View Single Post

Default 

November 27th, 2011, 21:13
Originally Posted by Nerevarine View Post
Ah, a perfect sample of completely objective voters who were in no way affected by the warm pull of nostalgia .
So every time an older game is overwhelmingly favored over a newer game it's automatically nostalgia? I think we're both smarter than that.

Maybe Gothic isn't actually better than Arcania. It could be that nostalgia is simply twisting our perception.

Originally Posted by Nerevarine View Post
Hmm… well, the length of Dragon Age seemed just about right for me, and the one major area that most complain about as being too long - the Deep Roads - was really enjoyable for me, and made sense within the setting as to why it would be such a long journey to finish. Playing through BG2, most of the complaints of repetitive enemy encounters and overly long sections of "filler combat" could also apply to that came as well. Micro-managing the spell system becomes extremely tiresome after 40+ hours, and is a bit of a headache overall. I would say that BG2 had more diverse enemies and encounters overall, but it still suffers from the same issue of drawn-out combat that isn't completely necessary.
I don't think they're even close in that aspect, but obviously some people have a higher tolerance of repetitiveness than I do.

You basically fought the same 4-5 enemies over and over again in DA, regardless of where you were in the world, with very few exceptions. Both games had filler combat, but the difference is that BG at least displayed a large variety of enemies, rather than just having you slay an endless supply of Darkspawn for the most part.

I'll admit that the BG series did have the advantage of being created from an IP that already had hundreds of monster types to choose from. If you look at it that way, then it's probably not really fair to compare them.
JDR13 is offline

JDR13

JDR13's Avatar
SasqWatch

#19

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Florida, US
Posts: 18,055