The Steam versions do NOT include the original versions. They are only bundled on GOG.

How? They are going to remove the originals from stores, from every store, just like they did with their "so called enhanced eeditions", so even if people would want to buy and play the originals, they won't be able to do it anymore. They'll have to s settle for the one no one asked for.

The point was written in bold in my reply. There are still over a thousand bugs in BG1 and BG2 EEs and they are hiding it, claiming that most of the bugs are fixed. I entered 12 bug reports (some game breaking like the final boss not going hostile or quests not progressing...). I had to enter them twice yet they still are not there.

Now that is out of the way, I want to make another correction in your previous statement. There are no graphical enhancements in any of the Beamdog titles. I had read that they used exactly the same graphics in their games for Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale and Planescape Torment. Someone, please correct me if I am wrong. When I open Baldur Gates 2 classic in one laptop and EE in another, the graphics are entirely identical. They overhauled the user interface (which many people hated), they did some weird sprite thing for character animations (which many including me hated) and they changed the cinematics into 2nd grade drawn picture slideshow (which some seem to like and I respect that). Beyond that, there is not a single graphical enhanced me according to my knowledge.

Also, I am guessing people have the illusion that Beamdog is writing new codes for those games. They are not! They are simply doing some modifications to the original codes. No original code --> no Beamdog game. That is exactly why there will never be ICEWIND DALE 2 EE since the original codes are missing.

Please notice that my intention is not to attack you personally. I am just sharing my view and knowledge regarding the situation.

I define doubling (or more) the price and hiding the originals behind extra effort (and only because everyone [probably GOG in particular] insisted on it) as damaging the originals. To a lesser extent, I define their claiming the originals as their own and making their vision the only acceptable one as damage, as well. I guess you don't see it that way. What actually has to happen in order for you to see it as damage? Do they have to take the old source code and take a literal piss on it? Because if they did that, and only that, it wouldn't actually damage the originals, and I'd be fine with it.

This thread brings the LOLs!

I thought we already had a rage thread?

Actually, it is possible to remake a game without access to the original source code; Lizardcube did just that with there remake of Wonder Boy III: The Dragon's Trap. (Apparently, they did eventually get the source code, but it was in assembly and not easy to work with, so they preferred to just reverse engineer the game.)

http://www.thedragonstrap.com/blog/post/201609_ReverseEngineering/

I did not say it is impossible. I said it is not what Beamdog is doing. I was very clear about that.

I guess I'm glad gog refused to accept my reply yesterday, as I seem to have misread you as well. I thought you were saying that Beamdog is not writing (much) original code, which in turn means that it's not really Beamdog's product. In my reading, dtgreene's answer doesn't even make sense: what does that have to do with not having access to the original code? It is clear that Beamdog does, in fact, have that access, as they have mentioned in their FAQ.

My reply was in reference to Icewind Dale 2 (where, according to the post I was replying to, the source code is missing), not to the games Beamdog actually is remaking.

(Side note: When remaking or patching a game like Neverwinter Nights, you need to be careful about fixing bugs, as some user-generated content might actually be made with the assumption that the bugs are present, and some might even rely on the bugs to function properly. I know that Super Mario Maker (a game built around users creating their own levels) had at least one patch that made some previously possible levels impossible to complete.)

Sorry. I guess you should've cut the quote a little more. I read the bold part, rather than the last part. I actually agree with your comment then: having the legal rights to remake a game is more important than having the code, especially if you have a talented/dedicated crew and a good idea of how the old game used to work. There are numerous examples of remakes done this way. In fact, there is one underway right now to remake NWN (xoreos), which I expect will get C&D letters real soon now.

I don't think they actually care. In any case, this is yet another argument in favor of making a new game instead of trying to "revitalize" an old one.

You forget that Beamdog is made up of people that developed the original. They have every legal and moral right to make this remaster. Yes, it would be nice if they could keep it compatible enough for the original version's mods to work, but failing to do so doesn't automatically make this remaster pointless.

What? When you claim stuff like that, the least you could do is actually provide some kind of proof because AFAIK, there are no former Bioware or Black Isle employees in Beamdog, or at least none that had an important role in making the IE games or NWN.

As much as I don't like them doing that, try looking at it from this point of view: they have the rights to the games and IP, apparently because Trent Oster (BioWare co-founder) and Cameron Tofer (BioWare programmer) founded Beamdog. They have seemingly decided that they don't want the originals competing with these remasters on any of the digital storefronts, and have therefore decided to bundle them. It is true that anyone that wanted to buy digital versions of the originals by themselves or in their own anthologies/bundles has had +/- 10 years to do so. I wish that they would reinstate the standalone and anthology versions of the originals on the digital storefronts, but it may not be entirely up to them anyway, and therefore, for that reason and the reasons I stated above, I cannot really fault Beamdog. Have they done everything perfectly? No. They need to be transparent and honest in future (as far as possible), and be attentive to technical support requests. It seems like they are trying to do that with NWN:EE at least, so this one last time, they deserve the benefit of the doubt.

Please read my reply to Elisebathe for clarification.

Neither Bioware or Beamdog own the Dungeons & Dragons license. Beamdog had to sign a contract with the IP owners which I believe is Wizards of the Coast. In other words, they don't have the legal right to do this, they had to get permission.

As I understand it, the contract they signed is what makes it pointless. Its the reason none of the Baldur's Gate companions where rewritten to the higher standard of Baldur's Gate II and none of the weak parts of the game were strengthened. For example, the Ruins of the Ulcaster School of Magic could have been anything and yet remain a lazy fetch quest.