Completely agree! Very consistent
Nowhere do they say they are going to add their own DOS system or create some kind of hybrid system but to keep it "definitive D&D game of it’s generation" adapting the rules for the better video game experience. Breaking fundamental rules of DnD system can hardly be called a "definitive D&D game" can it?
Oh believe it or not, I have my own criticisms and hopes for changes / focusing more on 5E. However to be taken more seriously, it helps to not rely on hyperboles or mis-quotes to back up one's arguments.
"I think change X and Y would play better if it'd do this and that in a particular suggested solution to adhere more closely to 5E ruleset.", would work a lot better in a debate than "They promised 100% accurate adaption because that's what I remember and it is true because I say so, and I will stubbornly stand by it even though history contradicts me, and if you disagree, I will die on this hill with more angriness, sarcasm and disingenuous stances."
They don't need to say what they're going to add that doesn't strictly adhere to RAW, that's besides the point of being genuine as a baseline, however we can point out what we believe works or doesn't.
For example, Larian never said BG3 was going to be the "definitive D&D game of its generation", but in the interview, that was a compliment to Baldur's Gate 1 and 2; Never a statement of what BG3 is or would be. Just a good game. Again, mis-quoting does you no favors. To keep true to myself, that's what they're *trying* to achieve. If we want to help guide development in that direction, we best do it the better way, is what I'm trying to say. No need to make enemies just to win an argument, when we all want the same thing. A game we can enjoy afternoons with.
Edit: To be clear, the point is that your premise for argument comes from misinformation, deflection by other quotes is besides the point, even though even those quotes contradict your earlier 'statement of fact' as well. The argument here isn't what Larian said or didn't say, or what they should've said, but rather voicing a desire for being as faithful to 5E as possible, at least where it makes sense. I'm no fan of needless changes for change's sake either. Shove being a bonus action instead of an action as a classic example. We can keep bringing that up, until maybe we either get some insight on why that's a bonus action now, or have it become an action again. But let's be civil and reasonable about it, rather than fighting over it. It's Larian's hearts we want to inspire, winning an internet argument amongst eachother makes no difference. We can put our pride aside. Larian already removed healing properties from food, and it's fine to want it back. I refer back to
this post.
