The thing with the bundling, beamdog placed the idea that it wasn't there idea or had nothing to do with it and even @JuliusBorisov said it was someone else and later he admitted his mistake but why release a statement when you dont have the correct facts. When you retract a statement it leaves an element of mistrust. That's what irked me and I'm sure many others.
Like when a friend owes u money and they can't pay you back but then u see them out spending money on crap. Makes you think that's dick move.
Nobody is perfect and we all make mistakes. Admitting them and learning from them is more important in my eyes. It doesn't make it easy though, when you make a mistake and an entire mob of angry gamers descend on you.
As to the topic of separating the classic version to the EE, I can see why some people would want it. However, most of the people that seem to be gunning for this already have the classic version, so the argument makes less sense. All new players would surely prefer to get stuck in with the EE (assumption)?
Not necessarily. They may have Windows XP or may want to play on some 1.69 servers. Perhaps their friends had 1.69 so they didn't buy the EE and they want to play together. There are many reasons. Even one and even the most insignificant one would be enough to keep them unbundled - because bundling them does not have even that smallest insignificant possible reason.
@Taro94 - Yeah I can understand that. It does seem like a very hot topic for some of the community. Given what I have heard of all the past controversy, it could also help the image of Beamdog by doing this - as a gesture to fans or the like, I suppose.
I guess for my part, I just can't see myself ever playing the classic version again after the new EE comes out - especially if it contains even a mere fraction of all the wonderful suggestions on these forums.
EDIT: They could still bundle classic with the EE - and also keep the classic version available as a separate purchase. You would still then have the added incentive to buy the EE, but for those that were absolutely not interested, they could just get the classic.
Not necessarily. They may have Windows XP or may want to play on some 1.69 servers. Perhaps their friends had 1.69 so they didn't buy the EE and they want to play together. There are many reasons. Even one and even the most insignificant one would be enough to keep them unbundled - because bundling them does not have even that smallest insignificant possible reason.
Who has Windows XP nowadays? :-D LOL
... wait a minute. I myself do. :-) Actually I need it to be able to play MM9 now and again when I feel like it, and since the laptop where it's installed can't handle anything more than XP, why not use it constructively? As I write this I even feel inclined to find the old CDs and install the original NWN from 2002-2003 on that machine just to see how it really DID look back then... And what the heck, the Electron toolset of NWN2 doesn't work 100% on anything else than XP... Hmmm. :-)
@They could still bundle classic with the EE - and also keep the classic version available as a separate purchase. You would still then have the added incentive to buy the EE, but for those that were absolutely not interested, they could just get the classic.
That would be a win win for everyone. Even the dislikers would probably admit it.
Most people who complain about this are those that already own the game and play it. Hell gog gave this game away for free about a year ago, so it is unlikely that many of gogs current patrons don't own it already.
If they don't, and still want the orginial before it gets bundled, now would be the time to purchase it. It is currently listed at $13 compared to $20 for EE here.
All the arguments for not bundling doesn't hold up for a new user of this game.
With it bundled, the purchaser doesnt have to choose what server they want to play prior to purchase. Both 1. 69 and EE servers will be available to them. Giving them more choice if it wasn't bundled.
Backwards compatibility also means all the old mods will still work on both versions.
If someone has an old computer with Windows XP and finally decides to upgrade, they have the EE version ready to go in their account. Why force them to purchase it twice becuase they finally upgraded?
Having it bundled prevents confusion. It gives more options after the title is purchased, not less.
It prevents miscommunication. A supported product is worth the extra $7. It's worth it more if I am getting another version of the game.
All the arguments for not bundling doesn't hold up for a new user of this game.
-using Windows XP -wanting to play on 1.69 servers -wanting to play only with friends who have 1.69 and don't plan on buying EE
I thought I've given more than one reason already. Sure, you can say that they get the original with their EE purchase. And I'd agree that's a convincing argument, if the EE's price wasn't double that of NWN:DE. As it stands, anyone NOT interested in EE content still has no choice other than pay for it extra. Which simply isn't fair.
With it bundled, the purchaser doesnt have to choose what server they want to play prior to purchase. Both 1. 69 and EE servers will be available to them. Giving them more choice if it wasn't bundled.
Then keep the bundle but allow people to buy the original for its regular price. Taking away the choice of buying one or another is hardly giving them more choice either way.
If someone has an old computer with Windows XP and finally decides to upgrade, they have the EE version ready to go in their account. Why force them to purchase it twice becuase they finally upgraded?
The thing is, they might not want it either way. They have the right not to want it. Don't take that right away.
Having it bundled prevents confusion. It gives more options after the title is purchased, not less.
More options after it's purchased, perhaps. But people appreciate the purchase options, too. The solution of having a bundle and only NWN:DE for its current price is ideal. In this case, everyone really can have their cake and eat it, too. What's your argument against it?
It prevents miscommunication. A supported product is worth the extra $7. It's worth it more if I am getting another version of the game.
That's your opinion and I share it, but it's up to everyone individually to decide whether extra support is worth the extra money. Or at least it should be.
Dosn't make sense to not bundle it; you had 15 years to convice friends to buy it, if they didn't then I don't think that they'll do now... (and really, GOG gave it away two times already...)
And if they want to really play 1.69 they can buy the bundle and do it.
Dosn't make sense to not bundle it; you had 15 years to convice friends to buy it, if they didn't then I don't think that they'll do now... (and really, GOG gave it away two times already...)
And if they want to really play 1.69 they can buy the bundle and do it.
You seem to assume that no one new can find out about the game and prefer NWN:DE over NWN:EE for any reason - which is an incredibly bold assumption and incredibly easy to dismantle.
And yes, they can buy the bundle and play 1.69. But it's absurd to buy a game you are not interested in (for a higher price) just to get the game you want, because that game you want has been specifically removed from the store in order to be included in the bundle. It doesn't matter if there is any connection between these games (such as one being a remaster of the other).
Imagine this - you want to buy Fallout: New Vegas, but are not interested in buying Fallout 4 - for any reason, be it bugs, content, or anything else. Fallout 4 is, of course, more expensive than NV. But Bethesda decides to bundle the two together, i.e. you can only buy Fallout 4 after its release and can only get New Vegas as an added bonus. And imagine they try to tell you that they've allowed you a choice by doing so, because you'll be able to play New Vegas after buying Fallout 4 if you wish. And telling you that you've had several years to buy New Vegas already.
This is exactly what's going on here. The only difference is that one game is a remaster of the other, not a sequel - a difference which does not change the fact this is simply wrong.
Fallout New Vegas and Fallout 4 are two completely different games, so that argument makes no sense.
NWN:EE is continued support for a product that has not had official support in about a decade. Beamdog bought the licence so that they can give that support to the community.
Imagine this: A patron on gog asks a question on the forum asking what's the difference between the EE and regular version. How many responses are going to accurately reflect those differences in choice? How many will 've incorrect facts about Beamdog?
If you dont like the price tag, just wait for a sale. Those exist.
Fallout New Vegas and Fallout 4 are two completely different games, so that argument makes no sense.
So what? There are many reasons one might want to play Fallout NV, but not Fallout 4. Similarly, there are many reasons one might want to play NWN:DE, but not NWN:EE. The fact in this case one is a remaster of the other makes no difference at all.
Similarity between bundled games is not a valid excuse for offering them only as a bundle.
Fallout New Vegas and Fallout 4 are two completely different games, so that argument makes no sense.
So what? There are many reasons one might want to play Fallout NV, but not Fallout 4. Similarly, there are many reasons one might want to play NWN:DE, but not NWN:EE. The fact in this case one is a remaster of the other makes no difference at all.
Similarity between bundled games is not a valid excuse for offering them only as a bundle.
No there isn't. There are 3.
- still using XP - wanting to play on 1.69 servers.
Having both copies of the game negate both of these.
The third - not wanting to support Beamdog
Is a personal choice that people want to force on others and not bundling the games makes it harder to do that.
They cant flat out lie about what the game adds to unknown consumers.
- still using XP - wanting to play on 1.69 servers.
Having both copies of the game negate both of these.
For almost double the price.
Edit: Correction - more than double the price, because NWN:DE costs $9.77 on GOG.
You seem confident that there are these 3 reasons possible and no more. If I think of a valid fourth reason, will you admit that perhaps it's up to a customer to decide if their reason for wanting game X but not Y is reason enough to buy one and not the other, and not up to you?
Might be a incredibly bold assumption but it's like that: if they didn't bought the game in the last 15 years they won't do it now and if someone new wants to play it they will for sure buy the new one (and still get the original).
It's like... Getting mad because GOG won't sell separately the Tomb Raider games and get at $2 each one because you don't want to play the first one
Might be a incredibly bold assumption but it's like that: if they didn't bought the game in the last 15 years they won't do it now and if someone new wants to play it they will for sure buy the new one (and still get the original).
It's like... Getting mad because GOG won't sell separately the Tomb Raider games and get at $2 each one because you don't want to play the first one
Adding some old games in a bundle to a retailer's offer is one thing, but going out of your way to remove a game in order to put it in a bundle is something else. It makes it difficult to believe Beamdog doesn't do it just to remove the competition in the form of the original title.
Although it's not actually competition since Beamdog owns the license to distribute Neverwinter Nights now. Just like they own the license to distribute the IE EEs. Beamdog's the entity that signed off on bundling the EEs in the first place, meaning that any competition is with themselves, which is no competition at all.
And yes it is dodgy that Beamdog said it was WotC's call originally, and I am curious as to why that happened, but it helps not to disseminate things that aren't entirely true.
Personally, I don't think allowing DE to be sold separately as well as bundled with GOG's NWN EE is a bad idea, nor do I think it really needs all that much justification. But the belief that Beamdog might bundle it just to remove the competition is not an accurate belief. It's based on false information.
Although it's not actually competition since Beamdog owns the license to distribute Neverwinter Nights now. Just like they own the license to distribute the IE EEs. Beamdog's the entity that signed off on bundling the EEs in the first place, meaning that any competition is with themselves, which is no competition at all.
Although it's not actually competition since Beamdog owns the license to distribute Neverwinter Nights now. Just like they own the license to distribute the IE EEs. Beamdog's the entity that signed off on bundling the EEs in the first place, meaning that any competition is with themselves, which is no competition at all.
Are you sure about that?
Either Beamdog has the power to bundle the games, which means they own the right to distribute the games, or they don't have the power to bundle games, which means they don't own the right to distribute the games. If the latter is the case, which it would have to be for actual competition to exist, then Beamdog has no power to decide whether or not to bundle NWN:EE with NWN:DE and this thread is a waste of everyone's time.
If they do have the rights to distribute the games, then they can bundle them as they wish, which they've done so far. Which suggests to me that if there's any competition, it's with themselves.
And you're again suggesting that a decision be made on the basis of appeasing people who hate Beamdog's guts.
And what if by chance they start to play the 1.69, see that it won't get support and it dosn't work because, I don't know, NVIDIA drivers? They'll have to drop another $20.
Better pay 20 and have, like Hanna Montana said "The best of both worlds" :P
Adding some old games in a bundle to a retailer's offer is one thing, but going out of your way to remove a game in order to put it in a bundle is something else. It makes it difficult to believe Beamdog doesn't do it just to remove the competition in the form of the original title.
That argument pretty much only comes from people who hate Beamdog and who aren't going to like Beamdog no matter what.
And what if by chance they start to play the 1.69, see that it won't get support and it dosn't work because, I don't know, NVIDIA drivers? They'll have to drop another $20.
Better pay 20 and have, like Hanna Montana said "The best of both worlds" :P
Not saying you're wrong, but I'm a supporter of freedom of choice. If they know the risk and are willing to take it, let them. If they have to drop another $20 then, it's their own fault, because it's a consequence of their choice.
That argument pretty much only comes from people who hate Beamdog and who aren't going to like Beamdog no matter what.
I'd appreciate you not accusing me of hate. I'm writing both here - trying to present some of the points I think are valid that GOG users raise - and on the GOG forums - trying to defend Beamdog against hate, lies and complete distrust.
And you know what? Both sides are accusing me of the worst, which I should probably take as a sign that I'm being pretty objective.
As for the competition part, that's a valid point. Still, Beamdog can have a motive still - they'd rather people buy a $20 version than a $10 one, even if they get the money either way. Not saying it IS their motive (because you may want to accuse me of doing that) - just saying someone can see it this way.
Like the argument that people might have bad thoughts isn't really a compelling reason to allow DE to be purchased outside a bundle. Making it available because people might want to buy it separately for any reason (and I don't care what those reasons are) is worthwhile.
A bad reputation could lower sales of future Beamdog releases. So it is important to consider the thoughts of at least some of the people who dislike Beamdog. They can't please everyone, but they could please some.
Right. And I don't think many people would be displeased about the games remaining unbundled.
I love all the rancor over $10 extra for a bundle. Maybe those people could get out of the basement and mow their mommy and daddy's backyard for the $10...
I love all the rancor over $10 extra for a bundle. Maybe those people could get out of the basement and mow their mommy and daddy's backyard for the $10...
A pointless comment which does not bring anything valuable to this discussion.
I love all the rancor over $10 extra for a bundle. Maybe those people could get out of the basement and mow their mommy and daddy's backyard for the $10...
A pointless comment which does not bring anything valuable to this discussion.
Sorry but I get sick of the endless bitching about games in general. I can buy a game that I can enjoy for hundreds of hours for $20. That's less than I paid for Wizardry back in 1982! $20 is about what I pay for a nice steak that I enjoy for 20 minutes or so. Or I could buy one novel that I'll enjoy (or not sometimes) for a few nights and then never read it again. I just don't get the entitlement mentality of gamers. Never will...
A bad reputation could lower sales of future Beamdog releases. So it is important to consider the thoughts of at least some of the people who dislike Beamdog. They can't please everyone, but they could please some.
The haters won't be swayed by anything. They'll just shift the goalposts so they can hate Beamdog more. Catering to them will achieve nothing. These are people who insist Trent Oster is stealing his own work and taking credit for it.
Comments
There are many reasons. Even one and even the most insignificant one would be enough to keep them unbundled - because bundling them does not have even that smallest insignificant possible reason.
I guess for my part, I just can't see myself ever playing the classic version again after the new EE comes out - especially if it contains even a mere fraction of all the wonderful suggestions on these forums.
EDIT: They could still bundle classic with the EE - and also keep the classic version available as a separate purchase. You would still then have the added incentive to buy the EE, but for those that were absolutely not interested, they could just get the classic.
... wait a minute. I myself do. :-) Actually I need it to be able to play MM9 now and again when I feel like it, and since the laptop where it's installed can't handle anything more than XP, why not use it constructively?
As I write this I even feel inclined to find the old CDs and install the original NWN from 2002-2003 on that machine just to see how it really DID look back then... And what the heck, the Electron toolset of NWN2 doesn't work 100% on anything else than XP... Hmmm. :-)
Most people who complain about this are those that already own the game and play it. Hell gog gave this game away for free about a year ago, so it is unlikely that many of gogs current patrons don't own it already.
If they don't, and still want the orginial before it gets bundled, now would be the time to purchase it. It is currently listed at $13 compared to $20 for EE here.
All the arguments for not bundling doesn't hold up for a new user of this game.
With it bundled, the purchaser doesnt have to choose what server they want to play prior to purchase. Both 1. 69 and EE servers will be available to them. Giving them more choice if it wasn't bundled.
Backwards compatibility also means all the old mods will still work on both versions.
If someone has an old computer with Windows XP and finally decides to upgrade, they have the EE version ready to go in their account. Why force them to purchase it twice becuase they finally upgraded?
Having it bundled prevents confusion. It gives more options after the title is purchased, not less.
It prevents miscommunication. A supported product is worth the extra $7. It's worth it more if I am getting another version of the game.
-wanting to play on 1.69 servers
-wanting to play only with friends who have 1.69 and don't plan on buying EE
I thought I've given more than one reason already. Sure, you can say that they get the original with their EE purchase. And I'd agree that's a convincing argument, if the EE's price wasn't double that of NWN:DE. As it stands, anyone NOT interested in EE content still has no choice other than pay for it extra. Which simply isn't fair. Then keep the bundle but allow people to buy the original for its regular price. Taking away the choice of buying one or another is hardly giving them more choice either way. Doesn't matter. If I'm interested only in the old content, I want to pay what I used to pay for getting access to it, not more than that. The thing is, they might not want it either way. They have the right not to want it. Don't take that right away. More options after it's purchased, perhaps. But people appreciate the purchase options, too. The solution of having a bundle and only NWN:DE for its current price is ideal. In this case, everyone really can have their cake and eat it, too. What's your argument against it? That's your opinion and I share it, but it's up to everyone individually to decide whether extra support is worth the extra money. Or at least it should be.
And if they want to really play 1.69 they can buy the bundle and do it.
And yes, they can buy the bundle and play 1.69. But it's absurd to buy a game you are not interested in (for a higher price) just to get the game you want, because that game you want has been specifically removed from the store in order to be included in the bundle. It doesn't matter if there is any connection between these games (such as one being a remaster of the other).
Imagine this - you want to buy Fallout: New Vegas, but are not interested in buying Fallout 4 - for any reason, be it bugs, content, or anything else. Fallout 4 is, of course, more expensive than NV.
But Bethesda decides to bundle the two together, i.e. you can only buy Fallout 4 after its release and can only get New Vegas as an added bonus.
And imagine they try to tell you that they've allowed you a choice by doing so, because you'll be able to play New Vegas after buying Fallout 4 if you wish. And telling you that you've had several years to buy New Vegas already.
This is exactly what's going on here. The only difference is that one game is a remaster of the other, not a sequel - a difference which does not change the fact this is simply wrong.
NWN:EE is continued support for a product that has not had official support in about a decade. Beamdog bought the licence so that they can give that support to the community.
Imagine this: A patron on gog asks a question on the forum asking what's the difference between the EE and regular version. How many responses are going to accurately reflect those differences in choice? How many will 've incorrect facts about Beamdog?
If you dont like the price tag, just wait for a sale. Those exist.
Similarity between bundled games is not a valid excuse for offering them only as a bundle.
- still using XP
- wanting to play on 1.69 servers.
Having both copies of the game negate both of these.
The third
- not wanting to support Beamdog
Is a personal choice that people want to force on others and not bundling the games makes it harder to do that.
They cant flat out lie about what the game adds to unknown consumers.
Edit: Correction - more than double the price, because NWN:DE costs $9.77 on GOG.
You seem confident that there are these 3 reasons possible and no more. If I think of a valid fourth reason, will you admit that perhaps it's up to a customer to decide if their reason for wanting game X but not Y is reason enough to buy one and not the other, and not up to you?
It's like... Getting mad because GOG won't sell separately the Tomb Raider games and get at $2 each one because you don't want to play the first one
And yes it is dodgy that Beamdog said it was WotC's call originally, and I am curious as to why that happened, but it helps not to disseminate things that aren't entirely true.
Personally, I don't think allowing DE to be sold separately as well as bundled with GOG's NWN EE is a bad idea, nor do I think it really needs all that much justification. But the belief that Beamdog might bundle it just to remove the competition is not an accurate belief. It's based on false information.
If they do have the rights to distribute the games, then they can bundle them as they wish, which they've done so far. Which suggests to me that if there's any competition, it's with themselves.
And you're again suggesting that a decision be made on the basis of appeasing people who hate Beamdog's guts.
Better pay 20 and have, like Hanna Montana said "The best of both worlds" :P
And you know what? Both sides are accusing me of the worst, which I should probably take as a sign that I'm being pretty objective.
As for the competition part, that's a valid point. Still, Beamdog can have a motive still - they'd rather people buy a $20 version than a $10 one, even if they get the money either way. Not saying it IS their motive (because you may want to accuse me of doing that) - just saying someone can see it this way.