We hear lots of <less but better quality>...No way. Its just not fun to have to pick from extremely low list of class combination...whats more only 4 slots! I guess thats a lot for you if CRPG= the Witcher. In BG2 you could have a Sorcerer, wizard, cleric, fighter/druid, ranger/thief, bard in the same party. Oh and cherry on top, everyone is a companion.
Dunno but even for the 18 BG2's <shallow> companions , like it or hate it everyone who played seems to clearly remember them ! The movie like cinematic qualities( I am being kind here because there are FAR from movie like incamera direction, screenplay...bordering on silly for many interactions...The Last of Us is how its done right if you really want to be cinematic ). of BG3 is also to its detriment in terms of class flexibility, party composition, and companion banter/dialogue interactions.
So I am in the camp: cut the cinematic fat, add more companions & classes. Because realistically having both is currently impossible apparently.
"Less but better quality" is just cognitive dissonance to convince themselves and their audience that they'll be blown over by the cinematics but if you scratch the surface you have less dialogue options, less companions, less choice fundamentally. This is the outcome of sacrificing oneself on the altar of making BG3 fully cinematic, which is something which clearly appeals to a lot of people. Personally I feel it is style over substance. The cinematics would have been fine for important interactions alone.
