Actually just restarted the trilogy again myself. Currently deep into BG1 using a party mostly made up of EE newcomers for curiosity(first play without Minsc et al.).
I actually find IWD holds up much stronger as a game. The environments, dungeons, and variety of monsters are more cleverly devised thrpugh its progression whereas BG kind of fafs about over-exposing fodder that drags down the narrative delights in all three games. But there is no doubt that BG tells a more riveting tale across its games.
I have BG1 and 2 on GOG but haven't really played them because I was a little overwhelmed to start with. Are the enhanced editions much different in terms of introducing the DND rules to beginners?
A lot of posters argue 'no' above, but I somewhat disagree with them and feel the EE games do offer more QoL improvements that help newcomers slightly more than given credit.
Reworked tooltips provide more detailed explanations for spells and other attributes that the original games can often presume player familiarity. Many UI features, such as lifebars and turn action icons, help suss out WTF is even happening in the chaos of combat. Highlighting equipment stat changes and which party member benefits(green numbers good, red numbers bad!) also helps newcomers to quickly discern how that awkward D&D 2.5 gear ruleset works in an idiot-proof manner. The journal is easier to follow, and much more...
The EE isn't a total overhaul that hand-holds players through the occasional mire that is D&D 2.5, but if you are new to the game the EE is unquestionably the superior version to play.
