I don't get it. The only new information in the OP is that the bug is (predictably) also present in SoD. The way you speak makes it look like the devs couldn't check for the bug before lefreut did.
Me, I've given up expecting anything to be done about the UI after finding out 2.5 doesn't even fix the unjoined store panels bug, after the solution (which takes literally 5 minutes to apply) was found over a year ago.
Fixes for UI have never been planned for the 2.5 patch. Instead, more than 1600 issues have been fixed to make the playing experience better.
This is what I don't get much. You introduced a brand new UI, which was a pretty huge change. But after that you don't seem to be overly interested in it. Literally everything else is more important. It's like the guy who made it got fired/left and nobody wants to take it over (that happens in my company ).
With all due respect, this is not correct. Of course crashes, platform incompatibility, MP problems, item duplication, not working quests, bringing the games as close as they can be to each, Engine-wise, are big issues and they are important. The team is very well aware about UI feedback and detailed UI tickets based on long discussions. If UI was a part of the 2.5 patch, it would have made the wait for it almost eternal.
We continue to listen to your feedback, right here, right now. This thread is in the "2.5 patches feedback" category, and the more similar threads we get, the better.
My criticism comes from the fact that you, as a BD representative, claim the 2.5 patch was solely focused on bugfixing and stability and yet there was time for stuff like color-coding Flaming Fist officers and bandits as "good" and "baddie" and introducing UB-like interjections for NPCs. Were these changes/additions necessary? How's that more important than having a functional UI?
What's even more disappointing is that for all the talk about bugfixing and stability, the 2.5 update seems like a step backwards in that regard. I can't play the EEs on mobile because the zoom-out area map effect seriously slows down (when it doesn't crash) the game. I pretty much can't play them with an Intel video card because of the freeze upon saving bug (which you guys knew about and decided to leave it for later).
All of this is aggravated by the fact that this update was two years in the making. You guys said that longer patch cycles were supposedly better than regular small updates, in the name of stability - is that really working out for you?
Here's some advice you didn't ask for: stop going crazy with the graphical changes - it's hurting the game more than enhancing it. Sprite outlines and highlights came at the cost of making the game blurrier than the originals (due to replacing the scaling algorithm). The zoom out effect creates serious compatibility problems and should be toggleable. The new UI system, while well-intentioned, came with an UI that's unpolished at best and amateurish at worst. All the great mods out there are not justification - the point of the EEs in the first place was not needing extensive modding to experience the game, wasn't it?
I think it needs to be said, we're very grateful for most the things that have been fixed in the game however.
However, the UI change was pretty controversial from the beginning because it wasn't really broken to begin with. All it needed was some updated code to fix some of the more hidden bugs associated with the original UI that some modders out there had trouble dealing with at the time when BGT was relevant (especially when the original Journal system was very buggy from mod to mod). Personally what should have been done was make UI Cosmetics as a optional component rather than being part of the game automatically. I always felt the change to the original JOURNAL was rather upsetting because it had more of a charm than the new style version IMO, some might feel differently about it
I understand at the end of the day it was all good intentions to enhance the game, but always consider some factors if such changes are necessary.
I hope I didn't sound like I was lecturing the Beam Dog Devs, I'm not as I just wanted to share the general consensus how most people felt about the UI changes. I don't want the Devs to avoid the BG Forums if we're being toxic, and ungrateful when we're trying our best to be polite yet critical when we come across controversial issues.
However one change I did appreciate was the Zoom-in, Zoom-out effect. It fixed a long standing problem with Resolutions due to the new laptops and desktops out there.
We’re interested in improving UI for Baldur’s Gate: Enhanced Edition and Baldur’s Gate II: Enhanced Edition. We want players to be happy with our games, and want to incorporate their feedback. We’re studying the current feedback on UI and trying to find the best solution.
lefreut
Member Posts: 1,462
Comments
Please, add the new details to it.
Me, I've given up expecting anything to be done about the UI after finding out 2.5 doesn't even fix the unjoined store panels bug, after the solution (which takes literally 5 minutes to apply) was found over a year ago.
@lefreut has already added the info to the ticket and changed the status to "New".
We continue to listen to your feedback, right here, right now. This thread is in the "2.5 patches feedback" category, and the more similar threads we get, the better.
My criticism comes from the fact that you, as a BD representative, claim the 2.5 patch was solely focused on bugfixing and stability and yet there was time for stuff like color-coding Flaming Fist officers and bandits as "good" and "baddie" and introducing UB-like interjections for NPCs. Were these changes/additions necessary? How's that more important than having a functional UI?
What's even more disappointing is that for all the talk about bugfixing and stability, the 2.5 update seems like a step backwards in that regard. I can't play the EEs on mobile because the zoom-out area map effect seriously slows down (when it doesn't crash) the game. I pretty much can't play them with an Intel video card because of the freeze upon saving bug (which you guys knew about and decided to leave it for later).
All of this is aggravated by the fact that this update was two years in the making. You guys said that longer patch cycles were supposedly better than regular small updates, in the name of stability - is that really working out for you?
Here's some advice you didn't ask for: stop going crazy with the graphical changes - it's hurting the game more than enhancing it. Sprite outlines and highlights came at the cost of making the game blurrier than the originals (due to replacing the scaling algorithm). The zoom out effect creates serious compatibility problems and should be toggleable. The new UI system, while well-intentioned, came with an UI that's unpolished at best and amateurish at worst. All the great mods out there are not justification - the point of the EEs in the first place was not needing extensive modding to experience the game, wasn't it?
However, the UI change was pretty controversial from the beginning because it wasn't really broken to begin with. All it needed was some updated code to fix some of the more hidden bugs associated with the original UI that some modders out there had trouble dealing with at the time when BGT was relevant (especially when the original Journal system was very buggy from mod to mod). Personally what should have been done was make UI Cosmetics as a optional component rather than being part of the game automatically. I always felt the change to the original JOURNAL was rather upsetting because it had more of a charm than the new style version IMO, some might feel differently about it
I understand at the end of the day it was all good intentions to enhance the game, but always consider some factors if such changes are necessary.
I hope I didn't sound like I was lecturing the Beam Dog Devs, I'm not as I just wanted to share the general consensus how most people felt about the UI changes. I don't want the Devs to avoid the BG Forums if we're being toxic, and ungrateful when we're trying our best to be polite yet critical when we come across controversial issues.
However one change I did appreciate was the Zoom-in, Zoom-out effect. It fixed a long standing problem with Resolutions due to the new laptops and desktops out there.
http://blog.beamdog.com/2018/08/august-24-livestream-recap.html