If it launches out of EA without some form of native support for a party of 6, it will be really hard not to feel that our EA feedback was basically ignored.
What it would mean is they listened to the feedback from a very small group of individuals and didn't agree with it. These threads can create an echo chamber where folks think their feedback is more popular than it actually is. Out of the million plus folks who got early access what percentage have given the feedback that they want two extra players in their party? (Answer: An incredibly small percentage)
I would hate a party of 6 as it would lengthen every combat even if you only took three companions (as the game would have to be tougher to accommodate a party of 6.) Party of 4 is perfect for me and I sincerely hope they don't change that.
much love fam, but i find it ironic that you say that the threads create an echo chamber where ppl think their own feedback is more popular than it is - and then you go on to state your opinion/feedback thinking its the popular take (but that couldve been the goal, lol).
tbh, unless there is a larian official survey that posits these alternatives (4v6) for ea players response with results that are public facing (ie 67percent are in favor of option x) there is no way to verify any of the metrics that you cite in your post in support for either opinion (although i would be happy to be wrong here if just so we can get an official larian response). in fact, i would argue that the majority of ea users dont create accounts for online forums to give feedback so by extension you are already working with a smaller percentage (and usually also more invested percentage than your 'standard consumer') of the population to even begin with.
i would prefer having 6 open slots and allow the player to fill as they prefer, and while i dont have an easy answer to your balancing concern (which is a whole issue in of itself before you even consider player party size - which can apparently already go up to 6 in multiplayer so is making the game 'tougher' really a constraint in implementation here?), i would say that the process of balancing should be expected at this stage of an ea game so thats why ppl are here giving feedback - and since the updates we have gotten from larian largely dont respond to any of the hot topics cited in these forums, its understandable that a community that was eager to provide feedback for a long awaited IP have begun to become disenchanted with the ea process and feel ignored by devs/the studio - sure, we are still early in ea, but the sooner the better for video game development and its not that difficult to shoot out a quick tweet - how long can larian stay in character creation? they have time to tweet about their new board games
Originally Posted by Alodar
Larian is not ignoring EA feedback. Your feedback is just not universal (nor is mine) In the end Larian will make the game that they want to play and that they think is the most fun for the most people.
also, im glad we circled back in your original post and acknowledge that ppl have differing opinions, which is the basis for why we are all here posting in the forums so larian can reference and identify whats most important for the success of bg3 at this stage in development, but i think your last statement walks a dangerous line for game developers in general - they shouldnt be making a game that 'they/larian' wants to play they should be making a game that the community consensus wants to play, and that part about what is most fun for the most ppl should happen organically bc of the feedback that larian is getting from here and other community feedback portals helping to improve the game.
your echo chamber metaphor can also apply in reverse to larian here where feedback that may be critical of 'larian's fun' in an effort to improve the game may be ignored or poorly rationalized away to the detriment of the community and the final product.
