I don't see the issue in at least addressing the issues on the mega-threads, some seem to be fairly decided already (party size, real time vs. turn-based) , others might be more like 'containment' threads to not clutter the general discussions ( differences with Dnd RAW), as well as threads that are about things which might be more 'undecided' or in development still (party movement, reactions, etc.). What would it cost them to share their current views on these issues ? I mean I get it, they already have our money and they're aiming for a bigger audience than just the EA fools, but why not treat us with some respect or even better, direct the immense amount of time and energy fans are willing to invest into something actually useful. Also not addressing issues also risks setting wrong expectations, as long as some issues are not closed, people will continue to project their hopes and fears on the possibility of their wish to be heard or not. I don't see how from a human, community, marketing, sales, and PR perspective it can be a good thing to nurture a reservoir of potential disappointment and resentment that might out itself in bad reviews and negative animosity at release. Better tell us the bad/good news now - months/years - away from full release, no ? I would assume that this way, any conflict and negativity can be had, ensuring the community that stays engaged in this EA does so fully knowing where Larian wants to take BG3, what they still don't know or don't wish to share with us, and what they can or can not conceive themselves of doing. I mean that would be ideal, obviously I would settle for any half-baked attempt at anything better than this abyss of eternal silence only interrupted by larian's seasonal patchnotes, LARPs, and vague 'soon'.
Last edited by SerraSerra; 28/10/21 08:24 AM.
