Clunky UI is a clunky UI for example. Tactically uninteresting combat...
For me, these are just words. I don't find the UI clunky. Nor do I find the combat uninteresting, tactically or otherwise. That's why I find it hard to take seriously.
For instance, if I happened to be in a restaurant enjoying meal, surrounding by numerous other people also enjoying their meals, and some fella sauntered in and claimed the food was bad, the utensils barely worked and the service couldn't be relied upon... I'd roll my eyes and keep eating.
I appreciate that people have different tastes, but I'd argue that some people's "tastes" mean they're incapable of recognizing a good thing when they see it. What I mean is that if an enormous number of people like pizza prepared one way and you don't, it probably means you shouldn't open up a pizza joint.
Well, it is definitely hard to criticise anything without using words. I have written in the past (using words as well, unfortunately, but also occasionally with aid of videos) with examples (I will stick to UI as that's I think the easiest to argue fairly objectively) how chain system requires more clicks and is less accurate than traditional control system - you make not care and enjoy the game anyway. That's great. For me, after so many years of playing games in the genre, I find such things irritating. I run into this video couple
weeks ago (time stamps 59:01). Even after almost 200h in the game it happens a lot. And it irritates me every single time - same when I have to micromanage hotbar, or abandon a characte concept as it turns out too powerful to be fun due to game's questionable balancing. It might not bother you, it bothers me. My ongoing playthrough is on hiatus, as I need to do some UI management, and I just can't be bothered. That is not a problem I encountered in many other RPGs (outside Larian's other titles). And BG3 isn't particularly complex either.
I don't think I am blind to games strengths. Sure, there are things I dislike that I know people enjoy (that's why I will avoid duscussing stuff like romances). As I said I think it is fine, just outside production value I don't think it is particularly exceptional.
The frustrating thing is that BG3 could be to my liking. I like turn based game, I like narrative games, I like systemic games. I like D&D and BG1&2 were some of my favourite games back in the day. But I suppose if you are into "a thing" and you consume a lot "of a thing", you also become more critical of "a thing".
Larian has been doing a great job in reaching new audiences. It doesn't mean that they are flawless, or beyond criticism. Pointing out potential flaws doesn't stop it from being a game that millions of players bought and enjoyed.
I suppose in some way I might be unfair to BG3. Personally, I stack it against the original BGs, or newer smaller games like Pathfinder, Pillars of Eternity or Disco Elysium, and I will simply always favour a tighter, more artistically consistant design of a smaller title. I should probably compare BG3 to likes of Dragon Ages - and in my mind it mostly overshadows those games. At the same time, should a game be held to a lower standard, just because it is severly overproduced? Does a film become immune to criticism simply because studio poured millions into the production? Maybe, gaming does tend to favour expensive looking AAA. It is just not a criteria I value that much.
Ok, at least we can agree that BG3 is better than most AAA shlock out there. In other aspects, let's agree to disagree.
