Giving gloom stalkers a conditional greater invisibility at level 3, without concentration, always seemed kinda silly and broken to me.
Creatures without dark vision can attack gloom stalkers with disadvantage, in darkness. Yet, the gloom stalker is invisible to creatures with dark vision? Pretty silly, right? Furthermore, how would a programmer even implement the 5e rules for this ability? Seems like a nightmare to program because the PC can have conflicting states, depending on which characters are looking at them.
At least in EA, I don’t think there any creatures with dark sight and a counter to invisibility. Giving gloom stalkers greater invisibility in act 1 would just result in extremely boring combat in places like the under dark.
------------------------------
It would be very difficult to program the game, so that the ability ends up being neither game breaking nor useless.
Even in tabletop, it is difficult for DMs to deal with. Pretty common for DMs to house rule changes to gloom stalker.
I realise this is a couple of months old and we know how it works (or you know, barely exists) in bg3 now. But in 5e you can attack invisible creatures with disadvantage if they are not also hidden (like from a successful stealth check). So all creatures can attack a gloomstalker in darkness at disadvantage, with or without darkvision.
It makes sense to nerf the ability from the tabletop version for bg3 because they've seriously buffed invisibility by making invis creatures completely un-targetable.
I think calling it "conditional greater invis" is a bit over the top since it's VERY conditional, is countered by a light cantrip, or a torch. As soon as you use magical darkness to give yourself the ability your own darkvision stops working and you're blind too. It's insanely rare to have fights in complete natural darkness if anyone there wants light. I've never seen a DM have to house rule against gloomstalker invis. It's so easily countered.
