Thank you to all my fellow regular posters for engaging with this— I’ve been very interested in hearing the diversity of your opinions.
On the matter of ambition: when the initial BG3 controversy broke out, I was one of the people saying that ambition ought to be encouraged, and that bigger dreams make for better games. I still believe this. What I am noting is that the ambition is spent “horizontally” i.e. across many different visions and ways to accomplish the game, rather than “vertically” I.e. providing depth and consequence to a smaller number of features or ways of playing. Ambition, in my opinion, is always good, but there are different ways to apply it that come with their own unique trade-offs.
I think there is strain between the part of the game that can be played like a multiplayer immersive sim, and the part of the game that can be played like a semi-linear party-based single player RPG. There are so many ways the quests and stories can be “resolved” that I feel the game hesitates to give you emotional investment at certain points. This game has to be everything to everyone.
My favorite way to play this game has been as a single player RPG focused on my companions and their interactions with my PC, each other, and the world. That’s the kind of game I like, but it seems that’s only a narrow sliver of what this game is. Now, I imagine there are people who prefer the immersive sim, multiplayer party type experience. Instead of committing to one vision, Larian spread its resources across many.
