Time limits are a bad idea. How many really do you remember the role-playing games that actually have them?
I also do not understand the complaint that the game is not consistent in this respect. I guess some people here have never played any role-playing game. There is something like this in practically every game.
No matter if you are stopping a rebellious specter / mad mage / darkspawn invasions / destructive god etc. you can always ignore it for some time and every time the game will wait for you.
This is practically an integral part of all RPGs for as long as I can remember.
The time limit that some people propose, the only thing that would bring to the game is that it would spoil the enjoyment of playing a huge crowd of players. How popular was Pathfinder with its limitations? I don't remember that it somehow stood out for sale.
I don't believe some people propose even more restrictive restrictions.
I don't feel like playing a game that practically forces you into a metagame.
Just because someone has a different opinion (and/or taste) than you, does not mean they necessarily are less experienced in any way.
I mean, it is absolutely fine and all to not agree on time restrictions and prefer them out of the game - absolutely. But to tell the people who advocate for it that they "never played any role-playing game" and then proceed to say that Pathfinder Kingmaker wasn't very popular (I mean, if you read around a bit, you'll see that a lot of people appreciate P:K here)... Degrading your opponents is not gonna do much good for your cause...
I personally do by no means belong to the veteran crowd here, so I am not one to start barking about how many popular / classic RPGs run with time restrictions - but as I've understood, a lot of people here that do advocate for time restrictions - in some form - ARE, in fact, veteran CRPG players and it feels very unnecessary to start a "my opinion is right because I am more experienced than you"-debate.
Besides, time restrictions =/= forcing you to meta game. There are so many different ways to implement it without "forcing" the player to do anything else than just... Play the game? Hard-set timers - like P:K, time-limited events - like PoE2, "hidden" (or rather logical) priority system (aka, you get locked out of certain side-content if you proceed too far in the story quests) - like ... Well, a lot of RPGs. There are probably many more ways to do time restrictions in a kind way just to give the game a sense of time moving forward without stressing the player out, but those are the ones that I came up with just on the spot.
I personally don't really mind either way. I've played games that do all of the above, and some with other unique systems. I do, however, agree on that there should be *SOME* kind of time-line that moves forward, even if it is only through the main quests (like villages being permanently destroyed after certain quests, like in DA:O). As long as Larian dedicates themselves to whatever system they choose and do their best trying to make it as good as possible, I am sure I'll be satisfied. After all, their game is what brought me into the CRPG-community. c:
