Originally Posted by Etruscan
what I would say is that BG2 did not have cinematics and I found that the writing was enough to convey the companions' personalities
I agree. But I think you need to commit to it properly. The Baldur's Gate games did a much better job of balancing this in my view. In DOS2 I found the visuals were empty and boring and only really distracted from the text/dialogue.

For example, with Pathfinder: Kingmaker I found that the [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuGEUdtIW0I]storybook events[/url were the best part of the storytelling.

BG3 has vastly better storytelling than DOS2 in my view, because it commits to cinematic storytelling properly.

Originally Posted by Niara
... and yes, they absolutely need to get someone on board who can talk to them about cutscene direction and cinematography while there's still room to fix thigns,

I just think it's not a priority. I think the cinematography is adequate. Meantwhile, I think they've done a pretty good job of putting resources into the story/dialogue trees, and I want them to double-down on that immersion. I like that my drow can walk up to a certain goblin camp and the goblins just assume I'm their friend. But there are broken bits -- like where later I got attacked in another part of the same camp for no reason.

So yeah, I think better cinematography would be "nice to have", but there are other things I care about more.