I can definitely see where you're coming from. I've logged so many hours on the original Baldur's Gate games over the years and it's a series I always come back to. However, with two decades separating the original games from BG3, there is no doubt much would need to change.
I play D&D 5e, so I think I am handling the changes to the gameplay pretty well compared to those that might not play the table top game. What I saw from the demo was very accurate in regards to the table top experience, but not necessarily the BG2 experience. D&D has changed a lot since then, so it is no wonder BG3 would need to change too.
I debated on whether turn-based was the way to go for this game considering BG1 and BG2 were RTwP, but I think getting as close to D&D 5e as possible is the right call...however...others will disagree and that is perfectly valid.
Seeing D&D monsters, races, classes, spells, and lore will hopefully reignite the feeling you're looking for.
I think people see the graphics and turn-based combat and immediately think BG3 is Divinity Original Sin re-skinned. I think that is over-simplified. BG3, unlike Divinity, is a class-bassed system (as D&D should be). That alone is going to change how the game is played. I think it will offer a lot as far as replayability too.
I agree with you. It feels too much like original sin and less like BG. Calling it BG just doesn't seem right. The change is not needed. but their just doing something that is kin to them, and I get that. If they tried to do something 100% new and straying away from how they build their games I'm sure it wouldn't be good. It's good they are keeping things tight.
