The lead designer of The Elder Scrolls 5: Skyrim has discussed the difference in design philosophy between Bethesda games and Larian’s Baldur’s Gate 3.
I think a very good distinction is the open-worldness of Elder Scrolls. When you have a virtual map spanning hundreds of acres, all of which you can visit, means the content gets thinned out and walking/climbing/riding around turns into a grind. Not every corner of BG3 has some amazing secret stowed away but I can’t think of any place I’ve visited so far that felt like a waste of my time.
I think a very good distinction is the open-worldness of Elder Scrolls. When you have a virtual map spanning hundreds of acres, all of which you can visit, means the content gets thinned out and walking/climbing/riding around turns into a grind. Not every corner of BG3 has some amazing secret stowed away but I can’t think of any place I’ve visited so far that felt like a waste of my time.
I think it’s a symptom of the old trend of making games ‘bigger’. Fallout 4 was four times bigger than Fallout 3 for example.
Bigger isn’t better. I want a world where I don’t feel the need to fast travel because I know I’ll have fun getting to my destination.
Elden Ring had a hybrid approach, oh look a cave, but 80% of the optional areas had interesting enemies, layouts and loot.
Definitely over tuned some extras, but for such a big game it was way better than Shrines or Koroks in Zelda
That’s one of the best parts about out Bv games- nothing feels contrived.