No, Bulgaria's more or less right for the year 1000. Samuil Kometopoulos had quite the empire for a few years. I made a map of the Byzantine area for Kraznaya when he was thinking about modding a Year 1000 NES (still bitter that he decided not to), and here it is - remarkably similar to the depicted Bulgaria in that map.
Of course, in
1001 Basileios II launched a campaign that divested Samuil of a third of his territory (the Paristrion part). And over the next 17 years - mostly because Byzantine operations were deliberately limited by the Emperor (there are several theories about this; it used to be popular to claim that Basileios had a cease-fire with Samuil, but that's been basically disproven, and now it seems like the Emperor was limiting offensive operations to cut down on troop costs and to reduce the scope for political opponents to win military glory) - the Byzantines slowly ground down Samuil's state until it ceased to exist.
And it should be mentioned that the empire of the Kometopouloi had very little to do with the Bulgarian state that was destroyed by Ioannes Tzimiskes - Samuil briefly controlled a member of the old Bulgarian imperial family, but everything rested on his own power, and he soon seized the title for himself. It might be best not to call it Bulgaria at all.
So it's misleading in the same sense that a map of the Roman Empire in 117 is misleading - that is to say, it isn't, and it's certainly not factually wrong, but it doesn't give you a very good idea of what the borders of the Bulgarian Empire looked like in general.
