I'm also baffled at some things. I'll try to (re)formulate it better in the future, but here's one attempt : I can't begin to understand how Larian works. I completely understand that it's EA, so a lot is currently missing, and I have no (huge) issue with placeholder and "this content is not available yet". I nearly applauded when I saw a cinematics saying about just that. What baffles me are :
- Self-contradicting mechanisms, writing, and promotional speech.
- Core things that are not just missing, but where it's not clear that Larian has figured out yet how they'll handle them. It's highly personal and subjective though. If I undertook such a large scale creative project, I'd personally want to have a much clearer roadmap drafted instead of thinking "let's set sail and we'll figure out the problems and solutions as they pop up".
- The fact that they were happy to let us in that early.
Anyway, I'm just baffled by the approach. I don't think there are too many issues where they have created themselves insoluble problems. And even when they have (e.g. waypoints), they can drop some of the choices they did (e.g. Gale explaining what the waypoints are), and not lose too much work.
So much this.
The whole approach to how Larian is developing this game feels extremely chaotic and unplanned to me.
It has been advertised that they are aiming for a faithful DnD 5E implementation, with only minimal changes that won't work because of the port to PC. But instead of actually implementing the rules, they make heaps of changes that throw the whole balance off.
Be it action economy, feats, advantage/disadvantage rules for height difference, the backstabbing thing, wrong rule application in low light conditions, wrong application of passive perception checks, wrong implementation of DCs, or that cantrips are changed unnecessarily, etc.
In addition, as you mentioned, there are numerous little things that massively disturb the immersion, such as (the non-existent) time flow, (missing) day/night cycle and weather, (fast) travel, long and short rests, just to name a few things.
You have the gift of expressing this much more eloquently and elegantly than I do, so thanks for taking the time to address these things in the forum.
But what concerns me most, regarding the future of this game or EA, are various statements of the responsible leading developers and designers, who call BG3 a AAA title, and want it to be as "flashy" as possible, who only want abilities and spells that make proper "bang", because otherwise BG3 will not sell well.
The just mentioned problems concerning the (combat) rules and immersion, do not seem to be so much problems (bugs aside), but 100% so wanted, because otherwise the game becomes too "complex", and then the accessibility suffers.
Am I really so alone in that I enjoy a living, complex world in a game? That I appreciate an inner logic the mechanics and processes in this world extremely?
Looking around the forum, obviously not. But it quickly gives the impression that Larian does not care, so according to the motto: We did it for the lulz
