I don't really agree with that. For starters, BG3 is no different from Dark Alliance and other games set in the city. It's a sequel, in the 'kind of' sense. Then there's how the idea that Dragon Age was the spiritual successor of the BG trilogy was a marketing gimmick. BioWare wanted to coach their new fantasy IP in something old and celebrated, even as they tried to diversify away from the design elements of their past. Dragon Age: Origins differed from Baldur's Gate in game design and tone. Drastically too. It's real focus was in the idea of Choice and Consequence, which wasn't a legacy of Baldur's Gate, rather one of Fallout's.

In truth the reason why Baldur's Gate 3 relates to Dragon Age is 90% because the late 90s/early 00s RPGs were just that influential and shaped the industry for years to come. The last 10% are things like the campsite aesthetics and rhythm, which are borrowed straight from Dragon Age. Baldur's Gate 3 is it's own beast, one that Larian and other RPG developers have been chasing for many years, and it actually doesn't care to be much of a sequel to Dragon Age's spiritual predecessor. It's not even in the same subgenre.

TL;DR BG3 is more of a refinement of Dragon Age than a sequel to Dragon Age's predecessor.