Originally Posted by Blackheifer
Hard disagree.
You can't be serious. No bloody way, mate.

1) Bethesda doesn't listen to player feedback at all and it shows - Larian has shown multiple documented instances of doing just that.
You must be referring to the ingenious BG3 features like Jump / Shove, projectiles and bottles that hit even when they miss, the ability to throw bottles twice as far as the arrow from Longbow can fly, and countless others. All of them having an overwhelming support from the community.

2) Larian and Bethesda have totally different marketing approaches - (Larian spent way less but was much more effective - it's actually a fascinating study of what good marketing looks like.) - Bethesda is going for a full brute-force approach, dominate every platform and control the message - very expensive, doesn't work that well because social media dominance is weak and outdated as a marketing approach.
You are completely (and possibly deliberately) missing the point here. Bethesda had no choice but to apply a borderline brainwashing amount of marketing because their new game introduces a completely new IP. Larian had an exact opposite of that - they piggybacked on a legendary, decades-old IP which they had nothing to do with when it was first introduced.

4) Bethesda is relying on modders to improve the game. Larian modders are adding additional content to the extent they currently can.
"Additional content" - as in, new locations / quests / dialogues? Or more magick items, as if we don't have them enough?
So far, one of the most requested mods (on this forum, at least) is the "No Larian Homebrew" one.

5) Larian has a very consistent and clear philosophy that is informed by a history and love of gaming - with a dude (Swen)that walks around in plate armor, he is a nerd. Todd Howard is like the most milquetoast, vanilla dude, possibly the unholy union of Ron Howard and a glass of Plain Milk (kidding) - but he is very much a Sales Guy Happy Dude.
Can't really say anything about this Todd Howard, but you appear to be having a very peculiar definition of "nerd". Ned Kelly was also wearing a plate armour, but I wouldn't call him a nerd by any stretch. Rather, "psycho" is the term that comes to my mind. Let's agree to disagree, since he can easily be both.

6) Bethesda is VERY corporate with a LOT of hierarchies and are answerable to the market. Larian has a far more horizontal structure and is the company is primarily held by Swen and his Wife, and are not answerable to wall street.
Oh, dear... While you are not wrong about Bethesda, I don't know what makes you to say that Larian has a horizontal structure. The company has somewhere between 300 and 450+ employees, depending on whom you ask. That's twice or thrice too much for an efficient horizontal structure. Ever heard about the Dunbar's number, or "Law of 150"?
Not to mention... when Swen postulated that "Shadowheart shalt hath the box", it resulted in immense cost overruns for company, but nobody around was brave enough to question / challenge his idea.
Horizontal structure, my arse... W. L. Gore & Associates has horizontal (or rather, lattice) structure - and it works great for them. At Larian, however? Looks more like "a tyranny of one" to me.

7) Bethesda never fixes bugs. They leave it to the community to do it. Larian has a great track record of squashing bugs, even years after the game has come out.
Yet you admit in the very same post, a bit above, that:
Originally Posted by Blackheifer
DOS2 had a fundamental problem with the "class system" that was essentially unfixable...[snip]

They tried a few band aids but there was just no fix - as the bone structure of the game was flawed.
While Larian's willingness to fix bugs is laudable, some of them are parts of the game's architecture. This is a failure on design level, and in case of Larian specifically, I suspect it has something to do with #6 in your list.