This concerns the "Gimme back BG" spreadsheet.
Generally I have the feeling that when reviewing points of the list, the point of view in the "comments" section of the sheet is that cold mechanics are all that make a game, not counting for choices in design and feeling. I don't think this holds up to reality in many points. Also it seems to me that the comment logic is often "can we bring it back to BG2?" where an obvious no colors something red, rather than discussing or refining thoughts.
Specifically,I don't get following points being red on the list:
18) I think this point is phrased in a way where the emphasis is on an item being from DoS, rather than not being true to D&D rules - the golden pantaloons in BG2 have nothing to do with it. The problem is the similarity to DoS more than any change from BG2. So it seems rather yellow to me.
Both games introduced new items. Arguably every point in this list arose as an issue of similarity to DOS2 and the game not having it's own identity than anything else. Is asking to not introduce new items from other lore a thing to do if BG creators introduced they own and not many people had issues with it? Yes, they also had a backdash from D&D fans back then for this as far as i heard ^^ 20 years and people didn't change.
19) This rather seems to adress a bug than a general game mechanic. The change would be: fix bugs. So green?
Red cause while being an issue to address nothing to reference in BG2 here.
22) and 23) concerning UI design choices - why would that automatically color them red? All discussion off?
Not really, I just couldn't think of a single feature from BG2 UI that was arguably better more than just " different".
Reinstalled BG2 and playing again through I figured out spells list didn't become overwhelmed with usable items. That alone was a way clearer way to organize them after me. Switched it to yellow.
From the esthetical point of view though it would be equivalent to " bring it back to bg 2" for the sake of doing it. I really want to stay away from that approach. It would be the most obvious way to pat BG fans on the back but is there more to it? Personally, I didn't see it.
24) Talking about being constructive - the "need to point this out" is simply because it's there, needs change and used to be different. Also: maybe at least yellow?
Changed to yellow. No need to point it out came from the assumption it's linked to EA. Adjusted the comment to reflect it.
25) The devil is in the details. This gives games a distinct feel, many small details in sum become game defining. At least yellow.
Changed the color. Difficult one cause this one impacts only the estethic of the games while not affecting the gameplay that much in pure theory. It's a good example when it comes to illustrating the issue around discussing game features.
28) Why in the Nine Hells is this commented on as being "a separate topic"? Yellow. Is this not the list to define and nail down things big and small that made BG2 great or at least gave it a distinct feel?
In this case, preparing a spell meant you had to take a specific action in game, that passed time and was not always possible to be able to use some spell. Being able to do so without even a symbolic action could be better design, or it makes decision making lackluster. At any rate, this smells of Yellow.
Considering resting is "spammable" in both games right now OR AT LEAST looks to be story wise the fact you can change spells without resting seemed to me like a QoL improvement more than a major mechanic change. Switching to yellow based on your comment. It's true that in BG2 you had very limited cases where you had to hurry (quest based time limit) or very long fights where you couldn't switch spells or rest.
32) Again, why is this not yellow? It reads as if "Well, BG2 was balanced poorly, so let's not even discuss this". Obviously the point was made because something felt better in BG2 than in BG3 now in terms of using or even abusing items. So why not
I wouldn't go in this directions mostly because item power is based on the enemies we face. Which are based on the D&D 5th edition instead of the 2nd. I pointed out here some items were also overpowered as an issue in BG2 more as a side note. Balancing of item power vs enemies seems an obvious step and BG2 doesn't have a clear way of approaching this subject.
I could go on and on, but I guess I should return to my general statement in the beginning:
The devil is in the details. Design and feeling are important, not only cold game mechanics - players interacting with mechanics make the full gaming experience. All abuse and cheese can not be exterminated - but there are such things as artistic cohesion. Cheesing with BARRELS feels more wrong than cheesing with mage spells in BG2. I know those things are very subjective, but then again, I think there is a way of discussing finer points without drifting of to discussions of taste.
I agree there are ways of doing so but if you go through DOS vs BG3 topics or even the earlier pages of this one you will end up with something insane. BG fans who are at least 20 years old and most of the times 30+ are not able to talk to each other. Some ....some of the bg fans are dead by now too ^^''' Maybe the drastic difference in demography causes this problem in discussion. Maybe it's a normal problem on forums . But getting as close to cold mechanics as I could seemed the way to go to even start a discussion about this subject without getting lost in BS.
EDIT: Also point 39 is about the mechanic in post Throne of Bhaal BG2 where pressing ALT would highlight items and containers rather than just giving us a little textbox without showing WHERE something is in BG3
Thx for that one
[VIRION EDIT: MY ANSWERS ARE ABOVE UNDER EACH POINT]
Thank you for your comments so far mate, I appreciate it .