You do realize that Larian hasn't said anything one way or the other about there being other companions, right? At least, not as far as I can find. And considering in their last game (DOS2) the only companions were the Origin characters, it's pretty safe to assume that it's the same here, especially since Larian has said that after Act 1 we're stuck with whatever companions we chose, just like in DOS2. Any other people I come across that happen to have an option to ask them to join my party (a certain tiefling ranger I helped) refuse to do so, not because my party is full but simply because they don't want to.
I agree that some of the reviews and complaints, especially on the steam discussions, can be just plain stupid. But those people are typically just trolls, anyone shouting about the SJW political agenda in BG3 is pretty obviously either a troll, or needs some heavy medication. As for the 5e purists, I think it's less about making it exactly like 5e, and more about not messing with what already works. For instance, one of my biggest gripes so far is the way they messed with the cantrips. Firebolt in 5e does 1d10 damage, which is pretty decent damage for a cantrip you can use all you like without worry of spell slots. But for some weird reason Larian decided to drop that to 1d6 damage and have it apply burn, which would be fine [i][if/i] the burn mechanics in this didn't apply burn right away, then apply it again at the start of the burned characters turn. Plus, it also creates a fire surface which causes more damage when they move from it.
So basically, they made firebolt OP for no reason. It also applies burn to enemies even when the attack misses them. The big problem with all the surfaces in BG3 though is that, while they worked out great in DOS2, the way D&D 5E works doesn't allow for nearly as many surfaces as the game creates. In DOS2 if there were tons of fire surfaces, it was no problem cause you could just use a spell like Rain or whatever to put it out, then you just waited for a small cooldown period and did it again as many times as needed. But in BG3, you can't do that because of spell slots. So when there is a massive area of fire and you don't have enough spell slots to use Create Water or whatever, you're just stuck with tons of fire on the ground.
This game is certainly fun, and even a good game, but it is not a good D&D game. It's a great Divinity game, but that's not what I was lead to believe I would be buying. I was marketed a D&D game, and ended up with another Divinity game. Taking some liberties with the rules is fine and all, but when you mess around with so many of them it's suddenly not D&D 5E anymore, and it's just compounded by the fact that lots of the tweaks they made either made things OP, useless, or just plain frustrating. Such as enemies, they didn't bother using the enemy stat blocks from the Monster Manual, which would be okay if they were at least well balanced. But gnolls get 3 attacks per turn, which is insane and also causes enough damage to down most of my characters in one turn.
As some people have said, BG3 currently feels like it's being run by the a DM who [i][wants/i] us to fail the game. Making 3 or 4 rolls in a row on dialogue is redundant and frustrating, because if you roll a success and are then expected to do it 2 more times it feels malicious. If the RNG decides to abandon you partway through your rolling, you fail. It should be a single roll, you either succeed or you don't, none of this "well I see you succeeded on your first roll...so do it again. In fact, do it two more times." BS. If you were playing a game of D&D and your DM made you roll the same thing 3 times in a row to get one outcome, and if you didn't roll high enough for a single one of them then you failed, a fight would happen because it's pretty obvious the DM is not there to make a fun, enjoyable game for you but instead to just frustrate and annoy you.
TL;DR tweaking the rules a bit is fine, but rewriting most of them (and badly at that) and then trying to sell it as a D&D game is not.
