I really think people forget that no one said "BG3 HAVE to be like BG1 and 2"...
But this is not the point of this topic.
I really have the feelings that lots of people here don"t really know WHY BG1 and BG2 are legendary games (nearly everyone agrees to say that, players, press,...).
It's not just about D&D, it's not just about the story, it's not just about general gameplay... It's an addiction of many things you can't understand playing those games now : if you play Baldur's Gate 1 or 2 for the first (or second) time today (or even for the past 10 years I have to admit it...), it just looks like an old game...
You're right, that wasn't the point of this topic. The point of this topic was to make a completely fallacious and misleading post in order to produce more animosity for the game or to outright troll. I'm honestly not sure why this topic wasn't just locked to begin with since there's no positive discussion that can possibly come from this.
As to this second bolded statement, this seems to be especially the case for you and some of the other members here. After all, you're saying how this IP is so legendary and how this can't possibly be a Baldur's Gate game, but then go on to say it's not due to any aspects of the game. If it's not gameplay, artistic direction, setting or lore, then what left is there?
An IP is defined by its lore first and foremost, the rest may make the media more enjoyable, but it's not what defines the IP, thus there's no point to any of these discussions. If the game were released and the lore/universe bastardizes like Fallout 3 or Fallout 76 did, then that'd be different. Thus far we haven't seen anything like Fallout 3's Super Mutants, FEV, Enclave and so on.
