I only noticed how off this enviroment is once I played Pathfinder. Smaller hubs connected through a world map for travelling would have been about the same amount of work (easier for optimisation as well) and would have yielded more real feeling maps. Pathfinder and BG1 demonstrated how you can still add exploration to such world-hub combinations. The result of Larian here was that to me it completely felt like a module in a handbook for a DM to use - each map a chapter with its own little optional encounters to pick up or not before moving to the next chapter - which is ironic since Pathfinder Kingmaker was based on a module and didn't have that feeling at all, but felt much more like a story and a world to explore.
I don't see them changing this. It would require probably major reworks and a change in world building philosophy would also affect every hub afterwards. Once you start changing the map, you need to adjust for encounter, story, quests on that map... even if its just adding a bit more ground. You don't want it to feel added, but integral to the original design.
I don't suspect they'll change this first chapter at all - but let's hope they change the later ones that aren't done yet.
I doubt the other maps are not done. They most likely are not polished at all, bugged and missing key assets, but you*d block all other teams if you don't have the basic map layout. They could not possibly finish the game next year if they are not already working on the maps' story and encounters. Usually this happens in parallel, as games is not made chronologically. Maybe Larian is thinking about changing smaller things in those areas, but map design is something really affecting a lot.
I must admit the impact of this issue isn't that big if story and gameplay immerse you enough and make you forgiving. At least for me its the case. But it is an area Larian could improve opon in future to reach the next level. I just don't see it happen with BG3.
