BG 1 and 2 were made in a different era, when the market was much smaller, much less saturated and the expectations of the player were different. At the time when BG 1 and 2 were released, most people playing PC games were us nerds. You could reasonably expect the people who are playing the game, to have some understanding of the ruleset. This is different to today, where I would argue that the average person playing PC games is not us nerds, it is far more of a mainstream hobby. There is another aspect of this as well, D&D itself has changed. Back when D&D was originally conceived, its roots were in war gaming. At the time of 2e, this was still present to some extent, with some of the rules like for example the different armor types being good against different damage types being present because of this. As a result of this, the audience for D&D itself was a more tactics driven audience. This has, for the most part changed. D&D now is marketed far more as a theater of the mind, with flashy effects taking center stage, with the main marketing of the brand being things like critical role. You can bet that the audience which enjoyed D&D in the 90s, is not the same audience as D&D today.
"D&D itself has changed" and become "far more of a mainstream hobby." Doesn't this imply that Larian, if they want to make a mainstream game, should follow D&D 5e rules? They should keep 5e purity because the rules of 5e have allowed it to become popular?
If D&D is more mainstream, then those who are arguing for BG3 to follow 5e rules are not "niche."
