I still cannot understand why people are so bent in saying that the gameplay showed that it is a DoS2 clone if they are clearly using the D&D5e ruleset and spells. I mean, no cooldowns, dice rolls, misses, critical misses, spell slots, the dying 5e mechanics, skills like shove, the mage hand...
So, Fallout 4-NV and Mass effect are a Call of duty clone because they are both 3rd person FPS? And I suppose Skyrim and Witcher 3 are a clone of Assassins creed because they are Action RPGs too...
The combat ruleset is very diferent, as it is the combat mechanics in DOS games and the ones you use in 5e. If you say that the graphics are similar... well they are using an improved version of the game engine of Larian so...
Neverwinter nights 2 and the first witcher game both use the Aurora engine and nobody that played those games will say that they are both clones because the games have very different mechanics even if they look similar.
I am not going to say that I´m thrilled with the idea but Sven Vincke from Larian and Mike Mearls from WoTC keep on saying that the videogame is based in D&D5e, sword coast setting, and the Baldur´s gate Adventures MiBG and DiA; not in the first games. They were very forthright even from the first interview so I kinda expected that.
Changing the background ruleset can be subtle thing that doesn't ultimately change the experience of playing a game. Or, it could change the experience quite a bit, for good or bad. But unless either the old or new system was particularly bad, I think it will hardly make a difference to the experience of playing the game. Playing D:OS 2 with its original TB combat and playing D:OS 2 with its combat replaced with D&D 5e rules is likely just about identical experience. It certainly won't be like playing the game with RTwP, or even better, playing an entirely different game with RTwP.
Basically, the underlying ruleset doesn't mean nearly as much as some people are making it out to be. The large majority of players probably couldn't even tell the difference. In either situation, they're choosing actions per turn, and those actions they choose per turn either succeed or fail. That's what they experience. You don't directly experience the background rulesets, you experience your actions succeeding or failing.
RTwP vs TB isn't as subtle a change as that, it changes the direct experience of the combat, and it shapes how environments are designed.
Ultimately, it's appearing as though Larian have sold-out and consider themselves a one-trick pony. I thought Larian had more confidence in themselves and also more integrity than what they're showing here. This is a very disappointing move by Larian. And their claims of wanting to be accurate to D&D is just a cop-out, making them even more disappointing.
Larian could have made a D&D game without using the Baldur's Gate series. They could have made a D&D game that includes the city Baldur's Gate, without claiming it's Baldur's Gate 3. They could even have made a D&D game that includes the city Baldur's Gate while including the name Baldur's Gate in the game title without claiming that the game is the third entry in the original Baldur's Gate series. But what Larian have chosen to do is to cash-in on the original Baldur's Gate series' name and the goodwill it has from its fans while being unfaithful to the series and betraying its fans. It's a sell-out move. This game that Larian has shown is not a Baldur's Gate 3, and it appears to instead be a D:OS 2.5 or a D:OS 3.
