I share your perspective on this issue too.

I equally believe the better the quality of a journal the higher % chance to be published

There are several variables in journal acceptance rates, and manuscript quality is certainly one of them. A high quality journal will likely get many, many papers submitted and some may be of insufficient quality. But a print-format journal will also typically have a certain number of issues a year, and a goal for a certain number of pages per issue. These goals might affect the number of papers accepted or rejected.

I had a paper once that was accepted by a high-quality journal, but it took them more than a year to actually publish because they had a large backlog of accepted papers. I know that the journal has since become more selective in which papers it sends out for review, and how many rounds of review it will allow before rejecting a paper.

Scientific articles should be of high quality, if it is a sound journal, it prints only qualitative scientific works.

please refer to

Article Correlations between submission and acceptance of papers in ...

I do not think it is more important the % acceptance/rejection of articles to ensure the quality of the journal, than its link to society, which in many cases provides the funds for research

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/opinion/academic-publishing-must-better-serve-science-and-society

I welcome new trends to socialize both research and the publication of its results and would suggest moving towards better regulating the anonymity of peer reviewers and the attributions of editors, as I have negative experiences in each case

https://blogs.plos.org/everyone/2020/01/14/registered-reports-are-coming-to-plos-one/