I have no issues with the game being linear; open world mostly only makes sense in sandbox-games and MMOs. BG2 was somewhat linear; several chapters were location and story progression locked, but in the open regions you could skip ahead to more dangerous areas though it was counterproductive to do so. Mostly an illusion of freedom. The replayability of DOS2 lies in the origin stories and the choices taken, *not* in the order of which you encounter the enemies. In BG3, the generic characters will be put on somewhat equal footing with the origin stories for even more replayability. Considering most gamers, allegedly 9 out of 10, don't even finish a game though...the issue of linear vs non-linear is a matter only for the most hardcore fans who likes to play the game a certain way.
That's a good point. If its going to be linear maybe they should have the recommended level in the journal, like Witcher 3 (if memory serves)? Then you wouldn't feel like you're hitting your head against a brick wall so much as you run into one impossible battle after another until you find something you can handle.
Have you ever played Gothic 1 and 2? They used a similar system of locking off areas with very difficult enemies, which felt natural and organic and man was it engaging, because you were always so keen to level up so you could take on that dragon snapper or that troll or whatever had peeled you. But at the same time there was a large chunk of the game world that was accessible, so you didn't get the feeling that you were blocked at every turn. And there were quite often ways you could use the environment to your advantage and get a higher level kill and boy was it rewarding when you found that nice sword it was guarding.
I think maybe Larian had been going for that sort of thing but I don't think they handled it as well.
