Well...it certainly appeals to me a great deal....and I'm an old RPG nerd with decades of gamer history. My first CRPGs were the likes of Dungeon Master, Wizardry 7 and Realms of Arkania. I was there when Fallout came out and when BG1 was the big thing. I played BG2 to exhaustion. And I've been a tabletop GM for longer than that. So, very much both a classic RPG fan and fan of the originals.
Please tell me why BG3 wouldn't appeal to me?
Turn-based combat? Not my first choice but that's just game mechanics. If it works, I'll deal with it. I certainly do have concerns about it (See my thread about incentivizing ambushes too much) but I'm reasonably certain I'll be able to make it work for me. If you're an old CRPG gamer, you absolutely should be able to adapt to it!
Being unfaithful to a specific ruleset? Man, I''ve played so many rulesets, believe me: rulesets are completely irrelevant for roleplaying. It would take effort, but BG3 could be translated into a different ruleset with all of the world's lore, its characters and stories intact. So rulesets might be more important in a CRPG than in tabletop, since you can't deviate from them if necessary, but they're still secondary. What counts is the world and its lore, the characters, and the stories. And in that regard, I am quite excited about BG3.
Banging the bear? I won't do it and it's likely to be five seconds in a game of 200 hours. So what? Why the heck should I care that the game has a few seconds of content that does not interest me?
Romance in general? I'm generally critical of people who place too much importance on this element, but I do like it's there and I occasionally engage with it to great satisfaction. Most romance scenes in games make me laugh but I don't have any objection. And by what we've seem of BG3 this might actually be quite good.
So is the game for people like me? Yes, it absolutely is. And if it is not *only* for people like me: that's very, very good!
