No one will ever know how many people won't buy the game because "it does not feel like a BG game" (or a DnD game, or whatever you want).
The premise was that this game was advertised as something else than what was delivered in the end ... if someone as you says "won't buy the game becasuse it does not feel like a BG (or a DnD, or whatever you want) game" ... those people were obviously not fooled by this "evil cheating advertising" ...
And therefore (quite logicaly i would say) cannot be part of amount of people who was.
But I saw a lot of people complaining on other forums I'm active on, especially at the beginning.
Yeah, that might be true ...
But once again, since there is no way to tell how many of them is just same people also active on other forums, just as you do ... its also irellevant. :-/
Unless you actualy found a forum where litteraly ten thousand different people were complaining about it, and even then you would only move by two decimal places closer to 1% while still being DEEEP below. :-/
This debate won't change anything but the title of this thread is still something many people agree with...
That is the thing ... where did you get "many" ?
I mean i totally understand that when your surrounding agree often, person totally can get the expression that presented opinion is accepted by the general public ...
Im just pointing out that this is just ilusion caused by the fact that your test group is:
A) Too small to base any conclusions on it
B) Interested in the topic and therefore not objective
Its just the same ilusion you get if you talk about politics with your friends ...
You asked them all and nobody voted for "Candidate A" (to keep it as unspecific as possible) ... therefore you can easily get to conclusion that he can never win the votes ...
Then later, when the votes are counted ... you find out that "Candidate A" have won with 80% votes.
Why is that?
Bcs your test group was not wide enough to be relevant ... if you are oriented to "Candidate B" (or vice versa) you with high probability will be talking with same oriented people, and therefore some "Candidate A" oriented person will be so rare in your surrounding you can easily get to conclusion that they dont even exist.
This topic is same story.
Most people who come here, come here just to add +1 to complaining ... you can see that by the fact that not even everyone curently active on this forum expressed themselves.
Therefore our group is too dedicated for our "Candidate A" (larian sucks, we want DnD) so we can easily get to conclusion that "Candidate B" (larian rocks, we want it as it is) dont even exists, or is so small to being irellevant.
But that is just bcs we ignore all those millions of people who are not curently here to complain.
You never played BG1 and 2
(smile because you love them)
Im aware, i was there.
Not sure why you are telling me tho. O_o
That is why i never (if you check this topic, you will see) expressed myself about how this game feels compared to them ...
Only to general topics i had opinion to ... and i dont think that there was any condition telling us that those who didnt play previous games cant understand rules of statistics, or telling them to others here. :P
Also completely missing the point (which is BG3 not being a Baldur's Gate game, not BG3 being a bad game).
On the contrary my dear friend ...
Im aware of this point, i just pointing out that this is matter of personal feeling that is distorted (among other aspects) mainly by thing called "selective memory" ... feel free to google it.
No matter how this game would look, work, or sell ... there will allways be someone who will be sure that its not BG or DnD enough ... the only way to prevent this is to create remaster instead of sequel.
This means that you assume that every single person who downloaded the game and did not express any opinion is automatically on board with you.
Not sure what means "being on board with me" ... also kinda doubt that you even know, but that is different topic ...
But yes, i asume that every single person that buyed a product that litteraly say "if you didnt like product you just buyed, please come to this web and complain" ... and dont come to this web and complain ...
EIther dont want to complain since they are satisfied, or isnt bothered enough by things they dislike to complain.
One ancient quote says: Silence means consent.
Bear in mind we're not arguing whether people enjoyed the game, the question here is whether we think it is as faithful a D&D translation as we feel we were promised.
I dared to mark most important part in this statement.
Now my reaction to this statement:
I understand YOUR point ... not sure about the others here to be honest ... but i even agree with you ...
But bear in mnd that im not arguing here whether the game is faithful as a D&D translation ...
Im just pointing out for some people that they actualy do compare their own expectations (just as you said) with final product, and blame developers for not meeting them ...
Wich would be udnerstandable and totally fine as long as people will say things like "i wanted" or "i expected" or "i would like" or w/e simmilar ... but not for people claiming "i was promised" or "it was advertised" bcs he wasnt, and it wasnt.
Nothing more, nothing less.
I could do the same to you: in this whole thread you've been the only person to say that Larian communicated effectively and it's us fools who failed to understand their vision. How much is that? Since it's just you and not a hundred people I will take your estimate and add a couple of zeros: 0,00000001%.
Does it feel right? It's just as legitimate as your own math.
I would say its not "as legitimate" since you are limiting both input (just people who said exactly the same as i did) and source of your check group (this topic only) ...
But if that pleases you, with this obviously purposefull restrictions you would be right.
But as soon as you start searching in other topics you can find other people claiming something quite simmilar to me ... this is one example of them: