What stops Beamdog from remastering the sprites?
I think the enhanced game are great, but it difficult to understand on why the developers can not remaster all the sprites. If you are unable to find the original files, why not just capture each frame and remaster it from there?
Obviously the developers have thought about it but I can not understand the problems.
Obviously the developers have thought about it but I can not understand the problems.
1
Comments
1. Law. First and foremost, they do not own the copyright for the game and their license is too restricting. Atari is now bankrupt, which means that negotiating any new contract with them is impossible untill the insolvency procedure is over and the rights get purchased by somebody else. We are lucky their old contract is still valid as it is (the sales were even temporarily stopped at one point). Not to mention that Bioware owns the rights for the infinity engine, and WotC owns the rights for dungeons and dragons (the game was published before the open D20 license), which pretty much means they can't alter the game too much (by importing or replacing stuff) without negotiating with them as well, because it may then be a new intellectual property asset.
2. Technical and financial stuff. Yes, it is conceivable that some people could even recreate the original models by redesigning them from scratch. But if Beamdog says the task is just too much for their current stuff, we can't expect them to just invest into transforming Overhaul, from a mere division specialising in republishing older games, to a regular video game developer just like that. I can't get into corporate minds, but my guess is that if they thought it would be technically viable and financially profitable they would go for it.
Now, before people start to blame copyright law, or beamdog for thinking small, or whatever, I have to say this: This was not a sure bet to begin with, the fact alone that someone took an interest and BGEE came out so long after the initial release of the game is by itself a triumph for the original developers.
It does have everything to do with the number of frames per animation that would need to be redone. To put that in perspective, the werewolf standing animation alone has 115 frames. And that's just when the werewolf is standing still.
1) A game I can install (yay! it works)
2) The game itself (not 100% here, as there are significant bugs that have kept me from playing it since v2014)
3) BG2 Engine for BG1 (again success)
4) Sprites
The rest wasn't important to me. Anyway, I'm resigned to the fact that the sprites make characters look like MineCraft (not quite, but almost). I can live with that, but am saddened.
However, I don't see why they couldn't be developing their own sprites at a similar level of graphics to those in the game so we can get some new monsters. New sprites don't require the lost art assets, you go from scratch and just try to match style with the game as it is.
A better solution would be implementing new monsters from IWD1/2 and PS:T, though currently they don't have the rights on those games afaik...
Really, there's not much they could do with the sprites anyway to make them better as most of them look great with a few exceptions.
I would understand it if it was an early 3D game like Morrowind or NwN1 or whatever and the models looked blocky and the textures low-res but that's not the case here.
And I think that at least the BG2 models look great, far better than the BG1 models which I admit looked very plastic-y and some of their animations were terrible.
And since everyone has an opinion (go figure eh?), i have one as well.
Now don't get me wrong friends, i do understand that from a business standpoint, it is probably costly to create new animations, and maybe it would take a significant amount of time to do so, or even touching the existing sprites.
That's why Beamdog decided against it, although it is obvious they have talked about it between themselves and explored the option.
And while i do understand the cost, and the effort required, i have 2 arguments to present to you, for whatever they are worth. Obviously, this is my opinion, and i'm not forcing it on you so take it easy.
1) Since, as we said, everyone has an opinion, my opinion is that a giant RPG in value, like BG, does not need extra quests or extra NPCs. It has enough, and they are what made the name of BG known to every RPG fan today. What it needed was new and smoother graphics, because it set its value from the existing NPCs and quests and plot, that people still talk about today. The only thing it lacked was visuals, even for its time.
In other words, for me, seeing new graphics(character ones) for BG was more important than new NPCs or new quests and areas. Cool if it's not the same for you though.
2) And the biggest one. You say it either costs too much, or takes too much time to produce new sprites. Ok, let me ask you, how much time did it take you to produce BG2:EE and BG:EE? I'll answer that. 9 months for BG:EE(march->november) and 10 for BG2:EE(november 2012 -> november 2013 - 2 months because of legal reasons).
You created a game in 10 months. 10. Ten. Was that so long? Would it matter if you took 14 months or 18 and produced new graphics as well? Other games take years to make and you will have to compete against them.
You created new areas. How did you do that? 31 new areas. You can't hire 2 animators and 3D modellers and create new sprites as well, or touch the existing ones? It's gonna take more than 31 new areas arguably, but then again, do you have to release this in 10 months?
Now, i understand that you said the cost was too much for that. But you have to realise, it doesn't sound good, and it certainly does not sound like a problem i have to solve. More like a limitation on your part, which i have to deal with. Or a matter of priorities.
And you still haven't answered, how sprites in BG2:EE will look, when they will be the same as in vanilla, while backrounds, that were already better looking than the sprites, will be even more sharp this time. Obviously you think that this is not an issue, but i beg to differ.
Anyway, some of us wanted new sprites for the game. We didn't have it. Sucks to be us, alright. Still, we're here supporting you, but let me say, and excuse my bluntness, i don't know if a company that cannot do something for the sprites of this game, can create a BG3 which will need to "compete" with its predecessors and other RPG titles, and of course present graphics from scratch as well, when and if you decide to make it. It's a matter of funds.
Anyway, this is, as i said, my opinion, i will say again that i expected more from the enhanced editions, so i'm not exactly thrilled about them, i do want to play BG2 again though. The enhancements cannot make it worse, it's still BG, but it's not the enhanced edition i wanted to see, although it offers more than the strict original( if you don't take Infinity Animations incompatibility into account ). I can't do anything about that( not being what i wanted ), and apparently, neither can you. I'm supporting you, and want to see if you're really serious about BG3.
Cheers.
P.S. @Dee , i certainly hope that you take this, as constructive criticism, because that's my intent. For some of us, graphics might mean more in a game we played again before so many times, and i won't accept people from the forum that belittle those that think that "graphics matter".
And to some of you folks, with all due respect, if graphics didn't matter generally in games, BG style or not, we would still be playing using pong level visuals.
This means one of two things:
A) we create entirely new 3D models to replace all of the animations in the game from scratch, thus risking a deviating art style for the entire game that would alienate most if not all of our players; or
Both of these imperfect solutions would also require an overhaul (another one) of the entire engine to allow for higher-resolution sprites without them being physically larger in the space.
There are a lot of reasons why we're not redoing the sprites. Ultimately, it's a lot of resources to spend on something that has the potential to break the entire game, and that people wouldn't see until (possibly) years from now.
Redoing a sprite would be more similar to redoing an existing area. You can't just go into Candlekeep and say, "Make it HD". If it looks different at all, it doesn't look good.
EDIT: Also what @Jalily said.
You could create the new sprites using the A, method. New 3D models.
Alienating the audience of BG because of graphics is an argument, a not so convincing one, since you didn't seem to believe that people will be alienated by the new UI or the new overly talkative NPCs like Dorn, Neera or Rasaad compared to the old ones. The new NPCs are written in a different way than the old ones, and it shows, but no one complains for that for real, although some have voiced the differences in style, because it's something new. No one would complain about new sprites either.
The new areas you created were not noticeable in differences compared to the old ones, so it is pretty clear that you could create sprites that resemble the spirit of the originals, if you wished.
About the engine needed to change to accomodate the new sprites, that would be needed also if you found the art assets anyway, so it's something you were prepared to do, you also changed almost the whole code of the engine as you were working.
Alternatively, you could use the same BAMing method to create the new sprites in the same resolution as now, but since it's a newer model, it would look more detailed, although the pixel count would be the same. The problem with some sprites is not just the resolution, but the artistic direction that was followed. One of Biowares less strong points i guess.
In any way, it would certainly take more than 10 months, variating depending of what you do exactly. But still, 10 months for BG2:EE?
We didn't ask for HD sprites anyway. BG is not HD and will never be. The resolution is 1920x1080 not because of more pixels in one place, but because of a bigger picture that you see. You could still make new models, and BAM them like the old ones, with no higher resolution, like you did with the new area art. Because of the better skills of artists these days, after long time learning 3D modelling, the new sprites would look better than the old ones even in the same old resolution.
I respect your answer, and the time you spent writing it, but i also respectifully think that if you really wanted to make new sprites one way or another, you would do it.
I've given an example of what could be done. I get the impression that you thought it's just not worth it.
Too bad, in my opinion. Yes, and the NPCs are optional, what's your point? That all the enhancements are optional? The UI is optional as well?
But if you're so fixed about options, here's a solution, Monkey Island remastered. You can choose to have the old art style, if you're so fixed about the old true style, or the new one. Everyone's happy.
Some things, are to be decided anyway, and they might alienate. The UI did it in BG:EE, and it was not optional. You're enhancing something, you're bound to change some things, even if they are not optional any more.
Sorry Jalily, i don't agree at all.
You also forgot to ask us if we wanted 1PP to be optional as well. Does that affect the entire game in your book?
We're telling you why it wasn't done and why it won't be done any time soon (if ever). You may not like the situation, but that's the way it is.
Edit: I think I may have misunderstood what you were saying there. Oh well, it was an interesting exercise anyways.
Anyway forget it, it seems like my opinion is starting to annoy.
I also note that you used the words "respect" and "respectfully" numerous times, which seems to suggest that you know what you're saying is dodgy at best and you're trying to surround it with less combative words. Even if that's not your intent, that's how it reads; and combined with incredulous questions such as... ...it's hard not to draw the conclusion that you're attempting to minimize the points we're making, rather than hearing what we're saying and addressing it.
It's a challenging thing, especially on the internet where you don't also have inflection and facial expressions to carry additional meaning, but in a setting like this where you're trying to make a case for something you feel strongly about, it's important to consider very carefully how you construct your arguments--not only with regard to the order in which you state your points, but also (and especially) the way you present them.
It's much more complex than "make everything HD".
What would that mean? Make everything from scratch. That means:
1) Much more expensive. This would increase the game price most likely. Money that could be spend on more important things than making the game "prettier" and "modern-looking".
2) Much more time. That would take them at least a year and I would say at least two, more realistically.
3) The game is already 2D. The sprites would be 2D if made HD. So, the dilemma is this: make everything fully 3D or change the art-style by updating the sprites.
People are already arguing about the portraits and the BG1 vs BG2 sprites. What do you think would happen if BGEE was actually fully 3D and had a completely different but new art style? Even more alienation.
4) Does the game look that horrible that being made in 3D or even more detailed HD is necessary? Not really, in my opinion. It has aged really well.
5) Given the choice between replaying the same exact game in 3D vs replaying the classic version with cleaner engine and many new additions, what would most choose?
The NwN2 module did the former. Remade the original BG in full 3D with 3.5E rules and you can play in isometric mode.
Some people still prefer the BGEE version even though you have to pay for it. Guess why.
So your ideal BGEE would be HD and that's it? Replaying the same exact game but prettier and shinier? Now we have new adventures, new companions, new kits.
Yes, in an ideal world BGEE should have been looking like an isometric Witcher 2. But in an ideal world, Bioware wouldn't have been making games like Dragon Age 2.
If BG3 is ever made, it will be made with the resources and experience that needed to make BG1EE and BG2EE and they said it will be in full 3D.
Personally, the ideal would be to look like Project Eternity or Temple of Elemental Evil.
I also note that you used the words "respect" and "respectfully" numerous times, which seems to suggest that you know what you're saying is dodgy at best and you're trying to surround it with less combative words. Even if that's not your intent, that's how it reads; and combined with incredulous questions such as... ...it's hard not to draw the conclusion that you're attempting to minimize the points we're making, rather than hearing what we're saying and addressing it.
It's a challenging thing, especially on the internet where you don't also have inflection and facial expressions to carry additional meaning, but in a setting like this where you're trying to make a case for something you feel strongly about, it's important to consider very carefully how you construct your arguments--not only with regard to the order in which you state your points, but also (and especially) the way you present them.
I understand that i sometimes sound aggressive. It's one of my flaws.
The truth is, i don't understand what you mean by minimizing your points. I think, what i did, was address that, when you talked about options in enhancements, you forgot that a lot of stuff can't be optional. And still, i presented a way to counter that, by giving an existing example, of Monkey Island for instance. You didn't give options for some things, like 1PP or the new UI, and no one asked you to. If you made new character sprites, you obviously would not be obligated to ask people if they want the graphics enhanced. You present something, if people like it, they buy it.
It's my fault for being aggressive, but, i know what i say is dodgy and try to camouflage it? Isn't that going a bit too far?
The "respect" part, was when i was talking to you. I saw another comment that for some reason, maybe my fault for misinterpretting it, sounded ironic. I answered hot headed.
In whatever way it's presented, an argument is an argument. There were no personal attacks in my post, aggressiveness yes, but no personal attacks.
On the other hand, i did sense a personal attack to me by your answer. I don't blame you, i may indeed sound like that, and i'm not in your shoes to see it from your side. But you picked my answer to 2 different people, and stitched it a bit.
Anyway, no hard feelings i hope.
@Archaos, yes, the ideal would be for it to look something like ToEE. I wasn't talking about Witcher BG, or true 3D.
This is one of the most common mistakes people make when offering feedback; trying, at the last second, to let the person know that you don't mean to be rude with all of the things that you just said that might have been rude.
So let's try that same exchange again, but with a little less aggression: Here, Person A is saying exactly the same information, but is doing so in a way that makes it clear that Person A is only offering feedback, and leaving the final decision up to Person B for how to proceed. What's more, everything is said with a focus on improving Person B's appearance at the party, which automatically makes Person A's suggestions helpful, rather than adversarial.
In the first case, Person B might wear the blue shirt, but they might only do so because they feel pressured. In the second case, Person B is more likely to wear the blue shirt because they find the advice helpful, which will not only make their friendship stronger, but also make the party more enjoyable for both of them.
I hope that makes sense.