Are people genuinely trying to compare the humor of Baldur's Gate and/or Baldur's Gate 2 to that of Larian's zanier attempt? Holy cow.
They are. The Larian generation is fixated with Minsc/Tiax/Dradeel/JanJansen when they clearly had a well justified, integrated and circumscribed role in the game. Maybe the originals Fallout humor was also off-putting, immersion-breaker and made it a incoherent game. There is little point arguing.
As a side note, I think Larian did a good job on the Globins, which are more in keep with their expertise.
Ironic that you mention Fallout here, because Larian writing is very close to Fallout 2. Fallout 2 world was zany and whimsical, it was literally a parody with dark undertones that's why silly jokes worked there. Same with BG3. That's why these worlds are immersive, while BG 1 and 2 felt extremely cringy with all the out of place stuff you encountered.
Gosh. Fallout's writing and world-building is the complete opposite of Larian's. Whenever there is humor (parody/criticism) in Fallout, there is tragedy/depression/sadness (FO2 and FNV included). Meanwhile, Larian's games are just pure silliness. Again, completely different prevailing tones.
BG3 dark undertones? Like the Aunt May Rag? The car salesman Raphael? The whining jester vampire spawn? The dumb wizard companion that always states the obvious? The party of tadpoles? Or the skeleton puppy that conveniently ressurects all and travels with you through dungeons? I cannot think of a more unimmersive game in CRPG history. Oh wait, DOS2 was worse.
