Your critisism has some merits, I also have problems with being immediately in the middle of everything or the saviour of the world. For example I never could accept being the person in PoE2 (I did not play PoE1) and following a weird god while exploring a Caribbean holiday area. Or being the Dragonborn in Skyrim or a searching farther in Fallout 4.
You should play PoE1 then. Not only is it a great game but it starts off from a very grounded place and the stakes never get to world-threatening level. Plus if you play it it becomes way easier to see why come 2 you're the one who gets tasked with chasing Eothas.
In general with regard to the story of the game I agree with Turnip though. The game goes to hard too soon. It would have been better to start with a slower burn, more mystery. Instead it throws so much at us right away that it makes it hard to fully buy into the low key stuff happening in the beginning of act 1. I think the problem with showing the big stuff at the start is that our PC is the one experiencing it. I think it could have worked if we were seeing purely from another character's perspective. It's like Star Wars, the first one. We open with a pretty frenetic and action-packed openning that presents how big the ultimate conflict of the universe is, but then we move to the perspective of a simple farmboy who doesn't really know about all that. We the audience know what's out there, but our viewpoint character doesn't, which helps to keep them grounded and allows us to feel the impact of their escalation while also letting us the audience feel excited for when they experience the larger world we know is waiting for them. It creates a dramatic tension. BG3 doesn't build that tension because our character has already experienced it, and we don't even get to express our feelings about it all that much. We get to talk about the tadpole somewhat, but our character went to Hell, that should ellicit some reaction.
