It looks to me like a nice kit. I know next to nothing about the real ship, but in general the parts show a level of finesse that Revell kits don't usually exhibit these days. If the underwater hull is indeed too shallow, it isn't obvious to the naked eye.
I agree that the "wood grain" effect on the decks is overdone, but I've certainly seen worse. A little gentle sanding and a good paint job could make an enormous difference. One feature of the deck closeup that jumps out at me is the hatch. Apparently the raised lines represent pieces of rope holding the hatch covers in place. I've never seen anything quite like that - but my knowledge of Dutch sailing merchant ships is just about zero.
It looks like the moldmakers confined that "wood grain" treatment to the decks. The hull planks appear to be separated by raised lines, with no "grain." (Logically that doesn't make sense. I wonder if the masters for the decks and the hull were made by different people.) The clinker construction of the upperworks is, as I understand it, fairly characteristic of northern European construction during that period - though the practical reason for it escapes me. The underwater hull appears to be smooth, with no planking detail at all. That's defensible. Any of the various treatments that were applied to ships' bottoms in an effort to ward off rot and marine life might well have concealed the edges of the planks.
One feature that isn't visible in any of the pictures is the inside of the hull halves. Many plastic sailing ships (including the otherwise beautiful little Revell Golden Hind that I'm working on at the moment) suffer from hull castings that are too thin. (The bulwarks of the big Revell Constitution, for instance, couldn't possibly be made up of frames with both internal and external planking on them.) The problem, ironically, gets worse as the scale gets larger. Plastic parts can't be too thick; if they are, they suffer from shrinkage when they cool after being removed from the mold. Maybe the Batavia is on a small enough scale to make the bulwarks believable.
Among the best kits in that respect are the two old Revell versions of the Mayflower. They're based on the replica ship Mayflower II, which was designed back in the 1950s by William Baker - one of the best in the business. He gave the Mayflower II unceiled bulwarks; the frames are visible on the interior, with no internal planking. Revell did a beautiful job of reproducing the structure of the real thing. (Would that they'd given the Golden Hind similar treatment. I spent about five hours the other night adding plastic strip "frames" to the inside of her port hull half. Next time I go out to the workshop the starboard half awaits me. I find it difficult to look forward to that job.)
The two-piece lower masts don't bother me. I've built quite a few kits whose masts were molded that way, and have never found it necessary to reinforce them. I'd be more concerned about the fact that the topmasts, topgallant masts, and flagpoles appear to be molded integrally with each other. I'd be happier if each segment of the mast, and each cap and other fitting, were molded individually. But I'd have to look at the parts carefully before forming an opinion.
I'll be on the lookout for this kit. I don't know that I'd get around to building it in this lifetime, but it is indeed a refreshing change of pace - and certainly one of the best plastic sailing ship kits to appear in the past twenty years. Indeed, quite possibly the best - though admittedly there hasn't been much competition. Many thanks to jwintjes for bringing it to the Forum's attention.