RPGWatch Forums - View Single Post - Is Dragon Age really a BG successor?
View Single Post

Default Is Dragon Age really a BG successor?

November 11th, 2009, 19:38
Originally Posted by Benedict View Post
How am I trying to rationalise against simple facts?

Let me give you an example of rationalization.

Trying to take the base classes *and* specialisations of DA and comparing them to just the base classes from the BG series, and then saying that DA has as many classes as BG. If you want to combine those then BG1/2 has around 40 classes, it's not even close.

Originally Posted by Benedict View Post
I've not disputed that those things are differences between BG & DA, that I grant you is fact. You expressed those as ways in which DA "takes a step backwards" though, suggesting that they are differences which in some way lead to a worse game, which is surely more a matter of opinion than fact (and so more deserving of discussion rather than simple dismissal)?
Take off the fanboy glasses for a second, you're getting way too defensive for no reason. Nobody ever suggested that one game was"worse" than the other. My points were about variety and choices that aren't present in DA, and yes, they are factual. Whether or not *you* care about those things being absent is not the point.
Last edited by JDR13; November 11th, 2009 at 20:06.
JDR13 is offline


JDR13's Avatar
Original Sin Donor


Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Florida, US
Posts: 23,591
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)