A different name would not have helped anyone but those wanting BFG3 to be a vision of what they expect a Baldur's Game to look like after 0 years of building it in their own minds.
I disagree with this. Simply because Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance exists. We all know it is a spin-off with different gameplay and storyline than that of the main BG series. This would have helped greatly with giving Larian their entry have more identity and respected the main series - having Baldur's Gate 3 as a direct sequel doesn't seem necessary at this point. It should not have been a numerical sequel because it resembles very little of the original games already.
Just look at the reaction all across the web, BG3 as a title has people talking!
I disagree with this also. Anything Larian would have pumped out would have had people talking regardless - they've now made a name for themselves these days. Many people know this game it's own thing - so did it really need the BG3 moniker? It has deviated away both in gameplay and narrative (the dialogue choice being Larian's evident writing). The only reason people may talk about this more is due to controversy. People would have talked just as much if it was a differently named D&D turn based video game.
