Availability of original games
System
Administrator Posts: 200
This discussion was created from comments split from: Is there a mod that removes questionable changes beamdog added into EE?.
Post edited by JuliusBorisov on
0
Comments
The question is not whether Beamdog has "the right" to alter the games because from a legal standpoint, as the current license holders, of course they do. The discussion is about whether they SHOULD.
I used to be on the field that we've had to appreciate the EEs for what they are because indeed, you can't please everyone. And, as many defenders of these new versions love to say, you can always go away and stick to the originals.
Except that now you can't, and for me, that changes everything.
Did you know that the original games have been removed from sale? The only way you can get them now is if you purchase the EEs first. Then you have to go through a convoluted process that will get you serial keys which can be used to download the originals.
In other words, Beamdog has effectively turned BG:EE and BGII:EE into the de facto official versions of these games.
I don't care how much you guys try to spin it around - it was a dick move.
Had Beamdog's approach been similar to the one taken in PST:EE, this wouldn't be much of an issue. But when you mess around with these games as much as they have and then proceed to sweep the originals under the rug and hold them ransom, then I finally have a problem with you.
I suspect the rights have reverted to Hasbro, or are just an impenetrable legal mess.
They have posted an official statement over at the GoG forums. Here's what it says:
"The decision to take Baldur’s Gate, Baldur’s Gate II, Icewind Dale, and most recently, Planescape: Torment from sale on GOG and bundle them with the Beamdog Enhanced Edition titles was a joint decision between the Beamdog and GOG leadership teams, just as it was when the GOG Definitive Edition Bundles were first announced."
And their justification was:
"We believe that bundling the old titles alongside their newer Enhanced Editions creates a value unique to GOG and allows for owners to enjoy the option of choosing to play the game as it was on release or the versions we have made available."
...which doesn't make any sense. GoG made money from selling the originals, so the whole "value unique to GoG" argument is questionable. Second, "the option of choosing to play the game as it was on release" was also there.
The only thing this bundle changes is that now you must pay Beamdog for the privilege of playing the originals.
So considering that and the fact the originals are no longer easy to find and buy but hidden behind a convoluted process which most players won't even find out about, I think it's safe to say that Beamdog has effectively replaced the original games with their versions.
What is the complicated process to download the original version?
GoG versions are compatible with the latest versions of Windows, MacOS and Linux. They also used to be cheaper and not require a DVD drive, which most modern computers don't even come with.
You can't seriously argue that because you've got used sales of a 2008 DVD release flying around, it doesn't matter if a game's available for download. You could buy the originals for 5 dollars each. Now you have to pay 20 dollars for each of the EEs. ˜Without paying extra" only counts if you intended to buy the EEs in the first place, which may not be the case. You have to retrieve a serial key which is buried in the EE's page in your GoG library and redeem it at GoG's store. Oh, and you have to find it out for yourself, 'cause you're not getting more than a footnote saying "includes the original versions" at the store descriptions.
If all Beamdog wants is to add value to their GoG releases, then why remove the originals from the store?
How convenient for them to give you the originals for free while making sure that "free" means "after paying for our own version".
Waaaaaay back when, a game was made. People loved the game. It was a classic! It sold pretty darn well! Sadly, it was dated. Full of bugs. Didn't really work that well with newer computers. Kinda needed to have a bunch of mods, along with knowledge of how to use mods, to be used.
Then comes along a company. As with any company, it wants to make money. It makes an agreement with the IP holders that they will update the old game. Fix the bugs. Make it compatible with newer computers. Even port it over to be used with phones and tablets.
This company talks with another company that sells old video games. This company, and the company that sells the games, both want to make money. Because they are companies. They decide to bundle the old game along with the enhanced game together. Why? Because they both want to make money.
(1) Now, does that make you feel good? No.
(2) Does it make money? Yes.
(3) Does making customers happy make them money? Yes.
(4) Does making customers unhappy lose money? Yes.
(5) Does making you feel good make them money? No. I mean, it doesn't sound like you would buy their products anyways. And truth be told, you probably already own your own version(s) of the original game, replete with mods so it is to your taste.
(6) Does making you unhappy make them money? Maybe. I mean, if for whatever reason you needed to buy Baldur's Gate again, now you have no choice but to buy the EE.
(7) Does bundling the game drive off potential customers? Probably not. Only people who don't want EEs would want to buy the game unbundled. And those people wouldn't be their customers anyways. And people who don't feel too strongly will still buy the games.
(8) Will your complaining lose them business? Probably not. Most people won't feel too strongly about an old video game. And those who will feel that strongly probably already own the original anyways. New customers probably just won't care.
Looking at the above, it doesn't sound like you are their customer. Bundling the game can make you their customer. They are a business. They made a good business move.
And sadly, when it comes down to it...every business is here to make money. And they must balance the drive to make money against making people unhappy for long-term profits. They made their choice, and by the looks of it, it was an intelligent one.
Unless, you are saying, that businesses should make decisions based on the desires of people who are not their customers, and can pay their employees with good vibes.
Dead companies contribute nothing to the customer.
But criticism is healthy imo.
Ultimately it's hard to disagree that it's your own responsibility to research what exactly it is you're paying for. Approach the gaming industry with as much cynicism as you would any other business, actually I would say even more so in the digital age.
Also, Grum's assumption about me not being a customer is incorrect. I've purchased every single release from Beamdog, often in more than one platform. I had already bought the original games from GoG before the bundling. The whole situation does not affect me directly.
I'm just not okay with supporting a company that will give the middle finger to everyone who would dare forego purchasing the EEs in favor of the classic versions.
I also don't like being lied to. Like when they blame WotC for it and later take it back and discreetly admit it was their idea all along (but only on GoG and not here, for some reason).
If you want to take the neutral position because this does not affect you, fine. But please, don't embarass yourself trying to excuse the inexcusable, specially if all you've got going for you is "that's how capitalism works".
beamdog never said it's anything other than a business move, so hopefully our esteemed friend @Kilivitz can understand that when a company (any company) wraps their announcements in "you're gonna like it!!!", "GREAT VALUE!!!" that that doesn't constitute a lie. it's just the packaging, not the core message.
Or it could be a mix of those two statements. Maybe Beamdog asked WotC for the Bundle and they accepted, presuming that they needed WotC agreement to do so. In this scenario, the two statements would be true, which is entirely possible. It's hard to know for sure from the outside.
any real fan of BG who knows it's a timeless classic would not want it to cost 5$ as if it's some badly dated, unattractive game, right?
The second link, the one you said they backtracked on, was to state that it was a joint decision by both GoG and Beamdog, and not just GoG's decision alone.
So it was WotC (IP holder) telling Beamdog (licence holder) to work with GoG (distributor) to make this happen.
That's all I have to say about on the subject, folks. Take it as you will.
As of our esteemed friend @bob_veng, congratulations on a fine job of moving the goalposts and disparaging my statements. I suppose there'll be no slap on the wrist for you.
It's just that not everyone agrees with those criticisms every time.
Newer players would not care that much about the minor changes, and would probably buy the enhanced copy anyway.