I am sorry because I'm gonna say exactly that. BG1/2 is objectively worse than BG3 on everything else except for story which are highly subjective.
I'm not sure why you're determined to say things that you and every sensible person knows are incorrect, but here are a few things raised already by the posts in this thread:
(examples)
Metric: Number of Available Companions Objectively lesser: BG3
Metric: Number of Active Party Members Available At One Time: Objectively lesser: BG3
Metric: Visual Depictions of Passage of Time: Objectively inferior: BG3
Metric: Number of Core Class Options: Objectively fewer: BG3
Metric: Number of Subclass options (kits): Objectively fewer: BG3
Metric: Selection of Spells, total: Objectively fewer: BG3
The list could be continued to a very extensive degree, depending on what aspects and elements you wish to compare, and how fine a field you wish to narrow your comparison metric to. You could do the same back at me for metrics by which BG3 exceeds BG1 or 2, but that would be irrelevant to the point which is that, no, BG3 is not objectively better than its predecessors in every way besides subjective elements. That's simple not true. It does not matter how many ways you care to define or point out that BG3 is better than its predecessors, it is unarguably not better in every way beside subjective matters. You know this, I know this - everyone knows this, as a simple matter of course, and it's easy enough to acknowledge it, and still present your own opinion, if you are an honest participant in the conversation.
