However, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with the whole linking party members system in principle, it just needs some refinement.
Well, congratulations, you just ruined a spotless record for the sake of it and managed to support TWO terrible design decisions in a row. Hope you'll sleep well with this heinous crime on your conscience.
Sorry to break your spotless record of people all forgetting (or not caring) that the control system has to work for multiplayer as well.
I know it’s nice to bask in all those plus +1s, but you did actually ask why why they used this system, compared to all the single player games you mentioned.
A simple example is two players each controlling their main character and one NPC. You ‘d want 2 teams of 2 moving around without having to select them each time. Then you might want to give one player control of both NPCs while the other goes solo for a bit. There’s also potential conflicts if both players try to grab control of the same character at the same time.
I’m not entirely sure what’s going on under the hood, but I think it’s more than just selecting and moving characters, but switching control of them between up to 4 computers.
Originally Posted by Mogan
If the party was ever split up and drag selecting wasn't handy, you could just shift or control click portraits, or directly on the characters. You know, like Baldur's Gate. When the party was together, drag selecting would be faster and you could use that. The basic control scheme in DoS and BG3 IS bad. It's slower and more cumbersome than traditional BG controls in every way.
I’m all for better and faster ways to link/unlink characters and move them. I don’t much like dragging portraits about, as that’s always been a bit finicky. But I do find having them grouped can be useful even in single player. For multiplayer, it’s probably essential to have something like the way they’ve done it.
Suggestions to improve the system are helpful. Just saying it that original BG is better isn’t really, and its more likely to be ignored.