Kindly stop dictating what Hickory and myself should say or not, and how we do it. It is not your place to do so, and you are no way any kind of authority-person in this thread or on the GoG boards. You have been doing it quite a few times now, and you come off as a bit obnoxious when you do that. + Darth is perfectly capable of speaking for himself.

This is not an attack on you. Just kind of "putting my foot down", as it were.

I stated my opinion just as the other person did. Until you become a moderator, butt out.
I know what I would think. I'll say it again: butt out. You're speaking out of turn.

Good grief. Hickory posted basically the same thing I did, at the same time. We are becoming synchronized.

I love a lot of your posts and the deep knowledge of these classics (which frustratingly we cannot buy any more), but I also tend to agree with posters here and there that a less aggressive approach may be fruitful.

As for the actual debate, Darth and Lebesque make very good points, which essentially are the same the way I read them. I am fully convinced this is rabid dog's doing, and not initiated by Hasbro, WOTC or even GOG (although I've been upset with them too, as they're clearly not the company they once were with the views and standards they once had). As Lebesque lays out, it makes sense the liers did it, and doesn't make sense for anybody else to do it. Other actors have something to lose, while the bags of tits had something to win by removing the only competitor.

Funny how different capitalism/market economy is in practice compared to how we learn in school that the system works.

They may well have needed to get Hasbro to be the gun, so to speak, but the initiative has surely come from the vile creature (yes, I'm aware I'm not very diplomatic here either, but I can't stand those lying bastards stealing a living off other people's great work). Hasbro is huge with a pile of other products, so probably doesn't give much of a rat's arse how a relatively minor product is bundled, and I can't imagine they got barked at in a particularly honest fashion either. "Oh, and btw, this will make it impossible to buy the classics". Maybe some suit just signed a pre-written letter, and that was that.

This seems plausible, I have no issue with the notion Beamdog initiated dialogue between them and Hasbro on the subject, I just reject that it would be Beamdog's decision. (That's why marketing a user campaign at Hasbro might be effective).

Your post would be funny if it wasn't so utterly, incompetently wrong. Let me educate you: the Cambridge dictionary completely ignores the unreliability clause, the Oxford dictionary includes unreliability as the 2nd definition among three, and etymologically the modern use, attested 1761, is "brief, amusing story" again without the unreliability clause.

So, (1) there is no definitional reason why an anecdote cannot be true and indeed many are, and (2) my statements are not anecdotal as I have no personal stories. My posts are opinions based on industry experience.

A lease is a specific type of contract and I'd be astonished if the Beamdog is an actual leases, and that's why I queried your term. Yes they are made under a contracted licence, but almost certainly not leases.

It's nice you're being nice, but it's okay. Some people just can't be helped, for example:

He didn't "dictate", he made a polite request, and it's telling that you (seemingly honestly) cannot detect the difference, and your subsequent over-response borders on the pathological.

As Bronn said, "there's no cure for being a..." except the cure was the type of wine served with dry pigeon pie.

1.Since you are so fond of the dictionary, you might have noted that I put Leased in quotation marks. I hoped that would tell you something.

2.And your opinion about this matters why? This was a conversation between me and him. If you are actively looking for drama, please do it somewhere else.

Well between the two of us, you are the one who has sunk to personal attacks, not I. So...as I said earlier. Stop trying to derail the thread by just trolling and making personal attacks. It is looking like you are trying hard to get this thread closed for some reason.

+ No need to bring the murder of children into this, is it? Joffrey was only 14, after all. Kind of...sick to use that as an example. If this is what you feel should be done with people who disagree with you, I think you should seek help.

[Edit: Typo]
Haha! Now *that* is funny. Nice bit of squirming you have going there, and parroting, too.

It remains anecdotal rubbish.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ESF5QFHa5g

As did I, but you seem to think you can and I can't - I even said please, what more do you want (oh, and please, put your butt away)? :p It's your right if you prefer not to keep this thread friendly (I disagree, my friend). There's no point in continuing this with you since it would only serve to further derail this thread.

Thanks. I said what I did because the last couple of years saw the rise of a Stig-ma attached to being a new member (they're all, obviously, scammers, trolls, etc - see Stig's "Julius 2.0" quote, below, that you had every right to be angry at, and now you know the whole story behind that comment - it's not just about Julius).

Anyway, he was even speaking for Hickory (and for you), who may stick his butt out again for that <shudder>. Oh, wait, Hickory replied right after Stig to imply *he* wouldn't like someone speaking up for *him*, but doesn't mind Stig doing it to him (or to you), and Stig contradicting what they both said by speaking for multiple someone elses.

You may not believe it, but Stig, actually, seems to have lightened up some since another thread a few months back, lol...

Hmm, I didn't know we were having a conversation. You said that you wanted me to stop and that you were putting your foot down. I guess it's back up again, sooo... his opinion matters as much as yours or mine. Of course, it's all in the eye of the "Beholder"...

What's that, you say? Or was what you said, below, an *impersonal* attack?

***Obnoxious Alert***: Relax! Your dictator demands it (yeah, I know, incoming for this, that and the other). You take everything so seriously if someone doesn't agree with you. I was, recently, doing my best in the Beamdog thread to quell your, well, not anger, exactly (suspicions? sensitivity?), to what I was saying (I did mean everything I said, though). If I said *anything* about you, however minor, you jumped in with something along the lines of "Who? What? Where? When did I say that? I didn't say that?", ignoring the point of the post, just as you did in this thread. As I said, you didn't say *that*, but I didn't bother to say that I never said you did say *that*.

The attitude you put out comes right back at you (aka - you reap what you sew), making this whole "discussion" of pointing fingers "pointless" and tending to degenerate the thread. I politely *asked* for this thread to be polite and friendly, but you and Hickory disagreed in word and deed.

So, back on track, have you all sent letters, periodically, to Hasbro (and GOG, just in case)? Beamdog's pointless, beamless and dogless.

No you didn't. You made a direct request, a request that would have been a demand without the "please", to a person you don't know and know nothing about, and in a place where you have no right or authority to do so. That is not an opinion, it is an attempt to assert your will. Don't call me your friend. You are not my friend.

You don't get to do that. Not here. Not until you have moderator status.

Can't claim to have done that. However, I've been saving up used toilet paper. The "writing" makes more sense than what the rapid dogs are capable of, so there is some chance they would take it as creative inspiration. Expect to see it in a game near you any moment. Possibly called Baldur's Gate 3??

1. Rather odd that someone who just registered immediately pops into a thread to try and deflect blame away from Beamdog, despite it is now very clear who decided to bundle the games. That is all I am saying.

2. I didn't stick up for Hickory at all. I just said you had no business telling others what to say or not in this thread. Like Hickory said. You aren't a moderator. I just used Hickory and myself as an example.

3. Yes. I said it looked like someone who just joined to defend Beamdog. Which is exactly what it was. Popping in and making some claim about having "worked in the business" without offering a hint of proof, and then just uses that as an argument to defend a rotten company who has done nothing but telling lies to customers since day 1. Not an insult to say what it looks like. i didn't call him any names though.

4. Uhm...I don't take everything seriously. And i am not angry either. But since you believe I am, maybe it is you that are taking things too seriously? And where did I do the *who?* *what?* bit. Link please. And if you don't want the thread to be derailed why are you bringing up stuff from other threads? Seems counter-productive?
And you are upset about finger-pointing, so you write a huge post where you are basically...finger-pointing. Very productive. And why is it important that Hickory and I agree in point and deed? We disagree plenty. I don't have any problems with him disagreeing with me. Why should you?

Yes. People have been sending mails to GoG, Hasbro and Beamdog about the bundling. A few posted the replies they got from Beamdog in this very thread too. They said GoG was behind the bundling and that Beamdog had no say in how their games were being sold. Which got contradicted by the post Beamdog posted here recently. Hence why people just don't trust Beamdog. People asked about the bundling on Beamdog's own forums too. The reply they got there was that WoTC had done the bundling. I posted a screenshot of it.

So yes. People have done plenty. Mailing every involved party about the bundling. Probably since last year. It hasn't worked, sadly. So advising people to e-mail beamdog, gog or WOTC is pointless. You are a year too late with your suggestion. People emailed WOTC and GoG a LOT, actually. since Beamdog said they were behind the bundling. WOTC first, then GoG got blamed for it later.

1. Strange use of scare-quotes but okay.

2. I don't think I've ever said my opinion "matters".

3. In the TV show King Joffrey I Baratheon died at the age of 19.
http://gameofthrones.wikia.com/wiki/Joffrey_Baratheon

By "defend" you mean "complains that the EE version is the only version online, wants the classic version back for resale, and is currently playing BG1, on the old engine, with the "Conservative" mods?

YES IT'S VERY STRANGE NEW PEOPLE COME TO PLAY OLD GAMES. IF THIS TREND KEEPS UP GOG MIGHT BE ABLE TO MAKE A BUSINESS VENTURE OUT OF IT...

1. Fair enough.

2. Didn't have to say it.

3. The tv show is Fan-fiction.