That has been my impression as well.
I played a bunch of Baldur's Gate 1 and 2, and they were my favorite RPGs (along with Fallout 1 & 2) until D:OS2 came out, which I quickly added to the top contender list. When BG3 was announced, I was overjoyed that Larian was going to make it, since, to me, they have perfected the CRPG by incorporating incredible attention to gameplay mechanics that, to me, in retrospect, and in spite of my love for the BG series, wasn't there in the original.
To my surprise, most people seem to disagree and think that every element in Baldur's Gate was superior. The trouble is that after a few hours of reading through those forums, I have seen no cogent argument as to why that would be the case.
Most of the posts are, at best, pure nostalgic idealization (or outright fantasy, which I guess is fitting), where BG is an axiomatically perfect game from which you cannot deviate. Nothing can be improved. If that's the case, I'm not sure how people can ever be contented, or why they would even consider playing a sequel, which, by definition, will have to be different from the games it follows.
Like you, I hope that Larian remains aware of the overwhelming support from people who loved BG just as much as the most vocal critics did (I doubt it's nearly half the fan base), and who can't wait to play the new game.
