Good point JDR and I agree.
However, I can understand other people's point of view a little better if they played it later after it revitalized the rpg genre, not before. We we're going through a dry spell there for awhile. There were some great games, sure, but not too many like BG.
See I don't know why people thought there was such a massive drought before Baldur's Gate . . . . a steady flow of M&M releases that from IV to VIII were IMO really good games, wizardry had one in 96 and another a couple of years later, return to krondor, shadows over riva, Albion, daggerfall (which was a bit shit but at least pushing things forward although after oblivions clearly in the wrong direction), . Games like Planescape and Siege of Avalon and Arcanum and Wizardry 8 and Gothic in between Baldur's Gate I and II or at the same time as II.
There were a lot of good solid RPGs being released and a couple of really great ones (Gothic, Planescape, Shadows over Riva, Arcanum, Return to Krondor and for my money the M&M games all have fonder memories than either baldur's gate).
IMO the drought starting kicking in for the few years after baldur's gate, diablo was released in 1997 and it was the aftermath of that and its massive success that led to the real drought IMO, the couple of years after that had some great games still in the pipeline but then such a large part of the rpg output started being shitty diablo clones (IMO clones of a shitty original game) that the decent releases became fewer & further between.
And I don't think either baldur's gate game could be said to have revitalised the genre . . . . where was the flow of similar games? Where was the innovation that built on the new market created by the baldur's gate games? I just remember a lot of gamers saying "We really enjoyed those games, can we have some more" and the industry doing fuck all about it.
EDIT - looking a bit more . . . fallout 1997, fallout II 1999.