If the Enhanced Edition engine is just a shell, couldn't it be given the old files?

[temnix]

As we all know, there are some features of the EE engine that are not in any of the IDS or 2DA files, and we can't affect those. Maybe Beamdog can, and they made those decisions, or maybe they can't either and it's something inherent to the IE engine in all its forms. Beyond this, however, what prevents us from taking the EE engine as it is, being the form, and giving it the old files from the classic BG as the content? Now, I understand that it probably could not or would not work with some of the old IDS files, so theoretically let it keep those. Let it keep all of the files without which it can't function, like the graphics for areas - everything it needs along with what might be replaced but there is simply no alternative, like there isn't to the interface. Recolors don't count, and no one has or can bring back the old stone interface, therefore, let the engine keep this one. And let it keep the files that are unequivocally better than the old versions, such as the new script actions. Let us be generous there and not take away anything that has expanded the horizon of available functions.

That will still leave a large number of files that could be one way or the other without breaking the engine. Changes that Beamdog introduced to classes, perhaps character progression, not to mention changes in actual creatures, spells, dialogues, ARE files and so on. Why could they not be undone by restoring old file versions? If players are unhappy with Dorn being there, bring back the version of the Nashkel mine script without that encounter and the Friendly Arm Inn ARE without him standing there. If players are unhappy with Montaron's proficiency changes, bring back Montaron's CRE. If it was nice to have powerful Sleep before Beamdog nerfed it, bring that back too. But "if" should be treated positively, as in, those elements amounted to a gameplay that was more original, fast and tight on the whole, so yes, bring them back even against contemporary ideas of "balance."

It seems to me that the mechanics of the game under EE fall into four categories:

1) Hard-coded "new engine as such" - leave it

2) What the engine absolutely needs or there is no alternative - leave it

3) What the engine does not need but an obvious improvement in the core functions - leave it

4) Not needed nor an improvement but an iffy alteration - replace it.

I don't think it would be all that difficult to sort all of the features into these categories either. This just appears complicated, and it will be if you decide on a case-by-case basis, but why? Most of the vital elements are going to be in the IDS and 2DA files or all-new file formats, like the PVRZ. Not many of those. The VVC did exist in the old engine, didn't it? Then spells can be brought back with their special effects setup. Of course, if you sit down and try to compare the old Dimension Door graphics with the new and decide which is better or ponder whether Safana should not keep the wakizashi, you'll be sitting there shaking your head at the stars forever, but if you side with the old unequivocally everywhere 3 is not the case, you can be consistent and quick as a happy hangman.

[DavidW]

You could do most of this relatively straightforwardly for BG2 (though I suspect you’d generate a lot of bugs unless you did it pretty carefully on a case-by-case basis) because the EE engine is basically a souped-up version of the ToB engine. BG1 is *much* more complicated, because the BG1 engine is quite different. BGEE is effectively a Tutu/BGT style conversion of the BG1 game content, with all the judgement calls that entails - and note that purists have long objected that Tutu and BGT are also not as good as the ‘true’ BG1.

(As an aside, this is one reason why the original launch of the EE was quite rough. BGEE is a way more challenging project than BG2EE, and from a programming point of view it would have been better to do BG2EE first - but obviously from a marketing and sales point of view BGEE had to go first.)