Glad to hear that they restored it. It made zero sense to delete it in the first place...

Baldur's Gate 1 is locked to a 640x480 resolution. Baldur's Gate 2 was locked to 800x600 (but may have had "experimental" support for a few higher 4:3 resolutions assuming I'm not confusing it with Icewind Dale).

Going beyond that required some sort of mod, such as the widescreen patch. It's possible the GOG non-EE version already contains one, but the original retail versions of these games certainly did not.
The EE changed some cutscenes, and annoyingly removed others. However, there's also a mod that restores them.

I don't agree with the claim that the EE "uses a different rule set." Both classic and EE used AD&D 2nd Edition rules (or at least as closely as they were implemented in the Infinity Engine). What EE adds are BG2 kits (which you could get in classic using mods like EasyTuTu and Baldur's Gate Trilogy), plus additional kits that were clearly inspired by Neverwinter Nights. Yes, that's new content, but it's not a new ruleset.

I already did so. Twice. And I'm sorry to the board for teaching you the word sophistry, you've used it in literally every post you've made since I said it.

But anyhow, once more for posterity's sake. They wrote new lines of dialogue for existing NPCs. Kivan, Jaheira, Viconia, et cetera. Adding new content is CHANGING content. I don't know where this asanine notion that "change only occurs when you remove content" but for some reason Beamdog apologists ONLY apply it to Baldur's Gate and absolutely nothing else. If I add five extra scenes into a movie you like that change the nature and tone of the characters, you can't argue that I didn't change anything because I didn't REMOVE content.

As expected, you can't. Your puerile attempt at ridicule asides, you lose.

By the by, it's the very first time I've ever been accused of being a Beamdog apologist rather than a Beamdog hater. Your powers of observation almost match your powers of equivocation. Congrats.

BG2 engine had support for quite high resolutions. It goes way beyond 1600x1200 from what I remember. The problem is that the engine supports only 4:3 aspect ratio by default.

BG2 was based on a 2nd/3rd edition hybrid. Let's call it 2.5. :) Kits are only one of the changes. Others include classes not available in the 2nd edition, more weapon proficiencies and new spells. The differences are quite noticeable and it makes the game better.
The added content is optional. This means you can skip it and experience all of the original content untouched. So Beamdog didn't change the original story content. It's simple. :)

Oh, for the love of... I DID. Twice. Y'know what, maybe this is my fault. I just assumed you knew how the forums worked. Fine, here's an indepth explanation. Refer to this post on the first page: Notice the two attachments? They're next to the paper clip icon and the word "Attachments"? If you click on either one of those files, it will provide you with the example that I, AND OTHERS, have already told you were previously provided.

Good God.

You're using the word wrong. *nosepinch* Just go back to sophistry, it's less irritating to have only ONE word that you spam incorrectly.



If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and gets caught defending Beamdog's shady practices and outright lying on their behalf... it's probably a Beamdog shill.

You choosing to ignore it doesn't mean they didn't change it. It being optional doesn't mean they didn't change it. Back to the movie analogy. If I splice in five scenes into a movie you don't like and tell you just to skip past them and not watch them, that they're optional, I've still changed your movie.

Honestly, I feel like I'm in a Twilight Zone episode here.

If I publish new chapters into someone's existing book, I've changed the book.

If I add new scenes to someone's existing movie, I've changed the movie.

If I add new lyrics to someone's existing song, I've changed the song.

If I add new dialogue to someone's existing NPCs, I've changed the game.

Why is it ONLY Beamdog's Enhanced Edition that people suddenly take issue with this? You couldn't argue "just skip the chapters and the book is technically unchanged" or "just plug your ears during the lyrics and the song is unchanged". It doesn't work like that. The English language doesn't work like that. Your refusal to acknowledge change doesn't make the change cease to exist.

Everybody is insane except you, right?

Or possibly stupid. We're online, I'd believe either.

Either way, the meaning is the same.

At least you're not pretending there's no change anymore. That's progress.

Not very bright, eh? I don't need to pretend. I know the truth.

Being mistaken is one thing. It happens to all of us. Being mistaken, getting proved wrong, then obstinately insulting and spamming a thread in sheer asshurt is a really unattractive quality in a person. Of course, this is just me hammering at a brick wall. If you were going to highroad your mistake, you'd have done it already, so fire another quip Hickory.

Yes, it is.

Called it.

Anyhow, the OP marked the post I included screenshots and evidence with. Anyone further reading the thread can find the answer there.