Baldur's Gate enhanced edition

[Hiro Protagonist II]

Just been checking out the game and so far, first impressions are mixed.

 

Pro

- Great choice of kits and skills for you character.

- Graphics look better

- The fight between Gorion and Sarevok looks better.

- The journal looks a lot better.

 

Con

- Encountered my first broken quest. Firebeard scroll. Tethoril was *missing* and didn't appear where he was supposed to. He's vanished from the game.

- The zoom feature is annoying as heck. You set the zoom at a distance you like which is great. However, everytime you enter a house, it defaults to being zoomed out and the characters are very small (on a 22" monitor). When you exit the house, it goes back to how you originally had it. It seems to save the zoom in the outdoors but doesn't save it anytime you enter a house.

- After the Gorion vs Sarevok fight. It's zoomed all the way out even though you are outdoors *sighs*

- If you exit a game and then reload, the zoom is zoomed all the way out again.

- The cutscenes don't look as good as the original movies. Original Introduction and Friendly Arm Inn are so much better than in the enhanced edition.

 

The zoom needs to be fixed because it breaks immersion so much when the screen zooms out every time there's a cutscene like Gorion/Sarevok or entering new houses/inns/stores/etc.

Edited November 29, 2012 by Hiro Protagonist II

[Gorth]

Just for reference sake, here's the Nashkel Mines intro (these do not contain spoilers for any that haven't played the game):

 

OMGFFS!!!Spoilerz!

 

You just gave away, that there are kobolds in there

 

[Lorfean]

Having seen both and even though the resolution is dated, I prefer the old one. Sarevok's entrance with the door exploding in pieces shows Sarevok's raw power, the different lighting effects againts Sarevok's armour, the helplessness of the bhaalspawn trying to get away which you don't see in the remake, the cut lines from the bhaalspawn saying 'there are others', Another example of Sarevok's raw power with the sequence of picking up the bhaalspawn, pushing him through the fence and having him hang over the edge, seeing the bhaalspawn struggle with his arms and legs. In the remake, the Bhaalspawn just seems to sit there and do nothing while Sarevok grabs him and then the next shot is Sarevok already out over the fence.

This.

 

I hadn't seen the new intro yet and... ugh.

 

Neither intro looks particularly good IMO hahaha.

The point is that the original is 14 years old, Alan... It was awesome 14 years ago and even today works a hell of a lot better than what beamdog replaced it with. The dark atmosphere and the sense of utter futility in the bhaalspawn's struggle is on full display, especially in the scene where Sarevok just lifts him up, rams him through the fence, and then the camera swoops back and up and you see him frantically kicking his legs, hitting the broken fence in the process. Beamdog managed to make sth that lacks all the tension, power and drama of the original, but still uses the original's music and dialog, which makes the whole thing even more awkward and amateuristic...

 

Also -- both you and Trent have now criticized the original's cinematics which, frankly, just makes you guys look petty and disrespectful. Sure, they look dated by today's standards, but nobody complained about them 14 years ago and they certainly didn't stop BG from becoming one of the all-time classic CRPG's of our time.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

Another cutscene comparision with the Friendly Arm Inn.

 

Original version 1998

 

Enhanced Version 2012

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3luiJuN7t2Q&list=UL

 

The picture looks a lot better, but it's just a picture with music. I was hoping for something more.

 

Mixed feelings overall. I think they should have put an option in the settings like: "Disable/Enable Showing Low Quality Movies"

Edited November 29, 2012 by Hiro Protagonist II

[Lorfean]

They cut the music off at the end, which makes no sense to me, especially since the "scene" is basically a still shot. And it's also lacking the awesome drawbridge sound effect from the original's introduction. Of course, there is no drawbridge animation in this new one so it would've been out of place, but I always liked it in the original -- it was a very effective little intro before the music came in.

 

Overall I'm not impressed with the replacements I've seen so far. Looking at the originals, they haven't lost any of their charm and are still very effective at introducing locations and story elements in the game. If this is what they offer in return for removing most of the original cinematics, then it was not worth it IMO. Not at all.

Edited November 29, 2012 by Lorfean

[Junai]

Pretty much unplayable for me, with a Mobile Intel 4 chipset. Frustrated people spamming the board.

[Nightshape]

I think Overhaul have dropped the ball, they've promised more than they could deliver and now they're being called on it.

 

That's the problem when you revisit such a cherished classic.

 

I would hope they address these issues, but it doesn't look like they will.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

I reloaded a previous save and figured our the Firebead and Tethoril quest. After I reloaded, I ran into the Inn and clicked on Firebead, then ran outside and searched for Tethoril and ran into him, already running away near the Inn I just came out of. He wasn't at his starting position around the side of the Candlekeep library. I have a second computer with the original BG and did the same quest and Tethoril is standing where he should be and didn't move until I was in sight of him. Not sure what to think about this.

 

Feel sorry for other people who haven't been able to play this due to the game crashing. I've been fortunate that everything is running perfectly, although the game seems to have a mind of its own with the quests.

[WDeranged]

I'll end up buying it eventually but I'll hang back and let the storm die down so they can get some patching done first.

[Junai]

Finally got it to work, by running the .exe in Win 95 compatibility mode. Lags a lot when I cast those color sprays though. Need a decent graphics card to run it.

[Gfted1]

Anyone playing it on a tablet yet? Thoughts?

[alanschu]

The point is that the original is 14 years old, Alan... It was awesome 14 years ago and even today works a hell of a lot better than what beamdog replaced it with. The dark atmosphere and the sense of utter futility in the bhaalspawn's struggle is on full display, especially in the scene where Sarevok just lifts him up, rams him through the fence,

 

I think that's it though. You have to qualify it. It probably helps that I haven't actually seen that video in probably 12 years, but you can definitely tell it's 14 years old. If not older.

 

 

Also -- both you and Trent have now criticized the original's cinematics which, frankly, just makes you guys look petty and disrespectful. Sure, they look dated by today's standards, but nobody complained about them 14 years ago and they certainly didn't stop BG from becoming one of the all-time classic CRPG's of our time.

 

Err, what? I'm petty and disrespectful now? I think you're getting a bit defensive. Are the people that "liked" my post also being petty and disrespectful?

 

Fact is, a lot of stuff in video games doesn't look nearly as good 14 years later. The only way someone can say it looks good is through the glasses of nostalgia. Take that video and show it to anyone that hasn't touched Baldur's Gate before and they won't be impressed. It's just a fact of life. It doesn't take much (if anything) away from the game though. It's just an intro video. It's why people play Baldur's Gate with Tutu and stuff like that. If they still were forced to play it in 640x480 it'd be a barrier of entry to those playing it.

 

Compared to the rest of the game, the originals ARE jarring. You can dislike the new ones (it doesn't look that good either. Am I being petty and disrespectful to Trent now?). It's more a reflection of how far the industry has come in doing those types of things. Nostalgia is a powerful thing, and maybe Trent shouldn't have bothered trying to change it, but having your nostalgia call me petty and disrespectful accomplishes little.

 

 

For instance, I loved Crusader's intro when I first played it. It's dated now though. Unsurprisingly, compared to today's stuff, it doesn't look good anymore. Having said that, for a 1996 game I'd argue the animations in it are probably still better than Baldur's Gate's.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvAt3hDcNT4

 

 

The fact is, I completely forgot those intro videos even existed until they were mentioned here. I could then recall the Kobold one, but I had to see the Friendly Arm Inn and Beregost ones. Yet I remember the actual layouts of the game and the places I actually go in the game. To me, the videos were not a big aspect of the game. Neither the original nor the new one would provide a barrier to me replaying Baldur's Gate at this time.

Edited November 29, 2012 by alanschu

[Tigranes]

I think it's absolutely fine for Trent or alanschu to say they don't think the original video is much good. If we call that 'disrespectful' I think we're just going overboard.

 

I don't care about which one is 14 years old or which one should be 'respected' or whatever. In the end, the only thing that matters is: they changed the cutscenes. Are they better or worse than before? To me, the answer is clear: worse, a lot worse. Thus, it's yet another factor in the "BG:EE = Waste Of Money" opinion.

[Drowsy Emperor]

The beginning intro for BG was fine. The small location videos were okay at the time, but nothing special.

 

Why they had to bother changing them instead of doing something actually worthwhile is anyone's guess.

Edited November 29, 2012 by Drowsy Emperor

[Spider]

I agree with what Alan said 100%. Well apart from liking the Crusader video (because I never played the game). He is one of the most level headed person on this forum and calling him petty and disrespectful is just odd to me.

 

That being said, the new cinematics certainly aren't better than the old ones so the change was probably uneeded. I would still want a skip option on a fresh install though, since I've seen them way to many times as is.

 

Anyone playing it on a tablet yet? Thoughts?

 

It's not out on tablets yet, is it? I think it got refuted by the app store and needs to resubmit (after bugfixing).

[alanschu]

I don't care about which one is 14 years old or which one should be 'respected' or whatever. In the end, the only thing that matters is: they changed the cutscenes. Are they better or worse than before? To me, the answer is clear: worse, a lot worse. Thus, it's yet another factor in the "BG:EE = Waste Of Money" opinion.

 

I haven't really followed the enhanced edition at all because it doesn't appeal to me. Is the idea to simply remake the game for people that loved the original, or was the motivation to rerelease it to introduce those that missed out can play it with relative ease?

[Spider]

All impression's I've gotten is pretty much the former. At least it feels like they're banking on a fair share of nostalgia sales (to the degree they even mentioned the prospect of making BG3 if the games sell well).

Edited November 29, 2012 by Spider

[Gfted1]

Anyone playing it on a tablet yet? Thoughts?

 

It's not out on tablets yet, is it? I think it got refuted by the app store and needs to resubmit (after bugfixing).

 

Ah, you are correct. I just checked the app store from my phone and its not there.

[alanschu]

@Spider

Interesting. If that's the case, I likely would have changed as little as possible. I might have even been hard pressed to even add the new characters, although I suppose there's the need to add something new to ensure that there is something of value over the base game.

Edited November 29, 2012 by alanschu

[Deraldin]

Another cutscene comparision with the Friendly Arm Inn.

 

Original version 1998

 

Enhanced Version 2012

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3luiJuN7t2Q&list=UL

 

The picture looks a lot better, but it's just a picture with music. I was hoping for something more.

 

Mixed feelings overall. I think they should have put an option in the settings like: "Disable/Enable Showing Low Quality Movies"

 

But... the layout of the fortress is all wrong in that image. The keep should be just behind the gatehouse not way off to the side. BG in name only!

[Lorfean]

Err, what? I'm petty and disrespectful now? I think you're getting a bit defensive. Are the people that "liked" my post also being petty and disrespectful?

 

Fact is, a lot of stuff in video games doesn't look nearly as good 14 years later. The only way someone can say it looks good is through the glasses of nostalgia. Take that video and show it to anyone that hasn't touched Baldur's Gate before and they won't be impressed. It's just a fact of life. It doesn't take much (if anything) away from the game though. It's just an intro video. It's why people play Baldur's Gate with Tutu and stuff like that. If they still were forced to play it in 640x480 it'd be a barrier of entry to those playing it.

 

Compared to the rest of the game, the originals ARE jarring. You can dislike the new ones (it doesn't look that good either. Am I being petty and disrespectful to Trent now?). It's more a reflection of how far the industry has come in doing those types of things. Nostalgia is a powerful thing, and maybe Trent shouldn't have bothered trying to change it, but having your nostalgia call me petty and disrespectful accomplishes little.

I apologize. I did get overly defensive and it was mostly due to having just read Trent's tweet saying his first thought when seeing a certain cinematic for the first time back in 1998 was "what the hell were the animators thinking", and then proceeding to remove that particular cinematic and a bunch of others for the EE without replacing them with anything new. I feel it was a bad call and his comment made it seem like that decision was based on personal taste more than anything else. Your comment, at that moment, just felt like it piled on and triggered an unreasonable response. I'm sorry.

 

For instance, I loved Crusader's intro when I first played it. It's dated now though. Unsurprisingly, compared to today's stuff, it doesn't look good anymore. Having said that, for a 1996 game I'd argue the animations in it are probably still better than Baldur's Gate's.

 

[awesome video]

 

The fact is, I completely forgot those intro videos even existed until they were mentioned here. I could then recall the Kobold one, but I had to see the Friendly Arm Inn and Beregost ones. Yet I remember the actual layouts of the game and the places I actually go in the game. To me, the videos were not a big aspect of the game. Neither the original nor the new one would provide a barrier to me replaying Baldur's Gate at this time.

You make a good point. Of course the videos are not the component that will create the most vivid memories, but for me (and a lot of other players, I'm sure) they were a part of the package that made the game have the huge impact that it had and I definitely hadn't forgotten about them. IMO if you're gonna release an "enhanced edition" that looks, sounds and plays extremely similar to the original -- in fact, the graphics look pretty much identical to vanilla BG with a couple of mods installed -- I imagine most people who buy it will know (or at least see) that its graphics and animations are basically over a decade old. So it's an old-looking and -playing game already... why, then, remove most of the cinematics because "they look too old"?

 

I would've understood a decision to replace all of them with new stuff, but I don't understand removing most and then putting in only a few new ones that have low production value (and still use the originals' music and voice over) and don't even have half of the intensity and dramatic impact of the originals.

 

Anyway, in the end it just comes down to me wishing BG had gotten a better "enhanced" treatment than what beamdog came up with. It deserves it. So does Crusader btw... But that's another story

[Hiro Protagonist II]

I think Overhaul have dropped the ball, they've promised more than they could deliver and now they're being called on it.

 

I agree. The Original BG has rock solid stability and works on my second computer (Win 7/Vista rolled back to XP) with 19" monitor to play old games without any problems. And it still looks great. All Beamdog had to do is take a stable game and make it compatible with Win 7, enhance it with new resolutions and make it similar with the current mods that change the original to the BG2 engine. They've managed to do some of this to great effect, but other things don't seem to work properly. Zoom reset being one of them. The cinematics are not what a lot of people expected with cut dialogue and I wouldn't even call the Friendly Arm Inn a cinematic. It's just a picture with music.

 

They had an opportunity to really make this game shine but it seems they've created something else which has divided the community. I would say this is still in beta with more work to be done on it. It's a shame because it's a missed opportunity for them.

[Lord of Lost Socks]

I have to say that I think the new cutscenes look a lot better. Then again I played Baldur's Gate when I was 10 so my memories are very fuzzy. Everything that happens is a new surprise while at the same time reminding me of the good old days

 

I do remember that the old graphics didn't even impress me when I was 10.

 

So far its run flawlessly, unlike my another copy of Baldur's Gate I bought two years ago which just refuses to work properly.

Edited November 29, 2012 by Lord of Lost Socks

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Is this game worth getting for someone that...

1. Does not currently have access to BG
   
2. Doesn't care about cinematics
   
3. Does not want to sort through various mods for BG
   
4. Will play in about a month so the major patches can be released
   

[LadyCrimson]

The new castle movie is a lot shorter than the old one. I suppose this could be a bonus, if you can't skip them, but between that and the content/layout of the new castle movie (the gate doesn't open, no panning of camera, no sensation of actually "entering the castle" etc), it makes me think they shortcutted things. Maybe it's because of money, I don't know. But I don't like it.

 

Would agree it's not that the old ones are some kind of cinematic masterpieces. The new ones just aren't improvements, so I don't see the point...and I personally don't like the artwork. I think it's flat and ugly, even compared to the old movies.

 

Anyway...I might get it one day, but from the sound of it, even beyond personal taste in cinematics, it needs some patching and stuff before I think I'd want to fork over money for it.