I'm honestly surprised by how many people complain about how 5-7 year old remasters of 20 year old games are not getting regular updates. While I would love faster updates, I'm just glad to get any new content or any new updates, no matter how long it takes. The games play just fine for me, and though I've found (and reported) bugs, I understand where Beamdog is coming from, and I appreciate any efforts they put into these awesome games.
The thing that does actually disappoint me though is the fact that Beamdog seems to be abandoning the idea of doing more enhanced editions of other games. There are still plenty of other awesome games that could be modernized and enhanced, so I hope Beamdog doesn't completely abandon the idea.
I'm honestly surprised by how many people complain about how 5-7 year old remasters of 20 year old games are not getting regular updates.
My complaint isn't that there are no updates, but that the issues that should be fixed by now are still not being fixed. If Beamdog would have fixed the UI regressions in the first (or second, or third) year after SoD's release, they would have also removed the reason for these complaints.
It's not fair to try to turn this around and say that we're being unreasonable because the game is old now. The fact that the game is old only means that Beamdog has had plenty of time to address these issues. But they just haven't.
I'm honestly surprised by how many people complain about how 5-7 year old remasters of 20 year old games are not getting regular updates.
My complaint isn't that there are no updates, but that the issues that should be fixed by now are still not being fixed. If Beamdog would have fixed the UI regressions in the first (or second, or third) year after SoD's release, they would have also removed the reason for these complaints.
It's not fair to try to turn this around and say that we're being unreasonable because the game is old now. The fact that the game is old only means that Beamdog has had plenty of time to address these issues. But they just haven't.
But isn't it the case that there are a great many games out there, including the original IE games themselves, where the developer ended patch support with several issues still not fixed? So why is Beamdog being held to a different (and unfair) standard?
Also, the so-called UI regressions are entirely subjective. Yes for a number of people in this forum who are rabid IE games fans this is a big issue. But for the vast majority of people owning these games, myself included and including the hundreds of thousands of owners who don't frequent this forum, this is not an issue and in fact we love the new UIs.
I'm honestly surprised by how many people complain about how 5-7 year old remasters of 20 year old games are not getting regular updates. While I would love faster updates, I'm just glad to get any new content or any new updates, no matter how long it takes. The games play just fine for me, and though I've found (and reported) bugs, I understand where Beamdog is coming from, and I appreciate any efforts they put into these awesome games.
The thing that does actually disappoint me though is the fact that Beamdog seems to be abandoning the idea of doing more enhanced editions of other games. There are still plenty of other awesome games that could be modernized and enhanced, so I hope Beamdog doesn't completely abandon the idea.
Totally agree with the first paragraph. Disagree with the second paragraph. They need to move on to making new games. AAO is not exactly what I have in mind, but if it serves as a first step to demonstrating that they have what it takes to make an original new game, I'm cheering them on.
I'm honestly surprised by how many people complain about how 5-7 year old remasters of 20 year old games are not getting regular updates. While I would love faster updates, I'm just glad to get any new content or any new updates, no matter how long it takes. The games play just fine for me, and though I've found (and reported) bugs, I understand where Beamdog is coming from, and I appreciate any efforts they put into these awesome games.
The thing that does actually disappoint me though is the fact that Beamdog seems to be abandoning the idea of doing more enhanced editions of other games. There are still plenty of other awesome games that could be modernized and enhanced, so I hope Beamdog doesn't completely abandon the idea.
Totally agree with the first paragraph. Disagree with the second paragraph. They need to move on to making new games. AAO is not exactly what I have in mind, but if it serves as a first step to demonstrating that they have what it takes to make an original new game, I'm cheering them on.
I agree they need to do their own games, but I would like to see more enhanced games as side projects as the Beamdog team grows. I would love a new BG style RPG by them. I'm just greedy and want both I guess.
So why is Beamdog being held to a different (and unfair) standard?
Also, the so-called UI regressions are entirely subjective. Yes for a number of people in this forum who are rabid IE games fans this is a big issue. But for the vast majority of people owning these games, myself included and including the hundreds of thousands of owners who don't frequent this forum, this is not an issue and in fact we love the new UIs.
#1) Because Beamdog sold its image that way - as a company who listens and cares and that's what dragged many players - myself included - to the EE at first.
When an ex-friend told me about the EE his exactly words were "and the guys who are doing this are very receptive and dedicated to the community, they really listen - every Twitter comment I made about the game was answered" and etc. And it was true back then.
And Beamdog created two sessions of the forum for gathering ideas from the community and so far, AFAIK, they were totally ignored.
That's why Beamdog is held in such a different standard: it told us it was and we believed.
#2) There are lots of subjective things towards UI, but there are lots of objective ones also - some of them impacts directly the life of modders (who are the ones that truly keep this game alive IMHO).
I'm on my phone now, but @Adul compiled a very nice list of UI issues where around 90% of the items are not subjective at all.
I love SoD's UI when it comes to design, but it is like a beautiful girl who likes to beat dogs - no matter how pretty it is, I just can't stand it.
But isn't it the case that there are a great many games out there, including the original IE games themselves, where the developer ended patch support with several issues still not fixed? So why is Beamdog being held to a different (and unfair) standard?
I'm actually glad that you've brought this up, as Beamdog's responsibilities in regards to the EEs is a topic that's not discussed nearly enough in my opinion.
When we're talking about the EEs, it's important to understand that Beamdog is in quite a different business than Bioware was. With Baldur's Gate, Bioware created their own game, and with BG:EE, Beamdog rereleased that game as a remaster. One company was in a creative role, the other is in much more of a custodial one. Of course, Beamdog has also decided to indulge their creative side by adding new content, but that is beside the point. I'm talking about their responsibilities over the original content here.
Of course, them being in a custodial role over the EEs shouldn't mean that Beamdog is now shackled to the IE games forever and they're required to provide updates until the end of time—that would be an unreasonable demand. However, it does mean that Beamdog has a responsibility to leave these games in a state that is as good or better than the original games were in.
That is why many of us are disappointed that in three years, Beamdog hasn't fixed the issues that they've introduced to the BG:EE, BGII:EE, and now IWD:EE user interface. These issues weren't there in the original games, they're entirely unique to the EEs. They diminish the original content instead of improving it (or leaving it in an unchanged state). That's why Beamdog has a responsibility to fix them.
Also, the so-called UI regressions are entirely subjective. Yes for a number of people in this forum who are rabid IE games fans this is a big issue.
The fact that we care about the issues may be subjective, but the issues themselves are (mostly) not. When we're talking about the UI regressions, we mean a wide spectrum of issues including full on bugs, missing sounds and aesthetics, logical inconsistencies, and usability issues. Some of them are subjective, but most are not.
It's okay if none of the issues bother you. We're different people with different sensibilities. What's not okay is that in three years, Beamdog hasn't bothered to fix objective issues that they've introduced to the games in their custody.
But for the vast majority of people owning these games, myself included and including the hundreds of thousands of owners who don't frequent this forum, this is not an issue and in fact we love the new UIs.
We have no data on what percentage of players outside of this forum are bothered by the UI issues, and to what extent. You shouldn't presume to know what their opinions are.
Edit: I want to make it clear that the list linked above is in no way exhaustive. It's just a loosely organized list of issues that came to my mind at the time while I was trying to prove a point. There are other 2.0 leftover UI issues that I haven't listed. As I'm sure there are many I don't even know about.
Also there are way more objective issues with current version than just UI itself. For example translation in my native language became unplayable last year due to a quite serious bug with overrides and the way game saves it state. Basically whole work that community put into the game by translating new content, fixing old bugs etc. is unusable.
Now we just have to wait and nobody wants to tell us how long. To make things worse there is no possibility to backport to last working version with Steam like with some other games.
Obviously nobody cares that game is still sold advertised with full support for Polish language both on Steam and GOG.
@Raduziel What's the plot hole if you don't mind me asking?
@ThacoBell Would you kindly do the honors, good sir?
Thank you for reading, and happy gaming to all.
Oh why thank you! Note that what follows is a massive spoiler for SoD's finale. Don't click if you haven't played yet:
Skie's soul being stuck in the Soultaker dagger. A big deal is made that her soul can only be restored if the dagger is recovered. Charname can even state that they will find the dagger and return it to save Skie. Then absolutely nothing comes of it. Its left open in a way that feels like a resolution was planned, but dropped. Its a massive hanging plot thread that NEEDS to be resolved.
@ThacoBell thanks for the refresh. I completely forgot as it’s been a while since I have played Siege of Dragonspear. I have skipped it on my last few playthroughs as I always wanna go straight to BG2 EE. I also agree that it does need addressing as it is a pretty big plot point that they created.
In regards to all the UI issues everyone is mentioning I had a read on the linked thread and I can honestly say that none of them ever really occurred to me lol I have always found the EE UI to be very good. I am an old school player and I have played all the originals and the one thing I stand by is that I have found all the EE games (especially Icewind Dale) to be a pleasure. I rarely have any issues with bugs and all the UI bugs mentioned in the other thread just don’t matter enough to me personally as I’ve never noticed them. I do however appreciate that other people have a much better eye for detail than I do and it’s all down to personal opinion. I am just personally very appreciative that I can play these awesome games on an up to date system without having to mess about with mods to make the games work. Again I know a lot of people in the community love mods and I have myself tried the NPC project for BG1 (pretty damn awesome) but beyond that I just don’t really have the know how with mods. I prefer knowing the game is gonna work easy and no hassle.
I'm honestly surprised by how many people complain about how 5-7 year old remasters of 20 year old games are not getting regular updates. While I would love faster updates, I'm just glad to get any new content or any new updates, no matter how long it takes. The games play just fine for me, and though I've found (and reported) bugs, I understand where Beamdog is coming from, and I appreciate any efforts they put into these awesome games.
Let me stress they actually introduced new game mechanics bugs in 2.5, and the 2.? versions are from the SOD DLC which they sold. The timeline has been pointed out before elsewhere. I am waiting for patch 2.6 (which hopefully brings no new regressions) since it was announced last year and this becomes tedious. So while I believe most people here and me among them appreciate that Beamdog has supported the EE's that long there is some perhaps growing element of frustration and confusion after the ongoing NWN EE work and the new game announcement in my perception.
If there is a "not working as advertised" language support (thats what I understand) I would believe it to be perfectly reasonable to expect Beamdog to bring the game in a "works as advertised" state with a patch, regardless how long after the introduction of the initial problem that is.
Now, some patch will certainly be the last patch for whatever reason. But this has not been communicated yet. To the contrary.
The thing that does actually disappoint me though is the fact that Beamdog seems to be abandoning the idea of doing more enhanced editions of other games. There are still plenty of other awesome games that could be modernized and enhanced, so I hope Beamdog doesn't completely abandon the idea.
An Arcanum EE as brought up by @alexey_ko in the "Ask Beamdog" thread (certainly slim chance on that :-) would actually interest me opposed to that new game they are promoting, I am certainly not their target audience. But if it keeps the IE patches (without introducing regressions) trickling in after (!) 2.6 I certainly will not complain.
@ThacoBell thanks for the refresh. I completely forgot as it’s been a while since I have played Siege of Dragonspear. I have skipped it on my last few playthroughs as I always wanna go straight to BG2 EE. I also agree that it does need addressing as it is a pretty big plot point that they created.
@Klakier Is it not as simple as moving all files from "00806\lang\pl_PL\override" to "00806\lang\pl_PL\sounds" ? Or is this a different issue from the SAV being filled with WAV files?
Ok, I can accept needing to fix issues that were introduced into the EEs that were not in the original games in their final pre-EE state, but that would be about it. @Adul, I appreciate you saying that expecting Beamdog to keep fixing these games forever would be an unreasonable demand, but you have to admit that at least some in this forum have come pretty darned close to demanding exactly that if not outright so.
Also, I do think it is reasonable for me to extrapolate that most IE game owners who are not registered in this forum don't have much if any complaints about the state of the games, because if they did they'd surely be active in this forum to voice and vent their complaints.
Bottom line, Beamdog should release a couple more big patches to fix up the last of the issues introduced into the EEs that were not there in the originals, maybe provide a 'rollback' toggle for the UI to the old UI for you guys who insist on using the clunky and unwieldy and ugly old UI but without taking away any of the new UI for those of us who will not go back to that ridiculous old UI, and then draw a line under these games.
Oh, and one more point about doing more EEs, an Arcanum EE for example. Given what Beamdog has had to go through trying to keep satisfied the IE purists all these past six years, I can't imagine they'd want to add to that pain with any more EEs. They'd just be opening themselves up to more of the constant complaining that they have taken yet another "greatest game ever made" and "wrecked" it. In fact, I don't see why any developer would want to do an EE of an old game other than possibly if the game was their own game to begin with. Beamdog has zero incentive to do another EE.
Oh, and one more point about doing more EEs, an Arcanum EE for example. Given what Beamdog has had to go through trying to keep satisfied the IE purists all these past six years, I can't imagine they'd want to add to that pain with any more EEs. They'd just be opening themselves up to more of the constant complaining that they have taken yet another "greatest game ever made" and "wrecked" it. In fact, I don't see why any developer would want to do an EE of an old game other than possibly if the game was their own game to begin with. Beamdog has zero incentive to do another EE.
I agree that some citicism leveled at Beamdog over the years was not fair as far as I am concerned. I will leave it at that.
But they did a NWN EE which is not an IE EE, didn't they ? :-) Apparently the IE EE's kept them economically afloat to the point they could develop new stuff Trent Oster personally is reportedly very interested in. So, may be all in all dealing with the community which kept the original IE's alive and extended them by modding for about an equally long time could be called a fair trade in the end.
And no, I do not seriously believe there ever will be an Arcanum EE or a ToEE EE. I do not believe those would be economically viable.
Ok, I can accept needing to fix issues that were introduced into the EEs that were not in the original games in their final pre-EE state, but that would be about it. @Adul, I appreciate you saying that expecting Beamdog to keep fixing these games forever would be an unreasonable demand, but you have to admit that at least some in this forum have come pretty darned close to demanding exactly that if not outright so.
Well, that's on them then. If Beamdog fixed all the EE-specific regressions and then never touched any of the IE games ever again, I'd kiss their feet, shake their hands, and wish them well on their further endeavors.
Also, I do think it is reasonable for me to extrapolate that most IE game owners who are not registered in this forum don't have much if any complaints about the state of the games, because if they did they'd surely be active in this forum to voice and vent their complaints.
Not everyone who plays games posts in gaming forums. This is just not something you can reasonably assume about other people without asking them.
But if you want to go on believing that, who am I to stop you?
Bottom line, Beamdog should release a couple more big patches to fix up the last of the issues introduced into the EEs that were not there in the originals...
I, for one, have many other things on top of UI fixes that I’m interested in—some of which, again, reported one or more years ago.
Beamdog’s a business and I appreciate the need to eventually drop patching these games and move on to more profitable ventures. Until then, I’ll keep vouching for those fixes and features I think are important and would make the game better.
I, for one, have many other things on top of UI fixes that I’m interested in—some of which, again, reported one or more years ago.
Oh, I completely agree with you. To be clear, I meant that Beamdog should fix all regressions, not just the UI-related ones. I just tend to bring up the UI because that's one area where they've barely made any progress despite the astounding number of issues they've introduced to it.
@Raduziel What's the plot hole if you don't mind me asking?
@ThacoBell Would you kindly do the honors, good sir?
Thank you for reading, and happy gaming to all.
Oh why thank you! Note that what follows is a massive spoiler for SoD's finale. Don't click if you haven't played yet:
Skie's soul being stuck in the Soultaker dagger. A big deal is made that her soul can only be restored if the dagger is recovered. Charname can even state that they will find the dagger and return it to save Skie. Then absolutely nothing comes of it. Its left open in a way that feels like a resolution was planned, but dropped. Its a massive hanging plot thread that NEEDS to be resolved.
Believe it or not (and you guys are gonna laugh at this), It was @ThacoBell's asking when the Soultaker plot would be resolved every week that finally convinced me to purchase my own retail copies of the BG:EE titles. Yes, during the sale on GoG, I willingly purchased these games with the full knowledge that at least one of them shipped with an unresolved quest plot device. Despite his warning and having not played any of the BG titles all the way through, I clicked on the spoiler containing the text explaining this issue. However, that has not deterred me from wanting to resolve said quest plot, or any other plot for that matter.
While I'm thinking about it, wouldn't it be cool if the party happened to walk into an area of the map containing a small pond, and in that pond were three frogs just sitting on lily pads? When the party approaches the frogs, they all speak a word in sequence.
[
Not everyone who plays games posts in gaming forums. This is just not something you can reasonably assume about other people without asking them.
But if you want to go on believing that, who am I to stop you?
That is not what he said... he said that it can be assumed that most people not posting in these forums do not have any issues, which I completely agree with. In my 20 years as a developer I have only heard from a handful of people that have no issues with the software, but you can bet that any users that run into bugs are contacting my team. It can be reasonably assumed that if somebody runs into a bug or issue that person would come here to report it or find out if others are also seeing the same bug.
In my 20 years as a developer I have only heard from a handful of people that have no issues with the software, but you can bet that any users that run into bugs are contacting my team. It can be reasonably assumed that if somebody runs into a bug or issue that person would come here to report it or find out if others are also seeing the same bug.
I've run into plenty of bugs in my career as a gamer that I haven't reported to anyone. So I know from personal experience that what you just said cannot be universally applied to everyone who plays games and encounters bugs.
It's also quite obvious that not all people universally report every single bug they come across in games when you just stop and think about it for a minute. In fact, I'm fairly sure almost nobody does that.
This is one of the weirdest arguments I've ever gotten into on these forums, and that's saying something. I'm honestly baffled.
I'd also like to add that it's not just the so-called 'purists' who think the new UI ought to be much better. Check out the reviews for both games on Steam to see plenty of folks complaining about the post-2.0 changes.
It's just as reasonable (if not more) to argue that it's in fact a few people with questionable taste trying to fight the common sense narrative that BD has botched the aesthetics and usability of these games, regardless of the overall value of the EEs.
It's just as reasonable (if not more) to argue that it's in fact a few people with questionable taste trying to fight the common sense narrative that BD has botched the aesthetics and usability of these games, regardless of the overall value of the EEs.
I think it's also a matter of how detail-oriented the observer is. A lot of SoD screens look great on the surface. I bet a lot of folks were blown away when they first saw the honestly very handsome SoD main menu screen.
Meanwhile, most of the UI issues are subsurface, meaning you need to scratch at the UI a little in order to see them come tumbling out. Granted, you don't need to scratch a lot, and once you do they start popping up by the droves, but still, one might miss them if they don't pay much attention to the UI, or if they just don't remember how things used to work when they actually worked.
This is just speculation, but this could also explain how the 2.0 UI got past QA. E.g. "When you just look at it, it's great. Just don't start clicking on things."
You're right - in fact, let me clarify to anyone who might be offended by me saying they have "questionable taste" that I don't even think the new UI is ugly.
I personally like SoD's dark dragon scale scheme. I also like and can see what they were going for with BG:EE's blue stone and gold - it looks more consistent with BG2 without completely forgetting the original. I think it has its own charm and it's a nice alternative for anyone who isn't exactly enamored with the original gray stone interface. To top it off, let me be the first to admit that the aforementioned gray stone UI does have its limitations and room for improvement.
The problem, as you point out, is with the implementation - with so many lazy and poorly thought-out design choices. I can't argue with anyone who says they like it just fine, but liking it won't change the fact that objectively bad choices were made. And some of them might not even bother players on a conscious level, but they're there, and they would be acceptable if it was the work of amateur modders, but we're talking about a professional studio who's not only selling these games for 20 bucks each, but has also taken active steps to ensure people will not play any other versions of them.
Expecting (or maybe even demanding) more doesn't make me or anyone a hater. It's Beamdog who set the bar high for themselves by claiming the EEs were the definitive and authoritative versions of BG. You can't expect players to take you seriously if you can't outdo the original developers.
I just discovered the UI issues when I started modding. And I don't mod UI, but kits, one of the simplest things a modder can do.
The user-level issues I've just noticed when they were pointed out and now I can't unsee them. And I'm quite surprised that I didn't notice those before as OCD makes me go nuts with details and perfectionism.
Probably because I play IWDEE way more than I play BG(2)EE.
But honestly, I'm really tired of arguing with Beamdog. The way I see it is pretty clear that the company is not listening and doesn't care, so I've decided to pack the maximum amount of fixes I can to my mods (when they are relevant to them).
If in one hand it saves me the trouble of wasting my time speaking with someone who doesn't listen in another hand it makes me angrier because those fixes are ridiculously easy to achieve and I make them alone, in my spare time and for free (I do have a lot of tutoring from most expert modders, though).
@Klakier Is it not as simple as moving all files from "00806\lang\pl_PL\override" to "00806\lang\pl_PL\sounds" ? Or is this a different issue from the SAV being filled with WAV files?
Unfortunately SAV is being filled with WAVs, and once WAV is pumped into SAV it stops working.
Unfortunately SAV is being filled with WAVs, and once WAV is pumped into SAV it stops working.
Unless you're on mobile, all you need to do is move (not copy) entire contents of folder:
lang\pl_PL\override
to:
lang\pl_PL\sounds
and new SAV files should stop filling up with WAVs. It won't do anything to help SAVs that are already corrupted though.
I can play using Polish language of BGSoD like this without generating corrupted SAV files.
Unfortunately SAV is being filled with WAVs, and once WAV is pumped into SAV it stops working.
Unless you're on mobile, all you need to do is move (not copy) entire contents of folder:
lang\pl_PL\override
to:
lang\pl_PL\sounds
and new SAV files should stop filling up with WAVs. It won't do anything to help SAVs that are already corrupted though.
I can play using Polish language of BGSoD like this without generating corrupted SAV files.
I just tested it and i think i owe you some ale Big shout-out to you, i'll spread this workaround in Polish section.
Comments
@ThacoBell Would you kindly do the honors, good sir?
Thank you for reading, and happy gaming to all.
The thing that does actually disappoint me though is the fact that Beamdog seems to be abandoning the idea of doing more enhanced editions of other games. There are still plenty of other awesome games that could be modernized and enhanced, so I hope Beamdog doesn't completely abandon the idea.
My complaint isn't that there are no updates, but that the issues that should be fixed by now are still not being fixed. If Beamdog would have fixed the UI regressions in the first (or second, or third) year after SoD's release, they would have also removed the reason for these complaints.
It's not fair to try to turn this around and say that we're being unreasonable because the game is old now. The fact that the game is old only means that Beamdog has had plenty of time to address these issues. But they just haven't.
But isn't it the case that there are a great many games out there, including the original IE games themselves, where the developer ended patch support with several issues still not fixed? So why is Beamdog being held to a different (and unfair) standard?
Also, the so-called UI regressions are entirely subjective. Yes for a number of people in this forum who are rabid IE games fans this is a big issue. But for the vast majority of people owning these games, myself included and including the hundreds of thousands of owners who don't frequent this forum, this is not an issue and in fact we love the new UIs.
Totally agree with the first paragraph. Disagree with the second paragraph. They need to move on to making new games. AAO is not exactly what I have in mind, but if it serves as a first step to demonstrating that they have what it takes to make an original new game, I'm cheering them on.
I agree they need to do their own games, but I would like to see more enhanced games as side projects as the Beamdog team grows. I would love a new BG style RPG by them. I'm just greedy and want both I guess.
#1) Because Beamdog sold its image that way - as a company who listens and cares and that's what dragged many players - myself included - to the EE at first.
When an ex-friend told me about the EE his exactly words were "and the guys who are doing this are very receptive and dedicated to the community, they really listen - every Twitter comment I made about the game was answered" and etc. And it was true back then.
And Beamdog created two sessions of the forum for gathering ideas from the community and so far, AFAIK, they were totally ignored.
That's why Beamdog is held in such a different standard: it told us it was and we believed.
#2) There are lots of subjective things towards UI, but there are lots of objective ones also - some of them impacts directly the life of modders (who are the ones that truly keep this game alive IMHO).
I'm on my phone now, but @Adul compiled a very nice list of UI issues where around 90% of the items are not subjective at all.
I love SoD's UI when it comes to design, but it is like a beautiful girl who likes to beat dogs - no matter how pretty it is, I just can't stand it.
I'm actually glad that you've brought this up, as Beamdog's responsibilities in regards to the EEs is a topic that's not discussed nearly enough in my opinion.
When we're talking about the EEs, it's important to understand that Beamdog is in quite a different business than Bioware was. With Baldur's Gate, Bioware created their own game, and with BG:EE, Beamdog rereleased that game as a remaster. One company was in a creative role, the other is in much more of a custodial one. Of course, Beamdog has also decided to indulge their creative side by adding new content, but that is beside the point. I'm talking about their responsibilities over the original content here.
Of course, them being in a custodial role over the EEs shouldn't mean that Beamdog is now shackled to the IE games forever and they're required to provide updates until the end of time—that would be an unreasonable demand. However, it does mean that Beamdog has a responsibility to leave these games in a state that is as good or better than the original games were in.
That is why many of us are disappointed that in three years, Beamdog hasn't fixed the issues that they've introduced to the BG:EE, BGII:EE, and now IWD:EE user interface. These issues weren't there in the original games, they're entirely unique to the EEs. They diminish the original content instead of improving it (or leaving it in an unchanged state). That's why Beamdog has a responsibility to fix them.
The fact that we care about the issues may be subjective, but the issues themselves are (mostly) not. When we're talking about the UI regressions, we mean a wide spectrum of issues including full on bugs, missing sounds and aesthetics, logical inconsistencies, and usability issues. Some of them are subjective, but most are not.
It's okay if none of the issues bother you. We're different people with different sensibilities. What's not okay is that in three years, Beamdog hasn't bothered to fix objective issues that they've introduced to the games in their custody.
We have no data on what percentage of players outside of this forum are bothered by the UI issues, and to what extent. You shouldn't presume to know what their opinions are.
Gotcha covered.
https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/comment/1029686/#Comment_1029686
Edit: I want to make it clear that the list linked above is in no way exhaustive. It's just a loosely organized list of issues that came to my mind at the time while I was trying to prove a point. There are other 2.0 leftover UI issues that I haven't listed. As I'm sure there are many I don't even know about.
Now we just have to wait and nobody wants to tell us how long. To make things worse there is no possibility to backport to last working version with Steam like with some other games.
Obviously nobody cares that game is still sold advertised with full support for Polish language both on Steam and GOG.
Oh why thank you! Note that what follows is a massive spoiler for SoD's finale. Don't click if you haven't played yet:
In regards to all the UI issues everyone is mentioning I had a read on the linked thread and I can honestly say that none of them ever really occurred to me lol I have always found the EE UI to be very good. I am an old school player and I have played all the originals and the one thing I stand by is that I have found all the EE games (especially Icewind Dale) to be a pleasure. I rarely have any issues with bugs and all the UI bugs mentioned in the other thread just don’t matter enough to me personally as I’ve never noticed them. I do however appreciate that other people have a much better eye for detail than I do and it’s all down to personal opinion. I am just personally very appreciative that I can play these awesome games on an up to date system without having to mess about with mods to make the games work. Again I know a lot of people in the community love mods and I have myself tried the NPC project for BG1 (pretty damn awesome) but beyond that I just don’t really have the know how with mods. I prefer knowing the game is gonna work easy and no hassle.
Let me stress they actually introduced new game mechanics bugs in 2.5, and the 2.? versions are from the SOD DLC which they sold. The timeline has been pointed out before elsewhere. I am waiting for patch 2.6 (which hopefully brings no new regressions) since it was announced last year and this becomes tedious. So while I believe most people here and me among them appreciate that Beamdog has supported the EE's that long there is some perhaps growing element of frustration and confusion after the ongoing NWN EE work and the new game announcement in my perception.
If there is a "not working as advertised" language support (thats what I understand) I would believe it to be perfectly reasonable to expect Beamdog to bring the game in a "works as advertised" state with a patch, regardless how long after the introduction of the initial problem that is.
Now, some patch will certainly be the last patch for whatever reason. But this has not been communicated yet. To the contrary.
An Arcanum EE as brought up by @alexey_ko in the "Ask Beamdog" thread (certainly slim chance on that :-) would actually interest me opposed to that new game they are promoting, I am certainly not their target audience. But if it keeps the IE patches (without introducing regressions) trickling in after (!) 2.6 I certainly will not complain.
There is a mod shsforums.net/files/file/1204-skie-the-cost-of-one-girls-soul/ by LavaDelVortel which tries that. So not all is lost, probably (did not play it) it is quite good in fact, so a win perhaps ? :-)
Also, I do think it is reasonable for me to extrapolate that most IE game owners who are not registered in this forum don't have much if any complaints about the state of the games, because if they did they'd surely be active in this forum to voice and vent their complaints.
Bottom line, Beamdog should release a couple more big patches to fix up the last of the issues introduced into the EEs that were not there in the originals, maybe provide a 'rollback' toggle for the UI to the old UI for you guys who insist on using the clunky and unwieldy and ugly old UI
I agree that some citicism leveled at Beamdog over the years was not fair as far as I am concerned. I will leave it at that.
But they did a NWN EE which is not an IE EE, didn't they ? :-) Apparently the IE EE's kept them economically afloat to the point they could develop new stuff Trent Oster personally is reportedly very interested in. So, may be all in all dealing with the community which kept the original IE's alive and extended them by modding for about an equally long time could be called a fair trade in the end.
And no, I do not seriously believe there ever will be an Arcanum EE or a ToEE EE. I do not believe those would be economically viable.
Well, that's on them then. If Beamdog fixed all the EE-specific regressions and then never touched any of the IE games ever again, I'd kiss their feet, shake their hands, and wish them well on their further endeavors.
Not everyone who plays games posts in gaming forums. This is just not something you can reasonably assume about other people without asking them.
But if you want to go on believing that, who am I to stop you?
Hey, that's my line!
Beamdog’s a business and I appreciate the need to eventually drop patching these games and move on to more profitable ventures. Until then, I’ll keep vouching for those fixes and features I think are important and would make the game better.
Oh, I completely agree with you. To be clear, I meant that Beamdog should fix all regressions, not just the UI-related ones. I just tend to bring up the UI because that's one area where they've barely made any progress despite the astounding number of issues they've introduced to it.
Believe it or not (and you guys are gonna laugh at this), It was @ThacoBell's asking when the Soultaker plot would be resolved every week that finally convinced me to purchase my own retail copies of the BG:EE titles. Yes, during the sale on GoG, I willingly purchased these games with the full knowledge that at least one of them shipped with an unresolved quest plot device.
While I'm thinking about it, wouldn't it be cool if the party happened to walk into an area of the map containing a small pond, and in that pond were three frogs just sitting on lily pads? When the party approaches the frogs, they all speak a word in sequence.
Frog #1: "Soul-"
Frog #2: "tak-"
Frog #3: "er."
Thank you for reading, and happy gaming to all.
That is not what he said... he said that it can be assumed that most people not posting in these forums do not have any issues, which I completely agree with. In my 20 years as a developer I have only heard from a handful of people that have no issues with the software, but you can bet that any users that run into bugs are contacting my team. It can be reasonably assumed that if somebody runs into a bug or issue that person would come here to report it or find out if others are also seeing the same bug.
I've run into plenty of bugs in my career as a gamer that I haven't reported to anyone. So I know from personal experience that what you just said cannot be universally applied to everyone who plays games and encounters bugs.
It's also quite obvious that not all people universally report every single bug they come across in games when you just stop and think about it for a minute. In fact, I'm fairly sure almost nobody does that.
This is one of the weirdest arguments I've ever gotten into on these forums, and that's saying something. I'm honestly baffled.
It's just as reasonable (if not more) to argue that it's in fact a few people with questionable taste trying to fight the common sense narrative that BD has botched the aesthetics and usability of these games, regardless of the overall value of the EEs.
I think it's also a matter of how detail-oriented the observer is. A lot of SoD screens look great on the surface. I bet a lot of folks were blown away when they first saw the honestly very handsome SoD main menu screen.
Meanwhile, most of the UI issues are subsurface, meaning you need to scratch at the UI a little in order to see them come tumbling out. Granted, you don't need to scratch a lot, and once you do they start popping up by the droves, but still, one might miss them if they don't pay much attention to the UI, or if they just don't remember how things used to work when they actually worked.
This is just speculation, but this could also explain how the 2.0 UI got past QA. E.g. "When you just look at it, it's great. Just don't start clicking on things."
Well, that and pre-release crunch, probably.
I personally like SoD's dark dragon scale scheme. I also like and can see what they were going for with BG:EE's blue stone and gold - it looks more consistent with BG2 without completely forgetting the original. I think it has its own charm and it's a nice alternative for anyone who isn't exactly enamored with the original gray stone interface. To top it off, let me be the first to admit that the aforementioned gray stone UI does have its limitations and room for improvement.
The problem, as you point out, is with the implementation - with so many lazy and poorly thought-out design choices. I can't argue with anyone who says they like it just fine, but liking it won't change the fact that objectively bad choices were made. And some of them might not even bother players on a conscious level, but they're there, and they would be acceptable if it was the work of amateur modders, but we're talking about a professional studio who's not only selling these games for 20 bucks each, but has also taken active steps to ensure people will not play any other versions of them.
Expecting (or maybe even demanding) more doesn't make me or anyone a hater. It's Beamdog who set the bar high for themselves by claiming the EEs were the definitive and authoritative versions of BG. You can't expect players to take you seriously if you can't outdo the original developers.
The user-level issues I've just noticed when they were pointed out and now I can't unsee them. And I'm quite surprised that I didn't notice those before as OCD makes me go nuts with details and perfectionism.
Probably because I play IWDEE way more than I play BG(2)EE.
But honestly, I'm really tired of arguing with Beamdog. The way I see it is pretty clear that the company is not listening and doesn't care, so I've decided to pack the maximum amount of fixes I can to my mods (when they are relevant to them).
If in one hand it saves me the trouble of wasting my time speaking with someone who doesn't listen in another hand it makes me angrier because those fixes are ridiculously easy to achieve and I make them alone, in my spare time and for free (I do have a lot of tutoring from most expert modders, though).
Unfortunately SAV is being filled with WAVs, and once WAV is pumped into SAV it stops working.
I can play using Polish language of BGSoD like this without generating corrupted SAV files.
I just tested it and i think i owe you some ale