Why majority of people say Bulder's Gate series are better than Dragon Age:Origins?

I have played many RPGs in my life, such as Diablo 1%26amp;2, Might and Magic 7, the Witcher, Morrowind, Oblivion, Fallout 3, Bulder's Gate 2, and Dragon Age Origins. But even as an experienced RPG gamer, I cannot understand why so many people believe that BG series are superior to DAO. I played both DAO and BG2, but I can't think of any major points that BG2 does better even considering the time they came out. They both have great story line, deep tactical combat, and mysteries to be discovered. Sometimes I even think that DAO is better than BG2 and I鈥檓 going to tell you why. And if you noticed I never played the first BG. I鈥檓 planning to do so as soon as possible. So I鈥檓 going to talk about BG2 and DAO only.

First of all, I got frustrated a bit by the bad path findings of the companions in BG2. They often times get stuck and you have to navigate them toward the edge of a map in order to go outside. When you want to travel in DAO you just have to open your world map and click on an icon. I also did not get why all the non-mage characters are unable to do anything but swinging swords and shooting arrows. Sure, thieves can hide in shadows and disarm traps, but those are basic skills for thieves in any other RPGs. The combat in BG is concentrated too much on magic spells in my opinion. The key to victory is basically about casting and learning appropriate spells. DA鈥檚 combat is more flexible compared to this because your worriers and thieves in DA are more reliable, thanks to their numerous skills they have.

I tried to think some points that made BG2 better than DAO for most people. The first thing that I came up was the fact that the graphics looks great even for its time. If you look at the environment of BG2, you鈥檒l notice many details on it. The second thing is that the overall designs and settings are more original than DAO. DAO was too much like LOTR even though it executed well. Lastly, the main villain in BG2 Irenicus is much more threatening than DAO dragon known as Arch Demon. He has more personality than that mindless beast and contributed to the story well. But none of these things are enough to make DAO lesser than BG2 since they are all minor points. I heard that in DAO once you find a certain combination of skills and spells you can win every encounters, but I never noticed that.

So I need you guys to tell me why Bulder鈥檚 Gate series are loved by RPG gamers more than Dragon Age Origins. Do I have unusual taste for RPGs or am I just spoiled by modern gameplays and graphics? Please tell me about what I am missing.



Remember, don't just tell me your personal preferences and think objectively before you comment.Why majority of people say Bulder's Gate series are better than Dragon Age:Origins?
Hm, I haven't played DAO (yet) but, leaving the gameplay aspects (such as controls, combat,...) and graphics aside (because obviously time always contributes to the advancement of those), I would guess that Baldur's Gate just has a kind of nostalgia to it. I think many gamers just consider it better because it was one of the first RPGs that did pretty much everything right and managed to suck players deep into the game world. And it may have been one of the first RPGs they played. It's kind of a dear memory. Also, it is (still) one of the best RPGs out there.

I also believe that any game that objectively could be considered equal (or better) will be compared to earlier games, and often memory adds a lot to the greatness of a title.

In addition to that, a new game today can only feature so many novelties because almost everything has been done before. Gamers have seen most aspects of a game somewhere else before, this makes it harder to wow them, you can't really impress people with things they've already seen (or maybe even take for granted).