For story based reasons, scumming is good as it lets you explore all the content in the game. You can pop back and see what happens if you do X stupid thing you'd never do, and then pop back to your actual save. It's fun and kind of the point of choice-and-consequence roleplaying games to have stuff like that.
So penalising it, is just penalising players for exploring the game content.
This. There is close to zero games in the world (nothing comes to mind) that I have ever played through again fully. So during the one and only playthrough I explore all the converstation options available. That means gazillion of reloads during content rich games.
This my personal opinion of course is that saving should allowed everywhere (no problems here) and loading speeds should be optimized (problems here). And should Larian change anything because of this? No.
So not this. I would argue save-scumming is BAD, for both story and gameplay reasons. When a game facilitates easy save-scumming, it oftentimes becomes a compulsion, a kind of roleplaying straightjacket. It incentivizes the player to control every outcome to reach the ideal goal, rather than play freely how you like and accept the outcome. Perfection(ism) is the enemy of good. By allowing "cheap" perfection, imperfection becomes unacceptable even though the path towards that ideal outcome is tedious, unimmersive and downright anti-roleplaying. Your "gazillion of reloads" make even finishing a single playthrough that much less likely. You burn yourself out - not only reloading constantly, but even restarting the game repeatedly. Most gamers don't even finish a game once for such (and other) reasons.
Cyberpunk 2077 has a loot system that incentivizes save-scumming. The loot is somewhat randomized and the power level variation is significant. This leads to hundreds, if not thousands of reloads trying to optimize the loot throughout the course of the game. You feel compelled to do it because of the satisfaction of getting the best version of an item...even though it saps enjoyment from gameplay in general. Both by doing a boring repetitive act that breaks immersion, and by contributing to becoming overpowered in such a way you trivialize combat. In this way instant gratification wins out nearly every time.
Baldur's Gate 3 has done a lot to disincentivize this kind of behaviour by providing multiple ways to avoid undesirable outcomes and/or by making outcomes less binary good or bad. When it isn't through roleplaying opportunities, it is straight gameplay mechanics such as "inspiration points". There are some concerns over the balance however. For instance, the way Larian too readily hands out advantage on attack rolls to limit save-scumming incentivized by bad RNG which is the nature of the beast with DnD. This is a rather heavy-handed measure that will upset fragile DnD balancing and lead to poor balancing and/or more "house rules" changes to the DnD rules. Some people with a low tolerance for real or perceived failure advocate for a "baked-in" save-scumming system, ie. by making skill checks easier to succeed (and thereby making skill monkeys like Bards and Rogues that much less useful). Larian focusing on this issue is a very good thing, hopefully they will find the right balance in the process though.