No, it just sucks. The flaws are so in your face that the scores the game received still baffle me. Maybe because of the CRPG revival? A game with randomized loot where enemies don't respawn and almost never drop such loot, not even the gear they are using; ugly characters, bad soundtrack, stupidly difficult combat (for real, every fight has you outnumbered 2x1 at least, with enemies higher level than you), overreliance on surface effects, no respec in a game where you can hit a wall very early and might have to restart.
All of those observations are subjective IMHO. Some are deliberate design decisions which I may or may not personally care for; Larian have always been a bit full-on in terms of combat biting you until you figure it out the hard way; the "bad soundtrack" mystifies me the most as Pokrovsky's work is pretty well renowned. I'm not arguing that everyone should respeck the game's awesome, there are things I dislike about it myself, but to say "it just sucks" as the indisputable and unalienable truth is... well, it's a bold claim.
I showed why it sucks. The only subjectiviness there is the soundtrack, which improves massively in DOS2. The rest is just there: the nonsensical randomized loot, ugly character models, exaggerate difficulty, need to use surface effects in every (like really, EVERY) fight in the game, no respec until 2/3 of the game. You know the main issue? The lack of choice, which is what defines an RPG. In DOS1 you can't create the character that you want, or play how you want, because the "puzzles" usually have only one solution that involves surface effects. Still, most of this was addressed in DOS2, which deserves its reputation as a masterpiece. Obsidian is more consistent in quality though.
