There's another issue, at least for architects, which has been peripherally discussed here before. There is a disconnect between the time needed, up front, to model the project, the way an architect gets paid, and the time when benefits derived from the model make their appearance. Most architects traditionally get paid roughly in line with the phase of the work completed. Schematic design, design development, construction documents, etc. But a process that relies on extensive development of a 3D model does not follow the traditional phases of architectural work.
Some of the up-front 3D work is design, certainly. But much of it has a direct impact on the final construction documents, when information gets extracted from the model. One could say that an important piece of the effort invested in creating a quality 3D model only receives its compensation late in the life of a project.
In practice this means that an architect who invests considerable resources up front in developing a model is taking a signficant risk. A client could change their minds late in the project, or even cancel the project outright, as has happened to me several times this past year. And then it becomes difficult, if not impossible, to ask for compensation for work done early in the process that doesn't fit neatly into the phase-oriented timelines of normal architectural contracts.