@Dexai : Thanks a lot for the link to the interview.
Reading what they said in that interview made my palm want to fly violently into my forehead. But after encountering many stupid things in the EA versions so far, my palm and my forehead have become like an old couple. They don't need to get physical all the time, they can nearly communicate through a mere look.
At first, what disappointed me the most was what they were saying specifically about Bless and spells. But when I think about it, really, it's a difference of vision and philosophy. They want the combat to be "Kaboom" et "omg, lol, that worked" (which leads to memes, and overall a better streamer-watching experience, I guess). I prefer a deep and meaty combat system. At least, now they have communicated more on their vision, and communication isn't what I would put first on the list of things Larian is doing very well in BG3/the EA phase. I'm glad I wasn't planning to be playing this game chiefly for the combat.
But after reflection, what is the most disappointing are the following two things.
a) Their use of player-data.
This is the (dawn of the) era of big data. Everyone and their neighbour is collecting vast amounts of data. But a secret about data, that most statisticians (and scientists in general) are happy to shout around as much as they are allowed to, is that big data doesn't give good insights on its own. Just like good ingredients in a kitchen don't turn themselves into good dishes without a good cook.
The data that they are collecting is obviously biased in so many ways. I don't want to repeat too many things that have already been said, and to devote too much space to massively obvious things, so I'll try the shortest way I can formulate this : the data is influenced by all the current game parameters. Given that the combat system is currently half built and broken as a result (with Bless being possibly a perfect example), it's obvious that any combat data must be manipulated with extreme caution.
So, seeing them have good fun and re-recreate the average Custom Characters is amusing, seeing them monitor how many people side with goblins is one of the very instructing things the data can be used for, seeing them seemingly give importance to a spell's usage rate at this point ... impresses me in the wrong direction.
b) What they say on experiencing the story vs what they say on combat.
I haven't played a Larian game before, but I've heard they indeed care about player choices. Here they state that when in comes to the story, and player decisions, they want to program something nice for all possibilities, even if a small percentage of players use any given one. That's one of the main things I'm excited about in BG3.
So it's kind of disappointing that, when it comes to combat, they apparently rather want to make all spells appealing all the time. I don't how many spells were in DOS, but 5E has over 200 spells. They can't be equally valuable all the time. In fact, many of them are very situational. But most players will have a very satisfying experience overcoming a difficulty (combat or not) by thinking of using that obscure spell they rarely ever use. Maybe they'll click the spell twice in a playthrough, but these two clicks might be strongly remembered.
