Skip to content

When can we expect the return to 1.3.20 original version?

Sophiel777Sophiel777 Member Posts: 54
in Baldur's Gate II: Enhanced Edition
It's been a while since new patches have been around and not every user who paid for the game is satisfied with forced changes that have been made.

Some of us would like to return to the original EE versions, UI's, menu's etc.

Are there plans being mage to remedy this situation?

Comments

  • ifupaulineifupauline Member Posts: 405
    edited May 2016
    I doubt that there is any plans being mage by Beamdog regarding this.

    solution 1 : you can buy the dvd on Amazon, it should be 1.3

    solution 2 : you find somebody who still has the previous version to share it with you.
  • Avenger_teambgAvenger_teambg Member, Developer Posts: 5,862
    On steam you can always go back to 1.3 I don't know about other distributions.
    On steam: click on game properties --> betas, select 1.3
  • dunbardunbar Member Posts: 1,603
    edited May 2016
    You'll have to be quick if you want them from Amazon UK, they're nearly out of stock (BG1EE - 1 remaining, BG2EE - 2 remaining).
    Edit: Updated.
    Post edited by dunbar on
  • ifupaulineifupauline Member Posts: 405
    only 9.90 in your nearest store -_-


  • Sophiel777Sophiel777 Member Posts: 54
    So versions from before still exist in physical copies.

    If they exist in physical copies, then surely there must be also a digital version somewhere within creators.

    Why can't they just upload it alongside 2.0 so that anyone can enjoy whatever version the bought and prefer?
  • dunbardunbar Member Posts: 1,603
    edited May 2016
    Just in case anyone's wondering.....

    These are the 1.3 versions.
  • dunbardunbar Member Posts: 1,603
    But why do they have to be "supported", rather than just offered for sale? If there are no game breaking bugs then the game doesn't need support. I'm running my DVD v1.3 games with some downloaded mods that I've installed quite happily without any support.

    What's the difference between selling old game DVDs and selling all of Bowie's back catalogue on CDs?
  • dunbardunbar Member Posts: 1,603
    Fair enough, I just naively thought that people would realise that an 'old' version of a game would no longer be "under warranty" as it were.
  • semiticgoddesssemiticgoddess Member Posts: 14,903
    dunbar said:

    Fair enough, I just naively thought that people would realise that an 'old' version of a game would no longer be "under warranty" as it were.

    People have certain ideas about what they as consumers deserve from developers. Sometimes they're reasonable about their expectations (get rid of game-breaking bugs before release) and sometimes not (support outdated versions of the game).
  • atakdogatakdog Member Posts: 51
    Mac users can still get 1.3 from the Apple Store. In fact that's the only version they can get from the Apple Store — no subsequent updates are available there. Beamdog hasn't said how long that will be true, but last time this happened the Apple Store was stuck on an old version for more than a year, so you may have plenty of time.
  • rapsam2003rapsam2003 Member Posts: 1,636
    edited May 2016
    Sophiel777 said:

    Why can't they just upload it alongside 2.0 so that anyone can enjoy whatever version the bought and prefer?

    Because the developers should NOT have to deal with the fact that you're being ridiculous about 2.x. They should NOT have to support it. They should NOT have to fix any bugs in it. They should NOT have spend money and man-hours on it.

  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • RobertMcDuckRobertMcDuck Member Posts: 133
    edited May 2016
    Piracy is against the site rules
    Post edited by JuliusBorisov on
  • fkirenicusfkirenicus Member Posts: 331
    edited May 2016
    rapsam2003 said:

    Because the developers should NOT have to deal with the fact that you're being ridiculous about 2.x.

    Some things never change, and neither do some personalities.
  • SirBatinceSirBatince Member Posts: 882
    edited May 2016
    its pretty harsh to treat people like garbage if they prefer an older version.

    I for one love to press ESC to instantly quit shops and prompts :)
    Post edited by SirBatince on
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    edited May 2016
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
    Post edited by [Deleted User] on
  • ErgErg Member Posts: 1,756
    Dee said:

    legacy software maintenance

    @Dee,

    first of all, I must say that I don't personally care about 1.3 or 2.0 or whatever as I'm not going to play neither because I consider the Enhanced Editions an abomination.

    That said, the OP is not interested in legacy software maintenance, but he/she just wants to have access to legacy software without maintenance. That request doesn't seem so unreasonable to me.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • lefreutlefreut Member Posts: 1,462
    edited November 2019
    ***
    Post edited by lefreut on
  • ErgErg Member Posts: 1,756
    Dee said:

    it provides some context as to why it's not necessarily just a matter of making the thing available.

    @Dee,

    I agree that if you have to maintain legacy software, "it's not necessarily just a matter of making the thing available". But in this case the OP is not asking for maintenance, so it really is "just a matter of making the thing available".
  • DeeDee Member Posts: 10,447
    We may be working with different interpretations of the word "maintenance" as it applies to this situation.

    Anyway, my goal wasn't to derail the thread with a semantics argument. Watch the video if you think it might be worth watching, or don't if you don't.
  • ifupaulineifupauline Member Posts: 405
    edited May 2016
    BillyYank said:

    The expectations are different in the software world and the music world. Nobody's emailing support@bowie.com when their CD starts to skip. But look at all the threads on this forum where someone cites a design decision made by Bioware or an oddity of the 2nd Ed rules and then goes on with "why hasn't Beamdog fixed this bug yet?"

    If they release the old versions they will be expected to support it. And even telling every customer who complains, "No, that's a historical release, we don't support it.", costs money. Not to mention all the forum threads that will pop up calling them names for not supporting their products.

    I've worked systems support and software support for decades. Believe me, the money and manpower drain just isn't worth it.

    Hello, I would have to kindly disagree with you.

    Did any of you heard about Renoise? This is a music tracker software. I bought it a long time ago and when I log to the backstage, all versions dating from previous 2005 are available for download. Of course, as a customer I do not expect them to maintain them to present day. I don't recall a thread from anyone asking for a fix or anything like that. Neither I saw an official thread from Renoise team reminding their customers that old versions are no longer maintained. And this lead me to believe that customers are wise enough to realize that older versions are simply at their disposal to leave them with the freedom of choice. I bought a product in 2005 and if in 2007 I do not like new implementations, I still have a choice.

    Now I expect Renoise community to be generaly older, hence more mature than the gaming community, so I don't deny that you will always have people complaining about impossible things.

    That being said, I also have to take in account that e-music softwares and games are 2 differents things.

    Now from Beamdog's side I totally understand that this would imply extra work which they don't want to bother with. Making older versions available is a thing you need to do from day 1. In my opinion, if Beamdog today would decide to do it, it could be interpreted as "We do not trust our work" more than "We want to provide the best experience to our customers".

    We are a small community, we need not to be scattered in order to keep things going, I want my IWD 2EE ok? :) Also multiplayer is a big aspect of keeping a community alive and that implies, we need to run the same version.

    So to conclude, I don't think that this is a matter of ressources or possibilities. This is how Beamdog see things, I totally respect it. And frankly... if anyone REALLY want 1.3, he/she can have it...
  • fkirenicusfkirenicus Member Posts: 331
    edited May 2016
    subtledoctor said:

    Who's treating anyone like garbage for wanting to keep 1.3?? I just see people who want 1.3 (like @fkirenicus) treating others like garbage.

    Oh, really? Good to know there's a (self)righteous judge always ready to mete "justice" upon deviants like me, then.

    Post edited by fkirenicus on
  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 22,760
    But you're fkIrenicus , so measures agaisnt deviants won't work against you, as the game shows.

    Anyway, people, let's not go personal in your comments. Don't forget about the site rules.
Sign In or Register to comment.

2025 Overhaul Games, a division of Beamdog. © 2025 Hasbro, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Baldur's Gate, Dungeons & Dragons, D&D, Forgotten Realms, Baldur's Gate, Wizards of the Coast and their logos are trademarks of Wizards of the Coast LLC in the U.S.A. and other countries, and are used with permission. Hasbro and its logo are trademarks of Hasbro, Inc. and are used with permission. © 1998 BioWare Corp. All Rights Reserved. BioWare, the BioWare Infinity Engine and the BioWare logo are trademarks of Bioware Corp. Black Isle Studios and the Black Isle Studios logo are trademarks of Interplay Entertainment Corp. Atari and the Atari logo are trademarks owned by Atari Interactive, Inc. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.