Compiled code is compressed code that's functionally unreadable by humans. Source code is the original code as it was written using a programming language. If you were going to change a program, you'd need the source code because it would be the only way to manipulate it and still know what you were doing.
Possibly another dumb question, but why can't the source code be back-engineered from the compiled code? All the information is there, it's just in a different format. And since mods and editors exist, that code can clearly be read and altered.
Long story short, programming languages are designed to be written, compiled, and then run. If a program ever needs to be re-written or tweaked, it will be done using the source code. In virtually all situations, except for this very weird one, the people who edit the program are the people who already have access to the source code. So the people who design programming languages don't bother creating decompilers (a word which spellcheck doesn't even recognize) because even if it's possible to create a decompiler, it would be extremely time-consuming and there would be little point.
People don't bother creating solutions for problems that no one would ever expect to happen, certainly not when they have other coding work to do.
Mods and editors can indeed read and alter certain parts of the game's code or files. But mods and editors represent the limits of what can be done without the source code. If it was possible to change X or Y in Icewind Dale 2 without the source code, there's probably already an editor for it. If there isn't an editor for changing X or Y, that's probably because you simply need the source code to edit that part of the game.
The editors that we take for granted, WeiDu or Near Infinity or DLTCEP or whatever, are actually kind of a miracle considering the IE games were never designed to be edited. They took years to create, and even then, they can't do all of the things you'd need to make IWD2 into IWD2:EE.
It wouldn't be much of an Enhanced Edition if they couldn't fix the Improved Initiative feat, for example, and currently the only bugfix for that is a weird workaround in which you use the console to create a potion that imitates the effects.
Just for the record, source code can be decompiled, or rather back-engineered, but if you don’t have source code, writing from scratch is cheaper, quicker, and less prone to error. Also, the IE games are, I believe, written in C/C++, which is harder to back-engineer than more modern languages.
And this, BTW, is a good thing when your code contains intellectual property.
If they can't get the original source code for Icewind Dale II to make an Enhanced Edition, they could consider the idea of performing a "complete reverse engineering" on said game.
I'm not certain if this would be something BeamDog would be willing to consider but if performed just right, they would be able to reconstruct the original source code from scratch according to Modern Vintage Gamer back on YouTube.
Sure, but that would mean investing more money than they had to invest in the other games before development could even be started, and this time in the least profiting IE game.
If they can't get the original source code for Icewind Dale II to make an Enhanced Edition, they could consider the idea of performing a "complete reverse engineering" on said game.
I'm not certain if this would be something BeamDog would be willing to consider but if performed just right, they would be able to reconstruct the original source code from scratch according to Modern Vintage Gamer back on YouTube.
This IS possible, but not necessarily legal. They need explicit permission (or for the game to be shareware, essentially) to do so. At least, as far as I understand.
If they can't get the original source code for Icewind Dale II to make an Enhanced Edition, they could consider the idea of performing a "complete reverse engineering" on said game.
I'm not certain if this would be something BeamDog would be willing to consider but if performed just right, they would be able to reconstruct the original source code from scratch according to Modern Vintage Gamer back on YouTube.
This IS possible, but not necessarily legal. They need explicit permission (or for the game to be shareware, essentially) to do so. At least, as far as I understand.
I believe this only applies if they use the name "Icewind Dale" as it is copyrighted. Calling it something like "IWD" might fit into a loophole somewhere. I'm likely very wrong as there will probably be a legal technicality I'm not considering.
If they can't get the original source code for Icewind Dale II to make an Enhanced Edition, they could consider the idea of performing a "complete reverse engineering" on said game.
I'm not certain if this would be something BeamDog would be willing to consider but if performed just right, they would be able to reconstruct the original source code from scratch according to Modern Vintage Gamer back on YouTube.
Why i wonder, waste SO MUCH time trying to make another version of a game who had an already SHITTY mechanic. I mean, the only *really* good thing of icewind dale II was the fact that *finally* was in 3.5.
But everything else? Seriously?
Beamdog: just get your average bgII enhanced engine with the proper adapting and let's get this over with.
I'd love to see this as much as anyone, but it isn't happening without the source code. GOG has patched their version to the best possible state it can be in for modern systems, which they attempt to do for everything they sell. It'll have to suffice.
Closest we'll probably ever get to IwD2:EE is via a NwN2 custom module from the makers of Baldur's Gate Reloaded and the Icewind Dale module. But who knows how many years it will take them? It's been five years since BGR was last updated and even seven years in the case of the IwD module. At this point I am honestly not even sure whenever those teams still work on the sequels or not. *shrug*
Bottom line: we either see it as a mod or not at all. Clearly not from Beamdog, of that I am sure.
I mean, the only *really* good thing of icewind dale II was the fact that *finally* was in 3.5.
3.0 not 3.5
Well, not that huge difference, and to be honest, it would be more appropriate to say "some sort" since most of the feats that should be also in 3.0 aren't in the game in the end.
Hot take: The best way to enhance Icewind Dale 2 would be to re-make it, completely from scratch. Anything else is just dressing up garbage.
Its better than IWD1 :P
Becouse BG1,2 and IWD1 are advanced D&D 2.0, which had some sort of 'improved' ruleset from chainmail (if i recall correctly) and those rules were... Well, they need lot to work on it. The 3rd edition had at least a 'fairly decent' ruleset. (i still don't find those either so perfect, but always better than 2.0 lol)
But yeah, i agree with warchiefzeke, at this point better remake a beamdog version and that about does it.
Honestly, I like 2nd edition better than 3.0 or 3.5 (I'm speaking only of PC gaming). In 2nd edition I always knew how to build my character(s). In 3rd it seems like it is too easy to make an OP build or a terrible build. Nevermind the fact that after WotC took over all the settings started to disappear (well, except we got Eberron).
I think that the early days of 3.5 were probably the best in terms of overall balance. As power creep crept in via new supplements (new feats, new spells, new prestige classes), the bloat got bad enough that it was fairly easy to create absurdly overpowered combinations.
The counterpoint to 3.5e eventually becoming bloated and over-powerful is that 2e was under-powerful and empty and boring. Many level-ups involved nothing for the player to do, and some level-ups resulted only in the character gaining 1 hp and that's it!
I'll take over-powered 3.5e over boring 2e any day. At least with an over-powered and bloated system you can fix that simply by not using a lot of stuff in your game. Problem solved. With 2e there's nothing you can do to make it better. You're just stuck with what you have, which is an empty and boring system.
The counterpoint to 3.5e eventually becoming bloated and over-powerful is that 2e was under-powerful and empty and boring. Many level-ups involved nothing for the player to do, and some level-ups resulted only in the character gaining 1 hp and that's it!
I'll take over-powered 3.5e over boring 2e any day. At least with an over-powered and bloated system you can fix that simply by not using a lot of stuff in your game. Problem solved. With 2e there's nothing you can do to make it better. You're just stuck with what you have, which is an empty and boring system.
And I feel like that made gear more meaningful. You gain more hp, more spells if you are a caster, but otherwise what sets you apart is the loot you find. Finding an ioun stone or that awesome weapon is a big deal. In 3rd edition I feel like for a piece of gear to be meaningful it had to be OP, which again doesn't help balance. A +2 weapon with 1d6 fire damage would be a much bigger deal for me to find in a game like Baldur's Gate or Planescape: Torment than in Neverwinter Nights.
Comments
People don't bother creating solutions for problems that no one would ever expect to happen, certainly not when they have other coding work to do.
Mods and editors can indeed read and alter certain parts of the game's code or files. But mods and editors represent the limits of what can be done without the source code. If it was possible to change X or Y in Icewind Dale 2 without the source code, there's probably already an editor for it. If there isn't an editor for changing X or Y, that's probably because you simply need the source code to edit that part of the game.
The editors that we take for granted, WeiDu or Near Infinity or DLTCEP or whatever, are actually kind of a miracle considering the IE games were never designed to be edited. They took years to create, and even then, they can't do all of the things you'd need to make IWD2 into IWD2:EE.
It wouldn't be much of an Enhanced Edition if they couldn't fix the Improved Initiative feat, for example, and currently the only bugfix for that is a weird workaround in which you use the console to create a potion that imitates the effects.
And this, BTW, is a good thing when your code contains intellectual property.
I'm not certain if this would be something BeamDog would be willing to consider but if performed just right, they would be able to reconstruct the original source code from scratch according to Modern Vintage Gamer back on YouTube.
It doesn't make financial sense.
Icewind Dale '3' instead? Hint, hint...
(Take my money now Beamdog!)
Icewind Dale '3' instead? Hint, hint...
(Take my money now Beamdog!)
Alas, WotC won't let that happen anytime soon, I imagine.
Sad but true. IwD3 in 5e would be awesome.
This IS possible, but not necessarily legal. They need explicit permission (or for the game to be shareware, essentially) to do so. At least, as far as I understand.
I believe this only applies if they use the name "Icewind Dale" as it is copyrighted. Calling it something like "IWD" might fit into a loophole somewhere. I'm likely very wrong as there will probably be a legal technicality I'm not considering.
Why i wonder, waste SO MUCH time trying to make another version of a game who had an already SHITTY mechanic. I mean, the only *really* good thing of icewind dale II was the fact that *finally* was in 3.5.
But everything else? Seriously?
Beamdog: just get your average bgII enhanced engine with the proper adapting and let's get this over with.
3.0 not 3.5
Bottom line: we either see it as a mod or not at all. Clearly not from Beamdog, of that I am sure.
https://www.gibberlings3.net/forums/forum/197-iwd-in-eet/
Well, not that huge difference, and to be honest, it would be more appropriate to say "some sort" since most of the feats that should be also in 3.0 aren't in the game in the end.
Its better than IWD1 :P
Becouse BG1,2 and IWD1 are advanced D&D 2.0, which had some sort of 'improved' ruleset from chainmail (if i recall correctly) and those rules were... Well, they need lot to work on it. The 3rd edition had at least a 'fairly decent' ruleset. (i still don't find those either so perfect, but always better than 2.0 lol)
But yeah, i agree with warchiefzeke, at this point better remake a beamdog version and that about does it.
I'll take over-powered 3.5e over boring 2e any day. At least with an over-powered and bloated system you can fix that simply by not using a lot of stuff in your game. Problem solved. With 2e there's nothing you can do to make it better. You're just stuck with what you have, which is an empty and boring system.
And I feel like that made gear more meaningful. You gain more hp, more spells if you are a caster, but otherwise what sets you apart is the loot you find. Finding an ioun stone or that awesome weapon is a big deal. In 3rd edition I feel like for a piece of gear to be meaningful it had to be OP, which again doesn't help balance. A +2 weapon with 1d6 fire damage would be a much bigger deal for me to find in a game like Baldur's Gate or Planescape: Torment than in Neverwinter Nights.