Originally Posted by Sven_

It's a combination of both to me for sure. The Witcher 3 is a wholly different beast to all of those games mentioned in the thread title. It's so heavy on non-interactive cutscenes that at times its more an interactive movie than a game. (...)
Fallout is likewise reknown for its skill system, player choice and how its quests can be tackled in numerous ways.

I suppose it depends what one is remembering BGs for. I remember BGs for being undercover agent in the underdark, exploring trolls-hideout, talking to companions, finding the serial-killer - getting locked in the Spellhold, watching Cutscenes with Irenicus.

I didn’t find Baldur’s Gate very reactive nor offer much freedom or reactivity. Played it many times, with different characters and vast majority of playthroughs are the same. There are small things I find every time, but nothing substantial. While BGs offer you a lot of freedom on how you explore, what you find there is pretty static - ways we can approach quests or dialogue options we get don’t change. Unlike Fallout1&2 where each character has a rather unique path to experience. Troll fortress, Fircraags lair, Spellhold: they play out the same way no matter who you are. And things that do (like not following sabotage quest in draw city) just arent as fun when it done as intended.

I used to think that Bioware “sold out” starting with a KOTOR, but honestly, looking at other RPGs at its time (Planescape, Fallouts1&2) I think BG strength was always presentation, linear story telling and “Hollywood adventure” over depth or reactivity. While we can define class of our Bhaalspawn and if he is good or bad, whatever choices we make are overridden by narrative thrust on us. Geralt gives us even less choice in character creation (and frankly I would rather have w3 drop “RPG” systems like leveling up - it only made combat weaker), but makes up in moment to moment decision making. It focuse on what I think made BGs great - and I am sure that W3 has far more sophisticated and reactive quest design then Baldur’s Gate2.

I just don’t think that deep, reactive, systemic design is really following what BG1&2 was going for - or at least what we got in the end. Biowares initial ambitions might have been different, just as they were with Miss Effects.