It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Hello!

We might be getting a BG2 remake. Both games could the remake treatment, but it looks like BG2 is in the spotlight with this. As of this posting there's no official announcement of the project. If this is real and not a rumor, Kevin Martens (BG2 co-lead designer) is working on it.

Source: https://www.pcgamer.com/games/rpg/a-baldurs-gate-2-remake-is-apparently-in-development-with-the-original-co-lead-designer-returning/
high rated
I don't care about whether it's done in Unreal Engine, uses an isometric view, or is RTwP vs. turn-based. My #1 question for a potential remake is:

"How do you expect to find someone more iconic than David Warner for the voice of Jon Irenicus." :-)
avatar
Ryan333: I don't care about whether it's done in Unreal Engine, uses an isometric view, or is RTwP vs. turn-based. My #1 question for a potential remake is:

"How do you expect to find someone more iconic than David Warner for the voice of Jon Irenicus." :-)
I loved him in that role.

RIP Irenicus and Kresselack (Tony Jay).
Um.

The EEs are already a remake.

And I couldnt care less if they remake the actual game from scratch in 3D or whatever.

Please just give us a new D&D game instead. The Forgotten Realms are HUGE and there are endless possibilities to write new stories for them.
avatar
Geromino: Please just give us a new D&D game instead
Okay

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4Td1B8Ne3k
Like that, yes. :-)

Besides, part of the charme of BG1+2 for me is not just the artwork, including the great voice actors, but also the old AD&D system.

Yes its needlessly overcomplicated, and the class balance is much, much worse than in D&D5 (where you can really pick whatever class you like and it will be great). But its own quirkiness is fun, too.
avatar
Geromino: Like that, yes. :-)

Besides, part of the charme of BG1+2 for me is not just the artwork, including the great voice actors, but also the old AD&D system.

Yes its needlessly overcomplicated, and the class balance is much, much worse than in D&D5 (where you can really pick whatever class you like and it will be great). But its own quirkiness is fun, too.
You think the old D&D rules are more complicated than the new ones? How do you figure?
avatar
Geromino: Like that, yes. :-)

Besides, part of the charme of BG1+2 for me is not just the artwork, including the great voice actors, but also the old AD&D system.

Yes its needlessly overcomplicated, and the class balance is much, much worse than in D&D5 (where you can really pick whatever class you like and it will be great). But its own quirkiness is fun, too.
avatar
alcaray: You think the old D&D rules are more complicated than the new ones? How do you figure?
Um.

Because thats bloody obvious to everyone who has ever looked into them ?

AD&D is full of arbritrary tables. The progression of the saving throws alone, there is no rhyme or reason to them.

Every attribute has a ton of effects that each have their own table, and that quickly gets arbritrary, too.
Man, count the buttons on the BG3 UI some time, just for fun.
avatar
alcaray: Man, count the buttons on the BG3 UI some time, just for fun.
Thats a quite curious choice of a metric, because many of these buttons are not caused by the rulesystem, but that doesnt work out either.

For example a highlevel Cleric/Mage in BG2 can prepare 101 different spells; 55 cleric spells (level 25) and 46 mage spells (level 20).

And you have to SCROLL THROUGH the spelllist, too.

Same character in BG3 ends up with 14 + 6 = 20 spells. I'm assuming Wizard 1 with Int 20 and Cleric 11 with Wis 16, which is how you typically would configure such a character.

OK I forgot Cantrips. Thats 3 for Wizard 1 and 5 for Cleric 11. So a total of 28 spell options.

Nevermind that BG3 is dearly missing essential buttons that older rulesystems still had.
Post edited June 05, 2026 by Geromino
2nd edition d&d was bad. It had it's charm but it was still bad.
Stats rarely mattered unless they were 15+ which was ofc what you wanted.
Exceptional strength could be the difference between a weak fighter and a meatgrinding monster.
The XP table for druids was ridiculously insane.
A single class rogue would at some point run out of skills to improve. The same was true for multi class rogues in ToB.
Dual classing was immensely overpowered.
Hold person was a 2nd level spell for clerics and it no limit on the number of targets, meaning with a bit of luck you could take out more than half the enemy party with just one spell.
Thac0 calculation was needlessly confusing.
With a few small exceptions, most spells were equally easy/hard to save against while saving throws kept improving. So at high level there was very little reason to cast spells that could be ignored with a succesful save.
Magic resistance... probably intended as protection against "save or die" spells but also made casting spells against certain enemies pointless. Unless you bothered to cast a few lower MR spells first (or cheated by casting a spell that gave them MR)
etc, etc.
avatar
gnarbrag: 2nd edition d&d was bad. It had it's charm but it was still bad.
Stats rarely mattered unless they were 15+ which was ofc what you wanted.
Exceptional strength could be the difference between a weak fighter and a meatgrinding monster.
The XP table for druids was ridiculously insane.
A single class rogue would at some point run out of skills to improve. The same was true for multi class rogues in ToB.
Dual classing was immensely overpowered.
Hold person was a 2nd level spell for clerics and it no limit on the number of targets, meaning with a bit of luck you could take out more than half the enemy party with just one spell.
Thac0 calculation was needlessly confusing.
With a few small exceptions, most spells were equally easy/hard to save against while saving throws kept improving. So at high level there was very little reason to cast spells that could be ignored with a succesful save.
Magic resistance... probably intended as protection against "save or die" spells but also made casting spells against certain enemies pointless. Unless you bothered to cast a few lower MR spells first (or cheated by casting a spell that gave them MR)
etc, etc.
You've got many good points here. I will note with amusement that the Hold Person issue means that in SSI's 1st edition Gold Box games, your low level cleric has an incredibly powerful weapon when facing most humanoid enemies. Those games often feature difficult fights, and I find it helpful. The only problem is your enemy clerics have the same weapon.
avatar
Geromino: ...
It was just the first thought I had. Here's a second: count the number of modifiers to his die roll Astarion has when he picks a lock. When I was running D&D in the 80s there's no way on the planet I would have put myself and my players through trying to keep track of all that BS. It's detail you add to make the world more realistic but does not make the game more fun. The later RPGs are full of that crap.
As I already pointed out, the number of buttons is a very poor if not completely irrelevant metric to measure if a rulesystem is needlessly overcomplicated under the hood. I dont want to entertain even more such foolish metrics.

I would estimate that ideally a rulesystem gives you around 50 options to choose from on a maxlevel character. The options of course have to be such that picking the right one is indeed a challenge of sorts. Even more options and it gets really hard to keep all options relevant, fairly balanced, and often enough of importance.

I wouldnt call AD&D outright bad, one can definitely enjoy it, once one has figured out its quirks and limitations.

But its oldstyle and overall D&D3 and D&D5 are clearly better.

In D&D5 specifically I like that you can play any class and its playable. Which unfortunately wasnt the case in AD&D and D&D3.

Skills got improved in D&D3 and again in D&D5. Since you can just write down what bonus you get on a skill, I dont follow your argument that it would be overly complicated.

D&D5 also of course has its drawbacks and problems. I really dont get why they think Backgrounds are a good idea. The whole idea of Advantage and Disadvantage is just godawful and should be removed. Fighters are hopelessly overpowered. Etc.
avatar
Geromino: As I already pointed out, the number of buttons is a very poor if not completely irrelevant metric to measure if a rulesystem is needlessly overcomplicated under the hood. I dont want to entertain even more such foolish metrics.
If you think my post was about counting buttons, then please reread it and try again.

avatar
Geromino: I would estimate...
Statements like this invariably mean that someone is about to pull statistics out of their ass.

avatar
Geromino: I wouldnt call AD&D outright bad, one can definitely enjoy it, once one has figured out its quirks and limitations.
I don't really care if you did call it "bad". I take issue only with your "more complicated" assertion.

avatar
Geromino: But... etc...
Whatever. Don't care what your opinions are on this stuff.