I understand and, grudgingly, accept their explanation. The day/night cycle (which I do think is very important to have when simulating a *real* D&D game) would be disruptive to their current method of story-telling (which is, judging by DOS2, likely to be a really well done, and fairly linear progression of connecting a variety of story way-points.)
That means that they will, likely, simulate some night events to create some variation. But, lets make no mistake, it will be the poor-man's faux night.
I see no reason that they won't be able to pull off an amazing story/game without a persistent day/night cycle... but in as much as it conflicts with their current method of story-telling I hope they realize that it is a self-inflicted wound. With luck, the foundation laid in BG3 will allow them to expand BG4 to include proper day/night cycles (even if it's only through portions of the unfolding adventures.)
Its the writers getting in the way of their own story. So many games fall into this trap of creating "the most epic story" that they dont let the players adventure for themselves. Its not a book (which is ironic because in a book the immersion would shatter completly if the writer ignored the 24-hour cycle) but an interractive medium. Things like needing to rest, stocking up on supplies, being more wary during night times... shit like that might seem mundane and tedious but if handled correctly only adds to the experience of playing an RPG.
