[AlaCarcuss]

Hi

I'm currently on a quest for a great classic RPG to play. However, my early research on Arcanum has already thrown up a paradox.

Over at rpgcodex.net, Arcanum is regarded, along with Fallout's 1 & 2 and to a lesser extent PS:T, as part of a holy trinity of the 3 greatest RPG's of all time. I've also been considering the Baldur's Gate series, but they don't even make thier top 10 and are generally considered RPG-Lites.

I come here and it seems the reverse is true, BG-II gets a 9.6 and Arcanum a 7.2 (lower even than Beyond Divinity - which is one of the worst RPG's ever made).

I don't have a lot of time to play games these days, so I need to choose the games I do play carefully. My question is, how can 2 dedicated RPG sites have so very diametrically opposed views of the same game?

Is Arcanum as bad/mediocre as Jason Potar makes out in his review or is it one of the greatest of all time as suggested by the RPGCodex?