It's not about being too good, it is the classes having some coherent identity mechanically and thematically.
Apparently, it is to some people on this thread, as it's their fall-back argument.
This change makes sorcerers mechanically more similar to wizards, which makes them existing as as separate class even less justified.
Not really. This change is only of the frequency in which a sorcerer can do something that it already could.
Hyperbole isn't doing your argument any favors. 1) Calling a long rest a nap is just tired. 2) Clerics, druids, and paladins already have access to "any spell they could theoretically have" after a long rest (and can switch out all of their spells rather than just one). 3) Wizards still have more spells prepared than spells known and have a wider array of spells (especially utility spells) on their spell list than the sorcerer. 5) (because 4 is on strike) people aren't seeing "what a massive change that is" because the argument that it is massive is based on presenting the most artifical, hyperbotastic, "sky is falling" theoretical extreme that ignores how real people actually play D&D that it's hard to take seriously.It means after a nap sorcerer can has access to any spell they could theoretically have. This makes them significantly better magic-based problem solver than the wizard, whose thing this used to be. To me this seems like a colossal shift. Going from having access to handful of spells to, what, over a hundred? I have super hard time understanding how people can't see what a massive change that is.