I brought up that "heavy metal scene" example already a few days ago. When, in late 90s, more and more metal bands started to introduce keyboards to their lineups (even extreme metal bands did that), there was a similar outcry, because "purity" and "it's is not teh metalz aNyMoRe!!11".
Similar situation here, it's like a deja vu.
I would wholeheartedly agree with the D&D people if something was taken away from them, but it clearly is not. All that BG3 does over BG2 is to make it BETTER an experience, offer more options, offer more player agency and make it a more cinematic experience.
For me this whole discussion is far too reminiscent of "who is TRVE METAL" and "whimps and losers, leave the hall" (to reference Manowar).
Come on, we all know that this will be an amazing game, we will get tons of dice to roll and lots of lore, even good old Volothamp Geddarm is with us here, like back in the good old days.
And with D:OS2 (much more so than D:OS1) being a groundbreaking game, I welcome that all the good things that were learned are put into action here as well.
No 500 square kilometers of necrofire was good choice, of course (blackpits... you know what I'm talking about).
Besides that, I will not stop being vocal about the micromanagement issues Larian games sadly still have to a great extent, and I assess that, at some point, Larian will fix that, too. If not in this game, then in a later one, but I'd prefer BG3 to already have a state of the art inventory / shopping / loot system in place which doesn't act as handbrake on the flow of the game.
And, to mention endgame once again: people were VERY vocal on all channels about the endgame of D:OS2 in the past (and still are). I think that this time it will be different. We can even already extrapolate a bit that it will be because the prologue area of BG3 is already a big improvement over the Merryweather, while still keeping the good things (exploitable, rich starting area environment and stuff) in place. What we could deduct from that is that also endgame will be much improved.
Lets have a little faith and never stop contributing our voices.
You likening criticism as motivated purely by some sense of regressive conservativism is a gross overgeneralization. Nor does MOAR mean BETTA. You use the word PLAYER AGENCY as a mantra for something purely positive when it's clearly not that simple. In fact, player agency can and oftentimes does hurt other aspects of the game. Particularly immersion and balance that many value higher than extra choices that often are redundant.
Maximuus touched on some of this, but allow me to rehash some of these mechanics:
DIP mechanic: A redundant system that promotes objectively poor and repetitive gameplay, is unbalanced and contributes to making an already overly complex game, harder to get into. D&D already has a plethora of balanced and immersive ways to achieve similar effects from cantrips, spells, coating with alchemical fire or poison, etc. But in ALL these cases; are finite resources to be managed and not basically freebie largely benefitting certain melee classes. A dual-wielding fighter with extra attacks, action surge, perhaps hastened benefit infinitely more from this mechanic than a warlock for instance. The player's OCD level/patience is made the biggest balancing factor in dipping, similar to how the now fortunately removed flanking/backstab advantage functioned. The fact this implementation is downright anti-immersive for obvious reasons adds insult to injury. The enemy AI does not exploit this despite it being a universal mundane mechanic, which is another negative. In short; the negatives of this Larianism FAR outweigh the positive. Objectively so. It's TRASH tier game design in my honest opinion.
PICKPOCKET mechanic: A legal exploit mechanic that adds player agency. When you know what to do; pickpocketing is completely risk-free and the quickest way to near infinite loot and money. It completely obliterates the risk vs. reward mechanic of the game besides the economy. It incentivizes anti-roleplaying or roleplaying kleptomaniacs because this again is a near endless resource without balance. It also incentivizes extreme hoarding which is also boring and unimmersive for actual role-players of a roleplaying game, cause looting everything is the only other way to afford buying (some of) the merchants loot. Roleplay a consistently heroic character like the majority tend to prefer, and you lose out.
RESTING mechanic: Rest whenever, wherever adds player agency. And shatters any pretense of balance in a game where the balance is built around strict adherence to said mechanic. Besides causing perhaps the grossest narrative dissonance in any roleplaying game ever; by being under the impression you're in a desperate race against time, but time obviously not mattering to the point of it not existing. The camp supply system that removed the anti-immersive heal food items (that also promoted player agency while ruining class balance and immersion), is a step in the right direction - but it's currently not balanced and largely illusory.
BARRELMANCY mechanic: I think you get the gist of this now. Added player agency seldom come without some hefty negatives in Larian's game design.
I have no doubt BG3 will be truly OUTSTANDING in MANY ways; I believe that is why many ardent critics still linger about. However, Larian has doubled down on many problematic game design choices that made me leave DOS2 uncompleted. A significant majority of players fail to complete their games, and being drowned in options is one issue that contribute towards this end. Excessive loot focus (partially at the cost of player build focus) & inventory micro-management is another biggie. D&D is not really a loot focused game, but BG3 like DOS2 most certainly is.
