Sarex

That went completely over my head. I apologize for my comments.

If writers wrote for themselves no one would read them. Writers always bear in mind the audience/readers when writing a story. What is a point of a story which only you would understand. It's pretty simplistic to view it in that way. As for your last statement, I don't really know where you got that from, and I must say that is a pretty arrogant and snobbish statement to make.

Nope, but the main gripes people have with DA2 are directly caused by switching the priority platform, the major one of them being the camera angle and party control. To elaborate further, the first console version was partly hack and slash as it did not have auto attack. I also feel that it caused the dumbing down of companions gameplay wise. The inventory was also castrated, as it was pretty hard to navigate through it with a controller in DA:O. I had more gripes then these but to be honest I forgot them, I haven't played DA2 since it came out. He himself stated that he was venting because he quit smoking, so no you didn't misunderstand anything.

Idk, for me Gaider only came across as immature in those tweets. I understand venting, but doing that in a public place which directly influences your job seems stupid, to say the least. In the end, he only showed that he isn't willing to own up to his own/teams mistakes. The problem with DA:I is that since Awakening they where pumping the whole "your choices matter" thing and now that they went back on that, they are surprised that people are put off by it. I won't even go in to the whole mess of gameplay "problems" they made, by making the console their priority platform, but it's worth saying that if they continue down this path, they should stop advertising DA as an true rpg.

Yes, waaaaay better. BG2? How many people voted?

Walking Dead only tried to do the story, PS:T tried to do both, as for KOTOR the gameplay was infinitely better. If PS:T was ahead of it's time people would like it more then the BG series now days, which is not the case.

@aries101 I think you are mixing your numbers there a little bit. I stand by what I said, it was not a commercial success by any standard. Though those things may have happened, the fact remains that they made the game before the "IT crash" happened and they still barely went in to black (if they did even that). This doesn't make the game "bad", so I don't really get why everyone is getting their panties in a bunch, but the fact remains that they chose to concentrate on the story and not the gameplay thus making it a niche game.

Studio/publisher doesn't matter, my point was that stretched over 10 years those numbers are still low. Abysmal may have been an overstatement, but I doubt they did much more then break even.

Yes it was. Stretched over how long of a period? How much does it cost now? Those numbers are still low. You are overestimating how much the studios get from these sales.

Planscape Torment was not a commercial success. It had abysmally low sales numbers.

Perfect. XD

Shhhh, they are magical.

That was nothing compared to a buff that gave warriors attack speed. I think that the animation couldn't keep up, because it stacked with another buff. Yeah found them:http://dragonage.wikia.com/wiki/Spirit_Warrior The blessing of the fade and beyond the veil stacked for some reason. I think it was later patched out.

This is what they told the fans, when asked. I just added the part about system complexity and my opinion on the warrior being better. That may be, but bioware felt that they weren't different enough.

They did it because they wanted to make a distinction between a warrior and rogue (in da:o a warrior did everything better then a rogue), but the system was not complex enough for that, so they did away with dual wield for warriors. @Malekith I think we just ended up on the matters of taste. It seems that the things you consider filler, I consider quality character development time. Edit for rogue

Let's get a little magic in to this thread. By popular demand a (almost) wizard hat.

-Well seeing as you don't like Rand, now I at least get why you don't like Wot. As for the random name generator, I would have to say that every named character had some impact on the story and wasn't there just for the sake of being there. -Ok first about the story. I read Wot about 4-5 times, and each time I figured out something new (an example would be phrases alluding to our time line (cold war) and the Mercedes emblem and lots of more important thing which I won't spoil). I don't think that I ever memorized all the characters, but there where some that did small things in the beginning that where huge later in the series, so yeah the characters mentioned in the book usually served a purpose. The plot was maybe slow paced at times, but only because there was character development happening. I will give you that Jordan was very descriptive, he was also very well know for that, but that is also something that some people like and others don't.(Thou it will help greatly when they make a tv series or a movie XD) -They where traveling through enemy territory with a clear purpose, so I don't get what you mean there. -See what Martin has to say about Jordan. -A important thing to mention there, is that the time lines aren't concurrent for all the characters. For an example one character will be doing something in one book, and then in the next book the other character would be covering the same timeline from his pov. -But those are all different genres, so there is no comparison that can be made, except in the quality of writing where most of the mentioned are on equal footing.

Had to google him, never read anything from him.

Watch some interviews from fantasy writers, whenever someone mentions prose and good writing, they will count Robert Jordan among the best. So it's not like I'm talking out of my ass. Another thing to add, is that Jordan had unparalleled "fight" scenes, which was down to him having war experience. As for you talking about plot being a mess, I don't see it personally, there where no contradictions in the plot and it flowed nicely to the end. As for 1/3 of the books being filler (not true), people think that because they only want to read about Rand and thus any book that he is not in they consider it a filler. Wot has the largest amount of named characters and thus is very complex and comprehensive, so yeah it's not everyone's cup of tea, but in no way does that make it filler. I think you are being very biased. What you have to consider is that Wot is an old book and the people who didn't pick it up as their first fantasy probably read a lot of books that followed in the vein of Wot, thus thinking "nothing new" when in fact it was the first to do it. The new books will always refine what the old ones did, but that in no way makes them better.

Are you implying that, those writers/stories are somehow better then Robert Jordan/Wheel of Time. If so let me tell you this, by writing alone, he blows Wolfe and Ericson out of the water and for me personally Wot is superior to Asoiaf.(I got bored at book 2 and couldn't finish the series(I don't like Dirty Fantasy))

While I love Erikson's books to death, anyone can see what a mess the storyline became towards the end. As for Jordan and Martin, they are both discovery writers so not much planning there, though Sanderson said that Jordan always had an idea of how the story was gonna go/finish.

Second to Tolkien, no one is ahead of him in world building. But he is dead and he only built one world.

Sanderson is an underrated writer, his newest series The Stormlight Archive is easily comparable to Jordan, Martin, Wolfe, Erikson in the quality of writing.

What does that have to do with anything? You are also, by that definition, a nobody, so I guess we should ignore you.

It's a "what not to do" instruction for this board.