This is partially true in my experience. But there are several things that factor in to one's impressions on this. A lot of it is dependent on how detailed and accurate your model is. You can develop a lot of 3D families that you can include in your model such that when you take a live cut of the connection, you don't have to include as many detail components. Accuracy plays a part because if you have modeled your elements in the proper locations, elevations and angles, then you won't have to replace those live elements with 2D components that depict a more accurate layout. I agree that there is a good amount of work that needs to go into the detail view to clean up member graphics, drawing elements that are not modeled because of level of detail vs value added, etc. Annotations and dimensions will always have to be added in the detail view. But I don't know very many companies that are compensated enough to model every single stud, plate, bolt, gusset, etc. That being the case, it's just more cost-efficient to leave things like that out of the model and let them be 2D components.
Bottom line is that there is happy medium between how much you're being compensated, what is required to be in the model, and what is the most cost effective method of identifying everything.
