For me the biggest areas would be to have meaningful choices that cover a reasonable range of choices, and then have real consequences following from those choices; meaningful reactivity from the world to my PC; my PC being central to the story; using the DU concept to provide a range of PC choices (while dropping the "origins" concept); a more balanced distribution of alignment personalities for my companion choices; no railroading; meaningful ways to avoid combat where the outcomes are not inferior to the outcomes from combat; the game being playable with a range of party sizes; and, ideally, a move away from DnD mechanics.
I'm gonna be totally honest, I totally don't get the last part. BG3 is probably the first game of this kind where *I'm not* worried that solving things peacefully will result in getting an inferior outcome. In fact, it's the opposite. I try to solve things as peacefully as I can in this run and it always feels rewarding. Have you really checked that part, because it really isn't true. At least it's not my experience and I also don't like to miss stuff.
Again, since I'm not playing the game, I'm going entirely by what poeple playing the game have said, and that is mostly people in this forum. And what I've seen be said is that avoiding combat generally (obviously not every single time) results in sub-optimal outcomes, especially from a "good" alignment POV. And furthermore, it also results in inferior/bad outcomes in later parts of the game, because generating a good path in that later situation necessitated having engaged in combat in some earlier situation. And then on top of all this there's the issue of whether one receives equivalent rewards in terms of XP and loot from avoiding combat versus engaging in it.
But if you have contrary experiences, by all means do present it, as I am always genuinely curious and interested in knowing the truth of what's in or not in the game.
Well, I do have quite the opposite experience on that matter yes, but I also know I won't be able to convince you to change your view. Of course, if you do the math and sum XP value for every enemy in a specific encounter vs XP gained, by closing the encounter peacefully, you'll probably get a bit more XP on combat, but the difference is really marginal and won't make your character progress gimped. I'm playing good character and in 90%+ cases there is an option to persuade or cheat your way out of combat, which definitely doesn't feel interior.
Out of curiosity, how would you imagine getting enemies loot after solving things peacefully? That they could just drop their gear for you to grab it? Or offer a reward for the fact, that you mercifully spared their lives? I mean, not getting their loot is not a bad design, it's the natural outcome of not killing your foes. It would have been the same in any other games, BG3 is not unique in that.
What I personally really like in BG3 is that each option results in an *interesting* outcome, even if doesn't necessarily mean getting more XP or better loot. But the narrative outcome (both immediate or longstanding) is always impacting. This is seriously one of the very few games, where I don't question my choices. I genuinely believe thinking too much about possible rewards for particular approach doesn't make sense in BG3. There is *a ton* of gear to loot in this game, and missing one or more items doesn't change a thing. You won't find legendary items an a random mob or group leader anyway.
