The majority of people responding on this thread are rabidly defending the lack of respawns. The flood of people who did a fanboy bum rush on my first post is further evidence.
So calling the game a total trash waste of money (expletives deleted) is apparently reasoned discourse, but if you disagree that respawning is absolutely essential, then that is 'rabid'?
There was no fanboy bum rush on your first post. There was a fair bit of reaction to your rather strange notions of what an RPG is, but that had nothing to be with being a fanboy, as it had noting at all to do with the game or Larian.
Im sorry but you cant just arbitrarily declare that a feature many people would find desirable is not needed just because YOU wouldnt find it desirable.
Likewise, you can not declare a feature necessary because you find it desirable.
The fact is that having respawns doesnt cramp anyones playstyle.
So how do I avoid having to kill the same opponents over and over when they respawn along my path back to town?
How do I get any sense of accomplishment clearing an area when 5 minutes later there is no difference from when I started?
How do I become immersed in the gameworld when nothing I do makes a difference?
Limited respawns, such as along the borders of cleared areas, could fit into the gameworld, but the game was designed from the start without respawn. The whole risk-reward dynamic of mindreading, enemy balancing, game pacing, etc, would all be different if Larian had decided to introduce respawning opponents. It can not be tacked on as an after-thought.
If its got a protagonist that you control, a story that you progress through, and a system designed to interact with the environment and scale your own ability to effect said envirnment based on your participation, ITS AN RPG.
Don't forget that if it has an ending or doesn't have respawning opponents then it can not be an RPG.