BG vs BG:EE

Originally Posted by JDR13
Feel free to explain it better.

I already said ITT what I think are the two ways of interpreting this term.

Sorry, but I'm not seeing that. All I see is you claiming that no classic game is going to make newer gamers feel like it just came out and some other such nonsense.

Originally Posted by JDR13
All I see is you claiming that no classic game is going to make newer gamers feel like it just came out

lolwut

I'll sum up my OP again:

It doesn't really matter if you play through a game of the original (patched, unmodded) BG or BG:EE. The enhancements (well, changes really) of EE aren't so fundamental that it's a different game; it has the same flaws and virtues as the original. I personally wouldn't start over again because IMO BG isn't such a strong game that it warrants multiple playthroughs.

^ That's what got the fanboys raging ITT, but I'm out. For everything else, open a thread called "Is BG a classic?" and give your opinion on that.

I don't see that having much to do with what we were just talking about, but then I didn't expect you to reply directly anyways.

Originally Posted by JDR13
I don't see that having much to do with what we were just talking about, but then I didn't expect you to reply directly anyways.

You can obviously read, but you don't see how I'm answering the OP's question in my post above. I'm baffled.

For everything else, I'm tired of people claiming BG is a classic and can't be replayed often enough without giving any reasons for it, but calling me a troll when I point out the flaws in it.

You offer no definition of a classic. Me, I think it's too nebulous and subjective and a personal preference thing to define absolutely, so I can't blame you. But just because a game has kiting doesn't rule it out. For the record, I don't remember kiting in those games.

Originally Posted by Sacred_Path
You can obviously read, but you don't see how I'm answering the OP's question in my post above. I'm baffled.

For everything else, I'm tired of people claiming BG is a classic and can't be replayed often enough without giving any reasons for it, but calling me a troll when I point out the flaws in it.

You still haven't given a definition of what a classic is or why BG isn't one, and the only flaw you've pointed out is that you can kite, which is debatable as a flaw anyways.

Originally Posted by JDR13
You still haven't given a definition of what a classic is or why BG isn't one, and the only flaw you've pointed out is that you can kite, which is debatable as a flaw anyways.

Others ITT have claimed that BG is a classic; why should I give a definition of it? You don't know how building an argument works

Originally Posted by Sacred_Path
Others ITT have claimed that BG is a classic; why should I give a definition of it? You don't know how building an argument works

Well I can certainly see when it doesn't.

Originally Posted by JDR13
Well I can certainly see when it doesn't.

Hum, well. I guess this is the point when we start calling each other poopoohead or post pictures of our cats.

Originally Posted by Sacred_Path
Hum, well. I guess this is the point when we start calling each other poopoohead or post pictures of our cats.

Only pussies own cats.

o rly

Originally Posted by Sacred_Path
o rly

i don't care much for your views of BG or cats but I must admit that cat is awesome.

Originally Posted by Sacred_Path
Others ITT have claimed that BG is a classic; why should I give a definition of it? You don't know how building an argument works

Let me be clear … If you are claiming to define what is a classic and defending a position, then you need to provide context. Or you are the troll some claim. And sadly your definition and criteria have been changing page to page.

Originally Posted by txa1265
Let me be clear … If you are claiming to define what is a classic and defending a position, then you need to provide context. Or you are the troll some claim. And sadly your definition and criteria have been changing page to page.

Let me be clear:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philoso…urden_of_proof

I assume you missed the part where others (I think DArt for starters) called BG a classic, not me.

Um, I'm pretty sure "burden of proof" does not apply to opinions.

Maybe it's easiest to just stick to discussing what you do/don't like about the game and whether that makes it a "classic" by your definition? Maybe even tell us what your definition is, if you so fancy?

Here, I'll start… For me a "classic" is a game that sticks in my head (in a positive way!) years after I've played it. It doesn't necessarily have to merit replays (though many do) and it doesn't have to stand up to modern standards (though some do). Thus, for me, BG2 achieves classic status, mainly for the quests and NPCs in the first town, while BG1 does not as I found a lot of its plot/characters/world less memorable.

Originally Posted by mogwins
Um, I'm pretty sure "burden of proof" does not apply to opinions.

In that case it certainly doesn't apply to people who don't share your opinion.

Here, I'll start… For me a "classic" is a game that sticks in my head (in a positive way!) years after I've played it. It doesn't necessarily have to merit replays (though many do) and it doesn't have to stand up to modern standards (though some do). Thus, for me, BG2 achieves classic status, mainly for the quests and NPCs in the first town, while BG1 does not as I found a lot of its plot/characters/world less memorable.

Productive! Not much of a basis for argument though. I assume it sticking in your head is a good thing (in this case)?

Top tip! Not everything posted on the internet is an "argument."

Originally Posted by mogwins
Top tip! Not everything posted on the internet is an "argument."

You're preaching to the wrong person here. If my OP had gone without comment I wouldn't have been sad

Originally Posted by wiretripped
Hello,

I was contemplating starting a playthrough of BG1. In the past, I've only gotten halfway — up to Cloakwood forest I think it was — but several years have passed and continuing that save proves hard. I have no clue of what is going, nor do I remember what I was doing.

So, I want to start from scratch. I have picked up the EE version during a Steam sale, so I am wondering now… Do I play the original, or the EE?

Any thoughts, suggestions? Do the EE additions dilute the original? And how bug-free is the EE?
Thanks in advance!

This thread has already been completely ruined, but I just wanted to answer the actual question.

Start over with EE. Honestly. Trying to continue a save game that's several years old is hopeless, and EE is a smoother experience overall which requires no modding or other weird tweaking.

As BG1:EE uses BG2 rules, it might be a bit confusing in the start. If you need any advice, just ask.