Baldur's Gate 1/2 melee classes weren't always fun because they had nothing to do in the previous versions.
The fighter of D&D5 has features and things to do.
But if you remove melee classes their zone of control they're not really usefull anymore.
AOO are a joke because of easy disengage and ennemies can often cross a part of your body so you can't really block any path/door/ladder - whatever, the battle arena aren't designed for such purpose.
Melee in the old games were usefull to control the battlefield. In BG3 they're just running everywhere because the majority of ennemies aren't melee and/or can teleport/jump/ranged attack with potions/...
I agree that fighters were boring in BG1 & 2, but I don't think they were all that useful in controlling the battlefield. Summons and aoe spells were far better at this job. Summons, because they were disposable and BG1 had no limit on how many you could have. Sleep in BG1 would let you win many of the early game fights (and is also why that mage at the Friendly Arm Inn was probably the most successful assassin in the BG saga
). Web was even more powerful in BG1 & 2 then it is in BG3, because anything caught in it would be "held", and "held" characters would be auto-hit.
If you wanted to powergame BG1, there wasn't any reason to take on melee characters. A party of archers with a thief for traps & locks, and a bard for wands & scrolls is all you need.
