The thing is, what they do - make very polished first halves and then skimp on the back half of the game - it's an effective strategy. Most reviewers will play just the first half of the game, so it helps to drive the hype for it. And yeah, I know they're not like, a big studio, so they have to work with what they got, and for a game or two, this could be forgivable from a smaller studio. But you watch it happen 3 times in a row, and it stops feeling so innocent. It starts feeling like a deliberate strategy, or an outright unwillingness to learn from past mistakes.
Maybe this is uncharitable. I mean look, I love the opening of BG3. (Even if I really, really don't like Larian's storytelling). The gameplay is some of the most fun I've had in a video game in a long time. But I can't help but feel, knowing the full state of the game, that they *really* don't deserve some of the praise they're getting. They deserve to face some consequences for this repeated strategy of "Amazing first half, rushed and crappy second half" that they *keep engaging in*. But they keep getting rewarded for it.
You're absolutely right. I don't feel this is uncharitable at all.
