It still puzzles me when people say this...
Bounded accuracy decreases the need to swing everything you can in one direction. It makes it easier to make off-score combinations without actually making yourself notably less effective in actual play than someone who didn't. I've been there and lived it, many times over.
You don't generally end up feeling like you've gimped yourself for playing off-spec unless it was your goal to make a character deliberately bad at something... 5e is actually really good for reducing that problem that existed in older games. I play character concepts, because that's what I like doing - I rarely care about what's optimal and what isn't, and I've never felt like it's had a negative impact on my capabilities compared to everyone else around me... not once. I once played a variant human who rolled an 18 - so she was able to start with a 20 at level 1. She was effective, sure, but didn't overshadow or outshine anyone else, and didn't feel particularly more optimal than anyone else I've played, at least not by enough to be worth commenting about.
When I play an Elf Fighter with 15 Strength and BG3 rubs Lae'zel's 55% vs. my PC's 50% in my face in every fight, it's just a constant reminder that my main PC is inferior. Maybe it's a BG3 thing.
