Everything is shit until proven otherwise. :D
But seriously, I've listed the things that make me suspicious they are going towards a DA:I gameplay - the dev team enlargement, the focus on production values, the refusal to commit to an answer in interviews.
The biggest indication for me are these quotes:
"...because porting the core rules, which Larian tried to do, doesn't work. Or it works, Vincke clarifies, but it's no fun at all. One of the culprits is missing when you're trying to hit an enemy..."
"You miss a lot in D&D—if the dice are bad, you miss," he says. "That doesn't work well in a videogame."
There are two ways you can interpret this. The optimistic one is that it's not a general statement, and perhaps he meant that dice rolls don't work in the type of video game that
he is making. Maybe his game plays something like this:
In which case I would agree. Dice rolls or hit chances don't work particularly well in
this type of game, namely an action game. You can argue whether this is true, but this is a sensible claim to make.
And the other - pessimistic interpretation would be that he literally means any video game with dice rolls and hit chances doesn't work. Just let that sink in. This makes so little sense to me that I initially waved it off as an impossibility. But apparently there is plenty of people who want to believe that BG3 is in no way an action game. In this case you have to accept that the next installment in BG series is going to be made by people who believe that games like ToEE, Fallout, and indeed both the previous entries of BG are "not fun" and "don't work".
In all honesty, all the fabulously optimistic people here should pray BG3 is some form of action game. Because the alternative is so much worse.
