As for Ascension- the author claimed he wanted to include some of it in the ToB but they ran out of time.
This is not true, and has been discussed at length on the forums already.
I reread his readme again, and you're right he does not say it like that. Still it doesn't change anything in this respect, I just meant to say that any addition to the game is an addition be it done by a modder or overhaul.
FYI Borsook, you can edit your existing posts - you don't need to post repeatedly in order to reply to different people.
Is it a problem? Sure I can copy paste everything into one post, but just clicking "quote" is more convenient, also putting everything in one post will mean the buttons "agree" and "like" will make no sense. But I think my say in the subject is at an end so no worries
@Sylvus_Moonbow I would say that the writing varies fairly wildly in quality, yes. I would not want to include it in BG:EE, but I think it's an excellent mod addition. (By the way: stay tuned, folks. Not long now.)
@Borosook Gog.com even gave it's customers info about "how to enhance your Baldur's Gate for free" or something like that. Basically, it was tutorial about mods... So, they did everything in they might to discourage people from buying BG:EE. I cannot imagine them selling BG:EE after all that.
Letting the consumer know that there are other options available. How horrible of them.
The interface is even strangely bugged in some way, compared to vanilla.
On the quickslot bar, there are now some "holes" that were added with BGEE. The first hole is after the third slot if i remember right. It's mostly aesthetic nuisance, but it may actually take a slot out. It's especially a pain when you're choosing from a lot of spells because it breaks the quick slots continuity and for some reason annoys me.
Anyway, i never understood where this came from and why it was not corrected on the past year. I also doubt the next patch will correct this because the same holes appear on the BG2EE screenshots.
Although certain aspects of this mod are a welcome addition to any Baldur's Gate adventure, the writing is atrocious. Perhaps a BG1NPC:EE is required, by someone with a masters degree in english.
What parts in particular did you find atrocious? I find several NPC:s very well written (Dynaheir, Kivan, Imoen and Edwin to name a few), so much so that if mixed with random BG2 banters I doubt people would be able to separate them quality-wise without before hand knowledge. Granted, I've not partied with/romanced every NPC extensively, so I've probably missed out on some of it. Still, I doubt it's any worse than, say, the werewolf island.
I agree with Kaeloree that the writing quality in the mod is quite inconsistent. It's definitely good for a mod (it's free after all, and writing quality in most mods often barely approach high school level), but honestly it falls well short of BG2. It's a BG1 mod however, and the writing for that game is rather inconsistent as well....
@Sylvus_Moonbow I would say that the writing varies fairly wildly in quality, yes. I would not want to include it in BG:EE, but I think it's an excellent mod addition. (By the way: stay tuned, folks. Not long now.)
@Kaeloree: The thing is, you kind of get the feeling that if Beamdog had been free to modify existing content, they probably would have run along the same lines as BG1NPC - the idea being to give each character a few banters (and maybe a sidequest) to flesh out their personality. It doesn't have to be held to the standards of BG2 because BG1's characters were wafer-thin to begin with.
Critiques are not bad. Complaints are not bad either. Do you know which yours was?
For my money, your comment staked out the extreme position of maximum hyperbole: everything is bad, nothing is right, it's a complete waste, waahh, booo, end of the world, etc.
You didn't give anyone any grounds to agree with you — clearly your positions are not literally true — and you took such an extreme and indefensible rhetorical position that you left no ground on which to stand, except to disagree. That people DO disagree with you is not because you are the Candle of Truth being cruelly snuffed by the hurricane of censorship. It's not poor widdle old you, just offering an honest critique, opposed by mindless fanboys who can't stand hearing a negative word. No, you just made it hard to agree with you. Not literally everything is a waste. Who's going to agree with that?
Just back up and decide if this is really the hill you want to defend. I think you'll find that the people in the thread have a point. Some good things were done; some good things are not done yet; some fixes are still in the pipeline; some things which we all want may be impossible, expensive, or in violation of Overhaul's writ.
Critiques are not bad. Complaints are not bad either. Do you know which yours was?
For my money, your comment staked out the extreme position of maximum hyperbole: everything is bad, nothing is right, it's a complete waste, waahh, booo, end of the world, etc.
You didn't give anyone any grounds to agree with you — clearly your positions are not literally true — and you took such an extreme and indefensible rhetorical position that you left no ground on which to stand, except to disagree. That people DO disagree with you is not because you are the Candle of Truth being cruelly snuffed by the hurricane of censorship. It's not poor widdle old you, just offering an honest critique, opposed by mindless fanboys who can't stand hearing a negative word. No, you just made it hard to agree with you. Not literally everything is a waste. Who's going to agree with that?
Just back up and decide if this is really the hill you want to defend. I think you'll find that the people in the thread have a point. Some good things were done; some good things are not done yet; some fixes are still in the pipeline; some things which we all want may be impossible, expensive, or in violation of Overhaul's writ.
Reading this I feel I will regret replying, but let's at least try - I've never said everything is bad, contrary I said in the first post the game is good, but that it could have been better and enumerated some of the points that could have been better. If you feel that for the sake of some cosmic balance I should also enumerate the same number of good points - this was not meant to be a complete review of the game, which does not mean there are no good points about it. Surprisingly, though, as you say I didn't give anyone grounds to agree with me still some people do. Though looking for agreement was not the point. Just please do not deal in absolutes, especially when it comes to other people's views, I do not claim everything is bad, that's a silly premise, just mentioned 6 things that are bad. And I do not believe nothing could have been done better, there some decisions that were taken. Not dealing with some issues comes as a surprise in the same way as some positives are surprising, never did I think we'll get zoom in an infinity engine, and they implemented it! As big a surprise as not testing the first quest in the game or not trying to run it on Intel Gpus. Some surprises are bad some good.
Ok, it's a wasted opportunity because there was a need for BG:EE, and plenty of room for improvements, a lot of the obvious ones were not realised, sure I don't have to buy (already did though) but so what? Somebody will make a different BG:EE? Even if someone wanted to, had the resources etc. this will not happen the same time over. Plus do you really think everybody should just like something or shut up? Is critique such a bad thing?
No, of course critique is not a bad thing and in fact is often highly useful to the person who did the creation so they know what worked, what didn't, what people liked, and what they didn't like. I have to admit the tone of your original post did sound as if you were wishing to air your list of grievances. The problem with doing so, though, is that voicing them will not result in any positive benefit for you. Sure, there are things I didn't like about the game, either, but some of that was due to the original game itself. For example, entering the city before chapter 5. Really? Our characters cannot swim across the river and then walk in? Well, rather than fix it so that walking across the river is possible I made it so that you can charm the guard and he opens the gate. No, I can't code my own game--unless I were being paid to do so--but I do take it upon myself to fix the things I can fix and ignore the problems I cannot.
For #3, I would point out that Atari was the one handling distribution outside of Beamdog pretty much... So, unless the people who's job that was visit here regularly that's kind of a poor point to make against the game...
@shawne I'm honestly not sure that would be the case. BG2 is the game for deep interaction, rather than BG1.
Well, sure, because that's how the games initially developed. But fidelity to the original doesn't require that shortcomings be preserved as well, otherwise what was the point of bringing BG2's kits and gameplay improvements to BG:EE?
For #3, I would point out that Atari was the one handling distribution outside of Beamdog pretty much... So, unless the people who's job that was visit here regularly that's kind of a poor point to make against the game...
Are you saying that Overhaul wanted to properly support BGEE on steam and other platforms? Trent Oster's tweets seem to suggest they never wanted it distributed anywhere outside beamdog, it seems to be Atari's deal, and Atari did not bother with cloud saves etc.
For #3, I would point out that Atari was the one handling distribution outside of Beamdog pretty much... So, unless the people who's job that was visit here regularly that's kind of a poor point to make against the game...
Are you saying that Overhaul wanted to properly support BGEE on steam and other platforms? Trent Oster's tweets seem to suggest they never wanted it distributed anywhere outside beamdog, it seems to be Atari's deal, and Atari did not bother with cloud saves etc.
I'm not saying they were for or against distribution on other places... But Atari was the one handling that with them having little to no say in the matter either way.
For #3, I would point out that Atari was the one handling distribution outside of Beamdog pretty much... So, unless the people who's job that was visit here regularly that's kind of a poor point to make against the game...
Are you saying that Overhaul wanted to properly support BGEE on steam and other platforms? Trent Oster's tweets seem to suggest they never wanted it distributed anywhere outside beamdog, it seems to be Atari's deal, and Atari did not bother with cloud saves etc.
I'm not saying they were for or against distribution on other places... But Atari was the one handling that with them having little to no say in the matter either way.
Well, that's the whole point. I'm saying that overhaul did not want to deal with distribution outside beamdog, did not even want that distribution to exist and hence did not embrace any features such platforms provide.
I had great hopes for Enhanced Editions of what are my favourite RPGs of all time. BG:EE is not a bad game, as the source material was of a high quality, but with the BG2:EE coming with BG:EE still not in a state one would hope for, here are my thoughts on the basics that were and are not done as they should have been.
1. A bugless experience.
BG1 had its share of bugs, but after years of modding community ironing them out it got to a near perfect state. BG:EE came with new bugs, some of them glaring. A prologue quest broken? Rendering not working on Intel cards? Re-edition of a game this old should be smooth, an ultimate experience, you buy it once again to get all the things working out of the box. Not here.
I take it from this that you are no programmer. Nor that you have any experience with the complexities of taking code and reworking it. Or the legal issues associated with taking someone else’s work (the community mods) and selling it as your own without getting their approval (and usually giving them a cut of the already limited profits).
If you haven't play Icewind Dale 2, have a look at it. Infinity engine in its last version, has many usability fixes, you can e.g. change the function and number of buttons. Want more spell slots? You can do it. More item slots? Sure. Whereas BG:EE ships with the same old interface, which a player has to fights against. BG2's one looks better but seems to have the same, old functionality.
When the rights were offered on this project they were for BG only. IWD may have had tweaks to the code, but that code wasn’t on offer (that I am aware of) and as I understand it, is a significantly enhanced engine to begin with. Therefore saying “Other games do it” is no guarantee that this game will. And how many enhancement requests did you put forth before making this post?
Beamdog tried to have the game exclusively to maximize the revenue from each copy... but surely it would be better for customers to buy it wherever they want? Obvious places like gog.com? Taking advantage of steam's mod distribution and matchmaking? While the game is available through other stores than beamdog's, it's a situation forced by Atari, and the devs do not want to take advantage of them in any way.
It seems to me that this game was sold on Steam. How much more modern do you need? Also, considering the limited profit margin of the game, other delivery systems may have cost more than it was worth. As for GOG.com, this isn’t a classic game. It is a new release of a classic game. This seems like you are merely grousing just to make a noise.
Some of the mods done in the past years are of better quality than the game itself. Anyone who played BG1 with and without BG1NPC project for example should know what I mean. Those mods could have been made compatible and even integrated into the game, they would be a more welcome addition than... black pits.
A lot of work was done by a lot of people in the community. Who is to say that they weren’t all tracked down (no small task) and asked for the ability to add these to the game, but some of them refused? How is that Beamdog’s fault?
Yes, black pits. Not only does it have nothing except combat (is this really the most appealing part of BG?) But it's not a part of the game even... those resources could have been used to add even a single quest to the game, or at least adding to its polish.
Meaningless Too YOU. Others seem to enjoy the additions. But fair enough, you are entitled to your opinion so long as you recognize that it is merely that; an opinion.
AI in BG has always been bad. There are mods out there (Stratagems) which make it much better, they could have been integrated again... But foremost - nothing has been done to the game's pathfinding system. Changing this would make the EE worth its price alone... Also some changes to the difficulty system could have been implemented (again look at IWD2), atm those who played the game a lot, or just like the challenge have to resolve to mods. Same as with vanilla BG...
Keeping IWD out of this as that was not in offer, I personally would have liked to see some of this implemented. Instead of blasting the DEVs on this point, how about asking for it?
I had great hopes for Enhanced Editions of what are my favourite RPGs of all time. BG:EE is not a bad game, as the source material was of a high quality, but with the BG2:EE coming with BG:EE still not in a state one would hope for, here are my thoughts on the basics that were and are not done as they should have been.
1. A bugless experience.
BG1 had its share of bugs, but after years of modding community ironing them out it got to a near perfect state. BG:EE came with new bugs, some of them glaring. A prologue quest broken? Rendering not working on Intel cards? Re-edition of a game this old should be smooth, an ultimate experience, you buy it once again to get all the things working out of the box. Not here.
I take it from this that you are no programmer. Nor that you have any experience with the complexities of taking code and reworking it. Or the legal issues associated with taking someone else’s work (the community mods) and selling it as your own without getting their approval (and usually giving them a cut of the already limited profits).
If you haven't play Icewind Dale 2, have a look at it. Infinity engine in its last version, has many usability fixes, you can e.g. change the function and number of buttons. Want more spell slots? You can do it. More item slots? Sure. Whereas BG:EE ships with the same old interface, which a player has to fights against. BG2's one looks better but seems to have the same, old functionality.
When the rights were offered on this project they were for BG only. IWD may have had tweaks to the code, but that code wasn’t on offer (that I am aware of) and as I understand it, is a significantly enhanced engine to begin with. Therefore saying “Other games do it” is no guarantee that this game will. And how many enhancement requests did you put forth before making this post?
Beamdog tried to have the game exclusively to maximize the revenue from each copy... but surely it would be better for customers to buy it wherever they want? Obvious places like gog.com? Taking advantage of steam's mod distribution and matchmaking? While the game is available through other stores than beamdog's, it's a situation forced by Atari, and the devs do not want to take advantage of them in any way.
It seems to me that this game was sold on Steam. How much more modern do you need? Also, considering the limited profit margin of the game, other delivery systems may have cost more than it was worth. As for GOG.com, this isn’t a classic game. It is a new release of a classic game. This seems like you are merely grousing just to make a noise.
Some of the mods done in the past years are of better quality than the game itself. Anyone who played BG1 with and without BG1NPC project for example should know what I mean. Those mods could have been made compatible and even integrated into the game, they would be a more welcome addition than... black pits.
A lot of work was done by a lot of people in the community. Who is to say that they weren’t all tracked down (no small task) and asked for the ability to add these to the game, but some of them refused? How is that Beamdog’s fault?
Yes, black pits. Not only does it have nothing except combat (is this really the most appealing part of BG?) But it's not a part of the game even... those resources could have been used to add even a single quest to the game, or at least adding to its polish.
Meaningless Too YOU. Others seem to enjoy the additions. But fair enough, you are entitled to your opinion so long as you recognize that it is merely that; an opinion.
AI in BG has always been bad. There are mods out there (Stratagems) which make it much better, they could have been integrated again... But foremost - nothing has been done to the game's pathfinding system. Changing this would make the EE worth its price alone... Also some changes to the difficulty system could have been implemented (again look at IWD2), atm those who played the game a lot, or just like the challenge have to resolve to mods. Same as with vanilla BG...
Keeping IWD out of this as that was not in offer, I personally would have liked to see some of this implemented. Instead of blasting the DEVs on this point, how about asking for it?
I assume you did not read all the posts here, some of your points have been answered already. Anyway:
1. My experience at programming is a modest one, true. But I do not need one to know that there are games of similar complexity without so many bugs, there are even remakes without them. And BGEE had and has more bugs than BG has. Let's take the famous broken scroll quest from the prologue, it takes 30 seconds of gameplay to find this bug, but it was not found. What does it mean? Simply that devs implement changes without running a single test.
2. I've never suggested to use IWD2 code, just gave an example of a different team than Bioware's making interesting and useful changes to the game code. If they could why not Overhaul? Either they lacked the skill or ideas. Both options do not make warm to them honestly.
3. I have requested some changes long before the game was published, they never have been implemented. And things like terrible pathfinding in the game aren't a secret.
I assume you did not read all the posts here, some of your points have been answered already. Anyway:
1. My experience at programming is a modest one, true. But I do not need one to know that there are games of similar complexity without so many bugs, there are even remakes without them. And BGEE had and has more bugs than BG has. Let's take the famous broken scroll quest from the prologue, it takes 30 seconds of gameplay to find this bug, but it was not found. What does it mean? Simply that devs implement changes without running a single test.
I assume you did not read all the posts here, some of your points have been answered already. Anyway:
My experience at programming is a modest one, true. But I do not need one to know that there are games of similar complexity without so many bugs, there are even remakes without them. And BGEE had and has more bugs than BG has. Let's take the famous broken scroll quest from the prologue, it takes 30 seconds of gameplay to find this bug, but it was not found. What does it mean? Simply that devs implement changes without running a single test.
You are quite charitable with things that you apparently have very little knowledge of. I defy you to name some of these games that are generally agreed to (a) have a of similar complexity, (b) were developed or re-worked on the same number of staff/budget that Beamdog had available and on the same timeline, (c) now have fewer bugs and/or resolved more bugs than were done so for BG:EE and (d) delivered as much value for the buck as BG:EE did. Instead of talking about this, you choose to say “See. This bug still exists.”
I am not saying that you have to give point for point equal time to every one of your grievances, but to merely say you expect a Bugless experience is a bit unreasonable, not to mention uncharitable and not reflective of the work that WAS done. Besides, name one PC game (or any game at all that has come out in the last 10 years) that is ‘Bugless’. I can’t think of any. Certainly not of any worth or complexity, and BG is VERY complex in its way in comparison with 90% of what comes out today. Not to mention, for the cost, it is (bugs or no) still a large site better than most games I can mention.
2. I've never suggested to use IWD2 code, just gave an example of a different team than Bioware's making interesting and useful changes to the game code. If they could why not Overhaul? Either they lacked the skill or ideas. Both options do not make warm to them honestly.
You said several times that if IWD could do it, that BG should do it. You can’t have it both ways. I read somewhere a while back (and can’t find the link so I didn’t want to mention it, but…) that IWD2 was, in terms of the Infinity Engine, the equivalent of BG 2.5. In programming terms, that means on it’s way to the third generation of finished product (or in Microsoft terms, fifth generation). Replicating that from scratch would have been a HUGE undertaking by all accounts. And since the expected margin for BG:EE wasn’t anywhere near what was in IWD2, you can more or less imagine that they didn’t have the resources necessary to copy that work. That isn’t to say that they didn’t tackle a large number of bugs, a fact that you feel comfortable ignoring completely.
3. I have requested some changes long before the game was published, they never have been implemented. And things like terrible pathfinding in the game aren't a secret.
Now we get to the crux of the matter. You requested change and your issues were not fixed to your satisfaction. That is a shame. I am sure that a lot of people can sympathize with you on that. And equally I am sure that the DEVs wish that they could resolve all of the issues brought up. But they prioritized what they could and worked on them. And they are STILL working on it, despite it generating no new revenue. I know large and well known (and funded) gaming companies that put out broken crap for games, never EVER patch them and just say “You bought it AS IS. Deal with it!” Overhaul didn’t do that. Give them some credit for that. For $19.99 (or whatever you ended up paying for the game), I think it is a steal. Try taking that same money and have dinner and a movie out. See how much that Mc-meal gets you in the way of satisfaction.
As far as the pathing is concerned, I did read something that Trent commented about during the development phase in that they tried to fix the path-finding. The result was that it was a huge mess and far beyond the resources they had available. So if that was your huge issue, I think you will find a lot of people agree that it is still a factor. But they don’t post a flame about it.
We might not agree on whether the current devs did a good job on the BGEE/BG2EE, but we can all agree that we love the Baldur's Gate series, hence why we're here supporting / playing it after a decade has passed by.
With that being said, no one thinks $25 is too expensive. Heck, I'd be willing to pay $50 for a BG3. But people's biggest criticism is that there is a 1) perfectly good working version available already 2) that's considerably less amount than the price EE is 3) and it has wonderful fan-made mods that really make the games better.
Is anyone arguing that BG:EE or BG2:EE made the game worse? No. I welcome any improvements like the new NPCs with their rich background or useless improvements (Black Pits) because it still adds to the overall game. (well maybe ahem Black Pits...but any other additions, however minimal, are welcome)
But there must be justification as to why we're willing to ditch our original BG/BG2 games that work perfectly well and pay more money if the EE ones don't necessarily "improve" it. Is it less buggy than the originals? No, the older games are actually more stable (ironic). Does it add way more new content? Yes and No. It adds new content but the fan-made mods also adds new content too, and they can have some really good ones out there (as long as you know where to look). You pay for new content, but EE is not compatible with some great mods, so you miss out on fan-made extra content too. So it cancels itself out. I honestly didn't think BGEE added enough new content to justify not being able to use some good mods. I also remember making a new character and looking at the new portraits / soundsets and I was very disappointed with it the small number. The interface was great, though.
I understand how much we want to support anyone who wants to "polish" our favorite nostalgic game. I just want them to "polish" it in a correct manner before I give them my full support, because it's easy for any sleazy third party to use our nostalgia and love for the game to take advantage of the situation by reaping maximum sales with minimum work.
Now, I'm not saying the current developers are anything close to sleazy...they have proven to be legit and done a pretty decent job so far. I just want them to really "enhance" BG2, because I'm afraid of our last hope company tarnishing / messing up the revival on one of the most epic games of all time. And that is why I will wait for BG2:EE reviews before I buy the game. Perhaps I'm being selfish about it. But if you're a true fan of the BG series, I ask you to be selfish too because we can't have anything half-assed for THE Baldur's Gate 2, one of the greatest game of all time.
Comments
also putting everything in one post will mean the buttons "agree" and "like" will make no sense. But I think my say in the subject is at an end so no worries
The interface is even strangely bugged in some way, compared to vanilla.
On the quickslot bar, there are now some "holes" that were added with BGEE. The first hole is after the third slot if i remember right. It's mostly aesthetic nuisance, but it may actually take a slot out. It's especially a pain when you're choosing from a lot of spells because it breaks the quick slots continuity and for some reason annoys me.
Anyway, i never understood where this came from and why it was not corrected on the past year. I also doubt the next patch will correct this because the same holes appear on the BG2EE screenshots.
@Kaeloree Excellent news.
For my money, your comment staked out the extreme position of maximum hyperbole: everything is bad, nothing is right, it's a complete waste, waahh, booo, end of the world, etc.
You didn't give anyone any grounds to agree with you — clearly your positions are not literally true — and you took such an extreme and indefensible rhetorical position that you left no ground on which to stand, except to disagree. That people DO disagree with you is not because you are the Candle of Truth being cruelly snuffed by the hurricane of censorship. It's not poor widdle old you, just offering an honest critique, opposed by mindless fanboys who can't stand hearing a negative word. No, you just made it hard to agree with you. Not literally everything is a waste. Who's going to agree with that?
Just back up and decide if this is really the hill you want to defend. I think you'll find that the people in the thread have a point. Some good things were done; some good things are not done yet; some fixes are still in the pipeline; some things which we all want may be impossible, expensive, or in violation of Overhaul's writ.
There was a fanmade project to do it, but it failed because of the amount of work required, and a company like Overhaul would be perfect for the job.
I'm moved by your story.
1. My experience at programming is a modest one, true. But I do not need one to know that there are games of similar complexity without so many bugs, there are even remakes without them. And BGEE had and has more bugs than BG has. Let's take the famous broken scroll quest from the prologue, it takes 30 seconds of gameplay to find this bug, but it was not found. What does it mean? Simply that devs implement changes without running a single test.
2. I've never suggested to use IWD2 code, just gave an example of a different team than Bioware's making interesting and useful changes to the game code. If they could why not Overhaul? Either they lacked the skill or ideas. Both options do not make warm to them honestly.
3. I have requested some changes long before the game was published, they never have been implemented. And things like terrible pathfinding in the game aren't a secret.
I am not saying that you have to give point for point equal time to every one of your grievances, but to merely say you expect a Bugless experience is a bit unreasonable, not to mention uncharitable and not reflective of the work that WAS done. Besides, name one PC game (or any game at all that has come out in the last 10 years) that is ‘Bugless’. I can’t think of any. Certainly not of any worth or complexity, and BG is VERY complex in its way in comparison with 90% of what comes out today. Not to mention, for the cost, it is (bugs or no) still a large site better than most games I can mention. You said several times that if IWD could do it, that BG should do it. You can’t have it both ways. I read somewhere a while back (and can’t find the link so I didn’t want to mention it, but…) that IWD2 was, in terms of the Infinity Engine, the equivalent of BG 2.5. In programming terms, that means on it’s way to the third generation of finished product (or in Microsoft terms, fifth generation). Replicating that from scratch would have been a HUGE undertaking by all accounts. And since the expected margin for BG:EE wasn’t anywhere near what was in IWD2, you can more or less imagine that they didn’t have the resources necessary to copy that work. That isn’t to say that they didn’t tackle a large number of bugs, a fact that you feel comfortable ignoring completely. Now we get to the crux of the matter. You requested change and your issues were not fixed to your satisfaction. That is a shame. I am sure that a lot of people can sympathize with you on that. And equally I am sure that the DEVs wish that they could resolve all of the issues brought up. But they prioritized what they could and worked on them. And they are STILL working on it, despite it generating no new revenue. I know large and well known (and funded) gaming companies that put out broken crap for games, never EVER patch them and just say “You bought it AS IS. Deal with it!” Overhaul didn’t do that. Give them some credit for that. For $19.99 (or whatever you ended up paying for the game), I think it is a steal. Try taking that same money and have dinner and a movie out. See how much that Mc-meal gets you in the way of satisfaction.
As far as the pathing is concerned, I did read something that Trent commented about during the development phase in that they tried to fix the path-finding. The result was that it was a huge mess and far beyond the resources they had available. So if that was your huge issue, I think you will find a lot of people agree that it is still a factor. But they don’t post a flame about it.
With that being said, no one thinks $25 is too expensive. Heck, I'd be willing to pay $50 for a BG3. But people's biggest criticism is that there is a 1) perfectly good working version available already 2) that's considerably less amount than the price EE is 3) and it has wonderful fan-made mods that really make the games better.
Is anyone arguing that BG:EE or BG2:EE made the game worse? No. I welcome any improvements like the new NPCs with their rich background or useless improvements (Black Pits) because it still adds to the overall game. (well maybe ahem Black Pits...but any other additions, however minimal, are welcome)
But there must be justification as to why we're willing to ditch our original BG/BG2 games that work perfectly well and pay more money if the EE ones don't necessarily "improve" it. Is it less buggy than the originals? No, the older games are actually more stable (ironic). Does it add way more new content? Yes and No. It adds new content but the fan-made mods also adds new content too, and they can have some really good ones out there (as long as you know where to look). You pay for new content, but EE is not compatible with some great mods, so you miss out on fan-made extra content too. So it cancels itself out.
I honestly didn't think BGEE added enough new content to justify not being able to use some good mods. I also remember making a new character and looking at the new portraits / soundsets and I was very disappointed with it the small number. The interface was great, though.
I understand how much we want to support anyone who wants to "polish" our favorite nostalgic game. I just want them to "polish" it in a correct manner before I give them my full support, because it's easy for any sleazy third party to use our nostalgia and love for the game to take advantage of the situation by reaping maximum sales with minimum work.
Now, I'm not saying the current developers are anything close to sleazy...they have proven to be legit and done a pretty decent job so far. I just want them to really "enhance" BG2, because I'm afraid of our last hope company tarnishing / messing up the revival on one of the most epic games of all time. And that is why I will wait for BG2:EE reviews before I buy the game. Perhaps I'm being selfish about it. But if you're a true fan of the BG series, I ask you to be selfish too because we can't have anything half-assed for THE Baldur's Gate 2, one of the greatest game of all time.