Just gonna say it. BG3 is based on D&D 5e, which is, hear me out here, also a turn-based game. So it is entirely in keeping with the rules of the source material. If they were making almost any other sort of game, you might have a point. But 'Turns' have been part of D&D from the beginning.
This argument doesn't fly when BG3 is supposed to be a sequel of BG1 and BG2, which were *not* turn-based despite also being based on D&D. Not to mention that a computer game doesn't have the same physical limitations as a pen-and-paper tabletop, which are turn-based by necessity. They shouldn't be treated the same.
I think it's a perfectly good argument. Fizzwick didn't say a D&D game
had to be turn-based, only that it is in keeping with the source material which it is. Sure there are other games, including BG1 & BG2, based on D&D or similar rule-sets that aren't turn-based, but that doesn't mean the choice to make BG3 so isn't valid, or that there is anything wrong with trying to make a game that is more true to the experience of playing PnP D&D in this respect. And much as I love BG1 and BG2, I don't think their combat mechanics are something to aspire to in 2023.
An argument that I don't think flies is that because computer D&D games don't
need to be turn-based given that they don't have the same limitations as PnP, they
shouldn't be turn-based.
