Edit: Drath Malorn already made the same point. Didn’t mean to pile on.
Having all the encounters and places of interest close to each other makes travelling in the game's world consistently exciting and entertaining, but it can make the world feel very artificial and non-sensical.
I think it's been a major problem with games for the last decade that they just make bigger worlds, but have nothing interesting to fill them with. [...] It feels big, but also empty and lifeless. I much prefer having everything close together than just putting a mile of green landscape between each point of interest.
BG3’s map density is good for pacing, like a DM saying “the party walks for a while and gets to the village.” But this utilitarian approach is what gives off theme park vibes.
The maps are built like networks, with points of interest connected by corridors. The player still has to travel but never gets to wonder what would happen if they wandered off the beaten path. They can only ever choose left or right when the minimap reveals a fork in the road.
There are other things which give the maps an air of artificiality. The obvious difference in scale between corridors and encounter areas; the deliberate placement of bridges, gates and jumps to mark new zones; the disconnect between the camp and the world.
Timelessness is the other half of the theme park problem. Since the map design isn’t going to change, Larian can’t get away with a world where not even the sun moves without the player’s input.
