We'll see how their next game fare. If we're still around.
There was a lot of changes since D:OS2; D&D was only one of them. As Swen explained in the
Exputer interview: D:OS2 got a better story, but BG3 had much more C&C and cinematics. Larian's also more popular after each release.
The EA was also a mixed bag - as someone who was in the EA from the get go *pleading* for certain features to be correctly implemented - only to be met with silence foe long periods of time - I was not overly impressed.
I was there since day 1, too, and also made suggestions (for ex. against the chain system) and bug reports that went unseen. But have you seen the sheer amount of posts and all the mega-threads? I don't think an individual plea has much weight, unless it's backed up by enough players and not in contradiction with something else. There's a limit to what they can read and process.
You can't deny that they changed the game in answer to the feedback. At some point, we were even concerned they might change too much; for example, with the first companions being perceived as too evil. Other obvious benefits were the improved stealth system and the rogue class, and Wyll's personality. DD2's is the kind of reception you can get without early feedback, even if your game is overall fine.
More importantly than the feedback, it generated a constant chatter.
I agree they have their quirks, though, like in parts of the romance of the game. I'm only saying there are many factors that contributed to the huge success of that game, not just the dev being Larian or the setting being D&D.