my problems are less technical than shoehorning in gay commie agenda, or editing the previous version to remove content that isn't in support of the gay commie agenda
In Vanilla, when you got your first mount at 40, it fucking meant something, and certain classes getting free mounts as spells was a huge deal. Now, they are just another cosmetic.
but it's like how I bitch when it comes to modern titles that people get hyper-focused on the woke aspect and don't seem to acknowledge that these are objectively borked projects that look like they've been setup as lazy cash grabs
Yeah, no. BG2:EE was the game that added in various self inserts and woke caricatures like the trans peasant who shouldn't exist in the D&D setting because there are actual mechanisms to change a character from one sex to the other, thereby eliminating actual trans status. But that's not actually what perpetual victims, grifters, and narcissists want because it would take away their special status, income, and attention that is the sole foundation of their existence.
BG2:EE is way better graphics and fewer bugs than the original. People say if you collect the right set of mods it's better than :EE, but frankly I couldn't be bothered to care that much.
I only played it without any party members so it looks like I missed the new content except Neera, who keeps annoying you until you slaughter her camp of freaks.
Looking at the changes, the new additions are bad content but almost entirely optional so on balance it's fine.
False, the dumb trans was inthe Beamdog original, “Siege of Dragonspear.” I have not played that one.
BG2:EE does have an added optional gay romance, and several new characters (including at least one who was generally well received.)
BG:EE and BG2:EE are technically excellent enhanced editions, though they took a long time to get there. Graphical enhancements, modding enhancements, thousands of fixed bugs, zoom, enhanced pathfinding, modern OS (tablet/console/desktop/etc) compatibility, etc. Totally fidelity to the original in these aspects.
The plot and character additions to BG:EE and BG2:EE were both both pretty poor, imho, but they’re also 100% avoidable and in no way affect the base game.
The pathing is actually worse in BG2EE over oBG2, and a mixed bag for BG1. The reason being, Beamdog simply changed the parameters, setting node counts much higher and delay between path checks lower, because modern PCs can handle pathing a bit more often than your Pentium II. Problem is, the existing pathing system worked better tuned down.
Whenever your party tries to fit through a narrow space, with the overclocked pathing, the guys in the back immediately think they're blocked and try to find an alternate path, which usually just means going around the entire fucking map. In oBG2, the longer delay meant the guys in the back effectively waited for the guys in front to get out of the way.
In BG1EE, the pathing is better in most places, oBG1 being a bit of a clunker, but it's such a disaster for the narrow dungeons that you're actually better off soloing or duoing them than trying to get your full party through.
Ok, I haven't played very much BG2EE, so I fully accept that may be the case. I remember back in the day, jacking up the search nodes to something crazy, like from 2000 to 20,000 or something like that.
My impression of BG:EE was that the pathing was improved, but I also can't say that I compared original to EE.
I may have just skipped all the retarded stuff. I simply don't use the stuff that is not in the original game. That said, I did buy it before I knew that they were (crypto-)woke, otherwise I wuddnadunit.
I mean, if you tried to create an 'Enhanced Edition' of the Iliad you'd also mess things up, simply because this age of insanity isn't capable of creating anything good, let alone great.
I haven't bought a game in years, and I'm quite content with that.
RTW enhanced really never made a lot of sense to me. Mods already covered most of the graphics and gameplay expansions, and RTW2 could accomplish much of the same sort of experience with mods as well.
And it wasn't a situation where the engine needed a fix or update just to be able to run.
Are you specifically citing the BG1 and BG2 enhanced editions in your examples? I mean I agree with your general premise, I was just a little confused what you were referring to specifically.
This is a great example of how shitty these updated versions have become: Kingpin Reloaded. I can't tell the difference between the original and the "enhanced."
IDK if you can blame turn based missing on consoles, because turn based games play fine. Not all of them, but I'm saying being turn based doesn't make them especially unsuitable for console. An RTS and a TBS that are basically the same game are equally ungainly on console.
Turn based games may be unsuitable for console players.
Walking and chewing gum at the same time is unsuitable for Console 'Tards.
I'll give you a more specific example. Bioshock spent the last months of development ripping out complex gameplay and plot to dumb it down. They received strong feedback from focus groups: "Too much talking. Why can't I run and gun?"
And too many more examples to count. I repeat:
Console 'Tards: Vomiting stupid on videogames since 2001.
my problems are less technical than shoehorning in gay commie agenda, or editing the previous version to remove content that isn't in support of the gay commie agenda
"You don't really want to play classic World of Warcraft. You think you do but you don't."
In Vanilla, when you got your first mount at 40, it fucking meant something, and certain classes getting free mounts as spells was a huge deal. Now, they are just another cosmetic.
they have the same root cause.
The Witcher EE was a big improvement over the original version.
When the original dev does it its "this is the game we wish we could have made back then" when it's a third party its "fulfill this contract"
Neverwinter Nights EE is the exception. Lots of great additions there.
Which ones are you talking about? BG2:EE was pretty good.
Yeah, no. BG2:EE was the game that added in various self inserts and woke caricatures like the trans peasant who shouldn't exist in the D&D setting because there are actual mechanisms to change a character from one sex to the other, thereby eliminating actual trans status. But that's not actually what perpetual victims, grifters, and narcissists want because it would take away their special status, income, and attention that is the sole foundation of their existence.
That was actually the BG1:EE expansion (Siege of Dragonspear) they whipped up out of thin air.
I haven't played BG2:EE so I can't speak to its quality, but that's not where the trans character drama came from.
BG2:EE is way better graphics and fewer bugs than the original. People say if you collect the right set of mods it's better than :EE, but frankly I couldn't be bothered to care that much.
I only played it without any party members so it looks like I missed the new content except Neera, who keeps annoying you until you slaughter her camp of freaks.
Looking at the changes, the new additions are bad content but almost entirely optional so on balance it's fine.
False, the dumb trans was inthe Beamdog original, “Siege of Dragonspear.” I have not played that one.
BG2:EE does have an added optional gay romance, and several new characters (including at least one who was generally well received.)
BG:EE and BG2:EE are technically excellent enhanced editions, though they took a long time to get there. Graphical enhancements, modding enhancements, thousands of fixed bugs, zoom, enhanced pathfinding, modern OS (tablet/console/desktop/etc) compatibility, etc. Totally fidelity to the original in these aspects.
The plot and character additions to BG:EE and BG2:EE were both both pretty poor, imho, but they’re also 100% avoidable and in no way affect the base game.
The pathing is actually worse in BG2EE over oBG2, and a mixed bag for BG1. The reason being, Beamdog simply changed the parameters, setting node counts much higher and delay between path checks lower, because modern PCs can handle pathing a bit more often than your Pentium II. Problem is, the existing pathing system worked better tuned down.
Whenever your party tries to fit through a narrow space, with the overclocked pathing, the guys in the back immediately think they're blocked and try to find an alternate path, which usually just means going around the entire fucking map. In oBG2, the longer delay meant the guys in the back effectively waited for the guys in front to get out of the way.
In BG1EE, the pathing is better in most places, oBG1 being a bit of a clunker, but it's such a disaster for the narrow dungeons that you're actually better off soloing or duoing them than trying to get your full party through.
As they say, the Q in Beamdog stands for Quality.
Ok, I haven't played very much BG2EE, so I fully accept that may be the case. I remember back in the day, jacking up the search nodes to something crazy, like from 2000 to 20,000 or something like that.
My impression of BG:EE was that the pathing was improved, but I also can't say that I compared original to EE.
I may have just skipped all the retarded stuff. I simply don't use the stuff that is not in the original game. That said, I did buy it before I knew that they were (crypto-)woke, otherwise I wuddnadunit.
Those are fighting words sir.
Pistols at dawn or a good old fashioned fist fight. Your choice.
I pick BOO. He will have your eyes before you can draw your weapon, evil!
Classic blunder.
I'll counter with Jan Jansen.
I mean, if you tried to create an 'Enhanced Edition' of the Iliad you'd also mess things up, simply because this age of insanity isn't capable of creating anything good, let alone great.
I haven't bought a game in years, and I'm quite content with that.
RTW enhanced really never made a lot of sense to me. Mods already covered most of the graphics and gameplay expansions, and RTW2 could accomplish much of the same sort of experience with mods as well.
And it wasn't a situation where the engine needed a fix or update just to be able to run.
Are you specifically citing the BG1 and BG2 enhanced editions in your examples? I mean I agree with your general premise, I was just a little confused what you were referring to specifically.
If its not a remake why bother buying it? Its the same game that you already love, why do you need to double dip on it?
Unless they've listed out clear QoL improvements that you consider important, they are never worth it unless you care about "muh HD textures!"
This is a great example of how shitty these updated versions have become: Kingpin Reloaded. I can't tell the difference between the original and the "enhanced."
https://youtu.be/SP9U_0znTCQ?si=2zU3Wt5-umYsrooG
Everything is optimized for the likes of Xbox now.
Console 'Tards: Vomiting stupid on videogames since 2001.
I can't stand inventories without search boxes. But on consoles they basically don't work so they are omitted.
Whole genres of games are omitted! RTS! Flight Sim! Turn based anything!
The Radial menu was invented because controllers are shit at selecting anything!
IDK if you can blame turn based missing on consoles, because turn based games play fine. Not all of them, but I'm saying being turn based doesn't make them especially unsuitable for console. An RTS and a TBS that are basically the same game are equally ungainly on console.
Turn based games may be unsuitable for console players.
Walking and chewing gum at the same time is unsuitable for Console 'Tards.
I'll give you a more specific example. Bioshock spent the last months of development ripping out complex gameplay and plot to dumb it down. They received strong feedback from focus groups: "Too much talking. Why can't I run and gun?"
And too many more examples to count. I repeat:
Console 'Tards: Vomiting stupid on videogames since 2001.