Interesting, and good points all. From the threads I've seen, yes, there are negative critiques of the playability of evil runs in terms of completeness and content, but still, even with BG3 being a gold standard for character interactivity and depth of story, Larian made an evil run that was so unpleasant that it left people with miserable experiences; not because there wasn't enough content, but because the story was too good. Yes, no argument from the perspective of some there was not enough evil content and noticeable segments of the game were left out during evil runs, but nonetheless, there was enough there to make players sad they did an evil run because of the darkness of the choices they made. There was a conversation on that big conversation posting website with an entire thread calling the decisions 'torturous' among other adjectives, with players finishing the game quickly because they didn't want to give up but wanted out.
My root concern is that Larian will make a game so dark and evil tinted that it will fail to be enjoyable. I mean, even the 'good' endings in BG3 weren't really happy endings, they were bittersweet at best, and to get something resembling a 'happy' ending with even one companion or character had to be carefully planned. I think it's arguable Gale was literally the only companion in BG3 (have not played origin Gale to be fair) who had anything resembling a decent life afterwards that didn't require relatively meticulously planned decision structures.
BG3 was as dark as I'd want to get in playing a game, and I definitely think I'm in the vast majority. I mean, it's Larian's game and they have a vision, who the fsck am I to tell them how to run their game design right? Just some schmoe who shelled out $60 for BG3 and others.
