The time mechanics seem unnecessary or poorly explained
In my opinion, the time consumption mechanic doesn't seem to be justified in the context of the gameplay, or the developers simply don't know how to rationalize its presence to the players (communication problem).
From a design perspective, a limitation can be a powerful tool that adds depth and complexity to the gameplay, but it has to have a specific purpose and provide a benefit (reward) for the player, which improves their experience with the game.
The Resident Evil series typically limits resources and inventory space, but the gameplay benefits from this because it increases tension and builds atmosphere and a sense of struggle for survival, without taking anything away from you.
In RDR2, the player must eat, sleep, hunt, fish, cook, provide appropriate clothing (to avoid hypothermia and overheating), and care for their horse (it also needs to eat). Traveling is dangerous and time-consuming, the world remembers your misdeeds, so you have to pay fines, and so on. On the one hand, these are burdens that spoil the "cinematic western experience," but on the other hand, they perfectly fit the atmosphere of the harsh life as an outlaw in the Wild West, giving the whole experience more weight and depth.
Do you see what I'm getting at? Imposing restrictions and chores on players can be good, but they must have a clear purpose and benefit. Imagine you're playing The Witcher 3, but out of the several hundred quests available in the game, you can only complete 40. When the counter reaches 0, the quest system is locked. Would such a version of the game be better than the regular? What would the player gain from such a restriction? In short, nothing, it would only hurt the game and the player experience, taking away most of the content which is the greatest game's strength.
In this context, what does BoD gain from its time mechanics? I don't see any benefit. Some people might say its realistic, but the point is, that realism in video games is not valuable in itself unless it serves the gameplay or the atmosphere. This is why most game characters don't poop, and female protagonists don't have a mechanic for changing tampons during their period. Yes, it's realistic, but would the game benefit from it? Most wouldn't, which is why games usually choose which elements of realism to use and which to ignore. BoD isn't inherently realistic either (it's not a sim), yet it adds this time restriction to the gameplay... why? For what purpose?
Replayability is also a pipe dream. These days, people don't finish games at all, even short ones, so believing they'll replay an RPG that takes dozens of hours just to see a few side quests they previously skipped is naive. Furthermore, most players are incapable of playing they way that contradicts their own ethics and beliefs, meaning that when making decisions, they are unable to decide against their own morals just to see an alternative path, because it would disconnect them from the character they are roleplaying. This is why many players, despite completing The Witcher 2 multiple times, never follow the path of Roche or Iorveth. It would just feel wrong to them.
To sum up, in my opinion either the developers can't explain it clearly, or it simply doesn't make much sense.