While I disagree with your opinion on timed quests (and really, I only actually lightly disagree. I had no problem with them in Pathfinder: Kingmaker, I just thought that only one such quest really used the idea to its fullest) I generally agree with all your other points. What I was saying is that LARIAN themselves disagree with you. Their attitude and approach, based on observable evidence, seems to be far removed from what you want to the point where I don't think some of the things you want would have ever even been serious considerations from Larian.

Speaking about timed quests specifically, like I said I think that at a table, no one would consider taking a random long rest because, ironically, the table setting enforces a greater sense of realism and groundedness in the setting than the game does. As to the idea in general? Implementing it in any sort of satisfying way would require changing a lot of fundamental aspects of the game. Most importantly, the companion stories. So far they're tied to long rests, and there is no way of knowing when you have one available, and the companion dialogues can overwrite each other. Currently I'm resting after every exchange and story happening so that I don't miss any companion stories. If quests were also timed, then I think the system would break entirely. The fact that companion stuff is tied to resting, to me indicates that Larian wants us to rest a lot. The same goes for the number of things and other characters which can be accumulated over the course of the game. The camp is a location in and of itself, an interesting one where stuff happens. So to me it seems that Larian wants us to be there with some frequency, and that approach clashes with timed quests. Timed quests sort of worked with Kingmaker because there was basically nothing inherently interesting about resting in and of itself. It's a thing you did because you had to for practical purposes. Now there's story stuff encouraging you to rest as well.

Another thing to consider with timed quests that go beyond this game is making them interesting and actually fun. I think for timed quests to really be good, then they should be more than just a pure failstate. I said earlier that I think only one quest in P:KM made great use of its timed nature. That was a quest where you had to uncover a location and get there before your enemy. You had multiple ways to find it, but if you didn't get there first, then what happened was that you lost the ability to settle the confrontation non-violently, and missed out on a couple potential boons. Failing was genuinely interesting because it changed the context of how things played out. I think people get too hung up on the idea of consequences equating to punishment. It can and definitely should sometimes, but at the same time, if devs only tool for consequences is gating content then I think that's not so interesting. "you didn't play the right way/make the right choice, you get less game to enjoy. Suck it" should be one option, not the first option implemented.