I certainly agree with Swen in my perspective. It's not either that some expectations are "too high", they are also very varied. Gather a group of 20 active discord users in the #BG3 channel, and they'll all have different opinions on whether it should be turn based, RTWP or some hybrid. They'll have mixed opinions on whether flying should be a level 3 spell, or a level 1. And then the discussion usually proceeds in a fashion as if they're the designers and trying to convince one another which is the best solution, and thus they build up a personal romantization of what is 'the ultimate BG3', even if subconsciously. Because when it lands, and it is not what they had personally settled through their countless discussions, that's against what they've made up their mind about wanting, and so it goes against their expectation.
There are only two things I am certain about with Baldur's Gate 3. It will be an amazing game, but it will also have a minority, but still a handful of reviews and forum threads about how it's not what it's "supposed to be" in the mind of the reader.
What I believe is rather the more underlying message from Swen is that there's no way all expectations can be met, you can't fill a bucket but empty it at the same time. There are binary expectations, where you can't meet both because they are direct opposites. There are considerations to be made between what makes gameplay fun (and work) contrary to the 5e ruleset it's inspired by, not followed as a Bible as some fans expect. There are people out there that expects a 5e interactive D&D campaign with a Baldur's Gate 3 stamp on it. Those are the expectations that should be curbed to some extent, because while 5e is absolutely fantastic as tabletop with friends over a late, long night, there are aspects that simply won't work as well in a video game medium, or will require considerable creative liberations to make it work. But if you do that, again, it'll upset some expectations.
