The biggest flaw of BG3 imo is the dissonance between gameplay and storytelling, like they are making two different games. Writers want to present Nere as a Darth Vader type sinister and serious villain, and gameplay team wants you to be able to hilariously slap him into lava in an exaggerated arc when dialogue ends. Writers want to go deep with characters like Wyll and really explore what making a pact with a devil means, while gameplay team wants you to be able to respec him into a Bard because Bards have fun abilities. Writers want to craft a serious story about giving in to dark temptations and murder but gameplay team wants inconsequential death and incinerated PC's teleported back to camp for a cheap rez.
I get the feeling they have been fighting the D&D system until the very end of development and never truly embraced it. That would explain the late changes to major features. They don't believe in D&D or understand why it would be such a breath of fresh air with 99% of games still suffering from MMO PTSD and trying to become them even when they are not massively multiplayer.
I also fear I will be completely let down by the gameplay of BG3 and that it will kill all replayability value the game might otherwise have.
Yeah, this nails it. I was trying to put my finger on it, but now recalling the increased seriousness of some of the D:OS2 plot interspersed with the wacky follow-up in the battle scenarios really drives this point home. While the combat in BG3 is definitely less wacky, the recent design decisions they've made certainly have angled it into that direction. "Oh, I'm having issues with this battle after this serious dialogue with the ominous tone and just recently picked up this specific uber bard item, off to Withers I go!"
