I have some writings from back in the thirties on the changing analyses of the feed given to different aged and sex larvae. I am sure there is more definitive analysis available today. In any case the testing showed no difference in what was fed to the larvae for the first two days. It did not go into the question of whether there would be any difference depending on the attitude of a fertilized cell or whether there would be different outcomes if there was lavish food amounts as compared to merely adequate.
The factor of the amount, rather than the content of the larval feed seems to be what would be most affected by the shape, attitude and size of the cell the egg hatched in. I can understand the warm feeling that comes from the conviction that the larvae was fed profusely from the moment of hatch but perhaps that is putting anthropomorphic values onto the situation that have no basis in facts of life of a bee.
I think there is little question that sparse feeding and possible poor temperature control of incubation could stunt a queens ultimate potential but that extreme does not guarantee that a queen would definitely have poorer potential because the workers were tearing down cell walls during the time she was also being fed her pablum! Would the queen raised in that nice plastic cup be any smarter?
I dont know but I think if it were that cut and dried there would be more definitive data on the common record.