Suppose some company decided to (and was allowed to) remake the original Baldur's Gate, but with the 4th Edition Dungeons & Dragons ruleset, which is notably quite different from other editions.
* Would you consider this remake to be a good thing, or a bad thing? (Assume that this remake doesn't replace the other version currently on the market.)
* Would you buy said remake (assuming the price is reasonable, and that any other criteria you have are met)?
* Do you think you would enjoy said remake?

* I would consider such remake just as a curiosity. It would be too different for me to treat it the same as the original, yet having the same world, story, etc. it's too similar to be a separate game. Even if the quality is top, I still would go for the original, if I would want to play Baldur's Gate. Similar thing is with Baldur's Gate Reloaded, it's an interesting curiosity, but I prefer the original. I wouldn't mind if it would replace the EEs, though. And if Beamdog would do it then I'm ignoring it.

* I would look closely at the gameplay first. If a certain company that I mentioned above wouldn't be involved and it would fit with the original aesthetic, then I might get it on sale.

* D&D 4th edition is the one that I skipped altogether, so it's hard for me to jugde, if I would enjoy it. Honestly, I would prefer if it would be a totally separate game inspired by BG with 4th ed ruleset, then I would be much more interested.

Thing with the 4th Edition ruleset is that it is very different from other editions, so the gamepay would be changed in ways that would be noticeable. For example:
* Fighters aren't just simple attackers, as they now have powers they can use (like every other class).
* Mages would be very different. In BG1, you might be familiar with how a mage might cast a sleep spell to trivialize an encounter (hopefully), and then not do anything meaningfully until you have a chance to rest. With 4e rules, the mage would instead be using an at-will power, like a basic attack spell that can be used infinitely, with the option of changing to an encounter or daily power if needed.
* (Encounter powers would recover once the game determins that you're not in battle; no need to rest. Daily powers would recover on rest.)

So, this game would be using an edition of the D&D ruleset, but it would still be very different because the edition used is very different.

(I actually think Wizards of the Coast should have called D&D 4e something else; that way players wouldn't have expected a similar game, and it wouldn't have to replace (and be replaced) by other editions of the rules. It's different enough that it could have stood on its own. I also note that the community, at the time, was divided on whether they liked this particular edition.)

(Also, I'm not familiar with 4e myself, but I do know some basic things about it, enough to know that it isn't similar to other editions.)

Actually that's not a problem. Playing a Fighter class in the previous editions was quite boring. The new powers should provide more fun as they increase the variety for players who want to play this class. That's a bigger problem, but it has some advantages as well. Low level Mages were quite useless in the previous editions. This would improve things a bit. I think it's a matter of getting used to the changes. The only meaningful problem is balance. New rules would force major balance changes in the game. This would make a potential remaster less closer to the original. Staying with old rules in the new edition of D&D could induce criticism that there's not enough changes to justify the new edition. So there's really no good solution to this problem. BG based on newer ruleset could be an interesting game. Some probably would call this change a heresy, but it's hard to please everyone. :)

I did not enjoy 4th edition at all from any of the games I've played with it. So for me, it would probably be worse.

My replay attribute is set pretty low. Games get so grindy and boring after I play them for a few days that there are some classics that I've never completed even once. If you talk about replaying a game with some changes, my tolerance is even lower. Why not make a new game with a new story instead?

I'm not too picky about rule-sets. If it's fun (and the UI isn't cumbersome) I will be happy to play (till I get sick of it). What games used 4th edition?

He may have been referring to pen-and-paper games, but... Daggerdale and the Neverwinter MMO are both loosely based on 4th Edition. I don't believe any CRPG actually implements 4E properly, though -- which is a bit ironic since during the one 4E pen-and-paper campaign I played in, many of us agreed that it felt like we were playing a computer game. Out of all the D&D editions, 4E felt like it was explicitly designed in a way that could easily translate into a computer game.

Neverwinter and that one D&D rpg that came out on Steam and then the developer died like a year later. Sword Coast Legends.

Something about the way the loot system works just rubs me the wrong way. Felt very unpleasurable to me. shrugs

EDIT: Excuse me, it appears SCL uses 5e. I still didn't care for the loot system.

the first thing is that 4th edition is a pen and paper set of rules so needs to be converted to work on computer games

for example; Druids are allowed (once per day/ rest) to transform into any animal i.e, a fly, fish, dog, bird or even a unicorn are all valid choices... how does that work in this new game engine?

but assuming you do come up with a set of rules that everyone (more or less) agrees to then the answer to your main question is No I would not want it because Baldur's gate is a game I love and I don't see why it needs to be converted unless this new game also adds something to the story like sidequests to find out what happens to Viconia, J and Imoen after you ascend or some other NEW material

Give the player a finite list of possible forms, and have the player choose from that list. It doesn't really need to be that different from the way it's implemented in Icewind Dale.

After all, BG2 has the Limited Wish and Wish spells, wnd those two spells can't be converted directly without some advanced natural language processsing (though some roguelikes have taken that approach). (BG2 Wish feels a lot like Wizardry 1-5's MAHAMAN, except that, instead of there being a cost of a level, there's the risk of having to choose between negative effects.)

1. If you have to remake something, pick something thats not so great and that you can easily make better. Not something so epic you're basically guaranteed to create something inferior.

2. DnD4 might be a good system, I dont know. But it wasnt actually DnD. For good reason there is no DnD4 game out there.

3. The Forgotten Realms are HUGE. No need to remake any game. Just create something new.

I actually think they should have called it something else and continued to develop both 3.5e (and later what we call 5e) and 4e alongside each other. The idea is that there'd be "Dungeons & Dragons" which would follow 3.5e/5e rules, and a different system with at different name that would be like what 4e is today.

I haven't played much games in 4E, but I was not at all impressed by how gutted it was compared to previous editions, so this would actually be a big negative in my books. If reviews of the game were positive enough, I might be curious enough to give a BG remake in 4E rules a try, but it would definitely not be a Day 1 purchase for me.

If it was made with the 4th ed rules, the game would suck badly. WOTC tried to turn The Forgotten Realms into a dumbed down World of Warcraft world, and failed miserably.