yes but the fact is you cant compare a game released 10 or more years ago to a new one without considering what were the technical possibilities of that time, and the standards.
If you take the witcher 2, you cut off all cinematics, you imagine it with 800x600 bitmap graphics and a combat system surely not real time the result is a very short rpg game, short dialogs and bit tiny zones to explore.
Also there is to consider some mechanics now are old, very old, and ofc its normal and welecome that games released in 2011 are different from games released in 1995, but the point is modern rpgs are more or less all going to be fast peaced console action games, reducing aspects like dialouges, exploration, hidden content, customization, longevity in general, to enanche aspects that are merely aesthetic mostly.
I point out also that in the last 10 years the console market is consantly going to be more and more the target of most producers, so many developer choices nowadays are pleasing less the pc "keyboard" gamer.

Planescape had worse combat. "Super repetitive" - DA:O had better moves and more variety.

But in regards to story, well, Planescape wins. Nuff said.

I wish someone would overcome the fear of low profits, make a proper old-school RPG and it becomes a hit.
That would be a wonderful way to spit in the faces of people with such claims.

I know, it won't happen, but one can dream, right?

This.


Yes, PS:T has great story (altough i never finished it, because of fighting - Planes after Prison), but story in other old RPGs? Laughable.
FNV has better story than F2, or F1 for that matter.

I kinda like the story of W2 too. The thing, that i can do nearly anything and even change the face of the world (and not only save it).

But, Eschalon is great, you have my word on that.

NWN2: Mask of the Betrayer was for me the closest experience I have ever come from a modern RPG to an experience like Baldur's Gate 2 or Planescape in story and gameplay. Drakensang was also good if only for the character progression and party based gameplay.

Are you talking about the original Drakensang or River of Time? The original had a horrible story, and the old-school gameplay wasn't enough to make up for that imo.
River of Time is much better though.

I was referring to the original but I knew it had a crap story going into it. I took it along the same lines as Icewind Dale or Temple of Elemental Evil; games I certainly did not play for the story. I agree about RoT.

The huge progress between the first two games made it all the worse when the stupid publisher decided that the games didn't make enough money and that the license should be turned into an MMO.
As if that would make them more money considering that apart from a few success story most western MMOs seem to fail rather badly.

That's part of what's wrong with today's RPG market. Whenever publishers see an non-action, non-MMO RPG they seem to think it's a failure and that it could obviously make more money if it belonged to one of those two categories.
That's why we have to go to indies to get more classic fare I suppose.

Eschalon Book 1 and 2 are very sexy. Skills are very unbalanced though (more evident in 1), and they could have had more in the way of choices n consequences, but they're still very solid games.