Creating a d&d campaign is difficult, and publishing it in a way that communicates what needs to be known is tricky. It's almost the opposite of a novel. In a novel you need to save twists and turns until the end. In a d&d campaign the DM needs to know them all from the start. But you also don't want to overwhelm someone with too much information. But you don't want someone who is following the module closely instead of using it as inspiration to "write" themselves into a corner because they didn't know something would happen in a specific way later.

The main published modules for 5e are all a little different in how they present everything. Some may be better than others for certain DMs and certain groups.

I don't play D&D - in fact I don't play any TTRPG anymore (imagine having friends) - but I've heard a lot of criticism about WOTC's products, yes. A lion's share of it is about how unhelpful the official adventures are for DMs, but I've also heard the writing criticised from time to time.

I've heard good things about Waterdeep: Dragon Heist and the Curse of Strahd remake though.

Well, canonically Edwin gets punked by Elminster and lives out his days as a bar wench. And since they decided from the get-go to set BG3 a hundred years after the originals he'd be long dead, along with any other human NPC from the older games. Which, the fact that they started from the point of "let's set it 100 years later" tells you enough of how much they wanted to deal with the older games. Viconia is not the only thing in BG3 that gives vibes of disdain at worst and disinterest at best for the originals. Flail of Ages is a useless trash weapon randomly sold by a vendor, for fucks sake!

I wonder how many at Larian even played BG1&2. I get such a Wiki-research vibe from a lot of the callbacks.