The real testament to AoD’s quality is that it was made by, what, three or four guys in their spare time (even if it took forever), on a shoestring budget, yet we usually end up talking about all of their design decisions as though they were determined purely by Iron Tower’s CRPG philosophy. When arguing about the game, we rarely fall back on, “well, duh, time and budget constraints, what the hell did you expect?”
I think this speaks volumes given that there were enormous constraints:
Games are also a result of their development history as well. For many, many years, the only tool we had at our disposal was the dialogue editor. We were working part time, and also had to spend a lot of programming time fixing T3D bugs and combat tweaks. So that's why we used it so much. We didn't have time to implement sneaking systems, and only in the last part of development we started doing interactive objects. So we went back and tweaked many scenes, like for example entering Feng's house or the blacksmiths. In the final version, entering Feng's house is very freeform. You have to hover over the vines, climb, then you can click to lockpick the hatch door, and when you get inside you move around in sneak mode (with harder checks closer to Feng's door) and you can examine different objects that have skill checks. Sure, there's no "select skill -> use", and in general it's a single skill you can check, but it's what we could do with what we had.
I mean, jesus, ITS made most of this game with one hand tied behind its collective back, but no one even thinks to grade it on a curve.