On the same engine? Not very likely They even say they would like to keep compatibility with mods. I don't believe they'll manage that, but if they're considering that option then it means the game will be almost the same (with refreshed UI, rendering and stuff). I like it.

Which one? Because I'd actually be really happy if they went with turn & initiative based combat. Actually, that would probably be the deciding factor in me buying the game. Well, that and the 3e ruleset.

A fucking "remake" in HD? Go to hell you fucking fake-hypers. I liked it better when I couldn't see shit.

Anybody looking forward to the many little "tweaks" to "improve gameplay" for the "broader audience" such as:

- every character is now Minsc

- removed armor class (note the ominous lack of a replacement)

- the max level is now 90, expect to be level 10 in the first hour. Players can still multiclass, which can be selected every 4 levels.

- getting ambushed while moving wasn't any fun, so they removed it

- no more guards in cities

Actually looking forward to this. I actually wish they would just remake alot of older games with updated graphics since its apparent that when they try to continue an old series the new generation of devs inevitably kill everything that fans of the series enjoyed.

Looking forward to it to.  I'm torn about the idea of remaking old classic games, on one hand you want a new version of something you once really enjoyed, but you don't want the new version to suck.  The big problem is that there are these gamers that refuse to look at anything objectively and also see any change in gameplay as heretical.  Some times they have legitimate complaints, but most of the time it's complete bullshit.

So maybe when "fans of the series" are dead, companies will be allowed to be creative (sometimes for good, sometimes for bad) with the licenses that they buy? Otherwise, seems better to leave the old IPs buried face down. New X-Com Enemy Unkown? Cancel it!!! Why? It's not going to be X-Com with better graphics!!! *inserts link to flame war about TUs*

I do agree with the feeling of offering "updated" versions of classics (as in working natively in Windows, possible bugs fixed and all that stuff without touching core content).

Meanwhile, I get a Hollywood feeling from "Enchanced" versions of games.

I am still waiting for that remake of pong.

See, I don't see it this way at all. They have access to many piles of good names if they want to do something *inspired by* another game. The problem for us rabid gaming fundamentalists is when they take something that was successful and then do MASSIVE changes to the fundamental identity of the game.

Examples:

Master of Orion 3: They took a game about strategic micromanagement of an empire and tried to turn it into a macro-management game where you had to have governors do the work, and you just direct the governors. MoO3 is NOT fundamentally a Master of Orion game. It is a space game with the MoO franchise name. Massive Failure.

Fallout 3: Admittedly, this is probably the "best" example of a successful fundamental rework of IP, but those of you who really loved the first three games can't tell me that you weren't just a little disappointed to see that it went real time FPS instead of isometric and turn based. Yeah, there was VATS but that was a sorry nod to the days of yore. Similar writing, similar world, but the underlying system is radically and fundamentally different from the original games. For the record, I enjoy Fallout 3, I just think that it was erroneously named.

X-Com Enforcer: Real Time, mission based Third Person Shooter. "Research" added to make it look like it might be a true X-Com game. Massive Failure.

I know that this is going to come of as incredibly ironic to those of you who read my posts in the FE threads, but one way in which I think that FE is a really good  example of how to properly tribute awesome games. Totally different name, many similar features, but enough of a different focus that it's got its own identity (and yes, I would love nothing more than someone to slap city production queues and new graphics/sound onto MoM and sell it to me, but I can gracefully accept that that's not what Elemental is).

Back to original point, if you are going to utilize an IP, you need to either CLEARLY differentiate it as a fundamentally different game or create new on top of the existing fundamentals. Otherwise choose a new name.

2.5 Edition Rules were the best D&D rules ever used. That's not an opinion, that's a widely known fact.

Amen

LoL, yeah I would too but I'm certain it's not that kind of remake. It's more or less on the same engine as the original. It's just a HD remake of the series with some small new stuff being added by some of the original team. Think about the HD remake of the original Bionic Commando on consoles a few years back, not the new Bionic Commando reboot that came out. That's what this is.

With the new content all I expect is some new but minor editions of things the original devs probably wanted to add but couldn't because of time constraints or budget. It'll probably have some updated lighting effects and enhanced spell effects, but visually even with a modern HD upgrade there's only so much you can do on that engine.

I agree that AD&D was my favorite ruleset

This entire post makes me sad.

The modding community did pretty amazing things to BG1 and BG2 back then. So while if I find it interesting (it might spark all kinds of hopes if it's a success...) I fear without the most essential mods it won't be the thing for me. 

Anyway, speaking of classics, here's an idea.... what about a MoM remale?  *hides* 

no, he meant turning a feminine game into something much more masculine... that's what a "remale" is, right?