Even the WotC guy was there for the reason I expected - yeah, there are limitations to tabletop and that's why its fine that changes are made. He was kind enough to ignore the balancing arguments for why it requires a bonus action to turn off wildshape and why no flying speed - its definitely not because 'we don't know what you might encounter in your tt-adventure' - most will see birds even without being adventurers.
this is so true - like, we can debate the changes that larian made to the wild shape mechanic and adapting to a computer versus human dm, but crawford didnt even address that.
larian presented wild shape action economy changes for a pc game with a 'hey, we changed this mechanic bc cool/fun - is that alright/what are your thoughts on these changes?', and crawfords response doesnt address the mechanical fallout of the change at all, and instead responds with the rationale as to why mechanics in the tabletop game restricting a druid's wild shape ability were structured in such a way (ie not to slow down the game for others at the table and not overpowering/unbalancing the game in the favor of the druid class) - it came off hollow and makes it sound like wotc isnt actually that closely involved in bg3's development at all tbh
