Nah, both of you two are pretty terrible when it comes to understanding basic concepts which makes it kind of a chore to even begin warranting a discussion.
Is that the reason you deliver no arguments?
It's pretty funny that King Tiki says I show little understanding of it yet this is all you need to understand that no system/framework is ever going to be a perfect fit right out of the box when you change its context in which it is built in. This is literally a fact of life and any engineer or architect gets it; you have your standard parts and always a ton of proprietary parts.
You could realize that I never said that and you just built a giant strawman. Obviously you cannot do everything from the tabletop 1:1 in a pc game. But you can do a lot of things and we mostly criticize that Larian changed even those parts that did not need changing.
5e performs well at certain level ranges and with a DM as a guide, it also performs well as a table top game with a certain group of people. It also makes some assumptions before you even begin a campaign or design one or think of one which is that the balance that does exist relies on short rests and long rests. This is called context.
And you fail to show which of these things are not possible to deliver in BG3.
Once you take 5e out of context and apply it to different situations you'll either have to change the situations or change the rule set. These different situations can include anything from intended audience, narrative liberty, and constraints such as time.
All changes I see are deliberate changes for points where Larian is not trusting the 5e ruleset and thinks they will do it better. Which as a systems architect I can understand, but as a consumer I find too lazy to justify. (Should these things be not just "EA faults").
Never once have either of you have thought of this from Larian's perspective, but always an egocentric memememe! mentality - it's fucking retarded to say the least. I mean, I get it, this isn't 5e and we have our god emperor Solasta for that because that's their only goal and context (which I have bought as well).
Whoa whoa, a little personal aren't we? "memememe! mentality"? For giving feedback in a feedback forum? The thing the Devs explicitly asked for? ("Tell us what you dont like and why!") Okay...?
Retarded? Are those the words of someone who has huge problems delivering arguments with actual substance? Yes. Also I have not even bought Solasta, but played the demo for 2hrs maybe. So that "fanboy" argument is weak. But its a fact that they show really good that the 5e rules can be adhered to and make something that is fun in the process. I really hope Solasta gets really popular in their EA, too. Maybe Larian will get over their fear that some aspects of 5e are not "fun enough".
So, bottom line is this: No system is perfectly balanced and this worsens when you take it out of the context in which it was originally designed in. Larian has a different context and, by demonstration, different priorities as well which is a POSSIBLE reason as to why they're taking the liberties that they are (and possibly a reason why WotC doesn't actually care -- it'll probably boost sales one way or another).
Oh a another strawman.
Like I said, go work a day or two as a systems architect or a game designer
Oh look at that. Thats my actual job
+ requirements engineering. Well shite. Better call my boss and tell her I never really worked until now, because some really smart dude on the internet has me all figured out
