There is no Black Isle logo in the trailer and what's more important Black Isle, a firm that made Planescape: Torment is not mentioned in the Store page, instead modders are. This is outrageous! They're trying to rewrite the history and don't give credit where credit is due.

https://www.gog.com/mix/beamdog_is_the_parasite_of_the_industry

They are already taking credit for BG 1-2 and IWD, because when they "merged" the classics with their EE versions, the reviews were merged as well. So every praising review of the Classic Planescape Torment, and the other games, now looks like praise for their EE games.

I also noticed that they used some Planescape review quotes someone said about the classic version, in the trailer for their EE version.

I am sure they are perfectly aware of this little "mistake".

They are parasites.. But that is capitalism.. A nest of parasites..

You're all far too quick to assume malice.

Beamdog and GOG legally can't display a Black Isle logo on a new release that Black Isle wasn't involved in. Doing so would be misrepresenting Black Isle, not "giving them credit".

I suppose they could mention them in the description blurb, e.g. change

"The original Planescape: Torment was released in 1999 to widespread critical acclaim."

to

"The original Planescape: Torment was developed by Black Isle and released in 1999 to widespread critical acclaim."

But wait, that still doesn't give credit to the original publisher. So make that:

"The original Planescape: Torment was developed by Black Isle and released by Interplay in 1999 to widespread critical acclaim."

But wait, much of the work was already done by the Infinity Engine which they re-used from Baldur's Gate. So make that:

"The original Planescape: Torment was developed by Black Isle based on an engine developed by Bioware, and released by Interplay in 1999 to widespread critical acclaim."

...Except that sounds more like a history lesson than a sales blurb that effectively draws in customers. Best to leave such things to the in-game credits and the Wikipedia page.

Julius Borisov has answered with some bullshit PR talk why they won't credit Black Isle: Which is a lie (see Fallout and Fallout 2 where Black Isle/Interplay is credited or other remakes). Truly parasitic company.

This is true. The Fallout games do credit Black Isle. I checked. But those aren't remakes, though.

Please share with us your insider information about the legal situation.

They did put blurbs praising Planescape Torment (the classic version) into their trailer for the EE version. So that means they are taking praise Black Isle Studio got for their work, and using it to promote their own product.

For the trailer quotes, they're about the same game, so it makes sense to use them. It's a remaster, not a different game. If you read the reviews from any of the quoted publications, I think you'll find all the positives they mention will be in the remaster too.

The original developers are credited as they should be. There are business decisions and legal decisions that the developers have agreed to. If you're angry at that, be angry at Black Isle.

The legacy of those involved with the original game is stronger than any addition of a logo could provide. The success of Black Isle and the legacy of the individuals who work there are ubiquitous, and anyone who plays cRPGs bows down to these people.

Beamdog are alright, this their product and all the Black Isle/Interplay IP and rights stuff has always been questionable and more than likely a tangle to work through. You guys are just bitching cause you probably hate Beamdog for petty reasons tbh.

This is illogical, why would I be angry at a firm that doesn't exist? I'm angry at Beamdog because they are spreading false information, i.e. that they are developers AND publishers behind Planescape Torment: Enhanced Edition when in fact they are MODDERS and publishers. I would be just as angry at Bethesda if they would try to take credit for developing Fallout: New Vegas for example or for Fallout 1 and 2.

No, otherwise there would be much bigger outrage at Beamdog than it is now or when Bethesda raped Fallout and made it an FPS walking simulator for idiots. The fact is that only a small percentage of RPG gamers know who Tim Cain, Alan Pavlish, George Ziets, Dan Spitzley, Chris Taylor (the one from Fallout) and other developers are or what they worked on, most only know the studios they worked at (let's be honest, how many people read credits?). And now it's more and more common to hear that Bethesda created Fallout , even among gaming journalists. Soon enough the same will happen with Planescape: Torment which to me is outrageous and unacceptable.

You're inconsolable and my impression of you is leaning towards crazy. You're wrong in several ways. across both quotes here, but I doubt you'll be convinced.

Please explain the difference between developers and modders. Merriam Webster defines developer as "a person or company that develops computer software" whereas it doesn't have an entry for "modder". In that regard, Beamdog qualifies as a developer.

Most developers today don't create everything from scratch. They are using third party libraries, tools, image and sound collections etc. Companies license technology or buy other companies alltogether. If you really want to credit all people and companies in the chain that led to the final product you would've a gigantic list or a slideshow lasting a looong time. That's the way the world works. Or do you know every engineer involved in the creation of your fridge or the bridges in your town? How about the chemists and designers of every tube of toothpaste? Only a few outstanding people are known beyond the companies they work for and often only among a small community of people with a specific interest. Many hard working and very creative people are not known to the public. If that's outrageous and unacceptable to you, be prepared to be outraged very often.

Calling people crazy doesn't belong in an civil productive discussion. Please point out the errors you see in goral's argument. Besides, in most discussions you won't convince your opposite. But can hope to plant little seeds of your position in their thoughts, learn yourself from their rebuttal, and/or convince others in the audience.

edit: typo

I meant you should be angry at the people who were at Black Isle. They're the ones who decided what to do with their trademark. That was their choice. You're the one disrespecting the people at Black Isle, saying that agreements they signed to should be invalidated because some random dude on the internet said so. They had more power over their creation than you do and that's the way it should be.

Instead you're angry at Beamdog for doing what Black Isle by proxy told them to do. That's just very faulty logic.