Regarding the similarity to NCIS office space, well see for yourself: they have a traditional staircase leading up to first floor with traditional hallways and doors to enclosed rooms up on 1st floor:
The steel-glass fassade is supported not only by the massive steel bars within throughout, but also by a strong columns in the corners of the front side. You would see that in the deviant art link pics. Also the side fassades of the building have concrete frames on the back, on the ceiling and foundation. That combinaton gives enough strengh against wind forces.
Also I am aware of the waste of usable space in this design, as i wrote already in the introduction " It’s broken up stories provide openness and lots of light, but of course on the cost of usable square meter." So i don’t know if you just did not read this, or what is youre point in criticising this? It’s like someone makes a “leightweight design” and then someone criticises the leightweightness.
Regarding the sound, thats a good point, even tho i don’t think the effect will be as dramatic as in a amphitheater. The general open design is not only optically, but made to encourage cooperation. To support this it helps if you get to know what the collegues do, esp. in the center creative area, and each one could contribute. So with this design many other workplaces can hear and learn what is going on there, e.g. possible change of plans.
This is not a cube farm. But some slideable, movable “sound-walls” (maybe semi-transparent) might be optionally put it e.g. at the office area to have more quiet spaces if needed.
I don’t know where you got the “rule” for ArchVis from that it has to be " he\she should get blueprints and pictures of some interesting place and make visualization of it."? So by you’re definition that restricts it to copying existing buildings.
Do you really think each ArchVis house is really built or for each does even exists worked-out blueprint plans? Me not, and I am not bound by this definition.