The thing about Larian is that they will make the game they want to make. Our feedback is the smallest part of their process. It was the same in DOS2. Yes, they made changes of one or two of the glaring issues people ranted about, but for the most part nothing changed except bugs and refinements based on heat maps.
Swen is stubborn, and he won't change his mind.
He created this project to show a wider audience "Larian's formula" of CRPG. They openly co-opted the BG name to do this.
That means DOS. That means puppy petting and cringe worthy companions and binary dialogue options and tons of barrels everywhere.
BG3 will never become the game D&D or BG fans expected.
That’s what I feel regarding this whole thing related to feedback.
The pledge for the early access was all about “hop on dude! Let’s build this game together”. So far, seems that the most representative feedback gathered and mentioned by Swen in the latest interview was about a guy who missed 8 times in a row. For those skilled with statistics are you aware of the odds of missing 8 times in a row (50% hit rate)?
Transparency is the thing that a customer (and I’m speaking strictly about my impression) values the most.
If the pledge was “invest in our early access yet be aware that our ambition is to develop OUR game. So please give us a leap of faith” I’d still have bought the game nevertheless. The main difference is that currently I feel scammed.
Also, for those saying that Solasta feels a much worse game compared to BG3 as an argument to justify the lack of return of Larian regarding the early access clearly shows that did not understood the purpose of this post. TA shows more customer experience orientation in 1 month of early access than Larian since DOS1 till nowadays.