Competent, not unique or outstanding. For a 'spiritual successor' to older games, they had to play it safe and they did so just fine. Difference being that it's more grounded than something like Forgotten Realms stuff due to Sawyer's autism (which is a positive for the game imho).
Pillars of Eternity 1 did good only because it was sold as the spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate (so it got a huge credit of trust before the reality hit in). The direct successor to Pillars of Eternity 2 (Deadfire) did so bad that Josh Sawyer decided to not direct Pillars of Eternity 3, if there would ever be an attempt at one. This came from the mouth of the guy whose brainchild Pillars of Eternity was (as a setting and mechanically). Why Deadfire sold poorly? I guess that's because PoE1 did capture the players and they roughly knew what to expect from PoE2.
My problem with PoE1?
They tried to create a fantasy world that was familiar yet different, but the end result was uncanny - there's always something irking me about it. The usage of made-up language that tries to make it seem foreign and therefore more interesting, but due to overuse feels pretentious instead. Or constant exposition dumps, because while attempting to make it a familiar setting it was not, and the writing wasn't great nor was it kept mercifully brief, which didn't help (although it isn't as bad as Tides of Numenera, although it shares the same issues).
What about the system? It sounded good on paper, but in practice it was a poor experience. The character creation didn't feel unique and the actual combat was even worse (the disengagement penalty was a horrible idea in particular, considering how easy it was for enemies to close in), especially early on, when you don't have many companions. The overall result was very dull for me personally. And I think not just for me, considering how PoE2 sold after that (I didn't even bother buying it).