And I am totally cool with that and have said so. The issue is that you seem to think your minority opinion is somehow more sophisticated and better, so what you want needs to happen for the game to be successful.
Let me try to explain this difference. I have put together multiple lists of suggestions. In those lists are some things I am totally against. However, I realize that if it is something repeatedly asked for, it should be included because my thoughts are not the be-all and end-all. I have literally thanked people for expressing opinions that I am diametrically opposed to because their opinion is just as important as mine.
Or let me try another way... Why should Larian try to conform to a "sophisticated" niche instead of wider appeal? And why do you think that if they are successful in appealing to a wider audience that they would score lower in reviews?
Because the reviews aren't made by the bigger audience that is easier to please, instead those are made by game designers, developers or people who actually belong to minorities like those you describe. To me there is nothing wrong in assuming some people is easier to please, but then if you actually please the hardcore minorities of people who are a little more perfectionist, with an eye more detail oriented, you will also please the bigger audiences (in most cases).
I would like to emphasize this, but I don't want it to sound arrogant: people who aren't seeing any problems with BG3's gameplay are being more permissive when it comes to details, to verisimilitude, with perfectionism. And that is not bad, it doesn't mean they are stupid, it just means that they don't care about those little things, they will have fun anyways.
It is not my ideas or my own voice that I am preaching, I am talking about a part of the gaming community that does care for those details and who think that the game needs some gameplay fixes, and to quote some reviews too you will see that I'm definitely not the only one hoping for some gameplay changes:
Collider:
"You won’t find remarkable combat here. In fact, I often found myself trying my best in dialogue to skip combat when possible. It’s tedious and takes a long time, a downgrade from the addictive terrain-based fights in DOSII"
GameSpew:
"All the ingredients are there. But with the graphics to be further improved, more content to be added, the gameplay tweaked and the player character to be given a voice... "
GameSpot:
"I found the tone of much of the writing to be a turn-off - the dialogue itself feels off to the extent that I'm not convinced anyone wants to be there."
"That your primary character remains silent during conversations, while everyone else is fully voiced, only exacerbates the problem, heightening the sensation you're playing as an interchangeable mannequin"
Polygon
"The act of playing Baldur’s Gate 3 is a rough one because of how slowly it moves and how constrained it feels to have to play this rule system “by the book.” It’s like hanging out with the worst rules lawyer on the planet."
IGN
"There’s also nothing I could find to stop me from heading back to camp and resting after every single fight, though, which tilts the scales too far in the opposite direction. If I can fully heal and regain all of my spells whenever I want, Baldur’s Gate 3 loses the feeling of being on a long and dangerous adventure on which you must think carefully about your limited resources, which is a staple of D&D"These were basically the same things you probably heard me and so many other users in this forum complain about, camping breaking immersion, mute main character, combat needing a re balance or some rework. If so many people (even though still a minority) are saying the very same thing... then maybe Larian should try to listen?
