I truly appreciate your very fair-minded words. However, the point I was trying to make is that it should not be surprising to anyone in any way that the numbers were 75:25 in favor of playing good. If anything, I would expect the numbers to be 90:10, and feel the only reason it is 75:25 is because some people who would normally never play evil decided to help out Larian's testing needs by giving the evil side a shot.
Furthermore, it is not at all realistic to expect that in a BG game the "good" side and the "evil" side will be or can be equivalent. The Forgotten Realms is a very decidedly good-aligned setting. The setting itself is good, and evil is restricted to pockets within it. Those pockets of evil, from time to time, try to break out of their pockets and spread out into the good parts of the setting, but eventually get driven back. Decades of FR lore makes it very clear that in the FR the good side ALWAYS wins in the end, and any gains by the evil side are at most LOCAL and temporary. So how is Larian supposed to make a story-driven RPG where somehow the evil side bucks all of that FR lore and the overall nature of the FR setting and ends up winning in the end? To put it more bluntly, if you as the protagonist somehow manage to "win" playing evil, at some point therein all of the many, many very powerful good-aligned NPC characters in the setting should/will rally against you and surely defeat you. Heck, the game should just have Elminster show up at your door and turn you into a smear on the ground.
Sure, but in that case Larian should have told us there is only a good path in BG3 and remove the Lolth Drow and evil aligned companions from the game entirely. And they should not have requested us to come try out the evil path in EA. And finally, they should also refund my 60e. I bought the game expecting to be able to play the role of evil in a
roleplaying game. *shrugs*
