Firstly, if C is for "computer," then every single RPG that we're talking about is a CRPG, in which case what's the point of adding in that extra letter? It is entirely redundant. Secondly, the language does matter because otherwise we're all just talking in isolation here. We can have conversations with each other, and especially engage in comparisons, only if we have a common understanding of our language being used.
It really doesn’t, not in case of terms - “c” stands for computer, because that’s when the term was used. The historical origin if “c” is relevant to genres creation, and therefore it’s identity. It’s like claiming that “j” in jRPG don’t stand for “Japanese” because they are western jRPG. Terms are just that - a word people come up with to name something that is not named. And that term was coined in 90s. You could argue that no modern games are true cRPGs as they are made in different era, so maybe they are all neo-cRPGs (Like films Noir made in 40-50, and neo-noir starting with Chinatown). That said I don’t think there is enough difference to justify the distinction, unlike noir where abandonment of production code change the nature of films.
And if anything, for me, BG3 is more closer to DA:I and Fallout 4. The whole point of BG3 is to be a very modern game, complete with all the modern crap that today's gamers apparently demand in their game at the expense of the things that were at the heart of old-school RPGs. BG3 is no cRPG.
You presented a thesis, but not an argument. I don’t want to get into an argument what should be called what, as I think it is up to gaming academia to decide, but you are not really presenting anything of substance here beside “no”.
To contrast BG3, there have been conversations where I straight up didn't have an option to say something that I thought would fit my character.
May I ask, what do you think the difference is? Why is it the way it is?
I am asking because I don’t see BG3 doing anything that I would consider as against cRPG design. I agree with you, but I think it is more of the result of BG3 low narrative priority, then design itself. Gameplay wise, what is it about BG3 which makes it less of a cRPG? PC having limited, flat and arbitrary dialogue options doesn’t in my opinion make BG3 less of a cRPG - just not a very good one. Origin doesn’t make BG3 less of a cRPG - it’s just jack of all trades design choice that provides weaker content in place where cRPGs (or RPGs in case of DA :-P) tended to excel at. And stronger content in case of coop (let’s give credit where credit is due).
