Same with the talking animals. No one is saying they shouldn't communicate when you cast Speak with Animals. But again, there's a difference between animals speaking like they are characters in a Disney cartoon with human-like intelligence and animals communicating in a more primitive way like.. animals would.
I don't care about the squirrels, but Scratch is adorable and the way you can talk with him is part of the appeal. I'd not like to see that changed to some "primitive" communication imitating animals. It doesn't feel out of place to me in a fantasy game, because while you consider it Disneyesque, animals being attributed human traits is a tale as old as fairy tales themselves.
Larian isn't the only game developer making use of it. In Pathfinder WotR has an optional dragon companion which could come straight out of a Disney movie. At the same P:WotR can be a very dark game, with graphic descriptions of torture that surpass anything in BG3. And yet the mythic path where this dragon is available is very popular, with the dragon companion well received.
Larian has added those "pet Scratch" or "pet owlbear cub" moments because very likely, thanks to the data they gather, they know what percentage of their playerbase enjoys that. Not everyone will, some like you would prefer a more realistic approach, but I don't think it's true for most players.
