So much this. I think owlcat or obsidian has proven that they are more capable at least in terms of getting the the look and feel, the settings the experience and the atmosphere of a fantasy RPG right. while larian made very impressive games like DOS and DOS2 which are fun and light-hearted, they completely failed in the artistic department. they failed to capture the how the return of baldur's gate supposed to be like. the wait of 20 years of a new baldur's gate turned out to be a DOS2 clone. it's really such a shame. this probably just my opinion.. the whole reason how larian able to get to work on bg3 is quite obvious WoTC is looking for a developer that can do multiplayer co-op, turn-based engine and DOS2 just hit right at home.
I suppose I'm surprised people are still saying that. When New Vegas was a thing, it was claimed it would be even better if it was isometric turn-based like FO1 and 2, but that Obsidian were "forced" to use FO3's engine. Fast forward to last year and The Outer Worlds where they decided to use a first-person real-time game that played remarkably like TES and FO3/4/NV. I guess times move on.
From Larian's catalogue I still prefer Divinity II which was essentially the same engine that Oblivion used, and would prefer them to go back to it. But I figured I could live with the isometric turn-based approach to the Original Sins even though that style of gameplay isn't my cup of tea. Doing stuff that doesn't appeal to me sometimes turns out to be an acquired taste; and even if it's a taste I don't acquire there's often plenty of stuff I enjoyed that I could've missed out on.
