Just examples out of my head, feel free to see this as Wild Speculation:
You pick Gale ... you go to Baldur's Gate to search for some magical way to cure his Nethereese orb.
You pick Astarion ... you go to Baldur's Gate to search for Cazador.
You pick Shadowheart ... you go to Baldur's Gate to search for Sharites.
You pick Lae'zel ... you go to Baldur's Gate to search for Shadowheart's artefact, bcs Vlaakith wants it back! :)¨
You pick Karlach ... you go to Baldur's Gate to settle her debts, as she said.
You pick Wyll ... no idea
... but maybe you go to Baldur's Gate to somehow resolve his pact with Myzora, or to gain back his Honor ... or maybe, just maybe, we find out in Moonrise Towers that army of the Absolute is allready marching on Baldur's Gate with all that gunpowder they buyed from Zhentarims, and Wyll will go there to protect his city ... or just go there to clean it from True Souls ... w/e
Yes, that's very much how D:OS2 worked. So 3-4 origin sidequest we "commit to" (amount depending if you go custom or origin ourselves) for playthrough. There is nothing to indicate that our companons won't want our help if we won't sleep with them, as you suggested. I am sure Gale will happily keep eating my artefacts, even if we won't end up in bed.
After all, remember that Larian promissed us mercenaries ...
It would not have much reason to have Mercenaries, if you dont have a option to take them with you since "your party is locked".
Yes, it was the same in D:OS2.
In act1 we can switch between companions (though not as conveniently as in BG3). At the transition between act1&2 all companions not in your party were killed (reappearing briefly against you later in the story)
but instead we gain the ability to hire-merceneries. You know, in case of the companions dies or we just want to branch out.
Also i never sid we will "get rid of the parasite" ... i just presume our problems with it will be resolved.
Meaning we will probably no longer have to fear that we could turn any moment.
I mean some Nethereese magic is keeping our parasite from turning us right now ... i believe all we need to do is to change this from "curetnly in stasis" to "permanently in stasis".
Yes, that I think we agree on. The final of act1 will be confirmation of what we more or less know, plus maybe reveal of the Absolute and what the game is REALLY about. It would make sense based on what we have and again, would follow D:OS2 formula, where
we are all revealed as godwoken, and are introduced to gods
. I expect more or less something like that for finalle of BG3. Still, parasite will remain an issue and rejecting/using its powers will remain the central point of the story. We ain't getting done with it yet. It's "seduction" is yet to be developed.
But since so many people allready expressed their concerns about this scenario, i dont believe that Larian would make the same misstake twice.
Q&A was a while back, so it is not impossible that Larian will walk back on the statement they made. The removal of spare companions in D:OS2 was especially puzzing to me, as they didn't seem to really find time to make advantage of the killed companions. Perhaps, they have some unfulfill vision/ideas that they want to explore fully in BG3. It might not be terrible if they end up doing something unique and cool with abandoned companions.
Considering how many parrarels can be drawn between D:OS2 and BG3, I find it silly to argue they won't do what they pretty explicitly "hinted" at. Nothing but to wait and find out, I guess.
