I think that is a gross overstatement, the bulk of the game is 5e, with changes. Saying that this is just DOS with a glaze of D&D is clearly false, but these claims happens with every computer game interpretation of D&D. People were upset with changes in BG1, NWN1 and 2, DDO, etc. These complaints have become the unavoidable background noise of game development for this genre.
I can totally believe this. For me, I just want some closure on the topic. Either way I want to know the kind of game to expect.
You should expect a turn based game based on the current edition of D&D, the way movies are "based on true events", which means liberties will be taken with the rules as the developers see fit. The final judgement of BG3 should be whether you had fun playing the game, not how closely the game hews to the canonical 5e rules.
The people complaining about the game not following the 5e rules exactly are just looking for reasons to reject the game so they can part of the cool kids clique, they want to drive a pin into one single point of the D&Ds 40+ year history and claim that single point as the only true version while ignoring the fact that the game has changed constantly with every iteration as a published book or computer game.
Not true at all, Baldur's Gate series is one of my favourite series of all time, and I'm a massive D&D nerd who plays pnp roleplaying (not always D&D) twice a week lol. I've been hyped for BG3 since it was announced and really interested to see the way they would go.
I'm not looking for reasons to dislike it, I'm looking for reasons to like it, and there are some, but right now after playing the EA (and buying it for a friend! - I want the game to succeed or i'd not have dropped £100 on it on release), I'm concerned. It's plot structure feels a bit too forced and rushed at the start so doesn't feel particularly grounded. The crazy events of the tutorial would be better as the events of a first act after a prologue where you have more mundane events then get abducted.
The companions are not especially likeable, which is sad as normally I'll love at least once companion in RPGs.
The gameplay feels quite wonky right now, with a lot of stuff feeling unbalanced, and my concern is, most of the things that feel unbalanced are the things Larian changed from 5e. I totally get that some stuff will HAVE to change because of engine limitations. However, where BG1/2 had to change a lot because of the RTwP direction, right now BG3 is turn based so has fewer reasons to need to change things. D&D 5e does a pretty good job of it's balance overall, so IMO getting the CRPG working within the remit of that edition (because it's the current edition) first, getting that out to EA with a few tweaks (having surfaces is cool, but not as they're currently implemented, for example) which they can build on once they're comfortable they have that stuff right would have been a much better approach.
I want a proper D&D 5e experience mechanically, because Larian did an awesome job including GM functionality in Original Sin 2, so the potential for running D&D 5e via BG3 is also very appealing, but it'll get a lot less buy in as an option if they diverge too far from the established ruleset.
I really hope the storyline is tightened, perhaps a few more likeable companions are added and generally the game ends up as a huge success, I really want to play it and not get irked by mechanics that feel really unbalanced, especially when I know how those exact mechanics /could/ have been done.
so in summary: No, I'm not saying i want the game to follow D&D 5e rules because I'm looking for excuses to hate it, I really want to love it, it has potential, I hope the issues are ironed out and the balance issues caused by their changes can be ironed out too, if the end result feels significantly better balanced than it is right now, tweaks are fine.
