Yes, sales will probably help them break even and then some but reputation takes long to build and not nearly as long to be ruined. Calling it anything other than BG3 would have prevented most negative feedback.
Originally Posted by kanisatha
Yes all fanbases are to one extent or another cross-cutting. But don't you think it is telling that the only fanbase that is near-universally thrilled with this game is the D:OS fanbase, whereas the BG and D&D fanbases are at a minimum divided and at most only lukewarm in their reactions to this game? I mean if, as Swen and other Larian people have been saying, this game is not a D:OS game and is truly a BG and D&D game, then shouldn't at least some portion of the D:OS fanbase feel like this is NOT their game? I love the PoE games. But I don't care at all for The Outer Worlds. So just because I love some games of a certain developer does not mean I will or should love all their games, right? But I cannot find any D:OS fans who intend to pass on BG3. That says something to me. It says a whole heck of a lot, actually, that the D:OS fanbase itself fully expects BG3 to be a D:OS game but just with D&D rules and set in the Realms.
The game looks and plays quite a bit like DOS, so that game's fans would NATURALLY be more satisfied. Relative to that, others would OBVIOUSLY be less excited as they have no/less hands-on experience with that type of gameplay or with Larian in general. Simply stating something that obvious is superfluous, let alone making an innuendo out of it. That says something to me. It says a whole heck of a lot, actually, that you have in your possession a tinfoil-hat +5! I'm absolutely convinced that a the large majority of the negative feedback is almost exclusively over the turn-based combat issue. I never saw any thread where that matter wasn't the crux of the grievance, with accusations of the title being a shameless money grab, and "looks too little like muh BG" (while failing to explain why that is) or alternatively "looks too much like bleh DOS" seemingly tacked on to add weight to their entitlement.
On what grounds rooted in D&D would pure-D&D fans have to dislike BG3? Nothing obvious, and certainly not the turn-based combat that is a must for 5e. On what grounds rooted in BG would pure BG-fans have to dislike BG3? Turn-based combat? As for the money grab issue, Larian has stated that there will be significant tie-ins to the original, but there is indubitably aspects of that for sure. This is a business after all. But is it a money grab of the proportions of Fallout 3, 3NV, 4, let alone 76, though? Is BG3 any less of a BG game than Bethesda's/Obsidian's newer Fallout games are Fallout games? The latter are hugely more dissimilar to their origin than BG3 is to it's origin after all.
