I had a similar experience. I got all the way to the City of Arx and just lost interest. I really didn't feel like exploring a large city as the stage for the end of the game - a fairly subjective reason I admit.
I love Larian as a company and really enjoyed Divine Divinity and to a lesser extent, Divinity 2 (the super finished version I forget what they called it).
I like the game engine they've come up with. But where they lose me with the Original Sin series is where they emphasized and de-emphasized. They spent a huge amount of time developing and refining tactical combat. Creating bajillions of objects most of which are uninteresting and useless. A crafting system that really doesn't need to be there but if it's going to be there, should provide a lot more useful things.
I was hoping the Original Sin series would surpass the world simulation aspects of Ultima 7. A continuous world without "maps" or "zones" would help a a lot… I know this has to do with limitations of console memory but still. Obviously, day/night cycles where time of day impacts NPC behaviors, danger levels, and perhaps other creative things. A real weather system that impacts the game the way day/night cycles might.
I enjoyed the custom characters of D:OS2 but this idea should be extended to the game world itself. The land of Britannia in the ultima series was as much a character as any NPC. Named dungeons, each steeped in lore, with NPCs providing information about their "danger levels" as just one example.
I have enjoyed the original sin games and I'm very happy that Larian is out there making games. It's just that the focus of the original sin games went in a bit of a different direction from Divine Divinity, which i consider their best game so far.
I agree with your criticism of DOS and DOS2.
To me, their games never really felt "authentic" - like, say, Ultima or Gothic. The engines are great and flexible - but they don't seem to put enough effort into the setting or the ambience.
I also agree they tend to go overboard with certain systems - and it's definitely true that the crafting system in DOS is completely superfluous. Much of the loot system is also boring and flawed - and the character system is less interesting than it seems like, at first.
I really dislike the over-emphasis on the elemental/magical effects during combat in DOS1 - where you almost never get to just be really tactical and smart, because that would get you killed through some stupid explosion that you unfortunately missed. It's almost like they encourage you to game the system, rather than be tactical. In DOS2 - it was less pronounced - but still an issue more often than not.
Which is sad, because the heart of the combat system is truly excellent - and I would have enjoyed it much more with a more straightforward approach.
But, what I do admire - and greatly so - are the interaction and simulation aspects of the world.
That said, the primary reason I'm a huge fan of DOS is the coop multiplayer and just how far they went making that work so well - and with such flexibility.
As for the Zelda games, I don't feel like I've played them enough to have a really informed opinion.
I think I understand why people like them - but they don't seem like immersive games to me. They seem more like a collection of toys and mini-games - where they cram as much "fun and cute" stuff into the world as they can, and you're supposed to just have a lot of silly fun.
Which is probably great for a lot of people - but absolutely not the way I enjoy games for the most part.
