I don't play TT 5e, but page 242 of the DMG addresses the issue of saves and ability checks, discussing not only critical success/failure (extreme outcomes), but also partial success/failure, and marginal success/failure. The notion is to encourage DMs to consider a continuum of outcomes and complications. rather than always apply simple pass/fail absolutism, which is not always a satisfying experience for players.
Would you consider Larian implementing auto-fail and auto-succeed for ability checks and saving throws to be "considering a continuum of outcomes and complications. rather than always apply simple pass/fail absolutism" ... Because I would not.
Pass/Fail absolutism seems to be entirely what they build all of their decision trees and dialogues around, currently, despite their claims to the opposite. Categorically, you're faced with a situation, and you can "do nothing" or "Not try" and see, guaranteed what the fail state outcome is... or you can "try to do something", and either succeed... or fail, and see the same failure outcome as if you hadn't tried. That's it. That's the entirety of their outcome mapping. They are not making-failure-fun, currently.
So whatever Larian have decided to implement for ability checks and saves, it is not a "bug", but a development choice. You can still tell them you don't like it ( with or without coherent reasoning ),
That's what I said, yes. They have confirmed as much directly.
