I find their rhetoric about getting burned out on BG3 stories and NPCs, and--at the same time--supporting fanart & other fandom stuff controversial and dishonest. Like, imagine any author saying "yeah, yeah, this character of mine is so cool, please love them... on a side note, I'm fed up with them, so poof". This doesn't make any sense and is a failed attempt to set the narrative.
If they had BG4 in a playable state, I read that as if the game had, say, Act 1 for the possible Early Access later (similar to BG3). It also meant they had the full game story written, as nobody starts the game production without writing the full story first. So they had everything ready, and I don't believe in burning out. They might be trying to convince themselves at this point. E.g. "Yeah, this movie sucked, it's good we didn't go watch it in the cinema" while discussing a super-successful and fun movie that a person failed to watch due to life circumstances.
I would say them not blaming WotC is an indicator that they might be open to another go in a distant future if all the WotC leadership/their approach is changed.
Or, just as the new revelation makes their rhetoric from 5 months ago look stupid, maybe we'll hear a true story after a few years (that will make even more previous statements look stupid).
Another point: you don't hear any similar rhetoric about their Divinity stuff (and they had quite a few games there, not one). They will never say "we got burned out on Rivellon"--because no author would say that, at least, not after dozens of games/books in the same universe. The only difference is that the Divinity stuff is their IP, while this is a licensed D&D property.
It's indeed baffling. Just one year, and it feels empty. Imagine any other creator saying "I got burned out on X story" just after 1 super-successful book.
And it's me speaking as a huge Larian fan. I love them, just don't love dishonesty.
www.gamepressure.com
