My five cents. Both games are very different to the point where comparison of any kind would be disingenuous. I am more sympathetic to the earlier editions of d&d as they provide a lot more room for self expression and creativity, albeit with that said, Larian adds a lot of homebrew which adds new complexity which regular d&d 5th edition never would have.
Between both complexities, I prefer BG3 to pathfinder as pathfinder has a lot of illusion of choice, but mechanically all play the same. You have various named buffs [pick one they don’t stack], and just have 1 of each buff. The result is gameplay that is a inch deep and gets boring quickly. With BG3 your choices are limited in scope, but their narrow interactions makes it easier to make memorable fights. Pathfinder has 5 memorable fights in 90 hrs, rest is trash fights out of Diablo.
When it comes to setting and storyline, pathfinder wins in all regards. They have 10 versions of the story, and it changes enough between each one via dialogue or order of locations, or unique fights / cutscenes. The story line’s cast do a much better job with voice acting then BG3 ever by miles, and are not tropes. BG3 companions are latterly copied from DOS2 to the point I and anyone else can identify it.
The only place I can compare both games is their horrible optimization. Bg3 is in EA so that may still change. But so far WOTR is superior to BG3 in a lot more ways
