do something cool to attract girls. Or just to do this to be together because they happen to enjoy each other's company.
I don't care whether they drive a Cadillac or a BMW or a Rolls Royce, or a rusty old Fiat. Whether they eat Filet Mignon or burgers.
What I do care about is whether or not they create a product that I want, at a price that I am willing and able to pay.
@Wikkid_suhn It was said a page or two ago.
A shame they don't have free reign, a shame in my view they didn't remake the game from it's bases (into a decent 3D fashion) and a shame they make so few new content for BG:EE, but at least they did something, $18,00 (what i paid) wasn't a so scam price to generate so much bad behavior.
I am sure beamdog told Atari of their intentions before they began and Atari did not act upon it. The fact Atari have waited for a whole release and the upcoming 2nd release of EE shows they had little care for the game until it was making profit for beamdog.
I have no idea why this is even up for debate. Atari should be getting their ass handed to them on a silver platter at the courts because of their inability to act and the greater crime of preventing better gaming content for public use at the expense of some greedy corporation from a game Atari had no intentions of touching. This is the kind of action taken from a drowning corporation like Atari that needs money.
I swear if this game doesnt see the light of day again, I will boycott Atari games until they are bargain basement prices. They will never receive that first week of crucial pay that so many companies crave.
Check this out if you do not belive me. Jimquisition is probally one of the best soruces of information on how gaming companies work.
I will warn younger people to not click the link. PG content required
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/6187-Why-Boycotts-Fail-Where-Whining-Tantrums-Win
There're so many good points and interesting ideas on this thread as well as encouraging speeches and insightful points of view. Keep it up! The Devs really need to feel our love and belief in these circumstances. They've given us a product of our life so let's give them everything we can.
Personally, it feels something special to be able to help, even morally, to this great team and to show them the respect they fully deserve.
Believe in your Team!
I would like to lend my support to your efforts in resolving this.
Aside from moral support, kind words, well wishes, fairy magic and Jedi mind tricks, I also wouldn't mind contributing financially. Have you considered setting up some way for people to donate directly?
I'm sure I'm not the only one who'd like to help out, and while it might not be enough to pay for legal fees, it could at least help cheer you up, or get you trough a rainy day. Even if you just use it for beer and pizza I'd consider it money well spent.
Regards.
there's the following statement (emphasis mine):
<...>We've taken this step at our publishing partner's request as we attempt to resolve a number of contractual issues <...> until this matter is resolved, we are unable to release the latest Baldur's Gate: Enhanced Edition patch<...>.
So, it clearly shows that Beamdog & Overhaul Games is not able to publish any patch now.
And Trent Oster's statement sent to Kotaku has the following (again emphasis mine):
<...>From our end, without the hope of revenue to cover salaries, we have to stop work on all Baldur's Gate products, including the patch. Instead, we need to look for new projects to move our team onto.
So, this part means that the work (the process) on the patch is stopped because of no revenue.
Both these parts don't contradict to each other, instead the second quote adds to the first.
Beamdog & Overhaul Games has no legal rights to publish any patch. And as there's no revenue right now, all the work on patches is stopped.
The answer to your question is: Overhaul is legally prevented from publishing patches to the already published game and in the same time because they cannot sell the game any more and cannot get any revenue they decided to stop current and future work on the patch till the moment this matter is decided.
Chapter 11 affords the debtor in possession a number of mechanisms to restructure its business. A debtor in possession can acquire financing and loans on favorable terms by giving new lenders first priority on the business's earnings. The court may also permit the debtor in possession to reject and cancel contracts.
Once a bankruptcy is filed, the Trustee (a Chapter 11 debtor-in-possession acts in the same capacity as a trustee) may cure any default and preserve the remaining benefits of the debtor's unexpired executory contracts. Alternatively, the Trustee may unilaterally terminate an executory contract and minimize the financial impact of the default. An executory contract may be sold and assigned to a third party, even though the contract has a provision which otherwise prohibits assignment.
The debtor's rights under the contract, such as the remaining term of a favorable lease, may have significant value to the bankruptcy estate. The Trustee may wish to sell those rights for the benefit of the creditors.
The Trustee may elect to affirm and accept (assume) or terminate and surrender (reject) an executory contract or unexpired lease. Assumption requires court approval. Most courts will apply the "business judgment test" to determine if assumption is appropriate. Rejection is automatic if the contract is not assumed within a proscribed time. The entire contract must be assumed or rejected. The Trustee may not assume part of the contract and reject or modify the rest. The contract may not be assumed unless the Trustee first cures the defaults or provides "adequate assurance" that any defaults will be cured. With some exceptions, the Trustee may assume and assign an executory contract notwithstanding an anti-assignment clause in the contract unless applicable non-bankruptcy law excuses the non-debtor party from accepting or giving performance to a third party, such as a personal service contract, without the party's consent.
So, according to the United States legislation Overhaul that has an executory contract with Atari Companies is legally prevented from publishing patches while there's no resolution on this case.