Considering they didn't add much of anything (negligible things really) to the base game, if I were reviewing a game like this, and others like it, I would judge three different aspects: how the original fared in it's own time (basically the original review score), how it compares to current trends and technology, and how the enhancement was implemented.

For obvious reasons, no one would read it. :)

Isnt an EE supose to be an upgrade from the original game?
Take a look at witcher 2 they added arena, dark mode and other stuff. It was an update over the orginal witcher.
Same happens with BG but they decided to "make" a new game.

I agree with score 6. It was good that they added stuff but it was one step forward and 2 steps back.
There bugs that didnt exist in previous BG.If they had tested before shipping the game would had better score.

Gamespot/IGN and the like have been pretty shite for reviews for years.In bed with the publishers. Dunno about PCgamer . I wish some journo's were a bit more objective and stuck to the basics ie graphics, audio, performance, gameplay

To me it seems overpriced and pointless. I love the original and a properly done enhancement would be welcome but this is more bug-riddled than the original. I for one would give this a long pass me by.

There are couple of bullet points for why BGEE is better than the original game.

*Less hardcoded, so modders can now do more extensive modifications.
*Integrates a number of modifications, making it simpler for players and modders.
*Playable on non-PC platforms, and more compatible with modern technology.
*Extra characters, and an mini-campaign.

Now, I personally consider the first two points to be extremely important for the modding community, because the game now more easily accommodates their work, and there is many bugs corrected. While it is true that a number of these fixes were done by modders in the past, the developers of the enhanced game can dig into the source code of the engine and fix the root of these problems, along with the ones that modders couldn't do themselves. Also, I like the idea that I do not have to personally install fixpacks to make Baldur's Gate playable. Making the game more moddable, stable, and convenient is worth it to me.

If I remember right, the criticisms some reviewers, including the GS ones, had was that the EE edition seemed to merely collate what was around already for free to spruce up the game and everything added to BG by the team itself actually degraded the experience either because it was low quality or buggy. As such they said you were better off getting the original and enhancing it yourself.

Yes, and they're judging it as a poor upgrade, not a poor game. That was my point.

"Why so serious?"

Youre not the center of the Sun (thats Conjure One) - anyways, I for example have to little brothers who were too young to play the original Baldur's Gate back then and never bothered to pick any games for GoG, because there are plenty of new games to go around.

I think BGEE is very good package for newer audience. I actually think, that BGEE may have been getting those bad ratings firstly from old veterans ("best game evah" -> ofcourse youre dissapointed more or less) and the atleast from some of the newer audience, who are more into tunnel experience.

Enhanced editions for old games are very good addition in my mind and anyway, who forces you to buy them now or even later? Personally I am not in a hurry, ill buy it some discount or another when the price drops somwhere under 10e.

That sounds like a well justified low score, then. It's up to the reader to decide if those reasons would matter to them.

Yes, I am aware of the fact that there are some people out there who have not played Baldur's Gate. But thanks for the reminder, because some people might not know about this fact.

The point still stands, is it worth paying $20 for a digital version of a 15 year old game, even with its enhancements? How much of these enhencements cannot be done just by modding the original version? And also, how faithful are these enhancements and additions to the spirit of the original game? This is the sort of the perspective that reviewers like those at Gamespot have to consider.

You have to remember, this is just an enhanced edition, not a remake.

Yes, I am well aware of the fact that I am not forced to buy the Enhanced Edition. Which is exactly why I haven't bought the Enhanced Edition.

I personally would have bought the Enhanced Edition if, A: it was DRM-free, and, B: all of the in-game artworks and models were updated for modern screen resolutions. But they didn't do that, so I don't see the point.

Maybe beacuse the "enchanced" version doesn't offer much that you can't already do with mods, and because it's reputedly rather buggy?
Also, the new content is too slim to be worth the prize IMO.

Another thread about BG EE. Really?.. Some poeple think it's not worth the money and mod it with whatever there is produced by fans during all the years, some people just want to make it easier for themselves and buy-install-play. And, really, reading Gamespot reviews?..

It was snowing outside. I had nothing better to do. :(

I would have been one of these, I bought the game, it wouldn't launch for me at all, I got a refund though from Beamdog, yesterday I downloaded a pirate version with the current update to see if it would work, but unfortunately no, still no launchee.

For anyone thats interested, they can get a Tutu version of the game if they google hard enough, dunno how well it works, but its an option for people that just want to play a more enhanced version of the original, other than the Beamdog version.