Sort of. I dislike them in general, but if they are reasonably implemented and don't turn the whole game into "can't explore in peace and must always hurry", then it's... bearable. Still, I wouldn't say they improve the game. It might be jarring if the premise suggests urgency and you can take all the time you want, but I'd say it's the lesser evil.
I don't see why decently implemented time limits should "prevent exploring". They are supped to limit how much time you have to achieve specific goals, not how much time you can spend into the game in general. It should be even less of an issue when matching a deadline gives you an extra reward, as in the Kingmaker example I mentioned, rather than punish you.
Hence why I said I can tolerate time limits if they're "reasonably implemented and don't turn[...]".
And that's the thing - specific goals. One mission with a reasonable time limit to have semblance of realism and nudge the player (two weeks to rescue Dynaheir). Main quest isn't really a "specific goal". Now perhaps I'm just imagining the bad way to do time limits, but if a game tells me "here, have this vast area full of quests and interesting areas to explore... btw, you have 7 days to finish Act I", that's not fun.