Some random thoughts from reading the article.
On humour. I didn't find the game that funny. Silly accents and copies of book/film scenes don't make for a good joke. On the other hand the Deathknights constant anger at what he was going through was funny, and I think that could have been played up instead.
On the Acts. I agree with other comments. Diablo 2 used the acts format, but it worked much better. If you are going to uses Acts then make each Act sufficently diferent to warrant the split. Travel to another dimension or another country, that kind of thing. Simply teleporting to another piece of identical looking basalt didn't work for me.
On limited wordcount. I can live with it, it didn't seem so bad. I would have got rid of some of the stupid cartoon imps to increase the more interesting Ranaar dialogue. It certianly explains why the novella was required reading to understand the history of the game...they couldn't fit it in the game itself!
On the interface. I thought it worked out quite well. All the inventory needed was an auto tidy button. Of course I would have preferred a more complex weights and volume type systems since carrying a dozen swords and breastplates in unrelaistic, but BD wasn't going for a realism apporach so it's not a real problem.
On the skills systems. It was very badly designed I think. I was annoyed to see that the Warrior Advanced Skills (Berserk, etc) were not learnable until the last 2% of the game. I've noticed that Larian has quantity is better approach to game design, since I remember Divine being advertiseed has having over 32000 screens. That kind of development mindset shoud have died out in the late 80s, it shouldn't still be used 20 years later. QUALITY is most important, and then add the quantity when the quality is right. Adding 50 more skills that are unusable due to timing or lack of effectiveness doesn't increase player choice.
Lesson not Learnt. Larian have made what I consider a fatal mistake in both their games, and there is no indication that they consider it a flaw. They are taking control away from the player at several points for no reason. Sure you can remove control while the villain is stationary and talks rubbish, you can take away control when the hero is tied up and captured, but you must NEVER take away control so some npc can walk across a room and perform some action in order to force the plot. Key examples? In Divine the brat Prince was attacked by Orcs and the Player cannot move so he can be blamed for not helping in order to advance the story. In Beyond a prison guard walks across a room a locks a door to force the player to take another route. These kind of design choices are unforgivable IMO.
Other Lessons not Learnt. Cliches and Larians love of them. Why have 'mysteries' if the dialogue and actions of the NPCs make it clear who is the villain. I think the entire Imp villaige must have had an intelligence of 1 not to have recognised what was going on with the Shaman! The game ending was quite nice, but I saw the 'twist' a mile away since Larian so love fantasy cliches.
