I mean in all fairness to Steinberg, they did give a heads up five years ago.
And I do think it’s a good thing that there’s no longer incentive to write new VST2 plugins. It’s an outdated model of how audio processing can/should work in modern workflows. From Steinberg’s standpoint, I’d be incredibly frustrated if I gave people a framework to create plugins with sample accurate automation, NoteExpression, dynamic channel configurations, complex multi in/out plugins, etc, only for people to keep writing VST2 plugins 10 years later.
At a certain point, VST exists primarily to extend the functionality of Steinberg’s platforms, and if they want to take it in an orthogonal direction from what VST2 can support they need to do something to get people to stop writing VST2 and start writing VST3.
Now I’d argue for a VST4 that is easier to use than VST3, has a low surface area C ABI, is better documented, a commitment to API stability on minor version releases, and a liberal license. But that’s just me.