For me the "BG feeling" is also being able to build a party that shares alignment, works well together and generally gets along. BG1&2 have a large selection of companions so you can always build a group you like.
I really loved playing a neutral kingdom in Pathfinder Kingmaker. That was my main motivation to play the game. I only would have wished that playing neutral would have given me more special quests & allowed me to recruit beasts and monsters into my kingdom.
Originally Posted by 1varangian
Because of the origin focus, BG3 might only have 8 companions. How many are you even going to like out of them?
Larian could simply give people to possibility to generate additional characters even in single player.
Originally Posted by 1varangian
I liked Gale at first but the Mystra story kind of ruined his credibility and then the overconfidence also became annoying.
He would have been great as being just an arrogant, conceited, self absorbed mage. Just a really genius mage with lots of intelligence who constantly reminds you how much better than you he is.
The Mystra story ruined it. It's too much over the top.
Originally Posted by 1varangian
My most used BG1 party has been Jaheira, Ajantis, Branwen, Dynaheir and Coran. (Who all seem like real adventurers somehow compared to the epic menagerie in BG3. I miss ordinary believable heroes. The BG3 cast just makes my eyes roll. Even the amazing voice acting doesn't help when everyone's story is so ridiculous.)
I either played alone with a ranger or sorcerer or together with Imoen, Jaheira, Khalid, Minsc, Viconia. Mostly just with characters I found interesting, not those that were useful.
