Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by Emrikol
Originally Posted by ThreeL
Originally Posted by Waeress
Hello! BG fan here. I am here to tell you that what I saw was a Baldur's Gate game.
I have wanted more Baldur's Gate since 2001 and I am very happy that I will at last be able to get that.

Then tell me what was baldurs gate on what you saw. What besides the name?

Maybe it is or isn't more BG. But DOS was more D&D than BG ever was, even without things like "magic missile" and "Vorpal swords" or whatever, Combining the unparalleled D&D type game of DOS with actual D&D rules is only sweeter.

Saying D:OS was more D&D than BG is just plain silly and only serves to hurt your credibility. Heck even Swen himself would never try to make such a preposterous claim.

BG1 & 2 had the races, the items, the spells, etc,of D&D. So, obviously, it's more in line with D&D that way. But RTwP? Sorry. That's not D&D. Unable to act outside the box (e.g push someone off a cliff)? That's not D&D. DOS2 replicates the table top system better than any game has before it. I think I recall from another thread that you stated you started playing RPGs in the 90s; if so, it makes perfect sense. BG is your baseline if you were born roughly 1984 to 1990. For those of us who grew up on table top D&D, using the BG games as a baseline for D&D is ridiculous.