Personally I'm not a fan of the decision to bring him over. Minsc is Minsc because he's the Bhaalspawn's companion. Without that he's just.. not as fun. It's like when they tried to make Jack Sparrow the protagonist instead of the supporting lead.

From game details: "Role-playing - Real-time - Fantasy".

Real-time? I hope Larian does realise this is not Divinity. Well, who knows, maybe it will be. I'm trying to be cautiously neutral, but when I see there are (what feels like) 36 multi-player modes in the works, I'm having a hard time. ^^

I hope you're right. I would just hate to get my hopes up now only to find out later that Beamdog actually is involved. That would be an instant deal-breaker for me

Well general Talking / Speaking. The Problem often is less the Fact something changes or an new Gameplay / Perspective approach. Because if that would be an sisue per se, i would like to know how Nintendo could do so well with Game-Series like Super Mario or The Legend of Zelda... i'd say the issue is often more the way how said Game are developed / made.

My personal Issue with either Fallout 3 and New Vegas was never, that they made out an Ego-Shooter of such great Classics, but moreover that the Ego-Shooter Part itself felt so wonky, clunky and bad, that this Change simply didn't make sense to me. If it's all about RPG-Elements and V.A.T.S than the could've sticked to the classic isometric. That's why, as surprising as it might sound for some people, i prefer Fallout 4 over NV / 3 due it was the first proper approach towards Gunplay / Ego-Shooter Part. Still far from perfect, due they reduced the RPG-Part, but with Fallout 5 if they keep the Gunplay / Ego-Shooter Part, but add more depth in terms of RPG Mechanics and such, it could possible the best Fallout even compared to the classic ones.

Than again if we look at Baldurs Gate, there is a nother Aspect which should be considered as well. Nintendo still deliever "classic" 2D Mario and Zelda Games besides their modern 3D iteration. In BG Case people aren't only thirsty for a new Game in this Lore, Universe and Story, but also thirsty for classic cRPG as well, so if it's too modernized / different it can be less appealing. However i want to point out, and even if some folks here might dislike it - if you look at Divinity Original Sin Series in all fairness and somewhat neutral, i would argue that Larian knows what they do, and if a company is capable to modernize classic Gameplay and translate it to our age, than it would be them. DOS TB doesn't feel archiaic and aged, but rather modern with a classic core and how some classic cRPG Fans wished that this genre would evolve and also opens up such Great Games up to new Players and Youngsters who can't get into the classic cRPG's that much. They did a great job to please both sides.

So that's why i would argue that Larian will try to stick true with BG3 to some extent, but also modernize in some aspects it. And if done well i'm sure that even most (classic) BG Fans will be happy, except some of the diehard Fans who want an simple copycat of BG2 with better graphics and new Story.

How it came about.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LI4v6hC_rjM

I wouldn't get my hopes up if I were anyone of you people. Larian is better than Beamdog in every single way but make no mistake, Larians writting is godawful and their worldbuilding is shaite, it can best be described as trying too hard to be funny or ''hip'' with no shortages of ''LOLSORANDUMB XD'' tier dialogue.

And as far as I know their worldbuilding is nonexistant at worst an unmemorable at best because I can't remember a damn thing of interest in D:OS2 and I played it a few days ago.

I'm not expecting this game to revolutionize the cRPG genre nor do I expect this game to be god awful. Who knows, it might even be great but I sincerely doubt it

I mean, I love Baldur's Gate to bits, but even the first game had no shortage of wacky dialogue. Actually, the wacky dialogue in the first Baldur's Gate is one of my favourite parts OF the game.

Really? What do you think of these?:

"Eh... it would appear that... the great and... mighty Tiax... has shrunk his undergarments... three sizes this day."

"I ate his liver with a nice Chianti and some Fava beans."

"Elminster this, Elminster that. Give ME 2000 years and a pointy hat and I'll kick his arse!"

"Brave-brave Sir Garrick, Sir Garrick led the way. Brave-brave Sir Garrick, Sir Garrick ran away"

"If a tree falls in a forest... I'll kill the bastard what done it!"

"Hi, come well and welcome! You have stumbled upon The Great Gazib Show, starring yours truly, the Great Gazib!!! Allow me to introduce the Amazing Oopah, the world's only exploding ogre!"

"WHAT?! You were going to ask about my name, weren't you? Everyone wants to know about it, and you're probably no different! Well fine! Maple Willow Aspen IS my name and YES my parents were VERY fond of TREES! I am VERY aware of it, and NO don't want to hear ANY jokes about family trees and me being the SAP! Are you HAPPY NOW?!"

[As much as I love the games, seeing the quotes out of them is a bit painful]

I have strong reservations about Larian making the next BG game. I played both DOS games and found them both OK, no more.

Specifically, I found many things about the games to be immersion breaking or not well implemented:
1. Too many puzzles that made me at times feel like I was playing a platformer (step on this slab of stone, open that door, use the teleporter stones to get behind the fence, rinse repeat... I hope I hope I hope the teleporter stones are not integrated into BG3).
2. The somehow widely praised elemental factors in battles -- oil, acid barrels at every corner, water puddles all around.
3. Bland stories, epic but not personal. One reason the BG (and of course the same is true of PS:T) games were captivating was the personal touch to it. I loved it that even if you played a LG character, the other NPCs doubted you (given who your father is), it was your heritage around which the epic story was built, and your choices of good vs. evil really seemed to matter. Even if some ethical choices were presented to you in the DOS games, I don't remember what I have chosen and whether it mattered at all.
4. Big maps. I don't like loading screens either and I understand the practicality of remaining on the same map for multiple quests. But in the DOS games I always got the impression that if my party walks on foot out of the town for a few seconds, I will encounter various monsters and bandits and what not, who just wait there in close proximity. The separate maps and the corresponding loading screens in BG gives you the feeling that, OK, now I travelled far from the city and into monster infested lands/forests etc.

I played BG 2 probably 5 or 6 times. The DOS games only once (and don't intend to play again).

Point taken. I got nothing to say to this aside from that I've seen worse.

So, I've been reading up on current affairs of the Forgotten Realms setting (The Second Sundering, etc.), and there is one big thing I did not know from the non-cRPG related, but p&p canon history that is very relevant to BG3: The current year is 1491 DR (or thereabouts) and Abdel Adrian lived to be 136 years old, up until 1482 DR, when [spoiler alert :P ] Bhaal returned.

They could definitely decide to make a whole new and separated story, but the ties to Bhaal and his Spawn are MUCH closer in time than one might think from just hearing "100 years have passed".

Technically speaking Black Isle's planned third entry, The Black Hound, was even going to focus on the protagonist's child (thus leaving it open-ended as to whether or not you picked godhood or not at the end of Throne of Bhaal). There's really no reason why that can't be the plotline here with you being Bhaal's grandkid. Heck, technically that would even open up the tiefling race (if we go by original 2E/3.5 lore and not the retcon that tieflings suffered under 4E) to players, being a quarter-blood monstrosity.