My point is that we need to question if what the fans like about Larian is BG3 or DOS1/2, not actually the studio, or the people behind it... I could easily see that when the game is released, and droves of BG3 fans don't actually like it, they'll blame AI or even the lack of AI... People are fickle!
I don't think so mate.
Unless there's some kind of huge and obviously AI-looking issue with Divinity (like, the art is really bland and overdetailed, and the dialogue is really space-y and odd), I don't think people will blame AI. Using AI openly like they are does lead to the risk that people will wonder if problems with your game are AI-caused.
However, I suspect the problems with Divinity will probably be distinctly not AI-caused, and based on all previous Larian games I think we can pretty easily guess what the major complaints with Divinity are likely to be:
1) The setting is lame and empty generic grimdark fantasy.
And that's also got an unfortunately flippant tone and has some really clumsy proper-noun stuff that kind of crushes the vibe rather than playing into the vibe (as most of the FR's proper-noun stuff does). There's really nothing to recommend Rivellon as a setting over, I dunno, literally making up a new setting (even a grimdark one). It's bad generic fantasy made worse by multiple other games using it to make bad Belgian jokes.
2) The characters are all total bastards who no-one really likes.
Now some people will like them - some people like the absolute vilest grimdark characters - but this is likely to be a major issue if they follow the DOS2 path particular. DOS2's characters are about 20-30% as likeable as BG3's characters. And note that when BG3 launched, BG3's characters were down towards that end of likeability - but huge pushback from the Early Access audience got them to change direction. As they probably won't do EA this time, and will get a lot of BG players, who expect likeable, even loveable characters, people are quite likely to be utter repulsed here.
3) The game is totally unbalanced and has confusing mechanics.
Mechanics that don't fit the setting or story very well at all, or even create "ludonarrative dissonance", and are themselves pretty complicated and weird. Certainly the case with DOS2, fully expect it to be the case here. Again, some people will love this because they only play for five hours in co-op or whatever and it's really funny to watch fire spread or explode barrels next to shopkeepers or something. But the sort of people who want a BG3-style experience are likely to be... very disappointed.
I expect it to get very positive reviews from a bunch of reviewers afraid to do anything else, and/or who are all very into grimdark and/or who are only playing it on co-op, sell extremely well initially because of BG3, and then drop off really hard due to word of mouth.
On the other hand, if they do go for Early Access, I think they'll be fighting the players, most of whom will be ex-BG3, every step of the way, but we'll likely end up with a game that's a hell of a lot better and more suited to a broader audience (and also less juvenile, frankly).
not actually the studio, or the people behind it
Which people though?
Only 100 of the 400 people at Larian were there for DOS1 or earlier. The rest were hired during or after DOS2's development, mostly during BG3's.
Neither of BG3's lead writers worked for Larian until after DOS2 had been released. So I think you can absolutely like "the people behind it" without liking the awful earlier Larian games. Just not Swen. But I've pointing this out for like, over six years at this point. Maybe a decade. Swen is a weird dude with many weird and frankly bad opinions (and a few good ones, but which he apparently doesn't hold very strongly). Those opinions got moderated in a helpful way when doing BG3 because he had to conform to the FR and D&D, rather than just his worst instincts. With Divinity it's extremely clear he didn't learn ANYTHING from that (see the recent Reddit AMA this thread stems from).
