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).
I think it's not that I feel BG3 isn't a crpg, I'd say that it is, I just think it's lackluster one, as you've sort of said. My feeling is that if BG3 counts as a crpg with flaws and different priorities, then I don't see what's so radically different about DA:O that moves it into a different category. I'm very hesitant to start stating what is and isn't a crpg because I'm pretty inexperienced I feel. I've never played the original baldur's gate games (I bought the enhanced editions on sale and will probably play them when I'm done with BG3) Neverwinter nights and Icewind dale, with their apparent multiplayer focus put me off very much, I've never played planescape or any of the truly classic crpgs, so I'm aware that I lack a lot of context for this discussion.
