Originally Posted by Gunderman456
I finished both the first Pillars and Divinity and both rated high and sold close to each other. I enjoyed both style of play tremendously and it kept the monotony from creeping in as both play styles were different.
I also finished Divinity 2 and I've yet to play Pillars 2 but I will when I complete Outer Worlds and Borderlands 3.
It don't matter that Pillars 2 did not sell as well, they just needed to re-purpose that engine since it suited BG3 better. Anyone buying BG3 couldn't give a toss what Pillars did or did not accomplish.
One thing to consider here and let's face it is that the majority of gamers these days are threatened if they have to think too much and may prefer the simpler turn based rather than real time. I mean when you rather pay to win (multi billion dollar business these days) to finish a game than put the effort into it...
Either way, BioWare (even though they have struck out of late) should have handled the story and used Obsidian's engine if they wanted to remain faithful to the game style while being simultaneously lazy.
And, the people who were involved with System Shock 2 "tried" to make System Shock 3. And we all know what happened with that, didn't we?
I'd rather have a company with a proven track record work on "Original Sin 3: Baldur's Gate" than a company that tries to rekindle 90's RTWP gameplay.
BG2, while it was a good game, did NOT have the best combat system in the world. Did each and every person here completely forget about how difficult it was to aim fireballs in BG1 and 2? And Delayed Blast Fireball and Cloudkill? Forget it.
I guess the same people are running around praising Ultima 7 as the best RPG ever when its combat system was one of the worst ever. (Let's all remember Iolo shooting quarrels into the back of the Avatar). Ultima 5 had the best combat system of the series (as long as you didn't abuse the invisibility ring bugs).
The Gold Box games handled AOE spells a lot more like traditional D&D.