But what if NONE of these games is a game I'm happy with? By not being critical, aren't I then sending the message that studios should keep making games I WON'T like? And that means I will NEVER get a D&D game that I like. But I'm supposed to be okay with this because a bunch of other people will get to have the games they want? Seems very unfair to me.
That’s a pretty entitled thing to say. Life isn’t fair. You kind of just have to deal with that. If your tastes are out of sync with the broader market, that’s just a reality you have to live with. If BG3 is a financial success, no amount of criticism that you make will have even the slightest impact on how the industry decides to proceed.
I think Kanisatha was simply saying that it is unfair that he is criticised for making comments that are intended to try to influence how the game develops, simply because other people don't want the same things.
A minority opinion shouldn't be shouted down, simply because it is a minority. As a minority, it is unlikely to lead to direct change in features, but may lead to developers including optional features or game modes etc to try to please as many people as possible.
As for tastes, profitability and the broader market, well, that's not even applicable to this game. This sort of game with relatively complex rules and turn-based execution ( weather RPG or Grand Strategy ) is not the mainstream market, and not where the real money is.
Obviously Larian need the game to sell, but they are making this game because it's the one they want to make, rather than for its profit potential. I applaud them for that attitude, even if they make design choices I don't personally like.
