I would absolutely trust Obsidian to handle the NG+ angle that Bethesda was aiming for, because they would have known that the right way to do it is to not let you do every faction's quest line in the same playthrough.

Did you play Starfield? It's definitely got plenty of ideas. It just chickened out of some of them and wrote checks it couldn't cash for others. (Also, I think you meant astronomy, not astrology.)

Definitions will vary from person to person, and plenty of games in each camp will represent some but not all of their defining characteristics, but you'll see some common themes. Historically, I've also preferred western RPGs by a wide margin, so that might color some of my definitions below. Also, both of these branches in RPGs had the same starting reference of D&D, and then a multi-decade game of whisper down the lane led to them diverging more and more.

Western RPGs:

• character creation, choosing from classes that you'll often see represented by other NPCs
• allocating attribute points, both at character creation and as you level up, that govern other things about your character
• generally flatter power progression (you might do hundreds more damage at the end of the game than you do at the beginning, but not hundreds of thousands more damage)
• in attempts to recreate the tabletop experience, will often times allow for outside-the-box solutions to problems besides combat as well as choices that affect the world state

JRPGs:

• usually a finite cast of characters that level up more or less only in one way, but you might have a secondary system for them to customize with equipment beyond weapons and armor
• combat usually doesn't involve positioning on something like a tactical map but rather a line of combatants on each side of the screen
• magic and abilities are more often limited by a magic points resource instead of a rest system
• dialogue with NPCs tends to be more limited in choices, telling a more linear narrative

I'll be honest, trying to differentiate these two with a list of bullet points was harder than I thought it would be to articulate. I'm almost more inclined to just say "I know it when I see it", haha. But for some points of reference, I'd say Baldur's Gate 3, Pillars of Eternity, and The Witcher 3 are western RPGs; Final Fantasy VII, Persona 5, and Pokemon are JRPGs; Sea of Stars is a JRPG that isn't made by a Japanese developer; and while also an action game, Dark Souls is closer to being a western RPG than a JRPG.

It's an RPG made in the west, but I've always heard that it was notable for being a JRPG.

They made enticing incentives for developers and publishers, but what incentive would I have as a customer to buy a game from EGS rather than Steam or GOG or even Humble?

Company Losing Market Share to Competitor With Exclusive Games Bought Studios To Make Their Own Exclusive Games

The thing I keep thinking of is that Musk bought Twitter and destroyed billions of dollars of value with bad decision after bad decision, and this Unity thing is still dumber than all of that.

I think that would make more sense in a Shadowrun campaign.

It starts conversations because it's designed to get people angry. It's the kind of engagement-driving Twitter nonsense that the fediverse doesn't rely on. Try shooting from the heart with your own opinion in a self post rather than just posting the most outrageous thing someone said on the internet today.

I think the ones that bother me more are the ones that are rage bait for a thing that the OP hasn't even experienced themselves. Maybe everyone else enjoys X and you find an article that summarizes your feeling on it, so you post that article and say how you share that position. That's all well and good. But posting an article that's angry about FFXVI's depiction of slavery, even though OP has no first-hand experience with the game to say if the article is full of shit or not; that bugs me. I don't know how many of the topics the OP has first-hand experience with, but I know they have none with FFXVI, and all of these articles are just designed to get people angry about something. Plenty of games have slavery in them without having to make their story about slavery being bad; we know slavery is bad. If OP has a problem with it after playing the game and that article sums up their thoughts, then it's okay to post that article. If OP is sincerely as pissed off about every one of these things that the articles they post are pissed off about, then maybe I should block them, because they'd have to be a miserable person. We also don't need 3 slightly updated posts about Baldur's Gate 3's split-screen not working on the Series S.

Is it possible to block a domain without blocking the OP? I'm sure they're a nice person, but they post the dumbest rage bait articles, and I'm sick of seeing them in my feed.

Is the loot more like a Diablo or Borderlands, where it's a treadmill and you're constantly getting objectively better equipment with higher numbers? Or is it more like a tabletop RPG or the old-school Fallouts where there's often nothing wrong with your starting equipment and you could feasibly play through the entire game with some or most of it? Baldur's Gate 3 has had me building a list of all the RPGs I wanted to play but missed, and your talk about the loot is making me reconsider this one.