Can't have them both without having a whole new layer of balancing to be considered, and very likely make combat overly easy if played with pauses. For the dumbed down argument, people keep using that for World of Warcraft too. Little do they realize, it's more complicated now than it was back in Vanilla. Difference is, now we're played it for many years and have gotten good at it, and understand what it is.
No one did then, because its format hadn't existed before.
I believe all critisism needs a counter argument, a suggestion in some sort of form. And then we can debate the suggestion and iterate on it, until perhaps it becomes something fruitful. For example, the combat could be turned into something alike Dragon Age: Inquisition - But even if that'd be worked out and play perfectly in a Divinity game, it'd be far from the type of game we know DOS games to be like - And I'd bet you half the playerbase would have a negative view on changing the format so much.
I personally would really like to see the turn based combat just within a full 3D-based world played in 3rd person, where instead of an AP bar you have an energy bar depleted by movement and action, or something of that kind. It'd be my first iteration of an idea to have "real time" but also turn based. But that spawns the question of party management, etc.
My point is, I could keep iterating and following up on new considerations after another, and ultimately I don't think it could or should be done for a Divinity game. Perhaps a new IP? Sure. In either regard, in most game design you should decide on one approach and stick with it. The moment you start wanting to have everything, it becomes a Jack of all trades, master of none type of situation.
