You keep going in circles and keep saying nothing of value. Can you decide already what is your stance so we can shit all over it as easily as we are now?
If they're more of walking sim and less of games, maybe the general disinterest of the policy that has an interest in games, is well deserved.
Where ever did I say that I thought video games were vapid entertainment? I love video games, I think they're just as valuable as playing cards, solving crosswords, etc. Less valuable, maybe, than reading books or listening to music, because the real life application of video game skill is smaller than that of knowledge of literature and music. But just as fun. The attitude towards video games displayed by most fans and press, however -- that's vapid.
So you don't see the difference, huh. Let me try to be very clear. I think that the BG series was extremely popular around the turn of the millennium for much the same reasons as Fallout 3 was popular and Dragon Age was popular (psst! I'm saying it wasn't good enough to deserve it!). This popularity means that people are still talking about the games, which leads to people going back and trying them.
I think those renaissance rpgs will be played and sold again , that if people still own pc, that if heat or the machete rape gang squads have not decimated us and our kids....
You're just saying that because you don't think D:OS is that good. Which is precisely what I'm doing with BG.
Well everyone is allowed to have an opinion even if they are wrong. So please do tell us what games you consider better than BG1 that were released before BG1 and then tell us which games released after BG1 were the level of those games that you considered superior to BG1?
There are a lot. As for older than BG, Pool of Radiance is the perfect example. Better encounter design, better combat, better maps, better areas. That's the gist of it. I'd mention writing if I thought either had anything worth writing home about.
) or BG2 it was from a cracked discs 15 years ago in my room with a bunch of drunken friends,and i fell in love with the games,and even ended up learning english because of them. It had nothing to do with popularity or fame,for me they were just a bunch of random cds that i came by. Many of the people here came by in a similar ways. I do play RPGs because i enjoy them,and if you enjoy something then why not repeat it 20 years later or even 40? Why do you play them?
If you don't think there are more more people playing and talking about D:OS 2 than Might and Magic or Wizardry then you're off your rocker.
And there's a reason why those were discs of Baldur's Gate and MM6 instead of, say, Dark Heart of Uukrul, which I don't think I've seen mentioned outside this forum. But even so, I think popularity was more indicative of quality back then. In fact, I think Baldur's Gate was the point at which popularity became a completely meaningless factor for my purchasing habits.When i first i played MM6(it was a very strange Russian version with a few different levels
My point is that people are talking about it. You said people aren't talking about it. That's my point. It doesn't prove anything one way or the other, just like people talking about BG doesn't prove anything. And really, the Baldur's Gate thread isn't exactly booming either.
