I like the map, personally.
I think generally speaking Larian is fairly good at designing diorama-like, miniature maps with super-compressed layouts.
The issue is: I just don't like these in principle. Not in an adventurous, massive RPG allegedly spawning across an entire province or region.
Yeah, that's fair. I'm not sure if it's because I mostly play Nintendo games these days or because I'm suffering from open world fatigue, but if asked to choose between a more compressed map and a large map with a lot of empty space, I'm usually going to favor the more compressed map. I'm not even sure the compression here is that bad, honestly. It wasn't something I actively noticed until I saw it brought up on the forums, and even after that there were only a couple times where I went 'Hmm, I dunno' such as with the tunnel to the grove being like a foot off the beaten path.
The game already HAS "timed quests", and in one of the most insidious forms as well: you just trigger timers by proximity without even noticing them or being told about them.
Once the trigger is activated just doing a rest or changing zone translates in automatically failing a chance to get/complete a sidequest.
I've noticed this too. Like talking to Nettie is a trigger that can completely screw over Gale's Weave-related scenes because Raphael shows up shortly thereafter.
I've rarely encountered a timed quest that wasn't more than generous enough to let players finish it. Even Fallout 1 never felt all that bad to me. And if people truly feel anxiety over time-based quests, a simple solution would be to give them an option to turn it off.
I see some of this as an issue between open world vs hub based.
Open world requires a sense of scale that makes sense (and usually a mount of some sort to keep it from being tedious), and some mechanic of time passing (via day and night cycles). Like TW3.
Hub styles require time to pass as you move between hubs with potential for random encounters on your “travel” between those hubs. Like DAO, BG, etc.
That's true. Right now BG3 seems to want to draw a lot of inspiration from Origins as well as recent open world trends (in addition to their own general design philosophy), with mixed results. I don't know if it's necessarily that bad, however. Not like, say, Inquisition, which really suffered from trying to be both hub and open world and just came across as painfully bland.
We also only have access to one hub in the game so far. Two, maybe, if you consider the Underdark a secondary "hub". Right now we know for sure there are two paths--the Githyanki creche and the overhead pass--haven't been included in EA. Their inclusion would help the first act feel less cramped.
I hope Larian sticks to their guns when it comes to this aspect of their design philosophy; facilitating creative interaction opportunities in a way that is not immediately obvious, that do not penalize the player (beyond the perfectionist mindset), and that are able to surprise even on a second playthrough - increasing replay value.
Hmmm, I dunno. I get replay value is a big talking point in games, especially rpgs, but hinging so much on multiple playthroughs doesn't respect the players' time. The vast majority of people are only going to play through BG3 once, maybe twice. Doubly so if they're older and busy with things like work and other media (like me, I still need to finish the book I'm currently reading and BG3 keep distracting me... oops lol).
